May 31, 2006
Now, does any one need to be reminded why mass immigration without assimilation a bad idea?
Small gangs of youths pelted riot police with rocks and set cars and garbage bins ablaze late Tuesday in a second night of unrest in the Paris suburbs, raising fears of a return of the disturbances that inflamed 300 French towns and suburbs last fall.The violence of the last two nights -- in which youths attacked police cars, government buildings and riot police -- was sparked in part by mounting resentment toward the mayor of the northeastern Paris suburb of Montfermeil, who in recent weeks imposed a law prohibiting 15- to 18-year-olds from gathering in groups of more than three and requiring anyone under 16 to be accompanied by an adult on city streets after 8 p.m.
The French government last fall promised to improve living conditions and job opportunities in suburbs heavily populated by immigrant families and where unemployment is rampant, but little has been done and the government's main initiative -- a youth jobs bill -- ended with this spring's politically disastrous student demonstrations.
This is Paris, France, but it could just as easily be Paris, Texas.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again and again: importing poverty is never going to solve a nation's problems and instead, can only add to them.
If you think nearly unchecked immigration is a problem now, wait until 40 million more arrive with little or no education, little or no job skills, and little or no English language skills.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:02 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.
A damning and detailed feature article, written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., for Rolling Stone and documenting evidence of the theft of the 2004 Presidential Election is set to hit newstands this Friday, The BRAD BLOG can now confirm. The online version of the article will be posted tomorrow (Thursday) morning.The article -- headlined on the cover as "Did Bush Steal the 2004 Election?: How 350,000 Votes Disappeared in Ohio" -- has been several months in development and will contend that a concerted effort was undertaken by high-level Republican officials to steal the Election in Ohio -- and thus the country -- in 2004!
Kennedy told The BRAD BLOG this morning that "the best evidence says the Republicans succeeded" in their plan.
He writes in the 10-page long article, and confirmed to us today, that evidence shows Ohio Sec. of State J. Kenneth Blackwell was "certainly in on" the scheme, and there are indications that the effort went all the way up to the White House.
Kennedy, who is co-host of Ring of Fire, a weekend show on Air America Radio, is an environmental attorney and the son of the late Robert F. Kennedy. This is his first public foray into the realm of Election Fraud, Election Integrity, Electronic Voting and, in particular, the questionable results of Election 2004.
It will be very interesting to see what "evidence" RFK, Jr. will present. Despite the claims made above, I suspect the content of the article will provide bold headline-inducing accusations, weave nebulous connections and schemes, and in the end, fail to provide any sort of evidence that can be considered solid, or bring forth witnesses that won't almost immediately be found to have credibility problems.
Even the flimsiest of evidence will be enough for the more excitable types on the far left, but barring something truly explosive and concrete (which is something that has been sorely lacking in every Democratic “bombshell” of the past six years), I imagine this will be grist for the Democratic Underground types for months to come, and largely forgotten within the next week by everyone else.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:36 PM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 372 words, total size 2 kb.
For those of you unfamiliar with it, My Lai (note: the following is summarized from the Wikipedia entry on the subject) was a massacre of hundreds of unarmed Vietnamese civilians by a Charlie Company, 11th Brigade, Americal Division of the U. S. Army. Ostensibly, U.S. intelligence pinpointed the 48th Battalion of the Vietcong as hiding in Son My village, specifically in areas labeled My Lai 1-4. Lt. William Calley led a platoon into the area, and after finding no Vietcong, they killed between 347-504 civilians, some after being raped or tortured. The date was March 16, 1968.
A cover-up of the incident was almost immediate, with the 11th Light Infantry Brigade's Commanding Officer, Colonel Oran Henderson running a cursory investigation that found just 22 civilians had died inadvertently while 128 Vietcong had been killed. Letters from several soldiers finally got the attention of Congress approximately a year later. They story broke publicly in November of 1969, and some reports indicate that thoughts of a cover-up (read the Wikipedia entry, take it for what it is worth) ran through many levels of the Army Officer Corps, all the way to the National Security Advisor and the Secretary of Defense.
The incident is major note not only for the brutality and scale of the massacre, but for the light punishment given to those who perpetrated it (Calley served just 3 1/2 years years as the only conviction), and the huge shift in perception it brought, bolstering and providing fuel for the anti-war movement.
But Haditha is not My Lai.
I will tread very carefully in discussing the Haditha incident as it is still under investigation, but we do know certain things that are beyond doubt. We know that on November 19, 2005, one Marine was killed and two more were injured when an IED went off near a convoy from Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines. We know that immediately after the event other Marines in the convoy dismounted and approximately 24 Iraqis were killed, some of them women and children. Everything else at this point is speculation.
My Lai started without any recognizable provocation, and seems to be a blatant small-scale genocide. Haditha had a real and quantifiable trigger; the death of one Marine and the injury of two others by an IED detonation. Right or wrong, Haitha had a discernible triggering event.
Unlike My Lai, there is no evidence of an attempt at a high level cover-up whatsoever with Haditha. Three officers—two Captains and a Lt. Colonel have been relieved of command, and at least two separate and apparently quite thorough investigations by the NCIS were launched months ago.
The Haditha investigations will also be far more thorough and accurate than the investigations at My Lai for several reasons.
First, the investigation in the Haditha has same-day evidence collection, including digital photos obtained by another Marine unit that responded to the area. It may also have some real-time evidence collected, as there is some indication that drone surveillance aircraft and radio communications may have also captured details of the events of that day. Forensic science has also progressed phenomenally in the near 40 years since My Lai, and the likelihood of investigations obtaining a far more detailed forensic record of events is all but assured. It seems most of these events happened indoors where evidence such as bullet holes in walls, fragmentation patterns, and firing lanes are precisely known.
No, Haditha is not like My Lai, but that has not stopped some from trying to inflate it to that level.
Chief among them is ex-Marine and current Democratic congressman John Murtha, who has alleged that the Haditha incident was cold-blooded murder, that this incident is indicative of the policy of our troops and now, that the incident is being covered up by the highest authority in the Marine Corps, citing Marine Corps General and Joint Chief of Staff Peter Pace by position, if not by name.
All of these charges by Murtha are unproven hyperbole, set forth with but one goal in mind: "redeploying" all American soldiers out of Iraq. The Haditha incident may be Murtha's last, best hope of purposefully losing a war he first began trying to undermine in 2004. John Murtha is willfully attempting to smear the entire Marine Corps chain of command (and by the extension, the Corps itself) down the river to advance his political agenda.
Always Faithful?
Hardly.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:31 AM
| Comments (67)
| Add Comment
Post contains 802 words, total size 5 kb.
Don't forget that ALL violence, and all DEATH is attributed to the war.
There are a lot of Crime deaths that are associated with "insurgents" and "secular violence" that are in fact, "basic crime"
And even more significant than all of that, the 4 bigwigs in "al queda in Iraq" were captured by Iraqi's, not by the US forces.
It sounds like Al Gore's out again:
Al Gore has made his sharpest attack yet on the George Bush presidency, describing the current US administration as "a renegade band of rightwing extremists".
I wish.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
06:15 AM
| Comments (16)
| Add Comment
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.
May 30, 2006
This morning I got email from Jesus himself. Actually, I got email from a liberal blogger who styles himself "Gen. JC Christian, patriot." The email, addressed to others and myself, ran as follows:
Hugh Hewitt, Hugh Hewitt Show
Bob Owens, Confederate Yankee
Gary Gross, California Conservative
Biggus Dickus, Blue Crab BoulevardDear Mr. Hewitt, Mr Owens, Mr. Gross, and Mr. Dickus,
About a week and a half ago, each of you published scathing posts attacking Rep. John Murtha for his comments about war crimes at Al Haditha, Iraq. Mr Owens called for Murtha's censure; Mr. Dickus demanded his resignation; Mr. Gross wants him frog marched off the Hill.
What seemed to enrage you the most about Murtha's comments was that he had made them before it has been established by the Marine Corps that a crime had been committed. I couldn't agree more. I mean we aren't talking about a goatherd at Gitmo here, we can't jump to any conclusions until Our Leader and Sean Hannity tell us it's acceptable to do so.
Maybe it wasn't a war crime at all. The final report might show that the victims were all terrorists. Who knows? Perhaps the 6 year old was shouldering an RPG and the 3 and 4 year olds were manning a .50 cal machine gun. We won't know until the final report is issued.
But as much grief as you gave Murtha for his remarks, you haven't written a word about remarks attributed to Rep. John Kline:
"I was saddened, surprised and outraged that this could happen," Kline said. He said he thought the incident would be regarded as "a horrific aberration" for the Marines.
Why have you been silent? Isn't he jumping to the same conclusion as Murtha? An official report hasn't been issued. He can't be certain that a war crime was committed, can he.Worse yet, like Murtha, Kline is a retired Marine. Why is it that these ex-leathernecks seem to be the angriest about what happened at Haditha? Does leaving the Marine Corps cause you to hate America? Maybe you should look into that.
Oh wait. I just realized that Kline is a Republican and one of Our Leader's most loyal servants.
Never mind.
Heterosexually yours,
Gen. JC Christian, patriot
While the others will presumably ignore this email (not the least reason of which is that he didn't bother to send it to everyone he addressed) and with good reason, I personally have no problem at all answering "General Christian."
It is a fair question to ask why I chose to call for Murtha's censure, while ignoring Kline's comments thus far, though I thought the answer would be quite obvious to any reasonable person, much less our Lord and Savior.
Kline, himself a former Marine, stated in the Washington Post (side note to General Christian: a link to a quote is good email etiquette, which is something even a false deity should know):
"I was saddened, surprised and outraged that this could happen," Kline said. He said he thought the incident would be regarded as "a horrific aberration" for the Marines.
He was further quoted three days later in the NY Times, "This was a small number of Marines who fired directly on civilians and killed them," adding "This is going to be an ugly story."
Does anyone have a difficulty spotting the difference between Kline's comments about the deaths in Haditha, and these from Murtha?
Rep. John Murtha, an influential Pennsylvania lawmaker and outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, said today Marines had “killed innocent civilians in cold blood” after allegedly responding to a roadside bomb ambush that killed a Marine during a patrol in Haditha, Iraq, Nov. 19.[snip]
Murtha said combat stress prompted the Marines' alleged rampage.
“It's a very serious incident, unfortunately. It shows the tremendous pressure that these guys are under every day when they're out in combat,” he said. “One man was killed with an [improvised explosive device] and after that they actually went into the houses and killed women and children.”
Kline notes the undisputed facts that the killing of 24 civilians was conducted by Marines, that this was going to be an "ugly story" and that in his opinion, such killing by Marines were "an aberration." At no point in his commentary did he attempt to assign motive, nor guilt, nor innocence. He merely commented on what most of us already knew from the Times and ABC News follow-up reports in mid-March.
John Murtha, however, has apparently declared himself prosecutor, judge and jury in this case. He pointedly accuses the Marines of killing civilians "in cold blood," and even attempts to ascribe a motive and a mindset, more than six weeks before the report of the investigation is even ready for release.
Perhaps in his omnipotence General JC Christian can look into the hearts of men and know what is in their souls, but John Murtha does not have that capability, nor do other mortal men.
It is for that very reason we have a criminal justice system, so on this mortal plane we can attempt to determine (as best we can) guilt or innocence by collecting evidence of a crime, filing charges against the accused, holding a trial where evidence is shown by both sides, prosecution and defense, before finally rendering a verdict of guilt or innocence.
I called for Murtha's censure because he attempted to short circuit the military criminal justice system, prejudging these Marines guilty without the benefit of due process, and potentially compromising the integrity of the criminal proceedings. I made no complaint against Kline, because Kline never even approached improperly interfering in this case.
A deity, particularly an omnipotent one, would presumably know such things. But as well all know, "General JC Christian, patriot" isn't a deity, but merely another poor player as the Bard noted, strutting and fretting his hour upon the stage before he, too, will be heard from no more.
I wish the good General all the best in his blogging endeavors, and hope that the real Jesus is as amused by his antics as I have been.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:28 AM
| Comments (110)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1042 words, total size 7 kb.
May 29, 2006
This wall's long black marbles slices into the ground. On it are engraved fifty-eight thousand American names from an undeclared war that no one wants to remember in the jungles of a country half a globe away. There are no ornate scrolls or stenciled directions, no fancy faded pieces of parchment, no self-serving sentiments, just names.
There's also a statue some distance away. Three bronze soldiers stare into the wall, waiting for word of their fellow soldiers or perhaps mourning their loss. The soldier's don't talk; they simply stare. They were all just boys, most only six years than I was then: nineteen.
Under the statue-soldier's gaze, and elderly man lagged behind a tour group at the wall. He caressed it and knelt to leave a single rose at the base. He sobbed. He had difficulty standing up. A nearby park attendant helped him up and asked, "One of yours, sir?" The man shook his head and replied, "Not one of them. All of them."
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:50 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 253 words, total size 2 kb.
Memorial Day
As we stand here looking
At the flags upon these graves
Know these flags represent
A few of the true American brave
They fought for their Country
As man has through all of time
Except that these soldiers lying here
Fought for your country and mine
As we all are gathered here
To pay them our respect
Let's pass this word to others
It's what they would expect
I'm sure that they would do it
If it were me or you
To show we did not die in vein
But for the red, white and blue.
Let's pass on to our children
And to those who never knew
What these soldiers died for
It's the least we can do
Let's not forget their families
Great pain they had to bear
Losing a son, father or husband
They need to know we still care
No matter which war was fought
On the day that they died
I stand here looking at these flags
Filled with American pride.
So as the bugler plays out Taps
With its sweet and eerie sound
Pray for these soldiers lying here
In this sacred, hallowed ground.
Take home with you a sense of pride
You were here Memorial Day.
Celebrating the way Americans should
On this solemnest of days.
Michelle R. Christman
USMC 1987 - 1991
Desert Storm Veteran
Update: Bumped to top
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:15 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 237 words, total size 1 kb.
May 27, 2006
John Kerry starts by showing the entry in a log he kept from 1969: "Feb 12: 0800 run to Cambodia."He moves on to the photographs: his boat leaving the base at Ha Tien, Vietnam; the harbor; the mountains fading frame by frame as the boat heads north; the special operations team the boat was ferrying across the border; the men reading maps and setting off flares.
"They gave me a hat," Mr. Kerry says. "I have the hat to this day," he declares, rising to pull it from his briefcase. "I have the hat."
He may have the hat, but what he needed was a map.
I cannot speak with authority about the charges brought by the SBVFT, but I can say one thing with absolute certainty:
John Kerry did not take anyone into Cambodia from his swift boat based at Ha Tien. The navigable Giang Thanh River runs near the Cambodian border, but at no point does it ever cross.
If Kerry said he took forces up the Giang Thanh and dropped Spec-Ops soldiers off so that they could walk into Cambodia, I could believe him, but geography does not lie.
John Kerry never took his swift boat from Ha Tien, Vietnam up the Giang Thanh River into Cambodia, and if he insists that he did, he is either delusional, or guilty of telling a lie.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:16 PM
| Comments (64)
| Add Comment
Post contains 267 words, total size 2 kb.
: Instead of running on 20 years of service in the senate, he ran on 4 months in the Delta.
I would imagine Kerry had told these stories so much he himself came to believe them. I've known people like that before. Told the same lie so often they really, really believed it. May 26, 2006
Someone who truly supports the troops, even if they do not support the war, would want this incident fully investigated to uncover the truth. They would want to know the facts.They would want to know if the Marines fired out of blind rage at the loss of their friends, and they would be equally interested in finding out if the Marines assaulted that location because someone inside fired upon them, as they claimed. Was it a slaughter of innocents, or were insurgents firing from within civilian homes? Were those that triggered the IED among the dead? We do not yet know, and some are already passing judgment.
If a just-published New York Times article on the investigation is true, then the incident was far worse than we dared suspect:
A military investigation into the deaths of two dozen Iraqis last November is expected to find that a small number of marines in western Iraq carried out extensive, unprovoked killings of civilians, Congressional, military and Pentagon officials said Thursday.Two lawyers involved in discussions about individual marines' defenses said they thought the investigation could result in charges of murder, a capital offense. That possibility and the emerging details of the killings have raised fears that the incident could be the gravest case involving misconduct by American ground forces in Iraq.
[snip]
Evidence indicates that the civilians were killed during a sustained sweep by a small group of marines that lasted three to five hours and included shootings of five men standing near a taxi at a checkpoint, and killings inside at least two homes that included women and children, officials said.
That evidence, described by Congressional, Pentagon and military officials briefed on the inquiry, suggested to one Congressional official that the killings were "methodical in nature."
Congressional and military officials say the Naval Criminal Investigative Service inquiry is focusing on the actions of a Marine Corps staff sergeant serving as squad leader at the time, but that Marine officials have told members of Congress that up to a dozen other marines in the unit are also under investigation. Officials briefed on the inquiry said that most of the bullets that killed the civilians were now thought to have been "fired by a couple of rifles," as one of them put it.
I'm not sure how to address this. I'd braced myself for the worst from the very first reporting of this story, steeling myself to the possibility that U. S. Marines, distraught over the death of one of their own, went on an anguished, emotional rampage in the immediate wake of the event, lashing out in a blind rage against the first possible targets that crossed their paths. This, of course, would still be a crime, but one that could be understood, if not tolerated.
But if sometimes truth is sometimes stranger than fiction, sometimes reality is worse than our darkest nightmares. If the Times article is correct, a staff sergeant led a squad on a methodical, multi-hour killing spree.
Why was this allowed to occur? Why was this sergeant not relieved of his command, and this unit immediately forced to stand down by other Marines? This event could not have occurred in a vacuum, and other Marines watched these murders occur, presumably without making any serious attempts to intervene.
I grew up on Guadalcanal Diary and the Sands of Iwo Jima, and have always had a fondness in my heart for the Marines that I saw from nearby MCAS Cherry Point and Camp Lejeune. The apparent fact that Marines stood by and let one or more of their brethren massacre civilians, and then apparently tried to cover up the crime (which will be the target of a separate investigation) are black stains on the long and storied honor of the Corps, and that sickens my heart.
If the Times reporting of this incident is correct, there does seem to be the possibility of capital crimes. Let the investigation proceed, let the trial be fair and unambiguous, and let justice be swift.
* * *
Eight days ago, before the joint NCIS/Multi-National Forces investigation had been completed on the case, before so much as one charge had been filed, ex-Marine John Murtha made the extraordinarily inflammatory and provocative statement that the Marines in this horrific incident "killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
I said then and maintain now that:
Â…it is unconscionable for any legislator to accuse U.S. military personnel of multiple counts of premeditated murder before an investigation into these charges is complete. Prosecutions must proceed at their own logical pace as evidence in the case dictates. Premature accusations by a public figure in such a case imposes an artificial timeline, endangering the accuracy and thoroughness of an investigation.At the same time, such heated rhetoric as charges of murder of "innocent civilians in cold blood" is prejudicial against the defendants, poisoning public opinion against them. This would be an explosive charge in a civilian court, but to make such charges against members of the U.S. Military when they are engaged in military operations in that country is absolutely fissionable.
Even if these accusations are proven true—once charges are finally brought and duly prosecuted—Murtha's grandstanding is still a reprehensible act, trading upon horrible (alledged) murders for temporary political gain.
Sickening souls on the far left are already gloating that Murtha's premature pronouncements may turn out to be accurate, without considering for a second that it was not his place to make those accusations. He could have endangered the investigation and prosecution of these apparent crimes. Of course, due process doesn't much matter to these folks. Making charges, whether they can be proven or supported, is part of their stock in trade.
I find I am able to feel disgust for all the black hearts involved; those that could perpetrate such horrific acts, those that could cover it up, and those who would try to profit from it.
May justice find them all.
Note: It is important to remember that the investigation is still on-going and that the final NCIS report is not expected for another 30 days. No Marines have yet been officially charged.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:31 AM
| Comments (45)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1069 words, total size 8 kb.
President Bush ordered the Justice Department yesterday to seal records seized from the Capitol Hill office of a Democratic congressman, representing a remarkable intervention by the nation's chief executive into an ongoing criminal probe of alleged corruption.The order was aimed at quelling an escalating constitutional confrontation between the Justice Department and the House, where Republican and Democratic leaders have demanded that the FBI return documents and copies of computer files seized from the office of Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-La.).
In a six-paragraph statement, Bush cast the dispute in historic terms and said he issued the order to give Justice Department officials and lawmakers more time to negotiate a compromise. "Our government has not faced such a dilemma in more than two centuries," Bush said. "Yet after days of discussions, it is clear these differences will require more time to be worked out."
The order capped five days of tumultuous negotiations involving the White House, the Justice Department and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), who denounced the Saturday-night raid as an infringement on the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches and had joined Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in demanding that the seized documents be returned.
I resisted the urge to make an immediate comment on this, and instead decided to sleep on it and mull things over. Now that I have, think I like the President's intervention even less.
I first noted on Wednesday and much more qualified experts have confirmed, there is no apparent validity at all to the argument by legislators that they have some sort of Constitutional protection from their offices being searched.
Congressional offices have no special protections under the Fourth Amendment compared to other offices, and the FBI did get a duly sworn search warrant from a federal judge. Nor does the Speech or Debate clause seem to be even an plausible impediment to the execution of a search warrant.
No, the more I look at the President's decision to intercede in this case by impounding the seized documents for a 45-day period, the more I dislike his decision.
There was no compelling legal reason that I can ascertain for the President to intercede in this matter, even though he has the apparent power to do so. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, the Justice Department, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation went well beyond the legal standard in their search of Jefferson's Congressional office, perhaps to the point of showing too much deference to his status as a congressman.
No, the "reasoning" here is purely political in nature, as Bush as paused (but not stopped) the investigation so that Denny Hastert and the rest of the Republican leadership can pull their heads out of their collectiveÂ… well you know.
From this perspective, President Bush overreached, using the power of the Executive to interrupt the Legislative branch's constitutional right to make complete fools of themselves by continuing to exhibit such constitutionally ignorant, publically repellant and arrogant behavior.
The great casualty in Bush's intercession is some much-needed congressional hubris.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:02 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 518 words, total size 4 kb.
May 25, 2006
House Speaker Dennis Hastert accused the Justice Department Thursday of trying to intimidate him in retaliation for criticizing the FBI's weekend raid on a congressman's office, escalating a searing battle between the executive and legislative branches of government."This is one of the leaks that come out to try to, you know, intimidate people," Hastert said on WGN radio Thursday morning. "We're just not going to be intimidated on it."
Asked later Thursday whether he thought he Justice Department retaliated against him with the leak, Hastert replied: "All I'm saying is, here are the dots. People can connect any dots they want to."
[snip]
Within minutes of that report late Wednesday, the department issued the first of two denials that it was investigating Hastert. The speaker demanded a retraction from ABC News, which stood by its story. Hastert on Thursday threatened to sue the network and reporters and executives for libel and defamation.
So Hastert believes that the Justice Department is trying to "you know, intimidate people," by first leaking false information about him to an ABC reporter, and then almost immediately and officially contradicting the false information in the strongest of terms. One would think if the Department of Justice was truly out to stain the Speaker as he maintains, they'd let the stain "set," and not issue a near immediate denial of the charge against him.
Of course, logic hasn't factored into much of what the Speaker of the House has uttered in the past week, so perhaps we shouldn't be too surprised at his foolish consistency.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
02:20 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 283 words, total size 2 kb.
Sixty or more schoolchildren might have been exposed to mercury in a series of incidents that led Wednesday to the closing of a Durham elementary school and the evacuation of a church and seven homes.Oak Grove Elementary School on Wake Forest Road was closed early Wednesday, a day after four students brought unknown quantities of the hazardous substance there. A Durham man who police think gave them the mercury was arrested Wednesday.
[snip]
State and county officials on Wednesday pieced together a sequence of events that they say they think began Friday night when Carlos Guerra, 21, who works for an air-conditioning company, went to an East Ramseur Street church and gave an unknown amount of mercury to four youngsters.
Garner police charged Guerra, of 311 LaSalle St., No. 3001H, with stealing the mercury from a Garner job site Friday.
"I don't think he knew what he was dealing with," said Lt. Don Paschall of the Durham County Sheriff's Office, which is investigating. "He was referring to it as 'magic water.' "
Health officials say Guerra gave the mercury in cups to four children at Iglesias De Restauracion, a storefront church east of downtown. On Tuesday, the officials say, the four children brought the mercury to school, wiped it on others and sprayed it from spray bottles on three school buses and in at least one classroom.
This is the story currently being reported by the media, but that may not be the entire story.
There are questions about the citizenship status of Guerra, as well as some of his victims. I have attempted to contact the Durham County Sheriff's Department and three reporters at local news organizations for comment, and hope to have confirmation of his status later this afternoon.
Roughly 65 percent of North Carolina's Latino population —more than 300,000—are illegal immigrants.
Update: I just got confirmation that Guerra is here legally.
He's just an idiot.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:19 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 335 words, total size 2 kb.
Federal officials say the Congressional bribery investigation now includes Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, based on information from convicted lobbyists who are now cooperating with the government.Part of the investigation involves a letter Hastert wrote three years ago, urging the Secretary of the Interior to block a casino on an Indian reservation that would have competed with other tribes.
There's just one problem with that theory: The FBI denies the story, and Hastert himself is demanding a full retraction.
Despite the denials and request for a retraction, Ross is sticking to his storyÂ… sort of:
ABC's law enforcement sources said the Justice Department denial was meant only to deny that Hastert was a formal “target” or “subject” of the investigation.
"Whether they like it or not, members of Congress, including Hastert, are under investigation," one federal official said tonight.
The investigation of Hastert's relationship with Abramoff is in the early stages, according to these officials, and could eventually conclude that Abramoff's information was unfounded.
Gentlemen, start your parsing.
In the original article, Ross was quite careful to only say that Hastert was “in the mix,” a vague, rather nebulous statement that most readers would interpret to mean that Hastert was most likely the target of a criminal investigation. Indeed, the Reality-Based Community (an oxymoron if there ever was one) seems to be exactly under that impression in their update, and the ambiguous wording is also apparently interpreted in a similar fashion at Booman Tribune, The Carpetbagger Report, and Washington Monthly, all leading liberal political blogs.
But these blogs were hardly alone. Mainstream news sources such as Bloomberg were also taken in by Ross's too-perfect parsing, declaring:
U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert is under investigation by the FBI in the corruption scandal involving former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, ABC News reported.
ABC News, citing unidentified Justice Department officials, said the information involving Hastert was provided by lobbyists who are now cooperating with the investigation.
Reuters and even local ABC stations were also apparently taken in.
Ross provided an initial report with carefully constructed sentences that are phrased in such a way that even the best of minds inferred that Hastert is most likely the target of the investigation.
Bravo, Mr. Ross. Very well played.
So what is occurring here? Are professional journalists (Richard Esposito and Rhonda Schwartz also contributed to the ABC reports) ginning up excitable bloggers and less careful fellow journalists to establish smears they can then plausibly deny as being mere misinterpretations?
Ross's own sources seem to think so:
You guys wrote the story very carefully but they are not reading it very carefully," a senior official said.
Hastert may be a number of things, but he is not the focus of a Congressional corruption probe.
Ross's purposefully misleading, barely justifiable reporting seems to be a classic case of sensationalism, and would appear to cross into the ethically-challenged world of yellow journalism.
Denny Hastert may or may not be found to be of interest in Congressional corruption investigations, but one thing we now know to be true: the reporting of Brian Ross, "ABC News' Chief Investigative Correspondent" is not to be taken at face value.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:01 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 557 words, total size 5 kb.
May 24, 2006
According to an AP story, the National Park Service needs to thin the elk herd in Rocky Mountain National Park. Officials estimate that it will cost $18 million to accomplish this.
The New Editor has other, more rational ideas.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:54 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 51 words, total size 1 kb.
Iraqi troops will be able to handle security in all 18 of the country's provinces by the end of 2007 with additional training and equipment, the country's new prime minister said Wednesday.[snip]
It is the second time in a week that al-Maliki has discussed a timeline for the handover of security responsibilities to Iraqi troops -- a development that President Bush has said would enable U.S. troops to leave.
With more training and better equipment, "Our security forces will be capable of taking over the security portfolio in all Iraqi provinces within one year and a half,"...
[snip]
During a joint appearance with British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Monday, al-Maliki said his government could take over security for 16 of Iraq's 18 provinces by the end of this year.
Obviously, Prime Minister al-Maliki has not asked permission to win the war from "liberal hawk" John Murtha, who said Iraq was unwinnable. He has not heeded the common wisdom of the New York Times, that Iraq was, is, and always will be a quagmire.
This Prime Minister Nouri Kamel al-Maliki ignores the pundits and the fatalists that long ago consigned his nation to the status of a lost cause.
Just who does he think he is to win?
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
06:40 PM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 232 words, total size 2 kb.
My brother-in-law made a sweet-looking custom chopper, one built at some of the most famous chopper shops in the United States. Fabrication and paint came at Orange County Choppers and J.B. Grafix of American Chopper fame in New York, and it was completed in West Palm Beach at Eddie Trotta's Thunder Cycles.
Believe it or not, he's selling it on eBay, so if you want it, go get it.
Alternately, if you happen to be one of my visitors for the left side of the tracks and you'd really like to see me offline, raise $20K or so and put it in my Paypal tipjar to the right, and I'll take it.
Think of it as your chance to "stick it to the Man."
Donations for my expected medical bills would be nice, too.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
01:57 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 152 words, total size 2 kb.
Showing abject ignorance of the applicable law and more than a little arrogance, Republican House Speaker Denny Hastert demanded that the document seized in the raid should be returned, and the FBI agents involved in the raid, "ought to be frozen out of that (case) for the sake of the Constitution."
As you might expect, the NY Times is having a field day:
After years of quietly acceding to the Bush administration's assertions of executive power, the Republican-led Congress hit a limit this weekend.Resentment boiled among senior Republicans for a second day on Tuesday after a team of warrant-bearing agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation turned up at a closed House office building on Saturday evening, demanded entry to the office of a lawmaker and spent the night going through his files.
The episode prompted cries of constitutional foul from Republicans — even though the lawmaker in question, Representative William J. Jefferson of Louisiana, is a Democrat whose involvement in a bribery case has made him an obvious partisan political target.Speaker J. Dennis Hastert raised the issue personally with President Bush on Tuesday. The Senate Rules Committee is examining the episode.
Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House majority leader, predicted that the separation-of-powers conflict would go to the Supreme Court. "I have to believe at the end of the day it is going to end up across the street," Mr. Boehner told reporters gathered in his conference room, which looks out on the Capitol plaza and the court building.
A court challenge would place all three branches of government in the fray over whether the obscure "speech and debate" clause of the Constitution, which offers some legal immunity for lawmakers in the conduct of their official duties, could be interpreted to prohibit a search by the executive branch on Congressional property.
A "separation of powers" conflict? Do either Hastert or Boehner or anyone else protesting the execution of this search warrant, have even the slightest reading comprehension? Folks, it isn't that hard.
Congressional office have any special protections from search warrants, as noted by White Collar Crime Prof Blog:
The Fourth Amendment does not afford any specific protection to legislative offices so long as there is probable cause to believe that there is evidence of criminal activity at the location specified, and the House of Representatives would not have standing to raise a Fourth Amendment claim on its own.
Thus, Jefferson's Office has no special immunity, or "specific protection," and the FBI had enough evidence to obtain a search warrant from District Court Judge Hogan.
Hastert seems to base his claims on his understanding of the Constitution—proving for once and for all that he understands it about has much as you might expect a former high school wrestling coach would.
Section Six of Article I of the U.S. Constitution clearly and unambiguously states:
The Senators and Representatives shall receive a compensation for their services, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the treasury of the United States. They shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place.
One does not need to graduate from a top flight law school to easily discern in the passage above that the commission of a felony is specifically cited as one of three exemptions from the privilege from arrest. The charges being pursued against Jefferson are indeed felony charges.
The "speech and debate" clause only applies to a Congressman's official duties, and if Hastert, Boehner and other congressmen think that accepting bribes is part of their official duties, then perhaps we need more search warrants executed on Congressional offices, not fewer.
A "culture of corruption" indeed exists in Washington, and this corruption manifests itself in the very souls of Congressmen who are so arrogant as to believe their offices are some sort of sanctuary from the law.
November.
Faster, please.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:34 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 767 words, total size 5 kb.
So far, I'm not that impressed.
4/24 Update (via Drudge): and it seems that things are even worst than first thought. A mock evacuation was cancelled because no one could figure out who was responsible for evacuating FEMA's largest trailer park in Louisiana.
And here's the really bad news (my bold):
Last year, as Hurricane Katrina approached, thousands of New Orleans' poor were left behind because they had no transportation, could not afford to leave or did not know where to go. The Louisiana Superdome and the convention center became shelters of last resort where thousands sweltered for days, suffering through shortages of food and water.Mayor Ray Nagin has said there will be no shelters in the city this time.
The authorities can't figure out how to evacuate you, and there will be no central shelters to retreat to.
Sleep tight, New Orleans.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:52 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 162 words, total size 1 kb.
May 23, 2006
Mort, it seems, has had it with those on the political left that he feels have taken partisanship to the extreme:
ENOUGH already! It's harmful enough that ideological conflict and partisan politics are preventing this country from solving its long-term challenges on health care, fiscal policy and energy. Now it's threatening our national survival.
Liberal State of the Day doesn't quite agree trying to make a parallel between the presidential administrations of WWII and the War on Terror:
Â… back then the US attempted to strictly adhere to the Geneva Convention. The US populace was not concerned that "The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave" was torturing its enemies. We weren't trying to form opinion and policy based on the latest episode of '24'. Now we have a Torture Veep; back then we had a something completely different - a reasonable and honest human being.
State's Jeff doesn't quite seem to grasp that his hyperbole would seem to bear out Kondrake's point about extreme partisanship to the letter, but let's focus merely on what he understands to be facts.
Did the United States "strictly adhere" to the Geneva Convention in World War Two? We would certainly like to think so and indeed in the vast majority of cases we did, but as Victor David Hanson notes:
We know about the horrific German massacres of American prisoners, but little about instances of Americans' shooting German captives well before the Battle of the Bulge. Such murdering was neither sanctioned by American generals nor routine — but nevertheless it was not uncommon in the heat of battle and the stress of war. No inquiry cited Generals Hodges, Patton, or Bradley as responsible for rogue soldiers shooting unarmed prisoners.
Biscari. Dachau. Chenogne. Very un-Geneva massacres did occur, and those involved, when tried, suffered few lasting penalties. We occasionally murdered, and we did in dire situations torture our enemies if we thought it could save American lives. The U.S population, at the time, certainly wouldn't have blamed Presidents Roosevelt or Truman for that if they knew the details, if it meant Johnny would come marching home instead of being unloaded from a train's baggage car.
Then, at least, partisanship has its limits.
Kondrake was imperfect in his arguments, as Bill Quick notes, but his overall argument remains:
Â…the fundamental problem infecting much of Congress, the media and the political class - especially those left of center - is that they are consumed with loathing for President Bush and all his works and are prepared to do anything to undermine him, even if it makes the country less safe.
I await a point-by-point rebuttal from the media, the Congress, and political liberals of these basic charges. It should be easy to prove that these claims are falseÂ… shouldn't it?
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:16 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 500 words, total size 4 kb.
- He and other U.S. Army Rangers were ordered "...do whatever it takes...to strike fear in the hearts of the Iraqis..." (1:07);
- He and other Rangers routinely executed children as part of the interrogations of their parents (6:15);
- He personally killed almost 200 men, women, and children, many at close range, and most or all noncombatants (7:30);
- He and other Rangers infiltrated a mosque, waited for about 200 worshipers to arrive and pray, slaughtered them with guns, ignited the bodies, hung them from the rafters, wrote anti-muslim graffiti on the walls, and left bodies in the streets (9:30);
- He and other Rangers shot and killed unarmed protesters and children who threw rocks (12:20);
- He personally killed a mother pleading for mercy, and her three children, including an infant, because he "had to."(16:05)
This willingness to call American soldiers murderers made him immediately popular on the fringe left, where he spoke at antiwar rallies and found himself the darling of the leftwing alternative media.
The problem was, Jesse MacBeth was never a Ranger.
Jesse MacBeth was never in any branch of the military, and his lies are almost too numerous to mention... except for those for which he garnered convictions, perhaps. MacBeth is currently wanted on bench warrant issued today for "violation of a court order" and "assault in the fourth degree" in Washington State and probation violations in Arizona.
I guess sooner or later, this fraud will get to wear a uniform after all.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
05:56 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 299 words, total size 3 kb.
71 queries taking 0.1252 seconds, 580 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
