« Obama’s Church Published Pro-Hamas Article | Home | FBI/CIA Illegal Alien Gets ‘Praised’ By Judge »

Other News For The Week Of May 17 - May 23

This thread is for the busy bees of S&L to post news items themselves.

In order to make the articles as readable as possible, please try to stick to the format described in the first of these weekly editions here.

Of course articles that fit under the topic of a recent thread should be posted there. As always, remember to excerpt heavily and to provide a link to the original source.

Related Articles:

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Saturday, May 17th, 2008 at 12:00 am. Comments are currently closed.

54 Responses to “Other News For The Week Of May 17 - May 23”

BillK
May 17th, 2008 at 2:27 am
From the clearly unbiased Los Angeles Times:

Razor-sharp concertina wire installed at U.S.-Mexico border

The U.S. says its use on an eventual 5-mile stretch of existing fence is to protect agents. But critics say it disregards immigrants’ safety.

By Richard Marosi

SAN DIEGO — – The U.S. Border Patrol is installing razor-sharp concertina wire atop border fencing between San Diego and Tijuana, marking a major shift in approach along a frequently violent stretch of the frontier.

The triple-strand wire, meant to keep smugglers from attacking agents, will stretch five miles when completed this summer — the longest expanse of this type of wire ever used on the Southwest border.

Federal authorities in the past have avoided using fortifications with such negative symbolism. Hundreds of miles of barriers going up in other areas have had to meet “aesthetically pleasing” federal design standards.

Critics say the new approach is inhumane and could leave illegal immigrants bloodied.

Border officials in San Diego say it was necessary and already is proving effective.

They say they opted to augment the existing fencing with razor wire amid escalating violence across from Colonia Libertad, one of Tijuana’s most notorious smuggling enclaves.

The hilly area, roughly between the San Ysidro and Otay Mesa ports of entry, is already one of the most heavily fortified along the Southwest border, with primary and secondary fences, stadium lighting and camera towers.

The area has been the scene of frequent clashes between rock-throwing youths and agents firing pepper spray and tear gas. Despite using tear gas to disperse attackers and improving cooperation with Mexican authorities, U.S. authorities are still being attacked, said San Diego’s Chief Patrol Agent Michael J. Fisher.

Fisher drew criticism late last year after his agents began tear-gassing densely populated areas, sending some residents to a hospital. He said the safety of his agents is his top priority.

“We didn’t just decide to put up concertina wire,” Fisher said. “This is a 1.5-year process on . . . how to make the border safe and secure, and to keep our agents safe from assaults.” …

http://www.latimes.com/news/lo.....5630.story

Awww… people trying to illegally enter the United States might get hurt.

Next up - Criminals escaping from prison might get hurt, pillows installed at perimeter…
bullforever
May 17th, 2008 at 2:40 am
Re-post

Hate to re-hash, but I really want to hear opinions on the following topic.

From the Associated Press:

MySpace case challenges ‘fake’ online conduct

By Anick Jesdanun
May. 16, 2008

NEW YORK - Think twice before you sign up for an online service using a fake name or e-mail address. You could be committing a federal crime.

Federal prosecutors turned to a novel interpretation of computer hacking law to indict a Missouri mother on charges connected to the suicide of a 13-year-old MySpace user.

Prosecutors alleged that by helping create a MySpace account in the name of someone who didn’t exist, Lori Drew, 49, violated the News Corp.-owned site’s terms of service and thus illegally accessed protected computers.

Legal experts warned Friday that such an interpretation could criminalize routine behavior on the Internet. After all, people regularly create accounts or post information under aliases for many legitimate reasons, including parody, spam avoidance and a desire to maintain their anonymity or privacy online or that of a child.

This new interpretation also gives a business contract the force of a law: Violations of a Web site’s user agreement could now lead to criminal sanction, not just civil lawsuits or ejection from a site.

“I think the danger of applying a statute in this way is that it could have unintended consequences,” said John Palfrey, a Harvard law professor who leads a MySpace-convened task force on Internet safety.

“An application of a general statute like this might result in chilling a great deal of online speech and other freedom.” …

http://tinyurl.com/6opkwt

I don’t know where to start. I think the most shocking is that if the prosecution were to win this, then it would set precedent that simple business contracts (civil law) can be substituted for or replace complex legislated criminal law. vee are vaah-ching zzyooo
wardmama4
May 18th, 2008 at 12:14 am
OK bull - I will jump - take out the lawyers who are hyping their ‘take’ for their benefit and take out the msm who always has an agenda - in this case an adult purposely and with harmful intentions portrayed herself as a teenage boy, established a ‘relationship’ with a emotional ill teenage girl and then lied about her - all to try to find out exactly what this girl was saying about her child - first it is immature, second it was wrong but as pointed out - she violated the terms of the News Corp terms of service which lead to the suicide.

It is hard to really pin this down - if we really understood what is the trigger for suicide - we could work to prevent it - I do think that as an adult - what she did was very wrong and deserves some sort of punishment. . .

But I do agree (to a degree) that this case is skating on thin ice - which is probably why the local and state legal eagles wouldn’t touch it. So maybe as a mother I am seeing too much of the one side - and since I don’t like the legal sharks in our country - not enough on the other side.

Talk to the girl’s mother, stand at their door and scream - but to create a ‘boyfriend’ for an already emotionally fragile teenager and then call her a liar. Kids can be nasty to each other, find appropriate ways to deal with it.This situation is just as bad as a sexual preditor prowling those sites - the end is meant for personal ‘jollies’ and the means is creating a fake personna - our children deserve to be defended and protected from the sick adults who apparently find some pleasure in making kids miserable and hurting them. And apparently have nothing better to do with their time.
texaspsue
May 18th, 2008 at 2:47 am
From Aswat Aliraq:

House speaker meets Pelosi, expresses concern over U.S. forces pullout

Baghdad, May 17, (VOI) - Iraq’s Parliament Speaker al-Mashhadani met on Saturday his U.S. counterpart Nancy Pelosi currently visiting Iraq, expressing his concern over a non-binding congressional resolution to withdraw the U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2009.

“Despite the improved capabilities of the Iraqi forces to carry out military operation in places such as Basra and Mosul, they are not fully capable to preserve the people of Iraq and its riches,” Mashhadani told reporters after meeting Pelosi in Baghdad.
“I reminded her of the moral duty of the U.S. toward Iraq, to maintain the democracy it initiated in the country. If security was absent, democracy would turn into no more than ink on paper,” Mashhadani added.

For her part, Pelosi who arrived earlier on Saturday in Baghdad, told reporters that she discussed with Mashhadani the forthcoming provincial elections, the progress made by the armed forces, and investments in Iraq.

http://www.aswataliraq.info/lo.....rSection=1

Ouch! (burn.)

Gateway Pundit has more:

Stranded in Baghdad– Pelosi Gets Snubbed By Iraqi Leaders

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot......html#links

Oooooh…. double burn! :-)
BillK
May 18th, 2008 at 5:19 am
From a triumphant Los Angeles Times, a (shocker!) story about how a “moderate Republican” judge had to vote to overturn the will of California voters because it was a “civil rights issue”:

California chief justice says same-sex marriage ruling was one of his toughest

Ronald M. George, a moderate Republican who voted with the majority, likens the case to civil rights battles.

By Maura Dolan

SAN FRANCISCO — In the days leading up to the California Supreme Court’s historic same-sex marriage ruling Thursday, the decision “weighed most heavily” on Chief Justice Ronald M. George — more so, he said, than any previous case in his nearly 17 years on the court.

The court was poised 4 to 3 not only to legalize same-sex marriage but also to extend to sexual orientation the same broad protections against bias previously saved for race, gender and religion. The decision went further than any other state high court’s and would stun legal scholars, who have long characterized George and his court as cautious and middle of the road.

But as he read the legal arguments, the 68-year-old moderate Republican was drawn by memory to a long ago trip he made with his European immigrant parents through the American South. There, the signs warning “No Negro” or “No colored” left “quite an indelible impression on me,” he recalled in a wide-ranging interview Friday.

“I think,” he concluded, “there are times when doing the right thing means not playing it safe.”

Yet he described his thinking on the constitutional status of state marriage laws as more of an evolution than an epiphany, the result of his reading and long discussions with staff lawyers.

As he sometimes does with the most incendiary cases, George assigned the majority opinion to himself. He wrote and rewrote, poring over draft after draft. Each word change had to be approved by the other three justices joining him in the majority. Even the likely dissenters had to be told in “pink slips” of every word change.

On Wednesday, the long-awaited ruling was finally ready.

Court Clerk Fritz Ohlrich locked up stacks of the fat, stapled court opinions in his office to protect against leaks, and George’s staff asked that security be beefed up. A fellow justice told George she would be at her desk in the morning because she wanted “to be part of history.”

On Thursday, George was in his chambers, being interviewed for a documentary on death penalty administration. He said he wished he had canceled the interview.

He was on camera when he heard “a big roar” from the crowd outside.

George, who grew up in Los Angeles, said he counts gays among his friends. Four years ago, he peered out his chambers’ windows across from San Francisco City Hall to watch gay couples lining up to marry. He saw the showers of rice, the popping of champagne corks, the euphoria of the couples.

He later joined four other justices in nullifying the marriage licenses, which the court deemed to have been granted illegally by San Francisco. The court refused to take up the constitutional questions of same-sex marriage then, insisting the cases work their way up through the courts.

A trial judge ruled in favor of same-sex marriage. A court of appeal overturned that ruling. And finally, the case was on George’s desk.

George said he had voted to void the marriage licenses because he did not think they should be “in limbo” while the courts tackled the constitutional issues. Once he took up the constitutional challenge, he said he did not permit any consideration of political fallout.

“I am very fatalistic about these things,” he said. “If you worry, always looking over your shoulders, then maybe it’s time to hang up your robe.”

Court rules bar George from discussing the ruling until it takes effect in 30 days or more.

During the two-hour interview with The Times, he refused to disclose anything about the court’s internal deliberations and responded to a number of questions by reading aloud from the decision. His elegant and comfortable chambers had neat stacks of papers piled on the floor, all over his desk and on a long conference table.

Asked whether he thought most Californians would accept the marriage ruling, George said flatly: “I really don’t know.” …

http://www.latimes.com/news/lo.....2300.story

Well, looks like California voters may well address those constitutional issues by amending the constitution.

That is, if SCOTUS doesn’t decide the case first based on your interpretation of the US Constitution.

He went home Thursday night drained and discovered a card left by friends at his San Francisco apartment. It was a Japanese watercolor of a branch with red berries. His friends had written “Congratulations!” inside.

“Why not go out on a limb?” the greeting on the card read.

Somewhere there’s got to be a card with a photo of George Burns on the cover with the greeting “It must be nice to believe you’re God.”

When you live in San Francisco, do you have any friends that wouldn’t be thanking you for your decision?
BillK
May 18th, 2008 at 5:28 am
The Los Angeles Times so helpfully tells the GOP how they need to change to save themselves:

GOP struggles to reinvent without losing itself

The party agrees it must change or face catastrophe in November. But that’s about all members can agree on.

By Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten

WASHINGTON — The bad news has come from Illinois, Louisiana and Mississippi — a string of unexpected Republican defeats in congressional elections that have prompted GOP leaders to say, with candor unusual in politics, that the party is facing an outright catastrophe this November.

Increasingly, top Republicans are calling on their party to reinvent itself or risk driving away more voters and donors. The GOP image is so stale, said Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), in a memo to colleagues last week, that “if we were a dog food, they would take us off the shelf” because nobody is buying it.

But even while facing crisis, the GOP is finding that change, if it comes, will not come easily.

The difficulty of a swift reinvention was on display last week as the central players in Washington’s conservative community gathered for their weekly strategy session, the Wednesday Meeting, held in a conference room of Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform organization.

A senior advisor to the GOP’s presumptive presidential nominee, John McCain, was on hand along with the Republican Party’s national chairman to make the case for McCain’s brand of Republicanism.

McCain’s approach — tough on taxes, but receptive to immigrants and committed to easing global warming — could help paint the GOP in new colors, more attractive to independent voters, Latinos and women. Some GOP leaders now say that by embracing McCain and his policy platform, Republicans would instantly “rebrand” and reinvigorate their party.

At first, that message from McCain advisor Carly Fiorina and RNC Chairman Mike Duncan seemed to resonate with the 200 or so Republicans in the room, many still absorbing the loss only hours before of a Mississippi House seat once considered among the party’s safest.

But one participant at the Wednesday Meeting rose to question the soundness of the Arizona senator’s plans for more government action to combat global warming. Similar ideas, the speaker said, had proved to be a disaster in Europe. Heads nodded and dozens of economic conservatives and global-warming skeptics applauded.

Global warming is one of several knotty topics causing Republicans to skirmish among themselves as they reckon with a horrific political landscape: President Bush’s record-low approval ratings, an unpopular war, a sagging economy and persistent scandals.

Before last week’s loss in a special congressional election in Mississippi, the party took a similar hit at the beginning of the month in Louisiana and, in March, another in Illinois.

The disconcerted and divided mood of the party contrasts sharply with its optimism and unity only a few years ago around plans to build an era of political dominance.

http://www.latimes.com/news/po.....9036.story

Sorry, too late.

For most of us, watching the GOP in action the past year or so has convinced us there’s little point in going to the polls this fall as all our so-called Republican leaders betray us time and time again in the name of being invited to the right Washington parties.

Perhaps it is time for the GOP to die.

All I can say is the Republicans can move to the center in the name of “revitalization” all they want; I think I can safely say most of us won’t be there if they do.

Gaining “independent voters, Latinos and women” and losing conservatives and evangelicals.

If it works it just proves our time has passed - at least until Americans realize they’ve gotten the government they deserve based on their actions.
BillK
May 18th, 2008 at 5:32 am
From the Los Angeles Times:

Sen. Kennedy hospitalized after seizure

After initial reports of ’stroke-like symptoms,’ the senator is said to be joking with relatives at a Boston hospital.

By Richard A. Serrano

WASHINGTON — Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, hospitalized Saturday after apparently suffering a seizure at his home on Cape Cod, Mass., was awake and joking with family members later in the day, a spokeswoman said.

The Democratic senator is undergoing tests at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston to determine the cause of the seizure.

The 76-year-old Kennedy, leader of a storied political dynasty and a liberal icon, was rushed from the family compound at Hyannis Port, Mass., to Cape Cod Hospital at 9 a.m. He was evaluated there, then airlifted to Massachusetts General.

Kennedy suffered what first appeared to be “stroke-like symptoms,” a Democratic Party aide said. The longtime senator experienced one seizure in Cape Cod and a second while aboard the helicopter flight to Boston, the Boston Globe reported.

By the end of the day, however, Kennedy was “conscious, talking, joking with family,” said Kennedy’s spokeswoman, Stephanie Cutter.

Nonetheless, news of his illness sent shudders through the Democratic establishment and commanded wide national attention, in part because he so vividly embodies the Kennedy legacy, with even his voice and appearance potently reminiscent of his two slain brothers.

Family members said they remained “guardedly optimistic” that he would recover soon, and hospital officials said he was resting comfortably. Relatives gathered at the hospital, joined by Kennedy’s Massachusetts colleague, Sen. John F. Kerry. …

http://www.latimes.com/news/la.....5195.story

I mention this in large part to note the civility here and on most other conservative forums on the topic.

Had this been a report of a Republican leader falling ill and had this been Kos or HuffPo, the cackles of glee and wishes for his swift death would be too numerous to count.

You know, because they care.
BillK
May 18th, 2008 at 5:50 am
The San Francisco Chronicle also chimes in with advice for the GOP, from Ahnold, of all people:

Schwarzenegger calls for ‘rebranding’ GOP

By Carla Marinucci

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger created shock and awe in the Republican Party when he warned years ago that the GOP was in danger of “dying at the box office” by failing to make the sale to a wide swath of voters.

And with the presidential election looming, the Republican governor of the nation’s most populous state - a decidedly blue state - has now found a chorus of agreement. The Republican “brand” - thanks to an unpopular president, a war, gas prices, foreclosures and deficit - has become such damaged goods that GOP Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia groused last week that “if we were dog food, they would take us off the shelf.”

The answer for GOP presidential candidate John McCain: take a page out of the Schwarzenegger playbook and sell a product that is “counter” to the current GOP brand on issues like global warming, spending and even immigration reform.

McCain comes to the Golden State this week on a campaign and fundraising swing, including a rally Thursday in Stockton being publicized with an invitation graced by a picture of a McCain hug - not with President Bush but with Schwarzenegger.

And the governor, in an interview with The Chronicle last week, had some candid advice and observations, not only about the GOP brand - but on McCain’s efforts to expand his appeal to independents and disillusioned Democrats.

“The Republican idea is a great idea, but we can’t go and get stuck with just the right wing,” Schwarzenegger said. “Let’s let the party come all the way to the center. Let those people be heard as much as the right. Let it be the big tent we’ve talked about.

“Let’s invade and let’s cross over that (political) center,” he said. “The issues that they’re talking about? Let them be our issues, and let the party be known for that.”

He observed that his own political opponents, including former Democratic Gov. Gray Davis, tried to define him in much the way McCain is being defined by Democrats - as joined at the hip with Bush.

“It didn’t work,” he laughed. But “how does (McCain) beat the Democrats? By offering a better future. He needs to offer hope, he needs to go in and show he can solve the problem in Iraq and have better relations with other countries again … and bring the economy back.”

As Democrats get closer to picking their party’s nominee, McCain is getting advice on his image “rebranding” from some of the same GOP insiders who helped Schwarzenegger win re-election. They include senior campaign adviser Steve Schmidt and former Schwarzenegger communications director Adam Mendelsohn, partners in a GOP political consulting firm, Mercury LLC in Sacramento.

“The Republican brand may be in a bad position because of the Bush presidency, but people recognize that John McCain is not George Bush. … John McCain has a long track record of being a nontraditional Republican - and so does Schwarzenegger,” said Mendelsohn. …

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....10LK62.DTL

It’s called “being a Democrat.”

McCain and Schwarzenegger offer warmed-over Democratic ideas but still somehow call themselves Republicans.

No, the idea is more like “tell the right wing to #$@! off, and we’ll win.”

He may well be right.

As Rush likes to say, most of us here are conservatives first, Republicans second.

But alas, the California GOP talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk:

California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner - the only Republican besides Schwarzenegger elected to statewide office - said his party’s image has been battered because GOP officials have forgotten the party’s core principles: lower taxes, less government.

“Spending has skyrocketed. … There’s been this real crisis in earmarks, which are not justified, and there’s been corruption because of ethics violations,” he said. “Republican Party leaders have done a terrible job and let the country down.”

But Poizner, speaking from Jerusalem where he accompanied Bush to celebrate Israel’s 60th birthday, said GOP leaders like himself, Schwarzenegger and McCain have proven it’s possible to stick to Republican principles and win elections, even when polls show the GOP to be the underdog.

“Swing voters are looking for people who have the ability to get things done in both the private sector and public sector,” said Poizner, who is considering a 2010 run for governor of California. “We can win elections if we get back to the basics - and that’s something that Sen. McCain can do.”

GOP leaders like Schwarzenegger, who is currently proposing more taxes than Grey Davis ever did before his recall?

The one that said the idea of lower taxes is just not tied to reality?

McCain who sees no problem with letting the EPA run the economy?

Those GOP leaders?

I think I’m going to have to switch my registration to Independent after all; beats having to throw away all that mail from the RNC.

Perhaps I should just mail in articles like this one to let them know why there’s no check enclosed.
wardmama4
May 18th, 2008 at 11:16 am
BillK - re GOP story -’The party agrees it must change or face catastrophe in November’- What the GOP/RNC/Republcian politicians are not hearing is that they have changed - into Dem lites, RHINOs and liberals - with the tax and spend, big government, earmarks, pork and awful personal behavior and that change is what the true conservatives and Republicans do not like and are not supporting. . . even their tone deafness to the People are indicative of their ‘change’ that no real Republican/conservative wants or supports.

Until they fix that - they will continue to lose seats, elections and the WH - which will make America more and more damaged and vulnerable.
1sttofight
May 18th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Algore Gore, Call your office.

Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM)

Who: Dr. Arthur Robinson of the OISM

What: release of names in OISM “Petition Project”

When: 10 AM, Monday May 19

Where: Holeman Lounge at the National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW, Washington, DC

Why: the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM’s Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,021 PhDs, are not “a few.” Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not “skeptics.”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/n.....med-monday

Excellent news, Truely great news.

Will it make a difference? I doubt it, waaaaaay tooooo much money is being made on this hoax.
ATLien
May 18th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Fascism anybody? Obama quote of the YEAR:

“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,” Obama said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080517/pl_afp/usvote
U NO HOO
May 18th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Here is what I get when I talk to politicians, “Don’t you know we can’t do that?”

(The road repairs can’t come from the general fund, that is for general things…etc.)
BillK
May 19th, 2008 at 9:17 am
From a disappointed AP - note the wrong and biased headline:

Study says global warming not worsening hurricanes

By Seth Borenstein

WASHINGTON (AP) — Global warming isn’t to blame for the recent jump in hurricanes in the Atlantic, concludes a study by a prominent federal scientist whose position has shifted on the subject.

Not only that, warmer temperatures will actually reduce the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic and those making landfall, research meteorologist Tom Knutson reported in a study released Sunday.

In the past, Knutson has raised concerns about the effects of climate change on storms. His new paper has the potential to heat up a simmering debate among meteorologists about current and future effects of global warming in the Atlantic.

Ever since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, hurricanes have often been seen as a symbol of global warming’s wrath. Many climate change experts have tied the rise of hurricanes in recent years to global warming and hotter waters that fuel them.

Another group of experts, those who study hurricanes and who are more often skeptical about global warming, say there is no link. They attribute the recent increase to a natural multi-decade cycle.

What makes this study different is Knutson, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s fluid dynamics lab in Princeton, N.J.

He has warned about the harmful effects of climate change and has even complained in the past about being censored by the Bush administration on past studies on the dangers of global warming.

He said his new study, based on a computer model, argues “against the notion that we’ve already seen a really dramatic increase in Atlantic hurricane activity resulting from greenhouse warming.”

The study, published online Sunday in the journal Nature Geoscience, predicts that by the end of the century the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic will fall by 18 percent.

The number of hurricanes making landfall in the United States and its neighbors - anywhere west of Puerto Rico - will drop by 30 percent because of wind factors.

The biggest storms - those with winds of more than 110 mph - would only decrease in frequency by 8 percent. Tropical storms, those with winds between 39 and 73 mph, would decrease by 27 percent. …

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s.....HURRICANES

Note the headline - “Global Warming not worsening hurricanes” - and the actual data from the study:

Global warming isn’t to blame for the recent jump in hurricanes in the Atlantic

Meaning Global Warming may not be occurring.

Note also that “hurricanes have often been seen as a symbol of global warming’s wrath” bur “those who study hurricanes and who are more often skeptical about global warming, say there is no link.

Hmmm, the people who study hurricanes say there’s no link but the Global Warming panic crowd do. Got it.

Needless to say, other scientists have already erected the stake Knutson is to be burned at:

MIT hurricane meteorologist Kerry Emanuel, while praising Knutson as a scientist, called his conclusion “demonstrably wrong” based on a computer model that doesn’t look properly at storms.

Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist, said Knutson’s computer model is poor at assessing tropical weather and “fail to replicate storms with any kind of fidelity.”

Trenberth, climate analysis chief at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., said it is not just the number of hurricanes “that matter, it is also the intensity, duration and size, and this study falls short on these issues.”

Knutson acknowledges weaknesses in his computer model and said it primarily gives a coarse overview, not an accurate picture on individual storms and storm strength. He said the latest model doesn’t produce storms surpassing 112 mph.

But NOAA’s Chris Landsea, one of the few scientists who does not belong to the Global Warming orthodoxy, stated:

But NOAA hurricane meteorologist Chris Landsea, who wasn’t part of this study, praised Knutson’s work as “very consistent with what’s being said all along.”

“I think global warming is a big concern, but when it comes to hurricanes the evidence for changes is pretty darn tiny,” Landsea said.

I think this gives a very tiny clue to what may happen in the future as the data fails to provide the climatic doomsday scientists have been predicting; we’ll see lots of “Oh, the data is inconclusive, but our models still say it’s going to occur.”

Then “doomsday” will be put off for another 10, 20 or however many years with Gore’s campaigns and Kyoto given “credit” for stopping something that was never going to happen.

Mark my words on that one.
wardmama4
May 19th, 2008 at 9:59 am
BillK - re: Global Warming & Oil - don’t forget that while all the election hoohaw is being plastered all over the msm, the Dems quietly attempted to sneak agricultural Shamnesty into the Iraq Funding bill, are attempting (using those wonderful GW computer models) to have the polar bear declared threatened with extinction (maybe in 35 years or so) in another attempt to secure eternal vorboten drilling in ANWAR. . .

Meanwhile, we the people are clamoring for drilling to commence yesterday. Just imagine the jobs, opportunities and maybe, perhaps even putting the US into the oil game (OPEC, anyone) - and the liberals (you know the ones who ‘claim’ they are always for the little people) are doing everything (behind closed doors and in the dark of night - of course all kept on the quiet by their mouthpiece, the msm) to stop it and drag America down into destruction and economic disaster.

All based on a hoax.
wardmama4
May 19th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Speaking of the global warming hoax - Carlos Mencia did a comedy routine on that - that vegatarians are really the cause/enabler of global warming by eating the plant life that converts our carbon dioxide into oxygen, while meat eaters are busy killing off (and eating) the flatulating cows. . . Food for thought or at least a good laugh.
U NO HOO
May 19th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
“to have the polar bear declared threatened with extinction (maybe in 35 years or so)”

That is correct, if there are no more polar bears 35 years from now they will be extinct.

Sometimes it appears the nuts want the bears to become extinct so they can shake their fingers and say “I told you so!”

Same for Al Gore, he WANTS to be right so he can be his smug self.
DW
May 19th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
There’s been a bit of an interesting dust-up over the remark Stephen King made about the military a while back (BillK mentioned this briefly on this thread last week)
From the Bangor Daily News:

BDN interview: Stephen King defends remarks on Army, Iraq
By Dale McGarrigle
Thursday, May 08, 2008 - Bangor Daily News

Who knew that promoting literacy could cause such a firestorm?

Bangor author Stephen King has found himself the target of e-mailers and phone callers for what he told high school students while stressing the importance of reading at the Library of Congress on April 4: “The fact is if you can read, you can walk into a job later on. If you don’t, then you’ve got the Army, Iraq, I don’t know, something like that.”…

…Even as King defended his position in a telephone interview with the BDN on Wednesday, the flap over his remarks drew a response from U.S. Army spokesman Paul Boyce, who said most soldiers are avid readers and that military recruits test above the national average in reading and vocabulary skills.

“America’s soldiers are proudly serving and fighting for us all. We can be proud of our soldiers’ selfless service, their skill and their ingenuity. They certainly are role models for every high-school student in America considering a noble career … and many book authors,” Boyce said.

A story about the issue in Wednesday’s Bangor Daily News also stirred considerable reader debate online at http://www.bangordailynews.com.

As of 6:30 p.m., users from across the country had posted more than 160 comments on the site. Nearly 5,000 people had taken an online poll on whether King should apologize for the remarks.

About 62 percent of those responding thought he should. Thirty eight percent said he should not.

A review of reader comments on the site found a roughly similar level of antipathy for King’s statements…

…King said he doesn’t regret his remarks.

“[Conservative commentators] shift the discussion away from education to who’s supporting the troops. Of course, I support the troops. In this country, there’s an equating of intelligence with elitism, and elitism with being unpatriotic. But smart people love the U.S., too.”

King said he just seeks to cut through the double-talk.

“Who’s for the war in Iraq and who’s not?” he said. “Who’s for better education and who’s not?”

King, who supports Barack Obama for president, readily proclaims that he opposes the war in Iraq.

“If it was up to me, none of those people would have died,” he said. “Four thousand have been killed, more than in the World Trade Center. It’s not right, especially when the reasons for going to war were bogus anyway.”

He understands that his remarks have offended people with ties to the military.

“Those in the military and military families are going to have their own political views and judge me according to those,” he said.

Full story:
http://bangornews.com/news/t/n.....zoneid=500

In all fairness to Mr. King, he has shipped cases of books to the troops overseas and lent financial support to programs that allow them to call home (and has done it unobtrusively).
But he seems to have a blockage on this one. Obviously what he said has offended a hell of a lot of people in the miltary -yet he refuses to apologize.
Or even acknowledge that he said something dumb:

>”Those in the military and military families are going to have their own political views and judge me according to those,”

Funny how the left bends over backward to avoid offending certain groups -but just certain ones.

Here’s Stephen King’s own website on the subject:
http://www.stephenking.com/for.....php?t=6457
http://www.stephenking.com/for.....php?t=6460

And one of the Newsbusters/Noel Sheppard threads that seems to be at the heart of the storm:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/n.....c-military
learner
May 19th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
I am not sure where this article came from other then it was in a newspaper from Spain:
ALL EUROPEAN LIFE DIED IN AUSCHWITZ
By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007

I walked down the street in Barcelona, and suddenly discovered a terrible truth - Europe died in Auschwitz . We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world.

The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.

And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and poverty, due to an un willingness to work and support their families with pride.

They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth and crime

Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts.

And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition.

We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for hoping for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs. What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe.

***********************************
A lot of Americans have become so insulated from reality that they imagine America can suffer defeat without any inconvenience to themselves. Absolutely No Profiling! Pause a moment, reflect back.

These events are actual events from history. They really happened! Do you remember?

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by A Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40.
2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
4. During the 1980’s a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
8. In 1988 , Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by: Muslim male extremists mostly between the of 17 and 40.
12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against: Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.
BillK
May 20th, 2008 at 5:59 am
“Accuracy” in media, as reported by the AP:

White House criticizes NBC News’ editing of Bush interview

Omitting the president’s sentences is called ‘deceitful.’ He was answering a question about whether his comments in Israel on negotiating with terrorists were directed at Barack Obama.

The White House criticized NBC News on Monday for what aides to President Bush called “deceitful” editing of an interview in which Bush was asked whether comments about the president of Iran were directed at Sen. Barack Obama.

Bush aides were angered by the way the president’s answer was portrayed when correspondent Richard Engel asked about his address to the Israeli parliament last week.

Bush had mentioned the president of Iran in the speech and said: “Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.”

Obama, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, considered that an attack on him. The White House denied it.

Engel asked Bush if he had been referring to Obama.

As it appeared on “Nightly News” on Sunday and the “Today” show#24696422 on Monday, Bush’s response was: “You know, my policies haven’t changed, but evidently the political calendar has. . . . And when, you know, a leader of Iran says that they want to destroy Israel, you’ve got to take those words seriously.”

NBC deleted the following passage between those sentences: “People need to read the speech. You didn’t get it exactly right, either. What I said was that we need to take the words of people seriously.”

Bush counsel Ed Gillespie, in a letter to NBC, said that “this deceitful editing to further a media-manufactured story line is utterly misleading and irresponsible.”

The unedited Bush interview is on the network’s website, NBC noted, saying the reporting accurately reflected the interview.

Gillespie said: “It’s simply absurd for people to have to log onto the Internet and stream video to get accurate information from NBC News.”

In NBC’s nightly newscast Monday, anchor Brian Williams noted that the White House objected to the editing.

http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....1630.story

What do you suppose would happen if say the RNC edited Obama’s comments together into a campaign ad, but stated “the complete unedited speech is available on our web site?

Hint: The Tennessee RNC is being smeared to hell and back by Dems for merely accurately quoting Obama’s wife, because she lamely said later it “wasn’t what she meant to say.”

Sort of like Kerry’s joke, if you recall.
nuthingbettertodo
May 20th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
From the Associated Press:

Ex-Army chaplain cleared in Gitmo spy case is Obama delegate

Posted by The Associated Press May 20, 2008

OLYMPIA — A former Army Muslim chaplain at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who was cleared of spy accusations is now a Democratic National Convention delegate pledged to Sen. Barack Obama…

http://blog.oregonlive.com/bre.....n_git.html

[Moved to its own thread.]
texaspsue
May 20th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
“….merely accurately quoting Obama’s wife, because she lamely said later it “wasn’t what she meant to say.”

LOL BillK… just like JK. Can you imagine if BO answered the “red phone” at 3 a.m.? His staff would be racing around to return the call and undo whatever stupid response that he had just given. BO’s staff: “No, no that wasn’t what BO really meant in the conversation he just had with you………….. he meant DON”T push the button. Oh drat, you already carried out his orders?” LOL
greybeard
May 20th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Published: May 19, 2008 by News Blaze
By Krzys Wasilewski

America Is Racist (According to the United Nations)

The United Nations is launching an investigation into alleged racism in the United States. U.N. representatives say that according to their report, prepared in March of this year, American security forces too willingly profile people of Middle Eastern origin.

yeppers - this militant declaration of war against the Great satan was proclaimed by 86 year old, white breast feeding, grandmothers - and we should not be examining the peoples of ethnic terrorist threat origins. - DOH–ing

Senegalese lawyer Doudou Diene, a U.N. special envoy, is to start his investigation on Monday. During his three-week mission, he is scheduled to meet with federal and local officials that are to answer his questions about how American agencies work and whether they negatively focus on racial minorities such as Arabs and Southern Asians. A U.N. press release issued last Friday said the investigator would “gather first-hand information on issues related to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.”

First, Issue the racist charge and then investigate…I have a suggestion for the UN… kiss my intolerant rear end. The Un is full up of the most globaly represented group of racist, corrupt and inhumane useless characters imaginable. Stick your investigation up you hypocritical buns zone and get your nose out of our national Security affairs.

…a Kieth Richards momentay pause here… for full report http://tinyurl.com/6afu7k

continued:
The United States has adopted stricter airport control since the September 11, 2001, attacks. Although the Bush Administration has continually rejected the notion that the new regulation only affected one group of citizens, the U.N. report, released in March this year, stated that “such practice continues to be widespread, particularly against Arabs, Muslims and South Asians.” It also warned Washington that “measures taken in the fight against terrorism must not discriminate, in purpose or effect, on the grounds of race, color, or national or ethnic origin.”

…yes, let us take a logical scrutinizing approach to identifcation based upon factors that do not represent identification.
So long as ‘the notion” is rejected we continue to fall into the trap of being accussed of ‘wrong-doing’ - and responding as if we are involved in violations… call a spade a spade and get the job done.

At the same time, U.N. officials say nothing when every year more immigrants from Africa and Asia are murdered in Russia than in all European countries put together. Also they refuse to react when Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatens to wipe Israel off the map. It is not the United States that is racist; it’s the United Nations.

Why do we continue to set ourselves up for failure and give ourselves over to being dictated to by a useless hypocritical enity?
JohnMG
May 20th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
America Is Racist (According to the United Nations)

…..”It also warned Washington that……”

Heretofore and forthwith I respectfully request that all further warnings to the US issued by Senegalese lawyer Doudou Diene, a U.N. special envoy, be hand delivered by him, personally to me.

End of problem!
DEZ
May 20th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
“Heretofore and forthwith I respectfully request that all further warnings to the US issued by Senegalese lawyer Doudou Diene, a U.N. special envoy, be hand delivered by him, personally to me. ”

Wear gloves and a rainsuit MG, or you just might get Doudou all over yourself.;)
JohnMG
May 20th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Question: What’s it take to become a special envoy to the UN?

Answer: A third-grade education, a massive anti-American chip on your shoulder, and three proof-of-purchase seals from three boxes of “Cuckoo Puffs”. That, and an over-inflated ego concerning your own self-importance. That guy talks like a man with a paper asshole preparing to wipe it with a blow torch. I would welcome a personal visit from him, but tell him not to buy a round-trip ticket.

What a shit head!
pagar
May 20th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Where is John Bolton when we need him? Ran out of the UN by Anti America Americans, because he would have never allowed this to happen.
imnewatthis
May 20th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
All I know is, during the single instance of air travel which I managed to undertake in the last 18 years, I was one of those taken aside to remove shoes and have a closer inspection. I am a blonde, blue-eyed, German/Swedish/English-American. At the time I also saw a teenaged Caucasian girl (who was travelling with her parents), pulled aside for similar (unproductive) scrutiny.
BillK
May 20th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
Time to panic again, from the Los Angeles Times:

Nanotechnology cancer risk found

Some carbon nanotubes used in bike parts, bumpers and other products could act like asbestos if inhaled, scientists report. Workers making the products are at greatest risk, the study finds.

By Alan Zarembo

Certain types of carbon nanotubes — microscopic graphite cylinders used in a small but growing number of Space Age applications — could pose a cancer risk similar to that of asbestos if inhaled, scientists reported Tuesday.

Researchers found that mice injected with nanotubes quickly developed the same biological damage associated with early exposure to asbestos fibers, a known carcinogen.

The study showed “the potential to cause harm if these things get into the air and into the lungs,” said coauthor Andrew Maynard, a physicist at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington.

Maynard said the nanotubes posed the greatest danger to workers who could inhale the dustlike particles during manufacturing. In finished products, the nanotubes are embedded in other material and thus pose less risk to consumers.

Sean Murdock, head of the NanoBusiness Alliance, an industry trade group based in Skokie, Ill., said precautions were now in place in many factories, usually requiring workers to wear respirators. Nanotubes are largely made in closed chemical reactors, he added.

“The good news is that we’re understanding the potential hazards before we have large-scale use of these products and not four decades later,” he said.

From the time nanotubes were discovered in the early 1990s, they have been billed as wonder particles for their incredible strength, low weight and ability to conduct heat and electricity.

Nanotubes are starting to be used in some products, including bicycle components, computer displays and car bumpers. Researchers envision them becoming common in medical devices, solar panels and hydrogen fuel cells.

But early on, scientists suspected that certain types of nanotubes could pose the same danger as asbestos fibers, which get stuck in the outer lining of the lung known as the mesothelium.

The damage results when the body’s defenses repeatedly try and fail to expel the fibers, eventually leading to mutations that can cause cancer decades later.

In the current study, published in the journal Nature Nanotechnology, nanotubes were injected into the abdominal cavities of mice. The tissue of these cavities is similar to the lining of human lungs.

One group of mice received tubes at least 20 microns long with walls several atoms thick. Other mice got shorter, thinner tubes that were bundled together. A third group was injected with asbestos fibers.

Among the mice killed by researchers after 24 hours, only those that had received asbestos or the longer tubes showed cellular inflammation, the first step in a long process leading to cancer. …

http://www.latimes.com/news/sc.....6662.story

Of course the number one cause of cancer in mice is scientific researchers.

While it’s good to know there’s a risk, I can see the trial lawyers’ ads starting on late night cable already.
BillK
May 20th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
You knew it was coming; from the AP:

Environmentalists sue to broaden polar bear decision

Bush must consider greenhouse gas effects, they say.

ANCHORAGE, ALASKA — Conservation groups announced Tuesday they are challenging Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne’s attempt to limit collateral economic damage from listing polar bears as a threatened species.

The Center for Biological Diversity/, Greenpeace and the Natural Resources Defense Council will seek court intervention to address what they say in the No. 1 threat to polar bears: greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming and melt Arctic sea ice.

Kempthorne, echoing President Bush, said last week the Endangered Species Act was the wrong tool to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Kempthorne that he would propose “common sense modifications” to make sure the polar bear listing would not set backdoor climate policy outside the normal system of political accountability.

The conservation groups said Kempthorne acted improperly.

“On the one hand, he’s acknowledging that global warming is impacting polar bears,” said Melanie Duchin of Greenpeace in Alaska. “On the other hand, he’s not willing to do anything about it. We’re asking the administration to uphold the spirit and intent of the Endangered Species Act.”

In court filings Friday that amended their original lawsuit, the conservation groups asked U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland, Calif., to reject Kempthorne’s administrative actions.

Interior spokesman Shane Wolfe said the department generally does not comment on pending litigation.

“The simple fact is that the Endangered Species Act is not a means to address the global challenges of climate change, which call for a global solution,” he said.

Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, warned that the court action could threaten domestic energy security and development, from offshore leasing to new coal-fired power plants and oil shale development.

“I can guarantee you this is the beginning of an endless series of court challenges and appeals that the national environmental organizations have been planning in their goal of using the polar bear issue for much larger purposes and goals,” he said.

Kempthorne, calling the Endangered Species Act one of the most inflexible laws Congress ever passed, said last week he had no choice but to list polar bears as threatened because of overwhelming evidence that the bears’ sea ice habitat had dramatically melted and that computer models indicate the trend was likely to continue.

However, Kempthorne said, the listing decision would be accompanied by a rule preventing “unintended harm to the society and economy of the United States.”

The law did not allow interventions on greenhouse gas emissions, he said, because no “causal connection” had been demonstrated on individual polar bears from specific power plants, resource projects, government permits or activities in the lower 48 states.

Kassie Siegel, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, called that reasoning “completely ridiculous.”

“It’s a classic ploy of answering the wrong question,’ she said. The issue, she said, is that greenhouse gas emissions cause global warming, and therefore harm polar bears.

“The notion that you need to tie the death of any polar bear to any particular carbon dioxide molecule is ridiculous,” she said. “They’re just making that up.” …

http://www.latimes.com/news/sc.....1784.story

Or, “the notion that there needs to be any proof that Global Warming is occurring or is actually causing polar bear populations to fall is ridiculous, as long as we can find a judge that thinks the way we do.”

Thanks for admitting the truth, Ms. Siegel.

Meanwhile Kempthorne is living in fantasyland if he believes any rule about preventing “unintended harm to the society and economy of the United States” would hold up among a liberal judiciary.

You can see the ruling now - “By forcing the United States to reduce its consumption, the United States becomes a better global citizen and a model for environmental activism the world over, thus increasing the United States’ status on the world stage, a benefit that will only grow with the passage of time. Any inconvenience suffered by US citizens would be ample payback for our greed and would show the world we too are willing to suffer, thus not only is there no harm, there is only long term benefit.”

Instead, I think all power that comes from CO2-emitting power plants should be summarily cut off from all environmetalist offices and environmental group members.

It’s what they’d want anyway.

You’ll be happy to know your tax dollars are funding the future dependence of America on foreign oil:

Andrew Wetzler, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said Kempthorne’s rules would be challenged on procedure because they were implemented without proper public notice, a comment period or environmental review. Wetzler also said the MMPA does not contain requirements for protection of critical habitat, a recovery plan or agency consultation.

“We are confident the rules won’t survive court review and that the polar bear will be given the full protection of the Endangered Species Act that it so badly needs,” he said.

The groups also claim Kempthorne should have immediately listed polar bears as endangered rather than threatened based on the scientific evidence collected in the listing process. A species is “endangered” if it “is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” “Threatened” means it’s likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future.

A U.S. Geological Survey study generated in response to the listing petition predicted polar bears in Alaska could be wiped out by 2050.

Don’t forget polar bear populations in Alaska have nearly doubled in the past forty years. Their “endangered” status would be completely based on computer models of events some scientists think is occurring for reasons they cannot prove, i.e. that Global Warming is occurring, has anything to do with CO2 emissions, and that polar bear habitat will, in fact shrink.

But the data in the form of huge increases in polar bear populations is to be ignored.

Remember folks, “science” is now merely providing plausible explanations to promote the political causes of the day. All that “scientific method” and “analysis of data” stuff is just old, outmoded crap.
BillK
May 20th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Blah blah “alternatives to intercourse” blah blah.

From the Washington Post:

Oral sex isn’t keeping kids virgins

Study contradicts myth of how teens avoid intercourse

By Rob Stein

Contrary to popular belief, teens do not appear to commonly engage in oral sex as a way to preserve their virginity, according to the first study to examine the question nationally.

The analysis of a federal survey of more than 2,200 males and females ages 15 to 19, released Monday, found that more than half reported having had oral sex. But those who described themselves as virgins were far less likely to say they had tried it than those who had had intercourse.

“There’s a popular perception that teens are engaging in serial oral sex as a strategy to avoid vaginal intercourse,” said Rachel Jones of the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization in New York, who helped conduct the study. “Our research suggests that’s a misperception.”

Instead, the study found that teens tend to become sexually active in many ways at about the same time. For example, although only 1 in 4 teen virgins had engaged in oral sex, within six months after their first intercourse more than 4 out of 5 adolescents reported having oral sex.

“That suggests that oral and vaginal sex are closely linked,” said Jones, whose findings will be published in the July issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health. “Most teens don’t have oral sex until they have had vaginal sex.”

Proponents of sex education programs that focus on abstinence said the findings debunked the criticism that the approach was inadvertently prompting more teens to have oral sex, which still carries the risk of sexually transmitted disease, in order to preserve their virginity.

If anything, the findings support the need to encourage more teens to delay sexual activity of all kinds, said Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association.

“This report reveals that teen sex - even with a condom - presents significant risk for future sexual experimentation and so underscores the need for redoubled emphasis on abstinence education for teens,” she said. “Only abstinence education adequately addresses this problem.”

But critics of abstinence programs said the findings reinforced the need for comprehensive sex education, because teens engage in a wide variety of sexual activities, all of which carry risks for the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.

“More than half of our teens are having sex - vaginal and oral,” said James Wagoner, president of the group Advocates for Youth. “We can’t afford the luxury of denial. Abstinence-only programs are the embodiment of denial. They have been proven not to work, and it’s time to invest in real sex education, including condoms.”

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....10P1UP.DTL

Soooo… the research shows that kids are more likely to have oral sex if they’re already having sex, and virgins are likely to have done neither, and yet the pro-sex education crowd says that somehow proves that abstinence programs don’t work?

I’m sorry, is there some new definition of “virgin” of which I’m not aware?

The study found kids having sex are probably having oral sex too.

Those not having sex aren’t having oral sex either:

A majority of the teens - 55 percent - said they had engaged in oral sex, which was slightly more than the 50 percent who said they had had vaginal sex. But oral sex was much more common among those who already had had intercourse: 87 percent of those who reported on a computerized survey that they had had vaginal sex said they had engaged in oral sex as well, compared with 23 percent who described themselves as virgins.

Could someone tell me how that’s an indictment of abstinence programs?

Oh, but that’s right, a certain President said oral sex isn’t “sexual relations” so the study is moot anyway.
BillK
May 20th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Shocker, from the San Francisco Chronicle:

Tiger attack survivor is charged with shoplifting video-game equipment

By Henry K. Lee

The younger of two brothers who survived a Christmas Day tiger attack at the San Francisco Zoo was charged today with five felony counts accusing him of shoplifting video-game equipment from Target stores in the East Bay, authorities said.

Paul Dhaliwal, 19, was arrested March 27 by San Leandro police after a security guard at the Target at the Bayfair Center mall on East 14th Street saw him hiding two Nintendo Wii controllers in his pants, police Lt. Tom Overton said.

An investigation led police to conclude that Dhaliwal stole similar equipment from a Target store in Livermore on March 24 and from the chain’s Hayward store March 25 and again March 27, Overton said.

Dhaliwal was charged today with three counts of commercial burglary and two counts of grand theft in connection with the incidents, said Ann Diem, an Alameda County assistant district attorney. Dhaliwal, who is in custody at the Santa Clara County Jail on a probation violation, is to appear Tuesday in Alameda County Superior Court.

In the San Leandro incident, store security guard Michael Marucut told authorities that he saw Dhaliwal stuff the controllers down his pants and followed him as he walked past the cash registers, a police report said.

Dhaliwal “was uncooperative and immediately began to resist” when Marucut and other security guards confronted him outside, Marucut wrote in a statement included in the police report.

Dhaliwal denied ever leaving the store with the items, police said. He was arrested and made bail the next day.

The San Leandro incident happened the same day Dhaliwal and his brother Kulbir Dhaliwal, 24, filed a claim against the city of San Francisco, seeking unspecified monetary damages in connection with the tiger attack. The city has since denied the claim, paving the way for an expected lawsuit.

The Dhaliwals contend that they suffered serious injuries and emotional harm when a 243-pound Siberian tiger named Tatiana escaped its enclosure and mauled them near closing time at the zoo Dec. 25. The tiger killed Paul Dhaliwal’s close friend Carlos Sousa Jr., 17, of San Jose before police shot and killed the animal.

Sousa’s parents, Carlos and Marilza Sousa, filed a claim against the city last week, seeking unspecified monetary damages and a court injunction ordering the city to meet all minimum enclosure requirements recommended by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, a national accreditation group.

After the tiger attack, the zoo said the concrete wall around the tiger enclosure was about 4 1/2 feet under the 16 1/2 feet that the accreditation group recommends. The zoo has since raised the wall to 19 feet.

Paul Dhaliwal had run-ins with the law before the Target incidents.

Both he and Kulbir Dhaliwal were arrested after they scuffled with San Jose police Sept. 7, authorities said. The two were charged with public intoxication and resisting arrest, both misdemeanors. Paul Dhaliwal was also charged with misdemeanor battery on a police officer.

The brothers were arrested after they refused to cooperate with officers who reported seeing them chase two men down the street, according to police reports.

In February, Paul Dhaliwal pleaded not guilty to marijuana possession after being cited in a Milpitas hotel parking lot Dec. 21 for allegedly having 1.8 grams of the drug in his pocket.

He had been placed on probation three days before that incident after pleading no contest to felony reckless driving and other charges for leading police on a 140 mph chase in April 2007, court records show.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....10PNEV.DTL

Remember, these are the kids their parents described as “innocent” and “kids just being kids” in the tiger incident.

Riiiight.
BillK
May 20th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
The usual smears from the AP:

White House denies story about attacking Iran

By Ben Feller

The White House on Tuesday denied a published report in Israel that said President Bush intends to attack Iran before the end of his term in January.

A story in the Jerusalem Post quoted a “senior official” there as saying that Bush plans to attack Iran in the coming months. The story says the unidentified official claimed that a “senior member” of Bush’s traveling entourage made the statement about attacking Iran in a closed meeting. Bush was in Israel last week.

The article also says the unnamed Bush official said that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney “were of the opinion that military action were called for.”

“An article in today’s Jerusalem Post about the president’s position on Iran that quotes unnamed sources — quoting unnamed sources — is not worth the paper it’s written on,” White House press secretary Dana Perino said in a statement.

“Let me respond by reaffirming the policy of the administration: We, along with our international allies who want peace in the Middle East, remain opposed to Iran’s ambitions to obtain a nuclear weapon,” Perino said. “To that end, we are working to bring tough diplomatic and economic pressure on the Iranians to get them to change their behavior and to halt their uranium enrichment program.”

Perino said the “president of the United States should never take options off the table, but our preference and our actions for dealing with this matter remain through peaceful diplomatic means. Nothing has changed in that regard.”

Members of Congress were unmoved Tuesday by the allegation. Senators used a lengthy congressional hearing with Defense Secretary Robert Gates to discuss instead whether the U.S. should establish a direct dialogue with Tehran.

When asked to comment on the Jerusalem Post report, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said: “You’re talking about an allegation without a source that has been denied by the president. I think we can leave it at that.”

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....056D55.DTL

I’m incredibly shocked that Pelosi was willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt on this; what ulterior motive must the Dems have?
BillK
May 21st, 2008 at 1:45 am
The battle with NBC continues.

From Fox News:

White House Challenges NBC News to Explain Whether Iraq Is in ‘Civil War’

The White House is calling on NBC News to declare whether the network still believes Iraq is mired in a “civil war,” escalating a fight that began when NBC aired an interview with President Bush that the White House called the product of “deceitful editing.”

The network rattled the White House in November 2006 when it called the conflict in Iraq a “civil war.” On Monday, White House Counselor Ed Gillespie wrote a letter to NBC News President Steve Capus, looking in part for an explanation of how NBC News now views the war.

White House press secretary Dana Perino said Tuesday the administration is “fed up” with the way NBC News is treating the Iraq war.

“I remember very distinctly, how there was a quite the pomp and circumstance when NBC, on The Today Show, decided to declare that they were declaring Iraq was a civil war. But since then, after the surge and things certainly have improved in Iraq, NBC has never had a corresponding ceremony to say that Iraq is not in a civil war. We’re just curious to find out what they believe,” she said.

Gillespie noted in his letter that “around September of 2007, your network quietly stopped referring to conditions in Iraq as a ‘civil war.’”

In two statements Monday, he asked for clarification.

“Is it still NBC News’s carefully deliberated opinion that Iraq is in the midst of a civil war?” he asked in the letter to Capus. “If not, will the network publicly declare that the civil war has ended, or that it was wrong to declare it in the first place?”

In a brief statement later, he said, “We … look forward to hearing their response to our additional concerns about their labeling Iraq as a ‘civil war.’”

So far, NBC News has not responded.

Gillespie initially challenged NBC News about the interview with Bush, during which correspondent Richard Engel asked whether the president’s comments in Israel about the “appeasement” of rogue nations were directed at Barack Obama. The interview aired Sunday night on “Nightly News” and Monday morning on “Today.”

Gillespie, in the same letter to Capus, blasted NBC for the interview, saying that a critical portion of the interview had been edited out, and “this deceitful editing to further a media-manufactured storyline is utterly misleading and irresponsible.” He asked that the network air Bush’s response in full on the two programs.

NBC countered that no effort was made to be deceptive and called Gillespie’s criticism a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

On Tuesday, the White House also asked NBC News to explain why it “disavowed” government data that showed the economy is not in a recession.

“Just another point on this, President Bush is going to continue to state what United States’ policy is for the next eight months and certainly during the six months that there’s an election going on. If, for example, if tomorrow President Bush says he believes the tax cuts should be made permanent, that doesn’t mean he is attacking anybody, he is stating his policy. And we just want to make sure it’s really clear that we’re not going to allow the president’s policies to be drug, dragged into the ‘08 election unnecessarily and unfairly,” Perino said. …

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356753,00.html

The Bush administration waits until now to realize that NBC and other networks are blatantly lying about him, his policies, the war and the economy to favor the Democrats?

Where have they been?

Meanwhile :

Keith Olbermann, host of MSNBC’s “Countdown With Keith Olbermann,” aired the full segment Monday and defended NBC News, saying the interview was available all along on its Web site and that Bush gave a non-answer anyway.

“The White House apparently not realizing that in full, it is clear the president never actually answered Richard Engel’s first question and clear that the president either does not know what he talked about or what he is now talking about,” Olbermann said.

NBC earlier said the unedited interview has been available since Sunday on the network’s Web site, and that the reporting accurately reflected the interview. It said the extra sentences by Bush were included during a report on Sunday’s “Today” show.

“Our reporting accurately reflects the interview. Just as the White House does not participate in the editorial process at the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal or USA Today, NBC News, as part of a free press in a free society, makes its own editorial decisions,” the network said in a statement.“

Once again, funny how the Obama campaign doesn’t quite take the same approach when unedited video is shown of his wife’s speeches, or Wright’s speeches, or for that matter, his own.

No, airing their own unedited speeches is painted as “GOP smear tactics.”

But NBC’s editing of Bush’s comments reflects pure “editiorial decisions.”

Asked by FOXNews.com whether NBC News planned to respond to Gillespie’s question about the Iraq war, a spokeswoman referred to the above statement and said via e-mail, “that is our complete response.”

I wouldn’t expect NBC to react any other way.
BillK
May 21st, 2008 at 3:07 am
From an overjoyed Los Angeles Times:

FBI agents objected to military’s 9/11 interrogations, audit finds

A long-awaited Justice Department report says they questioned the legality and effectiveness of certain tactics.

By Richard B. Schmitt

WASHINGTON — FBI agents who assisted with overseas interrogations of suspected terrorists after Sept. 11 often clashed with their military counterparts and refused to participate in the most aggressive intelligence-gathering methods because they doubted they were legal or effective, a long-awaited Justice Department audit found.

At the same time, the report released Tuesday by Inspector Gen. Glenn A. Fine faults officials at FBI headquarters for failing to provide prompt guidance to agents in the field on what to do if they witnessed interrogations using snarling dogs, sexual ploys and other abusive techniques that violated long-standing FBI policy.

The audit also found that, as early as 2002, agents were raising questions about whether the rough tactics were legal and whether evidence secured under the circumstances would stand up in court if the suspects were ever prosecuted. But Justice Department officials were mostly focused on whether the interrogations were yielding valuable intelligence rather than whether they violated any laws, the report says.

Concerns about military interrogation tactics reached the White House as early as 2003, Fine reported, but they were apparently dismissed. Aides to former Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft told Fine that Ashcroft in 2003 raised questions about the rough treatment of one detainee with Condoleezza Rice, who was then national security advisor. But Justice officials told investigators that those high-level talks also appeared to have no impact on curbing the aggressive tactics. Fine said Ashcroft declined to be interviewed as part of his investigation.

The 370-page analysis, more than three years in the making, generally portrays the FBI as having taken a principled stand against abusive interrogations and torture. Though it describes FBI dealings with other agencies, it does not attempt to assess the conduct of CIA or military interrogators. Their efforts have been condemned by human rights groups and others since abuses at the Abu Ghraib military prison outside Baghdad were exposed in 2004.

The report says the FBI deserved credit for deciding in 2002 to continue to follow its own strict interrogation policies. The FBI said it was “gratified” by the findings.

The American Civil Liberties Union said the report showed that top FBI and Justice Department officials should have stepped in sooner to stop coercive questioning and that the leadership was more concerned with avoiding responsibility than with enforcing the law. A few months after FBI agents began raising concerns, the Justice Department secretly prepared a legal opinion that sanctioned harsh interrogation methods by the CIA.

Other critics said the reservations expressed by the FBI foreshadowed legal difficulties the Pentagon is now facing as it prepares to try terrorism suspects at the Guantanamo Bay military tribunal in Cuba.

The report shows that harsh methods “were not working, would not work and would come back to haunt the United States as it moved from intelligence gathering to prosecution,” said Jennifer Daskal, a lawyer with Human Rights Watch, a Washington-based advocacy group. “This is exactly what we are seeing now, with the efforts to prosecute the alleged terrorists in Guantanamo Bay fatally tainted by the possible use of evidence obtained through torture and other abuse.” …

http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....6278.story

Because, you know, the FBI are such experts at terrorist interrogation.

This is just the smallest taste of the “reports” that will be issued once Obama is elected.

The story concludes:

The Pentagon, which is gearing up for the death penalty trials of several suspects in the Sept. 11 attacks, announced last week that it was dropping charges against Qahtani. The alleged “20th hijacker” had been designated for prosecution in February.

“We found no evidence that the FBI’s concerns influenced [Department of Defense] interrogation policies,” the report says. Once it was established that military interrogators were permitted to use interrogation techniques not available to FBI agents, the agents stopped complaining as much.

Of course, that’s why the Pentagon is backing off on prosecutions - not because it would reveal intelligence sources but because they “know” their evidence will never hold.

Silly me.
BillK
May 21st, 2008 at 6:44 am
From a joyful AP, news that more babies can be killed!!

Court strikes down Va. late-term abortion ban

RICHMOND, Va. — A Virginia law banning a type of late-term abortion is still unconstitutional, even though a similar federal ban was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

The 2-1 decision by a panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirms the same court’s 2005 ruling striking down the law. The Supreme Court had ordered the appeals court to take another look at Virginia’s statute after the ruling on the federal ban.

The appeals court cited a key difference between the federal and state bans on the procedure that abortion opponents call “partial-birth abortion.” The federal law protects doctors who set out to perform a legal abortion that by accident becomes the banned procedure. The Virginia statute provides no such protection.

The state has two weeks to ask the full federal appeals court to review the ruling, or 90 days to appeal to the Supreme Court. The attorney general’s office “is reviewing all possible courses of action,” spokesman J. Tucker Martin said.

The state law is unconstitutional “because it imposes an undue burden on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion,” Judge M. Blane Michael wrote in the majority opinion, joined by Judge Diana Gribbon-Motz.

The ruling means Virginia women will continue to have access to safe abortions through the second trimester of pregnancy, said Stephanie Toti, the Center for Reproductive Rights lawyer who represented abortion providers in the case.

“The court recognized Virginia’s law is extreme — that it effectively banned the most common method of second-trimester abortion, and that is unconstitutional,” Toti said.

The Family Foundation of Virginia said it hoped a higher court would reverse the ruling.

“It is disappointing that yet again just two people can thwart the will of the people, the action of a legislature, and simple justice for nearly born children,” said Victoria Cobb, the organization’s president.

The majority agreed with Toti’s argument that doctors performing a standard type of abortion would be at risk of accidentally violating Virginia’s law. Michael and Motz were both appointed to the court by President Clinton. …

http://www.comcast.net/article.....rtion.Ban/

I’m sorry - the left has spent so much time telling us how rare the procedure is, yet now they say it’s “the most common method of second-trimester” abortion?

Of course even if you believe in a woman’s “right to choose” the thought of killing a child six months along should horrify anyone.

This is why the left gets so apoplectic at the photos of fetuses - because they know that if people could see the children they’re killing, they wouldn’t be able to go through with it.

Better get used to judges overruling the will of the people, as that’s the kind of judge Obama has said he’d like to see appointed to courts.
BillK
May 21st, 2008 at 7:16 am
Note how MSNBC carefully avoids any possible mention of the word “terrorism”:

Explosives seized at nuclear plant

Worker stopped at Swedish facility with substance used in suicide attacks

STOCKHOLM, Sweden - A nuclear plant in Sweden was sealed off Wednesday after a worker was stopped at its entrance with a highly explosive substance, police said.

Sven-Erik Karlsson, spokesman for Kalmar County Police, said investigators were questioning the man, a welder who was scheduled to work at the plant.

Karlsson said the man carried a plastic bag with an explosive substance as he tried to enter the Oskarshamn nuclear plant on the country’s southeast coast.

He said police received a call from the facility at 7:58 a.m. local time.

“They told us a welder who was going to perform a job there had been stopped in a random security check. He had been carrying small amounts of the highly explosive material TATP,” Karlsson said.

TATP, or triacetone triperoxide, is a high explosive which is extremely unstable, especially when subjected to heat, friction and shock. It is more powerful than dynamite.

The compound can be prepared in a home laboratory from easily available household chemicals. It has been employed by suicide bombers in Israel and by Richard Reid, the thwarted British “shoebomber” who attempted to blow up a transatlantic airliner in 2001.

Karlsson said police have set up a security perimeter with a 985-feet radius around the plant. He says workers already inside were not evacuated and the plant was operating normally. …

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24752096/

Wouldn’t want to raise any concerns; we’ll wait until a Republican mentions it so we can blame them for “spreading fear.”
JohnMG
May 21st, 2008 at 8:46 am
“the man”—–”a welder”—–”worker”—–going to perform a job there—-? Doesn’t this asshat have a name and a nation of origin?

….”a welder who was going to perform a job there…… He had been carrying small amounts of the highly explosive material TATP,”

So just how many of these “small amounts” of this ̶

Buzz

Articles

Links

S & L

Other News For The Week Of May 17 - May 23

54 Responses to “Other News For The Week Of May 17 - May 23”