Sunday, 31 January 2010
Why does Fox News promote FBI-shunned group?
clear

COMMENT: If anyone can read the article below and watch the video HERE, and not believe that we have gotten so openbook minded that our brains have fallen out, there may be no hope of convincing them that we ARE in danger!!
Don't actually believe that our brains have fallen out?  Check this out:
Controversial Islamic Speaker Welcomed at Ft. Hood
. and State Department Clears Way for 2 Muslim Scholars to Return to U.S.
Now we have '
From Osama to Obama,' Bin Laden Delivers New Threats, in addition,
"Britain raised its international terrorism threat level to 'severe'".  There IS a danger!
If you have not yet ordered Muslim Mafia, you can click on the book to do so.

Additional information on Ibrahim Hooper:
CAIR: 'Moderate' friends of terror
CAIR's Ibrahim Hooper and radical Islam
CAIR's Honest Ibe Hooper caught boasting about getting Saudi money -- which he has denied getting in public

Want to contact Fox News? Click
HERE


Attention-getting excerpts from article below:
star"At no time during any of the four appearances by CAIR leaders did Fox bring up the fact that the FBI has cut off ties to CAIR or that the Justice Department has blacklisted the group as an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator – information critical to the public's understanding of CAIR's possible bias in delinking terrorism from Islam and arguing against Islamic terrorist profiling."

star"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future," Hooper said in a 1993 interview with the Minneapolis Star Tribune. "But I'm not going to do anything violent to promote that. I'm going to do it through education."

star"Do not think about your contributions (to CAIR) as donations. Think about it from the perspective of rate of return," former CAIR chairman Ahmed told finance ministers in Dubai, according to the Arab press. "The investment of $50 million will give you billions of dollars in return for 50 years" if a sufficiently Arab-friendly environment can be created in America to allow sheiks to buy up key U.S. assets, he said.


Why does Fox News promote terror-tied, FBI-shunned group?

Bankrolled by same wealthy Saudi prince, CAIR now regular guest on cable leader

Long a reliably patriotic media source in the war on terror, Fox News may now be among news outlets who have fallen under the spell of the Council on American-Islamic Relations' propaganda machine.

"We own the media," CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper privately brags, according to a source currently working inside the aggressive Islamist lobby group.

Fox News host Bill O'Reilly last week invited the TV-savvy Hooper on his show to debate passenger profiling, the second guest appearance by the CAIR spokesman in a month. At the end of the segment, O'Reilly thanked Hooper and called him a "stand-up guy," sending shockwaves through the conservative blogosphere.

CAIR is no ordinary guest. The government has blacklisted it as an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator, and the group remains under criminal suspicion by the FBI, which has cut off outreach ties to it.


FBI agents arresting CAIR founding director Ghassan Elashi in 2002.

Congress and the IRS also are investigating CAIR, which has had no fewer than 15 executives and board members convicted or implicated in terror probes, including its founding chairman.

In addition, CAIR's very existence as a legitimate corporation has been challenged in a lawsuit in federal court.

Given CAIR's proven ties to terrorism – which O'Reilly failed to mention – why would Fox offer the group's top executives a virtually uncritical forum on prime-time cable TV? Saudi Arabian money may be a factor.

It turns out that the same billionaire Saudi prince who owns a major stake in Fox's parent company also bankrolls Washington-based CAIR. And sensitive State Department records reveal Hooper – despite his repeated public denials – has personally solicited cash from the prince and other members of the ruling Saudi royal family during recent trips

to the kingdom.

The common financial bond between Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal and Fox, and between bin Talal and CAIR, raises questions not only about Fox News's independence, but about the truthfulness of CAIR's top spokesman.

Hooper repeatedly has denied that CAIR receives foreign support, insisting it's a "grass-roots" nonprofit organization. In CAIR press releases, Hooper has stated unequivocally: "We do not support directly or indirectly or receive support from any overseas group or government."

However, smoking-gun video footage obtained during a recent six-month covert investigation of CAIR puts the lie to Hooper's claims.

Go HERE for remainder of the article and to see 'smoking-gun video.
clear
Posted on 01/31/2010 5:55 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Sunday, 31 January 2010
More deceit -- alarmism falling apart -- more errors?
clear

1. World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

The west Himalayan range includes 15,000 glaciers

(Simon Fraser/Science Photo Library)

The west Himalayan range includes 15,000 glaciers

A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's 2007 report.  

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.

Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.

Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped: "If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments."

The IPCC's reliance on Hasnain's 1999 interview has been highlighted by Fred Pearce, the journalist who carried out the original interview for the New Scientist. Pearce said he rang Hasnain in India in 1999 after spotting his claims in an Indian magazine. Pearce said: "Hasnain told me then that he was bringing a report containing those numbers to Britain. The report had not been peer reviewed or formally published in a scientific journal and it had no formal status so I reported his work on that basis.

"Since then I have obtained a copy and it does not say what Hasnain said. In other words it does not mention 2035 as a date by which any Himalayan glaciers will melt. However, he did make clear that his comments related only to part of the Himalayan glaciers. not the whole massif."

The New Scientist report was apparently forgotten until 2005 when WWF cited it in a report called An Overview of Glaciers, Glacier Retreat, and Subsequent Impacts in Nepal, India and China. The report credited Hasnain's 1999 interview with the New Scientist. But it was a campaigning report rather than an academic paper so it was not subjected to any formal scientific review. Despite this it rapidly became a key source for the IPCC when Lal and his colleagues came to write the section on the Himalayas.

When finally published, the IPCC report did give its source as the WWF study but went further, suggesting the likelihood of the glaciers melting was "very high". The IPCC defines this as having a probability of greater than 90%.

The report read: "Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate."

However, glaciologists find such figures inherently ludicrous, pointing out that most Himalayan glaciers are hundreds of feet thick and could not melt fast enough to vanish by 2035 unless there was a huge global temperature rise. The maximum rate of decline in thickness seen in glaciers at the moment is 2-3 feet a year and most are far lower.

Professor Julian Dowdeswell, director of the Scott Polar Research Institute at Cambridge University, said: "Even a small glacier such as the Dokriani glacier is up to 120 metres [394ft] thick. A big one would be several hundred metres thick and tens of kilometres long. The average is 300 metres thick so to melt one even at 5 metres a year would take 60 years. That is a lot faster than anything we are seeing now so the idea of losing it all by 2035 is unrealistically high.”

Some scientists have questioned how the IPCC could have allowed such a mistake into print. Perhaps the most likely reason was lack of expertise. Lal himself admits he knows little about glaciers. "I am not an expert on glaciers.and I have not visited the region so I have to rely on credible published research. The comments in the WWF report were made by a respected Indian scientist and it was reasonable to assume he knew what he was talking about," he said.

Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, has previously dismissed criticism of the Himalayas claim as "voodoo science". Read more here.


2. Global warming alarmism falling apart in light of 'Climategate' and IPCC errors
By E. Calvin Beisner
Jan 22, 2010


Click to download Hi-Res Photo
E. Calvin Beisner
BURKE, Va. (BP)--One of the most alarming warnings in the 2007 Assessment Report of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was that Himalayan glaciers -- on which hundreds of millions of people depend for regular water supply from their annual contraction and recovery -- are in grave danger from global warming. "[I]f the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high," the report said (NOTE (1)).

But to the curious, there was a telltale sign that something might be amiss. The IPCC's rules require that all assertions in its assessment reports be based on published papers in refereed journals. But in this instance, the citation at the end of the sentence was "(WWF, 2005)." "WWF" is the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental advocacy organization that publishes no refereed journal and has a well deserved reputation for exaggerated claims.

As it turns out, "(WWF, 2005)" wasn't the end of the story. As reported this week in TimesOnline in the UK (2), "the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before...." And news stories aren't refereed. Further, this news story was "based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist...." And to make matters worse, "Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was 'speculation' and was not supported by any formal research."

That's not all, though. Hasnain says his "speculation" was based on a report he was bringing to Britain -- a report that was not, and never would be, peer reviewed or published. But even that report didn't say or imply that the glaciers could disappear by 2035. But WWF cited it in a campaign piece in 2005 -- and it was that campaign piece that the IPCC cited as its source. But even the campaign piece didn't suggest that the likelihood of the glaciers' disappearing by 2035 was "very high." That, apparently, was the utterly baseless addition of whoever wrote that part of the IPCC report. In reality, even if the IPCC's predictions about anthropogenic (manmade) global warming (AGW) are true, it would take hundreds of years -- not 28 -- for the Himalayan glaciers to disappear, if they ever would.

"If confirmed," TimesOnline continued, "it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research." Well, it is confirmed (3). And it is a serious failure. And there are others. For just three examples, the IPCC wrongly claims that

-- global warming has led to increased economic losses from hurricanes -- citing as support work by Roger Pielke Jr. that actually says the opposite (4).

-- sea level rise accelerated in the late 20th century because of global warming and constitutes a grave threat to low-lying population centers; but in reality the late 20th century had no acceleration in sea level rise (5) and, contrary to widespread claims, low-lying south Pacific island nations like Tuvalu are not endangered by sea level rise, because there has been no sea level rise there during the period in question (6).

-- late-twentieth-century global temperature rise was more rapid than other temperature rises from 1850 onward, giving rise to the assertion that it must be manmade, when the claim rested on what statisticians call an "end point fallacy," and a valid graph of the same data showed no increase in warming rate (7).

COUNTER ARGUMENTS

There is much more, though, to cause thoughtful people to doubt even the best documented of the IPCC's claims about AGW. The claims rest on the assertion that twentieth-century warming was more rapid, and brought global temperature higher, than anything in history. And those claims rest on the reliability of two things: our knowledge of twentieth-century temperatures, and our knowledge of pre-twentieth-century temperatures, with which to compare them. But both of these are highly in doubt. If recent warming was matched in the past, it could just as easily be a repetition of natural warming. And unprecedented warming is an absolutely essential piece of the argument for AGW.
Read more here
.


January 23, 2010
3. UN Climate change expert: there could be more errors in report

The Indian head of the UN climate change panel defended his position yesterday even as further errors were identified in the panel's assessment of Himalayan glaciers.

Dr Rajendra Pachauri dismissed calls for him to resign over the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change’s retraction of a prediction that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.

But he admitted that there may have been other errors in the same section of the report, and said that he was considering whether to take action against those responsible.

“I know a lot of climate sceptics are after my blood, but I’m in no mood to oblige them,” he told The Times in an interview. “It was a collective failure by a number of people,” he said. “I need to consider what action to take, but that will take several weeks. It’s best to think with a cool head, rather than shoot from the hip.”

The IPCC’s 2007 report, which won it the Nobel Peace Prize, said that the probability of Himalayan glaciers “disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high”.

But it emerged last week that the forecast was based not on a consensus among climate change experts, but on a media interview with a single Indian glaciologist in 1999.

The IPCC admitted on Thursday that the prediction was “poorly substantiated” in the latest of a series of blows to the panel’s credibility.

Dr Pachauri said that the IPCC’s report was the responsibility of the panel’s Co-Chairs at the time, both of whom have since moved on.

They were Dr Martin Parry, a British scientist now at Imperial College London, and Dr Osvaldo Canziani , an Argentine meteorologist. Neither was immediately available for comment.

“I don’t want to blame them, but typically the working group reports are managed by the Co-Chairs,” Dr Pachauri said. “Of course the Chair is there to facilitate things, but we have substantial amounts of delegation.” Read more here.


clear
Posted on 01/31/2010 5:54 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Sunday, 31 January 2010
Multiculturalism Will Bring Us Our Next 9-11
clear

NEW FLASH:
Man Claims Terror Ties in Little Rock Shooting
MEMPHIS — A Tennessee man accused of killing a soldier outside a Little Rock, Ark., military recruiting station last year has asked a judge to change his plea to guilty, claiming for the first time that he is affiliated with a Yemen-based affiliate of Al Qaeda .
In a letter to the judge presiding over his case, the accused killer, Abdulhakim Muhammad, calls himself a soldier in Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and calls the shooting “a Jihadi Attack” in retribution for the killing of Muslims by American troops.
“I wasn’t insane or post traumatic nor was I forced to do this Act,” Mr. Muhammad said in a two-page, hand-printed note in pencil. The attack, which he said did not go as planned, was “justified according to Islamic Laws and the Islamic Religion. Jihad — to fight those who wage war on Islam and Muslims.”
Read more here.



still burns
















I did not know anything about Rabbi Shifren until I discover his writings.  He has a very interesting bio and is running for the state senate in California, where he sponsored the first annual Conservative Teachers Conference on January 21st. The essay below is very thought provoking and is offered for your consideration. We are seeing around us EVERY DAY the consequences of 'multiculturalism'.

Please see a brief interview with General Jerry Boyken on CBN on this subject
HERE.

Multiculturalism Will Bring Us Our Next 9-11

Essay by Rabbi Shifren
 
Let's start by saying what everybody already knows: We will have another terrorist attack in the U.S. We just don't know when or where. What we as Americans are basically asked to do is be guinea pigs in an out-of-control terrorist experiment, where assessments will determine the best way for us to die. How has the greatest, mightiest country on earth been reduced to groveling and bowing down to cut-throat murderers? When did we become apologists for our individual freedoms and Constitution. Our Judeo-Christian heritage?
 
Let's take a walk through memory lane, to those tarnished halls of American academia, where our notions of academic freedom and striving for excellence, have long been discarded.
Since the 60's, our schools have been not only dumbed down, but as a result, we have become a "nation at risk." Listen to what the National Commission on Excellence in Education presented to then-President Reagan in 1983 its landmark study, "A Nation at Risk:"
 
The educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a nation and as a people...if an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an ACT OF WAR. As it stands, we have allowed this to happen to ourselves...we have, in effect, been committing an act of unthinking, unilateral disarmament."
 
An act of war? You'd never know it as you romp through the hallways of our schools. It's business as usual as our "teachers' churn out texts and agendas that bash America, Whites, Christians, and anything that smacks of the uniqueness of America, hard work, delayed gratification, honor to our military, sanctity of marriage, accentuating the accomplishments of the individual and rewarding such.
Has anything changed since 1983? How have we learned from our folly, and made good in our schools? Let's fast forward to 1998 and hear what educational experts wrote in a new report, "A Nation Still at Risk."
 
--more than 10 million Americans have reached the 12th grade without having learned to read at a basic level
--more than 20 million have reached their senior year unable to do basic math
--almost 25 million have reached 12th grade not knowing the essentials of US history.
 
Totally aside from the tremendous waste of taxpayer money ( a recent UC Santa Barbara study estimates the drop-out bill due to Californians at $45 billion), we are creating a sub-class that can and will be manipulated by demagogues, preparing them for massive shifts in government control over individual liberties, transforming America into a third-class banana republic. We will march off to our work camps, cheerily singing hymns extolling "hope and change", thereby ending the golden period of America.
 
But the question remains: Wither those disaffected youth, drop outs and malcontents, that were deprived of a proper education and robbed of their share in America's bounty by the "multiculturalists" that had wasted the formative years of our students with drivel and Marxist nonsense? Wither those dumbed-down, cast-outs, that sneer at achievement and the praising of the individual over the masses weaned on "cooperative learning?"
 
Several years ago, it came as a shock that a white, suburban teen ran off to Afghanistan, joined the Al Qaeda, and was one of our POW's in Guantanamo Bay. America was shocked! How could he?! How could he!?, was the refrain from the main-stream media. Well, look at the environment the spawned him, and you'll come up with the answers.
Those 60's hippies are now our "elder statesmen". The Michael Ayers prototypes didn't disappear after the Viet Nam War. They continued their seditious talents by infecting a whole generation of youth to hate America--here in our schools.
 
It's a known fact that the incarceration rate for young Blacks is double the national average. What goes on in the jails and prisons of America? More hate, more radical Islam shoved down their throats, more alienation of our institutions and the foundation of our country. But more disturbing is what happens to the alienated inner city youth BEFORE THEY GO TO PRISON. They are set up for failure. ALL races and ethnicities in our legions of educrats will tell you that "inner city youth need special accommodations. They ALL will tell you that the bar may not be raised. They ALL lay a total guilt trip about those individuals that have worked hard to excel and therefore evolve, claiming that the "stacked deck" is the rule for our Black and Hispanic students.
Read more here.
 

clear
Posted on 01/31/2010 5:51 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Sunday, 31 January 2010
The 2010 Census, the Constitution and You
clear

COMMENT:  As I understand it, the census started this week in Alaska, so it will be coming to us in the next weeks and months. The US Constitution calls for 'counting' the people every ten years.  This process is very important because after these numbers come in, we will proceed with re-districting.  There is no way to over emphasize the importance of this process. Districts are drawn up based on population -- the goal is to put a nearly equal number of people in each state house, state senate and congressional district. To see current house, senate and congressional districts, go HERE.  In a ten year period, the demographics of a district can change dramatically so the outcome of this process will greatly influence the politics of the state for the next ten years.

Official 2010 Census

How the 2010 Census is Different - Population Reference Bureau



census

January 25, 2010

Exclusive: The 2010 Census, the Constitution and You

 
The year 2010 is another Census year, and many Americans are concerned about the apparent politicization of a process that has been with us since our Constitution was first written.
 
The director of the Census Bureau will now report directly to “White House senior management” instead of to the Commerce Secretary. “Senior management” likely means Rahm Emanuel, an Obama political crony who is currently serving as White House Chief of Staff. The move was part of what prompted Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) to withdraw as commerce secretary nominee. According to the Wall Street Journal
 
 
Mr. Gregg also cited issues involving the Census Bureau. That appeared to be a reference to reports that the White House, responding to concerns from black and Hispanic lawmakers, would be highly involved in the political decisions surrounding the decennial count. The parties have battled for years over how to carry out the survey, with Democrats tending to favor methods that would increase the number of minorities, giving them greater clout in redrawing the congressional map. Mr. Gregg has been critical of those approaches.
 
Initially, the community organizing group ACORN was to play a large role in conducting the Census, but the Census Bureau severed all ties with the group after a couple posing as a pimp and a prostitute used hidden-camera footage to show ACORN employees advising them on how to skirt the law.
 
 
"Over the last several months, through ongoing communication with our regional offices, it is clear that ACORN's affiliation with the 2010 Census promotion has caused sufficient concern in the general public, has indeed become a distraction from our mission, and may even become a discouragement to public cooperation, negatively impacting 2010 Census efforts," read a letter from Census Director Robert M. Groves to the president of ACORN.
 
 
"Unfortunately, we no longer have confidence that our national partnership agreement is being effectively managed through your many local offices. For the reasons stated, we therefore have decided to terminate the partnership," the letter said.
 
Privacy advocates are also concerned that, as part of preparation for the census, GPS coordinates for every front door in the nation were collected. What happened to good old fashioned maps?
 
Also somewhat telling about the political machinations behind this year’s census is the fact that there is no question asking if the residents of a home are either citizens or legal residents. According to the Washington Times
 
It appears that this is the first census to omit this inquiry. Question 13 of the 2000 census form specifically asked the following:
 
 
Is this person a CITIZEN of the United States?
 
 
-Yes, born in the United States-->Skip to 15a
 
 
-Yes, born in Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, or Northern Marianas
 
 
-Yes, born abroad of American parent or parents
 
 
-Yes, a U.S. citizen by naturalization
 
 
-No, not a citizen of the United States
 
Meanwhile, they want to know your ethnicity (with Hispanics getting their very own section), age and sex. And if you were lucky enough to receive an American Community Survey, it has questions like whether you currently have a job, what cars you own, how old your home is, how many bedrooms it has, how many toilets are in it and how much you pay for fuel to heat it.
 
But are you a citizen who pays taxes  and is eligible to vote? Eh, not important.
 
Rep. Michelle Bachman (R-MN) says she refuses to answer any questions on the census other than the first one, which asks how many people live in the home, citing concerns about “very intricate” and “very personal” questions. Census spokeswoman Shelly Lowe says that anyone over the age of 18 who does not answer all of the questions could face a $5,000 fine.
 
But is that constitutional?  Read more here

clear
Posted on 01/31/2010 5:58 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Sunday, 31 January 2010
56 Percent of Americans Say Abortion is ‘Morally Wrong,’
clear


56 Percent of Americans Say Abortion is ‘Morally Wrong,’ Poll Finds
Friday, January 22, 2010
By Pete Winn, Senior Writer/Editor


(CNSNews.com) - After 37 years of legalized abortion, 56 percent of all Americans still say it is morally wrong – and 58 percent of those aged 18 to 29 take that position.
 
The poll was conducted by the Marist Institute for Public Opinion and is the latest in a series of such surveys commissioned by the Knights of Columbus.
 
“Americans of all ages – and younger people in even greater numbers than their parents – see abortion as something morally wrong,” K of C Supreme Knight Carl Anderson said. “America has turned a corner and is embracing life – and in doing so is embracing a future they – and all of us – can be proud of.”
 
Anderson told CNSNews.com that he wasn’t surprised at the results.
 
‘Given what polling we’ve done in the past, it’s consistent, so from that standpoint, no, I’m not surprised,” he said. "Medical technologies, like 3-D ultrasound, are revealing so much more clearly the humanity of the unborn child. 

“Conversely, a lot of people know women who have had an abortion and have come to realize that it wasn’t really a good experience for her. I think when you think about those dynamics, you’re not surprised.
 
“On the other hand, when you just look at it on the surface, these are people who have known nothing other than a regime of legal abortion, so you would expect them to be fully supportive of it, but they are not. And that’s a consistent finding over a good period time now,” Anderson said. 
 
The poll asked: "Regardless of whether or not you think it should be legal, do you believe that in general, each one of the following issues is morally acceptable or morally wrong?
 
-- 58 percent of those aged 18 to 29 – known as "Millennials"-- consider abortion to be "morally wrong."
 
-- 61 percent of Generation X (those 30-44) feel the same way.
 
-- 51 percent of Baby Boomers (those aged 45-64) agreed.
 
-- 62 percent of the Greatest Generation (those 65+) say it is morally wrong.
Read more here.
clear
Posted on 01/31/2010 5:56 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Monday, 18 January 2010
2009: The Year of Homegrown Jihad
clear


COMMENT:  You will not want to miss a word of the very important article and you will want to view a brief video, Sweden in Grip of Islam, HERE.


star" I heard it a million times [ at mosques here in the United States ]". [Wafa Sultan, a former Muslim and author of the book " A God Who Hates "] said. "That we are here to spread Islam and eventually to replace the American constitution with Islamic Sharia law."

2009: The Year of Homegrown Jihad

 
CHICAGO, Ill. – From the Fort Hood massacre to the failed attempt to blow up an airliner on Christmas day, Islamic jihadists have never been more active in their attempts to attack the U.S.
 
 
Many of the plots were hatched by U.S. citizens – homegrown jihadists.
 
 
Exibit A: Five middle class friends from the Washington, D.C., suburbs: one was a dental student at a local university, all were praised as "good kids" by leaders of their northern Virginia mosque.
 
 
"I have always known these kids as fun loving, career focused children that had a bright future ahead of them," said Mustafa Abu Maryam, youth coordinator of the young men’s mosque in Alexandria, Virginia.
 
I talked with Pat Robertson on "The 700 Club" about the growing threat of homegrown jihad. Click here
for the interview.
 
Now, a good part of that "bright" future may be spent behind bars. The men traveled to Pakistan in November to link up with Islamic terrorist groups and wage jihad against U.S. troops.
 
Their capture by Pakistani authorities capped a full year of terrorist plots, attacks and arrests involving U.S. citizens.
 
Terrorism experts say the rise of homegrown terrorism has left the U.S. more vulnerable to attack than at any time since 9/11.
 
"I see these individuals, these homegrown individuals, as sort of the crown jewel for international terrorist organizations like al Qaeda," Rick Nelson of the Center for Stragic and International Studies said.
 
Indeed, 2009 saw no shortage of American recruits for al Qaeda and its allies:
 
Fort Hood psychiatrist Nidal Hassan contacted an al Qaeda recruiter in Yemen before carrying out his terrorist rampage. Afghan native Najibullah Zazi stands accused of planning major attacks in New York City after involvement with an al Qaeda training camp. Fourteen Somali Americans are under indictment for providing support to an al Qaeda-linked group in Somalia. And two Pakistani Americans in Chicago were charged with seeking to attack targets in Denmark and India. One of those men, David Coleman Headley, traveled to India to scout out targets for the Islamic terror group, Lashkar e-Taiba.
 
The group later struck those targets in the Nov. 2008 Mumbai massacre that killed 166.
 
"Someone who has the ability as a legal U.S. resident to travel fairly freely throughout the world with a passport makes them a very useful tool," Nelson explained. Read more here.


Middle East Myths and Facts:
Myth: America and Islam have “shared hopes” and “common aspirations,” as President Obama has stated many times.

Fact: Islamic religious values and goals are decidedly different from and mostly incompatible with the values and ideals of Western secular society.
Myth: Western democracy and secular government are universal aspirations of all people.
Fact: Secularism and separation of Church and State were solutions to Christianity’s problem of decay from the Dark Ages and internal strife between Protestants and Catholics. Islam succeeded in its first 1,200 years because of reliance on religion, and declined only due to invasion of the West starting in the 1800s. Islamic revival, or “Islamism,” aspires to return to the roots of Islamic success – religious government and law. Therefore, Christianity’s political solutions like “separation of church and state” don’t fit into the Islamic historic experience or Islam’s religious values, where loyalty can only be to God, the sovereign of the world and all mankind.
Future of Iraq and Afghanistan Governments
Myth: Iraqis and Afghans will support their elected, pro-Western secular governments after the U.S. departure.


Fact: In Islam, political authority is derived from religion. While "reform" from the Western point of view means secular democracy, "reform" in the Muslim world means removal of Western influences and return to religious governance. Therefore, secular government has no legitimacy and no basis for loyalty amongst Muslims. Meanwhile, Islamism is the only serious alternative form of government in the Islamic world and meets the aspirations of the vast majority of all Muslims. Islamists are eagerly waiting to fill the balance of power vacuum when the United States withdraws its forces from Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S.-sponsored governments will likely collapse within weeks of an American departure.
Two-State Solution for Israel
 
Myth: A two-state solution in the Middle East that creates a Palestinian Arab state alongside Israel will bring peace between Israel and Muslim states.


Fact: A Jewish state called Israel located upon former Muslim-conquered land in Palestine was opposed by Muslims on religious grounds from the beginning of Zionism in the early 1900s. Muslim states attempted to eradicate Israel for these reasons in 1948 and 1967, even when they held the territories now in question. In Islam, Jews (Dhimmi) must live under Islamic rule in a state of natural inequality. Therefore, a Jewish political state of any size is unacceptable to Muslims. Even if Israel helps create a Palestinian Arab state within its borders, Islamists will continue an unending jihad to eliminate Israel, which is considered to be the number one target and obstacle to Islamic revival.
clear
Posted on 01/18/2010 11:42 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Monday, 18 January 2010
Rep. Gutierrez Introduces Mass Amnesty Bill
clear

COMMENT: While lots of attention is being focused on the Obama-Reid-Pelosi health care debacle, another battle is revving up. One can only hope that Mexico's ambassador is a prophet.  We won this battle in 2007 and we must win it again.

1.  Rep. Gutierrez Introduces Mass Amnesty Bill
2.  Obama to American Workers: Drop Dead
3.  Rhymes With Dumb:  Legalizing Illegals Before They Even Immigrate.
4.  Catholic Bishops Launch New Push for Immigration Reform
5.  Mexico says immigration reform unlikely in 2010

Rep. Gutierrez Introduces Mass Amnesty Billsign

 

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) introduced legislation today that offers amnesty to the nation's estimated 11-18 million illegal aliens. The Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity Act (H.R. 4321) would increase annual immigration numbers while putting an end to many of the enforcement mechanisms currently put into place by federal, state and local governments.

Rep. Solomon Ortiz (D-Texas) is the bill's official sponsor. The bill was introduced with 91 original cosponsors including Rep. Gutierrez.

H.R. 4321 would offer amnesty to all illegal aliens living in the United States at the time of the bill's passage as long as they meet a short list of requirements, including a criminal and security background check and a fine of $500 which will be waved for children and individuals who entered the country before the age of 16. Illegal aliens can then become citizenship by meeting requirements over a six-year period.

The bill would also discontinue E-Verify in lieu of a new employment authorization system. The initial outline of the bill provided by the American Immigration Lawyers Association does not offer details of the new system, but Rep. Gutierrez championed a biometrics verification system during a Senate Immigration Subcommittee hearing earlier this year. Read more here.


Obama to American workers: Drop dead

By D.A. KING

Last month, U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill, introduced legislation in the House to reward the hordes of illegal aliens who made it past our Border Patrol agents with legalization, jobs, public benefits and eventually the right to vote as citizens.

With the open borders lobby's usual shameless contempt for the intellect of the American people, Gutierrez is calling his bill "Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity."

The 2010 battle for repeating the "one-time" amnesty of 1986 has begun.

Don't expect the legislation to receive nearly as much attention from the media as Tiger Woods' love life. The hope is that we are too busy to remember that President Obama promised to deliver amnesty as part of his "Hope and Change" election campaign — or to consider that nagging detail about America's raging unemployment crisis.

The contrived talking point is that legalizing the current batch of job thieves would result in a "boon to American workers" and somehow "strengthen our economy." I am not making this up.

America's unemployment rate dipped from 10.2 percent in October to 10 percent in November. Many economists put the actual unemployment rate at 17 percent. Using the most positive figures, about 16 million Americans are out of work.

Official statistics show a loss of 11,000 jobs last month. About 190,000 jobs were lost in October.

While monitoring CNN, I heard a reporter tell viewers that there are at least six applicants for each available job.

One pundit put it this way: "Unemployment isn't just worse than Obama said it would be with the stimulus. It's even worse than he said it would be without the stimulus."

In addition to his recent "jobs summit" designed to get ideas on how to cut unemployment, the American president has publicly promised to pursue "every additional and responsible step" to get America back to work. Except, apparently, to stem the flow of illegal immigration into the U.S. and to remove the black market replacement labor from the work force.

Obama could put about 8 million Americans in jobs next week if he would only enthusiastically enforce existing immigration and employment laws today. As a longtime American who studies the organized crime that is illegal immigration — which is directly related to American unemployment — let me share some facts that Gutierrez and Obama hope you will never see.

You are supposed to believe the fairy tale that American borders have been secured.

U.S. Border Patrol apprehended 556,040 new "undocumented workers" illegally crossing our borders in fiscal year 2009, which ended Sept. 30. Optimistic official estimates are one in four or five illegal alien border crossers are captured at the border.

Do the math.  Read more here.



Rhymes With Dumb: Legalizing Illegals Before They Even Immigrate

The proposed House amnesty bill (HR 4321) not only grants legal status to virtually all 12 million illegal aliens in the country, it also provides (in Sec. 317) legalization 100,000 wannabe illegals each year for three years who have not yet even set foot in the country. For a summary of the 644-page bill see here, and for the complete text see here.

It is another visa lottery, this time for some of the people now living in nations that send us illegal aliens, such as Mexico. To be eligible you have to be ineligible for any of the multitudinous other ways that one can obtain an immigrant visa. You have to be out of the country and be willing to "submit to criminal background checks" and, presumably, pass those checks.

This is a case of Thinking Ahead, a program to legalize illegal immigrants before they even do the migrating; maybe before they even think about it.

It is called the "Prevent Unauthorized Migration (PUM) Visa." PUM rhymes with...

The program has a couple of interesting aspects. First, it enables the lottery winners to obtain a conditional visa which can be converted to a green card after three years. In contrast, the conditional visas granted to actual illegal aliens already in the country under the proposed amnesty cannot be converted to the green card until after the passage of six years.

Second, the benefits of the program are to be denied to two classes of people – those with serious criminal records, and those who have graduated from college ("has completed less than a 4-year college degree program"). It sounds like the old rules for voting for the British House of Commons; all citizens could do so, except lunatics and members of the House of Lords.

Most nations have immigrant-screening processes that tilt in favor of those with higher education – but this proposed visa bars such people.

There are other intriguing aspects of the House plan. One is the twisted use of the language. A $500 filing fee – and the immigration process is full of fees – suddenly becomes a fine in this program. This term is used to suggest that the illegals are paying a penalty for their prior status, which makes their legalization OK. One wonders if $500 a head would even pay for the costs of the program.

Another is the provision (Sec. 313) for giving the sons and daughters of Filipino World War II veterans permanent admission outside the annual numerical limitations which routinely keeps migration from the Philippines down to 20,000. (All nations have such a ceiling for what is defined as numerically-limited migration.)

Two thoughts here: 1) if this second-generation reward for service to the cause in WW II is important – and it is not extended to children of those killed in Battles for Britain or Stalingrad – why not give these second-generation members priority over other Filipinos within the numerical ceilings?

2) American governmental history is ignored here. The U.S. government spent millions trying to identify veterans of the Filipino Army right after World War II, in order to pay pensions. Even before WW II the paper records of that army were not the best, and what did exist in 1941 was pretty thoroughly destroyed during the Japanese occupation. Now DHS and State will be asked to match the fragmentary army records with that nation's shaky system of birth records – the opportunities for document fraud are enormous.

Neither the bill nor the summary mention that the U.S. Government, earlier this year, paid out an additional $105 million to the 11,000 surviving Filipino veterans of WW II, in lump sum payments of $15,000 (to citizens) and $9,000 (to noncitizens); these payments were in addition to all other benefits that these veterans had received over the years from the other veterans compensation programs of the two nations.

Some of the children of these veterans – the ones with the special immigration benefits – might be getting a little old for migrating anywhere. The war years were 1941-1945, so the children of those serving were probably mostly born between 1930 and 1970, and thus are now 39 to 79 years of age. Their spouses and minor children would also get such visas.


If you enjoyed this blog, please visit our HR 4321 overview page.

Internet source Here.

Catholic Bishops Launch New Push for Immigration Reform, Pathway to Citizenship

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) will push to get immigration-reform legislation enacted in 2010. The group has voiced support for one Democrat-sponsored bill that grants a pathway to citizenship for people who came to this country illegally.
 
In a conference call Wednesday with reporters, Salt Lake City Bishop John C. Wester said, “It is our view, and that of others, that the American public, including the Catholic and other faith communities, want a humane and comprehensive solution to the problems which beset our immigration system, and they want Congress to address this issue.”
 
Wester, who chairs the USCCB Committee on Migration, said the church will prod lawmakers take action on the issue, beginning with a postcard campaign to members of Congress and prayer vigils across the country.


The nearly-700-page bill includes an “earned legalization” program, more often referred to as a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants. It would allow about 100,000  unemployed immigrants into the country each year in an attempt to reduce the backlog of visa applications. It also would exempt immediate relatives from the annual cap on visas. Gutierrez said immigrants have born the brunt of blame for various domestic problems, especially unemployment, and he quoted the Bible to describe their plight
 
On Dec. 23, the Catholic bishops also wrote a letter of support to Rep. Luiz Gutierrez (D-Ill.) for a bill he co-sponsored -- the Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America’s Security and Prosperity Act of 2009 (H.R. 4321).  The bishops called the bill “an important first step in the legislative process.”
Read more here.


Mexico says immigration reform unlikely in 2010

By MARK STEVENSON - Associated Press Writer

Mexico's ambassador to the United States said Friday he expects immigration reform is unlikely to pass in that country in 2010 because of unemployment and midterm elections.

In an unusually frank assessment, Ambassador Arturo Sarukhan said Mexico will continue its quiet, "under the radar" lobbying for a reform that would benefit the estimated 11.8 million Mexicans living in the United States. A large percentage are undocumented.

"It's not that it is unachievable. It is possible, but it will be difficult," he told a news conference. "And this year, especially, the conditions ... will be particularly difficult." Read more here.

clear
Posted on 01/18/2010 11:40 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Sunday, 10 January 2010
What the Dems Know: Universal Voter Registration
clear


  Apathy is Deadly



COMMENT:  Please........DO NOT miss a word of this article and watch the brief Fund video. If this doesn't prompt action, nothing will!!  EVERY conservative needs to know and understand what we are up against in November.
To be forewarned is to be forearmed!!


What the Dems Know: Universal Voter Registration

By James Simpson
Many are puzzled that Democrats persist in ramming unpopular and destructive legislation down our collective throats with no apparent concern for their plummeting poll numbers. A widespread belief is that the Democrats are committing political suicide and will be swept from one or both houses of Congress with unprecedented electoral losses next November. But since Democrat politicians rarely do things that will not ultimately benefit themselves, this column asked two weeks ago, "What do they know that we don't?"

We may have
found out. It's called universal voter registration. The Wall Street Journal's John Fund described the Democrat plan recently at a David Horowitz Freedom Center forum. Watch the video here. [scroll down]


Fund describes the proposal as follows:

In January, Chuck Schumer and Barney Frank will propose universal voter registration. What is universal voter registration? It means all of the state laws on elections will be overridden by a federal mandate. The feds will tell the states: 'take everyone on every list of welfare that you have, take everyone on every list of unemployed you have, take everyone on every list of property owners, take everyone on every list of driver's license holders and register them to vote regardless of whether they want to be ...'

Fund anticipates that Congress will attempt to ram this legislation through, as with the health care bill. What a surprise! Fund covers the vote issue at greater length in his book
, How the Obama Administration Threatens to Undermine Our Elections.

Leftist groups are already arguing that universal voter registration will solve all the problems with our voting system. But the left created most of these problems. The radical leftist Nation Magazine, for example, absolutely loves the idea of universal voter registration. This is the same magazine, however, that advanced Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven's Manufactured Crisis strategy. The Cloward/Piven strategy was designed to undermine government institutions by overwhelming them with impossible demands for services. Cloward and Piven focused on welfare, housing, and voting as the main targets of this strategy, and the radical group ACORN was specifically created for the purpose of executing it.

The Nation article enthusiastically lists Cloward/Piven-inspired organizations like Project Vote, the ACORN group where President Obama cut his teeth. It also discusses the left's efforts to push enforcement of the Motor Voter law and explains how universal voter registration could assist in these efforts. Cloward and Piven were the ones who crafted Motor Voter legislation in the early 1980s and pushed for its enactment until 1993, when President Clinton signed it into law.

Cloward and Piven considered Motor Voter to be their crowning, lifetime achievement. The picture at right, from White House photo archives, shows Cloward (light gray suit) and Piven (green coat and navy dress) standin g directly behind Clinton at the Motor Voter signing ceremony.

The left has predictably launched vicious smear attacks against John Fund for bringing universal voter registration to our attention. A Google search of the issue brings up any number of nasty ad hominem attacks. Most notable is Media Matters, the leftist group whose sole purpose seems to be to smear Republicans and defend the left's indefensible policies. They put up this gem: "Right-Wing --- Weasel John Fund Doesn't Like Universal Voter Registration because of ACORN."

The problems with universal voter registration are numerous and obvious. Many states' lists include vast numbers of illegals, including some states which allow illegals to obtain drivers licenses; because many homeowners have more than one home, there will be duplicates; because so many people are on so many separate federal and state government agency lists, there will be duplicates; and because so many lists exist with little or no cross-checking capability, all of these duplicates are likely to go uncorrected. Add to this the fact that Dems hope to extend voting rights to felons, and the whole thing begins to look like a nationwide Democrat voter registration drive facilitated by taxpayers.
Read more here.

clear
Posted on 01/10/2010 5:13 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Sunday, 10 January 2010
As the Nation's Pulse Races, Obama Can't Seem to Find His
clear

Democrats' worst nightmare: Terrorism on their watch

...... the White House’s response to last week’s attempt to blow up a Northwest Airlines flight to Detroit could rank as one of the low points of the new president’s first year. Over the course of five days,  Obama’ reaction ranged from low-keyed to reassuring to, finally, a vow to find out what went wrong. The episode was a baffling, unforced error in presidential symbolism, hardly a small part of the presidency, and the moment at which yet another of the old political maxims that Obama had sought to transcend – the Democrats’ vulnerability on national security – reasserted itself. Read more here.

U.S. Knew of Airline Terror Plot Before Christmas

 The U.S. government had intelligence from Yemen before Christmas that leaders of a branch of Al Qaeda there were talking about "a Nigerian" being prepared for a terrorist attack, the New York Times reported Tuesday.
A senior official told the Times that President Obama was told in a private meeting Tuesday while vacationing in Hawaii that the government had a variety of information in its possession before the failed bombing on a Detroit-bound flight last week that would have been a clear warning sign had it been shared among intelligence agencies.
The newspaper said the information did not include the name of the Nigerian.
A CIA official prepared a report on Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab after a meeting with the suspect's father in November, who shared information about his son's extremist views, CNN reported Tuesday. The report was sent to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, but it sat there for five weeks and was not disseminated, a "reliable source" said.
"Had that information been shared... [he] might have been denied passage on the Northwest Airlines flight," the source reportedly said.
Read more here.


MI5 knew of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s UK extremist links
The security services knew three years ago that the Detroit bomber had “multiple communications” with Islamic extremists in Britain, it emerged this weekend.
Counterterrorism officials said Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was “reaching out” to extremists whom MI5 had under surveillance while he was studying at University College London.
Officials said the 23-year-old Nigerian was “starting out on a journey” in Britain that culminated in his attempt to bring down flight 253 as it prepared to land in Detroit, Michigan, on Christmas Day.
None of the information was passed to American officials, which will prompt questions about intelligence failures prior to the attack.
Read more here.
 

As the Nation’s Pulse Races, Obama Can’t Seem to Find His

WASHINGTON

I was walking through a deserted downtown on Christmas Eve with a friend, past the lonely, gray Treasury Building, past the snowy White House with no president inside.

“I hope the terrorists don’t think this is a good time to attack,” I said, looking protectively at the White House, which always looks smaller and more vulnerable and beautiful than you expect, no matter how often you see it up close.

I thought our guard might be down because of the holiday; now I realize our guard is down every day.

One thrilling thing about moving from W. to Barack Obama was that Obama seemed like an avatar of modernity.

W., Dick Cheney and Rummy kept ceaselessly dragging us back into the past. America seemed to have lost her ingenuity, her quickness, her man-on-the-moon bravura, her Bugs Bunny panache.

Were we clever and inventive enough to protect ourselves from the new breed of Flintstones-hardy yet Facebook-savvy terrorists?

W.’s favorite word was “resolute,” but despite gazillions spent and Cheney’s bluster, our efforts to shield ourselves seemed flaccid.

President Obama’s favorite word is “unprecedented,” as Carol Lee of Politico pointed out. Yet he often seems mired in the past as well, letting his hallmark legislation get loaded up with old-school bribes and pork; surrounding himself with Clintonites; continuing the Bushies’ penchant for secrecy and expansive executive privilege; doubling down in Afghanistan while acting as though he’s getting out; and failing to capitalize on snazzy new technology while agencies thumb through printouts and continue their old turf battles.

Even before a Nigerian with Al Qaeda links tried to blow up a Northwest Airlines jet headed to Detroit, travelers could see we had made no progress toward a technologically wondrous Philip K. Dick universe.

We seemed to still be behind the curve and reactive, patting down grannies and 5-year-olds, confiscating snow globes and lip glosses.

Instead of modernity, we have airports where security is so retro that taking away pillows and blankies and bathroom breaks counts as a great leap forward.

If we can’t catch a Nigerian with a powerful explosive powder in his oddly feminine-looking underpants and a syringe full of acid, a man whose own father had alerted the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, a traveler whose ticket was paid for in cash and who didn’t check bags, whose visa renewal had been denied by the British, who had studied Arabic in Al Qaeda sanctuary Yemen, whose name was on a counterterrorism watch list, who can we catch?

We are headed toward the moment when screeners will watch watch-listers sashay through while we have to come to the airport in hospital gowns, flapping open in the back.

In a rare bipartisan success, House members tried to prevent the Transportation Security Administration from implementing full-body imaging as a screening tool at airports.

Just because Republicans helped lead the ban on better technology and opposed airport security spending doesn’t mean they’ll stop Cheneying the Democrats for subverting national security.

Congressman Pete Hoekstra of Michigan was weaselly enough to whack the president and “weak-kneed liberals” in his gubernatorial fund-raising letter.

Before he left for vacation, Obama tried to shed his Spock mien and juice up the empathy quotient on jobs. But in his usual inspiring/listless cycle, he once more appeared chilly in his response to the chilling episode on Flight 253, issuing bulletins through his press secretary and hitting the links. At least you have to seem concerned.

On Tuesday, Obama stepped up to the microphone to admit what Janet Napolitano (who learned nothing from an earlier Janet named Reno) had first tried to deny: that there had been “a systemic failure” and a “catastrophic breach of security.”  Read more here.

Systemic Failure

 

WASHINGTON -- A couple of weeks ago on Oprah Winfrey's "White House Christmas Special," our first postmodern president, Barack Obama, gave himself a "good, solid B-plus" for his performance over the past 11 months. Then he added that if his healthcare reform passes he will grant himself an A-. This is false humility. Actually he is so proud of the government's impending nationalization of healthcare that when it comes he will grant himself an A, possibly an A+.

 

Right now, however, he is under fire for his inert response to that Nigerian terrorist's attempt to blow up nearly 300 passengers on a commercial jet as it landed in Detroit. He issued his arctic response after a round of golf and en route to his next presidential event, a tennis game.

 

Also, the criticism is mounting owing to the incompetence of his entire Homeland Security bureaucracy and the bureaucracies of his multi-layered intelligence community. All failed repeatedly to recognize the threat that this terrorist, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (UFA) posed. UFA's father, a prominent Nigerian, had warned our CIA about his son's growing radicalism and possible indoctrination into jihadist terror in Yemen. With intolerable slowness, the CIA handed over its information to the Directorate of National Intelligence's National Counterterrorism Center. What the Counterterrorism Center did with the information is unclear. Possibly it reached the president's National Security Council within the White House.

Then, too, none of the agencies that are supporting our Homeland Security efforts was able to stop UFA from entering the country. He had been denied a British visa. Yet if our security experts knew about it they did not take action against UFA. He was on a "watch list," but that information never got to any airport security people who might have stopped him from flying into the United States. He had purchased his ticket with cash, and it was only a one-way ticket -- two suspicious acts that should have alerted seasoned American security officers. Finally, he brought no baggage. No baggage, a one-way ticket, and one purchased not by credit card but by cash -- all very suspicious acts. Read more here

clear
Posted on 01/10/2010 5:10 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Sunday, 10 January 2010
The Newest Outrage in Health Care
clear

COMMENT:  I guess this comes under the heading of 'when you think you have heard it all'. Not only did Reid and Pelosi ramrod the health care bills through their respective houses, they fully intend to bypass the formal conference committee  and  continue their negotiations in secret. C-Span is challenging them to permit the televising of the talks, to no avail.  Obama promised that negotiations would be done in public -- oh dear, does this mean that his political promises don't mean anything?? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! Thankfully, the preparations are underway for potential lawsuits against this unconstitutional legislation.

During the height of the health care debate in June and July, President Obama, at least twice, used the Mayo Clinic as an example to be followed – for providing some of the best and most affordable health care in the country. Those words are coming back to haunt him because the Mayo Clinic will stop accepting Medicare patients as of now at one of its primary-care clinics in Arizona, saying the U.S. government pays too little. 


It has become apparent that the Administration and the Democrat party do not care what the voters think or what this effort costs the party in lost seats in 2010. 

ACTION ITEM:  Please go HERE to send our two Senators and your congressman an email urging each of them to insist on open negotiations.
Out of state subscribers go
HERE to find your Senators; go HERE
to find your congressman.


Dems to bypass tradition on final health deal
House, Senate negotiations to complete legislation will cut out Republicans

House and Senate Democrats intend to bypass traditional procedures when they negotiate a final compromise on health care legislation, officials said Monday, a move that will exclude Republican lawmakers and reduce their ability to delay or force politically troubling votes in both houses.
The unofficial timetable calls for final passage of the measure to remake the nation's health care system the time President Barack Obama delivers his State of the Union address, probably in early February.
Democratic aides said the final compromise talks would essentially be a three-way negotiation involving top Democrats in the House and Senate and the White House, a structure that gives unusual latitude to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California.
Read more here.

C-SPAN Challenges Congress to Open Health Care Talks to TV Coverage

 

The head of C-SPAN has implored Congress to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public, as top Democrats lay plans to hash out the final product among themselves.
C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb wrote to leaders in the House and Senate Dec. 30 urging them to open "all important negotiations, including any conference committee meetings," to televised coverage on his network.
The C-SPAN networks will commit the necessary resources to covering all of the sessions LIVE and in their entirety," he wrote.
Read more here.



Pelosi swipes at Obama's promises
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, piqued with White House pressure to accept the Senate health reform bill, threw a rare rhetorical elbow at President Barack Obama Tuesday, questioning his commitment to his 2008 campaign promises.
A leadership aide said it was no accident.
Pelosi emerged from a meeting with her leadership team and committee chairs in the Capitol to face an aggressive throng of reporters who immediately hit her with C-SPAN’s request that she permit closed-door final talks on the bill to be televised.
A reporter reminded the San Francisco Democrat that in 2008, then-candidate Obama opined that all such negotiations be open to C-SPAN cameras.
“There are a number of things he was for on the campaign trail,” quipped Pelosi, who has no intention of making the deliberations public.
People familiar with Pelosi's thinking wasted little time in explaining precisely what she meant by a “number of things” – saying it reflected weeks of simmering tension on health care between two Democratic power players who have functioned largely in lock-step during Obama’s first year in office.  Read more here.


New promise: Lawsuits to challenge 'Obamacare'
Social program called 'power grab that rewrites American history'

Obamacare, as critics have dubbed the president's plan to socialize health care, will be flooded with lawsuits if it ever becomes law, according to an organization that works to protect rights and liberties of Americans.

In an alert issued this week, Liberty Counsel, run by President Mathew Staver, promised his organization "is prepared to challenge the constitutionality of the bill since Congress has no authority to require every person to obtain insurance coverage and has no authority to fine employers who do not provide the coverage standards that are required in the bill."

"In addition," he warned, "the bill still requires citizens to pay a fine if they don't maintain insurance for themselves and their families."

The promise came just before the U.S. Senate approved its version of the health-care reform plan. The House has adopted a version that must be reconciled with the Senate's before moving to the president's desk. Among major sticking points are a government-run "option," as well as abortion funding, which has drawn strong opposition from the public. Read more here.

13 GOP AGs threaten health bill suit

Thirteen Republican state attorneys general are threatening to file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Senate health care bill.

In a letter sent to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Wednesday, South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster said he had “grave concerns” about the deal Senate leaders cut with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) to secure his crucial vote for the health care package.

“The current iteration of the bill contains a provision that affords special treatment to the state of Nebraska under the federal Medicaid program,” writes McMaster. “We believe this provision is constitutionally flawed. As chief legal officers of our states we are contemplating a legal challenge to this provision and we ask you to take action to render this challenge unnecessary by striking that provision.”

“In addition to violating the most basic and universally held notions of what is fair and just, we also believe this provision of H.R. 3590 is inconsistent with protections afforded by the United States Constitution against arbitrary legislation,” writes McMaster.  Read more here.

clear
Posted on 01/10/2010 5:09 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Sunday, 10 January 2010
The Newest Outrage in Health Care
clear

COMMENT:  I guess this comes under the heading of 'when you think you have heard it all'. Not only did Reid and Pelosi ramrod the health care bills through their respective houses, they fully intend to bypass the formal conference committee  and  continue their negotiations in secret. C-Span is challenging them to permit the televising of the talks, to no avail.  Obama promised that negotiations would be done in public -- oh dear, does this mean that his political promises don't mean anything?? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! Thankfully, the preparations are underway for potential lawsuits against this unconstitutional legislation.

During the height of the health care debate in June and July, President Obama, at least twice, used the Mayo Clinic as an example to be followed – for providing some of the best and most affordable health care in the country. Those words are coming back to haunt him because the Mayo Clinic will stop accepting Medicare patients as of now at one of its primary-care clinics in Arizona, saying the U.S. government pays too little. 


It has become apparent that the Administration and the Democrat party do not care what the voters think or what this effort costs the party in lost seats in 2010. 

ACTION ITEM:  Please go HERE to send our two Senators and your congressman an email urging each of them to insist on open negotiations.
Out of state subscribers go
HERE to find your Senators; go HERE
to find your congressman.


Dems to bypass tradition on final health deal
House, Senate negotiations to complete legislation will cut out Republicans

House and Senate Democrats intend to bypass traditional procedures when they negotiate a final compromise on health care legislation, officials said Monday, a move that will exclude Republican lawmakers and reduce their ability to delay or force politically troubling votes in both houses.
The unofficial timetable calls for final passage of the measure to remake the nation's health care system the time President Barack Obama delivers his State of the Union address, probably in early February.
Democratic aides said the final compromise talks would essentially be a three-way negotiation involving top Democrats in the House and Senate and the White House, a structure that gives unusual latitude to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California.
Read more here.

C-SPAN Challenges Congress to Open Health Care Talks to TV Coverage

 

The head of C-SPAN has implored Congress to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public, as top Democrats lay plans to hash out the final product among themselves.
C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb wrote to leaders in the House and Senate Dec. 30 urging them to open "all important negotiations, including any conference committee meetings," to televised coverage on his network.
The C-SPAN networks will commit the necessary resources to covering all of the sessions LIVE and in their entirety," he wrote.
Read more here.



Pelosi swipes at Obama's promises
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, piqued with White House pressure to accept the Senate health reform bill, threw a rare rhetorical elbow at President Barack Obama Tuesday, questioning his commitment to his 2008 campaign promises.
A leadership aide said it was no accident.
Pelosi emerged from a meeting with her leadership team and committee chairs in the Capitol to face an aggressive throng of reporters who immediately hit her with C-SPAN’s request that she permit closed-door final talks on the bill to be televised.
A reporter reminded the San Francisco Democrat that in 2008, then-candidate Obama opined that all such negotiations be open to C-SPAN cameras.
“There are a number of things he was for on the campaign trail,” quipped Pelosi, who has no intention of making the deliberations public.
People familiar with Pelosi's thinking wasted little time in explaining precisely what she meant by a “number of things” – saying it reflected weeks of simmering tension on health care between two Democratic power players who have functioned largely in lock-step during Obama’s first year in office.  Read more here.


New promise: Lawsuits to challenge 'Obamacare'
Social program called 'power grab that rewrites American history'

Obamacare, as critics have dubbed the president's plan to socialize health care, will be flooded with lawsuits if it ever becomes law, according to an organization that works to protect rights and liberties of Americans.

In an alert issued this week, Liberty Counsel, run by President Mathew Staver, promised his organization "is prepared to challenge the constitutionality of the bill since Congress has no authority to require every person to obtain insurance coverage and has no authority to fine employers who do not provide the coverage standards that are required in the bill."

"In addition," he warned, "the bill still requires citizens to pay a fine if they don't maintain insurance for themselves and their families."

The promise came just before the U.S. Senate approved its version of the health-care reform plan. The House has adopted a version that must be reconciled with the Senate's before moving to the president's desk. Among major sticking points are a government-run "option," as well as abortion funding, which has drawn strong opposition from the public. Read more here.

13 GOP AGs threaten health bill suit

Thirteen Republican state attorneys general are threatening to file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Senate health care bill.

In a letter sent to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Wednesday, South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster said he had “grave concerns” about the deal Senate leaders cut with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) to secure his crucial vote for the health care package.

“The current iteration of the bill contains a provision that affords special treatment to the state of Nebraska under the federal Medicaid program,” writes McMaster. “We believe this provision is constitutionally flawed. As chief legal officers of our states we are contemplating a legal challenge to this provision and we ask you to take action to render this challenge unnecessary by striking that provision.”

“In addition to violating the most basic and universally held notions of what is fair and just, we also believe this provision of H.R. 3590 is inconsistent with protections afforded by the United States Constitution against arbitrary legislation,” writes McMaster.  Read more here.

clear
Posted on 01/10/2010 5:09 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Friday, 1 January 2010
A New Year on the Horizon
clear


Happy New year
I am high-tech on most things these days and am amazed at what I have had to learn in the past few years in order to do what I do. (See, you CAN 'teach an old dog new tricks'.) This is especially amusing when I think about starting out as a secretary on a manual typewriter in the early 60s.  (Many of you won't even know what that is--ask your parents!!) 

However, there is one thing on which I am still very 'low-tech'. On the wall in the breakfast room end of my kitchen, just to the right of my computer screen hangs a real calendar with 'blocks' about an inch square for each day of the month.  That is my 'brain'. EVERYTHING gets posted there -- meetings, appointments, birthdays, sometimes weather notes, etc. My daughter says is it almost like a diary.

If it does not get posted, it does not happen. I know, I know... I could have all this in my computer, but it would not be the same.  I can glance at this calendar and see the whole month at the time and know exactly what is supposed to happen and turn the page for the next month. 

A few weeks ago I purchased my calender for 2010. When I opened it the days and months were blank.  On Friday morning we will see the start of this New Year.  None of us know that these days will bring, but we DO know:

My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. How precious to me are your thoughts, O God!  How vast is the sum of them!  Psalm 139:15-17

Last week I sat down and transferred to this calendar all the annual dates that needed to be recorded, adding meetings I already knew about.  As time goes on, many more activities will be added.  Those are my plans and my commitments.  They could be interrupted at any time by the unexpected. All that is the unknown. 

What IS known is that "
Jesus, the Messiah, is the same yesterday and today-and forever!" Hebrews 13:8   In addition "the eyes of the LORD your God are continually on it from the beginning of the year to its end." Deuteronomy 11:12b. That is our security.

We also know that we are commanded to pray for our leaders: 
"I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone— for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness." 1 Timothy 2:1-2.
One of the reasons we should do this is: He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. 2 Samuel 23:3.

And finally, we KNOW that we are CALLED to be faithful to the task set before us, especially in the perilous days in which we live:  "So let's not get tired of doing what is good. At just the right time we will reap a harvest of blessing if we don't give up." Galatians 6:9

"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." - Winston Churchill

Included below is a challenge and the Psalmist Resolutions.  I hope you will find these helpful as we enter this new decade.
Many Blessings
Bobbie  

                            
A CHALLENGE TO THINK ABOUT IN THE NEW YEAR:
What is in my hand that God can use?
What is in my heart that could keep Him from being able to use me?

The Psalmist Resolutions

1. Psalm 119
30 I have chosen the way of truth; I have set my heart on your laws.
31 I hold fast to your statutes, O LORD ;

2. Psalm 119
36 Turn my heart toward your statutes and not toward selfish gain.
37 Turn my eyes away from worthless things; preserve my life according to your word
 
3. Psalm 119
46 I will speak of your statutes before kings and will not be put to shame,
47 for I delight in your commands because I love them. 48 I lift up my hands to your commands, which I love, and I meditate on your decrees.

4. Psalm 119
63 I am a friend to all who fear you, to all who follow your precepts.
64 The earth is filled with your love, O LORD; teach me your decrees.

5. Psalm 119
75 I know, O LORD , that your laws are righteous, and in faithfulness you have afflicted me. 76 May your unfailing love be my comfort, according to your promise to your servant. 77 Let your compassion come to me that I may live, for your law is my delight.
78 May the arrogant be put to shame for wronging me without cause; but I will meditate on your precepts.

6. Psalm 119
114 You are my refuge and my shield; I have put my hope in your word.

7. Psalm 119
128 and because I consider all your precepts right, I hate every wrong path.

8. Psalm 119
173 May your hand be ready to help me, for I have chosen your precepts.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
Most Christians have an abundance of material blessings to count at the end of the year for which to thank the Lord. Even if they have none of these, however, God has crowned the year with goodness and favor, with lovingkindness and tender mercies, with grace and glory and honor and, best of all His own presence.
 
Psalm 65
11 You crown the year with your bounty, and your carts overflow with abundance.

Psalm 5
12 For surely, O LORD , you bless the righteous; you surround them with your favor as with a shield.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

As we stand on the threshold of a new year, may this prayer of faith and anticipation be ours:
 
O Lord God, who has called us, Your servants,
To ventures of which we cannot see the ending.
By paths as yet untrodden,
And through perils unknown,
Give us faith to go out with good courage,
Not knowing where we go
But only that Your hand is leading us
And Your love is supporting us.
                                                               
clear
Posted on 01/01/2010 5:14 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
sun mon tue wed thu fri sat
      1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31