Friday, 05 February 2010

PELOSI'S OTHER FACE: CIRCA 2003

Ken Berwitz

I just saw this at www.drudgereport.com.  Please note the date, the President, and what the current speaker of the house said about it at that time.

From the Office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi

 

 

Pelosi: Where Are the Jobs, Mr. President?

August 1, 2003

 

Washington, D.C. -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on the Bureau of Labor Statistics' announcement that 470,000 people abandoned their job searches in July and that 3.2 million private sector jobs have been lost since President Bush took office:

 

The fact is that President Bushs misguided economic policies have failed to create jobs. Since President Bush took office, the country has lost 3.2 million jobs, the worst record since President Hoover. And today we learned that in July nearly half a million people gave up looking for a job.

 

Job losses are taking a real toll on the financial security of American families. While Democrats are fighting for opportunity, jobs, and economic security for working families, Republicans continue to focus on helping those who need help the least.

 

According to todays survey, while the national unemployment rate dropped slightly, it still stands at a near record high. In addition, the unemployment rate for African Americans was still over 11 percent in July, and the unemployment rate for Hispanics was 8.2 percent in July.

 

It is time for President Bush and the Republicans to get to work for all Americans, not just the elite few.

You might want to keep this in mind whenever the two-faced Ms. Pelosi extols the great job President Obama is doing in "creating or saving" jobs.

BOBW IT IS NOW CLEAR THAT TOO MUCH BOTOX EFFECTS THE BRAIN (02/05/10)


THE SWASTIKA AND PARTISAN POLITICS

Ken Berwitz

This consumately disgusting story comes to us from Ben Muessig at www.gothamist.com.

Queens Assembly Candidate Sends Mailings With Swastikas

2010_2_swastika.jpg

A Queens Democrat has sent out mailings illustrated with a swastika that label his rival for an open Assembly seat as an "extremist" who is "out of touch with our community's values." Just days before a special election for a northeastern Queens seat, former Councilman David Weprin attacked Republican and Conservative party candidate Bob Friedrich with literature showing the Nazi symbol and text accusing his foe of not taking a tough enough stance against hate crimes.

One side of the ad shows police officers, crime scene tape, and a photoshopped swastika with the text: "Extreme Conservative Bob Friedrich Doesn't Think Hate Crimes Deserve Special Punishment." Friedrichwho is Jewishcalled the mailing "repugnant" and "offensive to all people." He told the Post: "Hateful campaign tactics like this, using Nazi propaganda with a swastika, really is offensive ... It goes beyond anything that I have ever seen in a campaign. I was sickened to my stomach when I saw it."

Weprin who is also Jewishhasn't commented on the mailers. But his campaign manager, Corey Bearak, confirmed they were sent out by the campaign. In a statement to the Daily News, Bearak said illustrating the ads with a swastika shouldn't be considered offensive:


"It's not offensive to make sure people know just home extreme Republican-Conservative Bob Friedrich is; this extremist opposes hate crimes legislationit's offensive that Republican Bob Friedrich actually opposes hate crimes legislation."

Does it get sicker, more offensive and more repugnant than that?  

I don't know either of these two men.  But until I have a damn good reason to feel otherwise, I will be rooting for Mr. Friedrich - or, more exactly, against david weprin.


AAFIA SIDDIQUI: THE STORY OUR MEDIA IGNORED

Ken Berwitz

Have you ever heard of aafia siddiqui?  Odds on, you probably have not. 

Dubbed "Lady Al-Qaeda" by the relatively few media venues that bothered to follow her trial, siddiqui is an unrepentant, US-hating, Israel-hating, Jew-hating terrorist who, ironically, graduated from MIT and Brandeis University, both of which have a disproportionate percentage of the Jews she loathes so much in their student bodies and on their teaching staffs.

She has been convicted of attempted murder, assault of US officers and employees and carrying a firearm (I may have missed a few others).  She will be sentenced in May and, if the judge has a head on his/her shoulders, will get the maximum of 60 years in prison.

How could our media have been so indifferent to siddiqui, her trial and her conviction?  Read this article by Phyllis Chesler of www.newsrealblog.com and marvel at their lack of interest:

February 4th, 2010 10:02 am

How a Nice American Girl Became a Jihadist: Dr. Siddiqui Found Guilty

She studied at MIT and at Brandeis where she received a Ph.D in Neuroscience. Thus, she was both an educated and in some sense, a westernized woman. Both her Pakistani-born father and Pakistani husband are physicians who trained in the West, in England and America, respectively; her brother and sister are also highly trained professionals. Nevertheless, Dr. Aafia Siddiqui learned to hate America, hate Jews, and hate Israel right here in liberal America.

Like a small but increasing number of westernized Muslim women, Aafia Siddiqui joined her local mosque (in her case, the Roxbury, MA mosque) and started to veil, and as she did, her ambitions became aggressively jihadic. This is not a contradiction. Obediently veiled Muslim women can be very aggressive, murderously so. They certainly police other women in savage and self-righteous ways in Iran and Indonesia. In Iraq, veiled Muslim women have blown up other Muslim female religious pilgrims. And, Muslim women who were normatively spurned by their mothers were manipulated by Samira Jassim, an attentive, loving Iraqi mother-figure, who carefully turned them into suicide killers

Women are very aggressivebut usually towards other women. I have written about this in Womans Inhumanity to Woman. Traditionally, women do not go up against men whom they view as their potential protectors and as more powerful than they are. Ironically, Islamic jihad wishes to reverse, upend, both Nature and human evolutionary history. Just as normatively degraded mothers are turned into hero-mothers who publicly praise their suicide killer sonsjust so, are normatively self-hating women turned into Al-Qaeda heroines who not only directly attack men, but who directly attack infidel male soldiers.

Although Al-Qaeda officially wants its women to breed and bear future male jihadists and to keep the homes and secrets of Al-Qaeda warriors, they have now publicly called for women suicide killers. The West has been threatened with a horde of veiled suicide killers, both male and female.

Today, the Islamic Veil is not a religious symbolread Marnia Lazreg on this. The Veil is a politically manipulated symbol of jihad. The French understand this and are trying to ban or limit the Islamic Veil, which they view as a security risk as well as a human rights violation. The Americans had better start this conversation now, not later.

Dr. Siddiqui tried to kill American soldiers in Afghanistan after shed been captured with instructions on making explosives and a list of New York landmarks in her possession, including the Statue of Liberty, the Brooklyn Bridge and the Empire State Building.

After jurors found her guilty in United States District Court, Siddiqui turned and faced them, held her index finger aloft and said: This is a verdict coming from Israel and not from America. Thats where the anger belongs.

Siddiquis lawyers claim that she did not try to shoot anyone, that she was trying to escape, and that secret imprisonment by the Americans had led her to lose her mind and accounted for her continual outbursts in the courtroom.

Some people, including her lawyers, insist that she is mentally ill. People are saying the same thing about Major Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter. He has been said to suffer from a non-existent condition: pre-post traumatic stress syndrome.

Siddiqui had continually demanded that no Jews be allowed to take part in her trial. She wanted the jurors to be genetically tested to prove they were not Jewish. I dunno. She sounds like a follower of Adolph Hitler to me. What difference does it make if we conclude that Hitler and his good German followers were mentally ill? Even if they were, the harm they did, through both acts of omission and commission, were radically evil and criminal. Caliphate dreams are no different than Hitlers dream of a Thousand Year Reich.

As soon as Major Hasan was conscious, he invoked his rights to a lawyer. The last words out of Siddiquis mouth were: This verdict is coming from Israel.

Either we judge jihadists by their own cultural standards (ironically, this is the politically correct position), or we diminish those cultural standards and judge them by our concept of mental illness which, in criminal cases, is often used to obtain sympathy for the devil.

Note: In a long article about Dr. Siddiqui, a former MIT student described her as nice; Imam Abdullah Faruuq, of the Roxbury Mosque, said She was an American girl and a good sister.

Interestingly, and very disturbingly, siddiqui's conviction has caused major demonstrations - supporting her - in her native Pakistan. 

Is there massive hatred of the USA there (along with hatred of Israel, of India, and assorted other places)?  You bet there is.  Just as there is massive support for the taliban in that sorry country. 

The harsh truth is that Pakistan is a near-hopeless case for us -- which makes the degree of cooperation President Bush got from then-Prime Minister Pervez Musharraf all the more remarkable (though our wonderful "neutral" media will never give him credit for it).

Did anyone with even minor brain function really think that Barack Obama's election to the US Presidency would change any of this?   Amazingly, a good many did - though their numbers have pretty clearly dwindled over the past year. 

Let's compare and contrast:

A couple of weeks ago conservative investigative journalist James O'Keefe (the guy who blew what little credibility ACORN had to smithereens), along with three others, somehow got into Mary Landrieu's senate office.  Their stated intent was to see if the office's phones were not operating properly (as Landrieu claimed) or if the staff was just not answering them to avoid explaining her behavior regarding ObamaCare legislation.  

How did our media handle this story?  They turned it into a week-long event, complete with misninformation that would damge O'Keefe's standing with the public (i.e. it was quickly reported that Mr. O'Keefe tampered with Landrieu's phone lines.  But, in fact, there is no evidence that happened and neither he nor his cohorts are chaarged with doing so). 

But aafia siddiqui?  A radical, hate-filled muslim terrorist with an MIT and Brandeis education who apparently was stopped from attempting to blow up major targets in the USA?  Not enough room in the paper, not enough room in the news broadcast.

Boy am I glad we have our priorities on straight.


THE BARACK BOUNCE?

Ken Berwitz

Last week, after his state of the union speech, I speculated that Barack Obama might get a bounce in the polls, and that it could be a short-lived one.  That was not a prediction - I almost never make predictions - it was just a speculation.

Well, let's look at the numbers from Rasmussen since President Obama's address and see:

Date

Presidential Approval Index

Strongly Approve

Strongly Disapprove

Total Approve

Total Disapprove

02/05/2010

-12

28%

40%

46%

53%

02/04/2010

-8

29%

37%

49%

50%

02/03/2010

-6

31%

37%

50%

49%

02/02/2010

-7

32%

39%

50%

49%

02/01/2010

-4

35%

39%

49%

50%

01/31/2010

-7

33%

40%

50%

50%

01/30/2010

-12

28%

40%

49%

51%

01/29/2010

-17

25%

42%

47%

52%

01/28/2010

-17

25%

42%

46%

54%

Mr. Obama went from a negative 17% in strong approval/disapproval to an almost even -4%.  But in the last few days he has gone to -12%, which is more than halfway back to the -17% level. 

Looking at overall approval/disapproval, Mr. Obama went from -8% (46% approve, 54% disapprove) to +1% just two days ago.  But now he is -7% again.

Are you surprised to see that fast run-up going back the other way?

I didn't think so.

===========================================================================

UPDATE:  It is one day later. 

Now Mr. Obama's strong approval/disapproval is at -15 (26% - 41%) and his overall approval/disapproval is -11%  (44% approve, 55% disapprove). 

I rest my case.


MICHELLE OBAMA & HER DAUGHTERS' PEDIATRICIAN

Ken Berwitz

It must the the blizzard about to hit DC.  People get snow fever, and say things that are silly, super-silly and just plain idiotic.

Can Michelle Obama really be criticized for the references she made to her daughters?  Read this report from ABC News and you decide:

Did Michelle Obama Send the Wrong Message With Obesity Comments?

 

First Lady's Mention of Daughters While Discussing Obesity Triggers Debate

 

By HUMA KHAN
Feb. 5, 2010

 

Michelle Obama has earned accolades for making healthy living and eliminating childhood obesity a priority as first lady. But when it came down to personalizing the issue in relation to her daughters, the remarks touched a nerve with some, and praise from others.

 

The first lady made the issue of healthy eating personal last week at an event in Alexandria, Va., where she kicked off a campaign addressing the issue of childhood obesity.

 

"We went to our pediatrician all the time," Obama said. "I thought my kids were perfect -- they are and always will be -- but he [the doctor] warned that he was concerned that something was getting off balance."

 

"I didn't see the changes. And that's also part of the problem, or part of the challenge. It's often hard to see changes in your own kids when you're living with them day in and day out," she added. "But we often simply don't realize that those kids are our kids, and our kids could be in danger of becoming obese. We always think that only happens to someone else's kid -- and I was in that position."

 

Obama said the doctor suggested she first look at her daughters' body mass index (BMI).  The minor changes she subsequently made in their daily habits, Obama said, made all the difference.

 

The first lady's comments have stirred up the Web and medical world, and have drawn both criticism and praise. Some say Obama should not have personalized the issue and brought up her daughters. Even if it is for the greater public good, critics say, it does not bode well for their self-image. Others say the first lady used that example only to connect to Americans who may find themselves in a similar position.

 

The first lady's office would not comment on the criticism.

If these people want to criticize Michelle Obama for something, make it her description of Sasha and Malia as "kids" instead of "children".  Speaking for myself, I've never liked that term, which is far more fitting for a goat's offspring than a human's, and rarely use it.

But the fact that Ms. Obama mentioned her discussion with the pediatrician to convey the fact that, because parents see their children every day, they sometimes do not pick up on situations that should be addressed?  What in the world is wrong with that?  And how in the world could she speak from personal experience without mentioning her daughters?

Anyone who has a problem with this really does need to get a life.


GLOBAL WARMING UPDATE

Ken Berwitz

From the National Weather Service:

Special Weather Statement

SPECIAL WEATHER STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE BALTIMORE MD/WASHINGTON DC
1234 PM EST FRI FEB 5 2010
DCZ001-MDZ004>007-009>011-013-014-016>018-VAZ042-050>057-501-502-
060145-
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA-FREDERICK MD-CARROLL-NORTHERN BALTIMORE-
HARFORD-MONTGOMERY-HOWARD-SOUTHERN BALTIMORE-PRINCE GEORGES-
ANNE ARUNDEL-CHARLES-ST. MARYS-CALVERT-LOUDOUN-ORANGE-CULPEPER-
PRINCE WILLIAM/MANASSAS/MANASSAS PARK-FAIRFAX-
ARLINGTON/FALLS CHURCH/ALEXANDRIA-STAFFORD-SPOTSYLVANIA-
KING GEORGE-NORTHERN FAUQUIER-SOUTHERN FAUQUIER-
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF...WASHINGTON...FREDERICK...WESTMINSTER...
GAITHERSBURG...COLUMBIA...BALTIMORE...ANNAPOLIS...WALDORF...
ST MARYS CITY...LEESBURG...CULPEPER...MANASSAS...MANASSAS PARK...
FAIRFAX...ALEXANDRIA...FALLS CHURCH...FREDERICKSBURG...WARRENTON
1234 PM EST FRI FEB 5 2010
...RECORD SNOWFALL FORECAST IN THE BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON DC REGION...
...EXTREMELY DANGEROUS WINTER WEATHER CONDITIONS DEVELOPING TONIGHT...
GUSTY NORTHEAST WINDS 20 TO 30 MPH WITH VISIBILITIES FREQUENTLY
FALLING BELOW ONE-QUARTER MILE DUE TO HEAVY SNOW WILL DEVELOP
TONIGHT TO PRODUCE NEAR-BLIZZARD AND EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS WINTER WEATHER
CONDITIONS TONIGHT THROUGH SATURDAY MORNING.  TRAVEL IS HIGHLY
DISCOURAGED TONIGHT AND WILL BE VERY DANGEROUS.
LOOKING BACK AT THE BIGGEST STORM OF RECORD FOR WASHINGTON DC... THE
JANUARY 1922 KNICKERBOCKER STORM...28.0 INCHES OF SNOW WAS
PRODUCED FROM 3.02 INCHES OF LIQUID WATER.  CURRENT FORECASTS FOR
THIS EVENT HAVE TOTAL LIQUID FALLING FROM THIS STORM APPROACHING 3
INCHES...WHICH ACCORDINGLY WOULD CREATE A SNOWFALL THAT WILL RIVAL
THE KNICKERBOCKER STORM TOTAL.  GENERALLY ACROSS THE REGION...20 TO
30 INCHES OF SNOW WILL FALL BY SATURDAY EVENING.
BALTIMORES RECORD OF 26.8 INCHES FROM THE PRESIDENTS DAY FEBRUARY 2003
STORM WILL ALSO BE THREATENED.
A FEW PRECAUTIONARY AND PREPAREDNESS ITEMS TO NOTE:
1.  FOLLOW MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS WHEN OPERATING A GENERATOR OR
AXILLARY HEATER.  ENSURE PORTABLE GENERATORS ARE ADEQUATELY VENTILATED.
2.  TRAVEL CONDITIONS TONIGHT ACROSS THE REGION WILL BE EXTREMELY
DANGEROUS AND LIFE THREATENING.  HELP YOUR LOCAL AND STATE
GOVERNMENT FIRST RESPONDERS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCIES BY STAYING
OFF ROADS LATER THIS EVENING AND TONIGHT.
3.  FOLLOW LOCAL AND STATE GOVERNMENT EMERGENCY DECLARATION ORDERS.
IF YOU ABSOLUTELY NEED TO TRAVEL IN AN EMERGENCY...DO NOT TRAVEL
ALONE.  LET SOMEONE KNOW YOUR TIMETABLE AND YOUR PRIMARY AND
ALTERNATE ROUTES.  CARRY WITH YOU A WINTER STORM SURVIVAL KIT WHICH
INCLUDES A MOBILE PHONE...BLANKETS...FLASHLIGHT WITH EXTRA
BATTERIES...HIGH CALORIE NON-PERISHABLE FOOD AND WATER...AND A
SHOVEL.
4.  IF YOU GET STRANDED IN YOUR VEHICLE...DO NOT LEAVE YOUR CAR TO
TRY TO WALK FOR ASSISTANCE...YOU CAN QUICKLY BECOME DISORIENTED IN
WIND DRIVEN SNOW AND COLD.  THIS STORM WILL SUBSIDE SATURDAY
AFTERNOON...SO WAIT IN YOUR CAR FOR EMERGENCY HELP TO ARRIVE.
PERIODICALLY RUN YOUR ENGINE FOR ABOUT 10 MINUTES EACH HOUR FOR
HEAT. ENSURE YOUR EXHAUST PIPE IS CLEARED OF SNOW AND ICE.  CRACK
YOUR WINDOWS TO AVOID CARBON MONOXIDE POISONING. TIE A COLORED CLOTH
TO YOUR CARS ANTENNA TO BE VISIBLE TO RESCUERS. FROM
TIME-TO-TIME...MOVE YOUR ARMS...LEGS...FINGERS...AND TOES TO KEEP
BLOOD CIRCULATING.
5.  AVOID OVEREXERTION WHEN SHOVELING SNOW.  BREAK THE SHOVELING
DOWN INTO SMALLER JOBS AND TAKE FREQUENT BREAKS.
6.  IN CASE OF POWER SUPPLY DISRUPTIONS...HAVE AVAILABLE FLASH
LIGHTS WITH EXTRA BATTERIES...EXTRA FOOD AND WATER...EXTRA MEDICINES.
7.  ENSURE ANY PETS AND FARM ANIMALS HAVE PLENTY OF WATER...FOOD...
AND SHELTER.
FINALLY...THE KEY TO GETTING THROUGH THIS AND OTHER PERIODS OF
HAZARDOUS WINTER WEATHER IS WITH ADVANCE PLANNING AND BEING AWARE OF
CURRENT CONDITIONS.  THIS STORM WILL BE WINDING DOWN EARLY SATURDAY
EVENING...SO DO YOUR PART AND LET YOUR LOCAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS
RESTORE ROADWAYS TO NORMAL CONDITIONS BY STAYING AT HOME.

How fitting that this should hit the city where our geniuses on Capital Hill and in the White House are trying to spend us into oblivion to prevent "global warming".

A few fun little factoids for all the aficionados:

-The snowfall tonight and tomorrow is expected to run 20" or more.  Washington DC averages 18 inches of snow -- for the entire season.  

-On December 19th, DC had a snowfall measured at 16.3" at Reagan Airport, but up to 23" in other parts of the metro area;

-Three of the 10 biggest snowfalls in DC history will have occurred in the past 7 years.  Weather records have been kept for well over a century; 

-This will be the snowiest season in DC history.  By far.

All I can say is, thank goodness for global warming.  Without it the weather could have gotten really rough out there.

free` The most bizarre thing is the global warming dodos still believe we are having global warming. I don't think anything will change there minds. (02/06/10)


MICHAEL MANN, PENN STATE AND THE GLOBAL WARMING SCAM

Ken Berwitz

 

Is Penn State covering up for one of its own a cliimate scientist who may have fudged his data to get millions of dollars in grant money for himself and the school?

 

The following report by Ed Barnes at Fox News certainly makes it seem as though thats what happened.  Read it for yourself the bold print is mine:

Penn State Probe into Mann's Wrongdoing a 'Total Whitewash'

By Ed Barnes

 - FOXNews.com

Penn State's probe that mostly cleared climate change scientist Michael Mann for any wrongdoing doesn't begin to scratch the surface, say critics. 

How thoroughly did Penn State University investigate a top climate scientist who brought hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants to the school? A growing number of critics say they hardly looked at all.

Penn State ended a two-month probe into the work of Michael Mann, a top climate scientist whose "hockey stick" graph of climbing world temperature helped galvanize support for the climate change movement, on Wednesday.

The probe stemmed from the release of thousands of hacked e-mails from a server at the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England that showed the internal debate and, some say, the manipulation of data, to support the scientific underpinnings of the case for global, man-made warming of the planet. Mann's e-mails were among those released and critics charged that he used "tricks" to make his data match studies that confirmed warming trends.

A three-person board of inquiry cleared Mann of three of four charges brought by the university that he falsified or tried to destroy data, and recommended further study on the fourth charge that his methods "deviated from accepted practices" of the scientific community.

They wrote in their report that "that there exists no credible evidence that Dr. Mann had ever engaged in, or participated in, directly or indirectly, any actions with intent to delete, conceal or otherwise destroy emails, information and/or data."

Click here to read the full report.

But the findings and, more importantly, the focus have set off a wave of criticism accusing the university panel of failing to interview key people, neglecting to conduct more than a cursory review of allegations and structuring the inquiry so that the outcome -- exoneration -- was a foregone conclusion.

On Friday, Rep. Darrell Issa, the ranking Republican on the House Investigations Committee, charged that the Penn State's failure to settle all the charges and called into question professor Mann's work. He is demanding that all grants to the noted scientist be frozen.

Mann, according to published reports, has gotten a grant almost $550,000 in stimulus money to study climate change and is part of a nearly $2 million grant to Penn State to study the impact of climate change on various diseases.

"Until the investigation is completed," Issa said, "the National Science Foundation should immediately freeze all grants and funding, including the $541,184 stimulus grant, to Professor Mann."

Criticism directed at the conduct of the investigation is being spearheaded by Steven Milloy, a former Fox News contributor and publisher of Junk Science, a Web site dedicated to debunking global warming research.

"It was set up to be a total whitewash and the panel made no effort to investigate," Milloy said. "They didn't even interview the recipients of the e-mails. It is ridiculous."

He charges that the panel did little more than look at the e-mails Mann sent and that, despite claims that "hundreds of hours" of time had been put into the investigation, only two people were actually interviewed. "None of them had any direct knowledge of the e-mails," he said.

"The only interviews cited in the report other than Mann's are with Jerry North and Donald Kennedy," he said. "Both are Mann's supporters and none have anything to do with the charges. Kennedy was the editor of Science magazine, and North helped Mann defend the 'hockey stick' graph. Yet Phil Jones, who got the e-mails, wasn't contacted."

Steve McIntyre of the Web site Climate Audit also charged that the panel looked at papers that were already publicly available. "They did not examine any of Mann's correspondence that was not already in the public record," he said. In effect, he argued, the panel didn't use any of its investigatory powers to plumb deeper.

Pennsylvania's Commonwealth Foundation, a conservative research and educational institute, proposed that the state legislature conduct an independent investigation of the charges and Mann's research.

A spokesman for the foundation said it was a "conflict of interest" for Penn State to investigate itself. Republican State Rep. RoseMarie Swanger also called for a separate investigation to be conducted by the state.

Graduate School Dean Henry C. Foley, who headed the investigation, referred all calls on the subject to media representatives for the school, who failed to return phone calls.

Barnes is describing an "investigation" that barely did any investigating, and only interviewed pals of the accused - who had nothing to do with the charges against him.  How bad does that stink? 

Frankly, the more we know about climate change/global warming science, the more it looks like a scam designed to extract a never-ending flow of money to the Michael Manns of the world and the places they work from. 

Should Penn State be ashamed of its behavior?  Is the school covering up so it won't be embarrassed by what Michael Mann did?  Is this a way to keep the $$$ flowing, regardless of whether there is any real science to justify it?

You tell me.


A LESSON FOR ERIC HOLDER, FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Ken Berwitz

Here is yesterday's lead editorial from the Washington Times.  It explains how obtuse and uncomprehending  Attorney General eric holder is about the terrorist threat and our history in dealing with terrorist suspects.  Importantly, it does so in language so plain that even holder might have a shot at understanding:

The attorney general is mistaking terrorists for common criminals

By THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The U.S. attorney general should read up on the history of terrorism. He might learn something.

On Wednesday, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. sent a five-page letter to Sen. Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, detailing his rationale for treating purported Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab as a criminal suspect rather than a terrorist detainee. The attorney general's defense betrays significant misreading of how the United States has dealt with terrorism in recent decades.

Mr. Holder incredibly claims that policies treating terrorists as criminals "were not criticized when employed by previous Administrations [and] have been and remain extremely effective in protecting national security."

Mr. Holder must be new to this issue. The problem of granting terrorists criminal status was at the center of the debate among counterterrorism scholars and practitioners in the 1990s. The policies of the Clinton era, which the Obama administration generally has resurrected, were critiqued in detail. Many warned that the domestic legal framework was insufficient to protect the United States from the emerging threat of globally networked Islamic terrorism. The events of Sept. 11, 2001, vindicated this argument. The Bush administration, armed with the Patriot Act and other important reforms, charted a new and more effective course that the current administration is in the process of dismantling.

Mr. Holder cited Zacarias Moussaoui as an example of a successful terrorism prosecution, ironically choosing the worst possible example to make his case. Moussaoui could be the poster child for the perils of Mr. Holder's preferred policies.

In 2001, FBI agents suspected that Moussaoui was involved in a terrorist plot but could not arrest him because they could not prove he had done anything illegal. He finally was detained in August 2001 on immigration charges. Over the next few weeks, FBI agent Harry Samit sent 70 messages to superiors warning that Moussaoui was a dangerous terrorist who probably was involved in a plot to violently take over an aircraft. French intelligence officials confirmed that Moussaoui was linked to Muslim radical groups connected to Osama bin Laden. Agents repeatedly sought permission to search Moussaoui's laptop computer; their requests were denied for a variety of technical reasons based on narrow interpretations of the law. Moussaoui, meanwhile, gave nothing of substance to interrogators.

Had Moussaoui been dealt with as a terrorist under the post-Sept. 11 framework, there would have been no question that his computer and other effects could have been examined for intelligence exploitation. Many think that had this taken place, the Sept. 11 attacks could have been disrupted. Mr. Holder's example of a successful prosecution is also the best example of a case in which using the techniques he advocates failed to stop one of America's greatest national tragedies.

Mr. Holder rushed Mr. Abdulmutallab into the criminal justice system. He writes that the U.S. Intelligence Community was "informed" that Mr. Abdulmutallab "would be charged criminally" before the fact, but the tone of the letter suggests that this was not open to debate. He reveals that the case was discussed in detail over subsequent days and during an interagency meeting with President Obama on Jan. 5 and that "no agency supported the use of law of war detention."

By then, however, it had been 10 days since Mr. Abdulmutallab had been charged criminally and Mirandized. The other agencies were presented with a fait accompli. Had they been consulted earlier, they might have raised some objections, but apparently they were not. Mr. Holder declines to discuss whether Mr. Obama explicitly gave the green light to pursue this as a criminal case.

Mr. Abdulmutallab was not a domestic criminal. He was a Nigerian jihadist on a combat mission, deployed to a foreign battlefield. He should be treated as such. Giving law enforcement the lead in this case shows that the Obama administration has not learned from the deadly failures of the past, which cannot bode well for the future.

eric holder is a national embarrassment, a national disgrace and an Attorney General who is about 100 times more sympathetic to terrorists than any AG ought to be.

holder should summarily be fired - with an apology from President Obama that he was hired in the first place.  But don't expect that to happen - at least not until there is less of a lopsided majority of Democrats in congress, thus serious pressure can be brought to bear regarding his tenure in this position.

The 2010 elections cannot come fast enough.  And that goes double for 2012. 


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.


About Us



Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.


At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!