HEADLINES

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Swiss Voters Approve ‘Harsh’ Deportation Plan for Criminal Immigrants

Swiss voters approved an initiative to automatically expel foreign residents convicted of serious crimes.
Of course, the initiative has been criticized by human rights groups.
Deutsche-Welle reported:

Swiss voters have approved a far-right initiative to automatically expel foreign residents convicted of serious crimes, according to poll results.

Swiss national broadcaster SF1 said 52.9 percent of voters backed the initiative in Sunday's referendum, a plan proposed by the nationalist Swiss People's Party (SVP).

A counter-proposal put forth by the Swiss government, which would make expulsion dependent on the length of a prison term rather on an arbitrary list of offenses, appears to have been rejected by most voters, according to preliminary results. Currently, decisions to expel foreigners convicted of serious crimes are made on a case-by-case basis.

The initiative, which would apply to foreigners convicted of crimes like murder, rape or trafficking in drugs or people, has been criticized by human rights groups and legal experts, who said it could disregard international anti-discrimination treaties and the free movement of peoples under European Union law.








Sent from my iPhone

Washington Set to Control Your Light Switch

Ever since this continent was electrificated, Americans have been allowed to plug anything they want into their own electrical outlet.

The history of electricity is a biography of modernism. Originally intended just to light homes, electric power was soon used to run sewing machines, fans, teakettles, and toasters. According to Dr. Rachel P. Maines the fifth electrical appliance to be invented, was a device to treat hysteria (which is used in more homes today, than sewing machines and electric teakettles). Shortly after hysteria was cured, electric irons and vacuum cleaners became feasible.

Following  the big war, came an explosion of things you could stick into an outlet: hair driers, electric drills, popcorn poppers, and television sets Not to mention, those goofy things that have a big belt and motor and are supposed to help you lose weight by jiggling your belly.

Today a home built only a generation ago is woefully inadequate for the number of appliances that need to find a plug. Hence, there has been a great market in power-strips. In my home office, (built in 1959) I actually have one outlet branching off into four different power-strips to handle all the appliances required of my profession.

Before the modern epoch, what you decided to plug in the privacy of your own home was an accepted civil right. If you're willing to pay the bill, power it up. I have an old RCA refrigerator in my basement that uses far more electricity than a sleek new Korean import but it looks so cool, I don't mind making my electric meter spin like a circular saw every time I restock it with beer.

A friend of mine, was so enamored with some of the waterfalls of Las Vegas that he built one in his back yard. It was a masterpiece of boulders and whitewater cascading across the 30-foot slope of his lakefront home. He used three high-powered electrical pumps to keep water churning down the hill at a spectacular rate of 25,000 gallons per hour. It took him months to build, but only one electric bill, to realize that it wasn't a 24/7 attraction, and should only be activated on special occasions. The free market encourages conservation.

When President Bush signed The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 we saw the first limits on which appliances we can use in our homes. (This bill is known by other names, such as the light bulb ban, or the 100 watt stockpiling act of 2012. It was spearheaded by GOP Rep. Fred Upton, who is this/close to assuming the Chairmanship of the Energy and Commerce Committee. That's right, the GOP Rep who hates Thomas Edison is set to create energy policy for the whole country.) The law was necessary, because most Americans prefer incandescent bulbs. They are more aesthetically pleasing, and help heat your home in the winter. Most people believe the extra money spent is well worth the cost of electricity. After all, what is more economical than sitting in the dark?

The next step in Green won't even require Congressional approval. The Department of Energy recently decided they have authority over appliances in your home. Energy Secretary Steven Chu recently issued five new energy efficiency standards for large appliances, and is reworking the policy to include ten new categories. According to Assistant Energy Secretary Cathy Zoi "…we have a mandate. Where we can actually just issue regulations and do market transformation."

It is like we are moving backwards in time, seeing modern life outlawed one convenience at a time. Right now social engineers are busy working on "Smart Grid" technology. (The perennial question: if environmental choices are actually so intelligent, why do the marketers have to convince us, with names like "Smart Car," and "Insight?") The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 set aside $11 billion dollars to begin construction of that grid.

Smart Grid sounds harmless and modern, but it will be incredibly intrusive. Appliances in the future will have microchips installed; when you plug them in, they will handshake with the grid, and a central authority will determine whether that appliance deserves to get power or not. If a bureaucrat in Washington decides that it's not hot enough for you to put on the air conditioner, your air conditioner will not work. If the Fed decides that Margaritas lead to too much trouble on Cinco de Mayo, all blenders can be disabled for the day.

They can also turn off radios, televisions and computers. In the era of electronic information, restricting the freedom of the press is as easy as turning off the light. The idea is to conserve power, but a Smart Government will be able to use the technology to retain power as well.

And as for my beautiful pink basement refrigerator, you can forget that. In fact every appliance that was built before the smart grid will eventually be forbidden power. Which means that once the "Smart" Grid is fully operational, everything in your house that requires a plug will probably need to be replaced –including your hysteria device (which will also leave a record the central office, every time it's turned on).

There is no question that Air Conditioners in Washington DC will be functional year round, while those of us out  in Red State American will deal with the limitations of windmills that are incapable of keeping the entire nation cool in the stagnant summer air.

Isn't technology wonderful?








Sent from my iPhone

Meet Stuxnet- The Computer Worm That is Screwing Up Iran's Nuclear Program

Little by little scientists are beginning to understand Stuxnet a computer worm developed with the sole purpose of doing what sanctions were not able to do, slow down the Iranian march to nuclear weapons. During the past year, Stuxnet the computer worm with a biblical calling card, not only crippled Iran's nuclear program but has caused  a major rethinking of computer security around the globe.
The construction of the worm was so advanced, it was "like the arrival of an F-35 into a World War I battlefield," says Ralph Langner, the computer expert who was the first to sound the alarm about Stuxnet. Others have called it the first "weaponized" computer virus.
Simply put, Stuxnet is an incredibly advanced, undetectable computer worm that took years to construct and was designed to jump from computer to computer until it found the specific, protected control system that it aimed to destroy: Iran's nuclear enrichment program.
Stuxnet acted like computer cruise missile rather than a computer virus. The computers it targeted were not connected to the Internet, so it had to be secretly introduced into the Iranian system and hop through a set of unconnected computers, growing and adapting to security measures and other changes until it reached a computer that could bring it into the nuclear facility. And when it reached its target, the worm would have to secretly manipulate the computers running the Iranian nuclear program until its damage was done and then finally it would have to destroy itself without leaving a trace.

That's exactly what happened  both at Natanz, which houses the centrifuges Iran used for processing uranium into nuclear fuel, and  at Bushehr, Iran's nuclear power plant.
At Natanz, for almost 17 months, Stuxnet quietly worked its way into the system and targeted a specific component -- the frequency converters made by the German equipment manufacturer Siemens that regulated the speed of the spinning centrifuges used to create nuclear fuel. The worm then took control of the speed at which the centrifuges spun, making them turn so fast in a quick burst that they would be damaged but not destroyed. And at the same time, the worm masked that change in speed from being discovered at the centrifuges' control panel.

At Bushehr, meanwhile, a second secret set of codes, which Langner called "digital warheads," targeted the Russian-built power plant's massive steam turbine.
Here's how it worked
  • The nuclear facility in Iran runs an "air gap" security system, meaning it has no connections to the Web, making it secure from outside penetration. Stuxnet was designed and sent into the area around Iran's Natanz nuclear power plant -- just how may never be known -- to infect a number of computers on the assumption that someone working in the plant would take work home on a flash drive, acquire the worm and then bring it back to the plant.
  • Once the worm was inside the plant, the next step was to get the computer system there to trust it and allow it into the system. That was accomplished because the worm contained a "digital certificate" stolen from JMicron, a large company in an industrial park in Taiwan. (When the worm was later discovered it quickly replaced the original digital certificate with another certificate, also stolen from another company, Realtek, a few doors down in the same industrial park in Taiwan.)
  • Once allowed entry, the worm contained four "Zero Day" elements in its first target, the Windows 7 operating system that controlled the overall operation of the plant. Zero Day elements are rare and extremely valuable vulnerabilities in a computer system that can be exploited only once. Two of the vulnerabilities were known, but the other two had never been discovered. Experts say no hacker would waste Zero Days in that manner.
  • After penetrating the Windows 7 operating system, the code then targeted the "frequency converters" that ran the centrifuges. To do that it used specifications from the manufacturers of the converters. One was Vacon, a Finnish Company, and the other Fararo Paya, an Iranian company. What surprises experts at this step is that the Iranian company was so secret that not even the IAEA knew about it.
  • The worm also knew that the complex control system that ran the centrifuges was built by Siemens, the German manufacturer, and -- remarkably -- how that system worked as well and how to mask its activities from it.
  • Masking itself from the plant's security and other systems, the worm then ordered the centrifuges to rotate extremely fast, and then to slow down precipitously. This damaged the converter, the centrifuges and the bearings, and it corrupted the uranium in the tubes. It also left Iranian nuclear engineers wondering what was wrong, as computer checks showed no malfunctions in the operating system
This went on for over a year, the worms causing havoc in the Iranian Nuclear Program. And as it did, the worm grew and adapted throughout the system. As new worms entered the system, they would "get together" with the old ones adapt and become increasingly sophisticated.

And here's the kicker. You see, Computer Scientists who are analyzing the computer worm that is slowing down Iran's attempt to develop nuclear weapons may have found a file name that seemingly refers to the Biblical Queen Esther.

Deep inside the computer worm that some specialists suspect is aimed at slowing Iran's race for a nuclear weapon lies what could be a fleeting reference to the Book of Esther, the Old Testament narrative in which the Jews pre-empt a Persian plot to destroy them.
That use of the word "Myrtus" — which can be read as an allusion to Esther — to name a file inside the code is one of several murky clues that have emerged as computer experts try to trace the origin and purpose of the rogue Stuxnet program, which seeks out a specific kind of command module for industrial equipment. 
During this time the worms reported back to two servers that had to be run by intelligence agencies, one in Denmark and one in Malaysia. The servers monitored the worms and were shut down once the worm had infiltrated Natanz. Despite numerous attempts to find those servers, all traces of that communication have disappeared.
Experts, including inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, say that, despite Iran's claims to the contrary, the worm was successful in its goal: causing confusion among Iran's nuclear engineers and disabling their nuclear program.

Because of the secrecy surrounding the Iranian program, no one can be certain of the full extent of the damage. But sources inside Iran and elsewhere say that the Iranian centrifuge program has been operating far below its capacity and that the uranium enrichment program had "stagnated" during the time the worm penetrated the underground facility. Only 4,000 of the 9,000 centrifuges Iran was known to have were put into use. Some suspect that is because of the critical need to replace ones that were damaged.
Whoever developed this worm is doing great work. Now if they can only develop a computer worm to target the WikiLeaks computer.
Please email me at yidwithlid@aol.com to be put onto my mailing list. Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com







Sent from my iPhone

U.S. Long Bond Becomes Bellwether as Fed Drives Trade

from BusinessWeek - Business News, Stock Market & Financial Advice


U.S. Long Bond Becomes Bellwether as Fed Drives Trade: "For the first time since the 1990s the U.S. 30-year Treasury bond is becoming the benchmark for the world’s biggest debt investors."

Belgium's Debt Prompts Concerns

from Europe Edition - Wall Street Journal - Latest News, Breaking ...


Belgium's Debt Prompts Concerns: "Belgium's borrowing costs are rising as high levels of public debt, the continuing political crisis and bailouts for euro-zone peers make investors nervous."

Irish Bank Dumps New York Assets

from Europe Edition - Wall Street Journal - Latest News, Breaking ...


Irish Bank Dumps New York Assets: "Anglo Irish Bank is raising cash by dumping New York real estate assets. Its latest move: selling a $147 million construction loan that financed the Setai Wall Street condominium and spa in the financial district."

The Wikileak Release – An Attack Upon This Country

from Flopping Aces


The Wikileak Release – An Attack Upon This Country: "


Wikileaks has released the next wave of classified material and it has made this country infinitely weaker. No country will want to confide, nor help, the US again knowing that they too could be embarrassed.


Ronald Neumann, who served as U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan from 2005 to 2007, tells Danger Room he fears the impact of forced candor on U.S. foreign relations. “A man might say things to his wife about his mother-in-law that he would be horrified to hear her repeat to her mother and the doing of which might even put great strain on his marriage,” Neumann says. “That is what a lot of classification is about. I believe it serves the public. There is always an argument for publicizing malfeasance. I do not believe there is one for making more difficult just getting on with the nation’s diplomatic business.”


The excuse given by Wikileaks for releasing the documents? Naive and ignorant:


This document release reveals the contradictions between the US’s public persona and what it says behind closed doors – and shows that if citizens in a democracy want their governments to reflect their wishes, they should ask to see what’s going on behind the scenes.


Allah:


If you take this argument seriously, any confidential communication between government officials should be fair game for leaking so long as it somehow contradicts or questions, however glancingly, state policy. (Hypocrisy!) But of course, they’re not limiting publication to only those documents that undermine official State Department positions; as noted above in the context of Turkey’s foreign minister, a lot of this stuff will simply be bits of intelligence about various international actors and speculation about their motives. Nothing “hypocritical” about it — but mighty embarrassing.


This was done to weaken this country, plain and simple. With a already weak President in office these documents have most certainly caused major harm to this country. I mean think about it. It’s common sense that State Department diplomatic cables would contain some embarrassing facts about different countries and their leaders. Now this country, and Obama, has a much more difficult road ahead:


The President needs his ambassadors to know what he wants; they need to be able to tell him what he can get. So it’s stupid to not be blunt and forthright in private about matters that require a softer public touch.


Think they will be blunt and forthright anymore?


Not gonna happen.


Joe Lieberman:


“Wikileaks’ deliberate disclosure of these diplomatic cables is nothing less than an attack on the national security of the United States, as well as that of dozens of other countries. By disseminating these materials, Wikileaks is putting at risk the lives and the freedom of countless Americans and non-Americans around the world. It is an outrageous, reckless, and despicable action that will undermine the ability of our government and our partners to keep our people safe and to work together to defend our vital interests. Let there be no doubt: the individuals responsible are going to have blood on their hands. I stand in full support of the Obama Administration’s condemnation of Wikileaks for these disclosures. I also urge the Obama Administration — both on its own and in cooperation with other responsible governments around the world — to use all legal means necessary to shut down Wikileaks before it can do more damage by releasing additional cables. Wikileaks’ activities represent a shared threat to collective international security.


“It is also outrageous for Wikileaks and its enablers to hide their conduct behind the ideal of ‘transparency.’ As a democracy, our nation has always believed the American people should have access to as much information as possible. But we have also long recognized that — to keep our country safe — some information must be kept secret. This is a balancing act that the American people themselves ultimately control through our democratically-elected representatives and our institutions. What Wikileaks is doing is to short-circuit this entire democratic process — claiming for itself the exclusive, unilateral, and unchecked power to decide what should and shouldn’t be made public. This is therefore not only an attack on our national security, but an offense against our democracy and the principle of transparency.”


As for the information contained in the documents I’m just going to highlight two, and both deal with North Korea. First, do you recall this speech?



Turns out the man was right:


Secret American intelligence assessments have concluded that Iran has obtained a cache of advanced missiles, based on a Russian design, that are much more powerful than anything Washington has publicly conceded that Tehran has in its arsenal, diplomatic cables show.


Iran obtained 19 of the missiles from North Korea, according to a cable dated Feb. 24 of this year. The cable is a detailed, highly classified account of a meeting between top Russian officials and an American delegation led by Vann H. Van Diepen, an official with the State Department’s nonproliferation division who, as a national intelligence officer several years ago, played a crucial role in the 2007 assessment of Iran’s nuclear capacity


~~~

The missile intelligence also suggests far deeper military — and perhaps nuclear — cooperation between North Korea and Iran than was previously known. At the request of the Obama administration, The New York Times has agreed not to publish the text of the cable.


Hmmmm, things just got much more difficult for Obama to deal with regarding the North Korea situation.


X2


Thinking about an eventual collapse of North Korea: American and South Korean officials have discussed the prospects for a unified Korea, should the North’s economic troubles and political transition lead the state to implode. The South Koreans even considered commercial inducements to China, according to the American ambassador to Seoul. She told Washington in February that South Korean officials believe that the right business deals would “help salve” China’s “concerns about living with a reunified Korea” that is in a “benign alliance” with the United States.


This release just gave North Korea an excuse for all-out war.


As Lieberman said above….blood is definitely on the hands of Julian Assange and his wikileaks.




"

Wikileaks Dump; Worst Loss Of Sensitive Information By A Superpower In History

from Red White Blue News


Wikileaks Dump; Worst Loss Of Sensitive Information By A Superpower In History: "

The release today of 251,000 sensitive security documents is the largest leak of information of this kind in history and happened while Obama has the keys. He can add this record to the other ones like the record Americans on Food Stamps and Unemployment.

The documents presumably came from the same source-Private First Class Bradley Manning who was upset after a bad breakup with his boyfriend.


These are the top headlines from the Leaks thus far:


Wikileaks Report Reveals Obama’s Flawed Assessment of Iranian Nuclear Threat/Iran Have Missiles That Can Reach Western Europe



Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, second left, reviews, Iran’s Shahab-3 missile, a weapon capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and reaching Europe, Israel and U.S. forces in the Middle East back in 2005. (LJ World)





Iran received help from North Korea and has missiles that can reach European capitals in Western Europe.

The New York Times reported:


Secret American intelligence assessments have concluded that Iran has obtained a cache of advanced missiles, based on a Russian design, that are much more powerful than anything Washington has publicly conceded that Tehran has in its arsenal, diplomatic cables show.


Iran obtained 19 of the missiles from North Korea, according to a cable dated Feb. 24 of this year. The cable is a detailed, highly classified account of a meeting between top Russian officials and an American delegation led by Vann H. Van Diepen, an official with the State Department’s nonproliferation division who, as a national intelligence officer several years ago, played a crucial role in the 2007 assessment of Iran’s nuclear capacity.


The missiles could for the first time give Iran the capacity to strike at capitals in Western Europe or easily reach Moscow, and American officials warned that their advanced propulsion could speed Iran’s development of intercontinental ballistic missiles.


There has been scattered but persistent speculation on the topic since 2006, when fragmentary reports surfaced that North Korea might have sold Iran missiles based on a Russian design called the R-27, once used aboard Soviet submarines to carry nuclear warheads. In the unclassified world, many arms control experts concluded that isolated components made their way to Iran, but there has been little support for the idea that complete missiles, with their huge thrusters, had been secretly shipped.


The Feb. 24 cable, which is among those obtained by WikiLeaks and made available to a number of news organizations, makes it clear that American intelligence agencies believe that the complete shipment indeed took place, and that Iran is taking pains to master the technology in an attempt to build a new generation of missiles. The missile intelligence also suggests far deeper military — and perhaps nuclear — cooperation between North Korea and Iran than was previously known. At the request of the Obama administration, The New York Times has agreed not to publish the text of the cable.


Now We Know… Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Got Bitch-Slapped By Iranian General



President Ahmadinejad (right) welcomes new Revolutionary Guards leader Mohammad Ali Jafari (Telegraph Photo)


Der Spiegel reported:


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emissaries also learn of a special “Iran observer” in the Azerbaijan capital of Baku who reports on a dispute that played out during a meeting of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. An enraged Revolutionary Guard Chief of Staff Mohammed Ali Jafari allegedly got into a heated argument with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and slapped him in the face because the generally conservative president had, surprisingly, advocated freedom of the press.


Reveal: Dangerous standoff with Pakistan


Reported by the NY Times


A dangerous standoff with Pakistan over nuclear fuel: Since 2007, the United States has mounted a highly secret effort, so far unsuccessful, to remove from a Pakistani research reactor highly enriched uranium that American officials fear could be diverted for use in an illicit nuclear device. In May 2009, Ambassador Anne W. Patterson reported that Pakistan was refusing to schedule a visit by American technical experts because, as a Pakistani official said, “if the local media got word of the fuel removal, ‘they certainly would portray it as the United States taking Pakistan’s nuclear weapons,’ he argued.”


Gitmo became game of ‘Let’s Make A Deal’ US to Slovenia: Take a prisoner if you want meeting with Obama


Reported By The NY Times


Bargaining to empty the Guantánamo Bay prison: When American diplomats pressed other countries to resettle detainees, they became reluctant players in a State Department version of “Let’s Make a Deal.” Slovenia was told to take a prisoner if it wanted to meet with President Obama, while the island nation of Kiribati was offered incentives worth millions of dollars to take in Chinese Muslim detainees, cables from diplomats recounted. The Americans, meanwhile, suggested that accepting more prisoners would be “a low-cost way for Belgium to attain prominence in Europe.”


Saudis are chief financiers for al Qaeda/Reveal: Saudis repeatedly urge US attack on Iran


Reported By NY Times


Mixed records against terrorism: Saudi donors remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like Al Qaeda, and the tiny Persian Gulf state of Qatar, a generous host to the American military for years, was the “worst in the region” in counterterrorism efforts, according to a State Department cable last December. Qatar’s security service was “hesitant to act against known terrorists out of concern for appearing to be aligned with the U.S. and provoking reprisals,” the cable said.


Reported By Reuters


WASHINGTON, Nov 28 (Reuters) – King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia repeatedly exhorted the United States to “cut off the head of the snake” by launching military strikes to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, according to leaked U.S. diplomatic cables.


More Smart Diplomacy: Hillary Clinton Ordered Spying on Countries at UN


Speigel Online reported:


The US State Department gave its diplomats instructions to spy on other countries’ representatives at the United Nations, according to a directive signed by Hillary Clinton. Diplomats were told to collect information about e-mail accounts, credit cards and passwords, among other things.


US diplomats are alleged to have been requested by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to spy on the diplomats of other countries at the United Nations. That was the purpose of the “National Humint Collection Directive,” which has been seen by SPIEGEL. The document was signed by Clinton and came into force on July 31, 2009.


The information to be collected included personal credit card information, frequent flyer customer numbers, as well as e-mail and telephone accounts. In many cases the State Department also required “biometric information,” “passwords” and “personal encryption keys.” In the US, the term biometric information generally refers to fingerprints, passport photos and iris scans, among other things.


The US State Department also wanted to obtain information on the plans and intentions of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his secretariat relating to issues like Iran, according to the detailed wish list in the directive. The instructions were sent to 30 US embassies around the world, including Berlin.


The detailed document also reveals which UN issues most interested the US government. These included: “Darfur/Sudan,” “Afghanistan/Pakistan,” Somalia, Iran and North Korea. Other top issues included Paraguay and the Palestinian Territories, eight West African states including Burkina Faso, Mauritania and Senegal, as well as various states in Eastern Europe.


As justification for the espionage orders, Clinton emphasized that a large share of the information that the US intelligence agencies works with, comes from the reports put together by State Department staff around the world.

















swenbwr"

Video: Out Of Control TSA Agents Steal Pizza & Assault A Store Clerk

from theblogprof


Video: Out Of Control TSA Agents Steal Pizza & Assault A Store Clerk: "It's bad enough that they are assaulting us at the airports - stripping us of our 4th amendment rights as well as our pants. Apparently, some TSA agents are taking their work home with them:
UPDATE: Linked by Ace and Ed Driscoll! Thanks!
"

Obama's Mid East Fail: No Freeze, No Talks, No COMPETENCE !

from YID With LID


Obama's Mid East Fail: No Freeze, No Talks, No COMPETENCE !: "



By Barry Rubin



While the outcome still isn’t clear, it seems that a new example of failure and humiliation is unfolding for the Obama Administration’s Middle East policy.



It appears increasingly unlikely that the president’s high-profile effort to restart Israel-Palestinian talks will succeed during the remainder of 2010 or even well beyond that time.



This Administration has had a very clear idea of what it wanted to achieve:



1. A comprehensive Israel-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli peace.





2. Getting rid of the Arab-Israeli conflict in the belief that this will reduce terrorism and strengthen US power in region and US interests.



3. Getting rid of the conflict to get Arab support on Iraq, Iran, and Aghanistan.



The embarrassment is taking place due to faulty assumptions about these goals and how to achieve them:



--That a high-profile effort would serve U.S. interests. By showing American engagement on the issue, the Administration thought it would please Arab and Muslim-majority countries so as to gain their support on other issues. This didn’t work.



--That, at best, a high-profile campaign would be likely to succeed in bringing rapid progress toward comprehensive peace. That obviously isn’t working.



--That , at minimum, they could at least get the two sides to sit down to pretend talks where nothing actually happened but at least it could be portrayed as a diplomatic achievement. Even that isn’t working and that's really embarrassing.



Part of the problem is due to the Administration’s additional wrong assumption that the Palestinians are eager to negotiate and get a state plus the belief that the current Palestinian Authority (PA) leadership could deliver a deal. In fact, both of these ideas are wrong, too. The PA leadership can't--and doesn't want to--deliver even on holding talks that go nowhere.



Most of the Palestinian leadership and the masses, too, are still locked into the belief that a combination of struggle and intransigence will bring them total victory some day in wiping Israel off the map. And even though they are more moderate than this, neither “President” Mahmoud Abbas nor Prime Minister Salam Fayyad are strong or determined enough even to attempt to change that orientation.



Another part of the problem is the Administration’s mistaken view that it could pressure or bribe Israel and the PA into doing what it wants. Yet since neither side has faith in the Obama Administration, both know that it’s weak, and Israel has seen that Washington doesn’t keep commitments, their incentive for cooperation is reduced. In the PA’s case at least, the United States doesn’t even put on any pressure or criticism. In Israel's case the Administration has not put on the level of pressure that its more extreme officials (and outside supporters) would like to see, though that wouldn't work either.



But even that’s not all. There’s every indication that the Administration has incompetently handled the actual negotiations about holding negotiationsy. It focused on getting Israeli concessions without firming up the PA side, thus allowing the PA to demand more. The offer to Israel was presented in a confused manner and it still isn’t clear what precisely is to be given in exchange for a three-month construction freeze.



Moreover, part of the package that led people to say that it was so 'generous' that Israel was being “bribed” seems to consist of things that the United States has always provided, like support in the UN or maintaining Israel’s strategic advantage over its enemies.



The whole thing has turned into a mess and this isn’t the first time that’s happened in Obama policy on the issue. To cite just four examples, there was:



--The raising of the construction freeze idea in the first place;



--The position that promises made by the Bush Administration would not be fulfilled by his successor;



--Praising Israel for a construction freeze that didn’t include Jerusalem and then screaming when Israel fulfilled the agreed conditions;



--And announcing last year that intensive Israel-PA negotiations would begin in two months when no such agreement had been made by the PA.



Yet even that’s not all. Why did the administration seek a three-month freeze (originally a two-month freeze) at all? What was the purpose of this clearly useless goal? After all, even if the Administration obtained the freeze there would have been twelve weeks of stagnant conversation—purchased by the United States at a high price—followed by the break-down of the talks. As an election ploy the idea at least made sense but if that was the motive the whole frantic exercise is now useless.



So far the Obama Administration has achieved a remarkable record of failure on this issue. It is, of course, understandable that the U.S. government was unable to solve the long-standing conflict--though making over-optimistic claims over what might be achieved was a self-inflicted wound--but it actually succeeding in moving the diplomatic process backwards.



Has the Obama done much harm regarding Israel-Palestinian issues? Directly, not so much since there was never much chance for dramatic progress. Yet for the Obama Administration's own reputation and credibility in the region this has been disastrous. Finally and worst of all, it isn’t clear that the current government has learned anything from the experience.



The above article could be taken as a highly critical bashing of the Obama Administration. But the sad thing is that it is totally accurate albeit not--in order to save time and to promote clarity--cloaked in bland language.


Please email me at yidwithlid@aol.com to be put onto my mailing list.
Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com
"

Naked Gun Actor Leslie Nielsen Dies [Video]

from Gawker


Naked Gun Actor Leslie Nielsen Dies [Video]: "
according to his nephew, actor Leslie Nielsen has died of pneumonia in a hospital in Florida. I was going to say that Naked Gun used to be my favorite movie, but who am I kidding? It still is. More »


"

More Smart Diplomacy: Hillary Clinton Ordered Spying on Countries at UN

from The Gateway Pundit


More Smart Diplomacy: Hillary Clinton Ordered Spying on Countries at UN: "

This must be more of that smart power they promised…

Hillary Clinton ordered spying on countries at the United Nations and now the whole world knows it.

Speigel Online reported:


The US State Department gave its diplomats instructions to spy on other countries’ representatives at the United Nations, according to a directive signed by Hillary Clinton. Diplomats were told to collect information about e-mail accounts, credit cards and passwords, among other things.


US diplomats are alleged to have been requested by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to spy on the diplomats of other countries at the United Nations. That was the purpose of the “National Humint Collection Directive,” which has been seen by SPIEGEL. The document was signed by Clinton and came into force on July 31, 2009.


The information to be collected included personal credit card information, frequent flyer customer numbers, as well as e-mail and telephone accounts. In many cases the State Department also required “biometric information,” “passwords” and “personal encryption keys.” In the US, the term biometric information generally refers to fingerprints, passport photos and iris scans, among other things.


The US State Department also wanted to obtain information on the plans and intentions of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his secretariat relating to issues like Iran, according to the detailed wish list in the directive. The instructions were sent to 30 US embassies around the world, including Berlin.


The detailed document also reveals which UN issues most interested the US government. These included: “Darfur/Sudan,” “Afghanistan/Pakistan,” Somalia, Iran and North Korea. Other top issues included Paraguay and the Palestinian Territories, eight West African states including Burkina Faso, Mauritania and Senegal, as well as various states in Eastern Europe.


As justification for the espionage orders, Clinton emphasized that a large share of the information that the US intelligence agencies works with, comes from the reports put together by State Department staff around the world.

"

Saudi Arabia urges US attack on Iran to stop nuclear programme (Guardian)

from memeorandum


Saudi Arabia urges US attack on Iran to stop nuclear programme (Guardian): "

Guardian:

Saudi Arabia urges US attack on Iran to stop nuclear programme — • Embassy cables show Arab allies want strike against Tehran — • Israel prepared to attack alone to avoid its own 9/11 — • Iranian bomb risks ‘Middle East proliferation, war or both’

"

Irish bailout 'stuns' experts

from Latest news and comment from Britain | guardian.co.uk


Irish bailout 'stuns' experts: "

There are fears that the additional money being put into Ireland's banks will not contain contagion in the eurozone

The additional €35bn (£29.8bn) being ploughed into Ireland's banks has shocked experts, who have expressed concern that tonight's bailout would not contain contagion in the eurozone.

Brian Lucey, associate professor of finance at Trinity College Dublin said he was 'stunned', adding: 'We've already put at least €32bn into them, so that's going to be €67bn, which is 50% of GNP, that's a world record'.

He also warned that a new government next year could rip up the deal. 'Sovereign governments have a right to effectively do whatever they want,' he said.

The EU authorities had hoped that the Irish bailout would draw a line in the sand and halt the threat of Spain and Portugal needing international assistance. But tonight, investors and analysts were far from certain that this would be achieved.

Ashok Shah, chief investment officer at investment firm London & Capital, said Ireland might now enjoy some "temporary relief", but that bond investors' concerns could now switch to Portugal and Spain.

'Portugal is already in the borderline, it will have to be rescued soon, maybe within a matter of weeks. The market will also focus on Spain. It will remain very volatile.'

Others agreed. 'There's absolutely no indication that the agreed package for Ireland is going to soothe those concerns stemming from the Iberian peninsula,' said Philip Shaw, chief economist of Investec.

Peter Westaway, chief economist at Nomura concurred. 'I don't think this is going to be a silver bullet. I think there are still going to be some question marks on Portugal and Spain,' he said.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

"

Wikileaks: Under Cyber Attack, American Diplomacy Laid Bare, Who Gains With This Revelation? — UPDAT

Now that they might make the President and the Russians look bad….it's personal. Back when it only made President Bush look bad, it was useful. Right now, Wikileaks is facing a Denial of Service attack, but the New York Times and news organizations around the world are releasing the documents at this moment. Ben Smith says it demonstrates the impotence of the administration. I don't know what it demonstrates yet, outside of creating chaos.

To some of the revelations (note: I'll link every point even if it's repetitive for ease of search):

1. The Obama Administration doesn't like the Brits.

2. The Germans don't like each other (via Der Spiegel's Wikileaks coverage):

Even the leadership of a close ally such as Germany emerges in a poor light in the cables. The members of the ruling government coalition in Berlin denigrate each other in comments to the US ambassador to Germany, Philip Murphy. For example, Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg tattled on his colleague German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, telling the US ambassador that Westerwelle was the real barrier to the Americans' request for an increase in the number of German troops in Afghanistan. And the US diplomats are rather cool in their assessment of Chancellor Angela Merkel: One dispatch describes her as risk-averse and "rarely creative."

3. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wants her diplomats to be spies:

Sometimes the US embassy activities seem to go beyond the requirements of diplomacy. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demands of members of her diplomatic corps that they prove their worth as spies. The embassy staff are asked to acquire any accessible personal details of UN staff, including credit-card numbers and frequent-flyer customer numbers.

4. Everyone is terrified of Iran (from the New York Times):

Feeding the administration's urgency was the intelligence about Iran's missile program. As it weighed the implications of those findings, the administration maneuvered to win Russian support for sanctions. It killed a Bush-era plan for a missile defense site in Poland — which Moscow's leaders feared was directed at them, not Tehran — and replaced it with one floating closer to Iran's coast. While the cables leave unclear whether there was an explicit quid pro quo, the move seems to have paid off.

There is also an American-inspired plan to get the Saudis to offer China a steady oil supply, to wean it from energy dependence on Iran. The Saudis agreed, and insisted on ironclad commitments from Beijing to join in sanctions against Tehran.

Also, the New York Time's bias just seeps on through. "The move seems to have paid off", they say. How exactly has it paid off? Never mind. There's more.

The Telegraph documents how destructive this leak may be:

Officials involved in overseeing British policy in the region say that diplomatic materials compiled between 2008 and 2010 on Iran contained sensational information that could jeopardise efforts to disrupt the nuclear programme if unveiled on WikiLeaks.

The UK has played a key role on breaking up one network of businessmen in Dubai who had been using the emirate as the "HQ of a worldwide spiders web" to supply equipment to Iran's banned nuclear programme.

"Information was provided to the UAE authorities that was only procured by getting inside this group. It was a very successful effort of disruption carried out at some personal risk by our people," said one Whitehall official. "It would not be good for any of this to come out."

5. U.S. has doubts about Turkey. From Speigel Online International:

The leaked diplomatic cables reveal that US diplomats are skeptical about Turkey's dependability as a partner. The leadership in Ankara is depicted as divided and permeated by Islamists.

US diplomats have grave doubts about Turkey's dependability. Secret or confidential cables from the US Embassy in Ankara describe Islamist tendencies in the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The US diplomats' verdict on the NATO partner with the second biggest army in the alliance is devastating. The Turkish leadership is depicted as divided, and Erdogan's advisers, as well as Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, are portrayed as having little understanding of politics beyond Ankara.

The Americans are also worried about Davutoglu's alleged neo-Ottoman visions. A high-ranking government adviser warned in discussions, quoted by the US diplomats, that Davutoglu would use his Islamist influence on Erdogan, describing him as "exceptionally dangerous." According to the US document, another adviser to the ruling AKP party remarked, probably ironically, that Turkey wanted "to take back Andalusia and avenge the defeat at the siege of Vienna in 1683."

How, precisely, is it helpful for this information to be out and open? Once again, Der Spiegel nails it:

Never before in history has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of such sensitive information — data that can help paint a picture of the foundation upon which US foreign policy is built. Never before has the trust America's partners have in the country been as badly shaken. Now, their own personal views and policy recommendations have been made public — as have America's true views of them.

Forget the content of the leaks for a moment, this is a moment of impotence so complete and horrifying–the Jerusalem Post notes that Israel's leaders were notified but that US officials aren't sure what's in the documents–that America is diminished before everyone. Consider this thumbnail:

The documents quoted in the leaked article include nicknames for a number of world leaders. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is referred to as "Hitler," French President Nicolas Sarkozy as a "naked emperor," the German Chancellor is called Angela "Teflon" Merkel and Afghan President Hamid Karzai is "driven by paranoia." Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is an "Alpha Male," while President Dmitry Medvedev is "afraid, hesitant."

The documents also say that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il suffers from epilepsy, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddhafi's full-time nurse is a "hot blond," and Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi loves "wild parties."

The article also quotes the State Department as saying that US President Barack Obama "prefers to look East rather than West," and "has no feelings for Europe."

"The US sees the world as a conflict between two superpowers," the diplomatic cables say. "The European Union plays a secondary role."

Well, this Wikileaks release of information doesn't seem particularly surprising, just confirming what most who pay attention believe about things. Still, how is this helpful to the U.S.' standing in the world? I don't see it.

The cavalier nonchalance of some on the left, in particular, about this leak speaks volumes. Aren't these the same folks who deified Valerie Plame? But wholesale diplomatic revelations is okay? I don't get the justification here.

UPDATED:

More from Greg Mitchell of The Nation.

China ordered the hacking of Google. Evil vs. evil. I wonder who won.

Israel feels vindicated by Wikileaks.

Blackfive: "This is nothing but Anti-Americanism wrapped in a sleazy cloak of whistle-blowing."

I've wondered this too: Will Hillary Clinton be booted for the spying orders? That would, however, free her up to run against President Obama.

UPDATED again:

Via Assange's own site (back up, evidently):

The full set consists of 251,287 documents, comprising 261,276,536 words (seven times the size of "The Iraq War Logs", the world's previously largest classified information release).

The cables cover from 28th December 1966 to 28th February 2010 and originate from 274 embassies, consulates and diplomatic missions.

More:

Key figures:

* 15, 652 secret
* 101,748 confidential
* 133,887 unclassified

* Iraq most discussed country – 15,365 (Cables coming from Iraq – 6,677)
* Ankara, Turkey had most cables coming from it – 7,918
* From Secretary of State office – 8,017

According to the US State Departments labeling system, the most frequent subjects discussed are:

* External political relations – 145,451
* Internal government affairs – 122,896
* Human rights – 55,211
* Economic Conditions – 49,044
* Terrorists and terrorism – 28,801
* UN security council – 6,532

UPDATED AGAIN:

William Jacobson says that it's official: President Obama is Jimmy Carter II.

And here the Pentagon's super awesome security measures.








Sent from my iPhone

More Hope & Change… “Never Before Has a Superpower Lost Control of Such Vast Amounts of Sensitive In

More hope and change… The release today of 251,000 sensitive security documents is the largest leak of information of this kind in history.
The documents presumably came from the same source-
Der Spiegel reports on the Wikileaks leaked information:

251,000 State Department documents, many of them secret embassy reports from around the world, show how the US seeks to safeguard its influence around the world. It is nothing short of a political meltdown for US foreign policy.

What does the United States really think of German Chancellor Angela Merkel? Is she a reliable ally? Did she really make an effort to patch up relations with Washington that had been so damaged by her predecessor? At most, it was a half-hearted one.

The tone of trans-Atlantic relations may have improved, former US Ambassador to Germany William Timken wrote in a cable to the State Department at the end of 2006, but the chancellor "has not taken bold steps yet to improve the substantive content of the relationship." That is not exactly high praise.

And the verdict on German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle? His thoughts "were short on substance," wrote the current US ambassador in Berlin, Philip Murphy, in a cable. The reason, Murphy suggested, was that "Westerwelle's command of complex foreign and security policy issues still requires deepening."

Such comments are hardly friendly. But in the eyes of the American diplomatic corps, every actor is quickly categorized as a friend or foe. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia? A friend: Abdullah can't stand his neighbors in Iran and, expressing his disdain for the mullah regime, said, "there is no doubt something unstable about them." And his ally, Sheikh bin Zayed of Abu Dhabi? Also a friend. He believes "a near term conventional war with Iran is clearly preferable to the long term consequences of a nuclear armed Iran."

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's emissaries also learn of a special "Iran observer" in the Azerbaijan capital of Baku who reports on a dispute that played out during a meeting of Iran's Supreme National Security Council. An enraged Revolutionary Guard Chief of Staff Mohammed Ali Jafari allegedly got into a heated argument with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and slapped him in the face because the generally conservative president had, surprisingly, advocated freedom of the press.

A Political Meltdown

Such surprises from the annals of US diplomacy will dominate the headlines in the coming days when the New York Times, London's Guardian, Paris' Le Monde, Madrid's El Pais and SPIEGEL begin shedding light on the treasure trove of secret documents from the State Department. Included are 243,270 diplomatic cables filed by US embassies to the State Department and 8,017 directives that the State Department sent to its diplomatic outposts around the world. In the coming days, the participating media will show in a series of investigative stories how America seeks to steer the world. The development is no less than a political meltdown for American foreign policy.

Never before in history has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of such sensitive information — data that can help paint a picture of the foundation upon which US foreign policy is built. Never before has the trust America's partners have in the country been as badly shaken. Now, their own personal views and policy recommendations have been made public — as have America's true views of them…

The leaked documents presumably came from the same source- Private First Class Bradley Manning who was upset after a bad breakup with his boyfriend.

…As with the close to 92,000 documents on the war in Afghanistan at the end of July and the almost 400,000 documents on the Iraq war recently released, the State Department cables have also been leaked to the WikiLeaks whistleblower platform — and they presumably came from the same source. As before, WikiLeaks has provided the material to media partners to review and analyze them.

With a team of more than 50 reporters and researchers, SPIEGEL has viewed, analyzed and vetted the mass of documents. In most cases, the magazine has sought to protect the identities of the Americans' informants, unless the person who served as the informant was senior enough to be politically relevant. In some cases, the US government expressed security concerns and SPIEGEL accepted a number of such objections. In other cases, however, SPIEGEL felt the public interest in reporting the news was greater than the threat to security. Throughout our research, SPIEGEL reporters and editors weighed the public interest against the justified interest of countries in security and confidentiality.

More…. Now We Know… Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Got Bitch-Slapped By Ali Jafari








Sent from my iPhone

Now We Know… Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Got Bitch-Slapped By Iranian General

It's kiss and makeup time…

President Ahmadinejad (right) welcomes new Revolutionary Guards leader Mohammad Ali Jafari (Telegraph Photo)

Today's Wikileaks leak is the historic. Never before has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of sensitive information. The The leaked documents presumably came from the same source- Private First Class Bradley Manning – who was bitter after a breakup with his boyfriend.

But despite the horror of this latest leftist assault on the United States, at least we now know this…
Ahmadinejad got bitch-slapped by Ali Jafari.
Der Spiegel reported:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's emissaries also learn of a special "Iran observer" in the Azerbaijan capital of Baku who reports on a dispute that played out during a meeting of Iran's Supreme National Security Council. An enraged Revolutionary Guard Chief of Staff Mohammed Ali Jafari allegedly got into a heated argument with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and slapped him in the face because the generally conservative president had, surprisingly, advocated freedom of the press.








Sent from my iPhone

New York Times Manages to Praise Obama Administration In Its Report on the Historic Leak of Sensitiv

Wikileaks announced today that leading international newspapers, including The New York Times, were going to release the classified American security information today even if the website was shut down.

They misspelled Spiegel.

Despite the fact that we have the most radical far left president in American history sitting in the White House these leftist papers couldn't resist the temptation to embarrass and damage US foreign policy. But, at least they praised the Obama Administration for their handling of this latest disaster.

John Hinderaker at Power Line reported on how the New York Times managed to make the Obama Administration look good despite this historic breach of security.

The paper needn't have much fear of criminal prosecution, since it uses the leaked cables as an opportunity for a paean to the Obama administration's foreign policies. Here, the Times reviews cables relating to Iran's nuclear program. Not surprisingly, they record the fact that pretty much everyone in the region urged the U.S. to do something to stop Iran from getting the bomb, by military action if necessary. The entertaining part of the story, however, is the Times's defense of the Obama administration's policy of "engagement" with Iran:

The election of Mr. Obama, at least initially, left some countries wondering whether the sanctions push was about to end. Shortly after taking office, in a videotaped message timed to the Persian New Year, he reiterated his campaign offer of a "new beginning" — the first sustained talks in three decades with Tehran.

The United Arab Emirates called Mr. Obama's message "confusing." The American Embassy in Saudi Arabia reported that the talk about engaging Iran had "fueled Saudi fears that a new U.S. administration might strike a 'grand bargain' without prior consultations."

In Europe, Germany and others discerned an effort to grab market share. "According to the British, other EU Member states fear the U.S. is preparing to take commercial advantage of a new relationship with Iran and subsequently are slowing the EU sanctions process," the American Embassy in London reported.

The administration, though, had a different strategy in mind.

The Times explains that Obama sent an emissary to meet with "more than 70 Middle East experts from European governments." His mission was to explain that the administration wasn't really serious about engagement (my paraphrase). This stratagem, the Times tells us, worked like a charm:

The decoding of Mr. Obama's plan was apparently all the Europeans needed, and by year's end, even Germany, with its suspicions and longstanding trading ties with Iran, appeared to be on board.

The paper details how the administration went on to secure support from Russia and China, which is where the story ends. Of course, what has happened since then is not encouraging, as Iran continues its nuclear weapons and missile development apace. Still, President Obama could hardly ask for a gentler treatment of one of his administration's central foreign policy frustrations. Leaking, evidently, isn't what it used to be.








Sent from my iPhone

Wikileaks Dump: Iran Has Nuke Missiles That Can Reach Western Europe


Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, second left, reviews, Iran's Shahab-3 missile, a weapon capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and reaching Europe, Israel and U.S. forces in the Middle East back in 2005. (LJ World)

Iran received help from North Korea and has missiles that can reach European capitals in Western Europe.
The New York Times reported:

Secret American intelligence assessments have concluded that Iran has obtained a cache of advanced missiles, based on a Russian design, that are much more powerful than anything Washington has publicly conceded that Tehran has in its arsenal, diplomatic cables show.

Iran obtained 19 of the missiles from North Korea, according to a cable dated Feb. 24 of this year. The cable is a detailed, highly classified account of a meeting between top Russian officials and an American delegation led by Vann H. Van Diepen, an official with the State Department's nonproliferation division who, as a national intelligence officer several years ago, played a crucial role in the 2007 assessment of Iran's nuclear capacity.

The missiles could for the first time give Iran the capacity to strike at capitals in Western Europe or easily reach Moscow, and American officials warned that their advanced propulsion could speed Iran's development of intercontinental ballistic missiles.

There has been scattered but persistent speculation on the topic since 2006, when fragmentary reports surfaced that North Korea might have sold Iran missiles based on a Russian design called the R-27, once used aboard Soviet submarines to carry nuclear warheads. In the unclassified world, many arms control experts concluded that isolated components made their way to Iran, but there has been little support for the idea that complete missiles, with their huge thrusters, had been secretly shipped.

The Feb. 24 cable, which is among those obtained by WikiLeaks and made available to a number of news organizations, makes it clear that American intelligence agencies believe that the complete shipment indeed took place, and that Iran is taking pains to master the technology in an attempt to build a new generation of missiles. The missile intelligence also suggests far deeper military — and perhaps nuclear — cooperation between North Korea and Iran than was previously known. At the request of the Obama administration, The New York Times has agreed not to publish the text of the cable.








Sent from my iPhone

John McCain Calls for Regime Change in North Korea

I've been out in front on this issue: "Regime Change North Korea." But I'm not pussy-footing around the military option. The story's at Politico and CNN (at Memeorandum):
"I think it's time we talked about regime change in North Korea, and I do not mean military action, but I do believe that this is a very unstable regime" ...








Sent from my iPhone

Technicalities: Is Rahm Emanuel Even a Resident of Chicago?

From the LA Times:

A veteran election attorney filed papers Friday to try to knock Chicago mayoral candidate Rahm Emanuel off the ballot, charging he does not meet city residency rules.

Under Illinois' municipal code, a candidate must be a resident of the city for a year prior to the election. Emanuel was working as President Obama's White House chief of staff until he returned to Chicago last month to campaign for the Feb. 22 election.

Emanuel said he meets the standard because he owns a home here, has voted here and always intended to move back. Lawyer Burt Odelson said the fact that Emanuel rented out his home, instead of leaving it empty, means he's not a resident.

"The law says you have to have a physical presence, not just intent," Odelson said. "Maintaining a residency means you have a place to go home to, a place where you sleep, a place where your wife and family are."

Odelson filed his challenge on behalf of Thomas L. McMahon, a retired Chicago police officer, and Walter P. Maksym Jr., a lawyer. Fourteen other Chicago residents have filed similar objections.

The code does not define residency, but exempts members of the military who serve away from home. State election code also includes a government service exemption that protects the residency status of anyone who temporarily leaves "on business of the United States."

Should Emanuel's lawyers argue that serving as the White House chief of staff fits the bill, Odelson has prepared a retort.

"Service to the United States is when you're in the military," Odelson said. "It's not when you're in service to the president of the United States."

Read the whole thing here.








Sent from my iPhone

Was Connecticut Conned?

Republicans and conservatives in Connecticut may be feeling like all their friends are having a big party, but they are not invited.

While most states in the nation, even some in liberal New England, caught the Tea Party/conservative wave, Connecticut citizens sent all of their incumbent Democratic representatives back to Congress.

And, while Republicans did pick up 14 seats in the Connecticut state house and one in the state senate, the General Assembly will continue to be controlled by Democrats, as it has been for decades.

And, now, the only current, major Republican-held position, that of governor, will be filled by a Democrat as well. Six days after the election, Republican gubernatorial candidate, Tom Foley, a wealthy businessman, new to politics, conceded the race to Democratic candidate, Dan Malloy, the mayor of Stamford, following a ballot controversy.

The troubled ordeal of the governor's race began in the afternoon of election day, when about half of the city of Bridgeport's polling stations were discovered to be running out of ballots. It was determined that only 21,000 ballots had been ordered for 70,000 registered voters.

The election snafus continued with questionable decisions by Democratic Secretary of State, Susan Bysiewicz, who attempted to remedy the ballot shortage by photocopying blank ballots while waiting for new ones to be printed.

The Hartford Courant story which chronicled the election, indicates that the Malloy team, understanding that the close gubernatorial race could be decided in their favor in heavily Democratic Bridgeport, "arranged an emergency after-hours hearing in Superior Court in Hartford," in order to file a motion for a court order to keep Bridgeport polls open for an additional two hours in precincts where there had been a ballot shortage. Secretary Bysiewicz joined that motion, while Republican attorneys and the state attorney general's office opposed it, arguing that the ballot shortage was the consequence of incompetence.

However, at several minutes before 8:00 p.m. closing time for Connecticut's polls, Judge Mitchell Berger granted the emergency order for the extension of voting hours in Bridgeport.

Following the court order, the mayor of Bridgeport, Democrat William Finch, used the city's 911 emergency system, in reverse, to inform voters that the polls would remain open for an additional two hours in precincts with ballot shortages.

With the race so close, both candidates were expressing confidence well after midnight and into the net day. Secretary Bysiewicz displayed more of what the Wall Street Journal termed, "bizarre" behavior, by announcing "unofficial" election results: that Malloy had won the race by about 3,100 votes.

Two days after the election, a suspicious bag containing 335 photocopied and filled ballots was discovered in Bridgeport. Meanwhile, a video surfaced, taken by the Republican mayor of Vernon, Connecticut, who served as a poll-watcher in Bridgeport, and who observed people voting without identification, voters receiving more than one ballot, and ballots left unsecured at the polling place.

On Friday after election day, Mayor Finch reported that, in Bridgeport, the count showed Malloy had about 17,000 votes to Foley's 4,500. However, Foley was not prepared to concede based on yet another unofficial count, and suggested he might seek a judicial review of the results.

On Friday evening, Secretary Bysiewicz's office made yet another announcement, this one that Malloy had won by 5,637 votes, a margin that would not require a recount. Malloy essentially said the results confirmed what he already knew, but Foley expressed considerable discomfort with the results, and insisted he was not planning to concede until he was "certain that the will of the voters was honored."

At this point, the Republican candidate was sounding strong and decisive, adjectives that did not necessarily cling to him throughout the campaign. While he had been a couple of points ahead in the polls, he had been criticized for not putting out strong conservative views. Foley often appeared weak and ambiguous, with a few bright spots during debates with Malloy. In his literature, however, he demonstrated clear support of merit pay for teachers, school choice, and the need to confront the union pension problem. By contrast, Malloy had been supported by the powerful unions in the state.

Nevertheless, on Monday, November 8th, Foley delivered a somewhat surprising concession speech that was devoid of doubt about the results. Stating that he did not think he could make up a gap of about 6,000 votes, Foley said, "The election on Tuesday was a conclusive victory for Dan Malloy, and this result should not be questioned."

Foley said that his team had explored the possibility of asking for a precinct-by-precinct re-canvassing of the vote, but determined that, in the end, it would not change the outcome of the election.

Meanwhile, as Foley was conceding, Chris Healy, chair of the Connecticut GOP, and possible contender for national GOP chair Michael Steele's position, was referring to the situation in Bridgeport as a "complete farce" and a "circus," and announcing that his team would be asking federal and state authorities to formally investigate the election- in spite of Foley's decision.

In his concession speech, Foley stated, "what happened in Bridgeport should be looked into," but asserted that the rest of the state's counting seemed "very reliable."

However, the Republican candidate for Attorney General, Martha Dean, an experienced attorney with a constitutional law background, who had Tea Party support during her campaign, had a different view. On November 11th, in an interview with Dan Lovallo, a local talk show host in the state, Dean, who lost to a Democratic candidate, questioned the results of the election in Connecticut's other two major cities, Hartford and New Haven. Dean appears poised to investigate her hypothesis that illegal aliens are being given a pass to vote in Connecticut elections.

While Connecticut might be perceived as a "deep blue" state, Peter Raymond cites interesting statistics in an article, in American Thinker, about the questions surrounding the controversial election. In particular, he notes that, in the Bridgeport 2010 election, votes for the Republican gubernatorial candidate plunged by 64% from the ten-year average of Republican votes cast for governor. Even in 2006, the last gubernatorial election, Raymond reports that there were 51% more votes cast for the Republican candidate than this year.

In the wake of the election, it is clear that Governor-elect Dan Malloy is beginning his term amid controversy that is not ending quickly. Public hearings are being held in the city of Bridgeport to determine why the election took the path that it did. A fact that Malloy must also reckon with is that most people in Connecticut did not vote for him. The state actually had three candidates for governor. The third, Tom Marsh, originally elected as a Republican to his local position, announced his candidacy for governor on the Independent ticket in the spring. Marsh received 17,000 votes, enough, had he not triangulated the race, to have given Foley the win, assuming that most of those votes would have gone to the Republican candidate.








Sent from my iPhone

Heritage Foundation

DrudgeFeed.com - Drudge Report RSS feed

RedState

Right Wing News

RenewAmerica

Hot Air » Top Picks

Conservative Outpost

Conservative Examiner

Michelle Malkin

Big Government

Big Journalism

Big Hollywood

Pajamas Media