Archive for August 16th, 2007

“The Two Things To Know Before Your City is Nuked By Terrorists” by Douglas MacKinnon

Thursday, August 16th, 2007

1.) Tragically, horrifyingly, but quite predictably, it’s going to happen. The only question being which American city or cities?

In a recent conversation with a former high level intelligence operative of our government, I raised the possibility of terrorists successfully detonating a nuclear weapon within the United States. His response was sobering in its hopelessness.

First, he stressed how grateful he was that he did not work in Washington, DC, and that his family lived far enough out to survive the coming nuclear blast. When I pressed him as to why he was so sure that Islamic terrorists – with or without the help of Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez – would eventually hit DC or another American city with a nuclear weapon, his anger boiled out.

He pointed the finger squarely at our politicians and our politically correct, left-leaning media, who, in his opinion, have “sealed our fate.” He spoke of politicians from both sides of the aisle who consider border security nothing more than a cheap tool to be used for their reelection and enrichment. He despaired about a media that not only gleefully leaks our nation’s most trusted secrets for partisan gain, but then willingly acts as a propaganda tool for the very terrorists intent on our total destruction.

He warned of the hundreds of “loose nukes” floating around our planet. He patiently explained that the former Soviet Union (no matter what they or our government claim), can’t account for a number of their nuclear warheads. That North Korea may well have a few they are willing to sell to terrorists to prop up their totalitarian regime. That Pakistan – already a nuclear power – may soon fall victim to the Islamic extremists trying to overthrow that government. Of an Iran further ahead in their development of nuclear weapons than thought. And last, but not least, he spoke of the thousands of cruise missiles unaccounted for around the world. A number of those missiles being nuclear tipped.

In short, because of what he portrayed as a “betrayal by those sworn to protect us,” a nuclear attack within our nation, in his mind, is “inevitable.”

2.) When said attack comes, you and your family are on your own. Period. My friend stressed that “our government won’t be there to help us. It is broken beyond repair and incapable of assisting those most affected by the blast.”

He talked of critical infrastructures like water, electricity, fuel, banks, our food supply, medical services, police and firefighters, being unavailable for weeks or months. He warned of the blind panic that would follow such an explosion. Of the looting, of neighbor turning on neighbor to take what they don’t have for their own survival. Of our economy suffering an economic loss in the trillions of dollars.

Knowing this, are you prepared? Can you and your family ride out the frighteningly unpredictable weeks or months following the loss of an American city and its inhabitants? If you are not in the city hit, can you survive?

Original Link.

“Sanctuary Nation or Sovereign Nation” by Michelle Malkin

Thursday, August 16th, 2007

Will the execution-style murder of three young students in Newark, N.J., finally turn the tide in the immigration enforcement debate? Will we at last abandon the deadly, chaotic, lawless sanctuary nation experiment and restore America’s lost status as a sovereign nation under the rule of law?

The death of six innocent men and women and the injury of more than 1,000 at the hands of several illegal alien 1993 World Trade Center bombers wasn’t enough to convince politicians in New York and across this country to end illegal alien sanctuary policies.

The death of nearly 3,000 innocent men, women and children at the hands of the 9/11 jihadists who exploited our lax entrance and visa enforcement policies in 2001 wasn’t enough.

The death of 10 innocent men and women in the Washington, D.C., area at the hands of an illegal alien sniper and his bloodthirsty mentor in 2002 wasn’t enough.

But now we are in the heat of a presidential election cycle. The open-borders opportunists in immigration enforcement clothing are professing to see the light. With illegal alien murder suspect Jose Carranza and his alleged MS-13 gang-banging boy helpers who are being sought in the brutal Newark murder case dominating the news on the Eastern seaboard, politicians can’t find a camera fast enough to condemn the very sanctuary policies they promoted and tolerated for decades — sanctuary policies I’ve highlighted for years in this column and on this blog.

Amnesty-first GOP presidential candidate John McCain is now singing the enforcement-first tune. And GOP presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani vowed Tuesday to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the U.S.

He’s touting a “tamper-proof ID card” that includes fingerprints for everyone entering the country and a central database to track when they leave.

What Rudy-come-lately fails to comprehend is that there are already multiple alien tracking databases mandated by federal law that have yet to be fully implemented, integrated and used. The reason they don’t work is because open-borders interests have sabotaged them by restricting funding for them, objecting to them on civil liberties grounds, and pushing local and state governments to forbid public employees from checking them to verify citizenship status. Ring a bell, Rudy?

Giuliani’s newfound border security zeal is intended to blunt criticism by GOP rival Mitt Romney of Giuliani’s pro-sanctuary record as NYC mayor. Giuliani has issued Clintonian denials that he supported sanctuary. But the record is clear. New York City’s sanctuary policy was created in 1989 by Democrat Mayor Ed Koch and upheld by every mayor succeeding him. When Congress enacted immigration reform laws that forbade local governments from barring employees from cooperating with the INS, Giuliani filed suit against the feds in 1997. He was rebuffed by two lower courts, which ruled that the sanctuary order amounted to special treatment for illegal aliens and was nothing more than an unlawful effort to flaunt federal enforcement efforts against illegal aliens. In January 2000, the Supreme Court rejected his appeal, but Giuliani vowed to ignore the law.

To this day, the city’s policy of safe harbors for illegal immigrants stands. Giuliani successor Michael Bloomberg defiantly reiterated the official sanctuary posture of NYC this week: “Let ‘em come.” Could he be more callous, cavalier and out of touch in a post-9/11 world?

From New York to Newark to Seattle to Portland to San Francisco to Los Angeles to San Diego to Houston to Miami, lawmakers have taken this go-with-the-flow attitude toward illegal alien border-crossers and visa overstayers and deportation fugitives. “Let ‘em come.”

But in the wake of the Newark murders and the illumination of illegal alien gang crime penetrating the country, a new rallying cry came from the lips of Newark Mayor Cory Booker: “Get this evil out of my city.” That won’t happen without a demonstrated commitment to cooperate with the feds to enforce immigration laws and deport violent and dangerous criminal aliens first.

A few weeks ago, I launched Nearly 8,000 volunteers have signed up to make their voices heard. Our top priorities will be to push for the adoption of a program known as 287(g) to identify criminal illegal aliens in as many cities as possible; to repeal “don’t ask-don’t tell” sanctuary laws; and to support lawmakers like Newark City Councilman Ron C. Rice, who is pushing a resolution to coordinate efforts between law enforcement when an illegal immigrant is charged with a felony, and New Jersey Assemblyman Richard Merkt, R-Morris, who proposed prohibiting jail officials from releasing illegal immigrants and requiring them to be remanded to federal authorities.

It’s time for ordinary Americans to come out of the shadows and remind Washington every day in words and actions that we are a sovereign nation, not a sanctuary nation.

No more promises. No need to wait for Election ‘08. Just do it.

Original Link.

Lone Star State’s Religious Expression Bill Goes Into Effect Sept. 1

Thursday, August 16th, 2007

It’s a shame we even need this law. It should be common sense.

Under a new law enacted earlier this summer and going into effect in a few weeks, public school students in Texas should feel less intimidated by the threat of legal action when sharing or expressing their personal faith on campus, whether it be verbally or in a class assignment.

The “Religious Viewpoints Anti-Discrimination Act” (HB 3678), approved during the last legislative session and signed by Texas Governor Rick Perry in early June, gives public school districts across the Lone Star State until September 1 to adopt a policy designating school events where public forums will be available for students. Many say it will create more opportunities for students to express their religious views in public schools — perhaps because the new law creates guidelines for student speakers at graduation ceremonies, football games, and other school-wide events, and also allows students to organize religious groups and activities.

Jonathan Saenz is with Plano-based Liberty Legal Institute, which helped draft the bill. He says the new law will protect the free-speech rights of students.

“This bill will give students confidence to be able to talk about what their beliefs are, just like students talk about all other kinds of topics and interests they have,” Saenz explains. “They won’t feel like they’re second-class citizens because they actually talk about something that’s religious or they happen to mention the name ‘God’ when they’re in a public school — something that our Supreme Court has said for years they’re allowed to do.”

Original Link.

NJ Activist Fears School Play Will Distort Facts of Matthew Shepard Murder

Thursday, August 16th, 2007

A New Jersey pro-family group is raising objections to a high school’s plans to sponsor a play intended to honor a slain homosexual college student.

The drama club at Ocean Township High School will perform a controversial play called “The Laramie Project” for a school assembly and on three other occasions in November. The play is about the reaction to the brutal murder of homosexual University of Wyoming student Matthew Shepard in 1998.

Superintendent Thomas Pagano initially opposed the performance, but after receiving a flood of protest from homosexual activists in New Jersey, decided he will allow the play on campus. Steve Goldstein, who heads the homosexual advocacy group Garden State Equality, claims 2,000 of the group’s members sent letters to school officials protesting Pagano’s original decision.

“They were extremely involved in the movement for domestic partnership benefits, then for civil unions,” Deo notes. “And now they’re … aggressively working to have marriage totally redefined in the State of New Jersey, and to be legislatively enacted, [Goldstein] says, within the next two years.”

Original Link.