U.S. Should Celebrate Sri Lanka, Not Condemn It

From: Commentary Magazine

In May 2009, the army of the South Asian island nation of Sri Lanka did what decades of UN diplomatic intervention and State Department pronouncements could not do. It ended its 26-year war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, more commonly known as the Tamil Tigers. The war not only extracted a tremendous economic cost, but had a massive human cost—the UN estimated that the death toll might exceed 100,000. In the end, Sri Lankan action was both merciless and effective. The army reconquered Tamil Tiger-held territory and slaughtered the group’s leadership. The final battle was messy, but with the Tigers gone, both Sri Lankan Sinhalese and Tamils can get on with their lives and, with luck and persistence, build a strong, democratic, and prosperous state.

The Tamil Tigers were an atrocious bunch who kidnapped children and slaughtered civilians in Sri Lanka, and terrorized the Tamil Diaspora with mafia-style extortion with which they funded their terror campaign. They maintained close links with terrorist groups and rogue states. For example, they reportedly helped train the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Congressional Research Service reported ties as well between North Korea and the Tigers.

Enter the Obama administration. Earlier this month, Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake traveled to Sri Lanka. Among the points on his agenda Blake was reportedly instructed to urge the Sri Lankan government open a war crimes investigation into their army’s actions which ended the civil war. War is hell, and the Sri Lankan army was brutal during the war’s climax, but this brutality was well-justified, ended the conflict, and ultimately saved lives. Further, the Tigers seldom if ever abided by the laws of war, and so it is rich to upbraid the Sri Lankan army for showing little restraint.

Rather than sully a victory over terrorism, the Obama administration should celebrate it. And rather than condemn an ally, the White House should congratulate it.

Gov. Christie: Obamacare’s Medicaid Mandates Are ‘Drowning’ States

FRom: CNSnews.com

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (R-N.J.) told CNSNews.com that the health care law’s Medicaid mandates are a financial burden for his state.
 

CNSNews.com asked Christie if he supports the House Republicans FY2012 budget.

“Listen, I think that there’s got to be a credible plan that’s put forward that deals with entitlements in a serious way and you know, I think Congressman [Paul] Ryan’s got a good set of ideas there, whether it’s the only way to go, we’ll wait and see but I think as a Governor what I’m most concerned about is getting us some more flexibility in Medicaid,” he told CNSNews.com on the red carpet of MSNBC’s White House Correspondents’ dinner after party. 

NEWSWEEK 1975: Global Cooling Caused Tornado. NEWSWEEK 2011: Global Warming Caused Tornados

A great entry from The Blog Prof. I'll post the YOu tube separately.

From: The Blog Prof

As it is, the some of the same people that in the 1970s were predicting our doom because of global cooling caused by our activity, are now saying the exact opposite. And I do mean the exact opposite. Via Jazz Shaw: Tornadoes Absolutely Caused by Global Warming. Or Cooling. Or Something

Inevitably the devastating tornadoes that killed more than 300 people in the US prompted Newsweek to ask: “Is global warming responsible for wild weather?” The answer, it found, is “yes”.

Another Newsweek article cited “the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded”, killing “more than 300 people”, as among “the ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically”. But that article was published on April 28, 1975, when Newsweek listed the US tornado disaster of 1974 as one of the harbingers of disastrous global cooling, heralding the approach of a new ice age.

And a flashback from TIME magazine:

In a story about the coming ice age on June 24, 1974 the magazine reported:

Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds — the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world.

Related: Flashback Video (1970s): In Search Of... THE COMING ICE AGE!

Comedy Central Continues to Censor South Park

From: Big Hollywood

On April 21, 2010, Comedy Central aired episode “201” of South Park. The previous episode, “200,” which was a celebration of their 200th episode, sparked controversy from a radical fringe Muslim group who threatened violence on the show’s creators because of their use of the character Muhammed. After seeing the season 14 DVD of South Park, the cowards at Comedy Central continue to bow to the wishes of radical Muslims, showing that our free speech can be silenced by violence or the threat of it. Following this path, which runs contradictory to almost anything Comedy Central has done in the past, willingly provides a disturbing upper hand to any groups wanting to limit free speech and the power of our popular culture.

When a new episode of South Park airs, it is generally available for streaming shortly thereafter from South Park Studios. In the case of “201,” we got this message:

Following this message, there was a long list of people upset that the network, who has courageously stood by South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone over the years, decided to cower in the corner and bleep important sections of episode “201.” In fact, Muhammed was shown in a bear suit, an obvious play on the fear of showing Muhammed on TV. Even that was censored out (important note: Comedy Central has allowed South Park to show Muhammed in the past). As the dust settled, many people (including myself) felt that the truth would be told and free speech will prevail, on some level, when the episode comes out on the season 14 DVD.

The Next dot.com bubble?

From: American Thinker

Social media is driving what appears to be another dot-com bubble as investor enthusiasm for such properties as Linkedin, as well as start up companies is driving billions in investment.

Will it be different this time? Reuters:

* Online advertising and e-commerce, in their infancy a decade ago, have matured into accepted and more reliable revenue sources
* The rush to cash out through an initial public offering has slowed. Bountiful sources of private investment, a raft of new public company disclosure regulations and the growth of alternative venues for trading private company shares provide the means and incentive to delay going public
Perhaps the most distinguishing factor from the "It's different this time" litany is that today's web frenzy is global.

Global Warming Wearing Thing

From: American Thinker

The so-called global warming crisis is falling apart at ever-increasing rates as skeptical bloggers chisel away at faults in the IPCC and whitewashes of ClimateGate, while digging up long-forgotten dire forecasts of weather driven by global cooling. It all must be working. Polls indicate downward trends in public concern over the issue, so organizations like Google come up with plans to fix public ignorance.

Global warming believers think this putative ignorance can be cured by shouting their old 3-part mantra louder:

1. "the science is settled";

2. skeptic scientists are paid by fossil fuel industries to "reposition global warming as theory rather than fact";

3. the media gives too much attention to those skeptics, who do not deserve equal time.

This strategy works when nobody questions anything about those three points -- thus the shouting.

I started questioning where the hokey phrase in point #2 came from in late 2009. Rather than finding simple answers, I instead found a sea of red flags associated with that corruption accusation and its promoters, the now-defunct Ozone Action group, and anti-skeptic book author Ross Gelbspan, prompting me to write articles here and elsewhere about it. Having gathered 17 months of research on this, it looks to me like all three points were consolidated at the hands of that group, so I do double-takes whenever I see a familiar looking mantra narrative.

Such as when I saw mantra point #3 in this "Longtime Minnesota TV reporter digs into global climate change" article just days ago in the Duluth Budgeteer, (reproduced here). At first glance, we read what appears to be a simple explanation:

After spending 32 years in front of the camera as an anchorman and investigative reporter for WCCO-TV in Minneapolis, Don Shelby wanted to apologize to people about climate change. ...

The TV newsman's mea culpa about having misreported climate change came after of years of treating the story the same as he would any other, requiring the views of two opposing parties ...

Shelby said he used the skills of any good investigative reporter and followed the money. "Once I began to trace back the source and the politics of that approach to science ... Things began to smell. I then started pointing out those facts". ...

The Politics of Motherhood

This is a great article.

From: Big Government

I’ve discussed this topic a lot all across the country, the wave of women, of mothers in political activism.

Why have so many mothers become so active?

Because motherhood is political.

I have two sons. One day they may hear the call of duty and enlist to fight for our liberty. One day they may be called upon to defend America’s shores. They may decide to enter business or take up a trade. They may decide to have families of their own someday. I want them to have every opportunity available to them and I will stand against that which impedes on their rights. It’s instinctual: my job as a mother is to raise up, nurture, and protect my children, to protect their interests, to protect the interests of my family. In a society where my first line of defense, my husband, has been compromised by the self-victimization of the female sex, I’ve volunteered to go to the front lines of this ideological battle and I do it for my children. I’m not the only one.

Boeing and the Radical NLRB

From: The Daily Caller

Several Republican senators penned an open letter to President Barack Obama on Thursday calling on him to immediately rescind National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) nominations for Lafe Solomon and former Service Employees International Union (SEIU) general counsel Craig Becker. Their request comes as the NLRB is leading a charge against Boeing for planning to open a non-union factory in South Carolina.

Republican South Carolina Sens. Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham, along with the other Republican senators who signed the letter, believe Becker and Solomon seek to support labor union bosses at the expense of workers. “The NLRB, at the behest of Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon, has taken unprecedented legal action against The Boeing Company to prevent it from expanding productions into South Carolina, a state that assures workers the freedom not to join a union as a condition of employment,” the letter reads. “We consider this an attack on millions of workers in 22 right-to-work states, as well as a government-led act of intimidation against American companies that should have the freedom to choose to build plants in right-to-work states. If the NLRB prevails, it will only encourage companies to make their investments in foreign nations, moving jobs and economic growth overseas.”

Becker and Solomon were both recess-appointed to the NLRB and, in Becker’s case, all 41 Republican senators wrote Obama to urge him not to make Becker’s recess appointment after the Senate rejected his nomination the first time around. Solomon has not yet appeared before the Senate for confirmation.

London streets not so safe for Israelis

From: Jerusalem Post

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s military secretary, Maj.-Gen. Yohanan Locker, did not accompany the prime minister on his trip to London for fear he might be arrested, Channel 1 reported on Wednesday evening.

Locker is a permanent member of Netanyahu’s entourage, but he was warned that since the British law on universal jurisdiction had not yet been changed, he might be detained upon landing in the UK over allegations of war crimes that human rights groups have accused Israel of committing during Operation Cast Lead.

Locker was deputy head of the Israel Air Force during the Gaza offensive two years ago.

In the past, several Israeli officials canceled visits to the UK after being advised by the Foreign Ministry that pro-Palestinian NGOs planned to take advantage of British law to arrest them when they set foot in the country.

In December 2009, an arrest warrant was issued for opposition leader Tzipi Livni. She served as foreign minister in the Kadima-led government that initiated the operation.

At the time, British foreign secretary David Miliband called her and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, and according to a statement put out by Livni’s office, expressed “shock” at the warrant, and promised to work immediately to ensure that a similar occurrence would not happen in the future against any Israeli official.

“The procedure by which arrest warrants can be sought and issued – without any prior knowledge or advice by a prosecutor – is an unusual feature of the system in England and Wales,” Miliband said in a statement.

“The government is looking urgently at ways in which the UK system might be changed in order to avoid this sort of situation arising again.”

The Labor government, in which Miliband served, did not change the law. In July last year, two months after the current British government took power, Israeli diplomatic officials lauded its announcement of plans to amend it.

UK officials said the government of Prime Minister David Cameron was moving on the issue, whereas the previous Labor government provided empty rhetoric.

Canada Is Ready for Her Star Turn

From: American Thinker

The nation which Canadian subject (and conservative author, columnist and radio and TV commentator) Mark Steyn calls the "Deranged Dominion" just elected a Conservative Party government may now be about to raise its game to the next level.

It should. The fact is that, for sixty-six years, Canada has punched below its weight in world affairs. It was not always so.

Winston Churchill, in Britain's darkest hour -- when the UK faced Hitler alone -- told Parliament and the British people that the overseas dominions would come to the aid of the mother country. He meant Canada (which Churchill had visited), as well as New Zealand, South Africa (where he had fought and been a POW) and Australia. They did.

By the end of the Second World War, Canada had the third-largest surface navy in the world. The Canadian Army took Juno Beach at Normandy on D-Day. Canada, with a population of only eleven to twelve million, put over 1.1 million men under arms, with the world's fourth largest air force. Some 45,000 Canadians died.

What? Canada -- today's pacifist, multicultural playground, refuge of American draft-dodgers during the Vietnam War -- was once a major military power? Really?

Really. By 1945, Canada's navy even included three aircraft carriers.

I learned these largely-forgotten facts one pleasant evening in the leather-walled confines of the library of Montreal's St. James Club. The club's set of the History of the Canadian Armed Forces in the Second World War was instructive in the extreme.

What happened after 1945 is only too familiar: big government liberalism, a welfare state, pacifism, a heavy dose of white guilt, open immigration and political correctness. The result: by choice and not by necessity, Canada hasn't been a world player since about 1953.

Is Winnie-the-Pooh Sexist?

From: FOX News Radio

A comprehensive study of traditional children’s book characters has determined that Pooh Corner may be rife with gender inequality.

Dr. Janice McCabe, a sociologist at Florida State University, examined nearly 6,000 children’s books between 1900 and 2000 and determined the stories have a definitive gender bias and a disproportionate representation of genders.

“We found that males are represented more frequently than females in the titles and the central characters in the book,” McCabe told Fox News Radio. 57 percent of the children’s stories featured male characters, 31 percent featured female characters and the remainder had animal characters of unknown gender identity.
Curious George, perhaps?

McCabe said she was surprised that modern-day children’s stories don’t include more female characters.

“I had kind of expected that books would start off in 1900 being unequal and become more equal over time,” she said. “We were surprised by the historical patterns and by the animals. The fact that the animals were the most unequal and even in the 1990s there were still two male animals to every one female animal.”

McCabe said gender matters in children’s stories because it’s in part how they learn about gender.

MAS Official: Bin Laden a "Visionary"

From: IPT

A leader of a major American Muslim organization, the Muslim American Society (MAS), is arguing that there "was nothing wrong with" Osama bin Laden's dream of creating a renewed Caliphate. Khalilah Sabra's comments are the most recent and worrisome from the group, which has a long history of defending alleged terrorists.

Sabra, the director of the North Carolina branch of MAS' Freedom Foundation, made the statement in a sometimes disjointed article entitled "Agreeing to Disagree About the Death of Osama Bin Laden" that was released Wednesday under the MAS logo. The statement aligns more with a period of Sabra's life in the late 1980s, when she traveled to Afghanistan with bin Laden's predecessor, Abdullah Azzam, to provide aid to the mujahideen fighting the Soviet Union.

Her statement doesn't defend bin Laden's terror attack on 9/11. But it does laud his vision of an Islamic state and his desire to "liberate" the Afghani people.

"He was a visionary who believed in the possibility of an Islamic state in Afghanistan and the possibility that this thing might someday be," Sabra wrote. "There was nothing wrong with that dream, even if it differs from that one that all Americans have here for themselves."

In 1997, bin Laden described his vision of a Muslim leader "who can unite them and establish the 'pious caliphate.' The pious caliphate will start from Afghanistan" and spread from there.

Mexican-American Studies Problem in the Tucson Unified School District

Why Are We Protecting Syria?

From: YID With LID

Here’s an unavoidable question: Why is it that when a relatively moderate Middle East state is threatened by demonstrations—Egypt and Tunisia—the Obama Administration calls for their instant departure while when it is a radical, anti-American, terrorist-supporting state—Iran and Syria—it refuses to act at all.

However you explain that paradox it nonetheless, undeniably, exists. And it is totally contrary to the U.S. national interests. Some people think that this sabotage is deliberate; others, like myself, think it is being caused by incompetence, ignorance, and an ideology totally out of touch with reality.

But here's what's really important: If you can't tell the difference between the deliberate destruction of U.S. interests and the inadvertent but systematic destruction of U.S. interests, doesn't that show how serious the situation is?

Egypt Demands Repatriation of the Blind Sheikh

From: IPT

The Egyptian government reportedly has asked the United States to release the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel-Rahman, and send him back to Egypt, according to the Open Source Center, a government clearinghouse of publicly available foreign intelligence.

Abdel-Rahman is the former spiritual leader of the Egyptian terrorist organization, Gama'a al-Islamiyya. He is considered the spiritual inspiration behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and is serving a life sentence in connection with a subsequent plot to bomb New York landmarks and tunnels.

But his continued imprisonment could spur anger in Egypt and other Islamic states, said his son, Abdallah Abdel-Rahman. Keeping his father in custody would show that the United States did not seek to combat terrorism, but rather sought war on Islam.

He asked Egyptian officials to make a similar request, and an official at the Egyptian Ministry of Justice indicated that had been done. The official recommended Abdallah Abdel-Rahman make his own request to the U.S. government for his father's repatriation since the two countries have no joint agreement for the exchange of prisoners.

Last month, hundreds of Gama'a members protested near the U.S. embassy in Cairo demanding Abdel-Rahman's release.

Better Living Through Chemistry (If Permitted)

From: The American Magazine

The overwhelming body of scientific evidence supports the safety of myriad chemicals in use today.

A fusillade of recent items by the New York Times, US News, CNN, and others purports to show how certain common pesticides lead to reduced IQs among children of women exposed to these chemicals while pregnant.

Dismayed, I carefully went over the paper that lies at the ground zero of the media frenzy. It is a study of the organophosphate (OP) class of pesticides by a group of researchers based at the University of California at Berkeley and led by Brenda Eskenazi.

OP insecticides were in widespread use from the mid-1960s until about ten years ago, when they were replaced in many applications by more effective chemicals. They are known for their brief persistence in the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to monitor these compounds for toxicity, and the permissible levels used have demonstrated no adverse effects at thousands of times their approved concentrations in laboratory animal testing. They work by inhibiting an enzyme needed for nerve conduction—but the levels effective against insect nerve function are orders of magnitude lower than any conceivable effect in humans. (A large 2008 U.S. study specifically seeking evidence of human health effects from the most commonly used OP pesticide, chlorpyrifos, found no such evidence.)

The Berkeley study is riddled with errors of commission and omission. It glibly assumes conclusions based on no science at all.

The Berkeley study is riddled with errors of commission and omission. It glibly assumes conclusions based on no science at all. For instance, despite the weak effect detected and the lack of any biologically plausible hypothesis of sufficient scientific merit to link pesticide exposure and IQ, the authors assert such a link; there is, simply, clearly no basis for implying a cause-and-effect relationship between the pesticide and change in IQ. Merely calling a chemical a “neurotoxin” does not justify such a leap.

Further, allegedly toxic byproducts of a pesticide are acknowledged to be of indefinite source: the authors admit that the breakdown products of the pesticide they analyzed—supposedly valid proxies for the levels of the pesticide itself—could not be definitively traced back to any individual pesticide, nor even to any group of pesticides, but may have arrived pre-formed in the mothers’ diets. Adding to the confusion—the uncertainties given short shrift by the authors and the breathless media coverage—the study ignores potential confounders (factors known to influence IQ that are unrelated to pesticides) as significant as parental smoking and alcohol intake—indeed, any paternal characteristics at all.

Will Muslim Brotherhood succeed where Osama bin Laden failed?

FROM: Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Like thousands across the world, I celebrated the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden. He rejoiced in killing. But bin Laden’s murder is not the end of Al Qaeda. And even if Al Qaeda were totally eliminated, the world would still have to deal with Al Qaeda’s progenitor.

Bin Laden was many things, but he was not original. He was himself introduced to the doctrine of jihad by the late Palestinian theologian Abdullah Yusuf Azzam. Significantly, before Azzam begun teaching bin Laden and others in Saudi Arabia, he was a member of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood.

Unlike Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood has evolved and learned the hard way that the use of violence will be met with superior violence by state actors. The clever thing to do, it now turns out, was to be patient and invest in a bottom-up movement rather than a commando structure that risked being wiped out by stronger forces. Besides, the gradualist approach is far more likely to win the prize of state power. All that Khomeini did before he came to power in Iran was to preach the merits of a society based on Islamic law. He did not engage in terrorism. Yet he and his followers took over Iran – a feat far greater than bin Laden ever achieved. In Iran the violence came later.

The point is that fighting violent extremists is only part of the battle; perhaps the easier part. The bigger challenge may be to deal with those Islamists who are willing to play a longer game.

In the West, bin Laden’s ignominious death in a Pakistani hideaway has frequently been contrasted with the mass protests that have swept the Middle East in recent months. Policymakers and commentators have drawn the conclusion that the Arab Spring has triumphed over jihadism, setting the region on a high road to democracy. This is too hasty a conclusion. Let’s take Egypt as an example.

Just how likely is it that Egypt will end up – after the inevitable transition period – being ruled indirectly or directly by the Muslim Brotherhood?

Three factors

The answer depends on a combination of three factors – two domestic and one foreign:
1. The Brotherhood’s strength within the Egyptian military, which is still in charge of the country;
2. The absence of a formidable secular rival within Egypt;

After Bin Laden, in the Fog of War, White House Struggles

From: NationalJournal.com

In the hours after the stunning killing of Osama bin Laden, the White House was quick to offer up the riveting details of the operation, including a movie-worthy denoument in which the terrorist leader, ensconced in a mansion, grabs one of his wives and uses her as a human shield against the American forces.

Much of that has proven to be false, and new details drip, drip, drip out about what really happened.

Administration officials say the evolving account is the unfortunate and inevitable by-product of the “fog of war” and their admirable haste to get information out to the public. Critics see everything from spin to lying.

Whatever the case, the story has changed. That isn't helping the administration as it celebrates an accomplishment and tries to leverage its success in Pakistan into victories on other fronts from beating back al-Qaida to beating back the Republican budget plan.

The contradictions in the administration's story are myriad. Senior administration officials reported a 40-minute operation in which they suggested that Navy SEALs spent much of it engaged by enemy gunfire.

They described Osama bin Laden using a woman as a “human shield.” And John Brennan, the president’s top counterterrorism adviser, even suggested the day after the operation that the Qaida leader died a cowardly death, while hiding in a $1 million compound as his terrorist brethren live in austere conditions.

Some initial details have withstood scrutiny: The White House has acknowledged that bin Laden was not armed, though sources tell National Journal that there was an AK-47 and pistol in his room. Others have not: The White House says that bin Laden’s wife was wounded when rushing a U.S. service member, but officials are no longer calling her a “human shield.”

Dept of Education orders universities to lower burden of proof in Harassment Cases

From: The Daily Caller

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is going to bat against the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) over what they see as infringements on college students’ due process and free speech rights.

In a “Dear Colleague” letter sent to colleges and universities in April, Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Russlynn Ali announced new federal regulations publicly funded schools must employ to address allegations of sexual harassment and sexual violence.

The new standards most notably lower the burden of proof to prosecute.

“[I]n order for a school’s grievance procedures to be consistent with Title IX standards, the school must use a preponderance of the evidence standard (i.e., it is more likely than not that sexual harassment or violence occurred),” Ali wrote.

FIRE reacted to OCR’s guidance to colleges and universities — with a letter of opposition Thursday, explaining the regulations infringe on student’s liberties.

“While it is of course necessary for colleges and universities to address allegations of sexual harassment and sexual violence with all requisite purpose, seriousness, and speed, the rights of those accused cannot be sacrificed simply as a function of the accusation itself,” FIRE’s letter reads.

FIRE’s President, Greg Lukianoff, explained that lowering proof standards will not aid the execution of justice.

51% of Households Pay No Income Tax

From: The Blog Prof

It's confirmed. There are now more people not paying federal income taxes than those paying them. So basically what is happening is a huge transfer of wealth from the productive to the unproductive, which will have the effect of incentivizing non-productivity while punishing productivity. Shouldn't that be backwards? So an update on a prior post on the issue before the 50% point was reached: not only does bottom 47% of taxpayers pay no federal income tax, but the bottom 40% GET MONEY BACK!
Well, that 50% level, as Granholm would say, has been blown away.