Haditha charges dropped against top Marine officer

By Dan Whitcomb 27 minutes ago

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A military judge on Tuesday dismissed the case against the highest-ranking U.S. Marine charged in the killing of 24 Iraqi civilians at Haditha, whittling down the list of those who must still face justice for the 2005 incident to just the accused ringleader.

Military Judge Col. Steven Folsom dropped all charges against Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, who was accused of violating a lawful order and dereliction of duty, at a hearing at the Camp Pendleton Marine base in Southern California.

Folsom's decision means that, out of eight Marines originally charged in December 2006, six have won dismissals of their charges and one has been cleared at court martial.

"We hope its over. We believe it should be over," attorney Brain Rooney said.

The reports brought international condemnation on U.S. troops in Iraq and famously inspired Rep. John Murtha, a Democrat from Pennsylvania and critic of the war, to charge that the Marines had killed the civilians "in cold blood."

Defense attorneys said the civilians died during a pitched battle with insurgents in and around Haditha that followed the death of Terrazas.

Rooney said that the fact that seven of the eight Marines had been cleared or no longer faced charges proved that the events at Haditha were "not the massacre that Time magazine and John Murtha made it out to be."

"We've had to go through a two-year process to prove what we knew from the beginning," he said. "You need to trust what your battlefield commanders are telling you and give them the benefit of the doubt."

The nightmare of Haditha has finally unraveled and is ending. Eight US Marines were charged with killing 24 civilians in Haditha almost two years ago. Actually, they were charged with and being prosecuted for the cold blooded murder of 24 civilians in Haditha. And if the media reports and the sentiments of those like Rep. John Murtha and others had prevailed, they would have been convicted and sentenced to prison or worse two years ago.

But now two years after the fact and after all the heralded headlines of Marine murderers and John Murtha's own private crusade of trial by public opinion, justice has finally prevailed. Charges against all but one Marine have been summarily dismissed at courts martial.

No banner headlines across the media today. No welcome home or thank you acclamations from a grateful nation. Just  the escape of certain unjust punishment for seven of those who shared the immutable belief that they had served their country and risked their lives for a worthy cause. Now, those seven can return to their own private lives and their own private hell. Shamed and bloodied for having had the unbridled courage and the fool hardy temerity, to believe that their country and their Corps actually supported their efforts and their sacrifices on behalf of this nation.

Many people speak of the terror and agony of combat. And of how it affects the psyche of men for the rest of their lives. Some call it post traumatic stress disorder. But what do you call a betrayal of faith and confidence by the service and the country that you served. Or the injury inflicted when your nation brands you a murderer up front, then slowly works it's way toward the truth. Is there a medical diagnosis for that or an identified service connect disability condition? What about a treatment. Can you restore a man's self pride, his honor or his feelings of honor and duty, after he has  been publicly shamed by his own country and vilified by those in the media and the US Congress? Those who had been all to eager to strip away his rights and condemn him of a crime for eternity, are now deafeningly silent.

I lived through it thirty six years ago. My own private anguish over why did those who had placed me in such a circumstance, turn their back on me and belittle me when I came home from fighting for them. For having done no more than serving my country and performing my duty, I was vilified, shamed and accused of the unspeakable. Thankfully, many like myself learned to deal with the lack of respect and the lack of appreciation and the snide remarks and the sneers. We simply moved on with our lives and learned to shy away from any discussion of that period of our lives and service. But the wound remained. As it will always remain.

The Marine Corps has gotten it right to this point. They have examined the scurrilous accusations and the lack of any substantive evidence against these Marines and dismissed the charges against seven of them, first brought to the fore front by an Army general in theater tow years ago. Someone who obviously had either his own appeasement agenda to fulfill, or was seeking some political career enhancement at the expense of the truth. There now remains only one Marine to stand court martial for crimes alleged at Haditha. My prayers are with him.  May justice prevail for him also and let it be quickly.

Semper Fidelis
 

Drill, But Not in ANWR Says McCain

Always a maverick, GOP presumptive presidential candidate John McCain is calling for new energy policies that are sure to both please and stymie his Republican base.

“The price of oil is too high, and the supply of oil too uncertain,” McCain said in a speech in Houston Tuesday afternoon.

John McCain may see himself as a maverick, but he had better start seeing himself as those he is courting for their votes see him. Placating and appeasing those who would see America become more dependent on foreign oil, is as bad as placating and appeasing those who would stand idly by while America is attacked by these same forces in the middle east once again.

While hard-line conservatives may be unhappy McCain would not pursue exploration in ANWR, a Rasmussen poll released Tuesday found this position would please most Americans. According to the poll, 67 percent of Americans supported drilling for energy off the coasts of California, Florida and other states. Only 18 percent disagreed and 15 percent were undecided.

In my opinion, Mark Twain said it best when he said "there are lies, there are damn lies and there are statistics." I feel the same way as it concerns polls. Polls like statistics, purposely skew the result by means of structuring of the questions toward the desired result.

If John McCain truly wants to get his fingers on the pulse of the nation, he first needs to look at some of his long held positions on issues like illegal immigration, and his coziness with the liberal socialist left. Then he needs to put down the push polls and the media driven politics and begin truly connecting with the American people.

Then he needs to get out and start meeting the people in the heartland and all across this nation. Stop talking so much John and start listening and thinking about what the people are saying! That is where the secret to success or failure for your candidacy lies. Right now, McCain's odds of getting elected in comparison to Obama, are somewhere between dead even to less than even.

He has to overcome that thin separation and begin to truly drive the wedges that will improve his odds significantly between now and November. And he can only do that by listening to the people while revealing Obama as the weak and manipulated candidate of socialist extremist left that he truly is.

As it concerns the war in Iraq, the common recurring phrase is that no options are off the table. Yet every time there is a discussion of oil and the dire future that Americans are facing, caveats are immediately inserted into the political conversations nationally to take common sense off the table. And if John McCain doesn't abandon that premise and begin talking to the people and actually practicing straight talk, he will find himself on the losing end come November.

Obama has already provided more than enough disparity of comparison, to make McCain's campaign the more sensible and reasoned position for those who truly care about the future of their country. But McCain continues to hedge and to want to wear the moderate mantle of supposed bipartisanship.

These are extreme times that we live in. Times that call for forceful and determined leadership. Not times where moderation and the politics of political correctness should govern or control the fate of this country. In the past, those who answered the call were called statesman. Being a statesman isn't an easy calling. One has to abandon much of the party rhetoric and pursue common sense to be a statesman. And be willing to suffer the slings and arrows in the media for having made the choice to dump politics and pursue the truth.

Barack Obama has the market cornered on the politically correct appeasement mentality of socialist relativism in this election. I say let him run with it.  The young and the ill informed and those who have spent a lifetime hating their country will revel (as they already have) at the opportunity to see America diminished and weakened. But the America that actually provides the momentum and thrust and the America that has moved this country to the leadership position that it has enjoyed for the better part of the last 100 years, won't buy into that soft pedaled populist crapola.

They know what makes the world turn and who is responsible. And they are firmly prepared to vote that conscience come November. But they are not prepared to compromise their safety and future on anyone who cannot buck up and get the job done.

We have lived through and witnessed what the lack of determination  and commitment to our future has provided over the last four years. Americans, especially conservative Americans want and expect more than that. The liberal left likes to point bony fingers and cast spells of name calling, as if that is going to sway the minds of the informed majority.

McCain is neither "Bush light or McSame." But his present stand on issues such as illegal immigration and pursuing American oil resources casts him as Obama light and McBlame to many conservative American voters. He either has to address that perception and change his commitment to the American people, or he had better be prepared to live with the consequences of having lost this election.

AP to meet with blogging group to form guidelines

Monday June 16, 6:29 pm ET
By Seth Sutel, AP Business Writer

AP and blogging group to discuss possible standards for quoting AP news stories online

NEW YORK (AP) -- The Associated Press, following criticism from bloggers over an AP assertion of copyright, plans to meet this week with a bloggers' group to help form guidelines under which AP news stories could be quoted online.

As the Church Lady on SNL might say...."isn't that special."

In the world of cyberspace, blogging has become the new frontier of information exchange. Formally known as news and the reporting of same. Those with an opinion and the ability to write, have significantly altered the way news is both reported and perceived by millions of Americans. Matt Drudge broke the ground twelve years ago, with his reporting of the Monica Lewinski affair and Bill Clinton. Mainstream media denied the stories for weeks, but in the end they were forced to admit that there was a story and that they had known about it for weeks before Drudge broke the news to the little people being stiffed by mainstream media.

With that said, most bloggers aren't news hounds or reporters. They are just average everyday people, with a penchant for examining what they see and read and what is dished out to them as the official version by the supposed legitimate media. They then form their own opinions and perspectives of what they have observed and comment on them for themselves. Often times pulling together several comparative sources of the same event and available information to make the points of their own observations.

The fact that the AP and others have their collective panties in their crack over supposed copyright infringement is more of a smoke screen than a genuine concern of lost or stolen intellectual property. The Fair Use doctrine has four basic tests as it concerns utilizing the authorship of others in your own writing. But the prima facie case made in most sustained violations of the doctrine, is that the user was either using the authorship of another, to make profit or the user was purposely misrepresenting the representation of ideas of the original author.

As a rule in the blogosphere (as is the case here in my minuscule little orbit), there is absolutely no profit involved. Only the publishing of obscure opinions concerning news and events and a limited readership. As is the case here.  When I reference an article or opinion that I am commenting on, I always attribute the original author and the link to their work. Therefore if anything, I am increasing the readership of the author's work and exposing  at least a few more people to what they have to say about the world, while I am commenting about their intellectual spin on the world.

But the AP and others want to set limits on what can be attributed or used in the commentary world of cyberspace and blogs. I wonder? Is there a sincere interest  on their part concerning fair use, or is there a sincere concern that their authorships will remain in tact and not inappropriately quoted or skewed? Or are they more concerned that their collective intellectual products will be scrutinized and taken to task for their own skewed representations and misrepresentations of facts, not to mention the truth. Or is it about the money. In my opinion, it is always about the money. As is the case with Drudge. He went from obscurity to the lime light and consequently he is now a very wealthy man. Or more appropriately considered...."a competitor."

The move by the AP to attempt to regulate the internet and blogs by mutual agreement between them and their antagonists, is comparable with the creation of the Church of Rome, after it became apparent to the Romans that they couldn't stamp out the spread of Christianity.

It's an age old problem really. The words that reach the people's eyes and ears must be controlled and filtered. Or else there is no control of thought and their is no faith in the church of media.

Illegals Haunt McCain, read the full article

This article was published last month, but it speaks directly to the reality of John McCain's deafness, when it comes to  listening to conservative Americans. There is a wide breadth of the republican party that remains as inextricably entrenched in their position on illegal immigration, as McCain appears in his reluctance to listen to them.

Not a lot has changed in John McCain's position of a year ago, as it concerns illegal immigration and immigration reform. Since then and during the campaign and debates, McCain when pressed, quickly stated that he had heard the concerns of Americans and understood that a secure border was their first priority. However, when you listen closely to his couched words after that concession, he appears to remain just as committed to securing unfettered access and legality for illegal immigrants as he has always been. And that is obvious once again in the article referenced above as it concerns his intentions for use of more federal dollars to support them.

In my opinion, John McCain believes that his embrace of (finishing the job in Iraq) is the only real issue that concerns his liberal supporters and potential "moderate" voters. Combined with the bounce that he is anticipating from displeased Clinton supporters, McCain appears of a mind that he doesn't need the conservatives of the republican party to win the presidency. I believe that John McCain feels that the GOP has morphed into some form of  bipartisan moderate political entity and he sees himself as the new standard bearer for the republican campaign toward future moderacy.

But I am afraid that John McCain is sadly mistaken in his read of the temperament of the electorate that matters. I believe that he is going to be not only surprised but embarrassed come November. Unless some quantum shift occurs in public opinion, as it concerns his represented policies and intentions. Especially in comparison to the momentum that Barack Obama has and is building daily.

John McCain is in my opinion, as out of touch with the pulse of conservative voters, as the party was twelve years ago, when they gave the nomination to Bob Dole. A nice man and someone who's record and service was admirable. But not the right man or the right candidate to take on the current champion of the committed left.  And not enough to stir the soul of a majority of the American electorate, to take a chance on someone they never really liked to begin with.

CHICAGO — A lawmaker says U.S. taxpayers are being bilked to the tune of millions of dollars by a biofuel subsidy that helps to lower gas prices in Europe, and he's leading the charge to close the apparent loophole.

CHICAGO —  A lawmaker says U.S. taxpayers are being bilked to the tune of millions of dollars by a biofuel subsidy that helps to lower gas prices in Europe, and he's leading the charge to close the apparent loophole.

“In 2007 this subsidy cost the American taxpayer $300 million, and it’s projected to cost the American taxpayers $600 million next year,” said Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz.

The scam — as Shadegg and others call it — is known as “splash and dash.” It stems from an existing $1 subsidy for every gallon of biodiesel fuel blended with regular diesel in the United States.

Here’s how it works:

Biodiesel is produced abroad using South American sugar cane or Asian palm oil and shipped to the United States, where it’s blended with just a “splash” of regular diesel.

A typical tanker-load of about 9 million gallons of biodiesel requires just 9,000 gallons of American diesel to make it qualify for the subsidy. But every gallon in the shipment garners a buck. The ship then makes a “dash” for Europe, where its fuel is sold below market rates.

That means each tanker-load that makes the dash nets importers about $9 million dollars in tax credits from the IRS. Lawmakers have estimated its cost to Americans at tens — or even hundreds — of millions each year.

Here is yet another example of how trade agreements and loopholes built into our system by congress, screws Americans and benefits others. This is a tragic example of the manipulation of our system and the manner in which Americans have been blinded by what their congress is actually doing.. Especially in light of the fact that Americans are paying between $460 and $5.50 a gallon right now for the diesel that they buy at the pump.

In Washington, financial speculators have a fat target on their backs.

They are being blamed for high gasoline prices, soaring grocery bills and volatile commodity markets, and lawmakers are lashing out at market regulators for not cracking down on them more vigorously.

"You study it, but you don't act against this incredible increase in speculation," Senator Carl Levin complained to a senior official of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission at a recent Senate hearing. "Unless the CFTC is going to act against speculation, we don't have a cop on the beat."

America must not hang a sign on its commodity markets saying "no speculators allowed," he said. "There is a difference between speculation and excessive speculation." But Congress has to "define and legislate that definition better," he added. "We can't just say, as Justice Potter Stewart once said of pornography, that we know it when we see it."

Those are the opening and ending paragraphs from an article outlining what is wrong with the present commodities market in America and how these unregulated influences are driving and influencing the price of oil and other commodities and propelling inflation. But the reality goes much farther in my mind. And as I heard Dick Morris explain tonight on Hannity & Colmes, the reality is an unrestrained  market fraught with speculators, that is what is really causing the runaway rise in the cost of gasoline at the pump as well as the rise in other consumables.

According to Morris' explanation, prior to 1999 the major investment companies like Goldman Sachs, had less than seven billion dollars in annual investment in the oil and petroleum commodities market. Today, those investments have risen to over two hundred billion. And unlike stock trading where stock futures can be obtained with fifty percent capital invested by the buyer, commodities only require a five percent investment of up front capital to buy large quantities of futures on the commodities market.

Goldman Sachs and other investment groups, are the ones along with large American and European banks who have taken a beating in the home mortgage collapse of the last year. These same entities also took a beating ten years ago, when the dot.com investment bubble burst. Therefore their answer, was to begin speculating in the commodities market. Everything from oil, to currency, to wheat and corn. Buy low now, hope for a cooperative media to spread fear and panic, then sell for a big profit later and repeat the process. That's the game.

Recently, there have been several congressional investigations both launched and called for, to look into the unregulated trading currently going on in the commodities futures market. Dick Morris (former political analyst and campaign manager for Bill Clinton) says that the way to regulate the markets and prevent further speculation and also stop what is going on now, is to first revert back to limiting those involved in oil speculation, to only those directly involved in the petroleum industry. Specifically, restrict futures speculation back to where it was before deregulation in 1999. Which involved only the oil companies and not the investment bankers.

Second, raise the level of initial investment capital required to invest in commodities from 5% to 50%, where it is comparable to the stock market and requires far more risk for the investor.  I have to agree.  The key to lowering the price of gasoline at the pump, rests not with taxing the oil companies further or wind fall profit thefts by a liberal controlled congress. It rests with regulation of the markets by law and the ability to prevent these present provocateurs, from bleeding the American people into a real depression.

Neal Boortz

From the Neal Boortz Page  June 12, 2008 12:11:32 PM

THE DEMOCRATS JUMP

John McCain made an appearance on the Today Show where he made the statement that it's "not too important" when the U.S. troops return from Iraq.  Naturally, the Barack Obama campaign and other Democrats have jumped at this chance to paint McCain as a senile war monger.

For those of you who actually care, here is the quote in context ... Matt Lauer asked John McCain that if the surge strategy in Iraq is working, does he have a better estimate of when American forces will return home.  Here's McCain's full response:

"No, but that's not too important. What's important is the casualties in Iraq, Americans are in South Korea, Americans are in Japan, American troops are in Germany. That's all fine. American casualties and the ability to withdraw; we will be able to withdraw. General [David] Petraeus is going to tell us in July when he thinks we are ... But the key to it is that we don't want any more Americans in harm's way. That way, they will be safe, and serve our country and come home with honor and victory, not in defeat, which is what Senator Obama's proposal would have done. I'm proud of them. And they're doing a great job. And we are succeeding and it's fascinating that Senator Obama still doesn't realize that."

So now what do you think?  Is this going to be another one of those "John McCain says that we are going to be in Iraq for 100 years!" moment?  Probably so.  The fact of the matter is that John McCain respects our troops and believes in our mission.  Compare that to Barack Obama who holds the military in complete disdain and wants them to shamefully withdraw immediately from Iraq.

By the way ... reports are that the Iraqi defense forces are doing such a good job of  containing the insurgency that American troops are quickly being relegated to a peacekeeper role. 

Bottom line?  Success in Iraq is bad for Democrats.  Don't ever forget that.

No Neal, It's going to be another one of those "McCain doesn't really care about the troops" moments. The democrats, will lay these comments right along side McCain's recent vote in opposition to the GI Bill legislation. Never mind that the democrats had tons of pork in that bill.

And aside from completely turning his back on the conservatives of the party, John McCain continues to blunder and blunder badly when it comes to his own version of moderate appeasement mentality.

McCain reminds me of of a cross between Elmer Fudd and granpa Amos McCoy when he speaks in front of people. Obama will make hash out of him in either these proposed town hall meetings or the scheduled debates. And for the record? I am not an Obama supporter or one of the "Branch Deaniacs." I am a life long republican and remain a committed conservative.

 I cannot believe that this is the best that the GOP can offer as a candidate for president of the United States.

Read the Entire: Bush Awards Medal of Freedom to Donna Shalala... Here

According to a White House press release (Update II, below), President Bush has awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to a woman who did her best to stamp out freedom of speech while chancellor of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Donna Shalala (NYT account, which incorrectly claims she's president of Hunter College, although she left in 1987)). And she's still at it today at the University of Miami, where she serves as president.

Shalala is the farthest to the left and most controversial of all President-elect Clinton's Cabinet appointments. The university's famed Madison campus, where she is chancellor, 'has become the epicenter of political correctness,' according to education expert Checker Finn. Critics in the academic community label her the 'queen of PC' – giving first priority to what is politically correct by liberal standards. She is a pillar in the administration's Hillary wing, succeeding her good friend Mrs. Clinton as head of the Children's Defense Fund.

Shalala's record provides no grounds for challenging her fitness to run HHS. It does challenge the authenticity of Bill Clinton's self-portrait as a centrist Democrat turning his party's course back to the middle of the road.

This is just another example of how Bush continues to attempt to placate the liberals in Washington. And it is yet another entry on the growing list of why President Bush will be remembered as a failure at managing his party and obtaining meaningful conservative leadership in Washington.

Robert Novak's email newsletter June 11, 2008

1. We cannot find anyone in Democratic ranks who honestly feels there is any chance that Sen. Hillary Clinton will become Sen. Barack Obama's running mate. There are Democrats who feel for that reason that it would be a good idea if Obama makes a choice for Vice President as quickly as possible to get the unhappy reaction from Clinton's female voters over as quickly as possible.
   
   
2. The eight-point bump in the polls for Obama after clinching the nomination is just about what would be expected and is unlikely to be permanent. A much more serious problem for McCain is the extraordinary lack of enthusiasm for him in Republican ranks even though he is the party's best bet in a down year for the GOP. It is clear now that, during the four months since McCain clinched the Republican nomination, he has failed to consolidate his base.
   
   
3. The response from McCain insiders is that the campaign depicting Obama as a leftist, in his past and now, will bring around the Republican troops. That may well solidify conservative support for McCain, but a negative campaign by itself always has difficulty in building genuine enthusiasm.

Novak says what many people are thinking. Hillary Clinton has a snow ball's chance of getting the VP nod in my opinion. And Obama will move quickly to wrap up his choice of VP nominee. Mean while John McCain has done absolutely nothing since winning the republican nomination, to even approach the republican conservative base, much less to attempt to win them over. And he appears as if it doesn't matter to him, whether those who elected both Bush's and Reagan matter to him at all.

At best, he has ignored them and went on about his campaign, as if he believes that his message alone will carry him into the White House. In my opinion, a brave new reality will be revealed to John McCain come November. The votes that he is seemingly counting on from Hillary Clinton supporters, those who he believes will abandon Obama because of their anger over Hillary not getting the nomination, probably won't materialize in the numbers that he thinks they will come November.

Neither will the perceived moderates of the republican party, that McCain seems to think will replace the votes of conservatives that he is ignoring. The votes that McCain seems to think he has, won't be enough to beat back the ground swell of support that Obama is building heading into the convention and the election.

And the worst possible thing that McCain can do between now and the election, is to attempt to have ten town hall meetings with Obama. Obama is a polished speaker, with a charismatic message. McCain comes off stiff and abrupt, with flashes of anger and he appears in public, to possess all the political savvy of Elmer Fudd. McCain will lose those head to head comparisons between him and Obama in town hall meetings across the board in my opinion.

There will be many conservative republicans as a result of McCain's record and actions and refusal to embrace conservatism, who will opt to not vote this time around. Either that, or they will write in a candidate who represents their concerns and ideals and who actually listened to them.

U.S. troops serving in Iraq may be getting more letters during mail call, but they won't be care packages — one group is sending them letters and DVDs claiming 9/11 was an “inside job” and that they should rethink why they’re fighting.

Group Plans to Send Letters to Troops in Iraq on How U.S. Government Planned 9/11

This speaks to the complete and diabolical madness of some people in this country. And to the extremes some people will go to, to have their five minutes of fame. It is one thing to harbor bizarre and deranged perspectives of reality, but to attempt to impose those ideological and deranged fantasies on soldiers and marines serving in a war zone, is just plain wrong.

American military personnel have access to most media that other Americans have access to. And with the age of satellites and the Internet, they can even communicate instantly with friends and family back home.

I just hope this jerk is proud of himself. But more importantly, I hope that more than a few of our service men and women, will take the time to send this crap back to him and enclose a personal message directing him to place his head back up his backside, along with his conspiracy theories where both belongs.

 

U.S. Court Orders Deportation of Former Nazi Guard Living in Pennsylvania

I came across this article today and it set me to wondering. My first thought was "when is enough enough?" I am quite aware of the atrocities carried out by the Nazi's during WWII. As I am also aware of the efforts began, by Simon Wiesenthal  over the last sixty plus years, to bring those to justice who were involved in the Nazi holocaust.

But there comes a time when the efforts of the Nazi hunters, becomes nothing more than a self fulfilling prophesy and justification for existence in my opinion.

The holocaust should never be forgotten. What Hitler and Nazism did to the face of Europe is despicable beyond comprehension. But are we still actually looking to find Nazi war criminals and those directly responsible for mass genocide during the holocaust? Or are we just looking to prosecute and persecute all who were alive and in the uniform of Nazi Germany during the 1940's.

Geiser, an ethnic German, served as an armed SS Death's Head guard at Sachsenhausen concentration camp near Berlin. He then was transferred to an SS officer training camp at Arolsen, where he escorted prisoners to and from the Buchenwald camp, where tens of thousands of Jews and others were exterminated. Geiser was at Arolsen until April 1945.

The most recently accused, Anton Geiser is 83 years old now. Which means that he was at best 17 or 18 years old, when he was conscripted into Hitler's army to serve as a guard at Sachsenhausen concentration camp, while assigned to Arolsen SS officer training.   The fact that he served as a guard at Sachsenhausen while attending training and never did more than escort prisoners is apparently a moot point.  Sachsenhausen  was a camp built primarily for the detention of political prisoners according to it's history. It held mostly Russians and was not a death camp where Jews were interred for genocide.

The Russians even used it to inter their own political prisoners for over five years after the war ended. later Geiser was assigned at Buchenwald, another of the Nazi's camps not intended for mass extermination of the Jews. that should have some evidentiary bearing on the fact that Geiser was not involved with the holocaust.

But facts and history mean little, to those who pursue vengeance against all who once wore the Nazi uniform.

It's a matter of perspectives I suppose, but perspectives should not operate in a vacuum of more than sixty three years after the fact and be allowed to discount wholesale, all relevant facts. Especially when those perspectives are allowed to exist outside the realm of reasoned judgment and justice.

America allowed a large number of Germans to immigrate to this country after the war. And many of them turned out to be war criminals. Those who had actually been involved in the extermination of Jews and other enemies of the German Nazi regime. And those war criminals have been uncovered and dealt with through the years. As they should have been. Well most of them anyway.

A notable name that comes to my mind, is Wernher Von Braun. History only pays a passing fancy to the fact that he was the father of German rocketry and as a result, he was directly responsible for the deaths of thousands, as a result of his creations of V1 and V2 rockets.

But he had a lot to offer the united States and it's own fledgling rocketry program. Without Von Braun, Neil Armstrong probably wouldn't have walked on the moon. And the moon might still just be something to stare up at and wonder about. Von Braun took us there. But at what price.

Von Braun gave us of his expertise and in exchange, we conveniently overlooked his past transgressions and the fact that he was one of the highest ranking Germans in the service of Adolph Hitler. And his tenure in the service of Adolph Hitler undoubtedly included the deaths of countless Americans during WWII at the hand of Von Braun's rockets.  America and the world forgave and discounted the history of many Germans who had both secrets and science to barter. But the lowly of the soldiers of the German Reich, were left to be fugitives and live in fear of righteous revenge for the remainder of their lives.

Anton Geiser is one of those soldiers. And with no record of doing no more than having been a soldier on the wrong side. A man who fled his past and surely his own guilt of association, not unlike thousands of other Germans after the war. None the less he came to this country and made an honest life for himself. He married and raised a family and retired as a respected citizen of his adopted country.

Only now to find himself charged and found guilty by association, with the most despicable part of the twentieth century. And what will be gained by the deportation and prosecution of this man? Aside from the pain caused to him and his family, by his being separated and thrust into a prison cell, to live out what little life he has left.

America is a bigger hearted and more forgiving country than that. At least I use to think and believe that. But not now. Not with our politically correct rushes to judgment and secular perspectives of social justice.  America has become IMO, what Anton Geiser is being prosecuted and persecuted for having been a victim of. America has become a place where going along with the crowd, is safe ground. And those who know their place, don't take exception to the cultural mandates of what is accepted and approved actions or thinking. Too many Americans just go along with the populist view and hope that by being one of the crowd of many, there is less of a chance for them to be singled out for scrutiny or social judgment or worse.

Yes, I asked myself. "When is enough enough"? And the answer that came back to me was never. Not when our society is governed and controlled, by the populist belief that all protected classes are victims, and those who are not among the protected classes are the real enemies of the state.  

 

 

 

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush has signed an executive order requiring contractors and others who do business with the federal government to make sure their employees can legally work in the U.S.

Once again, President Bush is what I call a day late and a dollar short. This bill would have gone a long way to address the reality of illegal immigration and illegal Mexican labor in this country seven years ago.

It would have even placed President Bush on firm ground with his conservative supporters that elected him, had he pushed for this initiative at any time during his first term. But his failed polices in dealing with our open borders and unenforced immigration policy, has only soured in the mouths of republicans and conservatives all across America.

And aside from the bad taste that it has left in their mouths, it has hardened their resolve to see something other than partisan lip service paid to the problem.

From the beginning of the recently concluded primary process, the number one issue of concern to many Americans, has been what will Washington do about the unchecked flood of illegal Mexicans entering this country every day.

However, the media immediately sought to over shadow any issue before the public, that didn't adhere to the preferred media propelled mantra, that "the war in Iraq" was the primary issue of concern to most Americans.

The president's surge policy initiated last summer in Iraq and prosecuted originally by General Petraeus has all but silenced the critics of the war during this election season. As it has proven that there is an end now in sight. But the issue of illegal immigration was purposely kept on the fringe of  American's radar by the media.

When the "dogs of war" continually pushed by the media ceased to hunt as an issue in the coming election, the next move by collective media was to highlight and profile the democratic candidates proposals to address supposed affordable health care and the economy. Meanwhile the concerns of many Americans concerning illegal immigration and it's influences on our safety and economy, not to mention it's burden on our health care system and social services programs nation wide fell on deaf ears.

Now that the party candidates have been decided, the new looming issue of this campaign, is the rising cost of gasoline at the pump. Regardless of the media's desire to change focus, the American people are feeling the pain at the pump and in the pocket book. And this is an issue that will not be pushed aside by either the media or the present hopeful candidates of either party. Or anyone that hopes to occupy the Oval Office come January.

Illegal aliens cost America a collective cost in excess, of 130 BILLION dollars annually.  But right now, that will rightly take a  back seat to the more pressing matters of $4.00 a gallon gasoline, headed to $4.50 a gallon or higher  this summer.

In my opinion, this was a nice try President Bush, but it was too little too late.  The American people will revisit this issue with the newly elected president next spring. And in the meantime, the high cost of fuel and it's impact on our economy seems to be accomplishing that which Washington couldn't.

The combined effects of the costs of gasoline and diesel and the loss of jobs due to a floundering economy and rising inflation, has led to a realization amongst many Illegal Mexicans. They have concluded that without jobs and an easy way for them to make a living, that staying in America just isn't cost effective.

Isn't that precisely what we have been trying to tell Washington for the past eight years?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has made quite a splash in the last few days. Traveling to the middle east and to Syria, Speaker Pelosi made headlines again yesterday, by having tendered a supposed peace proposal to the Syrians, on behalf of the Israelis.

Only for the Israeli Prime Minister to have to later clarify? That he had neither tendered any such proposal, nor directed US Speaker of the House Pelosi to deliver it to the Syrians.

But in all fairness? Speaker Pelosi has a larger problem concerning her trip to Syria. Aside from the fact that the president and the White House deplored her decision to travel to Syria? Speaker Pelosi committed a felony by her actions there. And she probably committed another felony by her subsequent actions involving messages to the Syrians, supposedly from the Israelis.

But all is well in the realm of 'looking glass and rabbit hole' politics of the 21st. century liberal elitist. No charges will be filed for Speaker Pelosi's wanton and intentional disregard of US law. Specifically the 'Logan Act.' (See below)

The act, set out in 1799, that is was a felony for 'anyone' to attempt discourse or diplomacy with any foreign government, if they were specifically not authorized to act in such a capacity by the president of the United States.

But precedent has already been established on such matters. John Kerry? He negotiated with the North Vietnamese thirty five years ago. In France and for the ultimate defeat of America in Vietnam. And John Kerry? Wasn't even a member of congress or the senate at that time. He was just an American (defeatist) activist.

Which is precisely what Nancy Pelosi is today. With the exception that she is a member of congress and the chosen Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Jefferson and Payne and many others, must surely be spinning in their graves.

Logan Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Logan Act is a United States federal law that forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. It was passed in 1799 and last amended in 1994.[1]

Passed under the administration of President John Adams during tension between the U.S. and France, it was named for Dr. George Logan of Pennsylvania, who engaged in semi-negotiations with France during the Quasi-War.

[edit] Text of the law

    § 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.

    Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

    This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

18 U.S.C. § 953 (2004).

[edit] References

 

For the past two weeks, the world has once again been entertained by the musings of Iran and their lunatic regime. After seizing fifteen British seaman and marines on the high seas, we have all watched in daily anticipation, for the newest pearls of wisdom  to flow from Persia.

And today? We learn that the Iranian president (Imsoinsane) has decided in his unlimited benevolence? To release them back to their countrymen. As an act of good faith and in recognition of the birthday of the prophet.

So the world is right once again. The media even stepped up and began to actually acknowledge them as 'captives' today. After Armedijad stated that they were captives. Isn't that special. The media in general has refused to call them anything but 'captured' up to this point. And heaven forbid that anyone other than Fox News, actually refer to them as what they were. Which was hostages.

Now we will see how the little drama plays out over the next few days and weeks. Will America release the five Iranians? The revolutionary Guard members that we captured in Iraq? Probably. And the Brits and Tony Blair will tender gracious thanks to the Iranians for letting their people live and releasing them. And within a month, Blair will lay out their plans to completely withdraw all UK forces from the region.

So the Iranians got just what they were after. They terrorized and intimidated the already weakened and running scared British. And the final act of that reality, will be when Blair announces that the UK has bigger fish to fry than staying any longer in Iraq. He will probably make some stunning announcement about British plans to address global warming and his intentions to do more about AIDS in Africa.

Meanwhile? The Islamic renegade regime in Iran becomes more emboldened and the rest of the middle east simply bides it's time, until Iran succeeds in producing multiple nuclear warheads for the coming war with Israel and the west.

And Nancy Pelosi? She's hobnobbing and high five'in the Syrians today. She has already asserted that she thinks that the problems of the middle east can be resolved with simple dialog and her added presence their to act as a calming effect on the savage beast? Can't be anything but a positive and calming presence.

Meanwhile, house democrats have directed that terms like the 'global war on terror 'be stricken from further use, in budgetary meetings and appropriations bills etc. So maybe by the time Nancy returns from her middle east junket? She will have a signed treaty that she can waive at the cameras. Like Neville Chamberlain once did..

I know I can't wait.