Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Crime story

Delingpole

Queensland turns the tide of environmental lunacy

It's everyone else's fault his son was a murderer. Does he even consider killing Jews murder?

Mohamed Merah: Toulouse gunman's father 'to sue France'

The father of Toulouse gunman Mohamed Merah has hired an Algerian lawyer to sue French special police over his son's death, French media report.

Mohamed Merah, 23, killed seven people, including three children, in southern France before he was shot dead in a siege at his home last week.

Algiers-based lawyer Zahia Mokhtari told French media Mohamed Benalal Merah considered his son had been murdered.

Mr Merah's plan to sue the state drew criticism from French politicians.

"If I were the father of such a monster, I would shut my mouth in shame," French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said on Tuesday.

'No al-Qaeda links'

Ms Mokhtari told the AFP news agency that a convention signed between France and Algeria allows lawyers to pursue cases in both countries.

"Mr [Mohamed Benalal] Merah came to our office in Algiers yesterday [Tuesday] to formally ask us to sue the French security services for not having followed procedure during the attempt to arrest Mohamed Merah and his murder," Ms Mokhtari told AFP.

Mohamed Merah died in a police assault on his flat in Toulouse on 22 March after a 32-hour siege. He had killed three soldiers in two separate attacks before shooting dead three children and a teacher at a Jewish school.

Merah, born in France of Algerian descent, is said to have told police he wanted to avenge Palestinian children and to attack the French army because of its foreign interventions.

His half-brother in Algeria, Rachid Merah, said Mohamed had been manipulated by the French intelligence services and did not have any ties to al-Qaeda.

"I deny that formally and I have doubts that he had any link with al-Qaeda or Taliban or any terrorist organisation in the world. And the fact that proves it is that France killed him before he could speak in a trial, while they could get him alive," Rachid Merah said.

Merah's family want to bury him in Algeria but the Algerian authorities have not formally granted their request.


Dr. Gaffe strikes again.

A police state needs poilice

Donald Trump at his best:
Let me get this straight . . . We're going to be "gifted" with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don't, Which purportedly covers at least ten million more people, without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that didn't read it but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a President who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, for which we'll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke!!!!!
'What the hell could possibly go wrong?'

The race business is very profitable for the Democrat left

Dem pulled from House floor for Trayvon hoodie






Is the State Department a separate entity unencumbered by law?

State Department Won’t Say Jerusalem Is in Israel

BY:

UPDATE: The State Department has altered an official communication to erase the fact that it had referred to Israel and Jerusalem as separate entities.

The release now states: “Acting Under Secretary Kathleen Stephens Travels to Algiers, Doha, Amman, Jerusalem, and Tel Aviv.” In a previous iteration of the release, the State Department separated Jerusalem from Israel.

An official State Department communication has labeled Jerusalem and Israel as separate entities.

In an official press release yesterday, the State Department announced that “Acting Under Secretary Kathleen Stephens Travels to Algeria, Qatar, Jordan, Jerusalem, and Israel.”

Keeping up with its longstanding policy, the State Department refuses to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s official capital—despite a U.S. law stating otherwise. Obama faced criticism on the issue last year, when it was revealed that the White House had scrubbed all references to Jerusalem being part of the Jewish state from a collection of photos on its website.

Obama has also been lambasted by pro-Israel leaders and some on Capitol Hill for capitulating to pressure from the State Department, which has long opposed U.S. law on the matter.

A senior GOP aide condemned the State Department’s recent press release as unsound foreign policy.

“Once again, President Obama’s administration reminds Jewish voters why he cannot be trusted when it comes to Israel’s security,” said the source. “He doesn’t think Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Is it its own sovereign nation?”

The GOP source also chided Obama for continuing to buck U.S. law on the issue.

“Under U.S. law, Jerusalem is recognized as the undivided capital of Israel—period,” said the adviser. “Unlike the U.S. embassy’s move, that fact is not subject to any waiver or exception. So the question really is, why is Barack Obama ignoring U.S. law and refusing to recognize Israel’s capital?”

The White House did not respond to request for comment.

The New Anti-Semitism

Not much different from the old anti-semitism. From Victor Davis Hanson:

Not long ago, the Economist ran an unsigned editorial called the “Auschwitz Complex.” The unnamed author blamed serial Middle East tensions on both Israel’s unwarranted sense of victimhood, accrued from the Holocaust, and its unwillingness to “to give up its empire.” As far as Israel’s paranoid obsessions with the specter of a nuclear Iran, the author dismissed any real threat by announcing that “Iran makes an appealing enemy for Israelis,” and that “Israelis have psychologically displaced the source of their anxiety onto a more distant target: Iran.”

It is hard to fathom how a democracy of seven million people by any stretch of the imagination is an “empire.” Israel, after all, fought three existential wars over its 1947 borders, when the issue at hand was not manifest destiny, but the efforts of its many enemies to exterminate or deport its population. I would not otherwise know how to characterize the Arab promise of more than a half-century of “pushing the Jews into Mediterranean.”

While it is true that Israeli forces stayed put on neighboring lands after the 1967 war, subsequent governments eventually withdrew from the Sinai, southern Lebanon, and Gaza—areas from which attacks were and are still staged against it. The Economist’s choice of “appealing” is an odd modifying adjective of the noun “enemy,” particularly for Iran, which has both promised to wipe out Israel and is desperately attempting to find the nuclear means to reify that boast.

The Economist article is fairly representative of European anger at Israel, a country that is despised by most of the nations that make up the UN roster. Or as Nicky Larkin, an Irish documentary filmmaker and once vehement anti-Israel activist, recently confessed, “An Irish artist is supposed to sign boycotts, wear a PLO scarf, and remonstrate loudly about The Occupation. But it’s not just artists who are supposed to hate Israel. Being anti-Israel is supposed to be part of our Irish identity, the same way we are supposed to resent the English.”

What then are the sources for widespread hatred of Israel? Such venom cannot be explained just by political differences with its Arab and Islamic neighbors. After all, take any major issue of contention—occupied land, refugees, a divided Jerusalem, cross border incursions—and then ask why the world focuses disproportionately on Israel when similar such disputes are commonplace throughout the globe.

Does the world much care about the principle of occupation? Not really. Consider land that has been “occupied” in the fashion of the West Bank since World War II. Russia won’t give up the southern Kurile Islands it took from Japan. Tibet ceased to exist as a sovereign country—well before the 1967 Middle East War—when it was absorbed by Communist China. Turkish forces since their 1974 invasion have occupied large swaths of Cyprus. East Prussia ceased to exist in 1945, after 13 million German refugees were displaced from ancestral homelands that dated back 500 years.

The 112-mile green line that runs through downtown Nicosia to divide Cyprus makes Jerusalem look united in comparison. Over 500,000 Jews have been ethnically-cleansed from Arab capitals since 1947, in waves of pogroms that come every few decades. Why are they not considered refugees the way the Palestinians are?

The point is not that the world community should not focus on Israel’s disputes with its neighbors, but that it singles Israel out for its purported transgressions in a fashion that it does not for nearly identical disagreements elsewhere. Over 75 percent of recent United Nations resolutions target Israel, which has been cited for human rights violations far more than the Sudan, Congo, or Rwanda, where millions have perished in little-noticed genocides. Why is the international community so anti-Israel?

A new sort of fashionable and socially acceptable anti-Semitism looms large. For much of the past two millennia in the West, hatred of the Jews was a crude prejudice, rich with state-sanctioned religious, economic, and social biases. By the same token, dissidents, leftists, and anti-establishmentarians once took up the cause of decrying anti-Semitism, an Enlightenment theme until well after World War II.

No more—with the establishment of Israel, anti-Semitism metamorphosized in two unforeseen ways. First, it became a near obsession of the modern Left, which associated the creation of the Jewish state with a sort of Western hegemonic impulse. That Israel was democratic and protected human rights in a way unlike its autocratic neighbors mattered nothing. To the international Left, Israel was a religious, imperialistic, and surrogate West in the Middle East.

The rest here.

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Think the unions care about their customers?


Exclusive: The Stunning JFK Airport Baggage Scandal; 200 Thefts Per Day


Sources: Baggage Handlers, Jetway Workers, Security All In On Ongoing Scam



NEW YORK (CBS 2) — Think twice before you check your luggage at John F. Kennedy International Airport.
Cash, jewelry, electronics and other valuables are being stolen from passengers’ baggage at a staggering rate.
It’s happening as a result of inside jobs that aren’t being stopped, CBS 2’s Marcia Kramer reports exclusively.
All Rita Lamberg has left is an empty jewelry drawer and pictures of the $160,000 worth of watches, rings and necklaces that were stolen from her baggage at JFK Airport.
“I am so sick. This is a lifetime, a lifetime of my savings,” Lamberg said.
But Lamberg isn’t alone. Law enforcement sources told Kramer that thefts at the airport have increased at a staggering and alarming rate. There are now more that 200 a day — and that’s every day. Baggage handlers, jetway workers and even security people are all in on the ongoing scam to steal you blind.
“The belly of the airplane has become like a flea market for airport employees. They go in there and go through all the luggage unencumbered, unchecked,” JFK security lawyer Kenneth Mollins said.
Mollins is representing Lamberg as she tries to get reimbursed by the airline. Former NYPD detective Frank Shea was hired by other clients who were also ripped off at the airport. They both said the theft problem at JFK is a nightmare that is going unchecked.
“What we’re seeing out there is that really anything that isn’t nailed down is being stolen and for that matter I would caution, some day, if there weren’t tires missing from an aircraft,” Shea said.
Sources told Kramer that one of the things that makes the thieves so successful is that they engage in luggage profiling. They go after the most expensive luggage, but they also check out where you come from. So if you live in Scarsdale or Muttontown or North Woodmere you’re more likely to have your bags opened and possibly things stolen.
“It’s really occurring on the tarmac or as it’s being loaded onto the aircraft,” Shea said.
Once they’ve found the goodies, Shea said there are many ways to make off with them.

In other words, thieves steal your bags, but as a passenger you never find that out. The airlines say they are lost in transit.“Sometimes they get loaded into the back of one of the vehicles out at the airport. They’re searched through. They can be discarded as rubbish. Other times they are leaving the airport grounds,” Shea said.
“The airlines don’t want to report these thefts because it’s bad for business,” Mollins said.
And they don’t want to talk to reporters about it because even if your luggage isn’t stolen you could still be a target.
“Fares go up clearly because of this. It’s a cost of doing business. They pay out and they hide the fact that these items are stolen,” Mollins said.
Most travelers have no idea what’s going on.
“You now scared the hell out of me,” said Sutton Place resident Louis Polk.
“I’m surprised. I didn’t know it was so, so bad,” added Rosana Perez of the Bronx.
And every time Lamberg looks into the emptiness of her jewelry drawer she said she feels, “heartbroken. I can’t believe it happened to me.”
The Port Authority, which owns JFK, said that workers are fingerprinted and given background checks though the FBI database.”
Even so, the agency said it’s going to install more cameras around the airport to help combat the problem Kramer has exposed.
Experts said that what really needs to happen is for the Federal Aviation Administration to tighten standards and for airlines to consider putting cameras in the belly of their planes.

Democrat Jew hatred

WHNT Exclusive: Louis Farrakhan To Visit Huntsville In April

"The Alabama A&M Poetry Club and Alabama A&M Democrats were two of the student groups that invited Mr. Farrakhan to campus. Poetry club president Kris Taylor says A&M administrators gave the go-ahead for Farrakhan to come, and called criticism of his past remarks overblown".

Obama's anti Israel campaign

State Department Won’t Say Jerusalem Is in Israel

BY: -


UPDATE: The State Department has altered an official communication to erase the fact that it had referred to Israel and Jerusalem as separate entities.

The release now states: “Acting Under Secretary Kathleen Stephens Travels to Algiers, Doha, Amman, Jerusalem, and Tel Aviv.” In a previous iterationof the release, the State Department separated Jerusalem from Israel.

An official State Department communication has labeled Jerusalem and Israel as separate entities.

In an official press release yesterday, the State Department announced that “Acting Under Secretary Kathleen Stephens Travels to Algeria, Qatar, Jordan, Jerusalem, and Israel.”

Keeping up with its longstanding policy, the State Department refuses to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s official capital—despite a U.S. law stating otherwise. Obama faced criticism on the issue last year, when it was revealed that the White House had scrubbed all references to Jerusalem being part of the Jewish state from a collection of photos on its website.

Obama has also been lambasted by pro-Israel leaders and some on Capitol Hill for capitulating to pressure from the State Department, which has long opposed U.S. law on the matter.

A senior GOP aide condemned the State Department’s recent press release as unsound foreign policy.

“Once again, President Obama’s administration reminds Jewish voters why he cannot be trusted when it comes to Israel’s security,” said the source. “He doesn’t think Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Is it its own sovereign nation?”

The GOP source also chided Obama for continuing to buck U.S. law on the issue.

“Under U.S. law, Jerusalem is recognized as the undivided capital of Israel—period,” said the adviser. “Unlike the U.S. embassy’s move, that fact is not subject to any waiver or exception. So the question really is, why is Barack Obama ignoring U.S. law and refusing to recognize Israel’s capital?”

The White House did not respond to request for comment.


First Amendment victory

Mich. militia members cleared of charges that accused them of plotting war against government


DETROIT — A federal judge on Tuesday gutted the government’s case against seven members of a Michigan militia, dismissing the most serious charges in an extraordinary defeat for federal authorities who insisted they had captured homegrown rural extremists poised for war.

U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts said the members’ expressed hatred of law enforcement didn’t amount to a conspiracy to rebel against the government. The FBI had secretly planted an informant and an FBI agent inside the Hutaree militia starting in 2008 to collect hours of anti-government audio and video that became the cornerstone of the case.

“The court is aware that protected speech and mere words can be sufficient to show a conspiracy. In this case, however, they do not rise to that level,” the judge said on the second anniversary of raids and arrests that broke up the group.

Roberts granted requests for acquittal on the most serious charges: conspiring to commit sedition, or rebellion, against the U.S. and conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction. Other weapons crimes tied to the alleged conspiracies also were dismissed.

“The judge had a lot of guts,” defense attorney William Swor said. “It would have been very easy to say, ‘The heck with it,’ and hand it off to the jury. But the fact is she looked at the evidence, and she looked at it very carefully.”

The trial, which began Feb. 13, will resume Thursday with only a few gun charges remaining against militia leader David Stone and son Joshua Stone, both from Lenawee County, Mich. They have been in custody without bond for two years.

Prosecutors said Hutaree members were anti-government rebels who combined training and strategy sessions to prepare for a violent strike against federal law enforcement, triggered first by the slaying of a police officer.

But there never was an attack. Defense lawyers said highly offensive remarks about police and the government were wrongly turned into a high-profile criminal case that drew public praise from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who in 2010 called Hutaree a “dangerous organization.”

David Stone’s “statements and exercises do not evince a concrete agreement to forcibly resist the authority of the United States government,” Roberts said Tuesday. “His diatribes evince nothing more than his own hatred for — perhaps even desire to fight or kill — law enforcement; this is not the same as seditious conspiracy.”

U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade declined to comment. Two years ago, when militia members were arrested, she said it was time to “take them down.”

The FBI had put a local informant, Dan Murray, inside the militia in 2008 and paid him $31,000. An FBI agent from New Jersey also was embedded. Steve Haug, known as “Jersey Steve,” posed as a trucker and spent months secretly recording talks with Stone. He even served as Stone’s best man at his wedding, a celebration with militia members wearing military fatigues.

Haug repeatedly talked to Stone about building pipe bombs and getting other sophisticated explosives. The FBI rented a warehouse in Ann Arbor where the agent would invite him and others to store and discuss weapons.

Haug told jurors he was “shocked” by Stone’s knowledge of explosives, noting it matched some of his own instruction as a federal agent.

Stone was recorded saying he was willing to kill police and even their families. He considered them part of a “brotherhood” — a sinister global authority that included federal law enforcers and United Nations troops.

He had bizarre beliefs: Stone suspected Germany and Singapore had aircraft stationed in Texas, and thousands of Canadian troops were poised to take over Michigan. He said the government put computer chips in a flu vaccine.

He had a speech prepared for a regional militia gathering in Kentucky in 2010, but bad weather forced him and others to return to Michigan. Instead, he read it in the van while a secret camera installed by the FBI captured the remarks.

“It is time to strike and take our nation back so that we may be free again from tyranny,” Stone said. “Time is up, God bless all of you and welcome to the new revolution.”

Swor said Stone is a Christian who was bracing for war against the Antichrist.

“This is not the United States government. This is Satan’s army,” Swor told the judge Monday, referring to the enemy.

Militia members cleared of all charges were Stone’s wife, Tina Stone, and his son, David Stone Jr.; Thomas Piatek of Whiting, Ind.; Michael Meeks of Manchester, Mich.; and Kris Sickles of Sandusky, Ohio.

“It’s hard to believe it’s over,” said Tina Stone, crying as she spoke by phone. “Thank God we live in a country where we do have freedom of speech.”

Joshua Clough of Blissfield, Mich., pleaded guilty to a weapons charge in December and awaits his sentence. Jacob Ward of Huron, Ohio, will have a separate trial.

___

Now why might that be?

GM's biggest hurdle to recruiting new talent? Finding people to live in Detroit

Corrupt Democrats. We don't need it but we will have it so Harry Reid and friends can profit.

HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT LINKED TO SEN. REID ON VERGE OF LANDING $4.9B FED LOAN


    Obama's Brownshirts

    Union Boss Violence and Intimidation

    Increasing the deficit, cutting benefits for military retirees, etc..

    Obama Requests $770 Million to Fight Global Warming Overseas

    (CNSNews.com) The Obama administration has requested $770 million in federal funds to combat the effects of global warming in developing countries, a new congressional report details, continuing its policy of using foreign aid to combat the effects of global warming in the developing world.

    The figure, from a recent report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), shows that despite another year of $1 trillion deficits, the Obama administration continues to pursue its policy of using foreign aid funds for anti-global warming measures – known as the Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI).

    According to CRS, the government has spent a total of $2.5 billion on GCCI since 2010 on overseas anti-global warming efforts in Latin America, Asia, and Africa.

    For 2013, the Obama administration has requested an additional $770 million for its policy, a figure that if approved by Congress would bring total foreign climate change spending to $3.3 billion.

    The administration uses the money to fund three types of anti-global warming foreign aid: adaptation, clean energy, and sustainable landscapes.

    Adaptation, according to CRS, seeks to help developing countries insulate themselves from the effects of climate change by giving farmers and government planners access to better climate data. It also aims to aid countries by teaching them new agricultural and land use methods, as well as methods to protect against the rising sea levels, floods, and increased droughts said to be the result of global warming.

    Clean energy funding seeks to aid poor countries in developing their own clean energy infrastructures in order to offset the fact that developing countries are the single fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions. The federal spending supports the creation of so-called green jobs in the developing world as well as the creation of clean energy projects.

    Sustainable landscape projects seek to stop developing countries from cutting down forests, particularly in tropical areas, for farming or logging – or at least teach them to develop more modern logging and farming techniques, laws, and regulations.

    CRS pointed out that Congress should consider several issues as it weighs the administration’s fiscal year 2013 GCCI budget request – including whether the funding was fiscally responsible.

    “Budget constraints may lead to questions about sustaining high levels of support for international development assistance in general, and international climate change assistance in particular,” CRS noted.

    “The burden is exacerbated during times of economic downturn, when the federal government is hard-pressed to generate fiscal resources to adequately address domestic challenges and maintain basic levels of public services and quality of life,” CRS added.

    They also noted that – like most foreign aid programs – there was a high probability that foreign countries would misuse or waste GCCI funds.

    “National and international institutions that dispense financial assistance have sometimes been criticized for inefficient and bloated bureaucracies, their lack of transparency about project procurement practices and operating costs, and the proportion of their funds misused or lost through instances of graft, corruption, and other political inefficiencies,” CRS said.

    Finally, CRS noted that foreign economic aid programs like GCCI have a mixed record of results and that Congress may want to consider the fact that there is a lack of consensus on whether global warming will happen at all.

    “Current uncertainties and ambiguities regarding the fields of atmospheric chemistry and climatology have been offered by some as reasons to postpone and/or reconsider international climate change assistance policies and programs,” CRS added.

    However, CRS also noted that the typical benefits of foreign aid applied to GCCI programs as well, including preserving the United States’ leadership role in the world, the national security benefits of keeping countries stable, and the benefits to U.S. corporations of trade with developing countries.


    History proved Carter wrong

    Obama Refuels Jimmy Carter's Failed Energy Policies


    Carter Redux: While President Obama talks about how forward-looking he is when it comes to the nation's energy, almost everything he's proposing is just a retread of Jimmy Carter's failed policies from the 1970s.

    In the face of historic gasoline prices and an increasingly agitated public, Obama has taken to lambasting Republicans. They're members of the Flat Earth Society, he says, and display "a lack of imagination, a belief that you can't do something in a new way."

    But the only thing imaginative about Obama's energy plans is how he's managed to recycle most of them from Jimmy Carter's playbook without anyone noticing. And we all know how well Carter's plan worked out.

    Here's just a sampling of quotes from Carter and Obama speeches on energy. Notice any similarities?

    Carter: We can't substantially increase our domestic production. The cost will keep going up.

    Obama: We can't just drill our way to lower gas prices.

    Carter: We must face an unpleasant fact about energy prices. They are going up, whether we pass an energy program or not.

    Obama: Anybody who says we can get gas down to 2bucks a gallon just isn't telling the truth.


    Carter: We are running out of gas and oil.

    Obama: We cannot sustain a future powered by a fuel that is rapidly disappearing.

    Carter: We can protect ourselves from uncertain supplies by reducing our demand for oil.

    Obama: If we really want energy security and energy independence, we've got to start looking at how we use less oil.

    Carter: We must start now to develop the new, unconventional sources of energy we will rely on in the next century.

    Obama: With more research and incentives, we can break our dependence on oil.

    Carter: I will soon submit legislation to Congress calling for the creation of this nation's first solar bank, which will help us achieve the crucial goal of 20% of our energy coming from solar power.

    Obama: I want to make sure when these guys are grown up that they're seeing solar panels all across the country.

    Carter: Conservation is the quickest, cheapest, most practical source of energy.

    Obama: Making our buildings more energy-efficient is one of the fastest, easiest and cheapest ways to save money.

    Carter: If we fail to act boldly today, then we surely face a greater series of crises tomorrow.

    Obama: We have to make a serious, nationwide commitment to developing new sources of energy and we have to do it right away.

    Carter: These efforts will cost money, a lot of money, and that is why Congress must enact the windfall profits tax without delay.

    Obama: It's time to end the taxpayer giveaway to an industry that's never been more profitable, (and) invest in clean energy that's never been more promising.

    Carter: This is an effort which requires vision and cooperation for all Americans. ... I can't tell you that these measures will be easy.

    Obama: Energy independence will require an all-hands-on deck effort from America. ... This will not be easy, and it will not happen overnight.

    About the only thing Obama hasn't lifted from Carter's energy playbook is the word "malaise." Then again, Carter never actually used that word.