Archive for the 'war' Category

Reid, Durbin: Dems Split on Ground Zero Mosque

Posted in Public Affairs, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Politics, Religion, conspiracy, ethics, Reid, Islam, Muslim, durbin, 9/11 on August 24th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

So who cares if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid opposes the ground zero mosque and Senator Dick Durbin supports it? Answer: only liberals who view this party split as one more reason to expect a severe beating at the polls in November. What? Reid takes his position based on election year politics and Durbin concludes he should support the mosque for the same election year considerations?

More to the point is that Dick Durbin uses the lame argument that this is about religious freedom and the idea that America is a cultural melting pot. He says NYC Mayor Bloomberg supports it and that’s good enough for him.

WTC 9/11Once again it is not about religious freedom. No one is suggesting that Muslims are not allowed to practice their religion. Unless you agree they believe all infidels must convert or die and somehow that is not at odds with the founding of our nation. Much about Islam is at odds with the founding of our nation.

If Mayor Bloomberg is so supportive of the ground zero mosque and as Durbin suggests this is about religious freedom ask them this. What about the St Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church that was destroyed on September 11, 2001 when a group of Muslims committed acts of terrorism or war at the World Trade Center?

It is approaching a decade later and their church is still not rebuilt. You can follow this link if you are unfamiliar with the story. Where was Bloomberg’s support for St Nicholas’ Church during his years in office. You know, the years he extended by corrupt politics. While you’re at it ask the Port Authority why the St Nicholas Church is still not replaced.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Howard Dean and the Ground Zero Mosque

Posted in Public Affairs, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Politics, youtube, Religion, America, Video, Islam, Muslim, 9/11 on August 22nd, 2010 by Stanford Matthews


Howard Dean’s approach is to sound like he gives a damn while pushing the liberal agenda. That is clear throughout this vid.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

President Obama’s Islamic Transparency

Posted in Public Affairs, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Politics, Religion, America, obama, Freedom, Islam, Muslim on August 19th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

“As a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances,” he said.

Another piece from Voice of America had this to say.

U.S. President Barack Obama’s support for an Islamic center to be built near the scene of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks has done little to mollify critics of the plan. However, it has strengthened the argument that it should be allowed in because of America’s tradition of religious freedom.

And this is what the Bill of Rights has to say about freedom of religion.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

No one is demanding a law about religion nor requesting that anyone not be allowed to practice their religion. But at the very least it is in bad taste to place a mosque in close proximity to the location where more than a dozen Muslims carried out the vicious murder of thousands of innocent victims.

Mr President, the flaw in your appeal to the Bill of Rights to defend what has been called an intentional provocation by certain Muslim individuals or groups obviously avoids the other side of the ‘rights’ equation. That is responsibility. When the rights of two or more persons clash a reasonable approach is needed to solve the problem.

Rather than pander to a special interest in direct opposition to the American traditions you cite as part of your argument you might consider calling them out on how they justify the description of a ‘religion of peace’?

Better yet, name one other religion that calls for the death of non-believers or infidels who do not convert to their religion. Name one other religion who has been responsible for as many deaths as Islam in the last 235 years. Name one other religion that calls for the destruction of an entire nation. Name one other religion having members who claim to denounce the radical elements within and do nothing to change it.

Could it be the quiet ones privately condone the violence of the religion of peace? Could it be their Jihad has its sights set on world domination? Could it be you will deny the threat of Islam until it is too late to respond?

Or are some of your critics right? You are just a Muslim at heart willing to aid the Jihad.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Ex Parte Milligan

Posted in Public Affairs, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Politics, disclosure, ethics, United States, Law, Justice, Opinion, Legislation, Supreme Court on August 18th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

camp xray

While reviewing some documents on the four American presidents who were assassinated at least one fact unknown to this blogger was revealed. I was reading about President Garfield because he was the one of the four about which my memory was the least clear. And it was the initial reason for conducting the search.

The senseless act of violence known as assassination defined as the murder of a public figure not only reminds us of how depraved humans can be but how senseless the perpetrator is.

Garfield had little time to savor his triumph. He was shot by Charles J. Guiteau, disgruntled by failed efforts to secure a federal post, on July 2, 1881, at 9:30 a.m. The President had been walking through the Sixth Street Station of the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad (a predecessor of the Pennsylvania Railroad) in Washington, D.C.. Garfield was on his way to his alma mater, Williams College, where he was scheduled to deliver a speech, accompanied by Secretary of State James G. Blaine, Secretary of War Robert Todd Lincoln (son of Abraham Lincoln[25]) and two of his sons, James and Harry.

Were it not for this despicable act the setting described above suggests a pleasant situation not likely a regular routine during anyone’s presidency. Further reading provided a glimpse of how history and the lives of presidents dramatically impact a nation and its citizens. And occasionally how they impact those who are not citizens.

Garfield was one of three attorneys who argued for the petitioners in the famous Supreme Court case Ex parte Milligan (1866). The petitioners were pro-Confederate northern men who had been found guilty and sentenced to death by a military court for treasonous activities. The case turned on whether the defendants should, instead, have been tried by a civilian court. Garfield went on to plead other cases before the high court, but none was as high profile as his first argument before the Supreme Court in Milligan.

President Lincoln has been criticized by some for his suspension of habeas corpus. Before James A. Garfield was president he was involved in Ex Parte Milligan as described in the preceding paragraph. And of course Presidents George Bush (43) and Barack Obama have been in the center of the controversy over those held at the military facility at Guantanamo Bay, Gitmo, and whether the trials should be military tribunal or held in civilian court.

The first case to be tried in civilian court is presently being determined. Which causes this blogger to present the following excerpt from Ex Parte Milligan. It has to do with the notion of Lincoln suspending habeas corpus as viewed by the Supreme Court in 1866.

An armed rebellion against the national authority, of greater proportions than history affords an example of, was raging, and the public safety required that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus should be suspended. The President had practically suspended it, and detained suspected persons in custody without trial, but his authority to do this was questioned. It was claimed that Congress alone could exercise this power, and that the legislature, and not the President, should judge of the political considerations on which the right to suspend it rested. The privilege of this great writ had never before been withheld from the citizen, and, as the exigence of the times demanded immediate action, it was of the highest importance that the lawfulness of the suspension should be fully established. It was under these circumstances, which were such as to arrest the attention of the country, that this law was passed. The President was authorized by it to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus whenever, in his judgment, the public safety required, and he did, by proclamation, bearing date the 15th of September, 1863, reciting, among other things, the authority of this statute, suspend it. The suspension of the writ does not authorize the arrest of anyone, but simply denies to one arrested the privilege of this writ in order to obtain his liberty.

This blogger by no means suggests any personal expertise in matters of law. But the passage above seems to indicate the court agreed on Lincoln’s right to suspend habeas corpus. That would seem to indicate a current suspension would be valid also. And in much of the content of the court’s opinion in Ex Parte Milligan there seems to be a recurring theme.

The rights and rule of law are being considered in terms of citizens. That is to say it seems the discussion centers around the rights of citizens and not non-citizens. It seems to me that those confined at Gitmo are seeking their ‘liberty’ by a process not afforded them under US law. And that those who support their ‘civilian’ day in court are co-conspirators.

That’s just my humble opinion.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Wikileaks: Irresponsible or Criminal

Posted in Public Affairs, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Politics, News Media, disclosure, ethics, Afghanistan, United States, Law, Justice, Military, 9/11 on July 26th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

Silence is securityThe name says it all. Wikileaks produces ’sensitive materials to communicate to the public’. In the name of a self-proclaimed ‘multi-jurisdictional public service’ this organization displays information without regard for the damage it may cause. In their own words the material is sensitive. They should understand that no matter how noble their intent might be the consequences of their actions can be viewed as irresponsible. That reasonable distinction between transparency and irresponsible behavior trumps any noble intent.

Of the nine people listed on their board for 2007 five are described as activist, dissident or social justice advocate. The other four are listed as writer, security expert or physicist.

If the actions of others resulted in the death of an activist, dissident, advocate or writer, etc., it would be no surprise if these same people at Wikileaks expressed outrage and a desire for justice. If death is caused by their brand of ‘transparency’ to someone outside their sphere of influence it is predicted no such outrage or call for justice would be forthcoming from Wikileaks.

In the days ahead a more complete accounting of Wikileaks latest crusade will develop. Questions about the content and validity of ’sensitive materials’ displayed will be raised. The effect and possible ‘unintended consequences’ may also be analyzed.

If harm to anyone comes from this action by Wikileaks fair is fair. They should be held accountable for their actions. Like most other things in life you can take whistleblowing too far. Any reasonable method for any reasonable purpose can be misused. It is only a matter of time before a group like Wikileaks finds that threshhold and violates standards of ethics and good judgment.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

story source:

WikiLeaks Founder Defends Releasing US Documents on Afghanistan

Afghan, Pakistani Reactions at Odds Over Leaked US Documents

Analysis: Leaks Only a ‘Snapshot’ of Afghan War Effort

June 6, 1944

Posted in Public Affairs, Announcement, war, wordpress, United States, Freedom, Military on June 6th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

D-Day Memories from the US Army
Ordinary people who accomplished an extraordinary feat to save the world from tyranny. The lessons taught by the actions of these remarkable individuals stand as testimony to what becomes necessary when the world ignores the threats to peace and liberty. To honor their service and sacrifice let us not allow this to happen again. You can watch a short video by clicking on the picture above as well as explore other features which commemorate this day in history.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Obama, UN, Israel and a Nuke-Free World

Posted in Public Affairs, Israel, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Politics, disclosure, ethics, Nuke, U.N., India, Iran, obama, Foreign Affairs, 9/11 on June 5th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

Ivy Mike King

If the recent rev/con of the United Nations on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty for 2010 is any indication the world is no closer to being the nuke-free peaceful utopia envisioned by UN rhetoric or that of US President Barack Hussein Obama. Statements made by Iran and Israel merely extend the never ending debate on Middle East peace that is equally illusive.

The following report from a few days ago inspired this post.

Israel denounces NPT ‘hypocrisy’ as Iran hails accord
by Gavin Rabinowitz Gavin Rabinowitz – Sat May 29, 4:24 pm ET

TORONTO (AFP) – Israel Saturday denounced as “hypocritical” a resolution adopted by the Non-Proliferation Treaty’s 189 nations and said it would refuse to take part in a conference on a nuclear-weapons-free Middle East.

Israel said the resolution adopted at the United Nations on Friday singles out the Jewish state and fails to mention arch-foe Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

One may have to take the announcement above at face value until the 28 page doc from the UN is available. As of this writing the following notice was found at the UN’s website.

8:58 AM 6/2/2010
Parts I and II of the Final Document of the 2010 NPT Review Conference are still being finalized and will be posted here (in English only) as soon as they are available. Other language versions will be added when ready.

It always seems that some sources are able to receive these items before the general public. But there are other items that help paint the picture.

UN NPT conference backs steps to disarm
Sat May 29 2010 12:05

A Major Gap

The disarmament action plan also inevitably leaves a major gap, since it doesn’t obligate four nations that are not members of the treaty - India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea, all of which have or are suspected of having nuclear arsenals.

On the Middle East, Arab states and Israel’s allies had been at odds over wording in the plan to convene a conference in 2012 to begin a process to turn the region into a zone free of nuclear and other mass-destruction weapons.

This Arab proposal for a WMD-free zone, to pressure Israel to give up its undeclared arsenal of perhaps 80 nuclear warheads, was endorsed by the 1995 NPT conference but never acted on.

Israel has long said a full Arab-Israeli peace must precede such weapons bans. But at this conference the US, Israel’s chief supporter, said it welcomed “practical measures” leading toward the goal of a nuke-free zone, and US diplomats discussed possibilities with Israel.

And what about Iran?

NPT 101: Is Iran violating the nuclear treaty?
By Scott Peterson, Staff writer / May 4, 2010
Istanbul, Turkey

Is Iran violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)?The answer isn’t black and white. It depends on whom you ask – and how deftly you define “violation.” But in essence, Iran is following the letter but not always the spirit of the NPT.

Iran claims it is in complete compliance with its NPT obligations, including declaring all its nuclear material and allowing inspectors to monitor its facilities. It advocates against nuclear weapons and notes that despite thousands of hours of inspections in Iran, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) – the United Nations body that monitors NPT compliance – has found no evidence of a bomb program.

It is not like the IAEA never dropped the ball regarding Iraq, Iran or other investigations they have undertaken. No one really knows the status of Iran’s nuke program but their repeated call for the elimination of Israel raises suspicion about nuclear weapons.

But let’s not get all worked up over Israel’s denouncement of this year’s nuclear theatre courtesy of the United Nations. Just last year there was at least one similar response by another nation under similar circumstances.

Friday, September 25, 2009, 00:47 IST
UN passes NPT resolution, India says no

New Delhi: India refused to abide by the UN Security Council resolution asking all non-NPT nations to sign the pact, saying it cannot accept the “externally prescribed norms or standards” on issues that are contrary to its national interests or infringe on its sovereignty.

India maintained that it cannot join the NPT as a non-weapon country even as it reiterated its commitment to no testing and no-first-use besides non-discriminatory universal non-proliferation.

The details may have changed over the years but generally speaking we are no closer to a nuke-free world than we were decades ago. Nothing anyone has expressed improved the chances of the world becoming peaceful. Perhaps focusing on nukes misses the point although it makes for popular news stories. War and other armed conflict with ‘conventional weapons’ as well as violence in general needs to be addressed in addition to nuclear threats before ‘universal’ peace can be achieved. Something that seems unlikely given the history of humans on this planet.

It would be helpful to keep the nuclear club at its present size. It would be more helpful to keep terrorists from making an IED from nuclear material e.g., a ’suitcase bomb.’ It might be fair to state that government leaders over a long period of time have caused this predicament in the way relationships, strategies and tactics have been arranged. Changing alliances and ‘national interests’ at odds with solutions that benefit all or at least do not unduly burden some while others gain are at the heart of the matter.

Until those trends are resolved the larger problem of a nuke-free world and an end to armed conflict are simply wishful thinking.

If only wishing for a perfect world made it so.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

More Do Nothing Iran Sanctions from Hillary and the UN

Posted in Public Affairs, Israel, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Politics, Clinton, Nuke, U.N., United States, Russia, Britain, France, China, Iran, obama, hillary, 9/11, Germany on May 18th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

crossposted at Maggie’s Notebook

As much as China and Russia have demonstrated their opposition toward ’sanctions’ against Iran’s nuclear pursuits more impotent reaction appears forthcoming from the security council at the United Nations. As noted below, a ‘fourth round’ of UN sanctions indicates previous provisions have accomplished nothing.

If Iran sends uranium to Turkey and Brazil for further enrichment with the stated medical purposes expressed a minimum of several questions come to mind. What is to stop others from intercepting and/or advancing enrichment to weapons grade? What value can sanctions have if they have not worked to date and Iran’s nuclear pursuit advances unchecked?

Spokespersons from Iran and Turkey have offered political rhetoric on the topic. Western nations have expressed a real concern that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Also in the report below readers are reminded of frequent expressions from Iranian leaders that they intend to eliminate the state of Israel.

And the past and current situation with Iran has done nothing to resolve these issues. But it has allowed Iran to continue unimpeded. It is long past the time for an effective response to Iranian nukes. And all that sending uranium around the planet achieves is higher risk that the material will be used by rogue states or terrorists supported by them.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

from VOA News….

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the United States and other major world powers have agreed on a draft resolution that could impose a fourth round of United Nations sanctions on Iran.

Clinton made the announcement in testimony to a Senate committee Tuesday, a day after Iran announced a plan to send some of its enriched uranium to Turkey in exchange for nuclear fuel.

The Security Council is set to hold consultations on the sanctions draft Tuesday.

Clinton said the plan followed talks among the five permanent Security Council members - the United States, Britain, China, France and Russia, as well as Germany.

She noted the agreement had been reached in cooperation with China and Russia - two nations that have previously resisted imposing more sanctions on Tehran.

On Monday, Iran signed an agreement with Turkey and Brazil to send 1,200 kilograms of low-enriched uranium to Turkey in exchange for higher-enriched nuclear reactor fuel to be used in a medical research reactor in Tehran.

Both Turkey and Brazil are non-permanent members of the Security Council.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast accused Western nations Tuesday of “seeking excuses” to avoid resolving the nuclear dispute with his country.

Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said talk of sanctions could “spoil the atmosphere” and lead to an “escalation” of statements that might “provoke” Iranian public opinion.

The United States and its Western allies accuse Iran of working to make a nuclear weapon. Iran says its atomic program is for peaceful purposes.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with top Cabinet members Tuesday to consider a response to the Iranian plan.

Israel views a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to its existence because of repeated calls by Iranian leaders for the demise of the Jewish state.

Alien Smuggling

Posted in Announcement, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Immigration, Tancredo, United States, Law, Justice, Border Control, ICE, Blogs4Borders, 9/11 on May 9th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

Heads of Canadian alien smuggling organization sentenced

BURLINGTON, Vt. - On May 3, Jose Manuel Galdamez-Serrano, 56, Norvin Gonzalez-Morales, 29, Ruben Damas-Hernandez, 31, and Emmanuel Antonio Galdamez, 27, of Montreal, Quebec, were sentenced in U.S. District Court in Burlington following their guilty pleas to alien smuggling offenses. The defendants were extradited to the United States from Canada to face the charges contained in the indictment.

Chief U.S. District Judge William K. Sessions III sentenced Jose Manual Galdamez-Serrano to 60 months imprisonment and three years of probation following his guilty plea to one count of bringing illegal aliens in the United States for the purpose of commercial advantage and private financial gain. Judge Sessions ordered co-defendants Emmanuel Antonio Galdamez and Ruben Alonzo Damas-Hernandez, each to serve approximately 11 months imprisonment and two years probation following their guilty pleas to conspiracy to smuggle illegal aliens into the United States.

According to court documents, the defendants, collectively known as the Galdamez Organization, conspired to smuggle aliens into the United States from Canada beginning sometime in 2004 until 2007. The Galdamez Organization was primarily consists of family members, with Jose Manuel Galdamez-Serrano as the head, his son Emmanuel Galdamez, and son-in-laws Ruben Damas-Hernandez and Norvin Gonzalez-Morales.

The Galdamez Organization offered aliens smuggling services to other alien smuggling groups and persons who trafficked in human beings and to individuals living in Canada who came from other countries, including but not limited to Central and South America, Pakistan and India, whose destination were the United States. More than 100 aliens were smuggled into the United States by the Galdamez Organization.

The aliens were housed at Galdamez Organization members’ homes while awaiting transportation into the United States. They were later driven to areas near the border between Canada and the United States. Galdamez Organization would guide the aliens across the border by foot and at night or directed them where to cross. Other coconspirators involved were from Maryland, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey and New York.

U.S. Attorney Tristram J. Coffin commended the efforts of special agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the U.S. Border Patrol.

The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Barbara A. Masterson.

 

– ICE –

596 Criminal Aliens

Posted in Announcement, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Immigration, Tancredo, United States, Law, Justice, Border Control, ICE, Blogs4Borders, 9/11 on May 8th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

April 30, 2010

596 criminal aliens arrested in targeted ICE operation throughout the southeastern U.S.
Operation Cross Check yields the largest-ever number of arrests

WASHINGTON — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and its law enforcement partners arrested 596 foreign nationals with criminal records during a three-day enforcement surge throughout the southeastern United States, making it the biggest operation targeting at-large criminal aliens ever carried out by ICE in the region.

During the operation, which concluded late last night, ICE officers and agents worked in teams with the U.S. Marshals Service, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and local law enforcement agencies in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee and Puerto Rico.

Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for ICE John Morton cited the operation – which involved nearly 400 federal and local law enforcement officers and agents – as another example of ICE’s focus on indentifying and removing criminal aliens from the United States.

“We are a compassionate nation with a proud history of immigration,” said Morton. “But we are also a nation governed by laws specifically designed to protect its citizens and residents. Those who come to the United States to prey upon our neighbors and communities will be prosecuted for their crimes and ultimately returned to their home countries. The results of this week’s operation demonstrate ICE’s commitment to that principle.”

Arrests in Florida and Puerto Rico accounted for the largest number of apprehensions during the operation where a total of 258 aliens were taken into custody. The Atlanta Field Office recorded the next highest number of arrests with 232. The arrestees, 544 men and 55 women, represent 60 different nations, including countries in Latin America, Asia, Europe, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

Because of their serious criminal histories and prior immigration arrest records, at least 12 of those arrested during the enforcement surge face federal prosecution. A conviction for felony reentry carries a penalty of up to 20 years in prison.

Some of the worst of the offenders caught this week during Operation Cross Check include the following case examples:

  • Oriel Bernard McCarthy, of Jamaica, was arrested Tuesday by the Atlanta Fugitive Operation Team in Jonesboro, Georgia. McCarthy was recently arrested for aggravated assault and possession of a weapon during the commission of a crime. McCarthy’s criminal history includes convictions and arrests in four states, including New York, South Carolina, Maryland and Georgia for crimes including felony forgery, stalking, criminal domestic violence, possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and manufacture, aggravated assault, sexual abuse and forcible contact, possession of stolen property, and robbery. He was ordered removed by an immigration judge on October 21, 2009 in New York City.
  • Jose Oscar Avalo-Molina, of El Salvador, was arrested Wednesday by the Miami Fugitive Operations Team in Pembroke Park, Florida. Avalo-Molina’s criminal convictions include first degree murder for which he was sentenced to 20 years in prison. On Feb. 28, 1991, he was ordered removed to El Salvador by an Immigration Judge. Avalo-Molina was removed on Aug. 13, 1997 and subsequently illegally re-entered. This case has been accepted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for prosecution for the crime of re-entry after deportation.

Any of the foreign nationals arrested during this operation who have active warrants will be referred to the associated local law enforcement agency and ICE will place detainers to ensure they return to ICE custody following disposition of their criminal cases. Those who have outstanding orders of deportation, or who returned to the United States illegally after being deported, are subject to immediate removal from the country. The remaining individuals are in ICE custody awaiting a hearing before an immigration judge, or pending travel arrangements for removal in the near future.

This week’s special enforcement action was spearheaded by ICE’s Fugitive Operations Program, which is responsible for locating, arresting, and removing at large criminal aliens and immigration fugitives — aliens who have ignored final orders of deportation handed down by the nation’s immigration courts. ICE’s Fugitive Operations Teams give top priority to cases involving aliens who pose a threat to national security and public safety, including members of transnational street gangs and child sex offenders. This week’s operation focused on the apprehension of criminal aliens, which are not necessarily fugitives.

The officers who conducted this week’s special operation received substantial assistance from ICE’s Fugitive Operations Support Center (FOSC) located in South Burlington, Vt. The FOSC conducted exhaustive database checks on the targeted cases to help ensure the viability of the leads and accuracy of the criminal histories. The FOSC was established in 2006 to improve the integrity of the data available on at large criminal aliens and immigration fugitives nationwide. Since its inception, the FOSC has forwarded more than 550,000 case leads to ICE enforcement personnel in the field.

This week’s enforcement operation is just one facet of the Department of Homeland Security’s broader strategy to heighten the federal government’s effectiveness at identifying and removing dangerous criminal aliens from the United States. As a result of this strategy, ICE removed a total of 136,126 criminal aliens from the United States last year, a record number.

For more photos from Operation Cross Check, visit the ICE media gallery.

– ICE –

related:

Jury hands down 1st conviction in Newark illegal alien gang massacre

Doolittle’s Raiders

Posted in Announcement, war, wordpress, America, United States, Russia, China, Aviation, Freedom, Foreign Affairs, Military, Japan on April 24th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

DoolittlesRaidersWiki02w400.jpg

This post is dedicated to those who serve.

The Doolittle Tokyo Raiders Association Reunion was held Friday through Saturday, April 16-18, at the U.S. Air Force Museum abeam Wright Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio. There are eight surviving crew members of the 80 who flew on the mission and four attended the reunion, including 88-year-old MSgt. David Thatcher (engineer/gunner - aircraft #7); 90-year-old Lt. Col. Robert Hite (co-pilot of aircraft #16 - the last one off the USS Hornet); 92-year-old Maj. Thomas Griffin (navigator and mission planner - aircraft #9); and 94-year-old Lt. Col. Richard Cole (co-pilot of aircraft #1 - Jimmy Doolittle’s plane).

All four men had numerous public autograph sessions, with hundreds of people in a line snaking through the museum, waiting for every two-hour session. We attended a 45-minute media conference to ask questions and hear their stories on Friday afternoon.

DoolittlesRaidersWiki01w400.jpg

Sixteen B-25B Mitchell bombers were launched from the aircraft carrier USS Hornet deep within enemy waters. The plan called for them to hit military targets in Japan, and land in China. All of the aircraft involved in the bombing were lost and 11 crewmen were either killed or captured. One of these B-25s landed in Soviet territory where its crew remained interned for more than a year. The entire crews of 13 of the 16 aircraft, and all but one of a 14th, returned to the United States or to Allied control. The raid caused little material damage to Japan, but succeeded in its goal of helping American morale. It also caused Japan to withdraw a carrier group from the Indian Ocean to defend their homeland and contributed to Japan’s decision to attack Midway. Up to 250,000 Chinese were killed by Japanese retaliatory measures.

related:

The Official Website of The Doolittle Tokyo Raiders

from the site:
This web site is dedicated to my father, Richard O. Joyce and the other 79 Brave Men whom were in the Doolittle Tokyo Raid.

Securing Loose Nukes: Pander, Promise and Fail

Posted in Terrorism, war, wordpress, North Korea, Nuke, United States, Russia, Britain, China, Iran, 9/11 on April 16th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

Ivy Mike King
President Obama persuaded 46 countries Tuesday to sign on to a plan to put the world’s nuclear material beyond the reach of terrorists within four years, but the commitments are voluntary, and experts said reaching the goal will be difficult.

Let’s be realistic. Even if everyone attending the bomb summit (preceded much earlier by the beer summit and nearly as silly) was sincere four years is a ridiculous timeline. It demonstrates the ‘experts’ view that ‘reaching the goal will be difficult.’ Attendees are either unwilling or unable to account for all their nuke material and secure it. That means it is not going to happen. Hence, the understatement the agreements are voluntary. Likewise for the commentary here describing the affair as silly.

“This is an ambitious goal, and we are under no illusions it will be easy. But the urgency of the threat and the catastrophic consequences of even a single act of nuclear terrorism demand an effort that is at once bold and pragmatic,” Obama said at a news conference.

Betrayed by his own words President Obama once again displays his ignorance or suggests you are buffoon for believing him. The UK Foreign Secretary is no newcomer to bonehead quotes either and he proves it with the following ‘rubbish.’

David Miliband, the British foreign secretary, said Obama’s summit should be seen in a broader context that includes the recent signing of a U.S.-Russia arms-reduction treaty. “What they’ve done is break a culture of cynicism” about nuclear issues, Miliband said.

The Brit wit is wrong again too. In case he missed it President Obama offered Russia a meaningless ‘pact’ that was nothing more than a gesture to pander for support of sanctions on Iran’s nuke program that will accomplish no more than they have to date.

If you read the rest of the WaPo report a long list of senseless commentary from various sources including bomb summit attendees confirms the little get together was worthless. The only worthwhile commentary comes from Senator John Kyl. This blog is no fan of the Senator. But for this particular Senator it is true even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in a while.

“The summit’s purported accomplishment is a nonbinding communique that largely restates current policy and makes no meaningful progress in dealing with nuclear terrorism threats or the ticking clock represented by Iran’s nuclear weapons program,” said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), a prominent critic of Obama’s nuclear policies.

But then, this epiphany from a member of the GOP is not breaking news. Anyone with half a brain can draw the obvious conclusion. Could it be those who are feeling buyer’s remorse in voting for Barack Obama in the 2008 US Presidential election have realized how serious their error was? Probably not and they would likely not admit it publicly anyhow. They bear more responsibility for any damage done by the community organizer than the rest of us. Especially if they continue to deny the danger.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Can’t Turn Back the Nuclear Clock

Posted in Public Affairs, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Politics, Nuke, United States, Russia, China, Iran, obama, hillary, Foreign Affairs, 9/11 on April 7th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

Ivy Mike King

Those seeking to justify their pursuit of nuclear weapons are fond of waxing nostalgic about those who belong to the ‘club’. And of course, mentioning that the US is the only country to have used a nuke in wartime is a favorite of ‘rogue states’. To no one’s surprise they casually omit the fact they might all be speaking German or Japanese or even Russian had the US not entered WWII. Just like the US gets to bear the burden of cleaning up other messes around the world. Something the UN likes to complain about publicly but toast privately while wringing their hands at the thought they should actually live up to their charter.

Enter Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. On the topic of Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons here’s a nice summary excerpt….

‘Our aim is not incremental sanctions, but sanctions that will bite.” Thus did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seek to reassure the crowd at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee two weeks ago about the Obama Administration’s resolve on Iran. Three days later, this newspaper reported on its front page that “the U.S. has backed away from pursuing a number of tough measures against Iran” in order to win Russian and Chinese support for one more U.N. sanctions resolution.

This fits the pattern we have seen across the 14 months of the Obama Presidency. Mrs. Clinton called a nuclear-armed Iran “unacceptable” no fewer than four times in a single paragraph in her AIPAC speech. But why should the Iranians believe her? President Obama set a number of deadlines last year for a negotiated settlement of Iran’s nuclear file, all of which Tehran ignored, and then Mr. Obama ignored them too.

After bowing to other heads of state in his world apology tour while trashing the country he was elected to lead President Obama continues pursuit of his reckless agenda. It could make you wonder who he’s working for? Talking about ‘tough’ sanctions or other means to stop Irans’ nuclear pursuit while caving to Russia and China at the UN will solve nothing.

“Do we have unanimity in the international community? Not yet,” said President Obama. “That is something we have to work on. We think that we are in a much stronger position to get robust sanctions now than we were a year ago, prior to us initiating our strategy.”

The United States has been working to obtain crucial support from China and Russia for a Security Council resolution. Beijing and Moscow have veto power in the council.

But efforts at the United Nations come amid increased concern in the U.S. Congress that Iran might be speeding up efforts to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

Dems in Congress like a deer in the headlights worried about November re-election chances and GOP members dreaming of retaking the majority combined with an inept White House give Iran all it needs to complete their objective. Help from Russia, China and the UN don’t hurt their chances either. While President Obama talks of a nuclear free world. How naive.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

US Scholar Blames Arab Culture for Mideast Violence

Posted in Israel, Terrorism, war, wordpress, Politics, Palestine, Opinion, Foreign Affairs, Islam, Muslim, 9/11 on March 25th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

‘…the Hudson Institute scholar argues that the principle cause of continued violence in the Middle East — and the reason so many peace initiatives have failed — is Arab culture itself.’

There’s a quote to attract your attention. It’s a safe bet Lee Smith, author of ‘Strong Horse: Power, Politics and the Clash of Arab Civilizations’ will not be offered a job in the Obama State Department.

The report offered below was a timely find for presentation with the last post featuring another slur of Israel from the United Nations Secretary General. The view from this blog has typically been the reason for elusive Middle East peace is that no one really wants it. It is as if world powers need conflict among less powerful nations to accommodate their perverse competition. A handy excuse to distance themselves from direct confrontation with each other.

Be that as it may the book by Smith provides a tempting addition to anyone’s reading list. It is refreshing to see a story not blaming Israel or the US for Middle East problems. A few more authors from the Middle East couldn’t hurt. But then speaking out in other parts of the world is much more dangerous than it is here. (the US) At least one American tradition (and contitutional concept) seems to remain intact.

So repeat after me, it’s all the Arabs’ fault.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

from VOA….

Lee Smith says it has always been hard for Americans to understand exactly why peace in the Middle East is so elusive, and why violence and terrorism are so pervasive and persistent in the Arab world.

He says those questions became even more difficult to answer after the 9/11 attacks by a group of Sunni Arab terrorists that killed 3,000 people on American soil, and after the massive U.S. military deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Smith says American academicians and journalists often cite a list of root causes for Middle East turmoil, in which the U.S., the West and Israel usually play a big part: a history of colonialism and economic exploitation, the creation of Israel and American support for the Jewish state, the politics of oil, Western backing of repressive Arab regimes and the U.S. military presence in the region.

‘Culture of Violence’

Smith concedes these are factors in Arab perceptions of the West. But in his new book, “The Strong Horse: Power, Politics and the Clash of Arab Civilizations,” the Hudson Institute scholar argues that the principle cause of continued violence in the Middle East — and the reason so many peace initiatives have failed — is Arab culture itself.

It is a political culture, Smith argues, in which violence has always played a central role. “Of course, it was not America’s hand that blew up mosques in Iraq. It was not the Bush administration that conducted a campaign of terror in Beirut, assassinating Lebanese politicians, journalists and civil society activists,” says Smith. “And the U.S. State Department sentenced no opposition figures, intellectuals, journalists or bloggers to prisons in Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere around the Middle East, where they were subject to torture, rape and murder. It was Arabs who did this to other Arabs.”

Smith believes that is the main lesson American policymakers should learn: that Arabs today are divided against themselves.

“A clash of Arab civilizations; clashes between Arab regimes and their own people, the regimes and their domestic rivals and insurgencies, clashes between Arab regimes themselves,” says Smith. Perhaps most importantly, there is the clash between world views, where on the one hand, there is the democratic and progressive trend embodied in the venerable and still extant tradition of Arab liberalism, and on the other hand, the bloody and violent current represented by far too many of the region’s seminal figures.”

Strong Horse

Smith is an Arabic speaker who moved to Cairo after 9/11 determined to find out what motivated the al-Qaeda attackers. He has spent the past nine years crisscrossing the Middle East in search of the answer. Smith took the title of his book, “The Strong Horse,” from a quote by Osama bin Laden, who said, “When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse.”

Smith believes Arabs are trying to stabilize and strengthen their societies after centuries of Ottoman control, Western colonization and decades of conflict while also looking for that strong horse to lead them out of their troubled past. Faltering Arab states like Yemen, which faces new threats from young, radicalized Muslim insurgents, also need help maintaining the rule of law and exploring democratic pathways to political reform. Smith argues that the United States can and should continue to play that role.

“There is no evidence that the U.S. is any less strong than it has always been. So I think it becomes clear that even if we want to reduce our regional profile, an issue like the Yemen issue makes it clear that this is not possible,” says Smith. “I think the U.S. can certainly be of assistance. I think that one of the things that a ’strong horse’ does is not just punish his enemies but he rewards and protects his friends.”

Struggle for supremacy

Smith sees a clear distinction between the two world views vying for regional supremacy in the Middle East. On the one hand, there is Iran and its allies in the so-called “resistance” block, including Syria, the Palestinian group Hamas and Lebanon’s Hezbollah. And on the other hand, there is the United States and the American-backed Arab regimes, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan.

Smith says the U.S. and its allies cannot afford to lose to the other camp. “It would be very bad for the U.S. and even worse for our allies in the region, because that would affect the political culture of the region to show that resistance ideology has scored a victory and that moderation and compromise are not as successful as resistance ideology,” says Smith. “So it would be a very bad thing for U.S. interests and U.S. allies in the region.”

Smith believes a victory for what he calls “the culture of resistance” would enshrine violence and vengeance as the manner in which all grievances, real and imagined, are routinely addressed.

U.S. role

The author acknowledges that after nine years of large-scale U.S. military involvement in the Middle East, and with the nation’s economic difficulties bearing down on them, many Americans feel the temptation to pull the U.S. strong horse out of the region.

But Lee Smith’s new book concludes that diminishing the American presence in the Middle East at this moment could create dangerous new instabilities that could worsen, not improve, the prospects for peace in the region.

Smith believes that would be especially true in the Arab Gulf states, where the U.S. for decades has ensured the security of the world’s largest oil reserves.

“The Strong Horse: Power, Politics, and the Clash of Arab Civilizations,” by Lee Smith, is published by Knopf Doubleday.

UN Chief Blames Israeli Blockade for Suffering in Gaza

Posted in Israel, Terrorism, war, wordpress, disclosure, ethics, U.N., Palestine, Opinion, Foreign Affairs on March 24th, 2010 by Stanford Matthews

What a surprise this is. Imagine that. The UN Secretary General is condemning Israel. Can anyone point to a UN condemnation of the Palestinians or Hamas or Hezbollah or al-Qaeda etc., etc.?

It is amazing that such a tiny place, Israel, surrounded by a massive geography of unfriendly neighbors is so often characterized as the sole problem for unrest in the Middle East.

Maybe the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, could try something new. How about pointing to the activities of others involved with unrest in the Middle East rather than simply single out Israel?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

from VOA….

As a result of the blockade, residents have been unable to rebuild thousands of homes destroyed by Israel during three-week Israeli war on Gaza in 2008 and 2009.

Luis Ramirez

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has made a visit to the Gaza Strip and repeated his condemnation of the blockade. Meanwhile, international efforts to get Israelis and Palestinians back to negotiations are stepping up.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon came the region to press Israelis and Palestinians to return to negotiations. On Sunday, while visiting the Gaza Strip, he condemned Israel for the blockade it and Egypt have on the enclave.

“I have repeatedly made it quite clear to Israel’s leaders that the Israeli policy of closure is not sustainable and that it is wrong,” Mr. Ban said. “It poses unacceptable suffering of human beings. This policy is also counterproductive. It undercuts moderates and empowers extremists.”

Israel has imposed a blockade since the 2007 violent takeover of the Strip by the militant group Hamas. Israeli officials say their restrictions on cement and other construction materials are meant to prevent Hamas from building bunkers to attack Israel.

As a result of the blockade, residents have been unable to rebuild the thousands of homes that were destroyed during Israel’s war on militants in 2008 and 2009.

While in the region, Ban has criticized Israel’s construction of settlements on lands it occupies in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

On Sunday, he appealed for Israel and the Palestinians to agree on a prisoner exchange that would result the in the release of Palestinian prisoners and the liberation by Hamas of kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

Speaking at a Cabinet meeting, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his government will not restrict building in East Jerusalem. The move puts Mr. Netanyahu further at odds with the United States, just before he is due to leave for a visit to Washington this week.

The prime minister said that from Israel’s point of view, building in Jerusalem is like building in Tel Aviv. He said he has made this clear to the U.S. administration. Mr. Netanyahu said that in upcoming indirect talks with the Palestinians, each side can present its position. He said he will make Israel’s position clear during his visit to the American capital.

Israel has not complied with U.S. calls for it to cancel the approval of 1,600 new housing units in a Jewish settlement of East Jerusalem, which the Palestinians claim as the capital of their future state.

The Palestinians have said they will not return to talks until Israel stops all settlement activity.

Special U.S. envoy George Mitchell is returning the region to push along efforts for both sides to start indirect negotiations.