.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Heavy-Handed Politics

"€œGod willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world
without the United States and Zionism."€ -- Iran President Ahmadi-Nejad

Friday, May 13, 2005

CIA Aircraft Kills Terrorist

Senior Al Qaeda Operative Struck by Predator Missile
A senior al Qaeda operative was killed by a missile fired from a CIA Predator aircraft on the Pakistani side of the remote area near the Afghan border earlier this week, U.S. intelligence officials told ABC News."
Haitham al-Yemeni, a native of Yemen known for his bomb-making skills, had been tracked for some time in the hope that he would help lead the United States to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, intelligence officials said. But with the recent capture in northwest Pakistan of Abu Faraj al-Libbi, thought to be al Qaeda's No. 3 man, officials worried al-Yemeni would soon go into hiding, and decided to take action."

Al-Yemeni was in line to replace al-Libbi, intelligence analysts said.
CIA officials declined to comment. Full article.

John Bolton

"The Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday voted to send John R. Bolton's nomination to be ambassador to the United Nations to the Senate floor but without the customary endorsement, dealing a public blow to President Bush but giving him time to try to rescue his pick."

"Now that John Bolton’s UN Ambassador nomination has been sent to the Senate floor, the hot question is: will they or won’t they? Will the Dems filibuster? Maybe, but more likely is they won’t, as it would all but guarantee the quick enactment of the stupidly-named “nuclear option” of ending judicial filibusters. Either way, the betting on Capitol Hill is that he will be confirmed."

"As he settles in to his new UN offices, don’t expect John Bolton to have been the least bit intimidated by the Dem’s vendetta against him, nor to lie low and not rattle anybody’s cage for a while. That’s not what GW is sending him to do at Turtle Bay. John has quite a list of cages he intends to rattle, and the first one belongs to France."

"France’s main claim to whatever remnant of international prestige and power it still possesses is its permanent seat on the UN Security Council." There are only five permanent members of the UN Security Council; and they are, France, Russia, China, the UK, and the United States. Clearly France does not belong on the council.

"There is much talk about expanding the council from its current five permanent members to 10 permanent seats." Japan wants a permanent seat along with India, Brazil, Nigeria and Germany. Some may say France vs. Germany is 6 of one and a half dozen of the other. I personally would swap Germany for France on the permanent council in a heartbeat.

Brazil and Nigeria have no business being permanent members either.

"Bolton is going to lob a Molotov cocktail into this bidding contest." His argument will be that The European Union (EU) should replace France.

"The EU is now Europe’s governing body, to which its 25 member countries have given much of their national sovereignty. 12 of them, including France, have abandoned their national currencies, replacing them with the Euro. 10 more have applied to join the Euro Zone."

"Why should France continue to have a permanent seat on the Security Council to the exclusion of the rest of Europe? If France’s response is, well, we want to let Germany in too – then, why only them? Why do all the other countries of the EU-Euro Zone not just have second-class status, but no status at all, no veto power, no permanent anything?"
You can easily see how John will pitch the fairness/unfairness angle. He is going to back Chirac’s France into a deep, deep corner. France’s only exit strategy will be to point at Britain, arguing that the UK too will have to give up its seat in place of the EU. John will finesse this by pointing out that while Britain does belong to the EU, it retains its own currency, the pound, and gives every indication it will not relinquish it for the euro.

Not belonging to the Euro Zone gives Britain a distinct status within the EU unlike France, and thus should keep its distinct Security Council seat.

At that point, France will realize Bolton and GW are not just after its Security Council seat and its international power prestige. They are assaulting the EU and the euro as well. Bolton’s proposal for replacing France but not Britain with the EU would give a tremendous boost for a “No” vote in the British referendum on the EU Constitution to be held in Spring 2006.

The EU Constitution is a ghastly dog’s breakfast. It destroys almost every vestige of British or any other member country’s national sovereignty, including citizenship – folks would cease to be British or Belgian et al citizens, and would be EU citizens. EU courts would have jurisdiction over almost every aspect of people’s lives throughout the EU Empire. While Chirac may con his fellow Frenchfolk into voting Yes this coming May 29, its hard to see how the Brits will next spring – especially with Bolton at the UN.

No wonder the French-loving Democrats desperately tried to demonize him. Destroying American sovereignty is their fondest dream. It’s going to be a lot harder to do now. The Bolton Show at Turtle Bay promises to be quite a performance.

Let's hope there is no filibuster, he gets an "up" vote, and can get started on his new duties at the U.N. There's alot of work to be done.

Reid cites FBI file on judicial pick

The Dems keep reaching new lows. As reported by Charles Hurt of THE WASHINGTON TIMES (registration required) minority leader Dirty Harry Reid "strayed from his prepared remarks on the Senate floor yesterday and promised to continue opposing one of President Bush's judicial nominees based on 'a problem' he said is in the nominee's 'confidential report from the FBI.'
Those highly confidential reports are filed on all judicial nominees, and severe sanctions apply to anyone who discloses their contents. Less clear is whether a senator could face sanctions for characterizing the content of such files.

Dirty Harry said Judge Saad would have been filibustered anyway and then went on to say, "All you need to do is have a member go upstairs and look at his confidential report from the FBI, and I think we would all agree that there is a problem there."

It's unclear, I guess, if he technically violated the rules of disclosure, since he didn't say what was in the file, he just said that there was something in those files.
Republican aides pointed to Standing Rule of the Senate 29, Section 5: "Any Senator, officer, or employee of the Senate who shall disclose the secret or confidential business or proceedings of the Senate, including the business and proceedings of the committees, subcommittees, and offices of the Senate, shall be liable, if a Senator, to suffer expulsion from the body; and if an officer or employee, to dismissal from the service of the Senate, and to punishment for contempt."

Furthermore, a "Memorandum of Understanding" covering the use of FBI background reports limits access to committee members and the nominee's home-state senators. Mr. Reid would fall into neither category.

Sean Rushton of the conservative Committee for Justice asks, "Can you think of a better way to trash someone's reputation?" By saying that there "is bad stuff from an FBI investigation in a file somewhere and leave that hanging. This is character assassination of the lowest order and completely improper."

Now folks, Dirty Harry knows you cannot say what's in those files. Republicans are saying that this is an "underhanded smear".

Michael Bouchard, sheriff of Oakland County in Michigan and a personal friend of Judge Saad, said he is "absolutely" certain that the FBI file doesn't contain anything damaging.

"I think Harry Reid is lying," he said. "He's hiding behind something he knows he'll never be asked to show. Harry Reid is a coward."

Confidants of Judge Saad said yesterday that the judge would release the file but that he has never seen it, let alone obtained copies of it. Judge Saad is not permitted to see the file, Senate staffers said.

So what we have here then, is the minority leader dangling the "fact" that there is "supposed" information in confidential files that is "supposedly" bad knowing that:
  • You cannot disclose the contents of those files
  • Judge Saad has not seen the contents of the files
  • Judge Saad will NEVER see the files because he is not permitted to see the files
  • He (Sen. Reid) will not have to prove or backup these accusations
  • and there is no way for Judge Saad to effectively refute these allegations
Much like the theory that you cannot scientifically prove or disprove the negative,
("I know the myth of 'you can't prove a negative' circulates throughout the nontheist community, and it is good to dispel myths whenever we can....as it happens, there really isn't such a thing as a 'purely' negative statement, because every negative entails a positive, and vice versa.......negative statements often make claims that are hard to prove because they make predictions about things we are in practice unable to observe in a finite time.")

it's impossible to refute or disprove "unknown allegations" that may or may not exist. A truly despicable tactic. But, I guess we shouldn't be surprised.

Oh, No..... This Cannot Be...........

Bush Finds Believer in Georgian Leader

"TBILISI, Georgia
-- President Bush's vision of spreading freedom and democracy throughout the world has found a home in the heart of Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili.

The 37-year-old, U.S.-educated freedom fighter who led a popular uprising in 2003 dubbed the "Rose Revolution," which ousted a former top Soviet official from power told The Washington Times yesterday that the U.S. president is on the right side of history.

"It's a new kind of ideology that we have from this president that's kind of crystallized now. It is idealistic. It's a much more moral position. It's also a very winning positive position," Mr. Saakashvili said. "I think President Bush was very fast to capture this mood," he added.

The Golden Fleece of Freedom

The new Georgian president, Mikhail Saakashvili, who was finally able to kick out the "mafiocracy" of Aslan Abashidze from Ajaria in May 2004 (even though the Russians still refuse to get their soldiers out of Abkazia and South Ossetia to this day) stood shoulder to shoulder with President Bush this week in Freedom Square, once called Lenin Square, and spoke in soaring rhetoric about the prospect of freedom and democracy to transform the world.

"So little wonder that over a quarter million Georgians turned out to hear the President of the United States celebrate the day, April 9, 1991, the statue of Lenin was pulled down at the very spot where he was speaking, and tell them “Americans respect your courageous choice for liberty – as you build a free and democratic Georgia, the American people will stand with you.” They cried tears of gratitude when his words were meant for Russia: “The territory and sovereignty of Georgia must be respected by all nations.”
(You can read the entire speech here .)

"The people of Georgia recognize George Bush as the savior and protector of freedom that he is. Why can’t the Russians? Churchill said Russia was an enigma wrapped in a riddle inside a puzzle. Why can’t they live in peace with their neighbors instead of always wanting a piece of their neighbors? Part of the answer must lie in there being no word for 'peace' in the Russian language."

"The Russian word mir is always translated as 'peace.' But mir doesn’t mean peace, it means order. For us peace means freedom, people being left alone without violence so they can conduct their lives and work towards their goals peacefully. For Russians, peace means conformity: when people are all good little boys and girls and do what they are told by their rulers, you have order and therefore peace."

"Put succinctly: 'Peace' in English means the absence of violence. 'Peace' in Russian – Mir -- means the absence of disobedience."

"Mir, Russian peace, can only come by being forcefully imposed on people and is always win-lose. As Lenin said, there is but one question of any importance in human relations: Kto-Kovo? Who-Whom? Who wins, who loses? For Lenin, the only way to win was to make someone else lose. The concept of win-win, of mutual cooperation for mutual benfit was incomprehensible to him (literally, like creating something out of nothing). Putin, the ex-KGB agent looks at the world the same way. It’s the Russians’ fatal mind-flaw."

"Until Putin and his fellow Russians abandon Kto-Kovo, the people of Georgia and those of other former Russian colonies will continue to look upon them as threats – and to seek protection from America."

Border Patrol told to stand down in Arizona

As I posted earlier here, the Mexican government is unwilling to help control and patrol the southern border. They encourage illegal immigration.....they have no reason to stop it....it's in their best interest to keep illegal immigration flowing.

The biggest problem I see is that OUR government does not want to stop it either. Here's another example of our governments unwillingness to control illegal immigrants as cited by Jerry Seper in his article.
U.S. Border Patrol agents have been ordered not to arrest illegal aliens along the section of the Arizona border where protesters patrolled last month because an increase in apprehensions there would prove the effectiveness of Minuteman volunteers, The Washington Times has learned.

More than a dozen agents, all of whom asked not to be identified for fear of retribution, said orders relayed by Border Patrol supervisors at the Naco, Ariz., station made it clear that arrests were "not to go up" along the 23-mile section of border that the volunteers monitored to protest illegal immigration.

"It was clear to everyone here what was being said and why," said one veteran agent. "The apprehensions were not to increase after the Minuteman volunteers left. It was as simple as that."

Another agent said the Naco supervisors "were clear in their intention" to keep new arrests to an "absolute minimum" to offset the effect of the Minuteman vigil, adding that patrols along the border have been severely limited.

Thursday, May 12, 2005


Neal Boortz writes:
Liberal Democrat Bill Cosby has been ruffling a lot of feathers on the part of the media, the left and assorted activists these days. Awhile back, he dared to speak the truth and criticize those in the black community for their priorities, the drop-out rate, illegitimacy and illiteracy. That went over like a lead balloon. A few people on the left praised Cosby, but most have been vilifying him...particularly in the media.

Since his campaign started, Cosby has been subjected to outright character assassination. Are some of the claims true? Nobody but those involved know for sure, but you can't deny the timing. After all, we heard nothing of Cosby's supposed indiscretions until he dared to speak out against the excuse-making victimology that infects the black community.

Bill Cosby is finding out what those on the right have known for years. Those who dare to criticize the liberal status quo can expect to be savaged by the mainstream media and their accomplices on the left.

But Cosby is right....maybe people will listen. Probably not.

Heavy-Handed says look at this picture closely. Note the expression of Jesse Jackson. Would you say he's a happy camper? I think not. Do you think Mr.Jackson approves of the message. "Negatory", thinks Heavy-Handed.

Has the tide shifted?

"David Brooks thinks that the tide has shifted in John Bolton's favor because, through testimony, it has become clear that Bolton was arguing on the basis of policy to defend the President's policies against those in the State Department or elsewhere who opposed them. That was his job.
The other thing the transcripts reveal is that many fights over clearing speeches were not about intelligence - they were about policy. The speech-clearance process was the policy-making process. Often when Bolton was pushing back at his colleagues, he was trying to defend the president's policies from dissenters at State.

For example, Larry Wilkerson believed that America's Cuba policy was "the dumbest policy on the face of the earth," as he told GQ. He disagreed strongly with the idea of imposing sanctions on arms proliferators, as he told Senate investigators.

So when he challenged Bolton, Bolton would bend on most matters, but not on policy.

As Wilkerson himself told the Senate investigators: "There were some problems, on a number of occasions, with Under Secretary Bolton's proposed remarks. I found him to be, at that point, basically receptive to my changes that were culturally sensitive. ... I did not find him to be receptive when we talked about policy changes, fundamental policy changes in his speeches."

That's because Bolton's job was to stand up for the president's policies.

The momentum has shifted on the Bolton nomination because John Bolton turns out to be a more complicated figure than earlier portrayed. It's become clear that earlier tales of him chasing women down hallways are unreliable. It's become clear that while he's abrasive, he is professional. If Senator George Voinovich reads these transcripts before he votes, I'm sure Bolton will be confirmed.
I just doubt that Voinovich is doing the due diligence that is required of the thoughtful senator he aspires to be."

From Betsy's Page

Castro-worshippers behind attack on Bolton

Robert Novak has written an article on who's behind the attack of John Bolton. It can be found at Townhall.com. Babalu Blog shares their view on the matter here.

Blood-Sucking Parasites

The cover story of the latest issue of the magazine of Germany's largest union, which depicts American businesses as blood-sucking parasites, has created quite a stir, to put it mildly:

The image “http://www.medienkritikonline.com/aussauger.JPG” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

In this post, Davids Medienkritik has thorough coverage of the controversy. Ulrich Speck (one of American Future's guest bloggers) posted the following comment:

It's not only the left who supports the European social(ist) model, i.e. the welfare state. It first and foremost the US.

There is a big, not openly outspoken deal behind this. It works like this:
America pays for international security and international order. Thanks to these public goods, Europeans can buy cheap raw material and export their products to the global markets.

A lot of the money Europe gets by doing so it spends for welfare programs. That is a means to pacify people and make them happy voters of the politicians who love to spend the money. Europe can spend this money for welfare because it doesn't need to invest in global order and security.

Is this an unfair deal?

Not for the Europeans. Many of them get money from the state - for doing nothing. That's the old dream of aristocrats and socialists alike. At the same time they are not responsible for what is going on on a global scale. They can blame the US for everything. This may not be healthy, but it makes you feel good. Morally superior.

Unfair for the US? Neither. As long as Europe spends it's money for welfare and not for weapons, the Europeans will not be able to challenge American supremacy. Americans get the blame for everything, sure, but they got the power too.

An interesting perspective.
From American Future

EU-3 Ultimatum to Iran

From the Washington Post:
Via American Future
European officials notified Iran for the first time yesterday that they will walk away from two years of talks and sign on to a Bush administration strategy for punitive measures against Tehran if it makes good on threats to resume nuclear work in coming days.

In a sharply worded letter to Hassan Rouhani, the head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany warned that such work "would bring the negotiating process to an end." The letter added: "The consequences could only be negative for Iran."

In mid-March, Secretary of State Rice announced that the US would drop objections to Iran's eventual membership in the World Trade Organization and would also allow, "on a case-by-case basis," some sales of civilian aircraft parts to Iran. She added that these incentives would go into effect only if Iran agrees to halt the enrichment of uranium permanently.

At that time I argued that the Bush administration was not cozying up to the mullahs; instead, the Iranians were being given the opportunity to show their true stripes and, by pursuing this diplomatic strategem, the risk of a split between the US and the Europeans was being minimized.

Bush's nuanced diplomacy seems to be paying off:
The willingness of the European trio to take Iran to task if it ends a suspension of its nuclear program after six months indicated that the Bush administration is having some success in persuading key allies to take a tougher approach with the Islamic republic.

The European shift was prompted in part by frustration with Iran but also by a change in tactics by the White House. After two years of refusing to back Europe's diplomatic track with Iran, the administration decided in March to support the process in exchange for written guarantees that if talks fell apart, Europe would agree to take the issue to the U.N. Security Council.

We may soon find out if the Europeans are as good as their word.

The EU and the Right To Work

From the Wall Street Journal:
Via American Future

A lot of people marvel that U.S. GDP per capita is about 30% higher than the West European average, but the main reason is surprisingly simple: Americans just work more. The U.S. labor-force participation rate is more than six percentage points higher and unemployment is about half the European level. And while German and French workers clock in about 1,400 hours per year, Americans work almost 1,800 hours.

The one major European economy that is similarly industrious is the U.K. But yesterday, the Socialist, Labor and Green members of the European Parliament decided they would no longer tolerate this aberration. They voted in favor of scrapping an opt-out clause that exempts the U.K. from an EU law limiting the average working week to 48 hours. More precisely, the clause allows British workers to opt out from this EU law -- if they so wish. No employer can force a worker to do overtime. And no country has to follow Britain's lead here. [...]

. . . the Socialist lawmakers are engaged in the time-honored practice of raising their competitors' costs. In this case, the competitor is the U.K., whose more liberal employment policies make it an attractive destination for investment and jobs within the EU. This in turn puts pressure on Europe's more-socialist countries to reform or lose jobs. But the socialists have found a third way -- make the U.K. less competitive by making its labor market less flexible. Disappointingly, British Labour Party members of the European Parliament have gone along with this assault on British liberty.

Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Recommended Reading

By Thomas Sowell

Recently a friend described a meeting with a nasty-tempered leftist who was from a rich family. Unfortunately, there are a lot of leftists who were born with a silver spoon in their mouth -- and, instead of being grateful, are venomous against American society.

Conversely, there are people like yours truly who were born on the other end of the economic scale and think this is a great country. No one has really explained either of these phenomena. Full article.

By Walter E. Williams

Let's talk about the rich -- those people who, according to former Congressman Richard Gephardt, are "winners in life's lottery." Or the people whom director Michael Moore preaches, in his book "Dude, Where's my Country?" got rich off the backs of the poor. Full article.


By David Limbaugh

If you want to get a real glimpse of the thought-tyranny of the academic Left, you should look at the case of Scott McConnell, who was recently expelled from Le Moyne College in Syracuse, N.Y., because his personal beliefs didn't fit within the school's indoctrination grid.

The Left, through an extraordinary process of self-deception, routinely congratulates itself for its enlightenment and open-mindedness, but the slightest scrutiny of its behavior in academia alone puts the lie to its claims. Sadly, the Left has even sunk its tentacles into Jesuit colleges like Le Moyne. Full article.

B Oliver North

EN ROUTE TO IRAQ -- My bosses at FOX News have sent me on assignment to the "sandbox," as our troops have taken to calling Iraq. There, I will spend time with some of the most impressive young men and women this country has ever produced. These soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Guardsmen never cease to amaze me. Their dedication, enthusiasm and resilience, even in the unforgiving heat and atmosphere of an Iraqi summer, are second to none.

On the day before my departure, The Washington Times carried a front-page photo of an unidentified American soldier cradling a young Iraqi child in his arms. The child was severely wounded by terrorists in Mosul, who used a car bomb to plow through a group of neighborhood children to attack an American patrol. The blast killed two children and injured 15 other Iraqis. Some might say the photo is an example of the horrors of war. It would more accurately be described as portraying the horrors of terrorism. Full article.

Tuesday, May 10, 2005

Milwaukee's Voter Fraud

Captain Ed has written a good piece on the voting fraud that took place in Milwaukee during the last presidential election in November, 2004. Read it here.

Anti anti-Americanism

By Victor David Hanson
Things are changing, however, both here and abroad. Thousands of American troops have left Europe. Its denizens now sense that the American people no longer wish to subsidize their defense only to earn ingratitude. The E.U. dream of heaven on earth may be mired in high taxes, low growth, high unemployment, and demographic and entitlement time bombs--not the sort of platform from which to hector a supposedly sinking U.S.

Read the whole thing here. For it is good.

Monday, May 09, 2005

First "Vigilantes", Now Denied Access

First, President Bush called The Minutemen Project 'vigilantes', and now "newspaper publisher Chris Simcox, who helped organize last month's Minuteman vigils and promised more in the future, was denied access to a Department of Homeland Security press conference in Arizona last week."

Jerry Seper wrote 'Homeland Security bars organizer of Minutemen' for THE WASHINGTON TIMES.
Mr. Simcox, who writes for, edits and owns the Tombstone, Ariz., Tumbleweed, wants the American Civil Liberties Union to determine whether his First Amendment free-press rights were violated.

He said the Border Patrol refused to let him attend the Thursday press conference featuring Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who spoke in Douglas, Ariz., on the need for additional agents and increased technology to gain control of the Arizona border.
This continual and wanton disregard for our countrys' borders and blatant disregard for the safety of our citizens and apparent affinity for having a country with no sovereignty is driving me INSANE......INSANE, I SAY. And, when citizens feel this way and try to stand up for themselves..... to do want our government should so .... but has no interest in doing, they are ridiculed and then shunned. What a great government we have.



Question: What is the truest definition of Globalization?

Answer: Princess Diana's death is a good example.

Question: How come?

Answer: An English princess

with an Egyptian boyfriend

crashes in a French tunnel,

driving a German car

with a Dutch engine,

driven by a Belgian who was drunk

on Scottish whisky, (check the bottle before you change the spelling)

followed closely by Italian Paparazzi,

on Japanese motorcycles;

treated by an American doctor,

using Brazilian medicines.

This is sent to you by an American,

using Bill Gates's technology,

and you're probably reading this on your computer,

that use Taiwanese chips,

and a Korean monitor,

assembled by Bangladeshi workers

in a Singapore plant,

transported by Indian lorry-drivers,

hijacked by Indonesians,

unloaded by Sicilian longshoremen,

and trucked to you by Mexican illegals.....

That, my friends, is Globalization

Sunday, May 08, 2005

The Dems and their Bolton Boondoggle

'Sore Losers' hope to win in fight over Bolton and force U.S. to pass 'global test'

"John Kerry and his friends are sore losers. They're unhappy that the American people last Fall rejected the idea of making the U.S. submit to the UN and its so-called 'global test."

"Of course, the Democrats can't come right out and say this is their real objection to Mr. Bolton. After all, President Bushoffered the American people a clear alternative -- rooted in a "policy of strong U.S. leadership in world affairs." And three-and-a-half million more voters agreed with Mr. Bush's stance -- a stance embraced and epitomized by one of his most able and tenacious subordinates, John Bolton -- and rejected Sen. Kerry's world view.

So, in the hope of winning in the Senate what they lost at the ballot box -- and, thereby, helping the UN become ascendant and remain unreformed -- Senators. Kerry, Biden, et.al. have adopted the "kitchen sink" strategy: Throw every charge imaginable at John Bolton, including impugning his character, integrity, judgment and competence, in the hope that something, anything, will stick and cause at least one Republican to join them."
---Center for Security Policy

Bush’s Border Blunder

Commentary by James Atticus Bowden
President Bush’s big border blunder was calling a couple of hundred middle-aged citizens ‘vigilantes’. The name-calling will blow up and destroy his presidency and Party if ever the Islamists attack again on his watch.

Terror Denial

By Robert Spencer

Last Friday, firefighters conducting a routine inspection in a Brooklyn supermarket found 200 automobile airbags and a room lined with posters of Osama bin Laden and beheadings in Iraq. An element in the airbags can be used to make pipe bombs. The owner of the building, according to the New York Post, “served jail time in the late 1970s and early 1980s for arson, reckless endangerment, weapons possession and conspiracy, according to the records.” But officials were definite: this has nothing to do with terrorism.

It doesn’t? What does it have to do with, then? Was this a local Rotary Club chapter that decided to sell pipe bombs as a fundraiser and thought that a few posters of Osama and Iraqi beheadings might liven things up? Full story.


In regards to humanity being the primary cause of global climate change, "Dr. Tim Patterson, professor of earth sciences at Ottawa's Carleton University, says this is very unlikely.

"The geologic record reveals that the only constant about climate is change. Long before our species inhabited the Earth, there were far more extreme changes in climate than what we see now. In the past million years, the Earth has been subjected to at least 33 ice ages and interglacial warm periods where temperatures soared far above that ever recorded in humanity's short history. Patterson and others show that, even in the past thousand years, there were periods much warmer and colder than today.

For more than 90 percent of Earth's history, conditions were much warmer than today. Two million years ago forests extended nearly to the North Pole. As recently as 125,000 years ago, temperatures were high enough that hippopotami and other animals now found only in Africa made their homes in northern Europe.

However, over the last 1.6 million years, it has generally been much cooler than this, with periodic rapid fluctuations from cooler to warmer intervals known as interglaciations. The causes of these dramatic climate variations include continental drift, changes in ocean/atmospheric circulation, natural wobbles in the Earth's orbit called Milankovitch cycles and variations in solar energy.

Despite a 0.7 degree C warming that has occurred over the past century (as much warming occurred before 1940 as since then, even though the large majority of the CO2 buildup in the atmosphere occurred after 1940) , overall, global temperatures have dropped about 2°C over the past 5,000 years (depending on latitude: a 6 degree C drop in some Arctic areas; a 0.5 degree C drop in some lower latitudes). Another ice age is expected to begin within the next few thousand years and so any gradual global warming could be a blessing, as it could delay the onset of the next glacial period, or at least reduce its severity.”

Professor Patterson gives an interesting, and easy to understand, verbal description of natural climate variation. Click here to listen to his three-minute presentation - please make sure your speakers are on.

Many other scientists are skeptical of the fashionable view that people are causing significant climate change. A particularly compelling one is Dr. Fred Singer, president of The Science & Environmental Policy Project."

Hat tip to Brightremarks.

"One thing this world doesn't need
and is getting tired of, indeed,
is the ignorant rant
and endless chant
of garbage coming from Harry Reid."

From Brightremarks

"Where there's a will there's a way"

The problem is ...... Mexico "lacks the will" to do anything at the border, according to Arizona's Republican Senator Jon Kyl.
Mexico has shown it can do more to keep its citizens from migrating illegally into the United States but doesn't have the will to sustain it, said an Arizona lawmaker who wants Congress to change immigration policies.
Of course thats true. The illegal immigrants want to come here because of their crappy economy; and The Mexican government wants their citizens to come here, and the more the merrier - because of their crappy economy. Does Sen. Kyl agree with me? Apparently so:
It's in Mexico's interest to promote illegal immigration because it relieves the country's poor economy and high unemployment and also provides a huge amount of repatriated money, billions of dollars that migrants send home annually, he said.
Troops could halt illegal immigration as they did during the Minuteman Project's run on this side of border, he says.

Mexico has shown it can do more to keep its citizens from migrating illegally into the United States but doesn't have the will to sustain it, said an Arizona lawmaker who wants Congress to change immigration policies.
The Mexican government does not want to do anything about it. There is no incentive for them to do so. Again, Sen. Kyle agrees:
Kyl said he expects the Mexican government will do nothing to dissuade migration.

[Even though]"The reality is that you could have that same amount of repatriated money if you had legal employment here, and relief of Mexico's unemployment situation" without being a detriment to the United States, Kyl said.
It's always the responsibilty of a country to control who is crossing the borders and coming into their country and a lesser concern of who is leaving their country. It is only when the country you share the borders with is respectful of borders, will it be more willing to cooperate with who is coming and going across those shared borders. This is clearly not the case with Mexico - they have no intention to curb this flow, and as we have seen, actually encourage illegal immigration into the U.S.
Republican Sen. Jon Kyl said Mexico needs to accept greater responsibility for controlling illegal immigration and that it succeeded in discouraging people from crossing into Arizona last month when members of a civilian volunteer group monitored a 23-mile stretch of border near Naco.

Kyl pointed to Mexican military and civilian authorities who were near the corridor monitored by the Minuteman Project, the volunteer group posted at the border throughout April to report illegal immigration to federal authorities. The group claimed that its work led to 335 apprehensions by the U.S. Border Patrol.
We are going to have to come up with reasons and incentives for the Mexican government to change its ways. They are not going to do it on their own.
Kyl said he heard reports that the government-sponsored Grupo Beta agency, which patrols along Mexico's northern border and aids Mexicans stranded in the desert, warned Mexicans against crossing in the area monitored by Minutemen, fearing that the group would hurt migrants.

"Mexicans didn't come across there," Kyl said. "What that demonstrates obviously is that the Mexican government could be very effective in helping us stem illegal immigration if it wanted to, but obviously they have not wanted to do that."

Kyl said the Mexican government could send forces or Grupo Beta to known staging areas such as Altar to stop people from going north.
Why else do I think the Mexican government is not interested in addressing this problem, aside from what's been discussed here ? This is great; you'll love this:
The Mexican government has said it can do nothing to prevent people from crossing into the United States because Mexican law allows the nation's citizens freedom of movement within their borders. Once they cross into the United States, they are no longer under Mexican jurisdiction.
Heh, heh.

And when you do try and do something about the illegals crossing over the border, you get this.

Good humor, huh?


"Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph."
--- Thomas Paine

Belarus Update

President Bush, first lady Laura Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice attended a ceremony at the Freedom Monument in Riga, Latvia, where Mr. Bush received the Baltic nation's highest honor. Update to my earlier post on Belarus.
Bush urges elections in Belarus / Joseph Curl
President Bush yesterday urged Russia to support democratic nations on its borders and called for free elections in Belarus, a Russian outpost the president labeled "the last dictatorship in Europe." Read the full article here.
(Registration required.)

The sad fall from grace of Paul Volcker

Paul Volcker has disgraced himself. He is trying to stop a former investigator who resigned from the commission from cooperating with congress regarding the probe of the U.N's food - for - oil scandal.

Radio Blogger says:
The powerful former chairman of the Fed, Paul Volcker, did a lot of good for this country during his tenure as the caretaker of this country's monetary policy. But he made a very tragic mistake. He didn't stay in retirement. When asked to head up the UN-instigated investigation into the Oil For Food scandal, he should have said thanks, but no. He didn't. Now, he's in the swamp.

Read the rest here.