You Asked!

You know those canned surveys that politicians send out to better serve you (ie: to make sure they are going with the flow of public opinion)? I like to answer them in detail when possible. It is good mental exercise and helps one to think positively about a subject that is often quite negative.

Here is an example. I received this survey in the spring from a State legislator. It was simply a list of boxes to check off if the voter thought the corresponding issue was important. Results obtained in this way can be misleading, however. For example, if one selects education as an important issue, that gives no indication of what the intended solution should be. One voter might feel that the teacher's pay needs to be increased to attract more professional or capable educators, while another might feel that the teachers should be fired en masse and the high school students should take over the elementary teaching positions, perhaps learning something themselves in the process.

Anyway...

----------------------------------------------------------

Dear Rep. _____,

I received the enclosed survey yesterday... Please accept my thanks for giving your constituents the opportunity to weigh in on the issues addressed. I think that several of these questions deserve more than a simple check, so with your permission I would like to address them specifically here.

On your question regarding funding sources for public schools, my only concern is that the income tax is too invasive of privacy. I realize that it is widely accepted , but I would view either a property tax or sales tax as preferable. Obviously, there is also the issue of tremendous waste within the public school system, so any increase in funding at the present would merely fuel the problem.

Regarding the reform efforts mentioned, I support all of them.

State government ought to be treated like a business where spending is concerned, although I recognize that this is not current wisdom. The pay raise scandal earlier this year is a perfect example. By the way, I appreciate your opposition to that job.

Election law is desperately in need of reform. I especially encourage you to lend your support to the Voter’s Choice Act proposed legislation you received from the PA Ballot Access Coalition. I would be delighted to see you as a sponsor of that legislation.

Gambling is a plague and a cancer on our society and the sooner this Commonwealth withdraws its support and involvement in it, the better for all of us.

The use of eminent domain is currently seeing shameful abuse around the nation and here in PA. The meaning of “public use” seriously needs definition, and it seems to me that the best way to control abuse of this power is to limit it to actual, direct and necessary public use, rather than simply anything that might improve revenue, view shed or property values.

And regarding Social Security Numbers, the dangerous rate of increase in identity theft alone should prompt a reconsideration of the widespread use of the SSN for identification. It is an extremely insecure form of ID; it is easily stolen and provides the criminal with almost limitless access to other private information. In addition, it is not really an identifier anyway, but rather an account number. And finally, the requirement of SSNs for state issued licenses discriminates against those who have religious objections to the Social Security System by denying them reasonable privileges as citizens of PA. Why would not the same ID required for a U.S. passport be sufficient for state licenses?

I also mentioned property tax reform: this is minor compared to the other points but I strongly believe that failure to pay property taxes ought not to result in the loss of the home. It could appropriately be tied to voting privileges without giving the state a default title to private property, which I believe is patently unjust.

On the issues you listed as potential focal points for state officials, I added Constitutional government, which I firmly believe ought to be the number one priority for every elected official in the Commonwealth. The fact that it has not been for some time only makes the need more urgent.

Overall tax burden – The waste and excessive spending that has characterized Harrisburg for years will have to be addressed before any true tax relief can be considered.

Property taxes – Above

Direction of the economy – This should not be the direct concern of the legislature.

Energy prices – Everyone would certainly like to see lower energy prices, but further interference by any level of government would only serve to exacerbate the problem. Free markets only work if they are free.

Crime/violence/drugs – These very serious problems are simply the logical result of our public school system, which has made the removal of moral inhibitions its number one priority.

Education/schools – They are precisely what one would expect from the lack of moral teaching and the emphasis on selfishness that they promote. If Pennsylvania would take a stand against the Federal courts, and be willing to lose federal funding in exchange for local control and real education, our school system would quickly surpass every other state in the nation, and this could be accomplished with only a fraction of the current level of expenditures. (Homeshoolers have proven this to be true beyond any reasonable doubt.)

Environment/pollution – This is a real problem in the cities, but has been so abused that I honestly don’t know how it should be approached at present.

Morality/Traditional family values – Tradition isn’t enough, sir. Until Pennsylvania is ready to allow God out of the closet, we will unfortunately be forced to deal with whatever else comes out in the best way we can.

Sanctity of life/Abortion – Every human being, regardless of age, is endowed by his or her Creator with certain inalienable rights, including life. Unless their right to life is forfeited by a capital crime, it is the first duty of all government to protect it. I believe abortion on demand is murder. Death as the result of a medical condition, however, is not. Medical technology should never be employed for the express purpose of taking life, but a person ought to have the right to determine to what extent it should be employed to keep them alive.

Traffic/roads/development and Farmland preservation - I support whatever can be done within constitutional limits.

Growth of government – Stop it!

Quality of life issues – Our government has enough to do within its proper sphere to take on such a vague and all-encompassing area of life beyond it.

Medicare/Medicaid programs – These programs are a drain on the state and a classic example of bureaucratic inefficiency, besides being socialistic and un-American in nature.

Prescription drugs – Given the abuse and danger of many of these drugs, their high cost may well be a blessing in disguise. Regardless, the people of this state will benefit more from a truly free market than from any amount of well-intentioned government intervention.

Thank you again for the opportunity to share these thoughts with you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Simple! Well ... ok. What's amazing is the fact that the Rep. I sent this particular response to actually read it! I've never had that happen before.

Dictatorship (almost)

A few days ago I forwarded an email received from _____ claiming that the defense appropriations bill signed by George the Third on Oct. 17 revised the Insurrection Act to expand the power of the Executive to impose martial law without State cooperation. (Read article here: http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2006/10/1732834.php ) I looked through the ponderous "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" to confirm the information in that article. Here is a summary of the changes I found.

A) 10 USC Chapter 15, previously titled "Insurrections," is retitled "Enforcement of Laws to Restore Public Order."

B) 10 USC 333, "Interference with State and Federal Law," previously authorized the President to use "the militia or armed forces ... to supress ... any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy," if it hinders or obstructs the execution of the law so far that the citizens are "denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution." Under the new law Sec. 333 is retitled "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law." Under the revised law, the President may also use the armed forces or the National Guard (militia is not mentioned) to restore public order and enforce federal laws following "a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition" which results in the breakdown of public order.

C) 10 USC 334, "Proclamation to disperse," requires the President, when using the armed forces in a law enforcement capacity under Chapter 15, to issue a "proclamation ... order[ing] the insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes within a limited time." The new law reads "... the insurgents, or those obstructing the enforcement of the laws, to disperse..."

While the author of the previously mentioned article reverts to hyperbole in his claim that Bush has, in effect, declared himself dictator, there is certainly a significant pattern of consolidation of power in these changes. It is worth noting that 10 USC Chapter 15 has already been widely abused by previous administrations without judicial or legislative interference. And while the sincerity of Senator Leahy is worthy of doubt, his statements are undoubtedly correct and should make all of us take a realistic look at how we have allowed the current climate of fear to excuse the discarding of our liberties.

Echoooooes

Military Commisions Act of 2006

Warning: material contained in this post may be detrimental to your state of denial.

I’ve just finished reading the final compromise version of Senate Bill 3930, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which establishes military commissions for trial of “unlawful enemy combatants” under Chapter 47A of title 10 U.S.C. A close study of the bill reveals a power grab of astonishing proportions. To detail even the most important points would be an extensive task, but a few key concerns are presented here. Please take the time to read the legislation for yourself to verify these statements. A link is provided here.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:2:./temp/~c109fZSPZH:e0:

(If it doesn’t work go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and type “Military Commissions Act of 2006” into the text search box. Select the version enrolled as agreed to or passed by both House and Senate.)

The most prominent concern on a first reading of this legislation is the sheer magnitude of the powers given to the President and Secretary of Defense. They include:

Unlimited authority to arbitrarily determine whether any person is an unlawful enemy combatant … - Sec. 948a(1)(ii) and Sec. 948d( c)
Sole authority to convene military commissions … - Sec. 948h
Sole authority to limit the unprecedented blanket power of Chapter 47A military commissions to “adjudge any punishment not forbidden by this chapter…” - Sec. 948d(d)
Sole authority to prescribe all “procedures and rules of evidence … including elements and modes of proof, for cases triable by military commission…” as long as they are consistent with Chapter 47A U.S.C. - Sec. 949a
These are only a few of the powers reserved exclusively to the Executive branch under this legislation. Lest there should be any misunderstanding of the unlimited nature of the authority granted, SEC. 3 (950j) prohibits any court from hearing any challenge to the lawfulness of Chapter 47A military commissions generally, or to any of their proceedings, no exceptions. SEC.7 prohibits any court from hearing any action “relating to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of confinement” of any alien who has been or may be determined to be an enemy combatant. The only exceptions to the Sec. 7 prohibition are the provisions of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and the appeals process under this Act. In addition, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (the only court which may hear appeals from Chapter 47A commissions,) may only consider whether the military commission followed its own rules and procedures, not questions of fact or evidence. - Sec. 950g

While the final version of this Act does prohibit torture and bans statements or confessions obtained by torture, it permits hearsay evidence and “coerced evidence” to be admitted at the discretion of the military judge. - Sec. 948r Combined with the limitations on the scope of review by the appellate court, this provision all but guarantees the conviction of any person the prosecution wants convicted.

But the most frightening aspect of this legislation is the apparently intentional failure to define the phrase “any person subject to this chapter …” as it occurs in Subchapter VII, Punitive Matters. While the stated purpose of the Act is to provide for the trial of “alien unlawful enemy combatants,” there are three clauses that call that purpose into question.

Sec. 948a - Definitions: Combatant Status Review Tribunals are not restricted by this Act to consideration of aliens.
Sec. 950q – Principals: In specifying persons punishable under this chapter, no mention is made of alien, national or citizenship status.
"Sec. 950v(b)(26) – WRONGFULLY AIDING THE ENEMY- Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct.” (emphasis added)

It is difficult to understand how an alien could be guilty of “breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States,” which clearly indicates that American Citizens may indeed be subjected to trial by military commission. If that is the case, an examination of Sec. 950v suggests that any common criminal could potentially be charged with terrorism, thereby losing his constitutional rights. Which, of course, means that the bill is unconstitutional. Don't let it shock you.

All in all, the bill is dangerously vague even if applied only to alien combatants, and could easily be interpreted to include foreigners engaged in the defense of their own country against the U.S. or its allies. While the injustice of such an interpretation is evident, it is worth noting that when this administration prematurely declared victory in Iraq, they endeavored to cover up their mistake by labeling as terrorists the indigenous Iraqi insurgency rather than admit that the demise of the Hussein regime was not equivalent to the restoration of peace. I make no objection to the label as applied to the Islamic jihadists who have selected Iraq as a battleground against the west, but a native Iraqi engaging in guerilla warfare against the invaders of his homeland hardly deserves to be accused of terrorism, regardless of the good intentions of the invading forces. I mention this only to highlight the fact that this law, through its extreme lack of clarity, lends a color of legality to such unjust sophistry.

The bottom line: get ready for the Brave New World, coming soon to a city near you. But remember:

“He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh.”

NAIS: Big Brother, Big Farmer?

On July 17 I attended a town hall meeting sponsored by the Berks Equine Council to discuss the National Animal Identification System. The USDA’s NAIS coordinator, Neil E. Hammerschmidt, gave a glowing presentation on the benefits of the new system, emphasizing the need for a timely response to potential disease outbreaks in livestock. He outlined the components of the system as a 7 character Premises ID# to be assigned to every premises where livestock are housed, managed or exhibited; and a15 digit Animal ID# to be assigned to each animal. (In the case of poultry or swine, a Group/Lot ID# could take the place of the AID#.) The AID# would be permanently attached to each animal with either a visual tag or an RFID microchip tag/implant. All livestock movements between premises, as well as births, deaths, and ownership transfers, would be reported via these two numbers to a massive Animal Tracking Database to be stored for future reference in case of a disease outbreak.

Mr. Hammerschmidt was careful to point out that premises registration is free and voluntary. He warned, however, that the USDA is prepared to pursue “development of regulations through normal rule making procedures” if full voluntary participation is not achieved by January of 2009.

Hmmmm. Sounds like a plan. Can anyone think of a good reason why we shouldn’t tag people too? Just imagine how much more efficiently our benevolent masters could respond if the dreaded avian flu should break out among us! How can we sleep at night knowing that if there was a sudden epidemic, federal health officials would be unable to determine whether we had been in company with an infected person or not? It’s a wonder that bovine spongiform encephalopathy hasn’t already depopulated half of the country in the absence of such critical disease fighting tools as the NAIS provides.

On second thought, maybe there are a few drawbacks. I would never want to be misunderstood as suggesting that the warmhearted do-gooders in Washington D.C. might use our personal information to harm us, but maybe, just maybe some terrorist could gain access to the wealth of information they are assembling. Then what?

Dr. Mary Zanoni of Farm for Life took issue with the characterization of the program as voluntary, pointing out that in at least two states the departments of Agriculture have submitted large blocks of information regarding premises locations to the NAIS database without the consent of the property owners affected. These owners then received notice that they had been assigned Premises ID#s, in spite of the fact that they were not even notified of the submission of their information to the federal government.

One lady in the audience commented that the entire program smacked of George Orwell’s 1984. An interesting observation, especially when one considers the fact that if anyone had predicted in 1990 that within a decade the USDA would be developing a serious plan to number and track every single significant movement of every privately owned livestock animal in the country, they would have been laughed out of town as a raving, paranoid conspiracy theorist. Now many folks are seriously wondering, not if, but when the next logical step will be taken and they will be subjected to similar surveillance.

Another attendee questioned whether the program would eventually be farmed out to private companies, and worried that such a move could lead to increased cost for livestock owners. His question failed to recognize that the program isn’t actually free. The concern was partially merited, however: since stockholders would not likely allow a private company to borrow into the trillions and still run an annual deficit, privatization could potentially force producers to pay for the program directly in addition to their tax bill.

Several members of the audience asked whether the program was constitutional. Hammerschmidt studiously avoided answering the question; in fact he avoided most of the questions asked during the meeting. He and Dr. John Weimer, also of the USDA, displayed an exceptional level of caution in their responses, rarely making statements that could be assigned definite meanings. An interesting feature of the meeting was the inability of Hammerschmidt or his colleagues to specify precisely what affected livestock owners would be required to do, or what action would be taken if they failed to do it. The USDA appears to have taken it for granted that livestock owners will be standing in line to receive further instructions regarding the disclosure of their private information to the federal government as they are made available. I sincerely question whether that will be the case.

While such a deep concern for the safety of the American people surely is commendable, there is one more point that ought to be considered. In order to understand the impact this program could have, it may be helpful to consider the results of other regulatory solutions to safety concerns. Forty years ago, it was the unquestioned right of law-abiding citizens to arm themselves for defensive purposes. Since the imposition of the Concealed Carry Permit (which purported to increase public safety by requiring periodic background checks for armed citizens), a number of formerly law-abiding individuals have found themselves imprisoned for no other crime than doing what Pennsylvania citizens had always done: carrying a weapon. Thirty years ago everyone owned a dog. Today, in this state, a fine of three hundred dollars per dog is imposed for failure to first obtain a dog license. Twenty years ago, seatbelts were merely required to be in vehicles for the safety of passengers. Today one can be fined for failing to wear a seatbelt; an act which endangers no one but themselves.

There was a time when a man was free to build an addition on his home whenever he chose; to build a useful product and sell it to his neighbors; to offer a service to the neighborhood and profit from his work; when even the profits he made were his own business and no one else’s. Today he cannot legally replace the shingles on his roof without a building permit; build a product without the proper zoning and use permits; offer a service for profit without a business license; and if he should fail to meticulously report to Big Brother the details of his personal finances, he finds himself jailed as a dishonest cheat. And what are the benefits we receive from each of these new limitations on our personal freedom? Roofs leak just as they always have; only now we have to call a licensed and insured contractor to fix them. We don’t have to put up with our neighbor working in his shop late at night, because for the most part, our neighbors don’t make anything; China does that for us. We have been so dehumanized that we seriously assume that an unlicensed businessman is an incompetent one. And we don’t even mind giving personal information to our bloated and bankrupt government, because it’s what all good Americans do, and after all, we don’t have anything to hide!

So what does this have to do with the National Animal Identification System? Simply this: when the NAIS becomes mandatory, those small, backyard livestock owners who don’t report every time their daughter’s pony goes to a 4-H show, every time they butcher a steer, or every time their neighbor’s billy comes over to freshen their milk goat, will become criminals. That’s right, criminals. And for what? Once again in the name of safety, a new class of law-breakers will have been created where none existed before. Can you imagine buying organic meat on the black market? If the past is any indication, that may soon be a reality.

How much is too much?

Operation Valiant Shield

Well, with all the din created by the news media reassuring us that the FBI just made our lives a little safer by shutting down a group of Islamic “online martyrs,” I wonder how many folks missed the little blurb about Operation Valiant Shield. An annual joint exercise of the US military in the Pacific ocean, this year’s Valiant Shield pitted Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force elements in the Pacific against a fictional enemy capable of air, sea, undersea and nuclear warfare. While it was a great opportunity to stick a not-so-diplomatic elbow in Kim Jong Il’s padded ribs, I couldn’t keep the word “idiocy” out of my mind at the cordial invitation extended to Communist China to sit in on such a pointed dress rehearsal. Less difficult to understand was the smiling, almost smug, acceptance of the offer by the keepers of the dragon. “Sure, yoo geev us all technology, why no queek show us how use? Throw in week of wining and dining too, yes?”

Sure, we’ll be there.

Check it out here:
www.pacom.mil/exercises/vs2006/

The Bill of Rights: New International Version

The Bill of Rights (NIV):

Amendment 1 -
Congress shall not impeach Judges who make law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; nor make any law abridging the freedom of politically correct speech, or press, or any form of immoral, unpatriotic, or distasteful expression, or the right of minorities to violently assemble, and to demand of the government a reimbursement for their ancestor’s grievances.

Amendment 2 -
A well-regulated group of duck hunters being necessary to the appearance of a free state, the right of some people to keep and bear arms shall not be entirely abolished.

Amendment 3 -
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, national emergency, or civil unrest, but in a manner to be prescribed by Executive Order; but these restrictions shall not apply to government officers, agents, or hired thugs, in the discharge of their orders.

Amendment 4 -
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be construed to obstruct any government officer, agent or hired thug in the discharge of his/her instructions, but no warrants, when desired, shall issue, but upon potential for possible cause, supported by oath, affirmation, or anonymous tip, and generally describing the region to be searched, and any persons or things not subject to detention or seizure.

Amendment 5 -
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, or the classification or representation of such person as evil by the President or Attorney General, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the National Guard, when in actual service in time of war, public danger, or the declaration of a potential threat by the President; but persons may be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, or be compelled in a criminal case to be a witness against him/herself, or be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, when the public safety shall require it; and the absence of just compensation shall not prevent private property from being appropriated for public use, when such action may be deemed necessary for the public pleasure or political agenda.

Amendment 6 -
In all criminal prosecutions, if the accused is a minority, he/she shall have the right to a speedy and public trial, by a minority jury of the State or district wherein the crime shall have been committed, unless he/she desires to be tried in another district; and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him/her; to have the charges dismissed if his/her rights were not read at the time of arrest; to have assistance in obtaining witnesses in his/her favor, and in prosecuting the officer, agent or hired thug which shall have arrested him/her, and to have the best counsel in the nation for his/her defense; in all other cases, the rights of the accused shall be determined by the Court, unless the accused shall have been classified as evil by the President or Attorney General, or have been charged with any political incorrectness, in which case he/she shall have no rights.

Amendment 7 -
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed a reasonable amount, the right of trial by jury may be granted, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, unless sufficient financial incentives be provided, or the public safety shall require it.

Amendment 8 -
Excessive bail may be required, and excessive fines imposed, but cruel and unusual punishments shall not be inflicted except in cases of politically incorrect persons.

Amendment 9 -
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to limit or restrict any powers retained by the government.

Amendment 10 -
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the entity with the most money and power.

Have a nice day!
Echooooooooooooooes

No Kidding?

Two days ago I was riding with a friend and, for lack of anything better to do, picked up his copy of Monday's USA Today. As I glanced through the stale assortment of canned political "analysis," irrelevant stories, bad reporting and worse entertainment, a list of "facts" about a monster black hole known as Saggitarius A* caught my eye. Apparently this weighty object has been the focus of recent "studies" by astronomers. Impressed by the specific nature of the information given (which included Saggitarius A*'s mass, distance from earth, age, etc., all expressed in numbers far beyond the comprehension of the writer), and curious how a few paltry tax dollars in the hands of professional students could have yielded such astounding results, I turned to the beginning of the article to learn more about this discovery.

The author began with a brief treatment of black holes in general, as well as the various theories regarding their formation and the part they play in the universe. He admitted that scientists know relatively little about black holes, and he drew heavily on science fiction to hold the attention of the reader. It would seem this information regarding Saggitarius A* must have been quite a breakthrough! I read on, anxious to hear how this impressive detail was achieved.

Halfway through the article, the author informed me that "Saggitarius A* is thought to exist near the center of a galaxy by the same name." ... Wait just a minute ... "thought to exist" ... ? You just finished telling me that its mass is equivalent to 350 million suns, that it is 10 billion years old and 25 million light years away. Now you tell me you don't quite know if it exists or not?

Your tax dollars at work, folks.

While we're on the subject of humorous news reporting: a few days ago NPR reported that "some lawmakers worry that the escalating violence in Iraq could plunge the country into civil war." Oh my, what an awful idea! I never thought of that before!

All I can say is that homeschooling looks better every day.

I read a great essay by George Orwell on Politics and the English Language. I highly recommend it to all of you who prefer to know when you are being brainwashed. Copy this link into your browser's address bar: http://www.resort.com/~prime8/Orwell/

Satire: Operation Chicago Freedom

Breaking news – Chicago: America’s second tallest skyline was blacked out early this morning after a multilateral coalition of police from Philadelphia, New York, Baltimore and Boston launched an all-out offensive operation to topple Chicago’s corrupt regime and capture or kill key organized crime bosses in the city. Philadelphia and NYPD SWAT teams moved into position around midnight in preparation for this morning’s assault. O’Hare International is in complete lockdown and traffic bound for O’Hare and other city airports is being diverted to other nearby cities. Firefights are currently raging around the airport’s main terminal building, as well as City Hall and several other public installations.


Mayor John Street of Philadelphia held a joint press conference this morning with the police chiefs of all coalition departments to discuss the war, dubbed Operation Chicago Freedom.


“The people of Chicago have suffered long enough at the hands of the corrupt and brutal city government,” he said. “It is high time for the freedom loving people of the nation to bring the leaders of Chicago and their Mafia partners to justice. We will not falter, we will not waver. We will succeed in our endeavor, and we will liberate the people of this great city.”


Several reporters displayed skepticism of Mayor Street’s explanation. “We all know Chicago has a problem with organized crime,” stated William Casper of the Washington Post. “But is it the prerogative of Philadelphia to unilaterally engage in city-building around the nation?”


Street brushed aside what he called “such a short-sighted view” of the problem. “Our intelligence sources indicate that the organized crime families in Chicago are directly tied to the city government. We have faced increasingly compelling evidence in the past few months that Chicago may be in possession of materials which could conceivably be used to construct chemical and/or biological weapons. Such a capability in the hands of a rogue city cannot be permitted. Chicago’s recent stockpiling of flu vaccines is only the latest in a long chain of evidence which leads us to believe that they may be preparing for a WMD attack on neighboring cities, perhaps even as far away as Cincinnati.”


The Mayor also dismissed criticism of Philadelphia’s actions as “unilateral.” “Our good friends in New York, Boston and Baltimore are entirely on board with us here. Chicago’s attempt to acquire WMDs, not to mention its practice of harboring and sheltering organized crime, is nothing short of an attack on freedom loving people everywhere.“


In a later press conference held outside Philadelphia’s City Hall, Street’s spokesperson, Ms. Barbara Thomas-Mezvinski, was equally confident. “The city of Chicago has repeatedly violated federal gun laws,” she said, emphasizing that a key reason for the operation was to force compliance with federal requirements. “At least 379 separate gun laws were broken in Chicago last year for a total of 13, 782 violations. So far, only 164 of these criminals have been brought to justice, and all 164 were minorities. Not a single Mafia leader has been jailed in Chicago since the last Mayoral election. Mayor Street was elected with a clear mandate to fight crime, whenever and wherever it appears. This is his job, and he will not shrink from the challenge.”


The Philadelphia City Council was divided over the operation. Several members expressed concern that such action, rather than strengthening Philadelphia’s position in Washington, DC, would actually result in further erosion of the sometimes rocky relationship between the city and the Fed. “We have no business overthrowing another city government without a clear mandate from the national community,” intoned Councilman Sam Katz. “This business is nothing more than a drain on the city’s resources and will be a source of keen regret later.”


But Councilwoman Pamela Brown disagreed. “Chicago has repeatedly thumbed its nose at the federal government, and is not well liked even within the State of Illinois. Philadelphia has a responsibility by virtue of our position as a respected leader in the national community to deal with threats to our citizens. We owe it to ourselves and to the rest of the country to protect our people from crime. In the past month, there have been 19 shootings in this city that are directly linked to Chicago crime families. We cannot afford to stand idly by at such a time as this.”


City Solicitor Anthony Capellini agreed. “If we let the Mafia take over this city and kill us all, then the Mafia has already won.”


Firefights between coalition forces and Chicago police are in progress in several parts of the stricken city, as helicopters circle over the central areas of town. Rumors are in circulation that Louis Capone, grandson of the infamous Al Capone, may already be in custody of the Philadelphia police. We will be bringing you periodic updates at this location, so stay tuned!


Echoes of Aberdeen is fully responsible for the contents of this post.

Politics by Murder

It seems the Republicrats in Washington D.C. have proven capable of outdoing themselves. They are unquestionably the epitome of dishonesty in a proverbiably dishonest capitol city. Rather than allow a vote on Rep. Murtha's proposal for a somewhat controlled withdrawal from Iraq, they chose to play the dirtiest of political games, defame an honorable and patriotic veteran, and offer an entirely unacceptable solution so that they could claim "victory." Their idea of victory in this instance may perhaps shed some light on their hopes for a victory in Iraq.

It is time to ask the real questions, people. Is withdrawal from Iraq necessarily "cutting and running?" What exactly is "staying the course" supposed to imply?

Vice President Cheney says, "The terrorists . . . have contempt for our values, they doubt our strength and they believe that America will lose its nerve and let down our guard. But this nation's made a decision: We will not retreat in the face of brutality, and we will never live at the mercy of tyrants or terrorists."

Did you hear that? The terrorists have contempt for our values? Imagine that! Perhaps if we had some values left they would respect them a little more. Not only that, but ... horror of horrors ... they doubt our strength! Why? Because our soldiers aren't allowed to win, that's why. Even worse, they believe we will lose our nerve and let down our guard! Impossible! Look at our borders, please? We have no guard left to let down. We are a nation of ostriches with our heads in the sand. But we will not retreat, no siree! We will never live at the mercy of tyrants. That is for the folks at Guatanamo, not us. We couldn't afford to have a tyrant over us, the economy might go south! (Or east ... waay east ... all-the-way-to-China east!)

Can we cut the politics for a moment? Mr. Veep, just what do you call the current situation in Iraq? Can anyone say Viet Nam? If we are really committed to defeating the threat of Islamic terrorism, for God's sake do it! Let's have a declaration of war on a tangible threat, let's commit our entire national resources to the elimination of that threat, let's get the job done and move on!

There is no way to occupy or even stabilize a nation the size of Iraq with the forces we have committed. We are not on unfamiliar ground here, people. We've been through this more times in the last 50 years than I care to think about. We've seen what happens when our military is throttled by international red tape, when our soldiers are sent into a foreign country without the resources or the permission to win, when their lives are wasted for the reprehensible purpose of "imposing the will of the international community" on some third world country. Korea, Viet Nam, Cuba, Somalia, does anyone see a pattern? We have no business sending Americans to die for the United Nations and their twisted plans for the world.

The men who landed in the Ia Drang valley in Viet Nam on Nov. 14, 1965 were fighting for the freedom of the South Vietnamese people. Or so they thought. Only in hindsight, thousands of dead buddies later, would it become apparent that no sacrifice on their part would be sufficient, that they were never supposed to win, that they were there solely to die on the altar of the "brave new world" that was to emerge from their ashes. Our soldiers are being sacrificed just as cruelly today. I believe we have no business in Iraq. They have never posed a legitimate threat to this country, and their personal problems have only been exacerbated by our invasion and continued presence. Be that as it may, the continued refusal of our leaders to end the conflict, either by committing a sufficient force to do so on our terms, or by acknowledging our error and withdrawing, leaves only one conclusion: they have something to gain by the continued bloodshed of our boys.

To the leaders of our nation and representatives of the American people: the course we are on is clear. You say a withdrawal would destabilize the region. Hello? The region is currently destabilized. You say the threat of terrorism is one we must stop. Hello again? It is unquestionably thriving as a direct result of the Shiite Islamic State your laughable imposition of "democracy" has instituted. You say we must not retreat. That leaves us two choices. We can "stay the course" or we can win. The course we are on does not involve any perceptible success. To vow your intention to stay that course is proof of your utter disregard for the lives of the men you so lightly jeapordize.

If the American people do not begin seriously asking themselves what the international power brokers have to gain by a state of perpetual war, they will find themselves in a totalitarian society without ever knowing how they got there. Time is running out.

God Bless Michael New

As veterans day approaches, it is inspiring to reflect on the sacrifices made by the courageous men and women through the years who have given whatever they could and risked everything for our freedoms. But for me, today, those feelings are mixed with sadness at the unprincipled efforts to purge the military of true Americans who love their God and country and take their oaths of military service seriously. So as Veterans Day '05 rolls around, I offer a tribute to an uncommonly courageous soldier who most of our country has never heard of, and who will not be officially honored tomorrow.

On October 10, 1995, at an American base in Germany, a U.S. Army infantry battalion drew up in formation, ready for deployment to Macedonia. It was a familiar scene. American troops had been operating as UN peacekeepers in Macedonia for 27 months already. But this time, something was new. Instead of the historic Army green Battle Dress Uniform, the troops wore the immature baby blue of the most corrupt organization in the modern world: the United Nations.

While the blue uniform was the most notable difference, it was not the only one. The troops reporting for the formation would be serving under a Flemish commander and carry UN identification, rather than U.S. These changes were patently illegal under current Army regulations, and were a first in the history of the U.S. Army.

Out of the entire battalion standing in formation that morning, only one man had the courage to appear as an American soldier instead of a U.N. "peacekeeper." Specialist Michael G. New took the stand that no other man dared to take. He reperesented then, and still does today, the same kind of American soldier that dared to risk his life, his fortune, and his sacred honor for the freedoms he received from his Creator. He stood for the right, alone, but not alone, as he knew by faith that his Father would stand by him and approve his faithfulness.

Michael New was dishonorably discharged by an ungrateful Army, but in this American's heart he is honored, and in this American's eyes he is a hundred times more worthy of that honor than those who kowtowed to peer pressure and violated their sacred oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. Thank you, Specialist New.

And to Sgt. Ed Rasor and the other men who placed duty and honor above their careers and supported Spc. New in his stand, Thank you too. You are heroes to us, if not to others. May God bless you.

To God Be The Glory

This is the day the Lord hath made; let us rejoise and be glad in it!

What a lovely autumn we are having here in PA! Driving Nantmeal Rd. between Rt. 100 and Rt. 401, I had to praise God for His wonderful works and awesome creations. Mile after mile of 200+ year old stone farmhouses and barns nestled into the hills, horses grazing in the pastures, with copper oaks and golden maples and beech trees stretching into the distance as far as the eye could see. If His creation in this world is so gorgeous, what will the new one be like? I can only imagine!

As if we don't have enough to be thankful for here in Penn's Woods, the God who rules over the kingdoms of the earth just answered prayer here in a big way! Some of you know about the sneak pay raise that our fat and kicking lawmakers slipped through at midnight with no debate earlier this year. Well, no legislators were up for election this year, but two Supreme Court justices were on the ballot for retention. Both of these judges received the pay raise.

Retention votes are a pure formality. Rather than two candidates running against one another, there is simply a yes or no vote on whether the judge should be retained or a new one appointed. Never before in the history of the state has a judge lost a retention vote. Never. But as they say, there's a first time for everything! Justice Nigro was removed from office and from the enjoyment of his illgotten salary, and Justice Newman barely avoided the same fate. YES!!!

I heard Justice Nigro complaining today that he was a victim of misguided voter outrage over the pay grab. Tough luck. Next year we'll have the same opportunity to send a few legislators packing. In the mean time, the bipartisan establishment needs to hear the message loud and clear. WE ARE SICK OF PROFESSIONAL POLITICIANS! If the major parties in this commonwealth can't find someone with principles to save their hide, they can take the cue and get out of the way for a real statesman.

A special note to Republicans - you have an opportunity in the next gubernatorial election to put a real statesman at the forefront of the party. Jim Paynard has the principles to garner support from those who, like myself, see the current GOP as a controlled opposition party, and a poorly managed one at that. I am no longer a Republican, but if Paynard wins the GOP primary he will have my full support, and that of many other genuine Americans as well.

Intelligent Design? Duh!

Well, intelligent design is a hot topic right now. I have to laugh when I hear the silly arguments going on right now over this one. I don't have much time, so I'll just say this: origins are not a scientific subject, they are a religious and historical subject. Evolution is nothing more than the humanist religion's creation story. There is NO scientific, testable, observable evidence for evolution. It is a religious view.

Intelligent design, on the other hand, is not a theory or story of how we came into existence. It is merely the acknowledgement that according to all known scientific and logical rules, we are not, and indeed could not be, an accident. What on earth could be wrong with that?

The answer is that our public education system has become merely a seminary system for the humanist religion. That much ought to be obvious to any observant person. Much as we would expect a conservative Christian bible college to balk at a requirement to teach evolution, (or the Hindu creation story, for that matter,) we should also expect the blind faith of the humanists to resist any requirement that they allow for the possibility of another answer to the question of origins.

SF

Morally Adrift

Daniel Boone was born on this day in 1734. Known for his patriotism, courage and woodsmanship, he was an icon of the early frontier. When asked how many times he had been lost in the vast forested expanses of Kentucky and West Virginia, he declared that he never was lost, but was once bewildered for a few days. Too bad our current leaders can't say as much when it comes to keeping their moral sense of direction.

The Washington Post reported today on the CIA's secret prison system for "terror suspects" around the world. While they declined to discuss the specific countries that have been involved in detention and interrogation of CIA detainees, those who care more about truth and justice than the public face of the CIA have long since identified several of them, most notably the former Soviet "republic" of Uzbekistan. According to The New American, the British ambassador to Uzbekistan was recalled not long ago for openly protesting the transfer of terror suspects from CIA custody to the Uzbek Secret Police. He claimed that Air America planes arrived in Tashkent on almost a daily basis with "cases" for the former KGB gentlemen to speak with. For those who don't know, these good people have long been considered by the intelligence community to be the ultimate in brutality, cruelty, and ingenuity when it comes to interrogation, torture and murder techniques.

According to the WP, Vice President Cheyney and CIA Director Porter Goss requested last month that the agency be exempted from legislation being considered that would bar "cruel and degrading treatment of prisoners in US custody."

Any guesses why that would be a problem for the good folks at "The Company?"

He Died - For Me!

My faith has found a resting place - not in device or creed:
I trust the ever-living One - His wounds for me shall plead.
I need no other argument, I need no other plea;
It is enough that Jesus died, and that He died for me.

Enough for me that Jesus saves - this ends my fear and doubt;
A sinful soul I come to Him - He'll never cast me out!
My heart is leaning on the Word - the written Word of God:
Salvation by my Savior's name, salvation through His blood.

My great Physician heals the sick, the lost He came to save;
For me His precious blood He shed - for me His life He gave!
I need no other argument, I need no other plea;
It is enough that Jesus died, and that He died for me!

Lidie H. Edmunds

He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed!
Isaiah 53:5

Have a wonderful Lord's Day!
SF

Learning From History (Not!)

Well, Scooter Libby is outa here. I don't know much about him, but considering his relationship to the VP I can only say bon voyage and who's next? (I have a dream!) Oh well, back to reality.

Five third parties here in PA have just gone to Harrisburg with their support for changes to the current election law that would place third parties on an equal footing with the bipartisan establishment when it comes to placing candidates on the ballot. Most voters would be suprised to learn that as the law now stands, third parties must collect as many as 33 times the number of signatures required of the Republicrat and Democan parties in order to be included on the ballot. It is high time to change that one.

Harriet Miers has withdrawn her nomination. Democans and Republicrats are both unhappy with the lack of information they have on her ideology and political positions. I for one am tired of hearing conservatives dwell on the abortion issue to the exclusion of others. No judge who holds that infanticide is a woman's right before the infant is born is qualified to make sound determinations of right and wrong, but I think there are other things we should be concerned with as well.

When John Roberts was confirmed, to my knowledge none of the questioning dealt with the real reason why he was nominated. Roberts had been involved in rulings which left no doubt of his position on the Habaeus Corpus rights of American citizens. Remember, the last time the issue of indefinite detention of American citizens came before the high court, the Bush administration lost their bid for dictatorial powers by a 5-4 vote, with Justice O'Conner voting with the majority. Roberts was selected to replace her for that reason and no other. The death of Chief Justice Rehnquist derailed that plan, and the administration is facing the same problem again.

I believe Ms. Miers was selected solely for her willingness to follow orders. Now that she has withdrawn her name, we can look for another willing servant to take her place. As long as the President can keep conservatives focused on a nominee's position on social issues, he will remain free to trample on the Constitution. It is time for true conservatives to refuse a compromise and demand a Justice who will enforce the Constitution rather than reinterpret it.

The death toll in Iraq has passed the 2000 mark. Two thousand brave American soldiers have died so that the Iraqi people can be free to establish the Islamic dictatorship of their choice. In accordance with my stated intention to bring the light of history to bear on today's events, perhaps a brief overview of a few previous efforts to free nations from themselves would be in order.

Cuba. The US supported Fidel Castro in his bid for power. In return, Castro established a close partnership with our worst enemies, including a tight relationship with Communist China which continues to threaten our national security today.

Zimbabwe. The US, along with the UK and other countries, enforced severe economic sanctions against Rhodesia and the Ian Smith government in the name of African independence. The Rhodesian government , under pressure, capitulated to the Marxist movement and Zimbabwe still has never had a fair election. Robert Mugabe has been in power for over 30 years and still retains all of the bloodlust and thirst for violence that characterized his rise to power. While Rhodesia was a major African exporter of food and agricultural products, Mugabe's Zimbabwe is still suffering from severe food shortages that are decades old.

Afghanistan. The US funded, trained and supplied Osama Bin Laden and other Mujahadeen "freedom fighters" to effectively stop the expansion of another former US ally, the USSR, in that area. These same "freedom fighters" established a brutal Islamic state, became a safe haven for anti-western terrorism, and eventually carried out the worst terrorist attack this country has ever endured.

Bosnia. The US essentially led the UN effort to overthrow the Milosevic regime and halt Serbian violence against ethnic Albanians. The Albanian Muslims, in turn, retaliated against the Serbs with little or no UN interference, and today are a friendly resort for Islamic terrorists and a significant threat to US interests.

Iraq. Last but not least, the US funded, supplied and abbetted Saddam Hussein in his brutal war against Iran. Saddam accepted US assistance until he felt that he was no longer in need of it, and has been a thorn in our sides ever since, until his overthrow last year.

I guess we haven't learned.