Young Christians Fighting for America

YCFA No Longer Active

2011-10-31T18:58:00.000-07:00

Young Christians Fighting for America is no longer active, though the principles of the organization continue to live on in the hearts and minds of its founders and former members. We encourage other young people to use our example as inspiration for what can still be done--to an even greater extent, if the Lord should so bless.

Young people of today are tomorrow's leaders, and we must embrace that responsibility with determination and action.

May God bless America as her people repent of their sins and bless our Lord Jesus Christ, the source of all true liberty.

Is Obama's candidacy constitutional?

2008-06-11T11:01:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Bloggers are raising questions about Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's qualifications to be U.S. president, because of the secrecy over his birth certificate and the requirement presidents be "natural-born" U.S. citizens.

Jim Geraghty, reporting on the Campaign Spot, a National Review blog, cited the "unlikely" but still circulating rumor that Obama was born not within the United States, but elsewhere, possibly Kenya.

Geraghty defined the concerns most clearly, stating: "If Obama were born outside the United States, one could argue that he would not meet the legal definition of natural-born citizen … because U.S. law at the time of his birth required his natural-born parent (his mother) to have resided in the United States for '10 years, at least [f]ive of which had to be after the age of 16.'"

He then points out Ann Dunham, Obama's mother, was 18 when Obama was born "so she wouldn't have met the requirement of five years after the age of 16."

Geraghty continues: " (Interestingly, apparently there isn't much paperwork on Obama's parents' marriage. 'Obama: From Promise to Power,' page. 27: 'Obama later confessed that he never searched for the government documents on the marriage, although Madelyn (Obama's maternal grandmother) insisted they were legally married.' Also note that Obama's father apparently was not legally divorced from his first wife back in Kenya at the time, a point of contention that ultimately led to their separation.)"

The reports released to date show Obama was born in Honolulu to Barack Hussein Obama Sr., of Nyangoma-Kogelo, Kenya, and Ann Dunham, of Wichita, Kan.

According to FindLaw.com, which is cited by Geraghty, the requirements that were in force from Dec. 24, 1952 to Nov. 13, 1986, encompassing the time of Obama's birth, state, "If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least 10 years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16."

Obama's father, a student sent to the United States from Africa, lived several places in the United States while attending class. He then returned to his homeland. Obama's mother later married another man and moved to Indonesia.

Geraghty said the Obama campaign could "debunk" the rumors about his birth simply by releasing a copy of his birth certificate, but the campaign has so far chosen not to do that.

"The campaign cited the birth certificate in their 'Fact Check' on William Ayers, so presumably, someone in the campaign has access to it," he said.

Hawaii doesn't make public information from birth certificates.

"If the concern of the Obama campaign is that the certificate includes his Social Security number or some other data that could be useful to identity thieves, that information could easily be blocked out and the rest released. (Although I wonder if identity thieves would find Obama a tougher than usual target, since using the name on purchases would almost inevitably bring closer scrutiny.)," Geraghty said.

The Obama campaign repeatedly has declined to respond to WND requests for comment.

The presumptive Republican nominee for president, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., already has gone through the same type of challenge, and the U.S. Senate responded with a resolution in April declaring him to be a "'natural born Citizen' under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States."

That article declares that "no person except a natural born citizen … shall be eligible to the Office of president."

McCain was challenged because he was born to two U.S. citizens in the Panama Canal Zone.

According to a report from Michael Dobbs on The Fact Checker, the McCain campaign consulted two leading jurists, Theodore Olsen and Laurence Tribe, and they agreed.

"They argue that McCain is a natural born citizen because the United States exercised sovereignty over the Panama Canal at the time of his birth on August 29, 1936, he was born on a U.S. military base, and both of his parents were U.S. citizens," the report said.

Others say the issue isn't quite that simple, and the matter could be resolved fully only by a constitutional amendment or a U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

Rising Energy Prices and the Falling Dollar

2008-06-11T10:54:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Oil prices are on the minds of many Americans as gas hits $4 a gallon, and continues to surge. How high can prices go? How can we solve these problems? What, or who, is to blame?

Part of the answer lies in understanding bubbles and monetary inflation, but especially the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve is charged with controlling inflation through interest rate manipulation, however, many fail to realize that creating money, and therefore inflation, is really its only tool. When the Federal Reserve inflates the dollar as drastically as it has in the past few decades, the first users of the newly created money go in search of investments for their dollars. They must invest this money quickly and aggressively before it loses value. This causes certain sectors to expand beyond what would naturally occur in the free market. Eventually the sector overheats and the bubble bursts. Overinvestment in dotcoms eventually led to a collapse of the NASDAQ. Next we had the housing bubble, and now we are seeing the price of oil being bid up in the creation of another new bubble. Investors are now looking to commodities like oil, for stability and growth as they pull capital out of real estate. This increased demand for investment vehicles related to oil contributes to driving up the price of the actual product.

If the Fed continues with its bubble blowing policies of the past, the new commodities bubble will continue to grow, gas prices will continue to go up, as the value of your dollars go down. We will see an overinvestment in these commodities as solutions are desperately sought for a supply shortage, which is only part of the problem. Make no mistake, though, this is not the free market at work. Government manipulations have added levels of complication and unintended consequences to the marketplace.

This is not the time for members of Congress to take political potshots at each other, or to imagine that the free market is somehow to blame. This is the time to understand and fix problems. That begins with making sure the decision makers have a firm grasp on the causes of the problems and possible effects of their decisions. This is absolutely crucial if we want to get it right this time. That is why I am in the process of calling for hearings on Capitol Hill on how the falling value of the dollar affects energy prices.

Governments need to get out of the way and let the people get back to work so that we can get our economy back on stable footing. Our destructive regulatory environment, confiscatory tax policies, and managed, rather than free trade have chased many businesses overseas. The bottom line is average Americans are being seriously hurt by these flawed policies, and they are not getting good information about the true dynamics at work. The important thing now is to get the diagnosis absolutely correct so we can administer the appropriate treatment and move on to a healthier economic future. To do this it is absolutely necessary to address the subjects of central banking and fiat money.

Decalogues everywhere, with thanks to the ACLU!

2008-06-09T12:09:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Thousands of stone Ten Commandments monuments on highly visible properties in communities across the nation, millions of smaller plaques in Christian and Jewish homes, and a massive bronze showing the biblical image of Moses holding the stones on which God wrote… The target of the ACLU? Nope. Thanks to the ACLU!

Joe Worthing, the executive director for Project Moses, says his organization, only a few years old, is well on its way to reaching many of its goals of placing Ten Commandments monuments all over the nation, and it's because of a complaint from the ACLU.

The ministry was launched by John Menghini, an Overland Park, Kan., businessman, who was disturbed by a news story about the ACLU demanding and getting the removal of a Ten Commandments monument from a Kansas City courthouse.

The Kansas City story also noted the fate of the monument to which the ACLU objected: It was moved about 100 feet across the street to St. Anthony's Catholic Church, so that it would be on private property and no longer subject to the whims of lawyers and judges, and a light clicked on for Menghini.

"The beauty of this move is that now, far more visitors to the courthouse actually view the Ten Commandments because it is more visible than it ever was on the courthouse grounds," he said. "I thought, if every church and synagogue in America would proudly display God's law, as this one church did, maybe our culture could turn a corner and come back to its Judeo-Christian roots."

The result was Project Moses, which works to install 900-pound stone monuments to God's Laws on church and other private properties in prominent civic locations across the country. Hundreds already are installed, as well as thousands of smaller stone plaques that are offered to families for their homes.

"The ACLU is not the problem [with removing the Ten Commandments from America]," Worthing told WND. "We need to send them a thank you. They awakened a sleeping giant.

"The problem has been the apathy of good citizens sitting on their hands and saying, 'That's happening in California or Boston, not in Omaha,'" he said.

One Nebraska city's situation is a perfect example of what the organization wants to do: A citizen brought a complaint against the city government for a Ten Commandments monument hidden in a remote corner of a public park.

A Ten Commandments display at First Baptist Church in Downey, Calif.

It was removed, but one of the Project Moses monuments was placed instead on a street front property. It happens to be only a few blocks from where the complainant lives, and he now has to drive within 15 feet of God's Laws whenever he passes that location, Worthing said.

"Listen, they [the ACLU] may have won a few skirmishes, but God's going to win the war," Worthing said.

He said his organization in just a few years has installed nearly 400 of the monuments, far more than have been removed from public locations because of litigation and intimidation over the past 30 years.

"Project Moses' stated mission is the restoration of respect for the Ten Commandments so all may live out Christ's call for true social justice in the home, communities and political policies," the organization says. It cites the instructions from the Torah, Deut. 6:4-9. "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. … Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates…"

Worthing says the primary goal is to place the stone monuments, 5 feet, 4 inches tall, "on every private religious property, Catholic, Protestant and Jewish, in America."

These monuments are intended to be on "'Main Street,' right in front for the whole community to see."

The cost of the monuments, including those made from marble imported from the Sinai Peninsula, run about $4,500 to $5,000 including delivery and the organization has various methods of raising funds for churches that want to participate.

Proposed bronze of Moses and the Ten Commandments planned for Washington, D.C.

The goal is to install a total of 5,000 monuments over the next five years and distribute 1.5 million eight-inch square stone plaques in homes and offices at the same time. More than 15,000 already have been handed out, officials said.

The last part of the goal is a bronze of Moses holding the Decalogue over his head. It is expected to be about 24 feet tall and be placed on private property in Washington, although no details about the land can be released until its purchase is completed, officials said.

Because the numbering traditions among Catholics, Protestants and Jews vary, the monuments are available in the St. Augustine, King James or Jewish number traditions.

The project's goal "is not to argue whose tradition is better but to get all who view these monuments to dive into Scripture and move beyond the simple 10 sentences we learned as children."

The project supports the efforts of many Christian individuals and organizations to maintain historic Ten Commandments monuments in public locations.

But, Worthing said, "If the first place someone sees the Commandments is at the courthouse, that's probably why he is there!

"Political battles need to be fought but conversion and changing how people live needs to be the goal. America is where it is at today, morally, not because of groups like the ACLU but because of the APATHY of the faithful.

"Sir Edmund Burke said it best when he said, 'The only thing necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.' Project Moses gives the average believer the opportunity they have not had in the courtrooms over the past 30 years, a tangible way to show support for God's laws," he said.

He said a teaching curriculum also is available to churches, since the goal is more than to plop a piece of rock on a sidewalk. Also available are plans for "Ten Commandments weekends" where churches raise their own funds for the monuments.

"More than 90 percent of the churches who hold a weekend raise more money than they need to buy the monument," he said.

Christians schools, too, should consider the impact, he said.

"Instead of having a cardboard cutout, how about a 900-pound stone monument in an entryway," he said. "It's something like 3,500 times a child will have to walk by that over the course of their grade school years. They just may be able to remember them then."

Only five states have not yet had such a monument installed, and plans are under way at this time for the first installation in Vermont. The other states remaining are North and South Carolina, Alaska and Hawaii.

WND has reported extensively of battles over the existence of Ten Commandments monuments in America, as well as on the existing historical references to the Ten Commandments in Washington, as well as politically correct effects to minimize, change or alter those references.

Top analyst sees $200 oil, $5.75 gas

2008-06-09T12:01:00.000-07:00

Story Source

The Goldman Sachs energy analyst whose predictions have fueled worldwide oil price speculation now foresees oil peaking at $200 a barrel, with gasoline rising to $5.75 a gallon before consumption cools enough to lower fuel prices.

In an rare interview published today in Barron's, Arjun N. Murti, Goldman Sachs' 39-year-old top energy analyst, said energy is in the later stages of a worldwide "super spike," with the possibility of $150 to $200 a barrel oil likely over the next six to 24 months."

Murti noted oil analysts have shifted from a 1990s attitude of, "It is easy to grow supply," to today's pessimism, "It is going to be more difficult to grow supply." The change is in part because oil-producing areas, including Mexico and the North Sea, are declining, while growth areas such as Brazil and Angola are just coming online.

In the interview with Barron's, Murti stressed he does not believe the world is running out of oil, and he does not subscribe to peak oil theories that worldwide oil production rates are necessarily declining.

In Murti's view, the problem is worldwide oil demand is growing consistently, while supply is growing more moderately.

"We do think that the places that have large quantities of recoverable oil, notably Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela and Russia, aren't on track to grow their supply aggressively," Murti said. "And, to some degree, high prices are disincentivizing some of these countries to either open up their industry or spend the money themselves. These countries don't need the incremental revenue."

Morgan Stanley agrees, predicting oil will hit $150 a barrel by the end of June or the beginning of July.

Crude oil set a one-day record Friday, surging more than $10 a barrel, to settle at $138.54 on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

The price of crude oil on world future's exchanges has more than doubled in the past year.

Departing today on what is billed as his "farewell visit" to Europe, President Bush today blamed Congress for refusing to allow drilling in Alaska and offshore on the continental shelf, "to give this country a chance to help us through this difficult period by finding more supplies of crude oil, which will take the pressure off the price of gasoline."

Sen. John McCain has attacked Sen. Barack Obama's push for government incentives to develop alternative renewable fuels as government subsidies calculated to enrich special interests.

According to Stephen Power writing in today's Wall Street Journal, McCain favors scrapping federal ethanol credits, moving instead to develop more nuclear power plants.

"I have to give you straight talk about government subsidies," McCain told a business leader roundtable last month in Washington state. "When government jumps in and distorts the market, then there's unintended consequences as well as intended."

Obama has promised to invest $150 billion in alternative fuels over the next decade, with a requirement that the U.S. get at least 25 percent of its electricity from renewable sources, including wind, sun and geothermal energy by 2025, even though those resources today account for less than 1 percent of U.S. electricity.

Clinton Endorses Obama, Suspends Historic Bid for the White House

2008-06-09T11:51:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Standing before a throng of supporters with American flags as her backdrop, Hillary Clinton did something Saturday that 17 months ago seemed unthinkable — she conceded defeat.

The former first lady, who as recently as Tuesday declared herself the strongest candidate, gave former rival Barack Obama an unqualified endorsement and pivoted from her role as determined foe to absolute ally. She suspended her historic bid for the White House, settling the dust following a grueling 17-month campaign.

Clinton repeatedly called on her supporters to unite behind the Illinois senator, casting the general election as a critical opportunity to shift course after seven years with a Republican president. She acknowledged the hard-fought and sometimes-bitter Democratic primary battle, but assured her voters that Obama has proved himself to the country.

“I’ve had a front-row seat to his candidacy, and I have seen his strength and determination, his grace and his grit,” she said.

“We all know this has been a tough fight, but the Democratic Party is a family … we may have started on separate journeys but today our paths have merged, and we’re all heading toward the same destination.”

Clinton kicked off her concession by directly thanking supporters who poured their “hearts” and “hopes” into her campaign.

“Well this isn’t exactly the party I’d planned, but I sure like the company,” Clinton said at the National Building Museum in Washington, D.C., her husband Bill and daughter Chelsea by her side.

Within minutes she announced that she was bowing out of the race.

“The way to continue our fight now … is to take our energy, our passion, our strength and do all that we can to help elect Barack Obama the next president of the United States,” she said to cheering supporters. “Today as I suspend my campaign, I congratulate him on the victory he has won, and the extraordinary race he has run. I endorse him and throw my full support behind him.”

Obama later issued a statement saying he is “thrilled and honored” to have Clinton’s support.

“But more than that, I honor her today for the valiant and historic campaign she has run,” he said. “She shattered barriers on behalf of my daughters and women everywhere, who now know that there are no limits to their dreams … Our party and our country are stronger because of the work she has done throughout her life, and I’m a better candidate for having had the privilege of competing with her in this campaign.

“No one knows better than Senator Clinton how desperately America and the American people need change, and I know she will continue to be in the forefront of that battle this fall and for years to come. “

Clinton was under pressure to send a strong signal to the 18 million voters who supported her in the marathon 50-state primary that it’s time to unite behind the presumptive nominee.

Obama secured the 2,118 delegates needed to clinch the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday after primaries in South Dakota and Montana. He planned to spend the weekend at home in Chicago.

Clinton on Tuesday gave little indication she was ready to bow out of the race. She congratulated Obama for running an “extraordinary” race but did not acknowledge at the time his delegate majority.

But on Saturday she paused to urge the audience to appreciate the historic nature of the race itself, which pitted the first serious female candidate for president against the most viable black candidate.

“Together, Senator Obama and I achieved milestones,” she said.

She said that even though her campaign was not successful, she paved the way for a woman to some day win the White House.

“Though we weren’t able to shatter that highest, hardest glass ceiling this time, thanks to you it’s got about 18 million cracks in it,” she said. “The path will be a little easier next time.”

Clinton began the race as the undisputed front-runner in January 2007. But she saw her march to the nomination derailed a year later after being swamped by Obama in Iowa’s lead-off caucuses.

The last major candidate of the 2008 primary campaign to fall, Clinton persevered by staying defiant when her back was against the wall.

In the critical contests she had to win to stay in the race, she won. She had a strong showing in the March 4 primaries, and then pulled off a victory in Pennsylvania April 22. The victories were used to raise doubts about Obama’s chances against presumptive GOP nominee John McCain, even as his delegate lead over Clinton stayed imposing.

Left on the table is whether Clinton will be considered as Obama’s vice presidential pick.

The two had a face-to-face meeting Thursday evening at the Washington home of a Senate colleague, California Democrat Dianne Feinstein, where they discussed the campaign to come. They spoke alone for about an hour. Both were laughing when they finished.

Clinton was expected to campaign for Obama and to help with fundraising while seeking his assistance in retiring her $30 million campaign debt.

The New York senator has told colleagues she would be interested in joining Obama as his running mate.

Following the speech Saturday, she made her way through the crowd of supporters, shaking hands and signing autographs, telling one supporter, “Don’t worry, I’ll be back.”

Also unanswered is how passionately Clinton’s supporters will file in behind Obama. Clinton was met with ear-splitting cheers when she began her address, but the crowd response became progressively more tepid as she spoke about driving Obama to victory in November.

Polls show the general election race against McCain is still tight. The latest national Gallup tracking poll shows Obama leading McCain by just 1 point.

Clinton spent much of Friday working on her concession speech with campaign manager Maggie Williams, media adviser Mandy Grunwald and strategist Mark Penn.

By suspending her campaign, Clinton would retain nominal control of her delegates and could continue to raise money to pay off campaign debts.

A party at her Washington home on Friday was intended as a way to thank and bid farewell to campaign staff.

Governor: Hamas nod dooms Obama in Florida

2008-05-22T14:44:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Citing the controversy that began with WND's interview with a Hamas leader, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist said citizens of the Sunshine State will find Sen. Barack Obama's positions on foreign policy out of the mainstream.

Crist, credited with helping Sen. John McCain win the Florida Republican primary, told a New York Times reporter he believes the Arizona senator will be successful this fall in the crucial swing state, because Obama "is for higher taxes, and I think the whole Hamas issue is a drag."

Crist was referring to the fallout from an interview by WND's Aaron Klein, author of "Schmoozing With Terrorists," and WABC radio with a top Hamas official who said he hopes the Illinois senator becomes president. Ahmed Yousef, Hamas' chief political adviser in the Gaza Strip, also compared Obama to President John F. Kennedy.

McCain seized on the "endorsement," with campaign manager Brian Rogers asserting "the reason for Hamas' praise of Senator Obama's foreign policy is his commitment to meet unconditionally with Iran."

Crist told the Times' Kevin Sack he believes Obama's stances on foreign policy and taxes won't win over the citizens of his state.

"I think Floridians are pretty mainstream," Crist said. "I'm not sure Senator Obama is. I believe some group rated him as the most liberal Senator. I don't think that will go over well in Florida."

The governor was referring to the National Journal's annual Senate vote ratings, published in January, which ranked Obama most liberal.

Analysts have considered Crist, a popular first-term governor, as a potential running mate for McCain.

In the interview with Yousef, the Hamas leader said, "We like Mr. Obama, and we hope that he will win the elections. I hope Mr. Obama and the Democrats will change the political discourse. ... I do believe [Obama] is like John Kennedy, a great man with a great principal. And he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community, but not with humiliation and arrogance."

Yousef volunteered his statements about Obama in response to a question inquiring whether he was surprised the senator and other presidential candidates criticized Jimmy Carter's recent meetings with Hamas.

Responding to the Hamas leader's comments, McCain contended Obama wants to "sit down and negotiate with a government exporting most lethal devices used against soldiers. He wants to sit down face to face with a government that is very clear about developing nuclear weapons. ... They are sponsors of terrorist organizations. That's a huge difference in my opinion. And I'll let the American people decide whether that's a significant difference or not. I believe it is."

Daughter of Christian music star killed by car

2008-05-22T14:41:00.000-07:00

Story Source

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — The 5-year-old daughter of Grammy-winning Christian music star Steven Curtis Chapman was struck and killed Wednesday by a sport utility vehicle driven by her brother, authorities said.

The girl, Maria Sue, was hit in the driveway of the family's home Wednesday afternoon by a Toyota Land Cruiser driven by her teenage brother, said Laura McPherson, a spokeswoman for the Tennessee Highway Patrol.

The brother, whose name and exact age weren't available, apparently did not see the girl, McPherson said. No charges are expected.

"It looks like a tragic accident," she said.

Several family members witnessed the accident, which happened in Williamson County just south of Nashville. The girl died later at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, hospital spokeswoman Laurie Holloway said.

In a statement, Velvet Kelm, a publicist for Chapman, said Maria was the Chapmans' youngest daughter.

Chapman, who is originally from Paducah, Ky., and his wife have promoted international adoption and have three daughters from China, including Maria. They also have three biological children.

The singer's Web site says the couple was persuaded by their oldest daughter to adopt a girl from China. The experience led the family to adopt two more children and create Shaohannah's Hope, a foundation and ministry to financially assist thousands of couples in adoption.

The Chapmans did missionary work at Chinese orphanages in 2006 and 2007, according to the Web site.

"After our first trip to China, my wife and I knew our lives were changing — our eyes and hearts were opening to how big God really is, and we have wanted to experience more of that," Chapman says on the Web site.

"We've really wondered whether or not we should just go to China and stay there. But I don't think so. I believe God is saying, 'I want you to go, get your heart broken, your eyes opened, and then take this story back to the church in America and around the world.'"

The 45-year-old singer also has released a book about being a father titled "Cinderella: The Love of Daddy and his Princess." He has won five Grammy awards and 54 Dove awards from the Gospel Music Association, according to Kelm.

McCain's green efforts 'futile'

2008-05-21T09:23:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Environmental policy expert Steve Milloy says Republican presidential nominee John McCain's effort to reach out to so-called "green voters" is a futile one.

Senator McCain (R-Arizona) says he plans to fight global warming by instituting a cap and trade system for limiting carbon emissions, with specific targets for national emission cutbacks. He is also trying to appeal to environmentalists by promoting "eco-friendly" campaign merchandise on his website. The items include "Go Green" shirts, hats, and visors with the recycle logo. He is also selling organic cotton "onesies" for babies, as well as "Go Green" McCain tote bags, notebooks, and travel mugs.

Milloy, a Fox News columnist and publisher of JunkScience.com, says McCain mistakenly believes that people who are historically left-leaning Democrats will vote for him "because he's green, too."

"Of course, this will never work. People who vote for the environment are also going to be voting against the Iraq War," he argues. "There's no chance he's going to pick up any of these people."

Instead, says Milloy, McCain is "just kowtowing and selling the rest of us out."

"[A]ll his global warming alarmism and his other environmental policies are all bad for Americans -- it's just going to raise energy prices. They're going to hurt the economy; it's not going to help America," Milloy contends.

In a recent speech on global warming, McCain condemned what he called the "dead-end of failed diplomacy that claimed Kyoto." However, McCain and 94 other senators voted against the international treaty designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Milloy believes McCain has flip-flopped.

To illustrate his argument, Milloy points out that greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. have dropped significantly because much of the manufacturing process have moved to countries like China and India -- countries McCain mentioned in his speech.

" ... John McCain said that 'even if China and India' ... are not going to cut down on their emissions, we're going to cut down," he summarizes. "So, we're going to hurt our economy; meanwhile, if you are worried about carbon-dioxide emissions, they're just going to be coming out of China and India. They're going to be like the world's CO2 smokestacks," Milloy explains.

It was hypocritical of McCain, according to Milloy, to deliver his climate speech at a wind technology plant because wind power is one of the most heavily subsidized forms of energy. Some analysts say a large reason McCain performed poorly in the Iowa Republican caucuses was his criticism of ethanol subsidies.

Milloy says it is great that McCain has "been strong on the war in Iraq," but argues there is a war going on in America over energy and economic policy -- and says if the country loses that battle, "it's not going to matter what happens in Iraq."

Placing 'help' above 'hype'

2008-05-21T09:22:00.000-07:00

hStory Source

A national coalition of pastors, Christian leaders, and policymakers has recently launched the "We Get It!" campaign, which deals with the environment, global warming, and poverty.

According to a "We Get It!" campaign press release, the campaign seeks to enlist one million Christians on a new, historic statement on environment and poverty. Signers of the declaration will be sending a message to Washington policymakers that they will embrace a biblical stewardship approach to the environment, and reject the environmental hype that threatens the poor.

Dr. E. Calvin Beisner is the national spokesman for the Cornwall Alliance, one of the national partners of the "We Get It!" campaign.

"We need to see that care for the poor and care for the environment need to go hand in hand," he explains, "and that our care for the environment needs to not be allowed to compromise our care for the poor ...." That compromise, says Beisner, often occurs when people are pursuing "policies based on fairly speculative claims about environmental problems, such as manmade catastrophic global warming."

One of the "We Get It!" signers is Dr. Danny Akin of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), who -- according to Beisner -- has urged fellow leaders in that denomination to follow his example in endorsing the declaration.

Another signer, the SBC's Dr. Richard Land, says the campaign is what is needed to set the record straight on global warming. "It has a high view of man, a biblical view of stewardship, and a responsible regard for the needs of the poor," Land says.

Other signers include U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), Focus on the Family's Dr. James Dobson, U.S. Senator Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, Christian historian David Barton, and singer Pat Boone.

Why dialogue about sin?

2008-05-21T09:20:00.000-07:00

Story Source

The president of Americans for Truth says the homosexual activist group Soulforce is trying to politicize Sunday worship in order to push an anti-biblical agenda.

On Mother's Day, Soulforce began what it is calling an "American Family Outing" campaign. The initiative features several same-sex couples who visit mega-churches in an effort to seek "peaceful dialogue" with the church pastors.

Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality calls the invitation to dialogue fraudulent. "I don't say ... I'm going to show up at your house on May 23, to dialogue with you, and if you don't dialogue with me, then maybe I'll have a protest," he quips. "That's not real dialogue."

It must be remembered, says LaBarbera, that Soulforce "promotes un-Godly notions" about homosexuality. "They try to persuade people that homosexuality is not a sin," he states bluntly.

LaBarbera says the homosexual activist movement is really just trying to undermine historic church teachings on homosexuality. He also argues it is no more appropriate to dialogue over homosexuality than it is to dialogue over any other sin. "I think if there was a group that was in favor of adultery, I don't think a church would be negotiating about [whether] adultery...is a sin or not with [that] group ...," he suggests.

The Soulforce initiative runs every Sunday through Father's Day.

Christian doctor safe behind bars

2008-05-21T09:18:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Robin Sardar, a 55-year-old successful Christian doctor in Pakistan, is in jail, being accused of blasphemy against Mohammed and the Quran.

Jeremy Sewell of International Christian Concern believes behind bars may be the safest place for him for now. "[Sardar] had a friend who was Muslim, and they were friendly with each other for a long time. But this Muslim friend became jealous that this Christian man who, in his [Muslim] belief system, is an infidel and an unbeliever, was succeeding so well in his practice," Sewell explains.

"This Muslim man filed a police report against the Christian doctor accusing him of blasphemy," Sewell reports, noting that that type of crime carries a penalty of life in prison or death.

According to Sewell, the Muslim "friend" then spread the word of Sardar's success as well as his spiritual beliefs. Angry Muslims then arrived at Sardar's home, ransacked it, and began beating him and his family. Police soon arrived and, according to Sewell, may have saved Sardar's life by arresting him.

"The police, in arresting him, actually saved his life because there was a Muslim mob [that] would have killed him if the police hadn't arrived in the nick of time to intervene," Sewell contends.

Muslim crowds are now demanding a public hanging, even though Sardar has had no trial.

Video game ratings enforcement under scrutiny

2008-05-21T09:17:00.000-07:00

Story Source

A bipartisan bill that would require retailers to check identification for all customers who purchase video games with a "Mature" or "Adult Only" rating is receiving praise from a pro-family organization.

Congressmen Jim Matheson (D-Utah) and Lee Terry (R-Nebraska) have unveiled the "Video Game Ratings Enforcement Act." The legislation comes on the heels of the recent release of the violent and sexually explicit video game, Grand Theft Auto IV (rated "M"), which has been roundly criticized for its content. Retailers have also been ripped for allowing sales of similarly rated games to younger children.

Dan Isett of the Parents Television Council (PTC) believes the legislation is needed. He says retailers have done a poor job when it comes to insuring that children cannot access "Mature" rated video games."[A] 2005 Federal Trade Commission study found that 42 percent of the time, a child was able to go into the store and come out with a 'Mature' rated game," Isett details.

Although the PTC spokesman argues that parents are the first and last line of defense, he believes retailers should shoulder more responsibility. "What's at issue here is whether a child's going to have complete unfettered access to this type of game [M- or AO-rated] -- and clearly that's not something that's in parents' best interests to have," he states. "And there's nothing that a parent can do, really, to ensure that a child can't go into any given store and come out with a game like this."

As for a parent purchasing such games and then giving them to a child? "That's for a parent to decide," says Isett.

Hearings have not been set for the proposed legislation. The bill calls for fines for retailers who sell "Mature" or "Adult Only" rated games to minors.

Taking 'sedation' to an extreme

2008-05-21T09:06:00.000-07:00

Story Source

"Terminal sedation" is a process in which a person with a severe illness or injury who is terminal -- or perhaps in a supposed "vegetative state" -- is sedated until unconscious and then starved to death. Rita Marker of the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide believes the practice is fairly common.

"Those who favor assisted suicide, for example, have defined it as ... both sedating the person and removing food and fluids," says Marker. "And then they say, well, you see, they're going to die anyway within 5 to 21 days."

As Marker explains, the process is completely legal. "First of all, a person can be sedated if they are in a great deal of pain. Secondly, under all state laws, food and fluids provided by tube -- which they would have to be if the person is sedated -- would be considered medical treatment [that] can be removed from the person who is sedated. So legally speaking, it is something that can be done."

Marker is especially concerned over a West Coast attempt to use terminal sedation to circumvent the ban on doctor assisted-suicide. "[T]here is a bill pending in California which actually would tell doctors that they're supposed to let patients know if they have been diagnosed with having a condition that will cause their death within a year," she says. "If the patient wants to know [their] options, [doctors] are supposed to inform them of all kinds of options, including ... terminal sedation."

The task force recommends individuals visit their website for free legal documents in which they can stipulate that terminal sedation be ruled out. An individual also needs to have a second party named to make decisions for them if they are unable, but it must be a person who fully agrees with their position.

Federal judge says no to in-school Bible giveaways

2008-04-30T07:58:00.000-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

NEW ORLEANS - A federal judge says Tangipahoa Parish public schools must stop in-school Bible giveaways to students.

"Distribution of Bibles is a religious activity without a secular purpose" and amounts to school board promotion of Christianity, U.S. District Judge Carl J. Barbier ruled.

As requested by both sides, Barbier made a summary judgment based only on the written briefs - something judges may do only if the law is absolutely clear.

But attorney Christopher M. Moody said he thinks the Tangipahoa Parish School Board is likely to ask the 5th U.S. Court of Appeal to overturn Barbier's decision, though he hadn't yet consulted with the board. "We think there's a very good chance" of a reversal, he said.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana filed the suit for an anonymous family whose daughter said she felt pressured into taking a Bible even though she doesn't believe in God. The girl was called Jane Roe and her father John Roe out of fear of retaliation by schoolmates and neighbors, the ACLU has said.

"Jane Roe states that she accepted the Bible because if she did not, her classmates would have 'picked on' her," Barbier wrote. "She feared they would call her 'devil worshipper.'"

Marjorie R. Esman, executive director of the ACLU chapter, said, "A child shouldn't have to choose between her family's beliefs and the wishes of school administrators."

Bible reading results in arrests

2008-04-30T07:57:00.001-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

Voice of the Martyrs is asking the communist North Korean government to release ten college students who were arrested for reading the Bible and watching a DVD about God's Word.

According to Free North Korea Broadcasting, hundreds of Bibles and CDs were purchased in China and secretly placed in flour bags before being smuggled into North Korea. The students were taking part in a Bible study as part of their underground church when they were arrested.

Todd Nettleton with Voice of the Martyrs (VOM) says information about the Christian students is hard to come by. "We don't know what the charges are officially, how it has been carried out, [or] if there has been a trial or not. We don't know the status of these ten believers," Nettleton points out.

According to the VOM spokesman, communist authorities are not releasing any information on the students. "It is likely that they are in a political prisoner camp. It is not out of the question that they were executed," he suggests. "But because the information is so tightly controlled in North Korea, we simply don't know at this point what the outcome of their case has been," Nettleton contends.

Voice of the Martyrs is calling on the North Korean government to release the students.

Barr's campaign for White House taking shape

2008-04-27T14:07:00.000-07:00

Story Source

There's not a bit of bunting in sight. No rope line to hold back the rabid throngs.

Secret Service protection? More like one endlessly patient young woman who answers the phone and greets strangers walking through the door with cheery aplomb.

At first glance, this conservatively appointed office suite — muted carpeting, framed Ronald Reagan photo on the wall — in a high-rise building near the Cobb Galleria Centre could be home to any of the countless well-connected doctors, lawyers or investment professionals who keep Atlanta ticking.

Instead, it's the epicenter of a political earthquake.

Maybe.

"There are several things we want to get in place before we would make an announcement," Bob Barr says during a recent interview at his consulting firm, Liberty Strategies LLC. "We anticipate having them nailed down in very short order."

As rhetorical stemwinders go, that's not quite up there with "Ask not what your country can do for you ... ." Still, it's tantalizingly, if incrementally, more detailed than what Barr, 59, had to say at the Heartland Libertarian Conference in Kansas City two weeks earlier.

There, the former Republican congressman from Georgia's 7th District declared he was forming an "exploratory committee" and would run for president as a Libertarian — if "sufficient numbers" of people were for it.

The tremors were felt immediately and everywhere. While bloggers debated Barr's electability and Libertarian cred — he's been a party member since just 2006 — his "exploratory" Web site (www.bobbarr2008.com) showed about $25,000 in contributions within two days. (By Friday morning, it was nearing $41,000).

James Peniston of Duluth was among the first donors. "It's the beginning of my personal Boston Tea Party," Peniston, 62, said of his $100 donation. "I'm fed up with the two-party system."

'Bless their hearts'

He's apparently not alone. The exploratory committee polled likely voters and found that 7 percent said they would vote for unannounced candidate Barr. Next up was a George Will column about Barr's potentially "ruinous" impact on presumed Republican nominee John McCain's chances.

So, has Barr heard anything — veiled threats, promises of plum ambassadorships — from the McCain forces lately?

"No, not directly," replies Barr, who had to give up his weekly op-ed column in the AJC when he launched the exploratory committee. Of the few "more traditional" Republicans he has heard discouraging words from: "They have this sort of idea in their minds, bless their hearts, that nobody should do anything to upset the Republican nominee. This notion that the political world swirls around two galaxies only, Republican and Democrat only, and anybody else who enters that fray is going to affect the other two and that's bad — that's a very myopic notion."

That's classic Barr, from the slightly withering "bless their hearts" to the almost reflexively Republican use of "Democrat" as an adjective. (Also on the wall of the onetime House manager: A framed display — including photos and gallery tickets — commemorating President Bill Clinton's impeachment trial.)

Barr also sounds — and behaves — like a man with more than just a notion about running for president.

There's the impressive Web site that went live seemingly while Barr was still having his Heartland parking stub validated. The growing public appearance schedule that this week has taken him into Yankee territory and out of strictly Libertarian settings, like Thursday's speech at The College of New Jersey. And the soundbite-ready argument — "Inside every American beats the heart of a Libertarian" — that he's the real change agent in a year of pretenders to the title.

Well, mostly pretenders. Whether Barr's decision to go exploring now had anything to do with Ron Paul's presidential campaign all but officially ending last month, he credits the Texas congressman's upstart campaign with helping prepare the way.

"In my lifetime, we've not had an administration that has presented such a clear picture of why the current system is broken as the Bush administration, and that has changed the dynamics of the political system this year," Barr says. "The 'Ron Paul phenomenon,' so to speak, also illustrates that there is a significant group of folks out there who recognize that the Libertarian Party does present to them very relevant issues of freedom."

Ducks in a row?

What's not here — yet — are some of the more obvious outward trappings of a presidential run.

No "Straight Drawl Express" parked outside an Atlanta-based national campaign office, no paid full-time staff working inside. Some experienced political hands have come on board recently as volunteers, but the staff and offices at Liberty Strategies LLC carry out much of the exploratory committee's work. A lot of it is done by Derek Barr, 26, whose duties include quietly fact-checking his father's recall of his six grandchildren's ages during the interview.

On his reason for (possibly) running, however, no prompting is needed: "The size and scope and power of government," Barr says even before being asked, "I suspect will be the key to a Bob Barr campaign."

Meanwhile, much of his time recently has been spent, well, exploring.

With a dozen other candidates already announced (and six more considering running), can he actually secure the nomination at the Libertarian National Convention come Memorial Day weekend? Who would work on his campaign? What would happen to his consulting and legal clients (he's also "of counsel" to the law firm of Edwin Marger in Jasper) for seven months? How much could his previous hidebound conservative positions — he drafted the Defense of Marriage Act passed by Congress in 1996 and was an outspoken supporter of the war on drugs — come back to haunt him with some Libertarians?

And what price a presidential run in the YouTube Age?

"Certainly what little sphere of privacy we've been able to recapture over the last couple of years will dissipate immediately," said Barr, whose wife, Jeri, is chief executive officer of the nonprofit Center for Family Resources in Cobb County. "Running for president is not something you do lightly or precipitously." Or without having all your ducks in a row first. Even if those ducks might never, er, hatch.

Preparing for battle

Russell Verney, a volunteer adviser who'd be Barr's campaign manager, recalled the night in 1992 when maverick Texas billionaire Ross Perot went on "Larry King Live" and blurted out his intention to run as an independent presidential candidate. Within two hours, 10,000 phone calls overwhelmed the switchboard of Perot's computer firm.

"From then on, it was playing catch-up," said Verney, who worked on that campaign and managed Perot's 1996 run. "It was always a campaign that was overwhelmed."

While Barr continues to mull his options privately and publicly — Wednesday's "Barr Blog" entry hinted ominously at "tactics and strategies" that might be used against him, then invoked Bob Marley as a model courageous figure — others prepare for battle. Verney is already pondering how many staff, volunteer coordinators and offices the campaign would need on Day One. Audrey Mullen of political PR firm Advocacy Ink helps set up Barr's media appearances and collects footage for a commercial that would be ready to run after a formal announcement.

For early donor Peniston, that announcement can't come soon enough. Or, apparently, without an endless supply of bunting.

"I hope he does run, if only to really shake things up," said Peniston, a self-described independent who leans Republican. "Unfortunately, third parties don't get involved in this till it's nearly too late. So if he's running, he's got to keep running for the next four years."

Bush lacked important info before Iraq invasion

2008-04-27T14:03:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Don Eberly, a former deputy assistant to President Bush, doubts the president would have ordered the 2003 invasion of Iraq had he known what he knows now.

Eberly is the founder of The Civil Society Project and author of the book The Rise of Global Civil Society: Building Communities and Nations from the Bottom Up. He served as a senior advisor on Iraq and was in the country when the new government was established after the fall of Saddam Hussein.

Hindsight, admits Eberly, is always better. "It's easy to attempt to play 20/20 hindsight here. At that time, coming out of the 1990s -- and especially after 9/11 -- there was a near-bipartisan consensus that Saddam was a big problem. It's only now that he was taken out and five years into this [war on terror] that we've seen how difficult it is to deal with the aftermath, that it's easy to question that," says the author.

"I think that [invading Iraq] would be a very difficult call if the president had the information he has now back in 2003. My guess is that he probably would have postponed and looked at other strategies," the Civil Society Project founder contends.

Eberly argues that the U.S. must give up on the idea that some kind of ideal Western-style democracy is going to take shape in Iraq.

Federal Credit Cards Misused

2008-04-09T13:53:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Federal employees used government credit cards to pay for lingerie, gambling, iPods, Internet dating services, and a $13,000 steak-and-liquor dinner, according to a new audit from the Government Accountability Office, which found widespread abuses in a purchasing program meant to improve bureaucratic efficiency.

The study, released by Senate lawmakers yesterday, found that nearly half the "purchase card" transactions it examined were improper, either because they were not authorized correctly or because they did not meet requirements for the cards' use. The overall rate of problems "is unacceptably high," the audit found.

The GAO also found that agencies could not account for nearly $2 million worth of items identified in the audit -- including laptop computers, digital cameras and, at the Army, more than a dozen computer servers worth $100,000 each.

Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), who requested the study along with Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), said that money "intended to pay for critical infrastructure, education and homeland security is instead being spent on iPods, lingerie and socializing."

"Too many government employees have viewed purchase cards as their personal line of credit," Coleman said. "It's time to cut up their cards and start over."

The audit is the culmination of a series of GAO reports over the past decade that have uncovered improper use of government-issued purchase cards at agencies, including the Defense Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Government employees spent nearly $20 billion last year using "SmartPay" cards and related convenience checks, for items ranging from pencils to computers to utility trucks.

Purchase cards, used by about 300,000 government employees in 2007, are essentially the federal government's equivalent of corporate credit cards. Issued by five major banks, they are primarily for transactions under $2,500 but can be used for larger contract payments. All transactions are supposed to comport with federal purchasing guidelines, including proper authorization and documentation.

The latest study used scientific sampling to gauge problems with the cards across numerous federal agencies from July 2005 to September 2006. The report singles out incidents for special criticism as "abusive," "improper" or "fraudulent."

In the fraudulent category, a longtime employee of the U.S. Forest Service in Oregon, Debra K. Durfey, wrote convenience checks worth more than $640,000 from 2000 to 2006 to a live-in boyfriend, who used the money for gambling, car expenses and mortgage payments, according to the GAO and the Justice Department.

The fraud went undetected until a whistle-blower forwarded a tip to the Agriculture Department's inspector general. Durfey, who headed her unit's purchasing office, pleaded guilty last year and was sentenced to 21 months in prison and restitution.

Another fraud case involved the U.S. Postal Service, where an unidentified postmaster used his card to charge $1,100 over a 15-month period for "various online dating services" while he was under investigation for viewing pornography on a government computer. The employee worked out an agreement to remain on sick leave until he retired in 2007 and paid back the money spent on the dating services, according to the GAO report and a Postal Service spokesman.

In a case the GAO deemed "abusive," the Postal Service spent $13,500 in 2006 on a dinner at a Ruth's Chris Steak House in Orlando, including "over 200 appetizers and over $3,000 of alcohol, including more than 40 bottles of wine costing more than $50 each and brand-name liquor such as Courvoisier, Belvedere and Johnny Walker Gold." The tab came to more than $160 a head for the 81 guests, the report said.

Postal Service spokesman Gerry McKiernan said the dinner was held to entertain large postal customers who were already in Florida for another conference, and actually saved money because it combined four events into one. He also defended the payments for alcohol.

"When you're having dinner with customers, it's normal to have a drink," McKiernan said.

In another case at the State Department, a cardholder spent $360 at the Seduccion Boutique in Ecuador to buy "women's underwear/lingerie for use during jungle training by trainees of a drug enforcement program." The report does not include further details, but it says a State Department official "agreed that the charge was questionable."

The GAO found that 41 percent of the transactions it examined did not follow government purchasing rules. The problem was worse with larger purchases: Forty-eight percent of transactions over $2,500 were in violation of federal rules, the report said.

Levin said in a statement that "although internal controls over government credit cards have improved, we still have a long way to go to stop the fraudulent use of these cards."

In a written response to GAO, acting Controller Danny Werfel of the Office of Management and Budget said the administration "is extremely concerned with the incidences of purchase card abuse highlighted in GAO's report," and said it has agreed to increase oversight to lower the number of problems.

OMB spokeswoman Jane Lee also said the White House supports proposed Senate legislation aimed at reducing "inappropriate purchase card transactions." The Government Credit Card Abuse Prevention Act would require regular audits and other steps to cut down on credit card fraud and abuse.

Schoolgirl pummeled for anti-illegals sign

2008-04-09T13:49:00.000-07:00

Story Source

A 13-year-old East Texas girl claims 21 classmates attacked and beat her in response to a sign she made for a history class calling for an end to illegal immigration.

Melanie Bowers was among the eighth graders at Athens Middle School asked by history teacher Janet Skelton to make "protest signs" that dealt with a past issue and a current one, the Athens Daily Review reported.

Bowers' sign read: "If you love your nation, stop illegal immigration."

Friday, according to her father, J.R. Bowers, a group of students attacked her in a school hallway, slamming her head into a brick wall and scraping her face down the side of the wall, the Athens paper said.

The students then attempted to drag the girl into a restroom and threatened to "rape and kill" her, said her grandmother, Layne Wilhoite. The sign was torn up, according to her mother, Shera Bowers.

The 13-year-old later told Dallas/Fort Worth Fox TV affiliate KDFW she was not sexually assaulted but was punched, scratched and stabbed with a pen.

"They picked me up, and they tried to put me in the boys' bathroom, and they said they were about to rape me," she said. "And I just started screaming and yelling, and I was, like, 'Leave me alone! Leave me alone! Leave me alone!'"

KDFW reported three Hispanic students are serving "in-school suspensions," and school officials are considering punishing two other students. The case is now in the hands of the school district's police department to determine whether criminal charges will be filed.

J.R. Bowers said Melanie suffered scrapes and bruises and sought medical attention. He plans to keep his daughter out of school until the situation is resolved.

Melanie Bowers told KDFW flyers titled "brown pride," with her face crossed out, were passed out at school.

Her parents have contacted the FBI and want to open a federal hate crimes investigation, the TV station said.

"She's upset, first and foremost, because she didn't feel like she had any reason to be attacked," J.R. Bowers told the Associated Press. "She loves going to school. We're having to keep her out because we're scared for her."

Meanwhile, police are reviewing security video, and Superintendent Fred Hayes said the investigation continues. But he already has concluded the class project was not a good idea.

"Should we deal with illegal immigration? Absolutely," he told KDFW. "But not at a 13- and 14-year student level."

After the attack, said J.R. Bowers, his daughter tried to use the school office to call him, but Assistant Principal Mark Castleberry would not allow it, arguing it would "mess up the investigation."

Hayes acknowledged Castleberry should have let Bowers make the phone call, but he said the assistant principal looked over Melanie Bowers and "did not see anything wrong with her," the Athens Daily Review reported.

Shera Bowers, however, said her daughter was checked out by a paramedic Saturday, suffering a swollen face, various scratches and bruises.

"I'm upset that this happened to my daughter, and that she wasn't allowed to call us," she said.

J.R. Bowers said his daughter identified 21 students involved in the attack – 17 boys and four girls – by using a yearbook, the Athens paper reported.

Principal Louis DeRosa and Hayes acknowledge there was an incident, but they stopped short of saying the girl was assaulted. DeRosa says only a few students were involved.

"There was an incident in the hallway after lunch on Friday, April 4, between two or three students," DeRosa said in a statement. "We have a camera system in the building. We are collecting information and statements from witnesses. This is all the information we have at this time."

Crackdown on biblical speech challenged

2008-04-03T12:21:00.000-07:00

Story Source: World Net Daily

A brief has been filed with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California again challenging a school district's policy that allows such slogans as "Stop the Hate," "fags," "queers," "that's so gay" and even "I Kiss Boys," but bans "Romans 1:27."

The case stems from punishment handed down by the Poway Unified School District for student Chase Harper, who was a sophomore in 2004 when the school recognized the "Day of Silence," an annual promotion in public schools of the homosexual lifestyle.

The event, scheduled this year for April 25, is targeted for exposure by a campaign assembled by a multitude of Christian organizations.

"It's outrageous that our neighborhood schools would allow homosexual activism to intrude into the classroom," said Buddy Smith of the American Family Association, one of a long list of organizations asking parents to keep their students home from school on that day.

"'Day of Silence' is about coercing students to repudiate traditional morality. It's time for Christian parents to draw the line – if your children will be exposed to this DOS propaganda in their school, then keep them home for the day," he said.

The "Day of Silence" promotion is intended, ostensibly, to make students "aware" of the "discrimination" suffered by homosexuals in society, by having students remain silent for the day. Such events typically are organized by a school's "Gay-Straight Alliance" group, but the event has been promoted for its previous 11 years by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.

The case over Harper's expression of his opinion developed in Poway High School in 2004. The district, which operates 23 schools in San Diego and 11 in Poway, serves about 33,000 students. But when Harper wore a T-shirt with two slogans: "Be ashamed. Our school has embraced what God has condemned" and "Homosexuality is shameful. Romans 1:27," he was ordered either to take the shirt off or spend the day in the school office, where he was photographed, questioned and challenged by a police officer.

The Bible verse reads, in the New American Standard version, "And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."

A school administrator then told Harper he should "leave his faith in the car."

The 9th Circuit initially ruled the school may have been justified in its censorship, but in March 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the decision.

Chase, and his sister, Kelsie, have renewed their case because of the potential impact of the school policy that prohibits students from expressing any religious beliefs that might be seen as "negative" or "offensive" by others.

The new brief submitted to the 9th Circuit notes that the school specifically authorizes recognition of the pro-homosexual "Day of Silence," and has allowed a variety of slogans, including "loser," and a purple square and yellow "equal" sign.

But it bans Harper's specific statement of Christian faith.

"Our education system is the incubator of democracy. And our democratic system depends on the ability of its members to engage in vigorous debate. Thus, schools have a duty 'to guide students through the difficult process of becoming educated, to help them learn how to discriminate between good concepts and bad, to benefit from the errors society has made in the past, to improve their minds and character,'" said the brief, quoting from a previous federal court ruling.

"But schools may not eliminate all diversity of thought. To do so would allow schools to become precisely what [the U.S. Supreme Court] said the First Amendment could never tolerate: 'enclaves of totalitarianism' where students are 'confined to the expression of those sentiments that are officially approved," the brief said.

"The school has made no attempt to respect the balance struck by the Supreme Court between preserving an effective educational environment and safeguard students' free speech rights. Accordingly, the Harpers respectfully request that this court reverse the lower court decisions and remand the case with instructions to enter summary judgment in the Harpers' favor on their facial challenges to the school's speech policies…" said the filing submitted by the Alliance Defense Fund and Advocates for Faith and Freedom, two law organizations.

"Christian students shouldn't be penalized for expressing their beliefs," said Tim Chandler, ADF legal counsel. "They have the same First Amendment rights as all other students on campus. Speech cannot be silenced simply because someone else disagrees with it or deems it to be 'negative.' As the Supreme Court has stated, students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate."

Just a few weeks ago, the Poway district adopted a new policy regarding "hate behavior," after a series of incidents including the hanging of nooses, a complaint that a Halloween costume looked liked a Ku Klux Klan outfit, and the drawing of a swastika and profanity, written in feces, on a student store window.

Supt. Don Phillips said it is meant to be clear that "intimidating (or) harassing will not be tolerated."

A district judge earlier had ruled in the Harper case that schools have a special "interest in protecting homosexual students from harassment" because that is a "legitimate pedagogical concern."

Such a concern, he ruled, "allows a school to restrict speech expressing damaging statements about sexual orientation and limiting students to expressing their views in a positive manner."

Critics have worried that opens wide the door for any activist school principal or superintendent to create a range of new ways for Christian students to be denied First Amendment rights based on the content of theier speech.

Robert Tyler, who has worked for the Alliance Defense Fund on the case, said that looks like a double standard.

"Why is it acceptable to tell a student of faith their views are not as valuable as the view of any person opposing them?" he said.

Judge Alez Kozinsky, who wrote the minority opinion the last time the case was before the 9th Circuit, had concluded, "I have considerable difficulty with giving school authorities the power to decide that only one side of a controversial topic may be discussed in the school environment because the opposing point of view is too extreme or demeaning … The fundamental problem with the majority's approach is that it has no anchor anywhere in the record or in the law. It is entirely a judicial creation, hatched to deal with the situation before us, but likely to cause innumerable problems in the future."

The campaign calling for parents to keep their children home of the "Day of Silence" for 2008 quickly is gaining momentum.

Matt Barber, a spokesman for Concerned Women for America, said the day "amounts to educational malpractice."

"Our schools are supposed to be places of learning, not places of political indoctrination. It is the height of impropriety and cynicism for 'gay' activists and school officials to use children as pawns in their attempt to further a highly controversial and polarizing political agenda," he said.

The coalition is suggesting parents ask their school districts about "Day of Silence" plans, especially the date because some school districts vary. Then, the group said, parents should "inform the school of our intention to keep your children home on that date and explain why."

Among the groups already promoting the protest are:

Congress offers solution to housing meltdown

2008-04-03T12:18:00.000-07:00

Story Source: World Net Daily

With the foreclosure crisis reaching unprecedented levels, Senate Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have reached an agreement to craft a bi-partisan housing bill aimed at helping families facing the loss of their home.

Critics watching the Senate forge the plan, however, question whether the bill would help families facing foreclosure or the lenders facing financial losses on repossessions.

Jennifer Morris, McConnell's press secretary, confirmed to WND today Senate Banking Committee chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and the committee's ranking Republican, Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, held closed door meetings throughout the day finalizing the language of a bill to bring to the floor of the Senate.

Late today, Dodd and Shelby announced that final language on the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008, the proposed legislation, had been delayed until tomorrow.

But summary points released by Dodd and Shelby included $4 billion in Community Development Block Grant Funds to be used by communities hardest hit by foreclosures and delinquencies to purchase foreclosed homes at a discount and to rehabilitate or redevelop the homes to stabilize neighborhoods and stem the losses in house values of neighboring homes.

Until language of the compromise bill is available, it remains unclear whether the $4 billion in grants would be available to prevent any families from losing their homes or would be available for community purchase only after foreclosed homes had been repossessed by lenders.

The compromise legislation also would provide $100 million in additional funding for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corp. to be used this year.

A position paper released by McConnell's office called for state housing finance agencies to issue up to $10 billion in tax exempt bonds with the proceeds being used to refinance subprime mortgages.

Other key features sought by McConnell include providing $15,000 tax credits for the purchase of a home in or approaching foreclosure and extending the current three-month delay of any looming foreclosure for a returning GI deployed overseas to six months.

The compromise language released by Dodd and Shelby today suggested the bill would delay foreclosures on returning GIs deployed overseas to nine months.

Also proposed in the compromise legislation were reforms to the Federal Housing Administration program, extending various limits to qualify additional families for FHA loans.

"The package that we agreed to is not perfect, nor will it solve all the problems that the economy and the American homeowners are facing today," said a joint statement released by Dodd and Shelby. "But it is an important step, and sends a strong message to the American people that Congress is willing to put aside our partisan differences and come together to tackle the challenges at hand."

Realty Trac reported foreclosure filings during 2007 were up 75 percent from 2006, with more than 1 percent of all U.S. households in some stage of foreclosure during the year.

Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported 2 percent of all home loans were in foreclosure, double the rate over the past 28 years and the highest foreclosure rate since the Mortgage Banking Association began collecting data in 1979.

According to Realty Trac, the top 10 states reporting foreclosures in Dec. 2007 were, in order: Nevada, California, Florida, Colorado, Arizona, Michigan, Ohio, Georgia, Illinois, and Massachusetts.

The Denver Post reported yesterday home foreclosure liquidators are offering dispossessed homeowners as much as $900 simply for agreeing to leave the property without stealing appliances or otherwise damaging or vandalizing the property in their anger and frustration.

In one anecdote, the Denver Post told the story of a little girl who had written a note in a walk-in closet, "Dear Bedroom, I'm going to miss you. When I get older, I’ll buy you back."

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported yesterday Ohio has launched a program where 1,100 lawyers from across the state have volunteered under a "Save the Dream" program to provide free legal assistance to Ohioans making under $54,000 a year who are in danger of losing their homes.

The paper disclosed data compiled by the Ohio Supreme Court showed more than 83,000 foreclosures were filed during 2007, the most in the history of the Buckeye State, while Cleveland, Akron, Toledo, Dayton, Columbus and Cincinnati were all ranked among the top 50 cities in the country in foreclosed properties.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York has posted a dynamic map of subprime mortgage conditions in the United States, displaying statewide, county specific and zip code variations the condition of securitized, owner-occupied subprime mortgage loans.

On Monday, the New York Times reported the Congressional Budget Office is projecting a record 28 million Americans will receive food stamp assistance in 2008.

The Times also reported one in eight Michigan residents, 12.5 percent, are now receiving food stamps.

Stalin's Oil Minister Dies at 97

2008-04-02T13:04:00.000-07:00

Story Source

MOSCOW (AP) - Nikolai Baibakov, who served as Josef Stalin's oil commissar and later guided the Soviet Union's planned economy for two decades, has died. He was 97.
Baibakov, believed to have been the last living commissar to serve under Stalin, died of pneumonia Monday in Moscow, Russia's gas monopoly Gazprom said.

He was also thought to have been one of the last surviving witnesses of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev's historic "secret speech" denouncing Stalin at the 1956 Soviet Communist Party congress.

Baibakov served as Russia's deputy oil commissar during World War II. In 1944, he was named Stalin's oil commissioner and was fired in 1985 by the last Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, whose economic and social reforms preceded the Soviet collapse.

In 1942, Baibakov recalled in a 1998 interview, Stalin summoned him and told him he would be shot if the advancing Nazi army seized oil wells in Soviet Azerbaijan. Stalin warned him that he would also be shot if, after the war, the wells couldn't be returned to production, he said in the interview with Petroleum Economist magazine.

"If you leave at least a ton of oil to Germans, we will shoot you," he quoted Stalin as saying. "But if the Germans don't get there, and we will be unable to restart the production, we will shoot you, too."

Baibakov fulfilled both orders, surviving to launch the Soviet Union's postwar development of oil and gas deposits in Siberia. He pushed for massive investment in the industry that would become the backbone of Soviet Union's planned economy, and the foundation for post-Soviet Russia's booming economy.

In 1955, Baibakov was appointed head of Gosplan, the huge Soviet central planning agency that set production quotas and investment levels for industry and agriculture. In that job, he was expected to ensure that what was called "the worker's paradise" delivered on its economic promises.

As top planner, he helped boost industrial production but failed to revive farm production, forcing the Kremlin to buy wheat from the United States and Canada and weakening the Soviet Union's positions in the Cold War.

"The Soviet economy that was formed in the 1960s, 1970s and, partly, the 1980s, was Baibakov's creation," Russia's former economic minister Andrey Nechayev told Rossiiskaya Gazeta daily.

In 1968, Baibakov survived an assassination attempt in Tokyo after a Japanese nationalist attacked him with a wooden sword. The attack was inspired by claims by both countries to sovereignty over four of the Kuril islands, which the Soviets seized in the closing days of WWII.

The issue of control of those islands still divides Japan and Russia.

In Baibakov's role as chief architect of Russia's economy at Gosplan, he and his staff tried to replace the forces of the free market by allocating investment and setting production quotas to anticipate demand. He also struggled to control Soviet military spending as the Moscow engaged in an arms race with Washington.

Gorbachev fired Baibakov in 1985, at the dawn of perestroika, after Baibakov resisted efforts to reform the Soviet economy.

Baibakov was born in 1911 into an oil driller's family in Baku, the capital of the then Soviet republic of Azerbaijan and one of birthplaces of world oil industry. He served in the Red Army in Far East and worked as an oil engineer.

Until his death Baibakov remained an active figure in the oil and gas industry and continued to defend the concept of a planned economy. "He was the knight of the Utopian planned economy," Ruslan Greenberg, director of the Russian economy institute, told the Izvestia daily.

In 1963, he received the medal of the Hero of Socialist Labor, the Soviet Union's highest civilian award, and a passenger ship was named after him in 1995—a privilege reserved for the most respected Communist leaders.

Baibakov is survived by his wife and two children.

He will be buried at the renowned Novodevichye cemetery in Moscow

Buck Knife ban gone, Navy confirms

2008-04-02T13:01:00.000-07:00

Story Source

The Navy has reversed itself regarding a voluntary program in Idaho for residents to raise funds and present veterans returning from military duty in Afghanistan and Iraq with engraved knives from Buck Knives, which is headquartered in the area.

WND reported just a day ago that a ruling from Navy officials was preventing the town from honoring its veterans, because the military personnel were not being allowed to accept the Buck knives.

However, a memo from Navy Capt. Michael Kidd today relieved service men and women of that restriction.

He said there is an exception to the ban on the acceptance of such honorariums, and it appears to apply in this case.

"Under the [ethics rules], gifts offered by non-prohibited sources to a group of personnel that do not distinguish on the basis of official responsibility or favor higher rank or pay may be accepted by those personnel," Kidd's memo said. "This exception applies when all members of a particular unit are offered gifts, which appears to be the case in this instance.

"Also, the donor group has been making similar presentations to the Idaho National Guard personnel and other military units returning from deployment since at least 2003. The current offer is a continuation of this practice and reflects an intent on the part of the donors to make these gifts available to a broad class of personnel returning from deployment," he wrote.

Kidd said personnel are not allowed to accept gifts "if acceptance could create the appearance of impropriety ... such as if the gift's value was excessive and unreasonable under the circumstances or acceptance would create an implied endorsement by the Navy of a non-federal entity."

However, "this does not appear to be the situation in this case. The knives are valued at approximately $100 and there is no indication that the actual presentations would in any manner imply Navy endorsement of a non-federal private entity (such as the manufacturer)," he said.

The general rule, he noted, is that Navy rules prohibit the acceptance by military personnel of certain types of gifts, specifically providing that they "may not accept gifts offered by a prohibited source or given because of the employee's official position."

He concluded that the local volunteers making the presentations did not qualify as a "prohibited source."

A spokeswoman for Buck Knives said a presentation for several dozen returning service members will go forward on Saturday as scheduled. It will be at the Buck offices, where personnel will get special editions of the company's "Vanguard" knife.

An unidentified senior Navy officer recently had told Troy Gilbert, a member of a Hayden, Idaho-based Mobile Construction Battalion, since the value of the knives was more than $20, members of the military were banned from accepting them, according to an earlier report in the Coeur d'Alene Press.

"Who's in charge here anyway? Dumb and Dumber?" asked "davenjan" on the newspaper's forum page.

A spokeswoman for Post Falls Mayor Clay Larkin confirmed that the mayor had discussed the situation with the Navy, and had been informed of the change in the decision.

Earlier, he told the newspaper the ban didn't make any sense.

"I would like to know what top-ranking brass made this decision, and I will personally call them and share my thoughts!" he told the newspaper.

The program was launched several years ago as Graham Crutchfield, a retired Marine, organized the plan to raise money from individuals, service clubs and businesses and work with the company on the commemorative knife presentations.

More than 500 veterans from the region, including those wounded in combat, have been given the knives since 2005, officials said. They also have been presented to family members of those killed in action.

Larkin noted an "interesting part" of the argument is that two generals already have been given – and accepted – the knives, "and never has anyone questioned the presentation or the gift for their service."

Paul Abschier, a World War II vet, told the newspaper. "It's the stupidest thing I've heard of. They've put their lives on the line and they can't receive a knife?"

On the newspaper forum, "Former Ranger," said, "This is utterly ridiculous. When did common sense leave those who are in charge?"

"I still can't believe any service would do such a thing," Crutchfield said. "Megan McClung was a Marine and Annapolis graduate who was killed in Iraq. We gave her parents a knife. Are we saying her life is only worth $20?"

'Silent' famine sweeps globe

2008-04-02T12:57:00.000-07:00

Story Source

WASHINGTON – From India to Africa to North Korea to Pakistan and even in New York City, higher grain prices, fertilizer shortages and rising energy costs are combining to spell hunger for millions in what is being characterized as a global "silent famine."

Global food prices, based on United Nations records, rose 35 percent in the last year, escalating a trend that began in 2002. Since then, prices have risen 65 percent.

Last year, according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization's world food index, dairy prices rose nearly 80 percent and grain 42 percent.

"This is the new face of hunger," said Josetta Sheeran, director of the World Food Program, launching an appeal for an extra $500 million so it could continue supplying food aid to 73 million hungry people this year. "People are simply being priced out of food markets. ... We have never before had a situation where aggressive rises in food prices keep pricing our operations out of our reach."

The WFP launched a public appeal weeks ago because the price of the food it buys to feed some of the world's poorest people had risen by 55 percent since last June. By the time the appeal began last week, prices had risen a further 20 percent. That means WFP needs $700 million to bridge the gap between last year's budget and this year's prices. The numbers are expected to continue to rise.

The crisis is widespread and the result of numerous causes – a kind of "perfect storm" leading to panic in many places:

In Thailand, farmers are sleeping in their fields because thieves are stealing rice, now worth $600 a ton, right out of the paddies.
Four people were killed in Egypt in riots over subsidized flour that was being sold for profit on the black market.
There have been food riots in Morocco, Senegal and Cameroon.
Mexico's government is considering lifting a ban on genetically modified crops, to allow its farmers to compete with the United States.
Argentina, Kazakhstan and China have imposed restrictions to limit grain exports and keep more of their food at home.
Vietnam and India, both major rice exporters, have announced further restrictions on overseas sales.
Violent food protests hit Burkina Faso in February.
Protesters rallied in Indonesia recently, and media reported deaths by starvation.
In the Philippines, fast-food chains were urged to cut rice portions to counter a surge in prices.
Millions of people in India face starvation after a plague of rats overruns a region, as they do cyclically every 50 years.
Officials in Bangladesh warn of an emerging "silent famine" that threatens to ravage the region.

According to some experts, the worst damage is being done by government mandates and subsidies for "biofuels" that supposedly reduce carbon dioxide emissions and fight climate change. Thirty percent of this year's U.S. grain harvest will go to ethanol distilleries. The European Union, meanwhile, has set a goal of 10 percent bio-fuels for all transportation needs by 2010.

"A huge amount of the world's farmland is being diverted to feed cars, not people," writes Gwynne Dyer, a London-based independent journalist.

He notes that in six of the past seven years the human race has consumed more grain than it grew. World grain reserves last year were only 57 days, down from 180 days a decade ago.

One in four bushels of corn from this year's U.S. crop will be diverted to make ethanol, according to estimates.

"Turning food into fuel for cars is a major mistake on many fronts," said Janet Larsen, director of research at the Earth Policy Institute, an environmental group based in Washington. "One, we're already seeing higher food prices in the American supermarket. Two, perhaps more serious from a global perspective, we're seeing higher food prices in developing countries where it's escalated as far as people rioting in the streets."

Palm oil is also at record prices because of biofuel demands. This has created shortages in Indonesia and Malaysia, where it is a staple.

Nevertheless, despite the recognition that the biofuels industry is adding to a global food crisis, the ethanol industry is popular in the U.S. where farmers enjoy subsidies for the corn crops.

Another contributing factor to the crisis is the demand for more meat in an increasingly prosperous Asia. More grain is used to feed the livestock than is required to feed humans directly in a traditional grain-based diet.

Bad weather is another problem driving the world's wheat stocks to a 30-year low – along with regional droughts and a declining dollar.

"This is an additional setback for the world economy, at a time when we are already going through major turbulence," Angel Gurria, head of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, told Reuters. "But the biggest drama is the impact of higher food prices on the poor."

According to the organization, as well as the U.N., the price of corn could rise 27 percent in the next decade.

John Bruton, the European Union's ambassador to the U.S., predicts the current trend is the beginning of a 10-15 year rise in food costs worldwide.

The rodent plague in India occurs about every half century following the heavy flowering of a local species of bamboo, providing the rodents with a feast of high-protein foliage. Once the rats have ravaged the bamboo, they turn on the crops, consuming hundreds of tons of rice and corn supplies.

Survivors of the previous mautam, which heralded widespread famine in 1958, say they remember areas of paddy fields the size of four soccer fields being devastated overnight.

In Africa, rats are seen as part of the answer to the food shortage. According to Africa News, Karamojongs have resorted to hunting wild rats for survival as famine strikes the area.

Supplies of fertilizer are extremely tight on the worldwide market, contributing to a potential disaster scenario. The Scotsman reports there are virtually no stocks of ammonium nitrate in the United Kingdom.

Global nitrogen is currently in deficit, a situation that is unlikely to change for at least three years, the paper reports.

South Koreans are speculating, as they do annually, on how many North Koreans will starve to death before the fall harvest. But this year promises to be worse than usual.

Severe crop failure in the North and surging global prices for food will mean millions of hungry Koreans.

Roughly a third of children and mothers are malnourished, according to a recent U.N. study. The average 8-year-old in the North is 7 inches shorter and 20 pounds lighter than a South Korean child of the same age.

Floods last August ruined part of the main yearly harvest, creating a 25-percent shortfall in the food supply and putting 6 million people in need, according to the U.N. World Food Program.

Yesterday, the Hong Kong government tried to put a stop to panic-buying of rice in the city of 6.9 million as fears mounted over escalating prices and a global rice shortage. Shop shelves were being cleared of rice stocks as Hong Kong people reacted to news that the price of rice imported from Thailand had shot up by almost a third in the past week, according to agency reports.

Global food prices are even hitting home in New York City, according to a report in the Daily News. Food pantries and soup kitchens in the city are desperately low on staples for the area's poor and homeless.

The Food Bank for New York City, which supplies food to 1,000 agencies and 1.3 million people, calls it the worst problem since its founding 25 years ago.

Last year, the Food Bank received 17 million pounds of food through the Emergency Food Assistance Program, less than half of the 35 million pounds it received in 2002. And donations from individuals and corporations are also down about 50 percent, according to the report.

High gas prices, increased food production costs and a move to foreign production of American food are contributing to the problem.

US Combat Deaths Show Sharp Year-to-Year Decline in Iraq

2008-04-01T07:57:00.000-07:00

Story Source

U.S. combat casualties in Iraq during the first 28 days of March are down almost 60 percent from where they were in the same 28-day period of 2007, and those casualties also have declined from where they stood in January, according to a Cybercast News Service analysis of U.S. Defense Department data.

Moreover, the number of combat deaths connected with the use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) also has experienced a significant reduction, the analysis shows.

The Pentagon reported 25 combat casualties for the first 28 days in March, compared with 62 for the same period in 2007. The instances of IED-related casualties also are down sharply from where they were a year ago. There have been 11 such casualties reported so far in the current month versus 46 in the first 28 days of March last year.

Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, who previously served as the second in command of U.S. forces in Iraq, commented on the use of IEDs in response to a question from Cybercast News Service earlier this month, immediately following his lecture at the Heritage Foundation.

The instances of IED-related combat deaths have now reached their lowest levels since the beginning of 2004, he observed. The reductions have been particularly significant in Baghdad, where al Qaeda has been driven out and pushed into the northern part of the country, he said.

Although the use of IEDs has increased recently in Mosul, U.S. offensive operations were beginning to show results in this area as well, Odierno added. Mosul is the capital city of the Ninawa province.

A Cybercast News Service analysis shows the downward trend in U.S. casualty figures began in June of 2007 and accelerated in the final months of the year.

Between June and December of 2007, there were 305 combat-related casualties versus 423 in 2006. That represents a 30 percent decline in combat casualties from 2006 to 2007 for the same seven-month period.

The combat casualties reported last December were the lowest of any month since March 2006.

Combat deaths did spike somewhat in January as the U.S. launched offensive operations against al Qaeda strongholds in the northern part of the country.

Fred Kagan, a scholar with the conservative American Enterprise Institute and a chief architect of the surge strategy, told Cybercast News Service in a previous interview that he anticipates seeing the causality figures rise as U.S. forces pursue al Qaeda operatives in the Diyala, Ninawa, Kirkuk and Salahuddin Provinces.

Now that al Qaeda has been expelled from Baghdad and Anbar Province, the U.S. is in a stronger position to pursue "a defeated enemy" in other parts of Iraq, he explained.

There were 39 combat related deaths in January compared with just 14 in December of 2007. However, the Pentagon reports for February and March of this year show the casualty figures have settled down to the levels recorded toward the end of last year.

The U.S. military is now better equipped to employ counterinsurgency strategies as a result of military doctrines that have been forged in just the past few years, Pete Hegseth, an Iraqi war veteran who served 101st Airborne in 2005 and 2006, told Cybercast News Service in an interview.

"The year of 2007 will been seen as the year of counterinsurgency. It was the year Americans figured out Iraq and learned how to protect the population," he said. "We are more prepared now because we have a doctrine, that's how we train."

Looking back to 2005 any infantry platoon leader who wanted to train for counterinsurgency had to fall back on "dusty manuals from the 1980s" that were not applicable to the dynamics on the ground in Iraq, Hegseth explained.

Hegseth now serves as executive director of Vets for Freedom, a non-partisan organization of combat veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Vets for Freedom is currently touring the nation in an effort to focus public attention on the need for success in both conflicts.

Navy prevents town from honoring vets

2008-04-01T07:54:00.000-07:00

Story Source

A voluntary program in Idaho for residents to raise funds and work with the maker of Buck brand name knives to honor veterans returning from the defense of the U.S. apparently has been torpedoed by military administrative rules regarding the value of gifts.

And the command wasn't sitting well with both members and leaders of the community near Post Falls, where Buck has its corporate headquarters.

"Who's in charge here anyway? Dumb and Dumber?" asked "davenjan" on a forum page in the Coeur d'Alene Press.

Clay Larkin, the Post Falls mayor, said the decision was senseless.

"I would like to know what top-ranking brass made this decision, and I will personally call them and share my thoughts!" he told the newspaper.

The program was launched about three years ago as Graham Crutchfield, a retired Marine, organized the plan to raise money from individuals, service clubs and businesses and work with the company on the commemorative knife program.

More than 500 veterans from the region, including those wounded in combat, have been given the knives since 2005, officials said. They also have been presented to family members of those killed in action.

But then, the newspaper reported, an unidentified senior Navy officer told Troy Gilbert, a member of a Hayden, Idaho-based Mobile Construction Battalion, since the value of the knives was more than $20, members of the military were banned from accepting them, the newspaper said.

Members of the Navy's Judge Advocate General's staff in nearby Washington state deferred a WND request for comment to the Washington headquarters. Officials there did not return messages requesting a comment.

But the Post Falls mayor was more than a little upset.

"I cannot believe what I read this morning about the Navy balking at their seamen receiving a gift from their communities for their service. Where has reality gone?" he said.

"I was in on the first Buck Knife giveaway for the 116th, Charlie Co. National Guard when they came back from Iraq," he continued. "Graham Crutchfield helped me on the fundraising. The looks on their faces when we presented the knives were priceless. Buck Knives employees have come forward and been a major supporter of the project, and I thank them for their involvement!"

He noted an "interesting part" of the argument is that two generals already have been given – and accepted – the knives, "and never has anyone questioned the presentation or the gift for their service," he said.

Paul Abschier, a World War II vet, told the newspaper. "It's the stupidest thing I've heard of. They've put their lives on the line and they can't receive a knife?"

"As a retired lieutenant colonel judge advocate general Army Reserve officer, it is my opinion that gifts exceeding a monetary value of $20 may be kept if they are for meritorious service or achievement," said Kootenai County prosecutor Bill Douglas. "Combat service in Iraq or Afghanistan would certainly fit this criteria."

On the newspaper forum, "Former Ranger," said, "This is utterly ridiculous. When did common sense leave those who are in charge?"

"I still can't believe any service would do such a thing," Crutchfield said. "Megan McClung was a Marine and Annapolis graduate who was killed in Iraq. We gave her parents a knife. Are we saying her life is only worth $20?"

Officials with the knife company did not respond to WND requests for comment.

Obama contends belief in Jesus Christ not necessary for salvation

2008-03-29T09:30:00.000-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

GREENSBORO, N.C. - Senator Barack Obama has told an audience that although he believes Christ died for his sins, those who reject that teaching can also be children of God.

During a campaign stop yesterday in Greensboro, North Carolina, Senator Obama told the audience that he believes he "can have everlasting life" because Jesus Christ died for his sins. But he then told a questioner that he believes Jews and Muslims who live moral lives are just as much "children of God" as he is. (listen to audio clip)

The Illinois Democrat added that his late mother didn't share his faith but was a kind and generous person, so he's "sure she's in heaven." (listen to audio clip)

In his life and in his politics, Obama said he asks himself, "How can I apply Jesus's teachings in a very concrete way?"

Obama's religious beliefs have been put in the spotlight over recent revelations about his former pastor. Videotapes of some of Pastor Jeremiah Wright's sermons have been described as being racist and anti-America.

Yesterday, the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for president referred to those sermon remarks as being "stupid," but he continues to reject suggestions that he should have left the church because of that kind of preaching from his pastor.

9th Circuit upholds constitutionality of Ten Commandments monument

2008-03-29T09:28:00.000-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

Attorney Steve Fitschen is applauding a federal appeals court that has upheld the constitutionality of a Ten Commandments display in a northwest Washington city.

The case involves a six-foot granite monument inscribed with the Ten Commandments that sits near the Old City Hall in Everett, Washington. The local chapter of the Fraternal Order of Eagles donated the monument to the city in 1959 -- and no one complained about it for more than 30 years. In its ruling in Card v. City of Everett, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the display does not have a solely religious purpose.

Steven W. Fitschen, president of the National Legal Foundation, says the case shows the true agenda of liberal groups. Americans, he argues, should not have to abandon their religious heritage in order to appease someone's political agenda -- an agenda he says is not even hidden.

"There is an agenda -- there's no doubt about it," says Fitschen. "Just go on the Internet [and] look at the websites of folks like the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, American Atheists -- and [it's] very clear about what they're trying to do."

The agenda of such groups is to rewrite history and remove any mention or acknowledgment of the God of the Bible, says the attorney, who believes it is important to defend the country's national heritage from revisionists.

"This country was founded as a Christian nation," he points out. "Yes, there is religious pluralism, but we don't need to lie about the past." Instead, says Fitschen, Americans "need to honor ... and build on the past -- not rewrite history."

Foreboding oil future called 'grim reality'

2008-03-28T08:11:00.000-07:00

Story Source

The oil industry's foreboding future is a "grim reality" that cannot be ignored, according to a Houston oil industry investment banker.

Matt Simmons told CNBC's Squawk Box program there is no getting around the declining potential for the industry.

His was one of a series of guests on the CNBC program to address the theory of peak oil, the contention that the world is in an irreversible downslide of oil production.

According to a transcript provided to WND by CNBC, Simmons said the grim reality of the world is that, "Oil company executives today are overlooking the fact they're in liquidation.

"No matter how much money they tend to spend, they just can't get ahead of their decline curves and their proven reserves are shrinking rapidly," he said.

As WND reported last week, John Hofmeister, the Houston-based president of Shell Oil’s U.S. operations appeared on CNBC and expressed doubt about the validity of peak oil theory, arguing that although Simmons' theory has "swamped the world," his "hypotheses are too narrow."

Hofmeister stressed Simmons' analyses had failed to account for unconventional oil, such as oil recovered from the tar sands in Alberta, Canada, a resource producing sufficient supplies for Canada to have assumed the position of the leading supplier of foreign oil to the U.S.

The peak oil theory involves a Malthusian fear the world's oil resources are finite and will be completely exhausted at a future date.

In his CNBC appearance, Simmons dismissed unconventional resources as a solution.

"It's very convenient to turn to Canada, where a single contract can theoretically give you the ability to produce that oil for 50 or 60 years that can boost your reserves," he said.

"Shell has a project in the oil sands area that they have been talking about for the last few years to increase their daily production by 100,000 barrels a day," he continued. "The last cost estimates I saw in the press were about $14 billion to do so. Shell is not sure if they can go ahead. At the prime of Saudi Arabia's oil, two wells produced 100,000 barrels a day."

He further argued that converting the tar sands to oil "takes an incredible amount of potable water that should be converted to agriculture," while consuming natural gas "to create enough steam to blow the oil sands and melt the tar."

Simmons stressed that oil coming from the Canadian tar sands is of low quality and must be upgraded with high quality oil to create crude.

"So, you're turning gold into lead," Simmons emphasized, diminishing the importance of the Canadian tar sands as an oil resource that could reverse peak oil predictions.

Simmons further argued that $100 a barrel was still a "very cheap" price for oil.

"As I continue to point out [$100 a barrel for oil] is 15 cents a cup," he said. "If anyone in the major oil company community would like to argue that 15 cents a cup for crude oil is an astonishing high price, I'd like to hear it."

Shell Oil disagrees.

In an annual strategy update given last week, the Dutch head of Shell Oil internationally said the company's Canadian business is at the center of its wider ambitions to meet growing energy demand worldwide, according to a report published in The Guardian.

Currently, the Anglo-Dutch Shell Oil Company is producing 155,000 barrels a day from the tar sands, with plans to raise this amount to 500,000.

The Guardian further reported Shell Oil has applied for a license in Canada to enable it to increase production to 770,000 barrels a day.

The peak oil theory, first propounded by Shell Oil geoscientist M. King Hubbert in 1956, has come under increasing criticism in recent years, as repeated predictions of world oil depletion have failed to match empirical data documenting increasing oil reserves.

For instance, data produced by the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration currently shows 1.3 trillion barrels of proven oil reserves worldwide, more than ever in recorded history, despite a doubling in world oil consumption since the 1970s.

In what has become a contentious worldwide debate over whether peak oil is fact or fiction, Simmons typically dismisses statistics that fail to meet his depletion models.

"The EIA has been as inept at forecasting oil outlook in both production and prices as anyone, yet so few ever remember their awful forecasts," Simmons wrote in an exchange of e-mails over the Easter weekend with WND involving several prominent peak oil advocates.

"If you took the EIA at its word, we would now be paying about $17.50 a barrel for crude oil," he wrote.

"The USGS [United States Geological Survey] record is about as bad," he continued. "How these mega-organizations got energy so wrong is baffling to me."

Simmons, author of the book entitled, "Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy," bases his conclusions largely on his analysis of 240 Society of Petroleum Engineers papers evidencing depletion statistics in Saudi wells.

Appearing on CNBC, Hofmeister also questioned whether Simmons' models accurately estimated the probability of new discoveries of previously unknown oil reserves.

"Simmons is also basing his conclusions on a particular study of one country, Saudi Arabia, while there are a whole lot of other reserves around the world we're still discovering," Hofmeister said on CNBC. "Some day we will peak, but not because we don't have enough oil."

WND has reported new finds of ultra-deep underwater oil being found by Chevron offshore from Louisiana in the Gulf of Mexico and by Brazil's Petroleo Brasileiro offshore in the Atlantic Ocean, each location apparently containing billions of barrels of economically recoverable oil.

In another of his Easter weekend e-mails, Simmons was dismissive that deep-earth oil found offshore will reverse peak oil predictions.

"The great Brazil find, as best laid out in the February issue of World Oil, is a great example of a handful of extremely expensive, rank wildcat wells finding at least traces of hydrocarbons," Simmons wrote.

"But until scores of other wells that are both flow-tested and also cored, there is no solid idea of how much oil might ever be recovered," he continued. "Given the severe deepwater rig shortage, it might take a decade or more to genuinely test the Santos Basin.

"I would be delighted to be wrong on all this," Simmons wrote, "but too much hard data is too specific, and the optimist case is all faith-based theories."

Reading carefully the report filed by contributing editor Arthur Berman in the February issue of World Oil to which Simmons referred, it is clear the current exploration of "three super-giant oil fields in Brazil's offshore Santos Basin" is yet in an exploratory phase.

Yet Berman called these new discoveries "the most important oilfield discoveries in decades," estimating one of the fields could prove to be "the third-largest oil field in the world."

Directly contradicting Simmons, Berman argued, "The real message of these discoveries is that we must not lose sight of the as-yet unknown, but possibly great potential of basins that are often the exclusive domain of national oil companies."

Finally, as WND has recently reported, new scientific discoveries have produced important evidence supporting the abiotic theory of the origin of oil.

Scientists have recently reported abiotic liquid hydrocarbons exuding from the mantle of the earth in fissures such as the Lost City Hydrothermal Field on the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean and abundant abiotic liquid methane on Titan, the giant moon of Saturn, found by the Cassini-Huygens mission jointly launched by NASA, the European Space Agency and the Italian Space Agency.

Traditional petro-geologists have maintained that oil is a biological in origin, arising from organic material deposited in sedimentary soil.

The organic theory of the origin of oil has served as a logical underpinning of the tautology at the heart of the peak oil theory.

Only a finite amount of biological material was deposited in sedimentary soil capable of forming oil, so there has to be a finite amount of oil.

The abiotic theory suggests that oil is formed naturally in the mantle of the earth by chemical reactions such as are described in the Fisher-Tropsch equations the Nazis developed to make synthetic oil from coal prior to World War II.

The abiotic theory of the origin of oil would suggest more deep-earth discoveries of oil should be forthcoming, especially since the industry has until recently lacked the technology to find and recover cost-effectively offshore oil.

With over 70 percent of the earth covered by water, much previously unexplored territory remains to be explored for oil, as ultra-deep oil drilling technology continues to progress.

However Simmons ridiculed the idea of abiotic oil, calling it "Buck Rogers to the 9th degree."

Teachers union to decide fate of homeschooling?

2008-03-28T08:05:00.000-07:00

Story Source

A California court has asked a teachers' union to provide its opinion on homeschooling, and the resulting decision will impact the rights of parents in the state to determine their own children's education.

As WND reported one day ago, the California Court of Appeal for the 2nd Appellate District granted a petition for rehearing in a juvenile case involving the family of Phillip and Mary Long.

The previous decision determined parents have neither statutory nor constitutional authority to school their children, causing a backlash of surprise and horror from homeschooling advocates across the nation, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The new order confirms the court is expanding its decision far beyond a single juvenile case to include an assessment of all state laws and opinions regarding homeschooling, as well as an evaluation of whether the state provisions follow the U.S. Constitution.

Additionally, the court asked the state's superintendent of public instruction, the California State Board of Education, the Los Angeles school district, the California Teachers Association and the Los Angeles teachers' union for their opinions on homeschooling.

The court denied a request by Sunland Christian School, the independent program in which the Long children were enrolled, to participate directly in the case.

Instead, it granted that school permission to file an amicus brief on the issues. Other homeschooling interests were invited to file such briefs, and the court said they would be considered.

Oral arguments are scheduled in June.

The court's opinion said the homeschooling case arose from a dependency case brought in juvenile court. In the process, attorneys assigned by the court to the family's two younger children sought a court order for them to be enrolled in a public or qualifying private school.

The district court denied the request, but the appellate court overturned the decision and granted the attorneys' request.

The appeals court noted its first opinion concluded the parents held neither a statutory right nor a constitutional right to provide homeschooling to their own children.

The court said its new ruling, when it is issued, will address whether state law allows homeschooling and, if so, under what circumstances, whether parents are allowed to homeschool their own children and whether California limits meet the demands of the U.S. Constitution.

Among the groups working on the case are the Alliance Defense Fund and Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation, who are representing the father.

"Parents have a fundamental right to make educational choices for their children," said Gary McCaleb, a senior counsel for the ADF. "Because this ruling impacts all of Californians, we believe the case deserves a second look."

"Another look at this case will help ensure that the fundamental rights of parents are fully protected," Kreep added.

The original ruling concluded parents who educate their children at home could be criminally liable under California law. Homeschooling advocates also warned if that would happen, civil charges for child neglect and others also could be added to the mix, creating the potential for fines, court-ordered parenting classes or even the loss of custody under extreme circumstances.

The original opinion, written by Appeals Court Judge H. Walt Croskey, said: "We find no reason to strike down the Legislature's evaluation of what constitutes an adequate education scheme sufficient to promote the 'general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence. … We agree … 'the educational program of the State of California was designed to promote the general welfare of all the people and was not designed to accommodate the personal ideas of any individual in the field of education.'"

The appeals ruling said California law requires "persons between the ages of six and 18" to be in school, "the public full-time day school," with exemptions being allowed for those in a "private full-time day school" or those "instructed by a tutor who holds a valid state teaching credential for the grade being taught."

Also involved in the case on behalf of the parents is the Home School Legal Defense Association, which said it would seek permission to file amicus briefs on the issues.

A long list of homeschool groups working in the state previously released a statement on the issue that could affect 200,000 students. Joining were the California Homeschool Network, Christian Home Educators Association of California, Private and Home Educators of California and HomeSchool Association of California.

"We are united in the goal of protecting the right of parents to teach their children private at home without additional governmental interference," the statement said. "We believe that children deserve to learn in the environment that best meets their individual needs. We support the right of parents to direct their children's education including, if they desire, teaching their children privately at home apart from any public school program and without a teaching credential."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the president has supported homeschoolers in the past.

"I'm sure it [the ruling] will probably be appealed, and then we'll see how it goes from there," she said.

Among the other responses have been:

1) Assemblyman Joel Anderson has proposed a resolution in the California Legislature that calls for the ruling to be overturned.

2) Gov. Schwarzenegger said, "if the courts don't protect parents' rights, then, as elected officials, we will."

3) California Supt. of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell said, "Parents still have the right to homeschool in this state."

4) A separate petition appeals to Schwarzenegger and the Legislature is being run by the Pacific Justice Institute, which is working with the website PetitionsToday.org.

5) And yet another petition also is under way, at the ReverseTheRuling.com website. That organization offers information for homeschoolers who want to follow the California case, because of that state's influence throughout the nation. It was assembled by the organization Learning By Grace, an outreach dedicated to providing parents with innovative online Christian homeschool materials.

Even students are getting their say.

"The court cannot 'make' something illegal – that's the legislature's job. Sheesh!" wrote Jon Chi Lou, of Heritage Christian High School.

And Hye-Sung F. Gehring added, "This is ridiculous. California is retarded. Always has been."

The HSLDA also is suggesting an amendment to the U.S. Constitution specifically recognizing parental rights. That effort already is under way under the banner of Parental Rights.

Pacific Justice also is representing Sunland Christian School in the case.

Emergency C-section at 8½ months delivers 'non-person'

2008-03-26T09:28:00.000-07:00

Story Source

A Colorado judge has dismissed charges against a man who caused a fatal car crash, because the victim, at 8½ months of a pregnancy, had only been scheduled for a C-section to be born, and that had not yet happened at the time of the crash.

"'Person' is a defined term for purposes of the homicide statutes," wrote Judge Richard Gurley in a March 20 decision in the case involving the death of Lileigh Lehnen, the born-alive daughter of 26-year-old Shea Lehnen.

"The definition states that 'person,' when referring to the victim of a homicide, means a human being who had been born and was alive at the time of the homicidal act," the judge said.

Lileigh Lehnen was born during an emergency C-Section after the November 2007 accident that was triggered when Logan Lage, 24, apparently drove on the wrong side of the road and crashed his vehicle headon into Lehnen's car.

Lileigh Lehnen lived several hours and died of asphyxia, according to Mesa County Deputy Coroner Rob Kurtzman, who concluded the baby's death was a homicide and said the collision damaged the mother's placenta, limiting blood flow to the newborn.

Lage faced a series of charges because of the baby's death, but his public defender, Will McNulty, challenged them on the grounds that the state law excluded the baby from the possibility of being a homicide victim.

The judge's order, which was posted online by the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel, said Colorado law doesn't allow Lileigh Lehnen to be considered either a "person" or a "child" at the time of the crash.

"I'm not happy at all," District Attorney Pete Hautzinger told the newspaper. "It's a very murky part of the law."

On the newspaper forum, the comments were running mostly on one side.

"He murdered that family's child," wrote JM. "Only his weapon of choice was a vehicle. … I think that it is disgusting that we, as a society, allow people to get off with killing and hurting children."

"I would say it's high time that we de'MURK'ify Colorado law in such cases. … If I was Lileigh's mother, I would appeal. We should push for legislation to correct this gross error in our state law," added Aunt B.

That's exactly what spokeswoman Kristi Burton of Colorado for Equal Rights has planned.

Her organization is proposing a change to the state Constitution that would declare the term "person" shall include "any human from the time of fertilization."

"This outrageous ruling is a clear example of they hypocrisy of Colorado law," said Burton. "If a child like Lileigh is not a person, what is she? There is no other answer. However, this case effectively illustrates the current state of our laws in Colorado and across the nation. Some states would recognize Lileigh's rights as a person, yet Colorado does not. It's high time we change this and clarify what a person actually is in Colorado. Our Human Life Amendment can lay the needed foundation to bring justice to people like Shea and Lileigh Lehnen."

Burton noted that had the same accident happened in California, the responsible party could have been charged with Lileigh's death.

"Once the Colorado Human Life Amendment gets on the ballot, it will go a long way in protecting people who currently have no protection under Colorado laws. This amendment is supported by common sense and by science. As Dr. Jerome LeJeune, an internationally recognized geneticist, wrote, 'Life has a very, very long history but each individual has a very neat beginning: the moment of its conception,'" Burton said.

Colorado for Equal Rights is collecting signatures to put the issue on the November ballot. Several states have similar efforts. Pro-life activists view the strategy as a direct attack on the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the U.S. Constitution grants a right to abortion.

Burton said it appears at this point Colorado's plan has the best chance of reaching the ballot. The state Supreme Court has approved the initiative's wording and form, and the group already has collected about 40,000 petition signatures of the 76,000 needed by May.

The plan also has earned the support of one-time GOP presidential candidate former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and members of the Colorado Legislature.

State Sen. Greg Brophy Wray told a Denver television station, "Clearly it's always the right time to take the stand for the sanctity of life."

Colorado's plan would grant personhood to the unborn from the moment of fertilization, meaning state and local laws protecting any individual life would be applied to the unborn. It targets a loophole the U.S. Supreme Court created when it issued the original Roe v. Wade opinion.

The opinion said: "(If the) suggestion of personhood [of the preborn] is established, the [abortion rights] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment."

While the change in the state constitution would not also change the criminal statutes at issue in this case, Burton said it is a first step towards having those reflect the lives of the unborn.

"The plain language of the definition could not be any clearer," wrote Gurley. "To qualify as a 'person,' three conditions must obtain at the time of the homicidal act: (1) the victim is a human being; (2) the victim has already been born; and (3) the victim is still alive…

"The only act in this case that could possibly qualify as the homicidal act occurred when Defendant drove on the wrong side of the road at high speed and collided with a vehicle being operated by Shea Lehnen. The People do not suggest otherwise. Lileigh Lehnen had not yet been born at this time," the judge said.

'Gay hate campaign' targets Oklahoma lawmaker

2008-03-26T09:10:00.001-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

Conservative groups are rushing to the defense of an Oklahoma lawmaker who has been branded a "gay basher" for decrying the homosexual lifestyle.

Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern (R) sparked an angry uproar in many liberal circles recently when she declared that "the homosexual agenda is destroying the nation" and is a bigger threat to the U.S. than terrorism or Islam. She also stated that "studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than a few decades." Kern has subsequently said she meant to say "generations" instead of "decades."

After a homosexual activist group posted her comments on YouTube, Kern has been accused of homophobia, bigotry and "Republican hate speech," among other things. Peter LaBarbera with the conservative group Americans for Truth About Homosexuality says a "torrent of homosexual hate" was unleashed against Representative Kern, including some messages threatening physical harm, prompting her to hire a bodyguard.

According to LaBarbera, those attacking Kern did some "careful editing" to a secretly recorded copy of her speech.

"For example, they left out the part where she says, 'The book that I base my life upon is God's Word, and it says to love everybody -- and I try to love everybody, but not everybody's lifestyle is equal.' Well," he continues, "they just started with the part where it says 'not everybody's lifestyle is equal.' They didn't want to have Sally Kern on tape saying that she loves everybody."

The Americas for Truth spokesman argues that the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund, which posted the redacted version of her speech, is trying to make example of Kern. "They are trying to show that if you speak out forcefully against the gay agenda in this country, that you will be demonized [and that] this flood of hate will be unleashed against you -- and that's what they did," he states.

LaBarbera says although it is debatable that the homosexual agenda is a larger threat than terrorism, most social conservatives would agree that homosexual activism is a threat to the U.S. The Thomas More Law Center has agreed to represent Kern should she face any legal action for her comments.

Canada orders ministry

2008-03-22T11:54:00.000-07:00

Story Source

The Canadian government has ordered a Christian ministry that teaches doctrine and the differences between Christians and cults shut down because its reference materials were "critical" of the beliefs of those who are not Christian, WND has learned.

So what used to be called MacGregor Ministries with offerings in how to recognize and eliminate "faulty fads" in Christian churches has been re-created in the United States, and now operates under the name MM Outreach Media Ministries.

Lorri MacGregor, who has dedicated her life to explaining the straight and narrow of Christian beliefs since she found her way out of the Jehovah's Witness system years ago, told WND Canada's version of a "hate crimes" law prevented their work from continuing as it had for nearly 30 years.

"Canada is no longer a Christian nation," she said. "And watch out America!"

The issue of the ministry's charities license in Canada, allowing it to operate as a ministry, came up during a routine audit of the ministry's finances, which was uneventful.

"The auditor that originally looked at our books told us her supervisor had said she wanted us shut down," Mrs. MacGregor told WND. "Canada has very strong hate laws."

She said the ministry points out the differences between Christianity and various cult beliefs, but also with respect, and never as a proponent. She said the work always is in response to a question or issue.

"When a group such as Jehovah's Witnesses said of our doctrine we're worshipping a freakish three-headed God (the Trinity), we should be able to respond," she said. "We say, 'Here's the doctrine of the Trinity and here is where it is in the Scripture.'"

That, however, violates Canada's hate crimes laws, and the ministry was ordered to either make wholesale changes in its presentations, or shut down.

"There was nothing we could do that would please them," she said. "They wanted us every time we criticized something to say, 'So Christianity is equal to Buddhism, Islam, Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses… Just decide for yourself.'"

"We cannot do that," she said of the work she and her husband, Keith, have spent their lives assembling.

"She gave us an ultimatum that we needed to say that all religions are equal, Lorri MacGregor was to stop writing our magazine on the cults, we were to remove our websites and stop selling any products to help [teach about] the cults, and any future DVDs that we do on the Bible must not be persuasive," the couple alerted friends in an e-mail. "We could not live under those restrictions."

"We chose to shut down the ministry and we are in Washington to sign papers to start up a U.S. corporation and also start the long process of applyign for 501(c)3 status in the U.S. We have been told that within five to 10 years, the U.S. government will be in the same position as the Canadian government and t hey will also go after Christian apologetics groups," the alert continued.

"It was a no-win situation. We didn't want to see our charity money eaten up by lawyers," Mrs. MacGregor told WND. "It was heart-wrenching."

"We wrote on Feb. 7 and voluntarily revoked our [license] ourselves," she said. "We said this auditor requires us to compromise our Christian faith, which we cannot do."

The ministry entered into the expense of relocating its corporate structure into the United States, and is in the process of applying for that nation's tax-exempt status offered mission organizations.

"You're not allowed in Canada to speak in a persuasive way about your own faith," she said.

The effort cost considerable funds, although Mrs. MacGregor didn't want to provide dollar figures on their loss through the changeover. "We had been saving up to build a studio, because we don't believe in debt," she said. "At the moment we are ready to start construction, the government moved in to shut us down."

"They said if we were just preaching our own Gospel, and weren't criticizing anybody else, we could continue," she said. "If you're going to defend the Gospel, you've got to criticize sometimes."

For example, the ministry addresses the issue of "fads," including a "creeping Eastern mysticism" appearing in some churches, "turning meaningful prayer meetings into mind-emptying rituals called contemplative prayer promising experiences of a spiritual nature."

"Feelings have often replaced the solid word of God," the website warns.

"Numerous churches have become 'seeker' churches, disposing of the parts of the Gospel message that might offend anyone's lifestyle. Crowds come to hear contemporary music, followed by a feel-good message, and perhaps even a 'conversion' experience, to an all-accepting Jesus. No change required! They now consider themselves Christians, but are they?"

Regarding Mormons, they have a list of cautions:

1) "Mormons won't tell you that all their so-called scriptures such as the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine and Covenants, and even their official 'Mormon Doctrine' statements contradict each other…"

2) "Mormons won't tell you that the reason the Book of Mormon has no maps is because there is not one scrap of archaeological evidence to support it!"

3) "Mormons won't tell you that their prophet Joseph Smith was heavily involved in the occult when he founded Mormonism."

4) "Mormons won't tell you that that they encourage visitations from dead relatives from the 'spirit world,' a practice forbidden in the Bible. (Deuteronomy 18:10- 12.)"

They also note the misguided teachings of others.

"Neale Donald Walsch who wrote the bestseller Conversations with God says, 'Hitler went to heaven' (Neale Donald Walsch, Conversations with God: An Uncommon Dialogue, Book 2, Hampton Roads Publishing Company, Inc., 1997; p. 35) And the reason according to Walsh 'There is no hell, so there is no place else for him to go.'"

"The Bible states that the ONLY WAY to heaven is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. Universalism teaches that there is not just one way of salvation but many different ways. The Christian inclusivists state salvation is by grace through faith in Christ alone, but they change the meaning to be that His grace extends out to those who do not believe (not needing faith) because he died for them too," the website teaches.

WND previously has reported how proposals are being made in Canada to raise taxes and fees on churches dramatically, as well as ban them from meeting in some locations.

WND also has reported on how many Biblical standards of behavior are under attack by the "bastardized courts" of Canada, where activists who claim they have "hurt feelings" are demanding – and getting – penalties imposed against those who oppose the homosexual lifestyle.

It also has reported on the times that "hate crimes" legislation for the United States has been considered in Congress.

Pastor recommends armed guards for churches

2008-03-22T11:50:00.000-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. - The senior pastor at a megachurch where a gunman killed two teenage sisters before being shot by a church volunteer recommends that all churches have armed guards.

The Rev. Brady Boyd, pastor of New Life Church, made the comments just before convening a free forum on church security that drew participants from about 120 Colorado churches.

"We've had contemporary experience that can help others," Boyd said, referring to the Dec. 9 shootings at the church. "We just don't want this to happen anywhere else."

Matthew Murray, 24, killed two people at a suburban Denver missionary training center and several hours later killed the two girls in the New Life parking lot. He committed suicide after he was shot and wounded by a volunteer security guard, who was credited with saving untold lives.

The forum, which was hosted by police and New Life security staff and closed to the media, included discussions on emergency planning, assessing potential dangerous situations, the role of church greeters and ushers, and how to recruit security staff, said Colorado Springs police officer Dave Husted.

Boyd said that New Life now has uniformed police officers patrolling the premises during Sunday services.

Several U.S. churches have been quietly adding armed guards in recent years, while others have avoided the practice because they either don't have the money or don't want to appear like a fortress.

Mississippi pro-life bills die in committee

2008-03-20T06:01:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Two key pro-life bills passed by the Mississippi State Senate have died in a House committee. Pro-life activist Tonya Britton is outraged at the lack of action by her state's lawmakers to protect innocent human life and young girls who've been the victims of sexual assault.

State Senator Alan Nunnlee sponsored the Child Protection Act, which would have required abortion providers to report sex crimes against minors; and a measure that would have prohibited the unlawful distribution of the abortion-inducing drug RU-486. Pro-life supporters were hoping for passage of the basic measures to hold abortion providers accountable for failing to disclose information on child rapists, and to restrict access to a drug that causes the death of a baby at the earliest stages of development.

Tonya Britton is president of Pro-Life Mississippi, which is based in Jackson, the state capital. She is outraged and disappointed at Mississippi Democrats.

"The Democratic Party in this state, and in this country, has systematically refused to honor the wishes of the majority of the people," laments Britton. "They also don't seem to understand that the targeted discrimination against the unborn is actually robbing them of votes."

Britton says it is outrageous that black Democratic lawmakers across the country refuse to acknowledge that they have the power to stop, or at least slow down, the number-one killer of black babies in America -- abortion.

'This is America. When ordering, please speak English'

2008-03-20T05:59:00.000-07:00

Story Source

A Philadelphia restaurant has been cleared of a discrimination complaint triggered by the owner's sign telling patrons, "This is America. When ordering, please speak English."

"This is a great victory," owner Joey Vento told WND today after the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations ruled his sign could stay in the window of Gino's Steaks South Philadelphia landmark store.

The controversy began in October 2005 when Vento put up a small bumper-sticker size sign.

On June 12, 2006, the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations launched on its own initiative a discrimination case against Vento. It alleged the sign violated the city's Fair Practice Ordinance by discouraging the business of non-English speaking people, including, most importantly, Hispanic-speaking immigrants.

"Joey is now totally vindicated," his lawyer Al Weiss of the Philadelphia firm Blinder & Weiss told WND in a telephone interview. "The Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations found Joey was within First Amendment rights to post the sign at his business."

Weiss told WND he was surprised Vento won at this level.

"We fully expected to lose the case before this commission," Weiss said. "The commission itself brought the complaint and heard the complaint. We thought we were going to lose and have to appeal, but the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations did the right thing."

"There was no testimony in the eight-hour hearing that found Joey or Gino Steaks did anything that violated the law," he said. "Joey never turned away anybody from any protected group from getting served at the restaurant."

During the controversy, Vento got national print media coverage and publicity that included multiple interviews on talk radio and appearances on Fox News.

"This is the sign that woke up the United States of America," Vento proudly proclaimed.

He told WND Gino's Steaks serves an estimated 1 million sandwiches every year.

"I didn't want to take somebody's money and end up giving them the wrong sandwich, just because they couldn't speak English," he explained. "Sure, we're a melting pot, but what binds us together is the English language."

"Teddy Roosevelt was right," he continued. "Immigrants have to realize we have room in this country for one language, and that's the English language. We're all one people, the American people, and we should all speak one language, the English language."

"I'm an American of Italian descent, but I don't go around telling people I'm an Italian-American. I always say I'm American-Italian. If you are a true American, then put America first."

Vento said he always took the sign positively.

"To succeed in this country it helps to speak English. It's as simple as that."

According to a press release by the Southeastern Legal Foundation, a group that assisted in Vento's defense, Vento was threatened with fines and potential contempt.

"On behalf of Joey Vento and the hundreds of thousands of free speech supporters who spoke out during this attack on Mr. Vento's free speech rights, we are pleased by the conclusions of the Commission," said Shannon L. Goessling, executive director and chief legal council for the Southeastern Legal Foundation.

"Joey serves as an inspiring example for all Americans who choose to speak their minds in the public forum," she continued. "'Courage under fire' describes this man and his efforts on the issue."

In its 11-page decision, the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations ruled, "The posted signage does not have the effect, result or consequence of communicating that the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of his business will be refused, withheld or denied or that the patronage any person within a protected category under the ordinance is unwelcome, objectionable or not acceptable, desired or solicited."

Vento said, "You have to assimilate here so the U.S. becomes your first country."

"Throughout the controversy, I never took the sign down," he said. "Now I want to thank everybody who supported me."

Anything that grows 'can convert into oil'

2008-03-19T19:25:00.000-07:00

Story Source

After three years of clandestine development, a Georgia company is now going public with a simple, natural way to convert anything that grows out of the Earth into oil.

J.C. Bell, an agricultural researcher and CEO of Bell Bio-Energy, Inc., says he's isolated and modified specific bacteria that will, on a very large scale, naturally change plant material – including the leftovers from food – into hydrocarbons to fuel cars and trucks.

"What we're doing is taking the trash like corn stalks, corn husks, corn cobs – even grass from the yard that goes to dump – that's what we can turn into oil," Bell told WND. "I'm not going to make asphalt, we're only going to make the things we need. We're going to make gasoline for driving, diesel for our big trucks."

The agricultural researcher made the discovery after standing downwind from his cows at his food-production company, Bell Plantation, in Tifton, Ga.

"Cows are like people that eat lots of beans. They're really, really good at making natural gas," he said. "It dawned on me that that natural gas was methane."

Bell says he wondered what digestive process inside a cow enabled it to change food into the hydrocarbon molecules of methane, so he began looking into replicating and speeding up the process.

"Through genetic manipulation, we've changed the naturally occurring bacteria, so they eat and consume biomass a little more efficiently," he said. "It works. There's not even any debate that it works. It really is an all-natural, simple process that cows use on a daily basis."

But does he think it will make environmentalists happy?

"They love this. We had one totally recognizable environmentalist from Hollywood say this is everything they ever had hoped for," Bell said. "This could be considered the ultimate recycling of carbon. We are using the energy of the sun through the plant. We're not introducing any new carbon [to the environment]."

The research has received strong support from the U.S. Department of Defense, Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture and committees in both chambers of Congress, and Bell plans further discussions in Washington, D.C., next week.

He expects to have the first pilot plant for the process running within two to three months, and will operate those for a year to collect engineering data to design full-scale production facilities. He thinks the larger facilities will be producing oil "inside the next two years."

And just how much oil is in Bell's bio-forecast?

"With minor changes in the agricultural and forestry products, we could create two to two and a half tons of biomass a year, and you're looking at 5 billion barrels of oil per year. That would be about two-thirds of what we use now."

Turning some of nature's produce into energy has been done for years, especially when it comes to the conversion of corn and cellulose-based products into ethanol, used to extend gasoline volume and boost octane.

The Energy Information Administration says in 2005, total U.S. ethanol production was 3.9 billion gallons, or 2.9 percent of the total gasoline pool.

Bell admits his bacterial breakthrough has been kept under wraps until now, but he plans to explain it all once his website is fully operational.

"We're actually gonna tell people how we do it, with streaming video. We're to the point now with our patent that we can say more and we fully intend to.

"We want to develop public support so they can understand what we're doing; to develop political support, because this is a combination of making the United States more independent from foreign oil sources; make [the country] healthier from an economic point of view; and it goes a long way to solving the environmental problems a lot of people are concerned about."

When asked why he thought no one else has patented this process, Bell answered, "It literally is because it's too simple. Everyone was looking for a real complicated mechanism. We looked at how it occurs naturally. But it's now going to develop in a hurry."

Recalling other great inventions, Bell cited on another person with his last name.

"Alexander Graham Bell put together stuff that was already on the shelf and made a phone. I don't want to compare myself to the great inventors. I'm not there yet, but to be able to look at simple things and create things from them, that's how we think in this company."

Congressional Hispanic Caucus wants to bring back amnesty this year

2008-03-19T19:20:00.000-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

A California-based immigration reform group says even though it's unlikely that Congress is going to pass any significant legislation dealing with immigration until after the 2008 elections, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus is apparently going to try anyway.

Californians for Population Stabilization (CAP) says Caucus chairman Representative Joe Baca (D-California) has been leading the effort to revive legislation that would grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S. CAP spokesman Rick Oltman suggests that after successive defeats of similar legislation in years past, there is only one reason why amnesty proponents want to craft such a bill at this time: they want to encourage more illegal immigration.

"There isn't a snowball's chance that there's going to be an amnesty passed this year -- and everybody knows that," Oltman exclaims. "And so one has to ask the question: who benefits from this discussion? And the fact is, those who want to see the continued influx of illegal immigration, they're the ones that benefit."

The continued debate on the matter plays well with lawmakers' Latino constituents, says the immigration reform advocate. "If you're sitting in some country where there's no opportunity, and you know somebody who has already made it to America ... and then you start to hear the president of the United States or a congressman, or in this case the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, all chatting up some sort of legalization that could induce you to finally get moving and get to America -- that's what it is all about," argues Oltman. "It is very transparent."

Oltman says the effect of any future amnesty bill would be devastating on the U.S. because some estimates point to an illegal population ranging from 20 to 40 million people.

U.S. loses No. 1 ranking as dollar drops

2008-03-18T13:54:00.000-07:00

Story Source

The European Union has overtaken the U.S. as the world's No. 1 economy due to the continued dramatic fall of the dollar, according to a Reuters report.

The U.S. Gross Domestic Product, or GDP, for 2007 is officially estimated at $13,843,800 billion. The 2007 GDP for the 15 EU countries is estimated at 8,847,889 billion euros, the report said.

That means when the euro yesterday topped $1.56, the EU officially became the largest economy in the world.

In a Financial Times commentary published Monday, former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan declared the current financial crisis in the U.S. "is likely to be judged in retrospect as the most wrenching" since the end of World War II.

Greenspan further concluded the U.S. financial crisis will not end until "home prices stabilize and with them the value of equity in homes supporting troubled mortgage securities."

Dollar in crisis

WND has reported the Federal Reserve is in a dilemma. As the Fed continues to lower rates to stimulate the sagging economy, the dollar is increasingly abandoned, hitting new lows almost every day against other major currencies.

If the Fed were to raise rates to prop up the dollar, most Wall Street experts would expect a broad sell-off of U.S. stocks across the board.

Today, before the opening of the New York Stock Exchange, the dollar was trading at a new low, $1.5787 against the euro.

Just yesterday, the dollar hit a new all-time low in foreign currency exchange markets, closing at 71.44 on the U.S. Dollar Index.

Home Equity Foreclosures Hit Bank Assets

Meanwhile, the crisis in the home equity market is spreading to impact major financial institutions.

Over the weekend, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury intervened, guaranteeing J.P. Morgan Chase's bargain basement purchase for a mere $2 per share of then in free-fall Bear Stearns, the 85-year-old Wall Street investment bank that had survived the Depression and two world wars.

Today, Wall Street is pressuring the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee to drop rates on federal funds as much as 1 percent, a nearly unprecedented one-time adjustment.

Fed Funds rates, now at 3 percent, reached a high of 5.25 percent in January 2007.

Since September, the Fed has been engaged in a series of rate cuts, trying to keep ahead of the developing financial crisis and economic slowdown that began with the downturn in the mortgage markets in the middle of last year.

The real estate bubble developed as Greenspan kept fed funds rates at a historical low of 1 percent throughout much of 2003 and 2004.

The resulting liquidity pumped funds into home equity markets, stimulating dramatic price increases that continued throughout much of 2006. That resulted in abundant cash for mortgage lenders to fund the risky sub-prime market where typically unqualified home buyers were being offered unconventional loans with artificially low mortgage payments in the initial few months.

The nation is now experiencing the fallout of collateralized mortgage obligations in which mortgages packaged as securities and sold to banks as assets were allowed to count in the banks' legal reserve calculations.

A wave of home foreclosures across the nation has caused a resulting failure in the collateralized mortgage securities held by banks.

When the collateralized mortgage obligations are marked to market, many banks across the country are finding they do not have adequate non-borrowed reserves to continue operations under current reserve requirements.

Again, the Federal Reserve has stepped in, providing multiple facilities in which struggling banks can borrow on a short-term basis the reserves needed to continue operating.

In a series of unprecedented moves over the weekend, the Federal Reserve has now made many of these same borrowing facilities available to securities and investment brokerage firms as well as commercial banks.

As WND reported, for the first time since the Federal Reserve has published the data, bank non-borrowed reserves have begun to turn negative, reflecting the increased borrowing banks are utilizing to continue operating.

Supreme Court hears arguments on 2nd Amendment

2008-03-18T13:35:00.000-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

A spokesman for Gun Owners of America says the Supreme Court cannot re-write the Constitution, and therefore should not even be talking about the right of Americans to keep and bear arms.

The U.S. Supreme Court has heard arguments about the meaning of the Second Amendment and the Districts of Columbia's ban on handguns. A majority appears to support the view that the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns, rather than somehow linking right to service in a state militia. But it is less clear what that means for the District's 32-year-old ban on handguns, perhaps the strictest gun control law in the nation.

Erich Pratt of Gun Owners of America says gun control advocates have tried to abolish the Second Amendment, but it is very clear in what it states. "The Second Amendment does protect an individual right -- and that is significant," states Pratt. "That means -- as the last four words of the Second Amendment say: 'shall not be infringed' -- [that] this right cannot be infringed."

Still, he argues, both the federal government and many state governments employ "a myriad of ways" in attempting to infringe upon that right.

On Sept. 24, 1976, one of the toughest gun laws in the nation took effect in the District of Columbia, essentially outlawing the private ownership of new handguns in a city struggling with violence. Over the next few weeks, a man with a .32-caliber pistol held up workers at a downtown federal office at midday, a cab driver was shot in the head, and a senator was mugged by three youths, one carrying a revolver, near the U.S. Capitol.

Since the ban was passed, more than 8,400 people have been murdered in the District, many killed by handguns. Nearly 80 percent of the 181 murders in 2007 were committed with guns.

To gun rights advocates like Pratt, the numbers prove a different point: violence continues unchecked despite the ban -- and while criminals seem to be able to get guns with ease, law-abiding people are being denied the means to protect themselves.

Obama pleads ignorance about pastor's controversial sermons

2008-03-17T15:52:00.000-07:00

From YCFA Member Maurice Page
Story Source

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Friday denounced inflammatory remarks from his pastor, who has railed against the United States and accused the country of bringing on the Sept. 11 attacks by spreading terrorism.

Obama called the statements appearing on television and the Internet "completely unacceptable and inexcusable" in a Fox News interview and said they didn't reflect the kinds of sermons he had heard from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright while attending services at Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ.

Obama, a member of the church since the early 1990s, said he would have quit Trinity had such statements been "the repeated tenor of the church. ... I wouldn't feel comfortable there."

In a sermon on the Sunday after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, Wright suggested the United States brought on the attacks.

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye," Wright said. "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."

In a 2003 sermon, he said blacks should condemn the United States.

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

He also gave a sermon in December comparing Obama to Jesus, promoting his candidacy and criticizing his rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"Barack knows what it means to be a black man to be living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people," Wright told a cheering congregation. "Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain't never been called a ni----."

Yesterday, Obama responded by posting a blog about his relationship with Wright and Trinity on the Huffington Post. Wright brought Obama to Christianity, officiated at his wedding, baptized his daughters and inspired the title of his book, "The Audacity of Hope."

Obama wrote that he never heard Wright say any of the statements, but he acknowledged that they have raised legitimate questions about the nature of his relationship with the pastor and the church. He wrote that he joined Wright's church nearly 20 years ago, familiar with the pastor's background as a former Marine and respected biblical scholar who lectured at seminaries across the country.

Obama wrote that he's looked to Wright for spiritual advice, not political guidance, and he's been pained and angered to learn of some of his pastor's comments for which he had not been present. Obama told MSNBC that Wright had stepped down from his campaign's African American Religious Leadership Committee.

"I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies," Obama said in his blog posting. "I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Reverend Wright that are at issue."

"Reverend Wright preached the gospel of Jesus, a gospel on which I base my life," he wrote. "And the sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor and to seek justice at every turn."

He said Wright's controversial statements first came to his attention at the beginning of his presidential campaign last year, and he condemned them. Because of his long and deep ties to the 6,000-member congregation church, Obama said he decided not to leave.

"With Reverend Wright's retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good," he wrote.

But on Friday, the United Church of Christ issued a 1,400-word statement defending Wright and his "flagship" congregation. The statement lauded Wright's church for its community service and work to nurture youth and the pastor for speaking out against homophobia and sexism in the black community.

"It's time for all of us to say no to these attacks and to declare that we will not allow anyone to undermine or destroy the ministries of any of our congregations in order to serve their own narrow political or ideological ends," John H. Thomas, United Church of Christ's president, said in the statement.

Wright: 'U.S. of KKKA' knew about Pearl Harbor

2008-03-15T17:37:00.000-07:00

Story Source

Newly released video of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Democrat presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama's controversial pastor, shows the preacher telling his congregation the United States knew of the attack on Pearl Harbor before the Japanese struck, the U.S. would plant weapons of mass destruction in Iraq "just like the LAPD," and those committing black-on-black crime are "fighting the wrong enemy."

The series of clips, taken from hours of sermons, was broadcast on Fox News' Hannity & Colmes program last night.

At times Wright, who moves his congregation to shouts of agreement, is shown wearing an African dashiki while in the pulpit and, at others, he wears a clerical collar.

Wright, again, called on God to damn America – or "white America, U.S. of KKKA," as he refers to the nation in another sermon – "for killing innocent people ... for treating us citizens as less than human."

As WND reported, in a 2003 sermon Wright encouraged blacks to damn America in God's name and blamed the U.S. for provoking the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks by dropping nuclear weapons on Japan in World War II and supporting Israel since 1947.

Yesterday, in response to mounting criticism over Wright's anti-American and racist comments, Obama issued a statement saying he strongly condemns and denounces "some inflammatory and appalling remarks [Wright] made about our country, our politics, and my political opponents."

Despite having been at the church for two decades, Obama said he was not in attendance when Wright made any of the statements and never heard such talk in private conversations.

"Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy," Obama said. "I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue."

Late yesterday, Wright stepped down from his formal role in Obama's campaign, as a member of his African American Religious Leadership Committee.

Statements in the newly released video segments suggest earlier samples of Wright's sermons were not isolated instances and add to questions of how Obama and his family could have been unaware of such provocative messages coming from the pulpit of their home church.

Here are excerpts from Wright's sermons revealed by Fox News:

"The government lied about Pearl Harbor. They knew the Japanese were going to attack. Government's lied."

"We've got a paranoid group of patriots in power that now, in the interest of homeland stupidity – I mean homeland security ..."

"The government lied about the Tuskegee experiment. They purposely infected African-American men with syphilis ..."

"Fighting for peace is like raping for virginity."

"... what's going on in white America, U.S. of KKKA ..."

"Black men turning on black men – that is fighting the wrong enemy. You both are the primary targets in an oppressive society that sees both of you as a dangerous threat."

"We cannot see how what we are doing is the same thing al-Qaida is doing under a different color flag ... And guess what else. If they don't find them some weapons of mass destruction, they going to do just like the LAPD and plant them some weapons of mass destruction."

"God damn America – that's in the Bible – for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating us citizens as less than human. God damn America ..."

These controversial statements join others Wright has made from the pulpit.

WND reported yesterday Wright preached a sermon at his alma mater, Howard University, in 2006 that "America is still the No. 1 killer in the world. ... We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns and the training of professional killers."

Speaking at the Washington, D.C., school's Andrew Rankin Memorial Chapel, Wright said, "We started the AIDS virus. … We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty."

The pastor reportedly said in a sermon just after 9/11, "The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government lied."

Petition seeks rehearing in homeschooling case

2008-03-15T17:28:00.000-07:00

Story Source

A California appeals court that issued a ruling banning homeschooling in the state failed to recognize existing state law, according to a lawyer who filed court documents today.

The petition for rehearing before the state's 2nd Appellate District Division Three court in the case involving the family of Phillip and Mary Long was filed by Gary Kreep, of the United States Justice Foundation.

The appeals court earlier concluded that there is no provision in California law for parents who want to teach their own children at home, but the petition notes that is supported numerous places in existing California law already.

The opinion, delivered just two weeks ago, has generated a shockwave through homeschooling circles in the United States. Just a day earlier, WND reported that Michael Farris, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, said he had met with several members of Congress, and they expressed "a lot of concern and outrage" over the issue.

He said although plans still were being developed, it was possible members of Congress could seek to intervene in the case.

The California case stemmed from the family's juvenile proceeding. That case already had been closed by the court when court-appointed attorneys for their children appealed specifically trying to have homeschooling banned, and the ruling from Appeals Court Judge H. Walt Croskey granted their wishes.

The court ruling said: "We find no reason to strike down the Legislature's evaluation of what constitutes an adequate education scheme sufficient to promote the 'general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence … We agree … 'the educational program of the State of California was designed to promote the general welfare of all the people and was not designed to accommodate the personal ideas of any individual in the field of education.'"

Those words echoed the ideas of officials from Germany, where homeschooling has been outlawed since 1938 under a law adopted when Adolf Hitler decided he wanted the state, and no one else, to control the minds of the nation's youth.

Wolfgang Drautz, consul general for the Federal Republic of Germany, has said "school teaches not only knowledge but also social conduct, encourages dialogue among people of different beliefs and cultures, and helps students to become responsible citizens."

The appeals ruling said California law requires "persons between the ages of six and 18" to be in school, "the public full-time day school," with exemptions being allowed for those in a "private full-time day school" or those "instructed by a tutor who holds a valid state teaching credential for the grade being taught."

Nor did the family's religious beliefs matter to the court.

Their "sincerely held religious beliefs" are "not the quality of evidence that permits us to say that application of California's compulsory public school education law to them violates their First Amendment rights," the court said.

In his petition for rehearing, however, Kreep said he suggested the appellate decision had not recognized a number of references in California law addressing parents who want to teach their children at home.

And he said the opinion relied on precedents that have since been rejected in newer court rulings.

The USJF specifically is appealing on behalf of the father, since the mother still was represented by court-appoint lawyers, officials said.

The law firm said a review of all pertinent statutes supports the idea of parents homeschooling their children.

Farris said one logical solution would be an amendment to the U.S. Constitutional specifically recognizing parental rights. That effort already is under way under the banner of Parental Rights.

The website notes the campaign exists "to secure a constitutional amendment that defends the rights of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children. … We believe that no government, regardless of how well-intentioned it might be, can replace the love and nurture of a parent in the life of a child."

Spokesman Allan Carlson of the The World Congress of Families told WND earlier if California's ban would be allowed to stand, the state would be on par with Germany and Brazil, two other governments that ban homeschooling.

In significant developments already.

1) Assemblyman Joel Anderson has proposed a resolution in the state Legislature in California that calls for the Croskey ruling to be overturned.

2) Gov. Schwarzenegger said, "if the courts don't protect parents' rights, then, as elected officials, we will."

3) California Supt. of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell said, "Parents still have the right to homeschool in this state."

4) The HSLDA said it would coordinate a petition seeking to have the legal opinion "de-published," which is a process that would prevent it from being used as a widespread precedent for other homeschooling families.

5) Another petition appeals to Schwarzenegger and the state legislature and is being run by the Pacific Justice Institute, which is working with the website PetitionsToday.org.

6) Yet another petition also is under way, at the ReverseTheRuling.com website. That organization offers information for homeschoolers who want to follow the California case, because of that state's influence throughout the nation. It was assembled by the organization Learning By Grace, an outreach dedicated to providing parents with innovative online Christian homeschool materials.

"We have seen God’s hand of protection on the homeschooling movement for the 25 years we have been working together for this cause. There is no reason to begin to doubt God now," Farris said.

Pacific Justice also is representing Sunland Christian School, which has been working with the family's children in a study program, on an appeal to the state Supreme Court.

"Don't panic," the school said in a statement. "Help those who feel distraught and afraid, to be at peace and have faith for a favorable outcome. While we are appealing this ruling, it won't be used in court against homeschoolers. Continue to homeschool effectively, caring about your family, children, their growth and development and their academic instruction," the school said.

The Longs previously told WND of their concerns with the public school district's advocacy for alternative sexual lifestyles and promotion of the theory of evolution.

"The parent-child relationship existed long before any government and makes it the responsibility of the parent to educate the child," Phillip Long told California reporters.

He said the responsibility includes protecting children from things that are hazardous "emotionally" as well as physically.

Croskey's ruling reversed a decision from Superior Court Judge Stephen Marpet, who said "parents have a constitutional right to school their children in their own home."

As WND has reported, the Longs had their children enrolled in Sunland Christian School, a private homeschooling program.

But Croskey, without hearing arguments from the school, opined that the situation was a "ruse of enrolling [children] in a private school and then letting them stay home and be taught by a non-credentialed parent."

The Private and Home Educators of California organization is posting a list of updates on the situation, and also a legal fact sheet for those who want to homeschool in California.

Recession? Maybe worse. Economy stumbles more

2008-03-13T20:17:00.000-07:00

Story Source

WASHINGTON – It was another gloomy day on the financial markets, as more economic indicators suggested America's financial crisis is deepening and spreading globally.

Chrysler told employees worldwide – not just factory workers – to take a mandatory two-week vacation in July.

1) The Carlyle Group announced creditors planned to seize the assets of its mortgage-bond fund after it failed to meet more than $400 million in margin calls on mortgage-backed collateral that has plunged in value.

2) Gold rose above $1,000 an ounce for the first time as mounting credit-market losses spurred demand for bullion as a haven from the sagging dollar and equities. Silver and platinum also advanced as the dollar dropped below 100 yen for the first time since 1995 and to a record against the euro. Gold is up 37 percent since the Federal Reserve began cutting interest rates in September, sending the dollar tumbling.

3) U.S. home foreclosure filings jumped 60 percent and bank seizures more than doubled in February as rates on adjustable mortgages rose and property owners were unable to sell or refinance amid falling prices.

4) Retail sales in the U.S. unexpectedly fell in February, indicating that declines in payrolls and home values and a surge in energy costs have pushed the economy into a recession. Sales dropped 0.6 percent, led by auto dealers and restaurants, after a 0.4 percent gain in January, the Commerce Department said. Meanwhile, the Labor Department said jobless benefits rolls climbed to a 2 1/2-year high, and import prices soared 13.6 percent from a year ago, reflecting higher energy costs.

5) U.S. import prices rose by a less-than-expected 0.2 percent in February as petroleum prices dipped while export prices increased by a surprisingly strong 0.9 percent as food prices soared, a government report showed today.

6) Global writedowns linked to the U.S. sub-prime crisis could reach $285 billion, $20 billion more than expected earlier this year, credit ratings agency Standard & Poor's said in a report published today.

7) The Dow and Nasdaq indexes were up slightly after a morning plunge.

Meanwhile, in the March-April edition of Foreign Policy magazine, the chairman of RGE Monitor warns that central banks cannot save the U.S. or the world from the worsening recession. Slashing interest rates is not enough, writes Nouriel Roubini, a professor of economics at New York University's Stern School of Business.

"Central banks don't have as free a hand (as they had in 2001)," he writes. "They are constrained by higher levels of inflation."

He also cautions that stimulus packages, like the one passed by Congress and signed by President Bush, will have little beneficial impact on the stalling economy.

"The United States is facing a financial crisis that goes far beyond the subprime problem into areas of economic life that the Fed simply can't reach," says Roubini. "The problems the U.S. economy faces are no longer just about having enough cash on hand; they're about insolvency, and monetary policy is ill equipped to deal with such problems."

Roubini points out the sorry details all too evident in the day's news – led by millions of households on the brink of default on mortgages.

"When the economy falls further, corporate default rates will sharply rise, leading to greater losses," he writes. "There is also a 'shadow banking system,' made up of non-bank financial institutions that borrow cash or liquid investments in the near term but lend or invest in the long term in non-liquid forms. Take money market funds, for example, which can be redeemed with just one month's notice. Many of these funds are invested and locked into risky, long-term securities. This shadow banking system is therefore subject to greater risk because, unlike banks, they don't have access to the Fed's support as the lender of last resort, cutting them off from the help monetary policy can provide."

Roubini concludes it will "take years to resolve the problems that led to this crisis."

In fact, it's hard to consider solutions when the problems seem to grow worse each day – especially in the area of mortgage foreclosures.

"With declining prices, there is a pervasive problem of not being able to refinance or sell,'' Susan Wachter, professor of real estate at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School in Philadelphia, told Bloomberg News. "I'm very concerned. This is continuing to worsen. It tells us that we are not at a bottom.'''

About $460 billion of adjustable-rate mortgages are scheduled to reset this year and another $420 billion will rise in 2011, according to New York-based analysts at Citigroup Inc. Homeowners faced higher payments as fourth-quarter home prices fell 8.9 percent, the biggest drop in 20 years as measured by the S&P/Case-Shiller home price index.

According to Rick Sharga, executive vice president of RealtyTrac, foreclosure filings are likely to be "explosive'' in May and June as more payments jump, after remaining at current levels this month and next. He said there may be between 750,000 and 1 million bank repossessions in 2008. '

February was the 26th consecutive month of year-on-year monthly foreclosure increases, Sharga told Bloomberg News.

Survey reveals variations in peoples' perceptions of 'sin'

2008-03-13T20:10:00.000-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

A new survey finds many inconsistencies among Americans when it comes to beliefs about sin.

The survey, conducted by Ellison Research, polled 1,000 American adults. Among the findings, 87 percent of Americans believe in the concept of sin -- which was defined in the research as "something that is almost always considered wrong, particularly from a religious or moral perspective."

Among those who believe in sin, 81 percent classified adultery as sin, 74 percent named racism, 65 percent said using hard drugs was sin, 52 percent named homosexuality, and 56 percent said having an abortion was sin. Ron Sellers, president of Ellison Research, says while most Americans believe in the concept of sin, there are inconsistencies when it comes to what qualifies as sin.

"For instance, Americans do tend to define sin according to degrees," Sellers explains. "We have 81 percent who say yes, adultery is a sin. However, only 43 percent say having sexual thoughts about someone you're not married to is a sin. Same thing on drinking -- only 14 percent believe that drinking any alcohol is a sin, yet significantly more than that believe that getting drunk is a sin."

The researcher is convinced that religious leaders can learn a lot from the survey. "A lot of religious leaders would be very surprised to find out what 'their own people' believe," he shares. "[Many] evangelical leaders would say, 'Wow -- that's all the evangelicals that believe such-and-such is a sin?' [And] a lot of the Catholic leaders would be very surprised at some of these findings as well."

Sellers says the survey shows a need by pastors to investigate and dialogue about absolute truth and sin with members of their congregations.

Do you and your friends have more of a biblical or secular worldview of 'sin'?
Vote in today's poll

2nd petition opposes homeschooling ban

2008-03-12T18:01:00.000-07:00

Story Source

A second petition has been launched in opposition to a California appeals court's ruling that is being interpreted to ban homeschooling in the state, this one an appeal to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state legislature, who already have expressed concern over the court's activism.

The new petition was announced by the Pacific Justice Institute, which earlier said it would be working on an appeal of the Los Angeles ruling on behalf of the school that was involved in the case by supervising the family's independent study work.

PJI said its petition is being assembled at the website PetitionsToday.org to let state officials know of the disaster that could face homeschooling parents if nothing is changed.

This week WND reported on an announcement from Capitol Resource Institute that California Assemblyman Joel Anderson had introduced a resolution calling on the California Supreme Court to reverse the lower court's decision.

The proposal notes that homeschoolers in California now are now "responsible positions as parents, as students in and graduates of colleges and universities, in the workplace, and as citizens in society at large. …"

It also notes "the United States Supreme Court has ruled that parents have a fundamental constitutional right to direct the education and upbringing of their children. …"

"On Feb. 28, 2008, the Court of Appeals for the 2nd Appellate District in Los Angeles issued an opinion in the case of In Re: Rachel L. holding that homeschooling without a teaching credential is not legal… [and that] denies California parents' primary responsibility and right to determine the best place and manner of their own children's education," the resolution says.

WND also reported when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger blasted the ruling.

"This outrageous ruling must be overturned by the courts, and if the courts don't protect parents' rights, then, as elected officials, we will," Schwarzenegger said in a statement. "Parents should not be penalized for acting in the best interests of their children's education."

California state Supt. of Public Instruction O'Connell also added his voice to those concerned about the ruling.

"The California Department of Education policy will not change in any way as a result of this ruling," he said. "Parents still have the right to homeschool in this state."

The Home School Legal Defense Association earlier launched a petition seeking to have the legal opinion "de-published," which is a process that would prevent it from being used as a widespread precedent for other homeschooling families.

Pacific Justice is representing Sunland Christian School, which has been working with the family's children in a study program, on an appeal.

The school issued a statement today that when the appeal is filed formally, the move will put the court's ruling on a suspended status until the appeal process is finished.

"The family [in the case] faced juvenile court issues, which were resolved," the school said, "the DCS case was closed, and the judge resolved the family could continue to homeschool. However, the children's court appointed attorneys did not like the decision and appealed. … In the California Court of Appeals, SCS was never given an opportunity to represent itself and address who we are and how we function. Much of the information the court used to render this current decision was on incomplete and inaccurate information."

The school said it would continue to serve its families, and besides the PJI effort, other groups apparently are working on a rehearing at the appellate level, a hearing at the state Supreme court, and filing for the depublishing.

"Are you confused?" the school asked. "Let's look at the facts." It said:

This ruling sets precedent and interprets the law for everyone in California in its current status. It is not a ruling just for the family involved.

At this moment, there is no provision in the California Constitution to allow parents a constitutional right to direct their children’s education.

California Educational statutes do not currently define homeschooling.

California homeschoolers have been educating their children under the current laws for the past 27+ years without any major conflict.

This ruling effects both private homeschoolers and public charter home school programs, distant learning and independent study programs.

Filing for an appeal (which SCS’s legal team, Pacific Justice, will be doing) puts in suspension the ruling until the appeal is denied or heard (possible 4 months to 5 years). During this time no homeschool family will be challenged in a court of law with this ruling.
It is creating panic among homeschoolers because if left unchanged, it soon could be cited against other families, the school said.

"Don't panic," the school said. "Help those who feel distraught and afraid, to be at peace and have faith for a favorable outcome. While we are appealing this ruling, it won’t be used in court against homeschoolers. Continue to homeschool effectively, caring about your family, children, their growth and development and their academic instruction," the school said.

Pacific Justice chief Brad Dacus promised, "I will leave no stone unturned in an effort to reverse this heinous attack on parental rights, and that includes asking for your swift and immediate help."

He said the petition allows thousands of people to join together in a voice to the government.

"The scope of the February 28 decision by the appellate court is stunning in its disregard for your Constitutional rights. Under the ruling, issued by Justice H. Walter Croskey and two other members of the appellate panel, parents like you could be subject to criminal sanctions, which could include the paying of fines and the completion of state-mandated parent education classes and counseling programs.

"But the potential threat is much worse! If this decision is upheld, the way will be paved for the courts to remove children from the homes of non-compliant parents on the grounds of 'educational neglect,'" he said.

Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, said the ruling was disturbing.

"The ruling is so alarming because the state appeals court judges actually wrote that 'parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children.' The judges said that parents without teaching credentials cannot teach. This ruling is a radical slam against homeschooling," his organization said.

However, Thomasson also said parents should not do anything extreme.

"Despite this intolerant, anti-parent ruling, California homeschoolers must not panic.… California homeschooling families should continue homeschooling, and parents who are considering homeschooling as a way to exit the immoral government school system should continue with their plans," he said.

The family in the case, Phillip and Mary Long, previously told WND they were reviewing their options for an appeal themselves but had not confirmed specifics yet.

There are an estimated 166,000 children in formalized homeschool situations in California, but Dacus estimated there are others "under the radar" that would be several times that number.

The Longs previously told WND of their concerns with the public school district's advocacy for alternative sexual lifestyles and promotion of the theory of evolution.

"The parent-child relationship existed long before any government and makes it the responsibility of the parent to educate the child," Phillip Long told California reporters.

He said the responsibility includes protecting children from things that are hazardous "emotionally" as well as physically.

WND broke the story of the ruling, which reversed a decision from Superior Court Judge Stephen Marpet, who said "parents have a constitutional right to school their children in their own home."

As WND has reported, the Longs had their children enrolled in Sunland Christian School, a private homeschooling program.

But Croskey, without hearing arguments from the school, opined that the situation was a "ruse of enrolling [children] in a private school and then letting them stay home and be taught by a non-credentialed parent."

Israel nails seminary butcher

2008-03-12T17:50:00.000-07:00

Story Source

JAFFA – The Israel Defense Forces today killed the man suspected of planning last week's Jerusalem shooting massacre in which eight yeshiva students were murdered, security sources said.

Just hours after the terrorist shooting, a WND report exclusively identified the planner of the attack, quoting senior Israeli and Palestinian security officials stating Muhammad Shehadi, an activist in Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah organization, set up the massacre from the West Bank city of Bethlehem.

Today, IDF forces raided Bethlehem on a hunt for Shehadi. They killed the Fatah official along with three other gunmen, including Ahmed Dalbul, a Bethlehem-area leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Fatah's declared military wing.

Israel's leading Yediot Aharonot daily and Channel 2 television here quoted security officials identifying Shehadi as the planner of the attack, the only mention of Shehadi by any media since last week's WND report. The Israeli media labeled Shehadi as an Islamic Jihad activist, even though he works for Fatah.

According to security officials speaking to WND, Shehadi was killed after the Israeli military received intelligence he was scheduled to attend a secret Fatah planning meeting in Bethlehem. Shehadi's Bethlehem area home was bulldozed by Israel last week, and he has been in hiding since.

Shehadi ran as a Fatah candidate in the 2006 Palestinian elections, but he lost.

He received financing from Hezbollah to plan last week's Jerusalem attack, according to senior security sources.

According to Palestinian security officials familiar with Shehadi, after losing the 2006 election as a Fatah leader, Shehadi worked for about six months for the Islamic Jihad terror group but then switched back to Fatah.

"He would go wherever the money was," said a Palestinian security official. "He thought he could get more money from Islamic Jihad, so he worked for them for a few months but then switched back to Fatah because he didn't like his Islamic Jihad salary."

Israeli security sources said Shehadi previously assisted in terrorist attacks carried out from the Bethlehem area by the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.

Last Thursday, a terrorist gunman infiltrated the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva, located near the entrance to Jerusalem, and fired hundreds of rounds of bullets at students studying in the building's main library, killing eight students and wounding about a dozen.

Scenes of the yeshiva's blood-soaked floors and of bodies being lined up outside the yeshiva's library were broadcast on Israeli TV. Prayer books, torahs and Talmud texts stained with blood were carried from the building.

The head of the ZAKA emergency services – among the first to arrive at the yeshiva following the attack – described the scene as a "slaughterhouse."

The fatalities have been identified as Yochai Lipschitz, 18, of Jerusalem; Yonatan Yitzchak Eldar, 16, of Shiloh; Yonadav Chaim Hirschfeld, 19, of Kochav Hashahar; Neriah Cohen, 15, of Jerusalem; Roey Roth, 18, of Elkana; Segev Pniel Avihayil, 15, of Neveh Daniel; Avraham David Moses, 16, of Efrat; and Maharata Trunoch, 26, of Ashdod.

West Texas school settles dispute over Bible course

2008-03-11T19:42:00.000-07:00

Story Source
From YCFA Member Maurice Page

A lawsuit over Bible curriculum in a West Texas school district has been settled.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of eight parents who claimed the Bible course -- taught at Ector County Schools in Odessa -- violated their religious liberty. According to an agreement hammered out by a mediator, the county school district can offer the Bible course, however, a committee appointed by the superintendent will develop the course work.

Hiram Sasser, with Liberty Legal Institute -- which represented the district, says groups such as the ACLU often intimidate and engage in campaigns of misinformation to keep court approved Bible courses out of schools.

"Even Time Magazine ran a story on why our students need to have a biblical education," notes Sasser. "They need to know things about the Bible, they need to have that as part of their base education and knowledge in order to be good...informed citizens and to have a quality, informed sound education."

Sasser says that the ACLU agreed that schools can have a Bible course with the Bible as the main textbook, and schools could also use whatever materials they wish in the development of the course. He also points out that with the ACLU agreeing to such terms, they will never be able to come after one of these Bible courses with a "straight face."

The material used in the West Texas school district is produced by the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools.

Pro-family leader calls for Spitzer's resignation

2008-03-11T19:35:00.001-07:00

Story Source

march 10 2008
From YCFA member Maurice Page

A pro-family leader in New York is calling on Governor Eliot Spitzer to resign for his alleged role in a prostitution ring.

New York Democratic Governor Eliot Spitzer has issued an apology to his family and the public, saying, "I acted in a way that violated the obligation to my family, and that violates my or any sense of right or wrong." The New York Times reports Spizter was involved in a prostitution ring called "Emperors Club VIP." Spitzer -- who is married with three daughters -- had been viewed by many admirers as a champion against organized crime and corruption.

Rabbi Yehuda Levin, a spokesman for the New York-based group Jews for Morality, said sarcastically that Spitzer was "being too hard on himself" during his news conference. "...There is no reason that we should be judgmental on this," says a sarcastic Levin. "We have to understand that those who are making a connection between his personal behavior and the social legislation he's pushing -- homosexual marriage, ...abortion as a...constitutional right in the state of New York. These people are just discriminatory, [and] bigoted..."

At a brief conference today, Spitzer seemed to indicate he was not planning to step down. He said, "I do not believe that politics in the long run is about individuals. It is about ideas, the public good...I will report back to you in short order."

Levin says that if there is any decency left in the government of New York, Spitzer should be forced to resign.

Spitzer issued his apology today not long after canceling a speech at a "family planning" conference in New York City sponsored by abortion provider Planned Parenthood.

Court limits home-schooling to credentialed teachers

2008-03-06T15:41:00.000-08:00

Story Source

A state appeals court has struck a blow against the home-schooling movement, ruling that California law requires parents to send their children to full-time schools or have them taught by credentialed tutors at home.

The ruling was issued by the Second District Court of Appeal in a dispute between the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services and Phillip and Mary Long of Lynwood, who have been home-schooling their eight children. Mary Long, who has no state credential, acts as their teacher.

The Longs said they have also enrolled their children in Sunland Christian School, a private religious academy, which considers them part of its independent study program and visits the home about four times a year. A juvenile court judge looking into one child's complaint of mistreatment by Phillip Long found that the children were being poorly educated but refused to order two of the children, ages 7 and 9, to be enrolled in a full-time school, saying parents have a right to educate their children at home.

But the appeals court said state law has been clear since at least 1953, when another appellate court rejected a challenge by home-schooling parents to California's compulsory education statutes. Those statutes require children between 6 and 18 to attend a full-time day school, either public or private, or to be instructed by a tutor who holds a state credential for the child's grade level.

"California courts have held that ... parents do not have a constitutional right to home-school their children," Justice H. Walter Croskey said in the 3-0 ruling, issued Feb. 28. "Parents have a legal duty to see to their children's schooling under the provisions of these laws."

Parents can be criminally prosecuted for failing to comply, Croskey said.

The court told the juvenile judge to require the Longs to comply with the law by enrolling their children in a school other than Sunland Christian School, because that institution "was willing to participate in the deprivation of the children's right to a legal education."

The court did not specify how the law should be enforced in other cases. A lawyer for Sunland Christian School said today that 166,000 California children are being educated at home and that the ruling threatens every one of their parents with prosecution.

The decision "not only attacks traditional home-schooling, but also calls into question home-schooling through charter schools and teaching children at home via independent study through public and private schools," said attorney Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, which represented the school.

Michael Smith, president of the Home School Legal Defense Association, said the ruling would effectively ban home-schooling in the state.

"California is now on the path to being the only state to deny the vast majority of home-schooling parents their fundamental right to teach their own children at home," he said in a statement.

But Leslie Heimov, executive director of the Children's Law Center of Los Angeles, which represented the two children in the case, said the ruling did not change the law.

"They just affirmed that the current California law, which has been unchanged since the last time it was ruled on in the 1950s, is that children have to be educated in a public school, an accredited private school, or with an accredited tutor," she said. "If they want to send them to a private Christian school, they can, but they have to actually go to the school and be taught by teachers."

Heimov said her organization's chief concern was not the quality of the children's education, but their "being in a place daily where they would be observed by people who had a duty to ensure their ongoing safety."

The Longs argued that the state laws violated their freedom of religion. They cited a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing Amish parents in Wisconsin to take their children out of school after the eighth grade and devote their lives to the religious community.

But Croskey said the ruling does not authorize parents who object to the educational system to remove their children, even if their objections are based on religious beliefs. The Amish ruling was based on factors that the current case did not share, he said: deep religious convictions held by an organized group, intimately related to daily living, whose centuries-old existence might be endangered if their children had to attend high school.

By contrast, he said, the Longs simply asserted that they have religious objections to sending their children to school. "Such sparse representations are too easily asserted by any parent who wishes to home-school his or her child," Croskey said.

The ruling can be viewed at links.sfgate.com/ZCQR.

More insight to this story can be found at this World Net Daily link.

California Supreme Court in gay marriage storm

2008-03-06T15:38:00.000-08:00

Story Source

The California Supreme Court is seemingly as divided as society is over gay marriage.

For more than three hours Tuesday, the seven justices of the state's high court shifted back and forth on whether to uphold California's ban on same-sex marriage, at times appearing to spar with each other as they weighed their most important civil rights case in decades.

The justices peppered lawyers on both sides of the case with dozens of questions that made predicting an outcome a fool's game. The court is reviewing a similarly divided 2006 appeals court ruling that upheld California's ban on gay marriage and a 2000 ballot initiative confining marriage to a union between a man and woman.

Underscoring the passions behind the conflict, demonstrators on both sides of the issue lined up outside the Supreme Court building, armed with placards and chants as they awaited the crucial legal arguments. Inside, an overflow crowd unable to get a seat in the courtroom jammed a downstairs auditorium to watch the arguments on a big-screen television, a boisterous group that cheered and jeered as though attending a high school basketball game.

But the stakes were evident in the courtroom, as the justices aired their first public views in a case they must decide within 90 days. Justices Marvin Baxter and Ming Chin, perhaps the court's most conservative members, seemed to have the deepest reservations about siding with civil rights groups and San Francisco city officials,who argue that the ban violates the equal-protection rights of gay and lesbian couples seeking the power to wed.
But Baxter and Chin were also frequently joined by Justice Carol Corrigan, a moderate who expressed sympathy with the civil rights argument but had major concerns over tampering with the will of the voters. Corrigan indicated several times she may agree with the majority in the appeals court ruling. That court found the Legislature or voters should decide whether to change marriage laws, not judges.

"Our views on this topic are in the process of evolution," Corrigan said to Therese Stewart, San Francisco's chief deputy city attorney, who argued in favor of gay marriage. "There is substantial difference of opinion about what that evolution should look like. Who decides where we are in California in that evolution?" she asked. "Is it for the court to decide or the voters to decide?"

Court's obligation

Other justices, however, hinted they have an obligation to intervene if the ban is unconstitutional. The justices repeatedly invoked another milestone marriage case - a 62-year-old California Supreme Court ruling that outlawed a ban on interracial marriage. At that time, it was the first court in the nation to strike the practice down as discriminatory.

Reading aloud from the 1946 ruling, Chief Justice Ronald George focused on a phrase that said marriage is a right to wed "a person of one's choice," without any reference to a man and a woman. George, often a crucial vote when the court is split, also relied heavily on recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings that have broadened the rights of same-sex couples, notably a 2003 decision that struck down Texas' anti-sodomy statutes.

Justice Joyce Kennard also expressed skepticism that the court should wait for the voters or legislators to remedy discrimination, noting that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger already has twice vetoed legislation that would permit gay marriage.

Deputy Attorney General Christopher Krueger defended the law, arguing that the state's strong domestic-partners provisions already provide equal rights to gay and lesbian couples. But that argument drew a lukewarm response from at least some of the justices.

"Are we saying separate is equal here?" Justice Carlos Moreno asked.

Lawyers defending Proposition 22 also found themselves on the hot seat when they tried to insist that permitting gay couples to wed would undermine traditional heterosexual marriage. At various points, Kennard, George and Corrigan all openly questioned that argument.

But Corrigan and Chin also pressed civil rights lawyers on why the state can't limit marriage. "Why doesn't the same argument apply to somebody who wants to marry two people?" Chin asked. And Corrigan interjected, "Or their cousin?"

The justices have 90 days to rule on the epic legal battle, which began to unfold four years ago when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom gave same-sex couples the short-lived right to marry at City Hall. Similar legal challenges have cropped up in other states, where courts have for the most part upheld bans on same-sex marriage and other bans have been put in place at the ballot box.

Raucous crowd

In contrast to the courtroom's staid, intellectual atmosphere, the auditorium and the crowd outside after the hearing were raucous at times. Outside the court, some demonstrators waved anti-gay placards while same-sex couples chanted for their right to marry. Belinda Ryan, a Fremont woman, held up a picture of her partner and child that read: "Justices please protect my wife and baby with your decision."

In other words, they were as divided as the justices.

Both sides expressed optimism about the outcome.

"I'm pleased with the line of questioning I saw from a number of justices," said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera.

Conservative groups opposed to gay marriage repeated their vow to take the issue to the voters if the Supreme Court overturns the same-sex marriage ban.

Said Glen Lavy, who defended the ban for the Alliance Defense Fund: "What the court is being asked to do is shortchange the democratic process."

Huckabee Drops Out of Presidential Race

2008-03-05T09:56:00.000-08:00

Story Source

IRVING, Texas (AP) - Mike Huckabee bowed to reality Tuesday and out of the Republican presidential race. "We kept the faith," he told his end-of-the-road rally Tuesday after John McCain clinched the nomination. "I'd rather lose an election than lose the principles that got me into politics in the first place."

The genial conservative went out as he had campaigned all along, with a quip: "It's time for us to hit the reset button."

Huckabee won the leadoff Iowa caucuses, making him a sudden but short-lived sensation, and then seven other states: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee, West Virginia, Louisiana and Kansas. Meantime, McCain piled up big victories on his way to winning the prize on Tuesday night.

The writing was on the wall for weeks, but the former Arkansas governor hung on until McCain secured the necessary delegates.

"We started this effort with very little recognition and virtually no resources," Huckabee told supporters. "We ended with slightly more recognition and very few resources."

The crowd laughed. "But what a journey," he said. "What a journey. A journey of a lifetime."

Huckabee rarely raised a negative word during the campaign about McCain, a man he clearly likes, and he called him Tuesday night to congratulate him.

Huckabee said he extended "my commitment to him and to the party to do everything possible to unite our party, but more importantly to unite our country."

Huckabee vowed: "We aren't going away completely. We want to be a part of helping to keep the issues alive that have kept us in this race."

An ordained Baptist minister, Huckabee spoke the language of the pastors and preached in their megachurches. He compared abortion to slavery and played up his opposition to gay marriage.

At breakfasts and large gatherings with national Christian leaders, Huckabee urged pastors to use their address books and e-mail lists to mobilize their flocks.

For a time, conservatives dissatisfied with McCain were drawn to Huckabee, but the party began to unite behind the likely - and now certain - nominee.

Huckabee displayed the common touch that came from a meager childhood in a little rented house with a father who worked two jobs in Hope, Ark., hometown of Bill Clinton.

He told working-class voters he understood their problems.

"When you grow up and life's a struggle, you have a whole different understanding of what most people are going through," he said in one ad. "Most Americans want their next president to remind them of the guy they work with - not the guy who laid them off."

He played the bass guitar on the campaign stage, to rock and roll classics like "Mustang Sally" or "Takin' Care of Business."

In scoring largely Southern victories, Huckabee demonstrated limited appeal outside of his religious conservative base.

He was also a near novice on world affairs, which became evident after a few stumbles. At one point, he was caught unaware that the White House had released a report saying Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program.

Throughout, he went easy on McCain - but not their common rival Mitt Romney.

Huckabee said he was proud that he and McCain ran a civil campaign. He told supporters in Columbia, S.C., the night he lost there, "Even though I'd like the outcome to be just a little different, I had rather be where I am, and have done it with honor, than to have won with the dishonor of getting there by attacking somebody else."

Summary of Dangerous Executive Orders

2008-03-04T15:38:00.000-08:00

Colleges to allow guns on campus?

2008-03-03T19:35:00.000-08:00

Story Source

Arizona lawmakers hope to stem the wave of unarmed students killed in campus slayings through a plan that would let adults carry firearms onto the grounds of the state's universities.

"The police got to both the Virginia Tech murder scene and the New Life Church [in Colorado] in about six minutes," noted Larry Pratt, the chief of Gun Owners of America. "At Virginia Tech, 30 people died. At New Life, two died in the parking lot and once the bad guy got inside the building he was engaged by (armed) security team volunteers and nobody else died. In fact, he was finished in about 30 seconds."

That, he said, ought to illustrate the issue as clear as anything.

In Arizona, legislation that would allow people to carry their guns onto community college or university campuses has been advancing, and now awaits further Senate action, after critics demanded public schools be removed from the plan.

State Sen. Karen Johnson, the bill's sponsor, said she was reluctant to make that change, because "I still feel our little kindergartners are sitting there as sitting ducks," she told the Arizona Republic. But Johnson said the remaining bill now has a better chance to move forward.

One recent vote on Senate Bill 1214, in the Senate Judiciary Committee, came just 11 days after a gunman killed five unarmed people and himself at Northern Illinois University.

Pratt noted that Utah and several local jurisdictions scattered around the U.S. already allow people with a license to carry their weapons onto campuses.

"We would like to see every state do something like that," he said, because of the tragedies that have been repeated multiple times in the past few years: a gunman starts shooting and killing people, they die, and then police arrive.

"Until we change that sequence, we're going to continue to have people become victims," he told WND.

Pratt cited the April 2007 Virginia Tech case, in which shooter Cho Seung-Hui, 23, fatally shot 32 people in a dorm and a classroom before killing himself, as well as the New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo., in December. Although the church operation is not identical to an educational campus, its sprawling acres and buildings and thousands of people have similarities. Police arrived on both scenes within minutes, but the death tolls were 32 in Virginia, two in Colorado.

"What greater contrast can there be?" Pratt suggested.

He also said carrying a weapon, not just having it at home, is founded in reason.

"Eighty-five percent of the attacks against persons actually occur outside the home," he said, citing women in parking lots, motorists along a road, wherever victims might be.

And just the deterrence would make a big difference. He noted in the U.S., where citizens are allowed guns, only 13 percent of home invasions happened when the home is occupied. In England, where firearms bans are much more expansive, the rate is 65 percent.

"Clearly signs that say 'No guns beyond this point' are not a deterrent," he said.

Police chiefs from Arizona State University, the University of Arizona and Northern Arizona told the newspaper they fear confusion with having citizens armed would lead to more people being killed. Officers could, they warned, shoot the wrong person.

The latest attack on unarmed teachers and students happened on Valentine's Day, when Stephen Kazmierczak, 27, walked into a Northern Illinois University auditorium and shot and killed five people, and wounded 16 others.

The gunman then shot himself.

The issue has been raised in recent weeks by a WND columnist. Dennis Prager, a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and author of several books, wrote:

Which of these three options is more likely to prevent further murderous rampages: a) making universities closed campuses and increasing the police presence (as the president of NIU has promised to do); b) making guns much harder to obtain or c) enabling specially trained students and faculty to carry concealed weapons on campus?
Because political correctness has replaced wisdom at nearly all universities, colleges are considering options a and b. But the only thing the first option will accomplish is to reduce the quality of university life and render the campus a larger version of the contemporary airport. And the second option will have no effect whatsoever since whoever wishes to commit murder will be able to obtain guns illegally.

But if would-be murderers know that anywhere they go to kill students, there is a real likelihood that one or two students will shoot them first, and if in fact some would-be murderer is killed before he can murder any, or at least many, students, we will see far fewer such attempts made.

The Arizona Citizens Defense League notes the state constitution provides, "The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired. …"

Lawmakers in Arizona told WND the legislation now is pending before the Senate. A Marine Corps veteran, identified as William, however, was urging action.

The veteran, who said he now works in security in Baghdad, wrote lawmakers:

"Sir, if I or any other responsible law-abiding gun owner was attending class in Illinois or Virginia on those fateful days and was allowed to carry, these tragedies could have been averted," he said ."Opponents … say that it is irresponsible to allow 18-25 year old young adults their basic right of self-defense. I have to say that I find this argument absurd. There [are] young adults carrying firearms right here in Baghdad in the Army, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Navy. These servicemen and and women's age does not in any way handicap them from being responsible with their firearms."

People who desire training in firearms handling also apparently would have no significant difficulty.

Ignatius Piazza, founder and director of the Frontsight Firearms Training Institute, said he was committing to provide every Arizona school teacher with a $2,000 handgun course, free of charge, at the time the plan is approved.

"Every time sanity begins to prevail with good legislators like Arizona Senate Majoirty Leader Theyer Verschoor and Sen. Karen Johnson introducing a real solution to protect our children from a violent attack, the unenlightened begin crying about their fear of teachers with guns," Piazza said.

Piazza also dismissed school presidents' concerns over confused police officers.

"When police arrive on the scene it will be very easy for them to identify the assailant. He will be the only dead body because an armed teacher stopped a potential massacre as soon as it started," he said.

The gun-control advocates at the Brady Campaign already has objected, however.

"Armed students? Armed teachers? That is the response of the gun lobby to the horrible massacre at Virginia Tech," the group said. "Despite the massacre at Virginia Tech, college campuses and schools are safer than the communities that surround them, precisely because those institutions have barred or tightly controlled firearms. We need to support those institutions, not strip them of the ability to control firearms on campus."

The group warned Nevada also has considered a plan to allow teachers to be armed, and South Carolina, Alabama, Michigan and Ohio are looking at plans similar to Arizona's.

But Pratt repeated his insistence that it's important to be prepared for a deadly attack. After killing two people at a Christian training center in Arvada, Colo., 24-year-old Matthew Murray went to Colorado Springs intending more murder and mayhem.

Murray shot and killed two girls in the New Life Church's parking lot, then headed inside the building where thousands of worshippers were concluding a service.

A volunteer security guard, Jeanne Assam, confronted him almost immediately and fired at him. He fell, and an autopsy later said he had shot himself.

California pastor seeks churches' aid in exodus from public schools

2008-03-03T19:31:00.000-08:00

From YCFA Member Maurice Page
Story Source

California pastor Ron Gleason is calling for parents to remove their children from public school after California lawmakers passed their version of affirmative action -- and he's asking churches to ease the discomfort in the process.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently signed into law SB 777, making it unlawful to criticize homosexual, bi-sexual, and transsexual teachers. Dr. Ron Gleason, director of the group California Exodus, says the bill goes even further.

"Schools are not allowed to say 'mommy' and 'daddy' anymore," Gleason states. "Children will be taught that sexual orientation and gender are merely a matter of personal choice -- and they will be taught to find what is 'right' for them."

The website for Gleason's group argues SB 777 essentially makes it lawful for public schools to "indoctrinate" children as young as pre-kindergarten to accept as normal and morally acceptable homosexuality and "other sexually deviant lifestyles." In addition, says the group, the legislation represents a "complete reversal of 2,000 years of Christian moral teaching on human sexuality, family, and marriage."

In response to the legislation, California Exodus is calling for concerned parents to remove their children from the California public school system. But Gleason says the goal is not just to send children to safe schools, but to schools that are academically sound. According to Gleason, CaliforniaExodus.org offers resources for parents who wish to take this sort of action.

Dr. Gleason also acknowledges the financial impact that decision could have on some families, so he is calling on churches -- with a willing membership and facilities that are largely vacant during the week -- to rethink how they spend their money.

"For a million dollars you could do an awful lot to set up a cooperative school or even your own school," he suggests. "And I think that's going to take some rethinking ... some re-prioritizing [and] some recommitment. But these are the types of things that can be done, and I believe that it's worthwhile to do it."

Dr. Gleason says that parents should be seeking a unity between church, school, and home in order to take care of the children God has entrusted to their care.

Mexican prez: Closing border a 'mistake'

2008-02-26T11:58:00.000-08:00

Story Source: World Net Daily

The White House believes the president of Mexico is "making very good efforts in trying to help secure the border," even though Felipe Calderon has described the two nations' economies as "complementary" and has warned anyone believing closing the border between the two will solve the "lack of competitiveness" in the U.S. is "making a very, very big mistake."

Mexican President Calderon recently spent nearly a week in the United States lobbying for his nation's interests. According to a recent Bloomberg report, Calderon said the number of people abandoning his nation and moving into the United States as illegal aliens soon will be reduced by new job creation in Mexico and economic growth there.

"It's possible to transform Mexico from a nation that loses its best people to migration into a nation capable of generating opportunity for Mexicans on their own soil,'' he told an audience at Harvard.

"We are neighbors, we are friends and we must be allies," he said. "Whoever is the next president of the United States, this country can count on Mexico to deal in that direction."

He said the two nations have complementary economies, because of the availability of U.S. capital and the extensive Mexican labor potential.

The White House believes the president of Mexico is "making very good efforts in trying to help secure the border," even though Felipe Calderon has described the two nations' economies as "complementary" and has warned anyone believing closing the border between the two will solve the "lack of competitiveness" in the U.S. is "making a very, very big mistake."

Mexican President Calderon recently spent nearly a week in the United States lobbying for his nation's interests. According to a recent Bloomberg report, Calderon said the number of people abandoning his nation and moving into the United States as illegal aliens soon will be reduced by new job creation in Mexico and economic growth there.

"It's possible to transform Mexico from a nation that loses its best people to migration into a nation capable of generating opportunity for Mexicans on their own soil,'' he told an audience at Harvard.

"We are neighbors, we are friends and we must be allies," he said. "Whoever is the next president of the United States, this country can count on Mexico to deal in that direction."

He said the two nations have complementary economies, because of the availability of U.S. capital and the extensive Mexican labor potential.

"The American economy is suffering, but if you take the point of view that the solution for this situation, the lack of competitiveness of the American economy, is closing the border, you're making a very, very big mistake," he said.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, however, told WND that President Bush believes Calderon is "making very good efforts in trying to help secure the border."

Her response came on a question from Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House.

"The AP reports that … Mexico's President Felipe Calderon, on his first trip to the United States, said, 'I need to change in Mexico the perception that the Americans are the enemy. And it is important to change the perception that the Mexicans are the enemy.' And my question: What evidence does President Bush have that Mexican troops and police are seriously halting Mexican illegal aliens from invading our country?" he asked.

"I don't think anybody here in this administration thinks that anyone from Mexico is an enemy, except for maybe those who are dealing drugs and violence on the border," Person responded.

"Well, I'm just quoting what the president of Mexico said…," said Kinsolving.

"We are working with the Calderon government. And President Calderon has said he's committed to working with us, and we actually have a package right now pending before Congress, in which we want to work with them in order to help make the border even more secure from – preventing illegal immigration, as well as helping stop drug trafficking and violence," Perino said.

"Does the president think the Mexicans have supported keeping our borders secure?" Kinsolving asked.

"I think the president believes President Calderon is making very good efforts in trying to help secure the border," she said.

In a column by Ruben Navarette of the Washington Post Writers Group, he said the situation has become a "fascinating turnabout."

"Not long ago, Mexicans were much too proud to think about the migrants who fled to the north searching for better opportunities," he concluded. "Now they're demanding that their leaders go to bat for these expatriates against what they see as a cruelty born of American xenophobia."

Calderon had set off fireworks even before he left on the trip, noting that "the most radical and anti-immigrant candidates" in the U.S. president race, "have been left behind."

He said it is "conservative talk show hosts" and others who now are creating a "hostile environment for all Mexicans in the United States."

He said many Americans make the serious mistake of believing Mexicans are their enemies.

"I hear it all the time. It's as if many Americans are waiting around for Mexico to solve our immigration problem by creating jobs south of the border or physically restraining those intent on crossing into the United States," Navarro wrote. "If so, they're going to be waiting a long time. Mexico now takes in about $23 billion annually in remittances from Mexicans living in the United States. It has no interest in turning off the golden faucet."

The comments from Calderon have the potential danger of being seen as lobbying for more privilege for immigrants, including illegal aliens, in the United States, one observer said.

"Calderon has to be very careful what he says," James Jones, a former U.S. ambassador to Mexico, told reporters, or he runs the risk of provoking a "dangerous, emotional, anti-Mexico response."

In a second questions, Kinsolving asked whether the White House had developed further concerns over a flyover of a U.S. air craft carrier by a Russian bomber. The recent incident was downplayed initially by the White House.

"Agence France-Presse reports that the USS Nimitz launched four F-18 fighters to intercept a pair of Russian TU-95 bombers off Japan, and escort one of them as it flew over the carrier at an altitude of 2,000 feet. And my question: What was the reaction of the commander-in-chief to this?"

"The president said that the Department of Defense handled it well, and we didn't think of it as a hostile act. It was nothing that we were really concerned about," Perino said.

'Muslim' photo raises Obama connection questions

2008-02-26T11:55:00.000-08:00

Story Source: World Net Daily

The Internet posting of a photograph of Democratic presidential primary frontrunner Sen. Barack Obama in what has been described as "Muslim" clothing during a visit to Kenya has drawn the typical political accusations and denials. But it's also raised questions about Obama's links to Kenya, which has Muslim neighbors on several fronts, and was home to Obama's father.

One of the concerns being expressed regarding Obama's ties involves his connections to Kenyan political opposition leader Raila Odinga, links documented through Obama's attendance at public rallies where he spoke on behalf of Odinga.

That's because Odinga admitted to Christian leaders in Kenya a Memorandum of Understanding circulating on the Internet is not fake, but a document Odinga signed with Muslim leaders in Kenya.

According to Jack Wheeler, the author of a newsletter titled To the Point, the Memorandum of Understanding allegedly contains a pledge by Odinga to make Kenya an Islamic state by re-writing the constitution of Kenya within six months after Odinga takes office as president, to recognize the Islamic sharia as the ruling law of the land.

Odinga's Orange Democratic Movement is in opposition to President Mwai Kibaki, who is part of Kenya's largest tribe, the Kikuyu, while Odinga is part of the second-largest tribe, the Luo.

In a disputed Dec. 27, 2007, election, Kibaki was named president but Odinga charged he was denied winning because of voter fraud, a claim that resulted in widespread fighting that killed more than 1,000 people.

Now Odinga is seeking a power-sharing arrangement in which he would be the prime minister in a government where Kibaki was president, with the two factions sharing 50-50 in the cabinet.

Former UN secretary general Kofi Annan has been mediating in the talks between Odinga and Kibaki.

There have been other reports of Obama's connections. In January, Odinga told the BBC that Obama's father was his maternal uncle, claiming Obama is his cousin.

However, a Reuters report published on Jan. 8 contradicted Odinga, quoting Obama's uncle as saying Obama's father came from the same area as Odinga, but he is not a blood relative.

But the same Reuters report alleged Obama was "deeply troubled" by the violence in Kenya since the disputed Dec. 27 polls, saying Obama telephoned Odinga in Kenya to express his concern.

The photograph in question was published on The Drudge Report. Obama campaign manager David Plouffe cited its publication in accusing the campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton of "shameful offensive fear-mongering."

The photo is authentic, taken in Kenya during Barack's five-nation taxpayer-funded trip to Africa in August 2006, although the Obama camp denies the photo proves any connection between Obama and Islam.

The photograph was originally published by Han-Geeska Afrika Online on Sept. 1, 2006.

It shows Sheikh Mahmed Hassan dressing Obama as a Somali elder during Obama's visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya near the borders with Somalia and Ethopia.

On Feb. 4 this year, the tabloid National Examiner had published the photo in an article which asserted Obama was wearing "Muslim attire" on a trip to the Kenya homeland of his father.

The Obama campaign then disavowed the National Examiner's sensationalism, arguing that Obama was dressed in traditional tribal garb, not "Muslim attire," much as President Bush or other U.S. leaders take on local clothing or traditional native costumes when meeting in foreign countries.

Somalia is almost entirely Sunni Muslim, so in that sense the Somali elder garb is also Islamic, but Obama has long denied being a Muslim, asserting that he is Christian, with membership in a Chicago church that focuses on its blackness and support for Africa.

In recent years, a number of Islamic attacks on Christian churches have been reported in Kenya, where the population of some 30 million is about 85 percent Christian and only about 15 percent Muslim.

Islamic violence in Kenya broke out once again in the aftermath of the disputed Dec. 27 election.

As reported by the Australian in January, a crowd of some 2,000 Kenyans attacked Christians in Eldoret, a community about 300 kilometers west of Nairobi, where the Christians were being hunted down by machete-wielding assailants and hid inside pit latrines and fled for refuge to the community's Assemblies of God Christian church.

The crowd set fire to the church, terrifying the hundreds of family members outside who listened to victims' screams as flames engulfed them.

According to Red Cross witnesses, about 50 died in the attack.

Over the weekend, the Nation in Narobi reported President Bush had dispatched Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to Kenya with a stern message from the White House to both President Kibaki and Odinga that the violence in Kenya must stop and that Kibaki and Odinga must share political power to end the current political crisis.

According to the report, Rice was instructed to tell Kibaki and Odinga the international community was not ready to allow the violence in Kenya to spiral out of control into a Rwanda-like situation in which hundreds of thousands were killed in 100 days.

Rice further warned that should political instability take hold in Kenya, then terrorism would have found a new home.

Georgia school district to divide boys and girls

2008-02-25T15:30:00.000-08:00

From YCFA Member Maurice Page
Story Source

GREENSBORO, Ga. - Nearly four decades after this rural Georgia county stopped segregating its schools by race, it wants to divide students again - this time by sex.

Greene County is set to become the first school district in the nation to go entirely single-sex, with boys and girls in separate classrooms - a move born of desperation over years of poor test scores, soaring dropout rates and high numbers of teenage pregnancies.

"At the rate we're moving, we're never going to catch up," Superintendent Shawn McCollough told parents in an impassioned speech last week. "If we're going to take some steps, let's take some big steps."

This pine-shrouded county of about 14,400 people between Atlanta and Augusta has in recent years become a magnet for retirees moving into luxury developments along the shore of Lake Oconee. But the vast majority of longtime residents _ and most of the 2,000 students in the county's schools - are black and working class.

McCollough pointed to research showing that boys and girls learn differently, and said separating them will allow teachers to tailor their lessons. Also, boys won't misbehave as much because they will no longer be trying to impress the girls, and the girls will be more likely to speak up in class because they won't be afraid to look smart in front of the boys, he said.

The school board's move to radically overhaul the system next fall has angered parents, students and teachers, who say they weren't consulted. And one of the nation's foremost proponents of single-sex education warned that the board has gone too far.

The measure, approved two weeks ago, applies to the high school, the middle school and both elementary schools. It exempts only the preschool and a charter school, which is public but operates independently.

"I am outraged," said Tammi Freeman, who has two children at the high school. "I am disgusted. It's making our county look like our kids are trouble when they're not."

Leonard Sax, head of the National Association for Single Sex Public Education, said that while single-sex schools and classrooms are on the increase, he knows of no other community that has converted its entire school system. He called the move illegal.

Federal law allows single-sex classrooms or schools, but parents must also have the option of publicly funded coeducation for their children, Sax said.

"This is the worst kind of publicity for our movement," he said. "It misses the whole point. Our movement is about choice. One size does not fit all. Even a small school district needs to provide choice."

U.S. Education Department spokeswoman Samara Yudof said officials "do not have sufficient facts to determine if the district would be in compliance" with federal law.

Districts across the U.S. have been switching to single-sex education since federal officials issued rules to ease the process in 2006. Nationally, at least 366 public schools are either entirely single-sex or have single-sex classrooms, Sax said.

In Greene County, boys and girls will be in separate classrooms in the elementary schools. Boys and girls in grades seven through 12 will attend separate schools. Some electives and extracurricular activities such as ROTC and band will probably be coed.

The charter school, Lake Oconee Academy, will remain coed; it is governed by a committee of parents and community leaders. It opened last fall amid protests from black citizens who said it brings back segregation, since the school has a fixed enrollment area centered on the mostly white, well-to-do lakefront.

Greene County is about 70 percent black. Many people in the county made their living at hosiery, clothing and fabric mills until the industry disappeared at the end of the 20th century and gave way to a service economy in which the big employers are the Reynolds Plantation luxury golf resort community and the Ritz-Carlton lodge.

McCollough said he hopes single-sex classrooms raise test scores and graduation rates in a district where more than three-quarters of the students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunches.

Sixty-seven percent of Greene County ninth-graders go on to receive a diploma, compared with 72 percent statewide. Last year, the students scored an average of 1,168 on the SAT, far below the state average of 1,458 and the national average of 1,495. The high school has been ranked 332nd out of 369 in Georgia.

Teachers and parents are split over the move.

"Sometimes big changes are needed for big results. The teaching staff I talked to are willing to work hard and make it work," said Sherry Shutze, who has taught at Union Point Elementary for nine years.

But another teacher, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of losing his job, said dozens of teachers are considering leaving because they feel the idea is being "crammed down our throats."

Dwain Evans said he is thrilled his three children will have a chance to attend single-sex schools: "If we continue to do status quo, we can't expect any better outcome."

Research shows that when boys and girls are separated, each group performs better in school and is more likely to go to college, said Julie Ancis, a professor in the school of education at Georgia State University.

But she said single-sex schools tend to be private institutions with updated technology and ample resources, not poor school systems like Greene County's.

Doctors Advised Abortion; Baby Born Healthy

2008-02-25T15:28:00.000-08:00

Story Source

A Wales couple are enjoying their healthy 5-month-old son after they defied doctors' recommendation to abort him.

Before Brandon Kramer was born, doctors diagnosed him, via an MRI scan, with a rare brain disorder that reportedly would cause deafness and blindness. Becky and Kriss were told their son probably would survive only a few hours. Just weeks before Brandon's birth, doctors recommended abortion.

The couple ignored the doctors’ advice and welcomed a healthy boy on Oct. 1, 2007. He is now teething and attempting to talk.

"I feel incredibly guilty thinking that I could have killed him — and then I find myself wondering how many other babies are killed who would have turned out to be completely healthy,” Becky told London’s Daily Mail.

The parents said they want their story to serve as a warning for other parents advised to abort their babies.

According to the British Paediatric Neurology Association, “Just because you have an abnormality in a scan doesn't mean your baby will turn out abnormally.”

Officials at the University Hospital of Wales said an urgent case review will be conducted.

Dawn Vargo, associate bioethics analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said prenatal diagnoses often are wrong.

"Unfortunately, parents who receive an adverse genetic diagnosis for their preborn child often are under immense pressure from their doctor to abort," she said. "It is encouraging to see parents to who were willing to recognize and affirm the life of their preborn child — despite dire warnings about supposedly serious health complications."

The U.S. Senate currently is considering the Prenatally and Postnatally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act (S. 1810), which would provide up-to-date information and resources to families that receive adverse genetic diagnoses during pregnancy.

New Tactics to Control Immigration Are Unveiled

2008-02-23T12:52:00.000-08:00

Story Source

Bush administration officials said Friday that they would begin using new technology to create a virtual fence along sections of the border with Mexico, and that construction had been completed on 302 miles of physical fence.

Further intensifying the crackdown on illegal immigration, the administration will unveil new rules in coming weeks requiring all federal contractors to participate in a system, known as E-Verify, to confirm the legal immigration status of their workers, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said at a joint news conference in Washington.

Next week, civil fines for employers who hire illegal immigrants will increase by 25 percent, the officials said. Current fines are $2,200 for a first offense and up to $10,000 for repeat offenses.

The Justice Department plans more aggressive prosecution of illegal immigrants and employers who hire them, adding about 50 federal prosecutors in border states, Mr. Mukasey said.

The administration is pushing ahead to extend fencing at the 2,000-mile Mexican border despite skepticism from many sides. Opponents of illegal immigration argue that the virtual fence technology is flawed and ineffective, while many officials and residents in border states say that real fences are expensive and block access to land and water for ranchers and farmers, but do little to stop illegal border crossers.

Administration officials have acknowledged that public doubts about President Bush’s border enforcement policies contributed to the failure last year of a bill he backed that would have given legal status to illegal immigrants.

After a year of trial and error, Mr. Chertoff said, border authorities have approved and are ready to use a suite of surveillance equipment that has been called P-28, because it was tested along 28 miles of border near Tucson. The technology, manufactured on a $20 million contract by Boeing, includes ground sensors and cameras mounted on 90-foot-high towers that relay images directly to Border Patrol command centers and vehicles.

In tests last year, the system failed to consistently communicate images and location information to agents on the ground. But Mr. Chertoff said, “We’re convinced at this point all of the defects have either been cured or they’re so immaterial we’re prepared to take a credit” from Boeing.

As part of a $2 billion investment in border enforcement projects over the next two years, the administration will also use up to 40 mobile ground radars and six unmanned aerial surveillance drones, Mr. Chertoff said.

Border Patrol agents, who now number 15,400, will increase to 18,000 by the end of the year, doubling the size of the force since Mr. Bush took office in 2001.

Mr. Chertoff and Mr. Mukasey said that a surprisingly effective recent initiative did not involve fencing at all.

In a few high-traffic border areas, federal prosecutors have started to bring charges — misdemeanors, in most cases — against all immigrants caught entering illegally, holding most in jail. Previously, illegal crossers who agreed to leave the country voluntarily were not prosecuted.

In Yuma, Ariz., where prosecutors brought 1,200 cases against illegal crossers in the last three months of last year, the number of immigrants caught crossing illegally dropped 70 percent in those months. In 45 days after the program started in Laredo, Tex., arrests of illegal crossers dropped 33 percent.

Officials believe that fewer arrests indicate that fewer immigrants are trying to cross.

The prosecutions had “an unbelievable deterrent effect,” Mr. Chertoff said.

Colson calls American church back to basics

2008-02-23T12:48:00.000-08:00

From YCFA Member Maurice Page
Story Source

A leading evangelical Christian says the church in America is being seduced by the comforts of modern culture. And life should be a pursuit of holiness and not happiness, says Chuck Colson.

In his newest book The Faith, Colson says many Christians in America do not have a proper view of sin, redemption, mercy, and grace. He believes many Christians cannot defend their faith because they do not know what they believe -- nor do they have a right view of the role of the church.

"We think the church kind of helps us get through life. We don't look at it as God's own structure for doing his work on earth that he entrusts us with," describes Colson. "We don't have a high, holy view of the church and of exactly what happened at the cross, which is an exchange of identities. It's not I who live, but Christ who lives in me, for I've been crucified with Christ." (Galatians 2:20)

Colson also says it is unfortunate that people do not have a firm grasp on the true meaning of salvation either. He says he questions some people's claims of salvation because he sees no spiritual fruit in their lives, and he encourages them to get back on track with living like Christ.

In his book, Colson says true Christians -- instead of focusing on happiness -- will strive to live lives of holiness.

Pro-lifer: Money speaks louder than human life

2008-02-23T12:46:00.000-08:00

From YCFA Member Maurice Page
Story Source

Kansas pro-life activist Troy Newman says for many politicians and judges, money talks louder than innocent human lives.

The Kansas Supreme Court this week blocked a subpoena issued to the attorney general of Kansas by a grand jury investigating Wichita abortionist George Tiller. The grand jury is trying to gather information -- such as patient records -- in an investigation of illegal late-term abortions performed by Tiller.

Operation Rescue president Troy Newman says there are two major problems in the state of Kansas. "Number one, you have huge amounts of abortion money that's been funding politicians for a very long time -- and that is stalling the [Kansas] Supreme Court from acting," he points out. "[It's preventing] the attorney general and the district attorney from actually getting to the bottom of this case.

"Secondly, I believe ... there's a huge spiritual dilemma all across the nation when it comes to the issue of child sacrifice," he adds.

Newman says Christians "need to storm the gates of heaven with our prayers and break through this logjam so that we can see the lives of these babies spared once and for all."

Iraqi pair nabbed in Mexico, headed to U.S. with fake IDs

2008-02-22T09:56:00.001-08:00

Story Source

WASHINGTON – Two more Iraqis with false Bulgarian passports were detained by Mexican officials in Monterrey – bringing the total to four this month.

Wisam Gorgies, a 34-year-old man, and Rana Nazar Peyoz, a 26-year-old woman, reportedly flew from Madrid and landed in Monterrey, according to reports in two Mexican newspapers today.

Following questioning, the pair admitted they intended to reach the United States. They were taken to Saltillo in the state of Coahuila, for final determination of their status.

Mexican officials said the are investigating "a network that could be made up of Mexicans operating in Greece who are selling false Bulgarian passports for $10,000 to European and Middle Eastern citizens."

Earlier this month, El Universal, a daily in Mexico City, reported two other Iraqis, Markos Ramy, a 25-year-old man, and Sollem Pate, a 20-year-old woman, presented Bulgarian passports upon arrival at the Monterrey airport after a flight from Spain.

They told customs officials they came as tourists for a couple days. But because they spoke no Bulgarian, their passports were determined to be fraudulent. The Bulgarian consulate did not acknowledge them as citizens and their hotel reservations proved to be phony.

Only after their cover story was blown did the couple admit to being Iraqis. They claimed to be fleeing the war.

Last year, dozens of Iraqis were discovered attempting to enter Monterrey with phony ID – 17 of them in a single event.

In addition, earlier this month, Norwegian authorities reported that Iraqis affiliated with al-Qaida and former Baath Party members may have slipped into Kuwait after obtaining $15,000 Norwegian passports. Authorities in Kuwait say they are on the lookout for any Iraqi citizen bearing a Norwegian passport.

The incidents raise the question of whether they are part of an orchestrated campaign by terrorists to enter countries targeted for attacks.

Last October, Kunio Hatoyama, Japan's minister of justice, made an astonishing admission at the Foreign Correspondents Club in Tokyo. Asked about a new law that requires foreigners visiting his country to be photographed and fingerprinted, the official said he favored the idea.

"A friend of a friend is a member of al-Qaida," he said. He explained he had entered Japan numerous times using false passports and disguises. "This particular person was actually involved in the bombings in the center of Bali. Although he is a friend of my friend, I was advised not to go close to the centre of Bali because it will be bombed."

The fingerprinting policy would prevent such people from entering the country, Hatoyama concluded.

Back in 2004, WND reported that al-Qaida planned to use Mexico as an entry pointinto the U.S. In addition, the 911 commission reported the terrorist network actually owned a travel agency in Mexico.

The commission also concluded that immigration enforcement failures led directly to the 911 attack . At least seven of the 19 hijackers carried false passports.

Also in 2004, WND reported Mexico was not fully cooperating with anti-terrorist efforts because of corruption and red tape inside the government.

That same year, WND reported al-Qaida expanding operations in Mexico and Latin America because of financial pressures brought on by the war on terrorism.

This followed an admission by former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that al-Qaida was attempting to smuggle operatives into the U.S. across the Mexican border.

In 2003, WND reported a Mexican smuggling ring specializing in bringing Middle Easterners in the U.S. was discovered.

Paraguay was also reported to be a hub for Arab terrorists.

Just a month after the 911 attack, WND reported on the evidence Arabs were routinely making the trek from Mexico to the U.S.

China to open world's largest Bible printing plant

2008-02-22T09:47:00.000-08:00

From YCFA Member Maurice Page:

Story Source

Bob Fu, the president of the China Aid Association, says it's ironic that the communist country of China will soon have the largest Bible print shop in the world.

It was recently reported that China will soon open the largest Bible production plant in the world on the outskirts of the city of Nanjing. The plant will be operated by government-sanctioned Amity Press and reportedly will print one-million Bibles each month.

But while Chinese officials have heralded the development, Bob Fu, president of the China Aid Association, says the communist government could do more to get Bibles into the hands of Chinese citizens. "If China is serious on this issue of printing Bibles, they should make the Bibles available, at least in the public library [and] bookstores and so that citizens can have free access to buy it if they want," states Fu.

Fu says the Chinese government has nothing to brag about with this new production plant. He says with the world's largest population (1.3 billion people), China has the largest number of Christians within its borders. "To print a few million Bibles does not really show there's any religious freedom to boast [about]," the Christian activists argues.

He says despite efforts to make the Chinese government look tolerant, the Bible is still restricted in the public square.

Lead-up to Olympics

Meanwhile, Associated Press reports the director of China's religious affairs bureau is trying to calm U.S. misgivings ahead of Beijing's Olympic Games this summer. In Washington, Ye Xiaowen met with U.S. officials and spoke at Georgetown University.

After talks Wednesday with Undersecretary of State Paula Dobriansky, he told reporters that China's peaceful development depends upon its respect for human rights and religious beliefs. Ye said he also met with President Bush's ambassador for international religious freedom, John Hanford, and with Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, the retired archbishop of Washington.

Ye criticized as groundless last year's State Department report on religious freedom that said China continued to repress religious groups and was cracking down ahead of the Olympics. Fu argues the crackdown on Christians and unregistered house churches is indeed related to the upcoming Olympic Games.

'Any person' has right to gun, state says

2008-02-21T07:43:00.000-08:00

Story Source

Montana officials are saying that the United States already has resolved any questions about the 2nd Amendment's application, defining that "any person" has the right to bears arms.

That's the issue at hand in a pending U.S. Supreme Court case originating in the District of Columbia, where authorities have banned handguns under the claim that such a limit is "reasonable" and therefore enforceable even given the rights granted by the 2nd Amendment.

U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has asked President Bush to order the U.S. Justice Department to submit a brief to the high court supporting the rights of individuals under the 2nd Amendment. A similar request already has been submitted by officials for the Gun Owners of America, whose executive director, Larry Pratt, warned:

"If the Supreme Court were to accept the Solicitor General's line of argument, D.C.'s categorical gun ban of virtually all self-defense firearms could well be found to be constitutional. ..."

He warned such a precedent to affirm any and all gun restrictions if they are considered by a judge to be "reasonable" would place those rights on the lowest rung of the constitutional ladder.

"In contrast to other provisions in the Bill of Rights, which can only be trumped by 'compelling state interests,' the 2nd Amendment would be relegated to an inferior position at the lowest rung of the constitutional ladder, should the Justice Department prevail," said Pratt.

But officials in Montana, including dozens of state lawmakers as well as Secretary of State Brad Johnson, have joined together in a statement that the U.S. already has determined the application, and 2nd Amendment rights apply to "any person."

In a joint resolution from the Montana leaders, including Congressman Denny Rehberg, they caution that should the Supreme Court decide to change the U.S. interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and allow those rights to apply only collectively, it would violate the contract under which Montana entered the union as a state.

"The Montana Resolution cautions that a collective rights decision would violate the Montana contract for statehood because when that contract was entered the collective rights interpretation had not yet been invented and the individual rights view was an accepted part of the contract," an announcement from the leaders said.

"A collective rights decision in [the pending court case] Heller would not only violate Montana's contract for statehood, but also Montana's customs, culture and heritage. We hope the Supreme Court will recognize and credit the contract argument, an argument unmentioned in any of the briefs submitted in the Heller case," said Gary Marbut, the president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association.

The Montana contract is archived as Article I of the Montana Constitution. At the time the then-territory's "Compact with the United States" was agreed to by Congress, the Montana Constitution included the "right of 'any person' to bear arms," the group said.

"Contracts must be implemented so as to effect the intent of the parties to the contract. A collective rights decision by the court could also call into question the sanctity of contracts, considered to have been a bedrock principle of law for centuries," the group said.

The state was admitted to the union in 1889 under President Benjamin Harrison and he approved the state constitution proposal including the right to bear arms, the officials said.

Any other determination, they said, would "offend" the Compact, officials said.

"[That] language … simply cannot be respun to somehow mean a right of state government," they said.

It could not have referred to the National Guard, which wasn't created until years later, officials said.

"Some speak of a 'living constitution,' the meaning of which may evolve and change over time. However, the concept of a 'living contract,' one to be disregarded or revised at the whim of one party thereto, is unknown. A collective rights holding in Heller would not only open the Pandora's box of unilaterally morphing contracts, it would also poise Montana to claim appropriate and historically entrenched remedies for contract violation," the group said.

Goode earlier wrote Bush that under the perspective being promoted in the District of Columbia, a national ban on all firearms, including hunting rifles, could be considered valid.

The government's position is available in a document submitted by by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement. He said since "unrestricted" private ownership of guns clearly threatens the public safety, the 2nd Amendment can be interpreted to allow a variety of gun restrictions.

"Given the unquestionable threat to public safety that unrestricted private firearm possession would entail, various categories of firearm-related regulation are permitted by the Second Amendment," Clement wrote in the brief.

Because of the specifics of the D.C. case, the ultimate ruling is expected to address directly whether the 2nd Amendment includes a right for individuals nationwide to have a gun or whether local governments can approve whatever laws or ordinances they desire to restrict firearms.

The amendment reads, "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Oxford to Study Faith in God

2008-02-21T07:41:00.000-08:00

From YCFA Member Maurice Page

Story Source

University of Oxford researchers will spend nearly $4 million to study why mankind embraces God. The grant to the Ian Ramsey Center for Science and Religion will bring anthropologists, theologians, philosophers and other academics together for three years to study whether belief in a divine being is a basic part of mankind's makeup.

"There are a lot of issues. What is it that is innate in human nature to believe in God, whether it is gods or something superhuman or supernatural?" said Roger Trigg, acting director of the center.

He said anthropological and philosophical research suggests that faith in God is a universal human impulse found in most cultures around the world, even though it has been waning in Britain and western Europe.

"One implication that comes from this is that religion is the default position, and atheism is perhaps more in need of explanation," he said.

The study will be funded by the John Templeton Foundation, a U.S.-based philanthropic organization that funds wide-ranging research into questions that deal with the laws of nature and issues of spirituality.

Educators say evolution still 'theory'

2008-02-20T09:36:00.000-08:00

Story Source

A decision by the Florida Board of Education to qualify evolution as a "theory" when the concept is taught in public schools has triggered a gusher of outrage from those faithful to Darwinian philosophy.

"Creationism is NOT science and is for fools who believe in fairy tales," wrote boston85 on a Tampa Bay Online forum after the state board simply voted to describe evolution as a "theory." It wasn't even considering allowing teaching alternative beliefs about the origins of the universe, such as creationism or intelligent design.

Added Brian06, "What is the problem? Darwin's theory of evolution by means of natural selection has stood the test of SCIENTIFIC studies and investigations. Why are the people against the writings in Darwin's book and have yet NEVER read it and yet they 'claim' to live their live (sic) by bible (sic) which they have also NEVER read!"

And lornoborno wrote: "You religious fanatics make us look like backwards fools to the rest of the world. Asia will overtake us in science and technology – you are hurting the USA worse than any terrorist or communist regime. Your stupid medieval myths do not belong in our classrooms. Go to your cult mega-churches and bask in your ignorance there – leave our children alone. EVOLUTION is REAL – the Bible is MYTH!"

The outpouring of goodwill and tolerance followed today's vote by the state board that in order for evolution to be taught in Florida's public schools it must be qualified by being described as a "theory."

"Although the Florida Board of Education approved the use of the word "evolution" it did so with the qualification that it is taught as scientific theory instead of scientific fact," said the Florida Family Association, which lobbied for considering evolution a theory, not fact.

"Supporters of Florida Family Association's e-mail campaign delivered more than 13,800 e-mails to the Florida Board of Education board members. They heard your request that evolution not be taught as scientific fact," the association said.

However, the board really should have gone further and adopted a plan that would have protected teachers' freedom to open discussion to other ideas.

John Stemberger, the Florida Family Policy Council president, said the reference to "theory" fell short of what parents deserve.

"This is a sad day in Florida, when a handful of religious Darwinists can hijack the curriculum framing process and push their ideological agenda at the expense of the education [of] our children."

Kim Kendall, a concerned parent, expressed concern the new standards "do not allow for academic freedom and protection for teachers who teach the weaknesses in Darwinism."

Existing policy for the state required that teachers refer to evolution in terminology such as "change over time," so the addition of the word evolution is new.

The definition of evolution as a "theory" was a modified proposal some considered a compromise, because it fell far short of the mandate that had been proposed by a state committee, one that stated as fact: "Evolution is the fundamental concept underlying all of biology and is supported by multiple forms of scientific evidence."

Board member Roberto Martinez took exception to the adjustment, saying the theory description was nothing more than an attempt to "placate" people who did not believe in evolution.

Board member Donna Callaway, however, called it a "minimal" change.

Board Chairman T. Willard Fair voted last and cast the deciding vote in the 4-3 decision.

The original proposal to the Board of Education, essentially, would have presented evolution as proven fact.

"The proposed standards [for evolution] presume ideas to be facts and leave no opportunity to study them beyond their narrow presentation," Fred Cutting, a retired aerospace engineer, had warned.

He served on the state's Science Standards Framers Committee because of his expertise in biology, specifically species origins and the human genome project, and found the treatment of evolution "very one-sided, bias[ed] and narrow in its final views."

He said, "There was no room for any critical thinking or criticism of prevailing science theories. Students are not encouraged to do any critical thinking or evaluations within the proposed standards being questioned. The life sciences subcommittee refused to distinguish between what can be observed, tested and objectively verified, on one hand, and what is speculation and/or mere hypothesis on the other."

Pastor Neal Ganzel Jr., of Ormond Beach, Fla., said such dogmatism isn't appropriate in science. "May I remind us all that Alchemy was once the ruling theory of science? Newton and Galileo gave us one authoritative understanding of time, then came Einstein and relativity. The human family has been embarrassed many times by versions of the Flat Earth Society," he said.

The Jacksonville Times-Union reported that school boards in the northeastern part of the state objected collectively, endorsing resolutions that urged the state to back down from the new standards promoting "evolution," not the "theory" of evolution.

Nassau Superintendent John Ruis said the theory of evolution has many holes, and having the state present it as an undisputed fact "is certainly contrary to the beliefs of many people, including myself."

The Orlando Sentinel reported more than 10,000 people logged on to the state website to denounce or praise the science blueprint. The newspaper's own forum on the issue had collected nearly 1,000 comments, including Woody Smith's endorsement of evolution: "Evolution by natural selection is an established PRINCIPLE of science – the fact that it is still called a 'theory' seems to imply to some ignorant people that it is somehow in doubt. ... It is supported by the fossil record. It has been observed in the laboratory. It has been observed in nature. It has been supported by advances in genetic science. NO evidence whatsoever has ever been discovered to contradict it."

But Bob W. followed with a different perspective.

"Evolution has never qualified as anything more than a theory. The theory caters to secular thought and the presupposition that man is the highest order of all beings. But the problem is that none of what the theory promotes has ever been observed, much less proved. No transitional forms, no new species and no new anything. … Evolution is such a mass of mumbo (sixty billon years ago) jumbo (the mountain turned upside down), that most folks taught this stuff still have no idea of what it is. They have to replay their Jurassic Park DVD to refresh their memory. Think of the markets that feed off this nonsense and folk's pocketbooks. Well, gotta go. Two Yugos just wrecked outside my window and I want to see the new Caddies that resulted … that's evolution."

The outrage after the board's decision evidenced itself in the newspaper forums.

"This is all a crock," wrote lolalove222, "Believe what you'd like, but there is a clear constitutional issue here: seperation (sic) of church and state. Since the PUBLIC schools are run by the state, NO religion has the right to demand ANY religious teachings be taught in schools…"

"I know! Why don't we teach science in school and religion in church! … If you want your children to know about the Bible, please don't ask schools to teach it. Take your kids to church on Sunday," wrote DarthRandall.

Paige, however, pointed out one other major point. "Evolution cannot be scientifically proven! That is what is so ironic about this debate…"

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

EXTRA:
Click here for Chuck Baldwin political article

Federal judge upholds Arizona immigration ordinance

2008-02-20T09:29:00.000-08:00

Story Source

From YCFA Member Maurice Page
Within the Week: 2/12/2008 10:00:00 AM

An immigration reform organization is praising the decision of a federal judge to uphold an Arizona law that prohibits businesses from knowingly hiring illegal aliens and yanks the business licenses of those that do.

U.S. District Judge Neil Wake dismissed a lawsuit filed by business groups that argued the law unconstitutionally infringes on federal immigration powers. But Wake concluded there is no conflict with federal immigration law because it specifically lets states regulate business licensing. Recently another federal judge upheld a similar measure in Valley Park, Missouri.

Ira Mehlman with the Federation for American Immigration Reform says good case law is being built among these judges. "[They] have said there is absolutely no conflict between local governments enforcing immigration laws and the federal government's authority over immigration policy," he adds.

And Mehlman says he is confident the ruling by a federal judge who struck down a similar ordinance in Hazleton, Pennsylvania, will be overturned. "Ultimately what is going to happen is that all these cases are going to get lumped together and wind up before the Supreme Court -- and the Supreme Court will render a final decision [in our favor]," he predicts.

The immigration reform proponent says the decisions in Arizona and Missouri should give a green light to other state and local governments that are thinking about passing similar ordinances aimed at curbing illegal immigration.

Fidel Castro resigns (two parts)

2008-02-20T09:19:00.000-08:00

Pt 1 2/19/08
From YCFA member Maurice Page

HAVANA - Cuban dictator, Fidel Castro, announced early this morning that he will resign. (see video report)

In a letter published by Cuba's official media, the ailing leader said he would not accept a new term when the newly elected parliament meets on Sunday.

"I will not aspire nor accept - I repeat I will not aspire or accept, the post of President of the Council of State and Commander in Chief," read a letter signed by Castro published quietly overnight without advance warning in the online edition of the Communist Party daily Granma.

The new National Assembly is meeting for first time Sunday since January elections to pick the governing Council of State, including the presidency Castro holds. There had been wide speculation about whether he would accept a nomination for reelection to that post or retire.

The 81-year-old Castro's overnight announcement effectively ends his rule of almost 50 years over Cuba, positioning his 76-year-old brother Raul for permanent succession to the presidency.

Over the decades, the fiery guerrilla leader reshaped Cuba into a communist state 90 miles from U.S. shores and survived assassination attempts, a CIA-backed invasion and a missile crisis that brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Since his rise to power on New Year's Day 1959, Castro resisted attempts by 10 U.S. administrations to topple him, including the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961.

The United States' discovery of nuclear-armed missiles on the island led to a showdown of the world's then-superpowers before the Soviet Union agreed to remove them.

Monarchs excepted, Castro was the world's longest ruling head of state.

His ironclad rule ensured Cuba remained among the world's last few remaining communist countries, long after the breakup of the Soviet Union and collapse of communism across Eastern Europe.

Castro's designated successor was his brother Raul, five years younger and No. 2 in Cuba's power structure as defense minister. Raul Castro had been in his brother's rebel movements since 1953.

Castro had already temporarily ceded his powers to his brother on July 31, 2006, when he announced that he had undergone intestinal surgery.

More than a year after falling ill, the elder Castro still had not been seen in public, appearing only sporadically in official photographs and videotapes and publishing dense essays about mostly international themes as his younger brother began to consolidate his rule.

But the United States, bent on blocking Fidel Castro's plans for his younger brother to succeed him, built a detailed plan in 2005 for American assistance to ensure a democratic transition on the island of 11.2 million people after his death.

Castro and other Cuban officials long insisted "there will be no transition" and that the island's socialist political and economic systems will live on long after he is gone.

Castro's supporters admired his ability to provide a high level of health care and education for citizens while remaining fully independent of the United States.

But his detractors called him a dictator whose totalitarian government systematically denied individual freedoms and civil liberties such as speech, movement and assembly.

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

Pt. 2 Story Source

HAVANA -- Now that Fidel Castro has retired, many Cubans are looking to his brother to let more people open businesses, own homes and even travel abroad. But it will probably fall to a new generation of leaders to ultimately fulfill or frustrate their dreams of prosperity.

During his 1 1/2 years as acting president, 76-year-old Raul Castro has hinted at reform but made few major changes _ a reticence many see as a sign of respect for his beloved, more doctrinaire, 81-year-old brother, who survived despite the efforts of 10 U.S. presidents to bring him down.

And while hoping that Raul and his likely No. 2, Carlos Lage, will advocate for change, they wonder how that will fly with Fidel, who stepped down but isn't going away.

"There has to be some change, more freedom with Raul," said Andres, 63, who like many Cubans wouldn't give his last name for fear of reprisal when talking about the Castro brothers. "The other one always nipped that off at the bud."

The resignation, announced Tuesday, should give Raul Castro the autonomy he lacked as the government's caretaker since Fidel was sidelined by intestinal surgery in July 2006.

The younger Castro raised expectations of openings in the state-controlled economy with his reported fascination with Chinese-style capitalism, calls for unspecified "structural changes," and acknowledgment that government wages averaging $19 a month do not satisfy basic needs. He also encouraged Cubans to open a fearless and critical debate, as long as they remember that the final decisions will be made by the island's Communist leaders.

"That way we reach decisions, and I'm talking about big decisions," he told student leaders in December 2006.

Many Cubans want to hear more such talk from their next leader. Inspired by Raul, some leading Cuban cultural figures have called recently for dropping onerous visa requirements and other limits on their freedoms, a message that resonates with ordinary Cubans.

"This is what we needed. I hope to God people have more freedom _ the freedom to have opinions and always speak their minds," 37-year-old Lydis Perez said after dropping her son off at school. "People talk in the hallways or the back rooms. ... There's a lot of fear."

Fidel Castro, however, insisted in his resignation letter Tuesday that he won't disappear _ or stay quiet if he sees his revolution going astray.

"This is not my farewell to you," he wrote. "My only wish is to fight as a soldier in the battle of ideas. I shall continue to write under the title, 'Reflections of Comrade Fidel.' It will be another weapon you can count on. Perhaps my voice will be heard."

As the Council of State's first vice president, Raul Castro has been his brother's constitutionally designated successor for decades, so the big question is who will take his place as No. 2 on Sunday when the National Assembly selects Cuba's new leadership.

A leading candidate is Lage, the de-facto prime minister, who at 56 is a full generation younger than the Castros. He's among the most experienced leaders in a power structure dominated by septuagenarian former rebels, and he has built a reputation as a reformer.

A less likely possibility could emerge from a handful of leaders in their 30s and 40s, such as Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque, whose Communist fervor earned them the collective nickname of "Young Talibans."

While no less loyal to the elder Castro, Lage was the architect of reforms that saved the island from economic collapse in the early 1990s. His moves allowed foreign investment in state enterprises, a measure of self-employment, and legal use of the U.S. dollar.

Raul Castro appears to get along with Lage, who is a quiet, pragmatic organizer like himself. Raul backed Lage's earlier reform proposals, especially farmers markets where excess crops are sold at market prices.

But both Lage and Raul Castro say any change will not be at the expense of socialism. And Lage has dampened hopes that Cuba would follow China and Vietnam in allowing capitalist markets to thrive.

"Their successes and failures should enrich our efforts," Lage told managers of state enterprises last year. "But the building of socialism in Cuba is only possible as a result of our own experiences."

Raul also has championed the concept of closer ties to the United States, offering again and again to discuss normalizing relations with Washington. But the Bush administration ruled that out Tuesday, deriding Raul Castro as "Fidel Lite."

That means that the nearly five-decade U.S. embargo of Cuba will remain in place for the known future _ frustrating both Cubans and many Americans who see much potential in trade with the island, not only for business but as a catalyst for change.

And despite a detailed U.S. plan meant to encourage a "democratic transition" from the Castros' rule, Cuban officials insist the island's socialist political and economic systems will endure.

For now, that means Cuba's tiny dissident community can only wait, and hope that the new leadership will be more open to change from within.

"History will say if it is a good day," said Oswaldo Paya, whose Varela Project seeking a referendum on civil rights and electoral reforms was quashed under the elder Castro's rule.

Former President Bush Endorses McCain

2008-02-18T15:30:00.000-08:00

Story Source

HOUSTON (AP) - Former President George H.W. Bush has endorsed Sen. John McCain for the Republican presidential nomination.

Democratic presidential hopefuls aren't waiting for the outcome of their own race to lump the Arizona senator with the unpopular current president and the past.

"Bush-McCain Republicans," Democrat Barack Obama calls them. It remains to be seen whether Democrats can make that mischievous hyphen stick.

President Bush is backing McCain through his body language, with protocol demanding that he not swing explicitly behind the candidate with a race still technically—and only technically—in progress.

His father's endorsement, which follows one from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, is a further nudge by GOP chieftains for conservative activists to get over their distaste for McCain and for rival Mike Huckabee to find a day job and get out.

Since he took a commanding lead in the delegate count, McCain has been working to solidify his support from a Republican base unhappy with his unorthodox positions on some tax cuts, immigration, campaign finance laws, global warming, stem cell research and more. Fellow lawmakers, including some stung by his cantankerous ways over the years, have bowed to the inevitable and fallen in line.

Karlyn Bowman, an analyst at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, saw little advantage for McCain from endorsements by the elder Bush and other party figures now that the true competition is over. But they are a chunk of the campaign that needs to fall into place.

"The absence of them could have some impact," she said.

In the elder Bush, McCain joins hands with another Republican who was not fully trusted by their party's right. On Friday, McCain simply invoked Bush's military service.

"He is a great man, a great American hero going all the way back to World War II," McCain said. "I'm honored to be in his company at any given time."

Earlier in the race, silence spoke as loudly as endorsements as the Bushes refused to take sides in the heat of competition despite a close relationship between McCain's chief rival Mitt Romney and two of them—the ex-president and the former Florida governor.

McCain and Romney buried animosities this week as only politicians can.

Neither associated himself during their contest with the president, whose approval rating dropped to 30 percent in an AP-Ipsos poll this month, although they backed his recent course in Iraq. Instead, they competed to be known as the successor to Ronald Reagan.

Now McCain and President Bush are on track to put any residual hard feelings behind them. Tension between them has been multifaceted, dating to a 2000 struggle for the GOP nomination marked by innuendo from Bush surrogates in a brutal South Carolina primary.

Bowman, for one, said Democrats could have a hard time tying McCain to Bush. "I think he'll be his own man and Bush will be a past president."

McCain twice opposed Bush's tax cuts and in 2004, questioned the president's veracity on Iraq as Bush sought re-election. McCain's cross-party appeal was so potentially strong that some Democratic strategists wanted McCain on their party's 2004 ticket and he entertained the thought before putting it aside.

Now he comes at the Democrats as their full-on opponent, soaking up the support of his party's hierarchy yet trying to dodge a hyphen.

Clinton aide accuses Obama of plagiarism

2008-02-18T15:21:00.000-08:00

Story Source

Howard Wolfson, the Clinton campaign's communications director, today accused Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) of committing “plagiarism” in a speech in Milwaukee on Saturday night. Wolfson made the explosive charge in an interview with Politico after suggesting as much in a conference call with reporters.

On the call, Wolfson said: “Sen. Obama is running on the strength of his rhetoric and the strength of his promises and, as we have seen in the last couple of days, he’s breaking his promises and his rhetoric isn’t his own.”

"When an author plagiarizes from another author there is damage done to two different parties. One is to the person he plagiarized from. The other is to the reader," said Wolfson.Obama closely echoed a passage from a speech that Deval Patrick, now the Massachusetts governor, used at a campaign rally when he was running for that office in 2006. The Clinton campaign circulated a pair of YouTube links of the two speeches on Sunday.

Here's Patrick at a rally for his gubernatorial campaign on Oct. 15, 2006, during the final stretch of his successful campaign against then-Massachusetts Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey (R):

“But her dismissive point, and I hear it a lot from her staff, is that all I have to offer is words — just words. ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, [applause and cheers] that all men are created equal.’ [Sustained applause and cheers.] Just words – just words! ‘We have nothing to fear but fear itself.’ Just words! ‘Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.’ Just words! ‘I have a dream.’ Just words!”

Here’s Obama on Saturday night at the Democratic Party of Wisconsin’s Founders Day Gala in Milwaukee:

“Don’t tell me words don’t matter! ‘I have a dream.’ Just words. ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’ Just words! [Applause.] ‘We have nothing to fear but fear itself.’ Just words — just speeches!”

An Obama official said: “They're friends who share similar views and talk and trade good lines all the time.”

Obama apparently ad-libbed the remark, which was not in his text.

The Massachusetts governor said in a statement: “Sen. Obama and I are longtime friends and allies. We often share ideas about politics, policy and language. The argument in question, on the value of words in the public square, is one about which he and I have spoken frequently before. Given the recent attacks from Sen. Clinton, I applaud him [for] responding in just the way he did.”

The Obama campaign immediately struck back with a document headlined: "Here are a couple of places Clinton freely borrowed rhetoric from Obama."

Among the examples are Clinton's use of Obama's signature chant "fired up and ready to go" in Davenport, Iowa, and later her echoing of his rally cry, "Yes, we can!"

The plagiarism wars are the nastiest turn yet in the Democratic presidential nomination race as the campaigns gird for clashes in debates in Texas and Ohio, to be followed by primaries in those states on March 4.

McCain's Citizenship Eligibility For President In Question?

2008-02-16T16:43:00.000-08:00

Story Source

"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States..."

A couple of weeks ago, I began receiving quite a number of emails making this claim:

"The origin of the natural-born citizen clause can be traced to a July 25, 1787, letter from John Jay to George Washington, presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention. John Jay wrote: "Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen." There was no debate, and this qualification for the office of the Presidency was introduced by the drafting Committee of Eleven, and then adopted without discussion by the Constitutional Convention.

Legislation and legal arguments

"The requirements for citizenship and the very definition thereof have changed since the Constitution was ratified in 1788. Congress first extended citizenship to children born to U.S. parents overseas on March 26, 1790, under the first naturalization law: "And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens." This was addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case as a form of naturalization. The Dred Scott case, however, was overturned by the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868. The Fourteenth Amendment mentions two types of citizenship: citizenship by birth and citizenship by law (naturalized citizens): "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

"All persons born in the United States, except those not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. government (such as children of foreign diplomats) are citizens by birth. There is some debate over whether other persons with citizenship can also be considered citizens by birth, or whether they should all be considered citizens by law (thus "naturalized"). Current US statutes define certain individuals born overseas as citizens by birth. One side of the argument interprets the Constitution as meaning that a person either is born in the United States or is a naturalized citizen. Thus, to be a "natural born citizen," a person must be born in the United States; otherwise, they are citizens by law and are naturalized. To others, the statute ! that grants citizenship to American children born overseas exempts them from the term "naturalized" and thus, as with the 1790 law, they are to be considered "natural born citizens" eligible for the Presidency. Examples of persons who become citizens at birth (whether "naturalized" or "natural born") would include: birth to Americans overseas, or birth on U.S. soil, territories, or military bases overseas. Children born outside the United States to American parents.

"Three major candidates have sought the Presidency who were born outside the United States: Barry Goldwater (ran in 1964) was born in Arizona while it was still a U.S. territory, George Romney (ran in 1968) was born in Mexico to U.S. parents, and John McCain (ran in 2000 and running in 2008) was born in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents. Barry Goldwater's case among these three is unique in that although Arizona was not a state, it was a fully incorporated territory of the United States, making it debatable whether or not he was born "outside" the United States. The Panama Canal Zone was under United States sovereignty between 1903 and 1979. None of these candidates was elected, so it has never been fully addressed whether children born to Americans overseas are "natural-born citizens" and thus eligible for the Presidency. However, McCain is currently seeking the 2008 Republican nomination for President."

My first reaction was that McCain, born of a parent who was on active military duty outside the country is automatically granted citizenship as if he were born at Walter Reed or a hospital in Terra Haute, Indiana. My husband's children were born in Germany on Army bases leased from the host countries. They automatically became citizens. When you think about it, how practicable would it be for the wife of a sergeant or general to have to catch a plane from Okinawa, Germany or Panama just to give birth so that child would be 'natural born'? Should a child of active duty military whose parents were born inside the U.S., be penalized for a parent's service to this republic by denying that child the right as an American citizen to run for the highest office in the land?

I am not an attorney, but I have learned a world of knowledge from some of the best legal minds in this country over the past 18 years. As this is such an important question because it would be a tragedy if John McCain were to get the GOP nomination in September, I asked constitutional attorney, Larry Becraft, if he could help me on this issue. He has spent years compiling statutes regarding the word 'citizen,' resident alien, application and so forth. Words have meaning in the legal world and interpretation of some words, shall, may will, have filled books found in law libraries. Larry sent the law passed in 1790 about citizenship; see pdf file here.

The question of citizenship regarding a presidential candidate has come up several times, including 2000 when McCain was running. After doing a thorough search on the Internet, I didn't find any lawsuit challenging McCain's citizenship in 2000. In 2004, the issue was raised again: U.S. Congress moves to clarify the rules: Just how 'American' must a president be? "His Natural Born Citizen Act would include children born outside the United States to citizen parents or parents able to transfer their citizenship. That would include McCain, whose parents were citizens, as well as an estimated two million others who, according to government figures, have been born to U.S. parents living and working overseas."

Further research brought me to this web site which states the following, in part:
"Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

"The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.

"Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

"Anyone born inside the United States
Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example:

"Many parts of the world have law to provide them with special status, to allow children born in those places to be considered natural-born. This allows families with a long history of working in these areas without ever returning to the U.S. to be considered natural-born. For example, the Panama Canal Zone had been in U.S. possession for a full century, and some families lived there for generations. 8 USC 1403 handles the Zone specifically, stating that anyone born in the Zone on or after 2/26/1904, to at least one citizen-parent, is a natural-born citizen. Similar law is in place to handle the acquisition of territories, such as Puerto Rico, Alaska, and Hawaii."

8 USC 1403 states:

TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1403 Prev Next § 1403. Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904

(b) Any person born in the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States employed by the Government of the United States or by the Panama Railroad Company, or its successor in title, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.

The question has also been raised about whether 'natural born' applies to geographical areas? This from a woman who wishes to remain anonymous:

"Does “natural born” also include all “American citizens” who got/have “automatic” U.S. citizenship status when born outside the geographical boundaries of the country of the United States (because that person's parents had citizenship roots from the 50 States or from the federal zones within the 50 States)? If so, then John McCain and our son, born in England, would qualify as “natural born.” (NOTE: I say “from the 50 States” because people born within the territories, such as Puerto Rico, Guam, etc., also are “automatic” citizens of this country. But there are different ways in which “automatic” citizenship is “granted,” which you'll see as you keep reading.)

"REMEMBER, we're dealing with TWO different issues here. “Automatic Citizenship upon birth” doesn't also automatically qualify one as the “natural born” requirement of the federal constitution. According to that Supreme Court case, there's the matter of “geography” involved. And also, remember, the “birth certificate” didn't exist at the time of the adoption of the federal constitution. Also, this country didn't have territories and military bases in other countries, nor “such District (not exceeding ten Miles square): Article I, Section 8. [17]” which is today's federal District of Columbia. The federal constitution at that time was only dealing with 13 States, each which had its own constitution, but which was considered the “country known as the United States.” (In the Declaration of Independence the country was termed to be “the united States,” another issue, but I note it just so the reader realizes there are many side/extended/related issues in all of this.) So I believe that “natural born” in regards to being born within the geographical boundaries of this country would be a correct interpretation by the Supreme Court in its decision."

The question then arises: Should a change to Art. II, Sect. 1, Clause 5, have required a constitutional amendment? I am vehemently against a constitutional amendment to change the citizenship requirement to accommodate one world government advocates like Arnold Schwarzenegger becoming president. Considering what happened with former Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, who I consider a traitor in the strictest sense, and the line of succession should a president be unable to continue in office, this is a dangerous proposal. One only has to do a bit of research to understand moles are groomed from toddler age to undertake becoming U.S. citizens for the sole purpose of spying and betraying America. Never under estimate your enemies.

However, we are back to the question raised: John McCain's eligibility to run for president based on citizenship. Larry Becraft said this is an issue that could be challenged legally; please note the word 'could.' How would this get done? A plaintiff has to have standing for one thing. Second, this would have to be done quickly as the clock is ticking. There are many fine legal scholars, i.e., Jonathan Turley), who could give qualified opinions on this question. There are exceptional constitutional attorneys, i.e., William J. Olson, Dr. Edwin Vieira, and others who could be retained for a legal challenge if they felt there was a basis for such a lawsuit. Before one undertakes any lawsuit with such weighty legal questions, there has to be a reality check as to a successful outcome with many factors to consider. It also takes loads of cash. As it stands right now, unless there is a legal challenge, this is a dead issue other than wishful thinking and interesting discussion on the Internet.

Atheist lawyer tries again to get 'under God' nixed from Pledge

2008-02-14T14:14:00.000-08:00

Story Source

Atheist lawyer Michael Newdow is once again trying to have the phrase "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance -- this time in New Hampshire.

David Cortman, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, says Newdow seems to be on a mission to destroy America's Christian heritage. He believes Newdow will not be happy until all of the founding fathers' documents are censored to remove any reference to God.

Newdow has filed the latest in his series of lawsuits against references to God in government oaths, ceremonies, and pledges in the U.S. District Court for New Hampshire -- a move that Cortman equates with "venue shopping."

"Enough is enough," states Cortman. "He should not be allowed to roam the country and try to find a suitable court that will agree with his musings."

Cortman finds it ironic that Newdow complains about the imposition created when an atheist is allegedly "forced" to listen to the reference to God in the Pledge of Allegiance. "While he complains consistently about the impositions of certain religious beliefs on him from the majority," he continues, "his goal is actually to impose his beliefs on the rest of us."

The Alliance Defense Fund has filed a "friend of the court" brief opposing Newdow's latest legal assault on the Pledge of Allegiance. According to an ABC News-Washington Post poll taken in 2004, 89 percent of Americans say the Pledge should contain the phrase "under God."

Biblical hero Joseph 'was really a Muslim'

2008-02-14T14:13:00.000-08:00

Story Source

In the wake of an attempt by Palestinians to burn down Joseph's Tomb – Judaism's third holiest site – Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah faction issued a statement denying it will help restore the shrine, referring to both the shrine and the biblical patriarch as "Muslim."

"Pay no attention to the rumors that we will work with Israel to restore the burial site of the holy Muslim Joseph," said the statement, issued from Nablus, the biblical city of Shechem. "We are going to guard this holy Muslim site."

Joseph's Tomb is the believed burial place of the son of Jacob who was sold by his brothers into slavery and later became viceroy of Egypt.

Palestinian security officials in Nablus said Monday they were called to the tomb to find 16 burning tires inside the sacred structure. A Palestinian police official who inspected the site told WND there was some fire damage to the tomb.

He said the Palestinian Authority, fearing embarrassment, immediately formed a joint committee from the PA's Force 17, Preventative Security Services and Palestinian intelligence, to find out who was behind the fire.

The move comes after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert announced last week he would ask Israel's Defense Ministry to work with the PA to reconstruct and restore the tomb, parts of which were destroyed in 2000 by Palestinians, including known PA security officers.

Under the 1993 Oslo Accords, which granted nearby strategic territory to the Palestinians, Joseph's Tomb was supposed to be accessible to Jews and Christians. But following repeated attacks against Jewish worshippers at the holy site by gunmen associated with then-Palestinian Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat's militias, then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak in October 2000 ordered an Israeli unilateral retreat from the area.

Within less than an hour of the Israeli retreat, Palestinian rioters overtook Joseph's Tomb and reportedly began to ransack the site. Palestinian mobs reportedly tore apart books, destroying prayer stands and grinding out stone carvings in the Tomb's interior. A Muslim flag was hoisted over the tomb.

Israel first gained control of Nablus and the neighboring site of Joseph's Tomb in the 1967 Six-Day War. The Oslo Accords signed by Arafat and Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin called for the area surrounding the tomb site to be placed under Palestinian jurisdiction but allowed for continued Jewish visits to the site and the construction of an Israeli military outpost at the tomb to ensure secure Jewish access.

Following the transfer of control of Nablus and the general area encompassing the tomb to the Palestinians in the early 1990s, there were a series of outbreaks of violence in which Arab rioters and gunmen from Arafat's Fatah militias shot at Jewish worshipers and the tomb's military outpost.

Six Israeli soldiers were killed, and many others, including yeshiva students, were wounded in September 1996 when Palestinian rioters and Fatah gunmen attempted to over take the tomb. Eventually, Israeli soldiers regained control of the site.

Gravestone at traditional burial site for biblical patriarch Joseph after it was ransacked by Palestinian mobs

The Palestinians continued to attack Joseph's Tomb with regular shootings and the lobbing of firebombs and Molotov cocktails. Security for Jews at the site increasingly became more difficult to maintain. Rumors circulated in 2000 that Barak would evacuate the Israeli military outpost and give the tomb to Arafat as a "peacemaking gesture."

In early 2000, the Israeli army began denying Jewish visits to the tomb on certain days due to prospects of Arab violence. Following U.S.-mediated peace talks at Camp David in September 2000, Arafat returned to the West Bank and initiated his intifada. During one bloody week in October 2000, Fatah gunmen attacked the tomb repeatedly, killing two and injuring dozens, prompting Barak to order a complete evacuation of Judaism's third holiest site Oct. 6.

'Philly 11' Christians appeal lawsuit over arrests

2008-02-13T09:45:00.000-08:00

Story Source

Eleven Christians arrested for expressing their beliefs publicly during a so-called "gay pride" festival in Philadelphia several years ago were in court Monday, seeking to have their lawsuit against the city reinstated.

The 11 individuals were arrested in 2004 at Philadelphia's "OutFest," a pro-homosexual event held on public property. The Christian activists were charged with various crimes for quoting scriptures while walking on a public street set aside for the event. Charges were dropped almost immediately against all but five of the Christians, and those five were later found not guilty of all charges.

According to attorney Joseph Infranco, those actions paved the way for a civil suit against the City of Philadelphia and the OutFest participants, claiming that his clients suffered constitutional harm as a result and arguing no one else should be subjected to such actions. "So this is a civil suit now, to make them accountable for their actions -- and filing those criminal charges was part of that," he adds.

Infranco, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, was at Monday's hearing, which asked appeals court judges to reinstate the lawsuit dismissed by the initial civil trial judge. The consensus at that time, he shares, was that the judges were more sympathetic to his clients than to those accused of violating their constitutional rights.

"They got the point," says Infranco, referring to the judges. "They got the point that when somebody goes into the public square and has an event and exercises their First Amendment rights -- [that] when you open such an event to the public, then you have to anticipate that some members of the public who disagree with that speech are going to be present, as well."

According to the ADF attorney, the same would be true if the tables were turned. "If you had a Christian event and you invited the public and it was in a public place ... well, you would have to expect other people would come along who want to express a contrary view," he suggests. "We're not trying to shout them down or anything like that. [But] what you're talking about is both views being expressed, side by side."

Infranco says winning the lawsuit is important to protect other Christians from what he describes as "constitutionally abhorrent" actions against them in the future. "We ... want what's called declaratory relief, so that the court ... says there should not be a repeat of this at a future event," the attorney explains. "It's the most basic form of discrimination because the police did not like the content of the message -- and that's completely inconsistent with the First Amendment."

A decision from the appeals court is expected in approximately two to three months, adds Infranco.

Obama and McCain win More Victories

2008-02-13T09:42:00.000-08:00

Story Source

Feb. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Barack Obama swept Hillary Clinton in three more primaries in the fight for the Democratic presidential nomination, giving him eight consecutive wins and a clear lead in the race for delegates.

Obama's decisive victories yesterday in Virginia, Maryland and Washington, D.C., follow wins in five contests over the weekend. The next elections are Feb. 19 in Hawaii, Obama's childhood home, and Wisconsin, where he has the support of the state's governor.

``This movement won't stop until there's change in Washington, D.C., and tonight we're on our way,'' Obama, 46, told a crowd of more than 19,000 people at the Kohl Center in Madison, Wisconsin. ``We have now won east and west and north and south and across the heartland of this country we love.''

Clinton, 60, is looking ahead to a March 4 showdown with Obama in the delegate-rich states of Texas and Ohio to halt his progress. After her string of losses, she needs wins in both states to regain momentum. She already has begun a staff shakeup, with deputy campaign manager Mike Henry last night becoming the second top aide to leave.

``We're going to sweep across Texas in the next three weeks, bringing our message about what we need in America,'' the New York senator told supporters last night in El Paso. ``I'm tested, I'm ready, let's make it happen.''

McCain Beats Huckabee

On the Republican side, John McCain, 71, defeated former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, 52, in all three contests, as the Arizona senator moves to seal his party's presidential nomination.

``We are approaching the end of the first half of this election on quite an upswing, McCain said to his supporters in Alexandria, Virginia.

Huckabee's strength in parts of Virginia, however, showed there are still a number of conservatives in the Republican Party who haven't fallen in behind McCain.

With last night's results, Obama now leads Clinton in the popular vote from the 35 states and territories that have gone to the polls. The Illinois senator has just over 9 million votes compared with Clinton's slightly more than 8.5 million. That excludes Michigan and Florida, where neither campaigned because the Democratic National Committee penalized the states for holding primaries earlier than party rules allowed.

Ahead on Delegates

Obama also has an advantage over Clinton in the race for the delegates who will cast the votes for the party's nominee at the Democratic National Convention in August.

An unofficial estimate by the independent, non-partisan Web site thegreenpapers.com shows Obama ahead of Clinton by 1,029 delegates to 952. The tally from last night's primaries isn't complete and the count doesn't include the 796 super delegates who aren't bound by election results. A candidate needs 2,025 delegates to win the Democratic nomination.

David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, put his candidate's lead at 136 pledged delegates. For Clinton to close the gap, she would need to win the rest of the voting contests by 20 to 30 points, he said in a conference call with reporters.

``We believe it's next to impossible for Senator Clinton to close that pledged-delegate count,'' Plouffe said. ``Even the most creative math really does not get her back to even in terms of pledged delegates.''

`Long, Hard Fight'

New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine, a Clinton supporter, said in an interview yesterday that Clinton should do ``very well'' in several large states with primaries coming up. Ohio and Texas vote March 4 and Pennsylvania has its contest April 22. Those states have 492 pledged delegates up for grabs.

``What is happening is we have a very competitive race,'' he said. ``It's going to be a long, hard fight and I suspect Senator Clinton's going to be the nominee.''

Obama defeated Clinton by a wider-than-expected margin of 64 percent to 36 percent in Virginia. With 99 percent of precincts reporting, he won 59 percent of the vote in Northern Virginia's Fairfax County, the most-populous area of the state. Fairfax's educated, suburban electorate closely resembles some counties in Pennsylvania.

``We knew that the states following Super Tuesday were Obama states, but he has won them more decisively than anticipated,'' said John Fortier, a political scientist at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington.

`A Solid Win'

``Without a solid win'' in Texas and Ohio, Clinton ``will trail in delegates, and the election could really turn against her,'' he said.

McCain now has more than 800 delegates. Both Virginia and Washington, D.C., award all delegates to the winner of the Republican primary. The candidate needs 1,191 delegates for the nomination.

McCain's campaign manager congratulated Huckabee on his ``strong showing'' and expressed confidence in the senator's campaign.

``John McCain will be the Republican nominee for president,'' Rick Davis said in a statement. ``He will continue to campaign hard in the coming contests across the country and unify the Republican Party for victory in November.''

Huckabee disputes vote count

2008-02-11T14:25:00.000-08:00

Story Source

The results of the state Republican caucuses were called into question Sunday after presidential candidate Mike Huckabee challenged the party's declaration that Arizona Sen. John McCain had won the delegate count.

Huckabee's campaign took issue with Washington state Republican Party Chairman Luke Esser's decision to call the race Saturday night with 87 percent of the precincts counted.

At that point, McCain was ahead of Huckabee by 242 delegates out of the 13,000 counted, Esser said. The Huckabee campaign contends there were another 1,500 or so delegates not counted.

In the face of the Huckabee protest, the state Republican Party quickly resumed its count Sunday, a bit sooner than it had planned.

In a news release, Huckabee's campaign said there were "obvious irregularities" in the state's Republican caucuses and that it is sending lawyers to explore "all available legal options regarding the dubious final results."

According to the Saturday tally, Arizona Sen. John McCain won about 26 percent of delegates, former Arkansas Gov. Huckabee won 24 percent, Texas Rep. Ron Paul finished with 21 percent, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who has dropped out of the race, got 17 percent.

"This was an error in judgment by Mr. Esser," a Huckabee campaign release said. "Washington Republicans know, from bitter experience in the 2004 gubernatorial election, the terrible results that can come from bad ballot counting."

The state GOP posted new numbers Sunday, with 93 percent of the precincts reporting. The percentages didn't change much, with McCain winning about 25 percent of the delegates, Huckabee 24 percent, and Paul 21 percent.

Esser said Sunday that the Republican Party was going to try to get as "close as we can to 100 percent" in the vote count. But Esser doesn't believe counting more votes will change the outcome.

Esser said their last county report on Saturday came shortly before 10:15 p.m., at which point they had 87.2 percent of precincts reporting.

That's when they did an analysis, saying: "Let's take every county where Huckabee is beating McCain, and double the margin of victory," Esser said. "And then take every county where McCain is winning and cut in half that margin of victory. Even if you assume that, Sen. McCain still holds on."

"That's when we said we're confident that Sen. McCain's lead was going to hold up," Esser said. "I would have done the same for Gov. Huckabee if he had the same margin and the same underlying dynamics as Sen. McCain."

Esser's acceleration of the count hasn't altered the Huckabee campaign's intent to investigate. Its lawyers were to arrive in Washington late Sunday, said James P. Pinkerton, a campaign spokesman.

"This clearly requires a full excavation as to what happened," Pinkerton said. "The political impact of calling an election before all the votes are counted is pretty seismic. Chairman Esser should fully explain what happened and why to the satisfaction of all Washington state Republicans and all Republicans nationwide."

Pastor Joseph Fuiten of Bothell, who's heading Huckabee's volunteer effort in the state, said three Huckabee supporters in Pierce County reported voting irregularities on Saturday.

Fuiten said one woman reported that she and a Ron Paul supporter were told that they wouldn't be allowed to run for alternative delegate positions — and that no actual vote was taken at the caucus. Instead, Fuiten said the woman reported that the caucus leaders simply tallied up the sign-in sheets to get the results.

"Counting is not so much the issue, so much as it is a concern about disenfranchisement," Fuiten said.

Fuiten, who spoke with Esser on Sunday, said the Huckabee campaign is working with the party to look into those reports.

Saturday's caucuses will determine only a portion of the 40 Republican delegates who will go on to the Republican National Convention. Caucuses at various levels will determine 18 of those delegates; 19 will be based on the state primary election Feb. 19. The three remaining positions are "automatic" delegates — the state party chairman and two national-committee members.

Paul's campaign is also not conceding the state.

Maureen Moore, Washington state coordinator for the Paul campaign, said her candidate "did wonderful — a lot more wonderful than what's being reported."

On the Democratic side, more than 200,000 people — a record — turned out for caucuses.

With 96 percent of the precincts counted, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama won about 68 percent of the delegates, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton won about 31 percent, and the rest choose either "uncommitted" or "other."

Final numbers will be released by 5 p.m. today, said Kelly Steele, spokesman for Washington State Democrats.

Pentagon charges six in Sept. 11 terror attacks

2008-02-11T14:22:00.000-08:00

Story Source

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon has charged six detainees at Guantanamo Bay with murder and war crimes in connection with the Sept. 11 attacks, it was announced Monday. Officials said they’ll seek the death penalty in what would be the first trials under the terrorism-era military tribunal system.

“These charges allege a long term, highly sophisticated, organized plan by al-Qaida to attack the United States of America,” Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Hartmann, the legal adviser to the tribunal system, told reporters. He added that the charges have been sworn “against six individuals alleged to be responsible for the planning and execution of the attacks” which occurred on Sept. 11, 2001 and killed nearly 3,000 people.

Hartmann said the six include Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the attacks in which hijacked planes were flown into buildings in New York and Washington. Another hijacked plane crashed in the fields of western Pennsylvania.

White House press secretaryt Dana Perino said that President Bush had no role in the decision to seek the death penalty.

“Obviously 9-11 was a defining moment in our history,” she said, “and a defining moment in the global war on terror. And this judicial process is the next step in that story. The president is sure that the military is going to follow through in a way that the Congress said they should.”

The military will recommend that the six men be tried together before a military tribunal. But the cases may be clouded because of recent revelations that Mohammmed was subject to a harsh interrogation technique known as waterboarding — which critics call torture.

Asked what impact that will have on the case, Hartmann said it will be up to the military judge to determine what evidence is allowed.

Prosecutors have been working for years to assemble the case against suspects in the attacks that prompted the Bush administration to launch its global war on terror.

The other five men being charged are:

Mohammed al-Qahtani, the man officials have labeled the 20th hijacker;
Ramzi Binalshibh, said to have been the main intermediary between the hijackers and leaders of al-Qaida;
Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, known as Ammar al-Baluchi, a nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who has been identified as Mohammed’s lieutenant for the 2001 operation;
Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, al-Baluchi’s assistant;
Waleed bin Attash, a detainee known as Khallad, who investigators say selected and trained some of the hijackers.
Tribunal system has changed
The men would be tried in the military tribunal system that was set up by the administration shortly after the start of the counterterror war and has been widely criticized for it rules on legal representation for suspects, hearings behind closed doors and past allegations of inmate abuse at Guantanamo. Original rules allowed the military to exclude the defendant from his own trial, permitted statements made under torture, and forbade appeal to an independent court; but the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the system in 2006 and a revised plan set up after Congress enacted a new law has included some additional rights.

Defense lawyers still criticize the system for it’s secrecy.

But Hartmann said Monday that the defendants will get the same rights as U.S. soldiers tried under the military justice system including the right to remain silent, call witnesses, and know the evidence against him. Appeals can go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

He called the charges sworn Monday “only allegations” and said the accused will remain innocent until proven guilty.

The decision to seek the death penalty also is likely to draw criticism from within the international community. A number of countries, including U.S. allies, have said they would object to the use of capital punishment for their nationals held at Guantanamo.

The military tribunal system requires that a panel of 12 unanimously find the defendant guilty for capital punishment cases, Hartmann said.

Trial to be held at Guantanamo
Officials plan to hold the trial in a specially constructed court at Guantanamo that will allow lawyers, journalists and some others to be present, but leave relatives of Sept. 11 victims and others to watch the trial through closed-circuit broadcasts.

Mohammed was among 15 so-called “high-value detainees” who were held at length by the CIA in secret overseas prisons — some subject to what critics call torture — before being handed over to the military in 2006.

Last week, for the first time, the Bush administration acknowledged that Mohammed was among three suspects who were waterboarded. CIA Director Michael Hayden said that waterboarding was used, in part, because of widespread belief among U.S. intelligence officials that more catastrophic attacks were imminent.

Waterboarding involves strapping a person down and pouring water over the suspect’s cloth-covered face to create the sensation of drowning. It has been traced back hundreds of years, to the Spanish Inquisition, and is condemned by nations around the world. Critics call it a form of torture.

In Guantanamo Bay hearings that have been criticized as unfair, Mohammed confessed to the 9/11 attack and a chilling string of other terror plots last March.

“I was responsible for the 9/11 operation from A to Z,” Mohammed said in a statement read during the session, according to hearing transcripts later released by the Pentagon.

Under the system, the charges are forwarded to the convening authority for military commissions, Susan Crawford. She can refer some or all of them for trial.

And it could be months or longer before trials begin for the six Sept. 11 defendants. With the appeals process, it would likely be some time after any convictions before executions would be possible.

Kansas Supreme Court blocks abortionist grand jury

2008-02-07T14:44:00.000-08:00

From YCFA Member Maurice Page:

Story Source

TOPEKA, Kan. - The Kansas Supreme Court on Tuesday temporarily blocked a grand jury from obtaining patient records from a physician who is one of the nation's few late-term abortion providers.

The grand jury is investigating whether Dr. George Tiller has broken Kansas laws restricting abortion, as many abortion opponents allege. The grand jury subpoenaed the medical files of about 2,000 women, including some who decided against having abortions.

Abortion opponents forced Sedgwick County to convene the grand jury by submitting petitions, the second such citizen investigation since 2006 of Tiller, who has long been at the center of the nation's abortion battle.

His clinic was bombed in 1985, and eight years later a woman shot him in both arms.

Tiller's attorneys asked the Supreme Court to quash the grand jury's subpoenas, and the court agreed to block their enforcement until it considers the issue.

Chief Justice Kay McFarland said Tiller's challenge raised "significant issues" about patients' privacy and a grand jury's power to subpoena records.

The Sedgwick County prosecutor presenting evidence to the grand jury had objected to the attempts to block the subpoenas, noting that the grand jury's term is limited, but McFarland said the grand jury's term can be extended.

The court set a Feb. 11 deadline for legal arguments in favor of allowing the subpoenas. Tiller's attorneys then have until Feb. 25 to respond.

Mary Kay Culp, executive director of Kansans for Life, the state's largest anti-abortion group, called the high court's decision "extremely disappointing." "There is no way to determine if the reasons for these late abortions were done within the narrow legal criteria without looking at the records themselves," she said. "His lawyers say they are worried about women's privacy. They are worried about protecting Dr. Tiller."

Tiller's attorneys, Dan Monnat and Lee Thompson, did not immediately return calls seeking comment Tuesday.

The grand jury is seeking records of all women who visited Tiller's clinic between July 2003 and last month and were at least 22 weeks pregnant at the time.

The grand jury also subpoenaed information about current and former employees and referring physicians.

The edited patient records would not have the women's names, but they would have patient identification numbers. Tiller's attorneys claimed in court last week that in an earlier investigation, former Attorney General Phill Kline was able to track down patients' names using the identifying numbers on patients' files.

A spokesman for Kline, who is now Johnson County district attorney, denied that any patients had ever been identified.

Kline eventually filed 30 misdemeanor charges against Tiller before leaving office last year, only to see the case dismissed for jurisdictional reasons.

BREAKING NEWS: Romney Steps Out Of Race

2008-02-07T14:34:00.001-08:00

Story Source

WASHINGTON -- John McCain effectively sealed the Republican presidential nomination on Thursday as chief rival Mitt Romney suspended his faltering presidential campaign. "I must now stand aside, for our party and our country," Romney prepared to tell conservatives.

"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror," Romney will say at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington.

"This is not an easy decision for me. I hate to lose. My family, my friends and our supporters... many of you right here in this room... have given a great deal to get me where I have a shot at becoming President. If this were only about me, I would go on. But I entered this race because I love America, and because I love America."

McCain prevailed in most of the Super Tuesday states, moving closer to the numbers needed to officially win the nomination.

Overall, McCain led with 707 delegates, to 294 for Romney and 195 for Huckabee. It takes 1,191 to win the nomination at this summer's convention in St. Paul, Minn.

"I disagree with Senator McCain on a number of issues, as you know. But I agree with him on doing whatever it takes to be successful in Iraq, on finding and executing Osama bin Laden, and on eliminating al-Qaida and terror," Romney said.

Romney acknowledged the obstacles to beating McCain.

"As of today, more than 4 million people have given me their vote for president, less than Senator McCain's 4.7 million, but quite a statement nonetheless. Eleven states have given me their nod, compared to his 13. Of course, because size does matter, he's doing quite a bit better with his number of delegates," Romney said in prepared remarks.

Romney's departure from the race came almost a year after his formal entrance, when the Michigan native declared his candidacy on Feb. 12, 2007, at the Henry Ford Museum of Innovation in Dearborn, Mich.

Over the ensuing 12 months, Romney sought the support of conservatives with a family values campaign, emphasizing his opposition to abortion and gay marriage, as well as his support for tax cuts and health insurance that would benefit middle-class families.

"We need to teach our children that before they have babies, they get married," he told voters at his campaign events.

But he was dogged by charges of flip-flopping, a criticism that undermined the candidacy of another Massachusetts hopeful - John Kerry in 2004. In seeking to unseat Sen. Edward M. Kennedy in 1994, Romney said he would be a better advocate for gay rights than his rival and he favored abortion rights.

Throughout his campaign, Romney was questioned by voters and the media about his Mormon faith. Hoping assuage voters skeptical of electing a Mormon president, Romney gave speech on Dec. 6 in College Station, Texas, that explicitly recalled remarks John F. Kennedy made in 1960 in an effort to quell anti-Catholic bias. He vowed to serve the interests of the nation, not the church, if elected president.

In early voting Iowa, Romney sought votes by casting himself as the guardian of the Reagan-era conservative triad - a three-legged stool, as the candidate put it - of a strong national defense, strong economy and strong families.

Fueled by what would grow to more than $35 million of personal donations, his campaign hired top-notch staff in the early voting states, and Romney scored an early win when his organization topped the field at the Iowa Straw Poll in August.

By that time, the national front-runners, McCain and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, had virtually ceded the lead-voting state to Romney.

Instead, McCain focused on New Hampshire, second on the calendar, while Giuliani employed an untested strategy of waiting out the early primary contests and instead staking his candidacy on a strong showing in the Jan. 29 Florida primary.

Romney's goal was to score back-to-back wins in Iowa and New Hampshire, clearing the field and creating momentum to roll through Florida - where he enjoyed the support of top aides to former Gov. Jeb Bush - and seal the nomination in the Super Tuesday contests.

Instead, Romney was beaten Jan. 3 in Iowa by former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a former Southern Baptist minister who received an unexpected outpouring of support in the caucuses from voters identifying themselves as evangelicals.

Five days later, Romney suffered a second consecutive defeat in New Hampshire, when McCain won the primary in part with the support of independents attracted to his self-styled maverick campaign.

Romney, who headed the 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, tried to cast each defeat in competitive terms, saying his second-place finishes amount to "silver medals." He also highlighted the "gold" he won in between and in the little-watched Wyoming caucuses.

Nonetheless, Romney took a cue from Huckabee's win, as well as Democrat Barack Obama's Iowa upset of rival Hillary Rodham Clinton, as a sign voters wanted change in Washington.

On the stump, he retooled his speech to harken back to the theme he broached in Dearborn, that America's future, and that of its government, were dependent on innovation. His campaign also hung new banners reading, "Washington is Broken," as well as a to-do list Romney would complete as president.

Romney and McCain went head-to-head in the Jan. 13 Michigan primary, and Romney won, in part by highlighting his background as a business consultant and venture capitalist. When McCain acknowledged what seemed to be obvious, that not all of Detroit's lost auto industry jobs would be recovered, Romney pounced.

He accused the senator of pessimism, outlining a $20 billion industry recovery package and telling audiences in economically ailing Michigan, "I will fight for every single job."

Romney also tweaked his stump speech to criticize McCain for stating that he was more familiar with foreign affairs and military matters than economic issues.

Highlighting his 25-year business career, he told audiences, "Senator McCain says the economy is not his strong suit; well, it is my strong suit."

As the calendar progressed, however, McCain picked up a big-ticket win in the Jan. 19 South Carolina primary. Romney instead focused on his victory in the Nevada caucuses the same day.

Ten days later, the two squared off again in the Florida primary, where McCain scored a major upset after winning endorsements from the state's two top elected Republicans - Gov. Charlie Crist, a popular figure who had previously said he planned to remain neutral in the race, and Sen. Mel Martinez.

The following day, Giuliani dropped out of the race and endorsed McCain. A day later, popular California Gov. Arnold Schwarzeneger announced his endorsement of McCain, reflecting a coalescing of Republican support behind the senator as he approached a Super Tuesday showdown with Romney.

Romney's final pitch was to label McCain a liberal like Clinton and Obama, a charge tantamount to heresy in the GOP. He was backed by conservative media voices like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.

Warring sides on same-sex marriages look to March 4 court date

2008-02-07T07:13:00.000-08:00

Story Source

The California Supreme Court scheduled a March 4 hearing Wednesday for the long-awaited clash between gay-rights advocates, the state and religious conservatives over the constitutionality of banning same-sex marriage.

The case, to be heard at the court's chambers in San Francisco, is a consolidation of four lawsuits by same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco, challenging the marriage restriction, and two countersuits by private organizations defending the law.

The court, which normally allots one hour for a hearing, scheduled a three-hour session, its longest in recent years. A ruling is due within 90 days.

Since agreeing to review the case in December 2006, the seven justices have been plowing through papers filed by multiple parties as well as 50 briefs representing the views of hundreds of outside organizations.

Among those supporting marriage rights for gays and lesbians are the governments of 20 California cities and counties, the NAACP and other civil rights groups, associations of psychologists and anthropologists, Levi Strauss and the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce.

The Knights of Columbus, organizations advocating alternatives to homosexuality, and the Mormon Church and the California Catholic Conference are among the state's supporters, while the Unitarians and other liberal denominations line up on the other side. Competing groups of constitutional law professors filed conflicting briefs.

The range of support "shows the depth and breadth of a belief in the importance of marriage equality," said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, whose office will take part in the arguments.

Attorney Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel, who will argue to uphold the state law on behalf of the Campaign for California Families, said allowing marriage for same-sex couples "will destroy the unique institution that provides a stable cultural environment for children and their families."

Similar suits have been filed in other states, but only Massachusetts' high court has ruled that the state's constitution forbids marriage discrimination against same-sex couples. Congress has forbidden federal recognition of same-sex marriage.

The California law defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman was passed by the Legislature in 1977 and reaffirmed by the voters in a 2000 ballot measure. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has twice vetoed bills to legalize same-sex marriage.

The law was first challenged in February 2004 when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered the city clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Nearly 4,000 marriages were performed in the next month before the state Supreme Court called a halt.

The court nullified the weddings in August 2004 and ruled that Newsom had no authority to disregard the marriage law, but it did not decide whether the law was constitutional.

The case returned to San Francisco Superior Court, where Judge Richard Kramer ruled in 2005 that the California Constitution guaranteed the right to marry the partner of one's choice, and that the law also discriminated on the basis of sex.

A state appeals court overruled Kramer in October 2006, saying the law's exclusion of gays and lesbians from marriage could be justified by tradition and by the fact that domestic partners in California have nearly all the rights of married couples. The state's high court then agreed to take up the case.

The justices will hear a variety of defenses of the marriage law. Attorney General Jerry Brown's office argues that the domestic-partner laws satisfy California's constitutional requirement of equal treatment for gays and lesbians. Schwarzenegger's office will present its view that discrimination based on sexual orientation should be judged less strictly than bias based on race or sex. Two advocacy groups will ask the court to uphold the law on the grounds that opposite-sex couples make better parents.

The court will begin the hearing at 9 a.m. at 350 McAllister St. The session will also be televised live on the California Channel.

Regardless of the ruling, the issue could go back before the voters. Some of the groups that sponsored the 2000 ballot measure reinforcing the prohibition on same-sex marriages are circulating initiatives that would write the ban into the state Constitution. The initiatives would also overturn laws granting benefits to same-sex domestic partners.

The Supreme Court case is titled In re Marriage Cases, S147999.

Senate's Stimulus Measure Blocked

2008-02-07T06:44:00.000-08:00

Story Source

A $158 billion economic stimulus plan drafted by Senate Democrats that included relief for low-income seniors, disabled veterans and the unemployed was blocked by a Republican filibuster last night when the Senate fell a single vote short of the 60 needed to consider the measure.

The defeat by the narrowest of margins nearly ensures passage of a less expensive stimulus plan fashioned by President Bush and House leaders, though the Senate may make some changes. But it keeps the government on track to begin sending hundreds of dollars in payments to most Americans this spring.

"Given a chance to act as recession looms, more than 40 Republicans today said no to helping 20 million seniors and no to 250,000 disabled veterans. They said no to those who have lost their jobs and no to small business," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said after the vote.

The Senate package, which included numerous provisions not offered by the House plan, attracted powerful supporters. Automakers Ford and General Motors, home builders, Realtors and mortgage bankers joined the AARP to press Republicans to embrace the Senate measure. Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) left the campaign trail to make rare appearances in the Senate chamber.

Reid tried to ratchet up the pressure on senators, telling Republicans that they would not be given the opportunity to have separate votes on whether to add payments for seniors and disabled veterans. They would have only two choices, he said: Accept the whole Senate package or the House bill intact.

The Senate plan attracted the votes of all 51 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, as well as of eight Republicans, but that was not enough. It was clear the Democrats would fall short when Sen. John E. Sununu (R-N.H.), whom they had been courting for days, registered his opposition late in the tally.

Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the front-runner for the Republican nomination for president, did not show up for the vote. Asked about his time away from the Senate, McCain, who was heading back to Washington aboard his campaign plane, said: "It's very hard. Obviously, I've missed a lot of votes. There's no doubt about it."

The final tally was 58 to 41, after Reid changed his vote to no, a parliamentary move that allows him to bring up the measure in the future.

The differences between the $146 billion stimulus plan approved by the House and the version crafted last week by the Senate Finance Committee are fairly narrow.

The House package would provide $600 payments for individuals -- $1,200 for couples -- plus $300 for each child. It would begin to phase out eligibility at $75,000 in adjusted gross income for individuals and at $150,000 for couples. Workers who can show $3,000 in earned income last year would be eligible for checks of $300.

Businesses would be offered tax incentives to invest in new plants and equipment, while the Federal Housing Administration and federally chartered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would be authorized to insure larger mortgages.

The Senate version would provide $500 for individuals and $1,000 for couples, but it would double the size of the eligibility caps. The working poor, some of whom may not pay any income taxes, would be eligible for the same checks, as would seniors and disabled veterans with $3,000 in Social Security or veterans benefits. Businesses would be offered investment tax incentives and would be allowed to write off more losses, which drew the support of large corporations.

The Senate version would also extend jobless benefits at a cost of $14.5 billion over two years. It would provide $1 billion in heating assistance for the poor, allow states to issue federally backed housing construction bonds, and take steps to ensure that illegal immigrants do not receive payments.

"Are you going to throw Grandpa and Grandma off the train, and the disabled veteran who put his life on the line for this country?" Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.) asked opponents of the package.

But the Senate Finance Committee also added billions of dollars in energy tax credit extensions, including an incentive for marginal oil and gas wells, as well as a measure that would reimburse coal companies for interest on wrongfully levied export taxes. Those measures, although adopted with bipartisan support, opened the package to criticism from administration and Republican leaders, who accused Democrats of slowing down the promised payments by loading the bill with sweetheart projects.

Over two years, the Senate package would cost about $204 billion, about $40 billion more than the House bill's two-year cost.

"Where's that money coming from?" asked Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.). "Nobody can deny that we're going to go to the markets, we're going to borrow the money and there's going to be very little payback. . . . Is there another way we can stimulate our economy without stealing from our kids?"

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called the package "a Christmas tree of legislative goodies that might not even get signed" by the president.

In the face of rising pressure, Republican leaders made a significant concession. Whereas they once demanded that the Senate pass the House bill and immediately send it to the president, they now favor the extension of benefits to seniors and veterans and the controls on claims by illegal immigrants. Such changes would force the stimulus package into House-Senate negotiations, which Bush and House leaders had wanted to avoid.

Reid must now decide whether to make good on his threat to immediately move to the House package or allow the Senate to make piecemeal changes through amendment votes. Republicans who voted for and against the Senate Finance Committee measure were betting yesterday that Reid's threat is meaningless.

"Can you imagine AARP, can you imagine our veterans letting the Democrats get away [with that], when we're willing to help them and let them be part of the package?" scoffed Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah). "I can't imagine."

"This is the Senate, not the House. It's not an all-or-nothing place," said Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), a top target of Democrats in the November elections.

John Rother, AARP policy director, confirmed that the group will push for a separate vote on adding payments for seniors to the House plan.

Democratic Senate aides said that they expect Reid to relent today, but only after the GOP absorbs the morning's news headlines on the filibuster.

McCain in Delegate Lead; Clinton, Obama Battle

2008-02-06T08:35:00.000-08:00

Story Source

WASHINGTON -- Sen. John McCain seized command of the race for the Republican presidential nomination early Wednesday, winning delegate-rich primaries from the East Coast to California. Democratic rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama traded victories in an epic struggle with no end in sight.

Clinton won Super Tuesday's biggest state, California, in the Democratic campaign, capitalizing on backing from Hispanic voters. Obama fashioned victories in Alabama and Georgia on the strength of black support.

McCain's own victory in the Republican race in the Golden State dealt a crushing blow to his closest pursuer, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

''We've won some of the biggest states in the country,'' McCain told cheering supporters at a rally in Phoenix, hours before California made his Tuesday Super. An underdog for months, he proclaimed himself the front-runner at last, and added. ''I don't really mind it one bit.''

In the competition that counted the most, the Arizona senator had 570 delegates, nearly half of the 1,191 needed for the nomination - and far ahead of his rivals.

Even so, Romney and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said they were staying in the race.

Neither Clinton nor Obama proclaimed overall victory on a Super Tuesday that sprawled across 22 states, and with good reason. Obama won 13 states and Clinton eight plus American Samoa. But with victories in New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts, the former first lady led narrowly in the early tabulation of delegates for the night.

Missouri was so close that although Obama won the vote count it was likely to be hours before it became clear whether he or his rival had captured a majority of the state's 72 delegates.

The Democratic caucuses in New Mexico remained unsettled. Clinton had a 117-vote lead when the party shut down its vote counting operation until 11 a.m. EST.

''I look forward to continuing our campaign and our debate about how to leave this country better off for the next generation,'' said the former first lady, looking ahead to the primaries and caucuses yet to come.

Obama was in Chicago, where he told a noisy election night rally, ''Our time has come. Our movement is real. And change is coming to America.''

Polling place interviews with voters suggested subtle shifts in the political landscape.

For the first time this year, McCain ran first in a few states among self-identified Republicans. As usual, he was running strongly among independents. Romney was getting the votes of about four in 10 people who described themselves as conservative. McCain was wining about one-third of that group, and Huckabee about one in five.

Overall, Clinton was winning only a slight edge among women and white voters, groups that she had won handily in earlier contests, according to preliminary results from interviews with voters in 16 states leaving polling places.

Obama was collecting the overwhelming majority of votes cast by blacks - a factor in victories in Alabama and Georgia.

Clinton's continued strong appeal among Hispanics - she was winning nearly six in 10 of their votes - was a big factor in her California triumph, and in her victory in Arizona, too.

McCain, the early Republican front-runner whose campaign nearly unraveled six months ago, won in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Missouri, Delaware and his home state of Arizona - each of them winner-take-all primaries. He also pocketed victories in Oklahoma and Illinois.

Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, won a series of Bible Belt victories, in Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee as well as his own home state. He also triumphed at the Republican West Virginia convention, and told The Associated Press in an interview he would campaign on. ''The one way you can't win a race is to quit it, and until somebody beats me, I'm going to answer the bell for every round of this fight,'' he said.

Romney won a home state victory in Massachusetts. He also took Utah, where fellow Mormons supported his candidacy. His superior organization produced caucus victories in North Dakota, Montana, Minnesota, Alaska and Colorado, and he, too, breathed defiance. ''We're going to go all the way to the convention. We're going to win this thing,'' he told supporters in Boston.

Democrats played out a historic struggle between two senators: Clinton, seeking to become the first female president, and Obama, hoping to become the first black to win the White House.

Clinton won at home in New York as well as in California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Arizona and Arkansas, where she was first lady for more than a decade. She also won the caucuses in American Samoa.

Obama won Connecticut, Georgia, Alabama, Delaware, Utah and his home state of Illinois. He prevailed in caucuses in North Dakota, Minnesota, Kansas, Idaho, Alaska and Colorado.

After an early series of low-delegate, single-state contests, Super Tuesday was anything but small _ its primaries and caucuses were spread across nearly half the country in the most wide-open presidential campaign in memory.

The result was a double-barreled set of races, Obama and Clinton fighting for delegates as well as bragging rights in individual states, the Republicans doing the same.

The allocation of delegates lagged the vote count by hours. That was particularly true for the Democrats, who divided theirs roughly in proportion to the popular vote.

Nine of the Republican contests were winner take all, and that was where McCain piled up his lead.

The Arizona senator had 570 delegates, to 251 for Romney and 175 for Huckabee. It takes 1,191 to clinch the presidential nomination at next summer's convention in St. Paul, Minn.

Overall, Clinton had 760 delegates to 693 for Obama, out of the 2,025 needed to secure victory at the party convention in Denver. Clinton's advantage is partly due to her lead among so-called superdelegates, members of Congress and other party leaders who are not selected in primaries and caucuses _ and who are also free to change their minds.

Alabama and Georgia gave Obama three straight Southern triumphs. Like last month's win in South Carolina, they were powered by black votes.

Democrats and Republicans alike said the economy was their most important issue. Democrats said the war in Iraq ranked second and health care third. Republican primary voters said immigration was second most important after the economy, followed by the war in Iraq.

The survey was conducted in 16 states by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for The Associated Press and television networks.

Already, the campaigns were looking ahead to Feb. 9 contests in Louisiana, Nebraska and Washington state and Feb. 12 primaries in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. And increasingly, it looked like the Democrats' historic race between a woman and a black man would go into early spring, possibly longer.

Obama and Clinton spent an estimated $20 million combined to advertise on television in the Feb 5 states.

Obama spent $11 million, running ads in 18 of the 22 states with Democratic contests. Clinton ran ads in 17, for a total of $9 million.