KENNEDY FAMILY FRIEND AND FELLOW MILLIONAIRE TO CHALLENGE LIEBERMAN IN PRIMARY

Memeorandom links to a DAILY KOS article saying that NED LAMONT will challenge Joe Lieberman for the Democrat party's nominatuion for the US Senate from Ct. LAMONT IS A MILLIONAIRE (a pre-requistite for the Democrats these days it seems - he made it in telecoms like moneybags Terry McAuliffe). AND... he's a close personal friend of the Kennedy's. YUP: KENNEDY. A Kennedy family ally is challenging Lieberman.

Daily Kos and his buddies on the extreme Left - MOVE ON and the like, (who now control the Democrat Party) are ecstatic. I am not.

I've been a registered Democrat since 1974. And I say this challenge proves that the Democrat Party's Left-wing is absolutely loony. They're making the party even more Leftist than it was during the McGovern era! And they'll get the same results. WHY? It's quite simple: you cannot get more votes in the south or midwest by going further to the Left. Not a single Democrat on the ballot in the last two federal elections lost to someone more to the Left. Going further to the Left will mean MORE LOSSES for the Democrats. That the Left doesn't see only this proves that these Leftists are IDIOTS. Idiots who are destroying the oldest politcal party in the land. The party of "neocons and hawks" like FDR and TRUMAN and JFK and LBJ and Scoop Jackson and Joe.

If the Left retakes the party - and remakes it in the image of McGovern and Kennedy and Kucinich and Dean and Pelosi and Sharpton and Feingold, then GOOD RIDDANCE!

HEY: I betchya that Mark Warner, Bill Richardson, Tom Vilsack, Phil Bredesen, Evan Bayh and even Hillary Clinton - (and every other centrist or centrist-wannabe in the party) - are almost upset as me. WHY!? Because if DK and MOVEON succeed in dragging the party EVEN MORE to the Left, then these more moderate Democrats know they don't have a freakin-deakin chance at their party's nomination in 2008. STAY TUNED.

NOTE: It will be very VERY interesting to see which national Democrats campaign for Joe in the primary. When GOP liberal Arlen Spector faced a challenge from his right-flank, right-winger Santorum fought very VERY hard for the senior senator from PA. An honorable thing to do. Will Hillary and Dodd and ther others I listed do the same thing? We shall see.... we shall see. (I suspect they do not have the BALLS to take on DK or MOVEON.) Stay tuned...

IRAQ: APPEASERS KEEP PAYING RANSOM AND KEEP INCENTIVIZING KIDNAPPING

News of another kidnapping in Iraq - this time an American female journalist (name withheld).

Why are kidnappings so common in Iraq? Could it be that so many have paid the RANSOM which the kidnappers seek? Duh.

Here are a FEW stories on ransoms paid [PARTIAL LISTING!]: HERE (4 "peace activists"); HERE by Italy; by Egypt HERE; by France HERE; by Cyprus (home of Benon Sevan) HERE; by Sweden HERE - and in this last post, the blogger asks: "Can a day go by without some European country paying ransom so that terrorists in Iraq can buy more weapons to kill Americans?" I would only add that the jihadoterrorists also kill A LOT of Iraqis. The ransoms paid by these appeasers pays for the "insurgency." MAYBE THE COWARDLY, APPEASING RANSOM-PAYERS DON'T CARE?!

OR MAYBE THEY LIKE THE FACT THAT THEIR MONEY BUYS WEAPONS THAT KILL AMERICANS AND IRAQIS FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM!? OR MAYBE THEY'D PREFER IT IF WE JUST WENT AWAY AND THEY COULD LIVE IN PEACEFUL DHIMMITUDE!?

We cannot depend on countries which pay ransom to the jihadoterrorists; they cannot make good allies.

Australia is a GREAT ally; they got it right:

Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has reiterated Prime Minister John Howard's insistence that the Government will not pay a ransom. Mr Downer said paying to secure freedom for Mr Wood, who is being held by Islamic insurgents, would only encourage more kidnappings. "We'll be doing everything we can with two exceptions -- we won't be paying ransom and we won't be changing our policies," he told reporters. "We are not sub-contracting our foreign policy to terrorists. And we're certainly not going to have the money of Australian taxpayers expropriated by terrorists," Mr Downer said.

JOHN HOWARD:

... these people are opposed to what we believe in and what we stand for, far more than what we do. If you imagine that you can buy immunity from fanatics by curling yourself in a ball, apologising for the world - to the world - for who you are and what you stand for and what you believe in, not only is that morally bankrupt, but it's also ineffective. Because fanatics despise a lot of things and the things they despise most is weakness and timidity. There has been plenty of evidence through history that fanatics attack weakness and retreating people even more savagely than they do defiant people. ...

you cannot conduct the foreign policy of a country as if it were shadow-boxing with fanatics. You just can't do that. You have to take decisions that you believe are in your country's best interests, and I believe very strongly it's in this country's best interests in 2005 to do the things we are doing in cooperation with our allies and our friends.

I cannot look you in the face or the Australian public in the face and say, "This country is guaranteed immunity from a terrorist attack." I hope and pray it never happens, but it's a possibility. We have to understand that that is the world we're living in, and it's fair to say that the people who died on the London Underground, they were certainly not all white Anglo-Celtic Christians, they were a combination of people of different races and of different religions and it just undermines the fact that murderous fanatics are the enemies of us all, not just the enemies of a stereotypical idea of what a Westerner represents.

The Aussies are GREAT! In fact, most of the Aussies and the Brits just simply GET IT. Old Europe simply DOES NOT. Why?! Continental Western Europe is largely mired in the thrall of post modernism (and the false collectivism, the false pacifism, the false moral relativism and the false anti-colonialism which are concomittant with post modernism).

Brits and Aussies (and Americans) are largely inoculated against the inner rot of post modernism by the strong presence of Natural Law which is safely located DEEP within Anglo culture. The NEW democracies of Eastern Europe aren;t Anglo, but are better allies because they are still so close to the time of their own liberation, and so they still appreciate the importance of fighting for democracy and the pitfalls of socialism. That's why Poland and the Czech republic are better allies than France and Germany. And less likely to pay ransom.

HERE'S a link to an article about the proper way to deal with kidnappings for ransom.

LEFT-WING LAWYER/BLOGGER INADVERTANTLY PROVES BUSH WAS RIGHT AND NSA INTERCEPTS ARE CONSTITUTIONAL

Greenwald argues:

One of the most revealing aspects of the NSA scandal has been the way in which Bush followers have been running around shrieking that national security has been damaged and treason has been committed by the New York Times. All of that is based upon the Times' disclosure that Bush ordered the NSA to eavesdrop without judicial oversight (rather than with it). Now that the initial screaming and demands for hangings are dying down a little, his followers are confronted with the fact that this accusation makes no sense whatsoever, since whether we eavesdrop with judicial oversight or without it can’t possibly be of any use to terrorists.

... So the diabolical, unprecedentedly dangerous terrorists who pose an existential threat to the U.S. that is equal to or greater than that posed by the Soviet Union are, in John’s mind, so uninformed, unsophisticated and stupid that they never heard of or knew about the 30-year old public law that defines the powers of the U.S. Government to engage in surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes. They never heard of FISA or knew anything about it until the Times published its story.

And now the cat is out of the bag – now, thanks to the Times, they know that we have this law called "FISA" and have become aware that we do this thing called "eavesdropping" and now they will be able to thwart us. Is that supposed to be satire?

GREENWALD'S HEAVY-HANDED SARCASM ASIDE, HE REALLY ARGUES THAT WHAT BUSH AUTHORIZED WAS CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL. How did he do this? Simple.

This post argues that the leak coudn't have harmed USA security because al Qaeda and its affilates must presumably know that they are being eavesdropped upon. If this is the case, then the eavesdropping is NOT unreasonable and is therefore entirely CONSTITUTIONAL according to Article IV - which only prohibits UNreasonable searches and seizures.

As you may know, there are at 28 types of warrantless searches and seizures which are routinely done by law enforcement all the time. Among the many reasons courts have always permitted these is the fact that they are each reasonable.

Therefore, since nobody communicating with al Qaeda or their affiliates can reasonably expect their conversations to be private, the POTUS-ordered NSA intercept program was constitutional.

It is also INCONTROVERTIBLE that the leakers broke the law. The Intelligence Whitleblower Protection Act signed by Clinton in 1998 provides a legal way for a whisleblower to "blow the whistle" on questionable government activity which is classified. The leakers did NOT use this means; they went to the press. This is against the law. Plain and simple. The leakers broke it.

[Which leads to this question: WHY DID THEY DO IT THIS WAY?! The answer is simple: They knew that the intercepts - although controversial - were legal and constitutional, and that therefore they wouldn't get anywhere using the legal whistle-blowing process. Therefore, they leaked it to the NYTIMES right before the 2004 election because they thought it could harm the president's re-election bid. This is the only logical explanation for why they leaked and when they leaked. It's another example of how the clandestine community attempting a virtual coup d'etat against Bush.]

I also take issue with Greenwald's argument that the NYTIMES and the leakers are not traitors (Greenwald argues that the leak was harmless to our national security because jihadoterrorist must already assume they don't have secure communications. And he argues that a harmless leak can't be treasonous.) HE IS WRONG AGAIN.

The NYTIMES committed treason because the only beneficiary of the leak was the enemy. HOW? Though the leak may not have been an earth-shattering NEWS to the jihadoterrorists, the leak nevertheless CONFIRMED to the enemy what they may have merely presumed or suspected.

Confirming details of the speed and range of intercept activity does actual harm to our efforts to collect useful and ACTIONABLE intelligence, and that obviously aids the enemy. HOW?!

Confirmation alerts the enemy that they MUST seek other less interceptible means to communicate - such as by courier, or by other means. They CAN do this, AND these extra efforts make it tougher for us to learn about and prevent attacks - ESPECIALLY HERE IN THE USA. This is incontrovertible. And it proves potential HARM - of a potentially catastrophic level. (Remember, a successful terrorist attack can cost US thousands of lives and trillions of dollars and tens of thousnads of lost jobs.)

In conclusion: Greenwald UNINTENTIONALLY helps prove that: (1) the intercepts are constitutional; (2) the leakers are criminals; and (3) the leaks hurts national security and aided the enemy. Thanks Glenn Greenwald. I hope your comrades on the Left learn have learned something as well.

UPDATE: JOE KLEIN of TIME corroborates my analysis (hat tip the invaluable and brilliant POWERLINE):

It would have been a scandal if the NSA had not been using these tools to track down the bad guys. There is evidence that the information harvested helped foil several plots and disrupt al-Qaeda operations.

There is also evidence, according to U.S. intelligence officials, that since the New York Times broke the story, the terrorists have modified their behavior, hampering our efforts to keep track of them—but also, on the plus side, hampering their ability to communicate with one another.

ARAB MEDIA WIDELY REPORTING THAT FORMER SYRIAN VP IS CALLING FOR ASSAD TO BE OVERTHROWN

See Arab reports on Khaddam's announcement HERE and HERE and HERE - and a UPI roundup of the Arab press on this story HERE. In addition, one must remember that Khaddam's original interviews were with the "PAN-ARAB PRESS." I think this is significant: The neighbors of Assad are not covering up for him; they are preparing their populations for the inevitable - as if it was IMMINENT. THIS IS VERY GOOD NEWS.

BIRD FLU PANIC HITS PARTS OF TURKEY

BBC:

Residents of the eastern Turkish town hit by a fatal outbreak of bird flu in humans have besieged a local hospital seeking treatment for symptoms. Three children from Dogubeyazit have died this week, at least two of them from the virulent H5N1 strain. [These are the first deaths outside of Asia - reliapundit]

Despite no evidence that the disease has begun to spread between humans, locals have sought treatment at a poorly-equipped hospital in the town. ...

The World Health Organisation has attempted to play down fears of the disease, as Turkish officials sought to defend themselves from accusations they were slow to act. A WHO spokeswoman in Geneva said the bird flu outbreak had been contained in one Turkish province and there was "no need for excessive panic".

Twenty people remain in hospital in Van, a larger city in eastern Turkey, under treatment for suspected bird flu.

Is this the start of the pandemic? Are the locals hysterical and wrong, or do they know/intuit something? Time will tell. A SHORT TIME. Stay tuned. FOR SURE: We will know if H5N1 has become H2H in one or two months. More from WHO.

FISA, NIXON AND THE ABUSE OF POTUS POWERS

I think we should remember that FISA was passed in part as a reaction to NIXON'S DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE ABUSES. The keyword here is ABUSE. Nixon ABUSED REAL presidential power, (he tried to construe and use powers in a way that was wrong) - HE DID NOT INVENT OUT OF WHOLE CLOTH POWERS THAT THE POTUS DOESN'T CONSTITUTIONALLY HAVE.

The POTUS does have the right and authority to order warrantless searches and seizures of US CITIZENS if the targets are primarily foreign agents. FISA law says this; the FISC has said this; the FISCR itself has ruled on this, (QUOTE: "... the President’s inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance, ..." ); the SCOTUS has ruled on this; Federal district courts have ruled on this. [These points are from liberal constitutional law professor Cass Sunstein, former Clinton #2 USA AG John Schmidt, and the legal eagles at POWERLINE.]

Nixon's searches and seizures were an ABUSE OF POWER because they targeted: (1) domestic threats who were (2) actually personal political foes of Nixon and NOT real threats to the national security of the USA. Other presidents, the SCOTUS, federal district lower courts, the FISCR and the FISC have all reiterated this point: they have each ruled that the POTUS has the authority to order warrantless searches and seizures if the targets are agents of foreign powers - even if they are US persons or US citizens.

Further buttressing Bush's argument that this NSA intercept program is legal and constitutional is the fact that the AUMF specifically defines al Qaeda (and its affiliates) as a foreign power. If that wasn't enough, federal district courts - since the 1990's - have also determined that, according to FISA, al Qaeda and its affiliates are foreign powers.

THEREFORE, when the POTUS orders programmatic surveillance or intercepts of agents of al Qaeda and its affiliates (even if they are US persons inside the USA) the POTUS is acting constitutionally and in accordance with FISA and the AUMF. The NSA intercepots program, therefore, cannot be described as an abuse of power; it is the correct use of constitutionally and legally defined power by the POTUS.

Those in the Left-wing dominated MSM and Left-wing dominated Democrat party who assail Bush as having committed a Nixonian deed and an impeachable offense in this matter miscontrue Nixon, FISA and the NSA intercepts. In other words: They get it ALL WRONG.

BBC: PLUTO'S MOON HAS NO ATMOSPHERE

Charon has no atmosphere. And the food sucks, too. BADA-BUM-BUM. And the portions are too small. But it is reasonably priced.

CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCHERS DOUBT POTUS POWERS. YAWN.

Memeorandum has several links to reports from the WASHPOST and the NYTIMES. GIST:

President Bush's rationale for eavesdropping on Americans without warrants rests on questionable legal ground, and Congress does not appear to have given him the authority to order the surveillance, said a Congressional analysis released Friday.

This research was done by career bureaucrats who are considered by most to be "non-partisan." They are - however - all career Congressional researchers, and they're biased against the executive branch and for the legislative branch. Besides this, the report was FAR FROM CONCLUSIVE, and their doubts were covered with qualifiers.

UPDATE: POWERLINE has read and analyzed the CRS report and compared it to the "breathless" reportage and found the reportage to be BIASED! (How shocking! heh!):

The Post's coverage of the CRS report is deeply misleading. In fact, the CRS concluded:

Whether an NSA activity is permissible under the Fourth Amendment and the statutory scheme outlined above is impossible to determine without an understanding of the specific facts involved and the nature of the President's authorization, which are for the most part classified.

The report also acknowledges the legitimacy of the administration's claim that the Constitution gives the President the inherent power to conduct the surveillance in question, regardless of any Congressional action or inaction (more on this later):

Court cases evaluating the legality of warrantless wiretaps for foreign intelligence purposes provide some support for the assertion that the President possesses inherent authority to conduct such surveillance.

Where the Post is most mendacious, however, is in the truncated quote that it presents as the CRS's overall conclusion: "The administration's legal justification 'does not seem to be ... well grounded,' they said."

Here is what the CRS actually wrote:

Given such uncertainty, the Administration's legal justification, as presented in the summary analysis from the Office of Legislative Affairs, does not seem to be as well-grounded as the tenor of that letter suggests.

So the Post's headline, instead of reading, "Report Rebuts Bush on Spying," should have said, "Report Expresses Uncertainty on Spying."

CONCLUSION: The actual report is NOT NEARLY as damning the the Left-wing dominated MSM and the Left-wing dominated Democrat Party would have you believe. Use this LINK TO THE POWERLINE ARTICLE and RTWT! NOW!

1998: PRESIDENT CLINTON LAUDED THE LAW THE NSA LEAKERS BROKE

AS HE SIGNED IT INTO LAW IN OCTOBER OF 1998, PRESIDENT CLINTON LAUDED HR 3594 - "THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT" - THE VERY LAW THE NSA LEAKERS BROKE IN ORDER TO SMEAR BUSH. CLINTON:

Presidential Statement on Intelligence Authorization Act
THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release October 20, 1998
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

Today I have signed into law H.R. 3694, the "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999." The Act authorizes Fiscal Year 1999 appropriations for U.S. intelligence and intelligence-related activities.

The Act is the product of the dedication and effort of many people in the Congress and my Administration. I believe that the Act will help our Nation maintain a strong intelligence capability and preserve the safety and security of our country. [...]

Finally, I am satisfied that this Act contains an acceptable whistleblower protection provision, free of the constitutional infirmities evident in the Senate-passed version of this legislation. The Act does not constrain my constitutional authority to review and, if appropriate, control disclosure of certain classified information to the Congress. I note that the Act's legislative history makes clear that the Congress, although disagreeing with the executive branch regarding the operative constitutional principles, does not intend to foreclose the exercise of my constitutional authority in this area.

It's obvious that Clinton understood what the whistleblower protection provision (HR3594) meant, AND - INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, that he also thought that it was important to use this moment to reasssert the pre-eminence of the operative constitutional principles of the POTUS in this area.

This presidential statement is a DOUBLE WHAMMY for foes of Bush: it clearly reiterates that the NSA leakers are criminals, and that the constitutional powers Bush is asserting over the NSA and the gathering of intelligence are neither new or peculiar to conservative or GOP presidents. (Proving once again that this whole episode is a drizzle in a teacup.)

THE NSA LEAKERS ARE LAW-BREAKERS NOT WHISLTEBLOWERS

POWERLINE has a thorough and brilliant analysis of the applicable laws HERE. EXCERPT:

Since the New York Times published the Risen/Lichtblau NSA story on December 16, we have cited the federal law that makes the disclosures on which the story is based a crime. The federal law is 18 U.S.C. § 798, a law that precisely prohibits leaks of the type of classified information disclosed in the story. Subsection (a) of the statute provides:

Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—

(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

POWERLINE: Subsection (b) defines the critical terms of the statute; suffice it to say that I believe they are clearly applicable to the conduct of the "nearly a dozen current and former govenment officials" who spoke to the Times. Their violation of the statute is a felony. Because their disclosures to the Times were illegal, these current and former government officials sought the promise of confidentiality from the Times to protect their identity.

And here is the Intelligence Whistleblower Law - HR 3694- passed in 1998. [UPDATE: BETTER LINK; WITH MORE EXPLANATION]

[H.R.3694 - Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)

TITLE VII--WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION FOR INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY EMPLOYEES REPORTING URGENT CONCERNS TO CONGRESS

(a) SHORT TITLE- This title may be cited as the `Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998'.]

This law was SPECIFICALLY PASSED TO PROTECT WHISTLEBLOWERS WHO HAVE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION. This law protect the leakers AND THE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION. (Use the link; RTWT.)

The law was UNANIMOUSLY passed and makes it clear that if a person thought that a classified operation was unconstitutonal or illegal they would have a way to "BLOW THEIR WHISTLE" without jeopardizing national security.

This law is WELL KNOWN to all people who handle classified data, it was passed to protect them.

The "dozen or so sources" the NYTIMES claims to have on this story have ALL broken this law. They did so KNOWINGLY, with forethought. They acted out of malice to the POTUS and his policies. They did so (by going to the NYTIMES) JUST BEFORE the 2004 election.

It is obvious therefore that their intent was to STEAL the election with a "scandal" reported in the MSM which could NOT have been properly addressed in the time remaining before the election - JUST LIKE RATHERGATE. This is nothing less than AN ATTEMPTED COUP, by "career bureaucrats"(AKA: POLITBURO) - a "shadow government" which thinks they UNIQUELY possess the "intelligence" to make policy and therefoe should have the power to the make policy of the USA, as opposed to our "less intelligent" ELECTED leaders.

The leakers knew that the POTUS had the right to do authorize what he authorized, THAT'S WHY THEY DIDN'T USE THE PROPER CHANNELS SET FORTH IN THE WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT. The leakers knew it was legal and constitutional but FELT that it could be SPUN into a scandal by a willing MSM, an this spin would HOODWINK a gullible electorate.

If the leakers had HONEST CONCERNS about the legality or the constitutionality program - and IF THEIR LEAKS WERE NOT AIMED AT STEALING THE ELECTION - then they WOULD HAVE used the proper channels as specified in HR 3694. The fact that they did not is PROOF of their nefarious aims.

The leakers should be found, charged, tried, convicted and either jailed for leaking classified data - or executed for treason.

[ASIDE: If the aim of the leakers was to damage Bush politically - and since this aim was SHARED by the NYTIMES - then why did the NYTIMES hold-up the story?

I think that they held the story because they'd just got BURNED BADLY by RATHERGATE (and the stolen weapons story - remember that: a depot in Iraq had been looted at some time, and folks were trying to "BLAME BUSH." I think it was called CACAGATE.). These BOGUS BUSH SCANDALS made the NYTIMES gun-shy. THEY FELT THAT THEY WOULDB'T BE ABLE TO HOODWINK THE ELECTORATE. THEY FELT THIS WAY BECAUSE OF THE INCREDIBLE FACT-CHECKING DONE BY THE BLOGOSPERE.

This scandal gun-shyness- coupled with the FULL-COURT PRESS by the POTUS, DCI Tenet, USA D.AG Comey and a leading Democrat in Congress all making the case for secrecy - led the NYTIMES to defer.

WHY DID THEY RUN IT NOW!? To boost book sales, to put the "KIBOSH" on the Patriot Act, and to damage the positive PR the president was getting from the Iraqi elections. Simply put: It was now or never. If the "annointed" bosses at NYTIMES were patriots, then the answer would have been never.]

SHARON - update

"He's back in suregry to stop NEW intra-cranial bleeding.. Not good. UPDATE: He's out of surgery; post-op CT-SCAN is IMPROVED - BETTER than previous CT-SCAN.

The medical director of Haddassah Hospital says the care he received after his last stroke was negligent. He should not have been allowed back to his Negev ranch, but kept in Jerusalem, and the anti-clotting medicine was administered poorly.

POLLS: Kadima with Olmert at the top of the ticket would win clear 40 seats; with Livni 38; with Peres 42. Sharon had also polled at 42.

FORMER SYRIAN VP NOW OPENLY CALLS FOR REVOLT - TO AN ARABIC NEWSPAPER

BBC:

Former Syrian Vice-President Abdul Halim Khaddam wants to oust President Bashar al-Assad through a popular uprising, he told an Arabic newspaper. Mr Khaddam told the Pan-Arab al-Sharq al-Awsat that the pressure for change had to come from within Syria. On Thursday, he said Mr Assad should go to prison for complicity in the murder of former Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri. "This regime cannot be reformed, so there is nothing left but to oust it," he said. "The Syrian people will be the ones to oust it."

TICK-TOCK... Stay tuned...
More HERE.

MORE PROOF THAT PROSPERITY IS A BY-PRODUCT OF LIBERTY

PRAIRIE PUNDIT HAS THE LINKS - TO BARONE, THE WSJ AND THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION. Excerpt:

"... there is a high correlation between economic freedom and income.

In the 20 nations classified as free, per capita gross domestic product is over $30,000.

In the 51 mostly free countries, it's $13,530.

In the 74 mostly unfree countries, it's $4,239, and in the 12 repressed countries, it's $4,058."

PROSPERITY IS A BY-PRODUCT OF LIBERTY.

SUNNI ON SHIA BOMBINGS KILL MORE THAN 120

Sydney Herald:

Two suicide bombers killed 120 people and wounded more than 200 in attacks near a Shi'ite holy shrine and a police recruiting centre, the bloodiest day in Iraq for four months. ... Coming a day after 58 people died in a wave of bombings and shootings, the latest bloodshed ratcheted up tension between Iraq's minority Sunni Arabs and majority Shi'ite Muslims.

The suicide bombers struck in Karbala, one of Shi'ite Islam's holiest cities, and Ramadi, a Sunni Arab stronghold in western Anbar province and a hotbed of the insurgency. "This is a war against Shi'ites," said Rida Jawad al-Takia, a senior member of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), one of the country's leading Shi'ite parties. "Apparently to the terrorists, no Shi'ite child or woman should live," he said. "We are really worried. It seems they want a civil war."

The Sunni/Baathists/jihadoterrorist scum who murdered the Shias are murdering them in order to re-establish their tyrannny over Iraq. THIS WILL FAIL: Neither the Kurds or the Shias will EVER allow Iraq to fall back into the hands of the Sunnis.

THE ONLY EFFECT THIS CAMPAIGN OF TERROR HAS IS ON THE LEFT - AND THE MSM THEY STILL DOMINATE: The Left and the MSM see this continuing terror and cry that we are losing, we can't win and should get out ASAP. I wish these Lefties were at least as brave as the Kurds and the Shias. If they were, then we wouldn't have to waste energy fighting this stupid political battle on the home-front.

BTW: AT THE TIME OF THE BOMBING AT THE POLICE RECRUITING CENTER, MORE THAN 1000 IRAQIS WERE THERE - IN THE PROCESS OF VOLUNTEERING TO SERVE. Each of these volunteers was MORE brave, and MORE committed to democracy in Iraq than most of the Left and the MSM. MORE HERE. And HERE.

CHENEY REAFFIRMS COMMITTMENT TO PROACTIVE WAR AGAINST THE ENEMY

Dick Cheney spoke to the HERITAGE FOUNDATION yesterday. He was as great as ever. EXCERPT:

If we have learned anything in the last 25 years -- from Beirut, to Somalia, to the USS Cole -- it is that terrorist attacks are not caused by the projection of force; they are invited by the perception of weakness.

And this nation made a decision: We will never go back to the false comforts of the world before September 11th, 2001. We will engage these enemies with the goal of victory. And with the American military in the fight, that victory is certain.

ONLY IF THAT MILITARY IS UNDER THE COMMAND OF A PRESIDENT WHO ISN'T GOING TO COW-TOW TO EUROWEENIES, APPEASERS, NAYSAYERS, DEFEATISTS, DOVES OR THE LEFT.

In other words, as long as the White House is occupied by a Republican. (EXCEPTIONS: Lieberman.)

BWAHAHAHA: GALLOWAY TO APPEAR IN SLEAZY BRIT REALITY TV SHOW!

BBC Entertainment News:

The fourth series of Celebrity Big Brother has kicked off with MP George Galloway joining 10 others, including Michael Barrymore, in the house. Other celebrities unveiled include Faria Alam, famous for her affair with England coach Sven-Goran Eriksson, and US basketball star Dennis Rodman. Model Jodie Marsh and actress Rula Lenska are also among the housemates.

This seems to me to be a better place for the socialist Galloway - virulent anti-Semite, shill for islamofascists, bribe-taker of Saddam, and blowhard/buffoon - than the House of Commons.

LOUSIANA CONGRESSMAN WANTS THE FEDS TO BUY-OUT NEW ORLEANS KATRINA VICTIMS

NYTIMES:

Representative Richard H. Baker, a Republican from suburban Baton Rouge who derides Democrats for not being sufficiently free-market, is the unlikely champion of a housing recovery plan that would make the federal government the biggest landowner in New Orleans - for a while, at least. Mr. Baker's proposed Louisiana Recovery Corporation would spend as much as $80 billion to pay off lenders, restore public works, buy huge ruined chunks of the city, clean them up and then sell them back to developers.

Desperate for a big-scale fix to the region's huge real estate problem, Louisiana officials and business leaders of all stripes - black and white, Republican and Democrat - have embraced this little-known congressman and his grandiose plan, calling its passage crucial. While the White House has yet to sign on, there are already signs that some Congressional leaders are interested in pursuing it; Mr. Baker said administration officials had not rejected it outright.

I love New Orleans. I think it is imperative to keep the STATE and LOCAL government OUT OF reconstruction; the federal government is less corrupt than either. BUT THIS PLAN IS A COLOSSAL MISTAKE, TOO. It's too statist.

I think, the best way to quickly redevelop New Orleans, would if the the local and state governments used KELO.

YUP: KELO. They should condemn huge swathes of destroyed real estate and then sell it to PRIVATE DEVELOPERS who would have to pay market price and then redevelop it according to an urban develoment plan approved local, state, and federal governments.

THIS WOULD NOT COST THE TAXPAYERS A PENNY.

I hated the KELO decision. But it is the law of the land. I love New Orleans - and want to see it beautifully rebuilt - more than I hate KELO.

WHAT IS KADIMA'S FUTURE WITHOUT AN ACTIVE ARIEL SHARON

Who will lead KADIMA if Sharon is as ill as the doctors know say? The way it looks now, Sharon will not be able to lead the nation or the Kadima Party for the next few months - AT BEST; though I pray he recovers miraculously and soon.

Kadima was built on the sheer boldness and bravura and brilliant strategy of Sharon. Who might be its next leader?

Ehud Olmert is a good man politically but he lacks the military gravitas necessary to make BIG BOLD MOVES like Sharon could. Shaul Mofaz current Defense Minister and former Likud member. He could be bold.

Ehud Barak would be my dark horse candidate. He has left the Labor Party - for all intents and purposes; (his ex-wfie of 35 years is a leader of Kadima). Either of these men would be a good PM - Barak has learned his lesson - and re-earned his creds - when he PROVED that Arafat was a fraud and an unrepentent jihadoterrorist.

And then there's NATAN SHARANSKY. And BIBI is not as bad as some think. Both of these men bring the added value of being committed to the free market. Kadima was not.

We shall see... MORE HERE. AND HERE. And HERE.

UPDATE ON POSSIBLE SUCCESSORS: see HERE (LIVNI - female, minister of Justice, former Likudnik) and a roundup HERE.

UPDATE #2: More background on possible successors HERE (Livni is ranked #2 behind Olmert, with Mofaz third).

ARIEL SHARON IN VERY SERIOUS CONDITION

I've been watching CNN and FOX and MSNBC: Sharon has a SIGNIFICANT STOKE and a CEREBRAL HEMMORAGE and is UNDER GENERAL ANESTHESIA and IS HAVING SURGERY.

As one reporter said: he is not fighting for the Pime Ministership; he is fighting for his life.

I pray that a longer life for Sharon - in which he may give even more service to Israel - is consistent with God's plans.

He is a truly GIANT in Israel's history. If he crosses over, or lives but becomes to diabled to serve any further, then the loss will be very great, too. MEn like Sharon dont come around that often. Sharon is a courageous man, and brilliant and bold strategist - on the battlefield and in the political arena. he has advanced the cause of Israel and israel's security as much as any man who ever lived. God Bless Him.

Years ago, Sharon's reputatuion was unfairly maligned for being behind a mass murder which occurred in a part of Lebanon which was then occupied by the IDF. (This SLANDER has persisted with the islamothugs and their comrades on the Left.) This massacre occurred at the Shatila refugee camp; a few hundred Lebanese-Arab Muslims were murdered by Lebanese-Arab Christians. Of course, they blamed the Jew! At the time, Sharon was defense minister - and he resigned. Blaming Sharon for the massacre is like blaming Rumsfeld for a massacre of Taliban by the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. IOW: it's ABSOLUTELY ABSURD. Anyhow, Sharon put the chapter behind him, and his comeback proved he was innocent of any wrong-doing.

I am praying for Sharon the Great tonight. And Israel. I hope Israel's enemies are not so stupid as to think that this situation makes Israel more vulnerable.

MORE HERE. Here's how the news developed:

00:39 Sharon`s aides: We are waiting for a miracle (Channel 10)
00:38 MK Yishai: Shas spiritual leader praying for Sharon`s recovery (Haaretz)
00:34 Senior political source: Sharon might not recover (Sky News)
00:13 White House sends PM Sharon get-well wishes (Reuters)
23:56 Sharon`s surgery time will depend on location of hemorrhage (Channel 10)
23:49 Doctors: suffered cerebral hemorrhage, receiving breathing assistance (AP)
23:45 Sharon in very serious condition, has been taken into surgery (Channel 10)
23:44 TV reports: Sharon`s life may be in danger (AP)
23:43 Sharon suffering from paralysis in his lower body (Channel 2)
23:41 Report: Sharon`s stroke is very serious (Channel 10)
23:40 Lapid: All opponents and friends wish Sharon recovery (Channel 10)
23:39 Ehud Olmert is acting prime minister for the next 100 days (Channel 10)
23:33 Hadassah general manager: Sharon suffered `significant stroke` (Channel 10)
23:32 Olmert taking over prime minister powers (Channel 10)
23:31 Sharon anesthetized for treatment (Channel 2)

MORE HERE. Stay Tuned...

ANOTHER "BIG LIE" OF THE LEFT: PRO-LIFERS ARE "OUT OF THE MAINSTREAM"

Polls done between 2003 and 2005 constistently show that between 40%-50% of Americans think that LEGAL limitations on abortion is a good thing. In addition, another 20-25% think they should be illegal. That means 60-65-% are opposed to abortion on demand.

For example: CBS - 12/05:

38% favor unlimited abortion on demand
39% favor some limitations on abortions
20% favor no abortion

Several polls on this webpage show a majority are pro-life. Others show a 44-44% split.

If these polls are accurate - (and the number of them which show similar results makes me think they are), then it is NOTHING BUT PURE DEMAGOGUERY WHEN PRO-CHOICE ADVOCATES REFER TO PRO-LIFE JUDICIAL NOMINEES AS "OUT OF THE MAINSTREAM." This is simply another example of the Left's penchant for "THE BIG LIE."

If a person who is pro-life is out of the mainstream, then 45% of America is out of the mainstream - and that is a contradiction in terms. America is still pretty evenly on abortion rights - which is why Bush is right to follow a policy which seeks to strengthen the "culture of life" and not proceeding legislatively - yet, not until a clear majority of Americans agree that abortions should be very limited.

Those who portray Alito as out of the mainstream on this issue are distorting the facts.

PELOSI LETTER TACITLY AGREES THAT PRESIDENT HAS AUTHORITY TO ORDER NSA INTERCEPTS WITHOUT FISA

BYRON YORK/THE CORNER/NRO, highlight Pelosi's letter to Hayden - now DDNI, and then the DNSA; Pelosi wrote in part):

"I am concerned whether, and to what extent, the National Security Agency has received specific presidential authorization for the operations you are conducting."

This is a contemporaneous admission that Pelosi believed that all the NSA probably needed to proceed with their intercepts was a presidential finding. Of course now, Pelosi - and other Leftist Democrat dove appeasers - want to impeach Bush for doing just that. York has much more. RTWT. Here's a link to the NYTIMES article which included Pelosi's redacted letter.

IS BUSH MEETING WITH ALL LIVING DoD AND DoS SECRETARIES PROOF THAT A PREEMPTIVE STRIKE ON IRAN IMMINENT?

Bush is ostensibly gathering all living secretaries of Defense and State to discuss Iraq. BUT IS THIS REALLY THE CASE!? RIGHTWING NUTHOUSE:

This could be, as some invitees have speculated, window dressing for the President’s continuing efforts to sell the Iraq War to the American people. Or, it could be something much more ominous.

Following on the heels of last weekend’s leak to Der Speigle about our contingency plans to bomb Iranian nuclear sites, this gathering could be one more signal we are sending to the Iranians that we are deathly serious about preventing them from building a nuclear weapon. Since Iran is going to be on the agenda, the President may want to gage what kind of support he can expect from Democratic heavy hitters if he feels it necessary to escalate the crisis, probably within a few weeks.

I think this speculation is VERY interesting - and very plausible. Stay tuned...