Memorial Day… VIETNAM 50th ANNIVERSARY
(ABC7/AP) – Memorial Day in 2012 bore extra meaning for those who served and fought during the Vietnam War, as this year commemorates the 50th anniversary of America’s first involvement in the conflict.
And, for the first time on Monday, Vietnam veteran Raul Barerra brought his family to the place that cuts so deep – the Vietnam Veterans Memorial on the National Mall – and that reminds him of decades of missing two childhood friends.
“Maybe, someday, we’ll walk the streets in heaven together, like we did back home,” he said.
This year’s Memorial Day marked the beginning of a 13-year project to commemorate and remember American involvement in Vietnam. Speaking at the memorial, Obama said of the veterans of that war served with “just as much patriotism and honor as any before you.”
http://www.vietnamwar50th.com/
Brittany Jacobs of Hereford, N.C., hugs her 17-month old son Christian at her husband, Marine SGT Christopher Jacobs’ gravesite in Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day at in Arlington, Va.
Culture and Media Institute:
Program launched to teach press about Muslim sensitivities, blames ‘right-wing activists.’
A new course on Islam designed for journalists tries to minimize the impact and importance of ”jihad” by comparing it to the number of murders in America each year. That same course claims ”right-wing activists” tried to tie American Muslims to terrorism and doesn’t mention examples of Islamic attacks on press freedom.
That’s the way a prominent news organization is teaching journalists in a three-hour online course. The Poynter News University, part of the Poynter Institute, launched the free course ”Covering Islam in America” to guide the media on their coverage of Muslim communities.
The George Soros-funded Social Science Research Council, which received $50,000 from the Open Society Institute ”For Initiative on HIV/AIDS and Social Transformation,” is one of the groups behind the initiative, along with the Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University. That fits with a theme for liberal financier Soros, who has spent more than $52 million on influencing the media. The Islamic course also links to another Soros-funded entity, the well-financed Center for American Progress.
In about 30 pages of text with links to other reports and articles, journalists can go through and read about the history of Islam, Muslims in America, and how to cover stories on Islam. Besides learning basic facts about Muslims and their history, the course adds ways to put ”jihad” into perspective, attack conservatives, and provide a list of liberal groups that can be contacted for expert advice and quotes.
The pre and post-assessments give a hint as to the nature of the course. One question asked, ”What grievances might sources associated with ‘Political Islam’ hold against Western journalists?” The answer is that ”Western journalists are seen as all of the following: ”hostile to Islam,” ”focus too much on Islamic violence,” ”viewed as water carriers for Western government agendas,” and ”thought to be unable to understand Islam unless they embrace Islam.”
Course instructors Lawrence Pintak and Stephen Franklin are both former foreign correspondents. Pintak serves as dean at The Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University, which is a partner of the project. He also has two books on journalism and Islam and defends the biased, activist network Al Jazzera English.
This course is ”A project of The Poynter Institute funded by The Knight Foundation.” Soros’s Open Society Foundations have worked closely with The Knight Foundation. They partnered up to start the Investigative News Network, which received $200,000 from the Knight Foundation and $100,000 from the Open Society Foundations. The Knight Foundations President and CEO, Alberto Ibarguen, is also on the board for AOL and yet another key Soros backed group, the progressive investigative reporting start-up ProPublica.
There is some useful information in the Islamic course for those journalists that did not pay attention in their history classes and are ignorant of Islamic beliefs. However, this does not excuse statements that accuse conservatives of bigotry.
”Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, a group of right-wing activists who view themselves as ‘anti-Jihadists’ have aggressively tried to tie American Muslims to terrorism overseas and in the United States. You can learn more about some of these groups in the following…”
The reports that journalists are told to look at to uncover the ”right-wing activists” agenda are even more telling. The first is a report from none other than the Soros-funded progressive group Center for American Progress, which received $7.3 million from the Open Society Foundations since the year 2000.
Fear, Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America, details charitable groups that ”spent almost $43 million financing anti-Muslim campaigns.” One of the coauthors of the report is the Koch-hating Lee Fang, who writes for Center’s left-wing blog Think Progress. Fang continuously goes after the Koch brothers for their contributions to conservatives and Tea Party support.
The other report is by The Tennessean in Nashville titled Anti-Muslim Crusaders Make Millions Spreading Fear. This article details the story of ”activists who have raised millions of dollars after they convinced donors that the nation’s Muslim population posed a security threat.”
Another section of the course also encourages journalists to add context to their stories. They note it is important to explain political motives stating ”Politicians do not oppose or support proposed mosques and other Muslim-American projects without taking into account their own interests.”
One of the more offensive statements is that ”context is essential in covering this global story in a way that does not amplify fears of jihad.” Journalists ”are far more likely to report on jihad-related incidents than other violence’ which gives people a ”skewed impression of the prevalence of jihad.”
In order to combat this, journalists are told to compare the ”approximately 3,000 people killed on Sept. 11, 2001” by terrorists to the general murder rate:
”To give those numbers some context, the FBI reports that approximately 15,000 people in the U.S. are murdered each year (A half-million individuals die each year from nutritional deficiencies, more than 800,000 from malaria, and two million from HIV/AIDS.) Jihad is not a leading cause of death in the world, even in the three countries that account for the bulk of the casualties: Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.”
The first section of the course described Shariah law and the concerns surrounding it. ”Most Americans have heard some reference to Shariah law. There is even a movement in the U.S. dedicated to fighting what its members claim is the encroachment of Shariah, or Islamic law, in this country.”
Without describing the concerns about the encroachment of Shariah law within the U.S., the course blandly described Shariah and compared it to other religions.
”Shariah literally means the “straight path.” It is Islamic law based upon the Quran, the Hadith and the Sunna, which are the habits and customs of the Prophet Muhammad. At some level, Shariah governs every aspect of Muslim life. However, just as some Catholics might ignore strictures on birth control or Jews may eat pork, Muslims also sometimes veer off “the straight path.”
While Catholics may ignore birth control rules or Jews may eat pork, they are rarely killed for doing so. In Islamic countries that abide by Shariah law, including Saudi Arabia and Iran, ”non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims under the law‘ and one can be stoned to death, beheaded, or flogged for ”crimes of sin such as adultery,” as described by Former Muslims United Director Nonie Darwish. Just a week ago, a Sudanese worker was executed in Saudi Arabia for ”sorcery.”
Besides leaving out the violent nature of Shariah law, other important facts about radical Islam and journalism are omitted. No where in the course does it mention The Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard who published a cartoon of Muhammad sparked global riots around the globe. Protesters in 2006 ”burnt embassies and stormed several European buildings in a wave of rioting and flag-burning in which more than 100 people were killed.” There was even an assassination attempt four years later.
Nor does it mention Molly Norris, another cartoonist who changed her name and went into hiding ”on the insistence of top security specialists at the F.B.I.” She was ”threatened by Islamic extremists’ for promoting ”Everybody Draw Muhammad Day” on the internet after Comedy Central ”edited out references to Muhammad from an episode of ‘South Park’ that month’ which ”triggered threats from extremists.”
This isn’t the first time Soros foundations have advocated for Islamic causes. Soros’s Open Society Foundations have funded and hosted events that promote similar ideas. Their ”At Home in Europe Project ”explored Muslim integration in cities across Europe. ”As a result of the attacks in New York, Madrid, and London, Muslim communities in Europe today are under heightened scrutiny. Yet, there is also increasing acknowledgment of the prejudice Muslims experience and the social and economic disadvantages they suffered.”
An OSI forum from 2004 had Olivier Roy discussed his book Globalized Islam, ”neo-fundamentalist movements, in particular al Qaeda, as a direct response to globalization pressures exerted by Western cultural and economic values. ‘Islamic radicalization is a pathological consequence of Westernization,” he said.’
Another OSI forum summary, this time from 2006, was described on its website, ”Central Asian leaders are exaggerating the danger posed by Islamic radicals, two experts asserted.”
Numerous Soros-funded groups chimed in on these issues too, such as The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. It received $1,880,398 from Open Society Foundations since 2000, promoted recognition of the radical Muslim Brotherhood. The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation in 2004 received a $75,000 grant ”To challenge selective application of immigration law with regard to Muslims.”
http://patdollard.com/2011/09/soros-establishing-pr-office-to-train-media-to-downplay-islamic-terrorism/
Fitzgerald stepping down as US attorney in Chicago…
By DON BABWIN and TAMMY WEBBER
Associated Press
CHICAGO
In a city and state known for tenacious corruption, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald became known as a man who was just as tenacious in going after politicians of every stripe.
During more than a decade in Chicago, Fitzgerald put behind bars a former Republican governor and then his Democratic successor. He traveled to Washington to win convictions of a top aide to the vice president of the United States, then returned to target an international media mogul and aides to one of the nation’s most powerful mayors.
On Wednesday, two months after former Gov. Rod Blagojevich walked into prison following Fitzgerald’s insistence he be tried a second time for trying to sell a Senate appointment, Fitzgerald announced he is stepping down after 24 years as a prosecutor.
Fitzgerald gave no reason for his decision to leave the providentially appointed post he’s held since Sept. 1, 2001. During that time he’s overseen prosecutions of Blagojevich and former Gov. George Ryan, former Vice President Dick Cheney’s top aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby and media mogul Conrad Black. He took on public corruption, international terrorism, corporate fraud and organized crime.
“Eleven years is a very long time in a very high-pressure job,” said Peter Fitzgerald, a former U.S. senator, no relation, who recruited Patrick Fitzgerald to the post and spoke to him Wednesday morning about his decision. “I think it’s really hard … to divide responsibilities between family and job. I think he just felt it was time and also thought the office would benefit from new blood.”
Fitzgerald, who is married to a schoolteacher and has two young children, will hold a Thursday news conference in Chicago but said in his statement that he wants take the summer off before considering other job possibilities.
“When I was selected for this position in 2001, I said that it was one of the greatest privileges that I could ever hope for,” he said in the statement. “I believe that even more now after having the privilege of working alongside hundreds of dedicated prosecutors and agents.”
Fitzgerald has been mentioned as a possible successor to FBI Director Robert Mueller. When asked about elected public office, he has said he would never consider it.
In fact, after being appointed by a Republican President George W. Bush and keeping his job under Democratic President Barack Obama, the intensely private prosecutor has never publicly made his politics known.
“He was one of the most non-political U.S. attorney’s we’ve ever had … and in a town like this where everything is political, it is incredible to have a U.S. attorney like that,” said former state appellate Judge David Erickson.
Job prospects or no, the timing of Fitzgerald’s announcement makes sense, coming just after his office saw through Blagojevich’s imprisonment and the last of the big cases stemming from the three-year-old investigation of the former governor.
It was that case that tested Fitzgerald like no other in Chicago.
From the day of Blagojevich’s 2008 arrest, when Fitzgerald famously characterized the former governor’s actions as a “political corruption crime spree” that would “make Lincoln roll over in his grave,” he has been scrutinized for the case.
“I worked under three U.S. attorneys and none of them ever would have uttered such comments, and if any assistant did, he or she would have been fired immediately,” said Phil Turner, who worked in the northern Illinois office before Fitzgerald’s tenure began.
Criticism mounted when the jury in Blagojevich’s first trial deadlocked on the vast majority of charges, including the most damaging allegation that he tried to sell Obama’s vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder.
The Washington Post published a scathing editorial saying Fitzgerald had his shot at the former governor, lost and “should stand down before crossing another fine line _ the one that separates prosecution from persecution.” The Wall Street Journal wrote, “If Mr. Fitzgerald doesn’t resign of his own accord, the Justice Department should remove him.”
Undaunted, Fitzgerald pressed on, tried Blagojevich again and ultimately secured a conviction that resulted in a 14-year prison term for the ex-governor.
While critics insist Fitzgerald crosses lines, attorneys in his office are intensely loyal.
“He’s just a guy who does the right thing,” said Joel Levin, who left the office after he helped prosecute Ryan. “He is a person of incredible integrity.”
Fitzgerald also may be the country’s best-known and, to those he targeted, most-feared federal prosecutor. In addition to the ex-governors, his office won convictions against aging mobsters, city workers, trucking executives and top figures in former Chicago Mayor Richard Daley’s administration.
Nationally, he was tapped to be the special prosecutor who investigated the disclosure of the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame and eventually won the conviction against Libby, though Bush later commuted his sentence.
In that case, Fitzgerald tried to force former New York Times reporter Judith Miller to testify before a grand jury, with Miller sitting in jail for three months for refusing to do so. She ultimately relented, saying Libby had given her permission to publish Plame’s name.
It was his reputation for that kind of determination that got him the job in the first place.
Born in Brooklyn, N.Y., the son of a Manhattan doorman, Fitzgerald spent years advancing his career one criminal case at a time. From the East Coast to Chicago, he earned a reputation as a tough anti-corruption prosecutor who worked, as one observer put it, “28 hours a day.”
As an assistant U.S. attorney in New York he successfully prosecuted major terrorism cases, including against those responsible for the 1998 bombing of two U.S. embassies in East Africa and Omar Abdel-Rahman, the so-called “blind sheik,” convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and conspiring to blow up bridges and buildings around New York city.
In 1993, he helped jail a Gambino crime family capo and three other mobsters for murder, racketeering, narcotics trafficking and other crimes. And he supervised the 1996 trial of three men who plotted to blow up 12 airliners.
“From his early consequential years in New York City confronting the terrorist threat to his strong leadership of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois, Pat has rightly earned a reputation over these last 24 years as a prosecutor’s prosecutor,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a Wednesday statement.
Fitzgerald was among 10 or more people with strong credentials in law enforcement whose names were mentioned a year ago as possible nominees to succeed Mueller as his 10-year term leading the FBI neared an end. President Barack Obama decided to stick with Mueller, keeping him in place for another two years until September 2013.
During an appearance last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mueller said he has had discussions with Obama about potential successors, but “not very recently.”
“We are preparing for 2013 when we would expect a new individual to take the helm,” Mueller said.
If Fitzgerald were to accept a nomination, he could potentially run into opposition on Capitol Hill from Republicans, some of whom view his prosecution of Libby case as an illustration of prosecutorial overreach.
“He’s done and incredible job and … most of us in this profession think the world’s wide open for him,” said Anton Valukas, who headed the U.S. attorney’s office in Chicago from 1985-1990. “All the big firms in the country will want him to come to the private side and I would be surprised if he is not considered for a high political post.”
___
AP writers Jason Keyser in Chicago and Pete Yost in Washington contributed to this report.
When the looter is the government:
By George Will
May 18, 2012
TEWKSBURY, Mass.
Russ Caswell, 68, is bewildered: “What country are we in?” He and his wife, Pat, are ensnared in a Kafkaesque nightmare unfolding in Orwellian language.
This town’s police department is conniving with the federal government to circumvent Massachusetts law — which is less permissive than federal law — to seize his livelihood and retirement asset. In the lawsuit titled United States of America v. 434 Main Street, Tewksbury, Massachusetts, the government is suing an inanimate object, the motel Caswell’s father built in 1955. The U.S. Department of Justice intends to seize it, sell it for perhaps $1.5 million and give up to 80 percent of that to the Tewksbury Police Department, whose budget is just $5.5 million. The Caswells have not been charged with, let alone convicted of, a crime. They are being persecuted by two governments eager to profit from what is antiseptically called the “equitable sharing” of the fruits of civil forfeiture, a process of government enrichment that often is indistinguishable from robbery.
The Merrimack River Valley near the New Hampshire border has had more downs than ups since the 19th century, when the nearby towns of Lowell and Lawrence were centers of America’s textile industry. In the 1960s the area briefly enjoyed a high-tech boom. Caswell’s “budget” motel, too, has seen better days, as when the touring Annette Funicello and the Mouseketeers checked in. In its sixth decade the motel hosts tourists, some workers on extended stays and some elderly people who call it home. The 56 rooms rent for $56 a night or $285 a week.
Since 1994, about 30 motel customers have been arrested on drug-dealing charges. Even if those police figures are accurate — the police have a substantial monetary incentive to exaggerate — these 30 episodes involved less than 5/100ths of 1 percent of the 125,000 rooms Caswell has rented over those more than 6,700 days. Yet this is the government’s excuse for impoverishing the Caswells by seizing this property, which is their only significant source of income and all of their retirement security.
The government says the rooms were used to “facilitate” a crime. It does not say the Caswells knew or even that they were supposed to know what was going on in all their rooms all the time. Civil forfeiture law treats citizens worse than criminals, requiring them to prove their innocence — to prove they did everything possible to prevent those rare crimes from occurring in a few of those rooms. What counts as possible remains vague. The Caswells voluntarily installed security cameras, they photocopy customers’ identifications and record their license plates, and they turn the information over to the police, who have never asked the Caswells to do more.
The Caswells are represented by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian public-interest law firm. IJ explains that civil forfeiture is a proceeding in which property is said to have acted wrongly. This was useful long ago against pirates, who might be out of reach but whose ill-gotten gains could be seized. The Caswells, however, are not pirates.
Rather, they are victims of two piratical governments that, IJ argues, are violating the U.S. Constitution twice. They are violating the Eighth Amendment, which has been construed to forbid “excessive fines” that deprive individuals of their livelihoods. And the federal “equitable sharing” program violates the 10th Amendment by vitiating state law, thereby enabling Congress to compel the states to adopt Congress’s policies where states possess a reserved power and primary authority — in the definition and enforcement of the criminal law.
A federal drug agent operating in this region roots around in public records in search of targets — property with at least $50,000 equity. Caswell thinks that if his motel “had a big mortgage, this would not be happening.”
“Equitable sharing” — the consensual splitting of ill-gotten loot by the looters — reeks of the moral hazard that exists in situations in which incentives are for perverse behavior. To see where this leads, read IJ’s scalding report “Policing for Profit: The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture” (http://ow.ly/aYME1), a sickening litany of law enforcement agencies padding their budgets and financing boondoggles by, for example, smelling, or imagining to smell, or pretending to smell, marijuana in cars they covet.
None of this is surprising to Madisonians, which all sensible Americans are. James Madison warned (in Federalist 48) that government power “is of an encroaching nature.” If unresisted, it produces iniquitous sharing of other people’s property.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-government-is-the-looter/2012/05/18/gIQAUIKVZU_story.html
WHO IS BARACK OBAMA? (IMAGE)
The “Anybody But Obama” movement is growing – as evidenced by this scathing (and quite accurate) image portraying the ongoing cover-up of Barack Obama’s still largely unknown past:
PLEASE: Read This File- A Primer Put Together By A Dedicated Freedom Fighter for the neophytes who still may be in denial.
THANKS TO ULSTERMAN FOR HIS UNENDING DUE DILIGENCE! {{HUGS}}
Republican leaders John Boehner, Eric Cantor and Kevin McCarthy joined with Darell Issa in a letter to Obama Attorney General Eric Holder that demands Holder cooperate fully with the ongoing investigation into the failed and deadly gunrunning operation. And according to that letter just released to the media, Boehner and his fellow Republicans are focused in not only on what Eric Holder knew and when - but perhaps Barack Obama himself.
EXCERPT:
…“We write to express our concerns with the lack of full cooperation from the Department of Justice with the ongoing Congressional investigation into the operation known as ‘Fast & Furious’ and the related death of Border Agent Brian Terry,” the House leaders wrote to Holder.
…The House GOP leaders said there are “two key questions” that “remain unanswered.”
“[F]irst, who on your leadership team was informed of the reckless tactics used in the Fast & Furious prior to Agent Terry’s murder; and, second, did your leadership team mislead or misinform Congress in response to a Congressional subpoena?” the letter reads.
…Issa says he is planning to move forward with contempt of Congress proceedings against Holder if he does not comply with the subpoena. Earlier this week, Deputy Attorney General James Cole claimed that his boss has complied with the subpoena and alleged that the potential contempt proceedings would be “unwarranted.”
In their Friday letter to Holder, though, Boehner and his deputies said they were “troubled” with the Department of Justice’s “assertions that the Executive Branch possesses the ability to determine whether inquiries from the Legislative Branch have been fully complied with.”
“As the Supreme Court has noted, each co-equal branch of our Government is supreme in their assigned area of Constitutional duties,” the GOP leaders wrote. “Thus, the question of whether the Executive Branch has sufficiently complied with a Congressional subpoena requesting specific information pursuant to Congress’ Article I responsibilities is one only the Legislative Branch can answer.”
……………
TWO Very important assessments- (explaining why we shouldn’t get too excited!)
FROM: truthandjustice
May 18, 2012
Heard some knowledgeable people who know about how corrupt “politics” is run in D.C. – like Brit Hume – that they predict this will go nowhere. These contempt deals have been done before & they never go anywhere. It’s just “dog and pony” show as they say. Likely that these GOP leaders (at least Boehner and Issa, probably Cantor) can’t do anything even if they wanted b/c of favors that were done for them in the past (involving Holder), and they are calling them in now.
That’s why Obama regime is not too worried about being prosecuted or run out of office for anything. If it’s not held in secret, it’s rigged where they can’t if they find evidence for prosecution. Also can’t impeach without Senate being involved and they won’t b/c they’re dominated by fellow radical Dems.and would take several months, which ends up around election time. So I guess the Repubs. are just “wishin and hopin” the elections will solve things.
And the ones that might be patriotic and might try to do the right thing are probably threatened. My guess about Blago, who probably knew some damaging info re Obama, was threatened & that’s why we didn’t get any info from him and had to go to prison….to protect his family.
I don’t think most of us know how far and deep this runs – about their protection & help from the int’l radicals.
Of course I’ll be hoping I’m wrong….we’ll see……..
AND… from: Whistleblower
May 18, 2012
I appreciate fully what you are asking , and know you will understand when I say what you ask is very difficult to do.
That said, let me start with this. The first step in trying to understand how all the pieces fit together is to understand how we got her. I recommend people take a serious look at how Patrick Fitzgerald became U.S Attorney in Illinois.
Where did he come from and what he really has been up to. Did Patrick Fitzgerald go to Illinois to clean up the corruption or did he go to Illinois to clear the way. Clear the mine fields so to speak. Forget the hype and take a close look at what Fitz has done. Then take another look at everything you know , and see what the view is like. I hope this helps , and I look forward to expanding on this discussion.
AND… from: Whistleblower
May 19, 2012
Fitzgerald has been protecting the corrupt in Chicago from the first day he arrived from NY, where he had recently brought charges against a virtually unknown Bin Laden, before 911. Patrick Fitzgerald came to Chicago the first week of September 2001.
The press made him out to be Elliot Ness and then they helped him protect Obama and friends. We could go into particulars, however if you would indulge me and except this premise, and look at recent history through this prism, perhaps somethings will make a little more sense. If it helps, try to recall just who has gone to jail in Illinois. Less than the # of dead. Why does Holder think Fitz is pretty, and why was/is Fitz on short list to replace Mueller as FBI director ? Why did the press not ask the U.S. Attorney who brought charges against Bin Laden his thoughts on his demise ? Things are seldom what they appeared to be in Chicago.
(above excerpts taken from Ulsterman)
………..AND for my two cents; they sound about RIGHT!
