Iraq recovers missing air force

Russia deploys missiles along border with North Korea

Russia has put defences on alert along its border with North Korea amid tensions over possible new missile tests by the secretive Communist regime.

The Kremlin ordered troops to deploy Russia’s most advanced missile defence system, the S-400, to intercept any threats from North Korea’s nuclear programme. General Nikolai Makarov, the head of the Russian army, said that a mobile battery of 32 surface-to-air missiles had been put into operation in anticipation of any Korean tests.

“We are taking these preventative measures as a security guarantee against faulty launches of the missiles and to guarantee that fragments of these missiles never fall on Russian territory,” he said. “We are concerned by the fact that the site in North Korea where it carries out its nuclear tests is located quite close to the Russian border.”

A senior Russian senator said that use of the S-400 system could not be ruled out, but he rejected any comparison between Moscow’s actions and the decision by the United States to build a missile defence shield in Eastern Europe. The US argues that the shield is necessary to deter attacks by rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea, but Russia has denounced the plan as a threat to its national security.

Mikhail Margelov, chairman of the Federation Council’s International Affairs Committee, said that the US was responding to “non-existent” dangers, while Russia was defending against “the emergence of real sources of threat”.

Russia’s Far Eastern city of Vladivostok is just 93 miles from its narrow border with North Korea. Six missiles test-fired by North Korea in 2006 reportedly fell in Russian waters in the Sea of Japan.

North Korea fired 11 short-range rockets with a range of up to 500km in two separate launches last month, defying a United Nations ban on ballistic missile activities linked to sanctions against its nuclear programme.

The regime in Pyongyang carried out a second underground nuclear explosion in May at the same time as it test-fired another series of short-range missiles. It also test-fired a long-range missile in April that is said to be capable of reaching Britain and the US.

Russia is a member of the six-party group, along with the US, China, Japan, North and South Korea, that is attempting to convince Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear ambitions. The S-400 “Triumph” system has a range of up to 400km and is said to be capable of bringing down cruise and tactical missiles as well as aircraft using stealth technology.

The defence system was put in place as a Russian presidential envoy travelled to South Korea for talks yesterday with President Lee Myung-Bak. A Kremlin spokesman said that they discussed “issues relating to trilateral co-operation between Russia, South Korea, and North Korea”.

Iran Update

The Iran Countdown

August 30, 4:20 AMSan Jose Republican ExaminerAnnie Hamilton

It's not as though we haven't been WARNED repeatedly.

In the eight short years since September 11th, we've watched, analyzed and worried about Iran and the possibility that they would gain access to nuclear weapons, and for good reason. There is ample evidence that this Regime has aggressively pursued the development and acquisition of nuclear technology since the early '80's. In his book, "The Iran Threat" Alireza Jafarzadeh describes how Alireza Assar, a Physicist who trained in Scotland and Italy was approached in 1985 by Commanders from the IRGC who recruited him to begin work on such a program through their Ministry of Defense. Over the years, several discussions were reportedly held, including the revelation that they'd managed to collect $800 million dollars to complete the project, $700 million more than deemed necessary. The IRGC has experienced turmoil over the years, between Leadership changes, information leaking out and incarceration for those who refused to continue to cooperate within the parameters of the program.

While the development of nuclear technology is a situation that always calls for concern and tremendous consideration, Iran's situation is highly unique as they seem to offer a networking 'hub' for organized violence, holding court as the Chief sponsor of Islamic terror. In addition, they openly and quite happily harbor al Qaeda as well as other operatives  and at a minimum, indirectly support al Qaeda's ongoing battle for Iraq. To add to our growing list of concerns, one must consider Iran's President Ahmadinejad, former Revolutionary guard, who reportedly helped 'take over' the U.S. embassy in Iran in 1979. A radical islamist, his open hatred of the US and Israel is well known and documented. During his speech, " The World Without Zionism" he openly stated,  ... "To those who doubt, to those who ask is it possible, or those who do not believe, I say accomplishment of a world without America and Israel is both possible and feasible.”  

Military sources have now confirmed  that Russia has been supplying Iran with the S-300 air defense system, several agreements having already been signed between Ahmadinejad and at least one former Soviet Republic. Although Israel's F-16 multi-role fighter is equipped with systems that can detect and alert pilots of potential launches, it's unclear how many of their craft possess this critical ability. Adding to this turn of events was the announcement that Syria is also expected to receive access and capability for the S-300. 

I find it increasingly disturbing that our Administration, currently staffed with spineless apologists and brain-dead lefties, (including Obama, Napolitano, Clinton and introducing  former Los Angeles times columnist and anti-Israel Rosa Brooks, new advisor to the Undersecretary of Defense) refuse to understand or acknowledge the ever present danger facing our Nation as a result of ignoring the constant rantings of Ahmadinejad who behaves like a mentally incompetent mini-Hitler with a Napoleon complex. Despite the continual warnings, rising tension, elections that successfully launched Iran into a full-blown state of chaos, how did Gates react? he cuts our military budget, yet again.  Are these goobers waiting for Ahmadinejad to publish his intent to 'rid the world of the Great Satan and mini-Satan' respectively, in a full page spread in the New York Times?  Rather than deal with reality, our inexperienced excuse for a leadership has announced that we are 'not in conflict with Islam' and that we need to find new ways to work together and to embrace Muslims. How? by sharpening their swords for them? Has the White House gone completely nuts? Perhaps they're waiting for 'The Monkey' (as Ahmadinejad is called throughout Iran) to make the first 'serious' move in order to prove their intent? Well, how's this for intent: Iran is expected to have their previously rumored, yet now confirmed nuclear program at 100 % capacity by next year.

And what was the official reaction? by setting an end of September 'deadline' for the beginning of talks. Now, although a failure to meet that deadline could mean economic sanctions on Iran, (by unblocking the current bill in Congress) including cutting off their supply of refined gasoline, not to mention permitting Israel to strike against their nuclear program without fear of opposition by our Administration,  I'm guessing that Ahmadinejad is about as frightened of Obama's hollow threats as Muammar Gaddafi was when Obama forewarned them that 'they had better not celebrate' al-Megrahi's release by Scottish incompetent Secretary MacAskill back to Libya. And we have all seen how that turned out...Obama standing there, shaking his head with 'disappointment' while al-Megrahsi and friends party it up in Libya. Gordon Brown, only validated Hannan's earlier statements accusing him of lacking any semblance of testicular fortitude by remaining silent on the issue although Former Minister Tom Harris pointed out that there is nothing in the Scotland Act to prevent a Prime Minister from commenting on a decision by the Edinburgh government.

It's critical to understand and consider Iran's impressive influence throughout the World. These are educated people, much different than other terrorists that largely live in tribal settings. In Vallely/McInerney's recent book, "Endgame" it's described how in recent years, Iran has begun forging alliances with Cuba and Venezuela, a relationship that makes little economic (or political) sense as they hardly share ideologies yet they do share a pathological hatred of North Americans. As such, Chavez has only been too happy to provide a training ground for al Qaeda.  There is speculation that our Administration's decision  to send an Ambassador into Syria was decided with the hopes of restoring this deeply troubled relationship, (severly damaged since Damascaus was blamed in the 2005 murder of Lebanon Prime Minister Rafik Hariri  in a bomb explosion in Beirut ) with the intent to distance and discourage Syria from continuing their dangerous ties with Hamas, Hezbollah and especially, Iran.  

Strange as it may sound, President Ahmadinejad swears that a  halo of light appeared around him while he addressed the UN in '05, confirming his "divine purpose on Earth " Ahmadinejad’s is also obsessed with the return of Shiite Muslims’ messiah and as a stringent follower of Islam, has expressed his ultimate goal of the destruction of America and Israel on more than one occasion. Iran’s “Supreme Leader” Ayatollah Ali Khameini declared that Iran refuses to “beg world powers for its right to develop nuclear technology” and has demonstrated that it will not retreat from the "field of danger" and will protect those rights, even should it mean death for them. Ahmadinejad  reportedly spoke with Syrian president Bashar Assad recently, where (if sources are citing truthful statements) Assad is reportedly hoping for a united war as it will only strengthen their 'position.'
 

Deadline or not, this hardly portrays a positive outlook for our safety in America, our Administration or for hope for peace in the middle east. The $800 million dollar question remains: How will our Administration react to this deadly threat against Israel and America?

Since when does Immigration Reform mean Open Borders and Amnesty?

August 31, 7:37 AMSan Diego Immigration Policy ExaminerCarl Braun

 Our immigration system and our country is under duress

 Most of us on the right and left side of this debate will acknowledge there is a desperate need for “immigration reform” but what does that mean? Well for some it means open borders and amnesty while for others it is quite the opposite. The differences are complicated and the sides are diametrically opposed to each other on many of the points. One wants the system fixed and demands that anyone who came here illegally be dealt with through the legal system. The other side wants the system fixed and demands that everyone who came here illegally get a “gimme” on the crime or crimes they have committed and get a path to citizenship. They want an immigration system that is liberal and one that provides anyone with the ability or desire to come here, the “right” to do it. We are not likely to find common ground on this. Amnesty is unacceptable for the right and a core principal for the left.

Illegal immigration aside, what about the system everyone agrees should be fixed? Certainly it is broken. How could it not be? Since the 1960’s Ted Kennedy and his ilk (please forgive me for not shedding tears on his passing) have turned replacement level immigration into a free-for-all. We have allowed more people to immigrate to the United States/America in the last forty years than in the last four hundred years combined. It has transformed our culture, the environment, our education system, our economy…virtually no aspect of American life has not been impacted by those on the express train to America.

You’ve heard it said time and time again. We are a nation of immigrants, blah, blah, blah. Yes we are and I wouldn’t be here were it not for a couple of German and Irish immigrants with a desire to come to America. They emigrated here about 100 years ago, legally through Ellis Island and staked their claim to the American Dream. They went through incredible hardships to get here and continued to work hard to become Americans. Amongst each other they spoke their native tongue but refused to let the kids speak anything but English; probably so they could keep a few secrets. They had customs that they passed down and new ones they made up. It is the same story told millions of times across this country.

Immigration can be a good thing but only as long as it is controlled, the immigrants can make a contribution to their new country and they do it legally. My grandfather was a printer. A skilled tradesman. At a time when we needed both. The reason for controls is key to the whole reason for immigration in the first place. We as a society must know who are here, if they have received proper health screenings and are they going to make a “needed contribution” to our society. This part of the equation is often overlooked. We must have a NEED. People do not have a RIGHT to come to America no more than I have a RIGHT to emigrate to Mexico or the Sudan. Historically it is a PRIVELEGE granted by those who are citizens and/or already legally here and it should be based on what skills are needed in the US at the time and what level of contribution will be made by those brought in to fill those needs. What is so hard to understand about that? Ah, maybe it is that whole logic and reason thing again. I always get caught up in that line of thinking. 

Illegal Immigrants come here because they simply want to and they cannot or will not do it the LEGAL way. It really is very simple. Millions get in line to do it properly every year. Illegal immigrants have NO RIGHT to be here. Granted, the system is messed up (thanks again Teddy) but violating it is really no different than saying you don’t like the price of the food in the grocery store so you’re just going to walk out the door with the product without paying for it.

Now we can fix the system and we should, but the illegal immigrants should not have say in it nor should they be allowed a “Get Out Of Guatemala Free” card. Immigration should be tied to the needs of the country and NOT the immigrants. This is where we part ways with the left. Right now our country does not NEED immigrants. We need jobs for those already here. When that changes, then let those in that can make a contribution to our economy and our society, not be a drain on it.

I think we need to put a 2-5 year hold on ALL immigration. (Oh my. Did he really say that?) While we are at it, fix the system, deport those that are criminals and give everyone else that are not supposed to be here a choice, leave or prove WHY you should stay? What are you contributing to our society? Did you commit any other crimes in America, other than crossing the border illegally? If not, let’s take a closer look but no guarantees. We’ll have plenty of bureaucrats to handle the interviews. They won’t be processing new immigration applications for a while anyway. Come up with a set of rules based on need and rigidly follow them. Allow for an appeals process. If you don’t fit… adios, see ya, au revoir, auf wiedersehen, have a nice life…in your country.

Yes, our government was complicit in allowing illegal immigration to occur for decades. We permitted our government to get away with it and for that WE bear some of the responsibility. No, it is not possible in my opinion to deport all twenty million plus illegal aliens nor should we. Many have been here for decades, made a solid contribution to our country and are otherwise law-abiding residents. If the tables were turned and Mexico gave Americans a green light to come aboard for all the benefits and opportunity you can bet your bottom dollar some Americans would have done it even though it may have been illegal. Doesn’t make it right but it would have happened nonetheless. We should however deport every criminal we get our hands on and properly secure the border so they cannot get back in. This is critical.

Let’s fix the system once and for all and give everyone who wants to be a citizen the same amount of respect they showed the citizens of this country, not the other way around. Lets be sure we have enough work for Americans before we let another 1.5 million in next year. That’s my immigration reform. If you have a “common sense” reason for allowing anyone in that wants to come, I’d like too hear it. If not, get on the immigration reform train, shed that amnesty baggage and lets fix our country, and it’s immigration system, together.

At a town hall meeting Wednesday Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) told Chickasha residents he does not need to read the 1,000 page health care reform bill, he will simply vote against it.

"I don't have to read it, or know what's in it. I'm going to oppose it anyways," he said.

Inhofe said public opinion and information provided by news media have helped him become a staunch non-supporter of the bill. He said he would prefer waiting until after mid-term elections in 2010 to enact reforms. He did not say nothing should be done. He simply feels that a topic as important as healthcare should not be rushed through the Senate or House of Representatives.

City Council Member Hank Ross agreed with Inhofe. Ross owns a medical care company in Chickasha. He said he does not believe the government would be efficient in providing care and would like to see reforms happen at a slower pace.

"I personally think Obama has over reached," Ross said. "I think we need to treat this with kid gloves and do it right."

Inhofe also spoke about the diminishing military budget and the closing of the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center, but healthcare was the hot button subject.

Inhofe took the opportunity to blame Democrats for a bevy of issues. He lashed out at democrats for overtaking the government and spending billions of dollars on unpopular packages. He said government is becoming too big and overreaching its boundaries.

"People are not buying these concepts that are completely foreign to America," Inhofe said. "We're almost reaching a revolution in this country."

Many in the meeting agreed and were vocal about their disdain for the current climate in Washington.

"No more compromise," Chickasha resident Ed Hicks said. "We're losing our country."

Inhofe's town hall meeting was much like others happening during the Senate's recess. Except there was no dissent, just concerns about change and what is happening in Washington. Health care reform was the main topic of discussion, but some voiced their worries that the Cap and Trade bill would hurt local oil producers. Others were worried about their Second Amendment right and their ability to own and carry firearms.

Inhofe tried to squelch the concerns, but until Republicans take control of at least one branch of the government it will be an uphill battle. He said he will do anything he can to keep fighting and promote the wants and needs of his constituents when he returns to Washington next month.

Former Fox News military analyst and US General launches grassroots group

August 29, 5:15 PMLaw Enforcement ExaminerJim Kouri

Former US Army Major General Paul Valley has created an eGrassroots™ public policy research organization for the purpose of promoting dialogue -- and discipline -- of the principles found in the United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence and other Founding documents.

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Editor's note: Earlier reports that Officer Wesley Cheeks Jr. is a police officer were in error. Further investigation has revealed Officer Cheeks is a member of the Fairfax County Public Schools' trained School Security Officer team. To contact the school's security force, e-mail Fred Ellis, the director of safety and security for Fairfax County Public Schools, or Jim McLain, the security coordinator.

A depiction of the sign banned by Officer Cheeks

"This used to be America," argued a protester outside a health-care town hall meeting in Reston, Va., after a security officer threatened him with arrest for holding up a sign with a picture critical of Barack Obama.

The officer's response?

"It ain't no more, OK?"

Get the prescription for reclaiming America's heritage of liberty – before the what the officer said is true – Joseph Farah's "Taking America Back," autographed only at the WND SuperStore.

A video of the town hall held earlier this week by Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., shows an unnamed protester standing on school grounds carrying a sign that read "Organizing for National Socialist Health Care – The Final Solution" and depicted Barack Obama in the Joker's makeup.

Officer Wesley Cheeks Jr. then told the protester that even though others were holding signs, his sign was unacceptable because of the depiction of Obama.

"But you got this with a picture," Cheeks said, explaining why the protester was being singled out from the others. "That's the difference. This has got a picture on it. That don't have a picture on it.

"Sir, leave the picture down," the officer said. "If you put the picture back up, you'll be charged with trespassing."

Video of the exchange can be seen below:

 

(Story continues below)

The protester continued the argument, wondering how his presence among hundreds of others at the town hall meeting could be deemed trespassing.

The officer answered, "If I told you once to take it down and you put it back up, I can charge you with whatever I want to charge you with."

The argument continued until the officer walked away.

"This used to be America," said the protester.

"It ain't no more, OK?" answered Cheeks.

Officer Cheeks is a member of the Fairfax County Public Schools'  trained School Security Officer team. The school's security force, however, refused to comment on the story until its communications offices reopen on Monday.

As WND has reported, Americans have been flocking to lawmakers' health-care town hall meetings, typically voicing loud displeasure with the ever-expanding size of the federal government and what many see as yet another intrusive expansion.

All across the country, legislators coming to their home districts in attempt to sell the health-care plan to constituents are being met with fierce opposition and huge crowds:

• Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., was confronted by self-described Democrats who accused their representative of lying about health reform and protested, "Why would you try to stuff a health-care plan down our throats in a couple days when the president took six months to pick a dog for his kids?"
  

• Also in Maryland, Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., admitted to receiving nearly 1,600 RSVP's for a town hall meeting at a concert hall that only seated only 500. When an estimated 1,500 showed up for the meeting, protesters lined the streets outside with signs and shouts.
  
• In Mehlville, Mo., protesters lined up around the block of the Bernard Middle School gym where Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-Mo., had planned a public forum. When hundreds were left standing on the street, they remained outside into the evening. Eventually, a union representative reportedly assaulted one of the protesters, Kenneth Gladney, which lead to six arrests, including a St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter. Gladney later appeared in an interview on the Fox News Channel explaining the attack, which drew national attention.
  
• A video posted on YouTube, one of many from around the country, reportedly shows several hundreds standing outside in a stunningly long line, waiting to get into a packed town hall meeting on health care with Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga.
  
• Rep. Tim Bishop, D-N.Y., has called off further events after a June 22 event he held in Setauket, N.Y., in which protesters dominated the meeting by shouting criticisms at the congressman for his positions on energy policy, health care and the bailout of the auto industry.
  
• Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., got an earful, too – especially on the health-care issue.
  
• Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., heard from a very well-informed veteran – to the enthusiastic applause of those gathered.
  
• Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., also heard from the crowd when he made a gaffe by saying the work needs to be done "fast."
  
• The Pittsburgh Tribune review captured video of a town hall with Specter in Kittanning, Pa., reporting that 1,500 showed up to voice their concerns over health care. "I've never seen anything like this," Specter told reporters afterward.
  
• U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., tried to explain at a town hall that people "don't know" how much they're already paying to cover the uninsured, but his reasoning was drowned out by protesters.
  
• WND reported the story of Mike Sola, a Michigan father who confronted Dingell in a separate meeting over what he feared Obamacare would do to his handicapped adult son. Sola later reported he was threatened at his home, at night, by supporters of the government health-care plan.
  
• House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., visited a Denver, Colo., clinic for the homeless to raise support for Obama's health-care plan, only to be met by streets lined with protesters opposed to the measure.
  
• Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-TX, went out to meet constituents, only to be met with protesters shouting in opposition to the health-care bill, "Just say no!"
  
• At a health-care town hall event in Syracuse, N.Y., in July, police were called in to restore order, and at least one heckler was taken away by local police.
  
• Close to 100 sign-carrying protesters greeted Rep. Allen Boyd, D-Fla., at a late June community college small-business development forum in Panama City, Fla.
  
• Danville, Va., anti-tax tea party activists claimed they were "refused an opportunity" to ask Rep. Thomas Perriello, D-Va., a question at a town hall event and instructed by a plainclothes police officer to leave the property after they attempted to hold up protest signs.
  
• Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., was chased by a crowd saying the Pledge of Allegiance.
  
• In the wake of vocal town hall protests covered by the press, Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., attempted to ban news cameras from his public forum on health care reform, but eventually relented and allowed the coverage.
  
• A handful of New York's congressmen, including Democrats Brian Higgins and Louise Slaughter and Republican Chris Lee, have shunned the town hall meetings altogether, opting instead for telephone meetings or no meetings at all.
  
• Rep. Mark Schauer, D-Mich., also sought to dodge boisterous health-care reform critics by holding a teleconference forum, rather than a public town hall meeting. The decision didn't stop protesters on both sides of the debate rallying outside the lawmaker's office.
  
• The constituents of Rep. John Tanner, D-Tenn., unable to access their representative through a town hall meeting, created a video charging that Tanner has met with Michael Moore and Fidel Castro, "But he won't meet his constituents in the 8th District to talk about health care."
  
• Meanwhile, as WND reported, pre-written questions from participants with track records of campaigning and organizing for Obama have led some to believe the president has been stacking his own town halls with "plants." The practice, some allege, may also be in use at other, purportedly open public forums.

The biggest source of protests are the health-care bill, the $787 billion economic stimulus package and the cap-and-trade legislation. They're also angry about Barack Obama's refusal to release his birth certificate to prove he is a "natural born citizen" and constitutionally eligible to serve in the White House.

According to an Associated Press report, Obama's top political adviser, David Axelrod, showed senators in D.C. video of some of the boisterous town-hall meetings and discussed how to respond to disruptions.

"It's a challenge, no question about it, and you've got to get out there and make the case," Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said afterward. "This is not the time for the faint-hearted."

PASS ID: REAL ID Reanimated

In February, the opponents of REAL ID were given a bit of hope when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said that she wanted to repeal the REAL ID Act, the federal government's failed plan to impose a national identification card through state driver's licenses. But what has taken place since is no return to sanity, as political machinations have produced a cosmetic makeover called "PASS ID" that has revived the push for a national identification card.

The PASS ID Act (S. 1261) seeks to make many of the same ineffectual, dangerous changes the REAL ID Act attempted to impose. Fundamentally, PASS ID operates on the same flawed premise of REAL ID -- that requiring various "identity documents" (and storing that information in databases for later access) will magically make state drivers' licenses more legitimate, which will in turn improve national security.

Proponents seem to be blind to the systemic impotence of such an identification card scheme. Individuals originally motivated to obtain and use fake IDs will instead use fake identity documents to procure "real" drivers' licenses. PASS ID creates new risks -- it calls for the scanning and storage of copies of applicants' identity documents (birth certificates, visas, etc.). These documents will be stored in databases that will become leaky honeypots of sensitive personal data, prime targets for malicious identity thieves or otherwise accessible by individuals authorized to obtain documents from the database. Despite some alterations to the scheme, PASS ID is still bad for privacy in many of the same ways the REAL ID was. And proponents of the national ID effort seem blissfully unaware of the creepy implications of a "papers please" mentality that may grow from the issuance of mandatory federal identification cards. Despite token provisions that claim to give states the freedom to issue non-federal identification cards, the card will be mandatory for most -- the PASS ID Act seeks to require everyone to show the federally recognized ID for "any official purpose," including boarding a plane or entering a federal building.

At the moment, health care reform is commanding tremendous attention and effort on the hill, so the PASS ID Act seems to be on the backburner for now. But after the August recess, anything can happen. So stay tuned for more about PASS ID and critical opportunities to flag your opposition to this flawed national ID scheme.

Related Issues: Privacy, Real ID

Why is President Barack Obama in such a hurry to get his socialized medicine bill passed?

Because he and his cunning circle realize some basic truths:

The American people in their unimaginable kindness and trust voted for a pig in a poke in 2008. They wanted so much to believe Barack Obama was somehow better and different from other ultra-leftists that they simply took him on faith.

They ignored his anti-white writings in his books. They ignored his quiet acceptance of hysterical anti-American diatribes by his minister, Jeremiah Wright.

They ignored his refusal to explain years at a time of his life as a student. They ignored his ultra-left record as a "community organizer," Illinois state legislator, and Senator.

The American people ignored his total zero of an academic record as a student and teacher, his complete lack of scholarship when he was being touted as a scholar.

Now, the American people are starting to wake up to the truth. Barack Obama is a super likeable super leftist, not a fan of this country, way, way too cozy with the terrorist leaders in the Middle East, way beyond naïveté, all the way into active destruction of our interests and our allies and our future.

The American people have already awakened to the truth that the stimulus bill -- a great idea in theory -- was really an immense bribe to Democrat interest groups, and in no way an effort to help all Americans.

Now, Americans are waking up to the truth that ObamaCare basically means that every time you are sick or injured, you will have a clerk from the Department of Motor Vehicles telling your doctor what he can and cannot do.

The American people already know that Mr. Obama's plan to lower health costs while expanding coverage and bureaucracy is a myth, a promise of something that never was and never will be -- a bureaucracy lowering costs in a free society. Either the costs go up or the free society goes away.

Mr. Obama knows Americans are getting wise and will stop him if he delays at all in taking away our freedoms.

**********

There is his urgency and our opportunity. Once freedom is lost, America is lost. Wake up, beloved America.

Ben Stein is a writer, actor, economist, and lawyer living in Beverly Hills and Malibu. He writes "Ben Stein's Diary" for every issue of The American Spectator

"The liberals like kicking Rush Limbaugh around,
Me they're trying to run out of business!" - Glenn Beck

Obama Special Advisor A Communist!

Obama appointed his friend radical Black Nationalist Van Jones as his "Green Jobs Czar". Jones-who was jailed for helping incite the 1992 Rodney King riots in L.A.-- is now attacking Glenn Beck-who continues to out Jones' dark past. Jones who said he was "a rowdy nationalist" prior to his arrest, emerged from prison and said he had become "a communist." The White House apparently approves and has not raised any challenges or denials saying only that "Jones is not a Czar. He is a special adviser to the president!"

Now Glenn Beck is being attacked by Color of Change--a radical Black Nationalist group co-founded by Van Jones--in retaliation for Beck outing Van Jones' questionable past. Beck aired a segment on Jones on July 28 where he called the activist a "self-professed communist" and questioned the role he was playing in the administration.

Jones founded Color of Change after Hurricane Katrina, calling President Bush a "racist" for his response. Rapper Kanye West made a statement that Bush "hated Black people" and "ordered troops to go down and shoot" Blacks in New Orleans. Jones' group immediately starting selling t-shirt on their website which read "Kanye was right". Now this same group is trying to shut down Conservative Glenn Beck for exposing the Obama agenda, once again playing the race card.

Select Below to Defend Glenn Beck

DefendGlenn.com is a special project of The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) a non-profit organization, whose tax-exempt status under IRS section 501(c)(3) has been recognized by the Internal Revenue Service. Your contributions are tax deductible. Corporate contributions may be accepted.

What The H1N1 Pandemic Means

The swine flu is now an official pandemic, but that doesn't mean you should panic.

After six weeks of closely watching the spread of H1N1 swine influenza across the globe, the World Health Organization (WHO) today declared the outbreak an official pandemic, raising the threat alert from 5 to 6, its highest level.

Officials were careful to note, however, that the announcement reflected the flu's reach, not its severity. As of Thursday afternoon, the organization had tallied 28,774 cases and 144 deaths in 74 countries. Margaret Chan, the WHO's director general, called an emergency meeting when officials noticed a sudden rise in cases around the world, particularly in Australia.

"At this early stage, the pandemic can be characterized globally as being moderate in severity," the WHO said in the statement, urging nations not to close borders or restrict travel and trade. We "remain in close dialogue with influenza vaccine manufacturers," it said.

Several public health experts said the announcement was expected and shouldn't trigger alarm.

See Also: What You Should Know About Swine Flu

"They're just confirming what we already know," says Dr. Martin Blaser, an infectious-disease expert at New York University's Langone Medical Center. "It is a pandemic; it has been spreading all over the world." Dr. Blaser added that the number of fatalities has been lower than what officials see in the course of a normal flu season, which typically reaches 250,000 to 500,000 cases worldwide.

"I don't see it as being greatly consequential to the world's health," says Dr. Philip Alcabes, an infectious-disease expert at Hunter College in New York. He is also the author of Dread: How Fear and Fantasy Have Fueled Epidemics from the Black Death to Avian Flu.

Dr. Alcabes applauded the WHO's cautious approach to declaring a pandemic, despite criticism that the organization hadn't acted quickly enough. Still, he argues the current six-point threat scale is too "blunt an instrument for a complex disease outbreak."

Declaring a pandemic heightens awareness among public-health officials and tends to increase government funding and response. The U.S. government has already taken steps like increasing the availability of flu-fighting medicines and authorizing $1 billion for the development of a new vaccine against the novel virus.

But a more forward-looking strategy, Alcabes says, one that focuses on how outbreaks occur and how public-health officials can stop them, would be more effective than such an alarm system.

For those worried that the pandemic announcement has implications for average people, Dr. Blaser urges them not to worry--or to take greater precautions with travel and public exposure.

"There's no hidden meaning," Blaser says. "For public-health authorities, they'll just watch this carefully and take appropriate actions."

See Also: What You Should Know About Swine Flu

The Associated Press contributed to this report

Inovio Biomedical (INO) In Collaboration Agreement to Develop Universal Influenza Vaccines

Inovio Biomedical Corporation (NYSE: INO) entered into a research collaboration agreement with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Vaccine Research Center (VRC) to develop influenza vaccines.

Under the agreement, the VRC and Inovio will pool technologies to develop universal influenza vaccines as well as rapidly advance development of vaccine candidates targeting the emerging pandemic 2009 H1N1 swine flu strains.

http://cryptogon.com/?p=10637

Bill Would Give President Emergency Control of Internet

Via: Cnet:

Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.

They’re not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.

The new version would allow the president to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “non-governmental” computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for “cybersecurity professionals,” and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.

“I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness,” said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. “It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill.”

Research Credit: WS