Palin to resign at end of month

By Reid Wilson
Posted: 07/03/09

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) stunned political observers Friday by announcing she will resign the governorship after just two and a half years in office.

The first-term governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee made the announcement at her home in Wasilla. Some political observers had expected Palin to forgo an opportunity to seek re-election, but few expected Palin to resign office. Her reason for stepping down was not immediately clear.

"I’m not wired to operate under the same old politics as usual. I promised that four years ago, and I meant it. It’s not what’s best for Alaska at this time," Palin said on Friday…

Palin’s move, coming nearly a year before she would be forced to reveal her plans by filing deadlines, is sure to lead to widespread speculation that Palin will devote herself full-time to a presidential bid in 2012. At Friday’s news conference, Palin did not give an indication about her future plans; she did not take questions.

And the announcement comes after a week in which Palin allies and detractors blew up a war of words that has been quietly brewing ever since the presidential ticket led by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) lost in November.

An article in Vanity Fair this week featured multiple sources in the McCain campaign who told the magazine, on condition of anonymity, that Palin was not ready to be vice president. Palin allies, including conservative columnist Bill Kristol and several heavyweights in Washington, slammed the anonymous sources for cowardice and malicious intent in subsequent pieces in other publications.

In her Friday announcement, Palin made a seemingly veiled reference to the Vanity Fair article, which she characterized as a blatant shot at wounding her politically.

"My choice is to take a stand and effect change and not hit our heads against the wall," Palin said. "You are naive if you don’t see a full court press from the national level picking away right now a good point guard." …

Despite the tension surrounding Palin’s tenure as vice presidential nominee, the Alaska governor remains one of the leading contenders for the GOP’s presidential nomination in three years. She has ignited a frenzy among a Republican base that, otherwise, has been unenthusiastic about its leaders in Washington.

We’re not sure we accept The Hill’s assumption that Mrs. Palin is resigning her office so as to run for the Presidency. To some extent her comments imply the opposite.

In any case, it is painfully clear that she is rightfully sick of being the target of the politics of personal destruction from the Democrat and their lickspittle slaveys in our watchdog media.

For who can blame her?

Anyone who seeks to run for or hold office as a conservative should have their head examined. They and their family and friends will be endlessly savaged in every way possible.

Mrs. Palin in every way embodies the kind of citizen-statesman that the Founding Fathers envisioned when they created our republic.

That she could be hounded out of office, and possibly politics altogether, by a ravening mob marks another nail in the coffin for representative government in our country.

This is a terrible day for our once great nation.

  Update!

As if to prove our points above, here is the Huffington Post’s report on Mrs. Palin’s announcement:

Note the tags, which include ‘Trig.’

Just in case anyone might miss their despicable ‘humor.’

American Apparel has made immigrant labor a hallmark of its social message, which includes extending legal status.

U.S. Shifts Strategy on Illicit Work by Immigrants

By JULIA PRESTON

July 3, 2009

Immigration authorities had bad news this week for American Apparel, the T-shirt maker based in downtown Los Angeles: About 1,800 of its employees appeared to be illegal immigrants not authorized to work in the United States.

But in contrast to the high-profile raids that marked the enforcement approach of the Bush administration, no federal agents with criminal warrants stormed the company’s factories and rounded up employees. Instead, the federal immigration agency sent American Apparel a written notice that it faced civil fines and would have to fire any workers confirmed to be unauthorized.

The treatment of American Apparel, which has more than 5,600 factory employees in Los Angeles alone, is the most prominent demonstration of a new strategy by the Obama administration to curb the employment of illegal immigrants by focusing on employers who hire them — and doing so in a less confrontational manner than in years past.

Unlike the approach of the Bush administration, which brought criminal charges in its final two years against many illegal immigrant workers, the new effort makes broader use of fines and other civil sanctions, federal officials said Thursday…

On Wednesday, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal agency known as ICE, said it had sent notices announcing audits of hiring records, like the one it conducted at American Apparel, to 652 other companies across the country. Officials said they were picking up the pace of such audits, after performing 503 of them in 2008…

The Obama administration’s new approach, unveiled in April, seems to be moving away from the raids that advocates for immigrants said had split families, disrupted businesses and traumatized communities. But the outcome will still be difficult for illegal workers, who will lose their jobs and could face deportation, the advocates said…

Executives at American Apparel were both relieved and dismayed after receiving the warning from the immigration agency of discrepancies in the hiring documents of about one-third of its Los Angeles work force. The company has 30 days to dispute the agency’s claims and give immigrant employees time to prove that they are authorized to work in the United States, immigration officials said. If they cannot, the company must fire them, probably within two months.

But no criminal charges were lodged against the company and no workers have been arrested, American Apparel executives and immigration officials said…

American Apparel and its outspoken chief executive, Dov Charney, have waged a campaign, emblazoned on T-shirts sold across the country, criticizing the immigration crackdown of recent years and calling on Congress to “Legalize L.A.” by granting legal status to illegal immigrants…

At a news conference last year, Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa of Los Angeles publicly lauded Mr. Charney for helping the city with its faltering economy by providing “the dream of a steady paycheck and good benefits for countless workers.”

While it has been no secret that American Apparel’s largely Latino work force probably included many illegal immigrants, Mr. Schey said the company had been careful to meet legal hiring requirements. Many illegal immigrants use convincingly forged Social Security cards or other fake documents when seeking work…

Immigration officials, who asked not to be identified because the case is continuing, said the fines to American Apparel so far were about $150,000…

Angelica Salas, the executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, an advocacy group, said she welcomed the end to “showboat enforcement raids.” But in the end, Ms. Salas said, “there is still enforcement of laws that are broken,” adding, “The workers will still lose their jobs.”

Mr. Obama is effectively de-criminalizing the hiring of illegal aliens.

Which, lest we forget, was the major sop to the opposition in the initial amnesty legislation, the so-called Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, that was passed during the Reagan administration:

Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986

The law criminalized the act of knowingly hiring an illegal immigrant and established financial and other penalties for those employing illegal aliens under the theory that low prospects for employment would reduce illegal immigration. It introduced the I-9 form to ensure that all employees presented documentary proof of their legal eligibility to accept employment in the United States.

So what is Mr. Obama’s message here to employers?

Who will not be willing to risk the piddling fines, when you can save much more money by hiring illegal aliens?

Iranian cleric: British Embassy staff to be tried

By Lee Keath, Associated Press Writer

A top Iranian cleric said Friday that some of the detained Iranian staffers of the British Embassy in Tehran will be put on trial, and he accused Britain of a role in instigating widespread protests that erupted over the country’s disputed presidential election…

Jannati, a powerful hard-liner who is close to Iran’s supreme leader, told worshippers during a Friday prayer sermon in Tehran that the detained staffers "made confessions."

"In these events, their embassy had a presence," he said, referring to the post-election turmoil. "Some people were arrested. Well, inevitably, they will be put on trial."

He did not say how many staffers will be tried or on what charges. Earlier Iranian officials said all but one of the nine embassy personnel originally arrested had been released, but European Union officials said they believed more than one was still being held…

Jannati does not hold a position in the government or judiciary, but is the head of the Guardian Council, a powerful body in Iran’s ruling clerical hierarchy that stands above the elected government. He is also close to supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Jannati told the thousands of worshippers that the British "had designed a velvet revolution … In March, they said (in their Foreign Ministry) that street riots were possible during June elections. These are signs … revealed by themselves."

He also said those involved in protests "need to repent and ask God to forgive them." …

Apparently the Iranians learned from their experience when they kidnapped the British navel personnel.

There is no down side for them.

(Thanks to Melissa for the heads up.)

Taliban buying children for suicide bombers

Sara A. Carter

July 2, 2009

Pakistan’s top Taliban leader, Baitullah Mehsud, is buying children as young as 7 to serve as suicide bombers in the growing spate of attacks against Pakistani, Afghan and U.S. targets, U.S. Defense Department and Pakistani officials say.

A Pakistani official, who spoke on the condition that he not be named because of the sensitive nature of the topic, said the going price for child bombers was $7,000 to $14,000 – huge sums in Pakistan, where per-capita income is about $2,600 a year.

"[Mehsud] has turned suicide bombing into a production output, not unlike [the way] Toyota outputs cars," a U.S. Defense Department official told reporters recently. He spoke on the condition that he not be named because of ongoing intelligence efforts to catch Mehsud, a prime target for a U.S. and Pakistani anti-Taliban campaign…

Suicide bombings have become frequent in Pakistan in the past year, including high-profile attacks on hotels frequented by Westerners, as well as on Pakistani police and military installations. There has also been a spate of such attacks directed at U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan.

The U.S. official said the price depends on how quickly the bomber is needed and how close the child is expected to get to the target.

"[Mehsud] produces these suicide bombers, which are sold or bartered, which can be used by [Afghan Taliban leader Mullah] Omar’s Taliban or … other groups," the U.S. official said.

In some cases, he said, the children are kidnapped and then sold to Mehsud.

Using child suicide bombers "is the grim reality of the Taliban Frankenstein that now threatens to overwhelm the Pakistani state," said Bruce Riedel, a Brookings Institution scholar who chaired a review of Pakistan-Afghanistan strategy for President Obama.

Efforts to reach a spokesman for Mehsud were not successful…

In other conflicts, such as that between Israel and the Palestinians, suicide bombers are generally older, at least in their late teens or early 20s.

Suicide attacks mounted by Mehsud have killed prominent officials and politicians, including former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, and hundreds of civilians…

It looks like the Taliban has their own version of a jobs stimulus package.

Still, this is news that you just won’t see from those champions of the faith in our watchdog media.

Indeed, note this sentence:

"[Mehsud] has turned suicide bombing into a production output, not unlike [the way] Toyota outputs cars," a U.S. Defense Department official told reporters recently.

Notice that this Defense Department official spoke to more than one reporter.

So why is it only the Washington Times reported this?

Colchester General Hospital

Hospital patient so shocked at dirty ward she climbed out of bed to clean it herself

By Andrew Levy
3 July 2009

After 12 years cleaning care homes and private houses, Tereza Tosbell has a keen eye for a dirty room.

But the last place she expected to need her skills was in hospital – where she was a patient.

The sick 48-year-old was so disgusted at the conditions after three days on a ‘filthy’ ward that she grabbed the antibacterial fluid dispenser at the end of her bed and some hand towels from the bathroom.

Patient Tereza Tosbell was so disgusted at the cleanliness at Colchester General Hospital that she got out of bed and cleaned the ward herself

She set about cleaning her four-bed ward, even going down on hands and knees to sanitise the floor as she dragged her drip trolley behind her.

The divorced mother-of-one said during her four-day stay there was just one brief visit from a cleaner who left dusty curtains, dirty bedframes and a messy floor.

‘It was shameful to see how sloppy the cleaners were while I was there. I was not prepared to put up with such conditions,’ said Miss Tosbell, who was admitted to Colchester General Hospital in Essex with an abscess in her neck.

‘I reckon in total I was cleaning for about an hour. I could hardly move my neck because of the abscess behind my left ear and my left hand was bruised from the cannula but I had to do something.

‘The nurses and other staff saw what I was doing but just left me to get on with it.’

She added: ‘My 22-year-old son Liam came to see me on the first night and the first thing he said was "Have you seen how filthy the lift is?" before complaining about the room I was in.

‘He’s a typical university student, so coming from him it must have been bad.’

A spokesman for Colchester General Hospital said staff took hygiene responsibilities seriously…

Miss Tosbell, from Stanway in Colchester, was admitted to the hospital on June 15 after her GP became concerned at the lump on her neck. Doctors decided to keep her in to run tests before lancing the abscess.

On the first day of her stay, she said a cleaner turned up for less than two minutes to wipe the sink with tissues and a spray.

On the second day a male nurse raised a patient’s bed and briefly wiped it down using tissues from the bathroom and tap water.

That evening the same nurse and a female colleague cleaned a recently vacated bed, again using water not antibacterial fluid.

Miss Tosbell, who cleans private houses but used to work as a carer in a home for those with learning difficulties, said: ‘I never saw the ward Hoovered or a mop and bucket during my stay.

‘The radiator was filthy, there were cobwebs on the curtain rail round my bed and you could write your name in the dust on the windowsill.’

The Patients’ Association yesterday said what Miss Tosbell had experienced was ‘nothing unusual’.

Its director Katherine Murphy said: ‘Where there should be round-the-clock cleaners there will be one who is going round three or four wards and can only skim the surface.’

A Colchester Hospital University NHS spokesman said: ‘In the annual health check ratings for 2007-2008 we scored maximum marks for safety and cleanliness and we have also been praised for our very low levels of infections such as C. difficile and MRSA.’

Coming to a hospital near you.

(Thanks to Rocketman for the heads up.)

(Click to enlarge)

Coffers Empty, California Pays With I.O.U.’s

By JENNIFER STEINHAUER

July 3, 2009

LOS ANGELES — An ever-widening budget gap joined with intractable political paralysis to deliver California its biggest fiscal blow in decades on Thursday, when the state’s controller began printing i.o.u.’s in lieu of cash to pay taxpayers, vendors and local governments.

It was only the second time the state had adopted the emergency payment method since the Great Depression. The National Conference of State Legislatures had no record of any other state’s ever using them.

It was unclear whether the i.o.u.’s, known as warrants, would be accepted by all of the banks in California, which were caught off guard by the move and seemed hesitant to entrust the state to repay the them — at an interest rate of 3.75 percent — in October, as promised.

The controller, John Chiang, issued 28,742 warrants totaling $53.3 million. If state lawmakers fail to reach a budget agreement by the end of August, the amount would grow to $4.8 billion.

While the emergency move resulted from California’s combination of outsized budget gaps, unusual budget rules and a morass of financial obligations approved at the polls, the action was seen as a warning flag to other states that have failed to close their budgets this fiscal year because of the economic downturn….

In California’s misery, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, has found some opportunity in standing his ground. Mr. Schwarzenegger has not only refused to sign off on stopgap measures like those proposed this week by Democratic lawmakers, but has also demanded that lawmakers adopt substantive changes in policy as part of any budget deal.

Democrats indicated Thursday that they were beginning to submit to Mr. Schwarzenegger’s demands, taking proposed tax increases that he opposes off the table as they worked to close a budget gap estimated to have grown to $27 billion…

Among the changes Mr. Schwarzenegger insists be included in a budget agreement are the fingerprinting of recipients of certain state services for the poor and infirm, tighter checks on the job status of those who receive welfare benefits and changes to the state pension program…

So California is now just like a family that spends more than it takes in and holds off on the cable bill while paying the mortgage: its expenses are greater than its revenues. The state, which previously used i.o.u.’s in 1992 and 1933, will issue them rather than checks to those it can get away with not immediately paying.

Most warrants will go to Californians waiting for tax refunds, vendors doing business with the state and local governments, especially in social service areas. Federal and state laws prohibit i.o.u.’s from being issued to state employees, schools or Medicaid recipients.

While it is against federal law for a state to declare bankruptcy, California’s move Thursday will not go unnoticed by Wall Street or escape consequences.

The state’s credit rating is already shaky, and any further downgrades from rating agencies could send interest rates on its bonds soaring, forcing deeper service cuts…

Do note who the powers that be decided to send the IOUs to first.

The blind, the old, the disabled.

Federal and state laws prohibit i.o.u.’s from being issued to state employees…

Heaven forbid that they try this with any of their millions of union thug bureaucrats.

Anyone who will tug at the heart strings.

While it is against federal law for a state to declare bankruptcy…

Who knew? Hasn’t the media been full of stories about states that are on the brink of bankruptcy?

If this is true, it is probably the only thing that is keeping California from going Chapter 11. Maybe we should pass such a law for companies that are ‘too big too fail.’

In any case this is ultimately another ploy to get the voters let them raise taxes even more.

So California is now just like a family that spends more than it takes in and holds off on the cable bill while paying the mortgage: its expenses are greater than its revenues.

As California goes, so goes the nation.

Synthetic oil plant at Zeitz, Germany, destroyed by Americans in aerial bombing operations during World War II. 1944.

Recycling Nazi Secrets

Monday Apr 18, 1977

If the U.S. is in an energy bind, consider the one that Nazi Germany faced in the 1930s: it prepared to fight a world war with no secure reserves of oil at all. The Germans’ solution was to make oil from coal, and they did that so successfully that after 1944 (when oil supplies from Nazi-aligned Rumania were bombed out) the Luftwaffe planes flew, and the Reich tanks rolled, almost exclusively on coal-derived gasoline. Could the Nazi know-how help the U.S. three decades later?

The question occurred to Professor Richard Wainerdi, a chemical engineer at Texas A. & M. He and a colleague. Historian Arnold Krammer, set out 18 months ago to look up what was known about the German synthetic-oil program. It proved an unexpectedly arduous task.

Not for lack of documents. Because the Germans were compulsive record keepers, the entire history of the program—plant diagrams, patent descriptions, detailed reports on which catalysts and additives work best, even the monthly reports of Hitler’s 25 oil-from-coal plants—fell into American hands at the end of the war. But crude oil was available then in ample supply at $2 per bbl., and the man-made oil cost up to five times as much. So the German documents were filed and forgotten. Wainerdi and Krammer found some of the papers in the National Archives in Washington and others stuffed into crates in Government buildings around the country. Until the two men came along, the documents had lain untouched for 30 years.

The Texas A. & M. specialists have located about 300,000 documents, only 15% of which had been catalogued after the war. Dow Chemical, Union Carbide and Diamond Shamrock will help underwrite the massive job of collating all the information and feeding it into a computer at the federally run Oak Ridge Energy Center, where it will be available to anyone who wants it. Already some interesting findings have turned up. For example, German scientists discovered a method of capturing the sulfuric acid released by coal when it is turned into oil; that could point to an important pollution-control technique.

The basic technology for turning coal into oil or gas is known to just about every chemistry graduate student. But until now, it has been considered uneconomic—though a plant built in South Africa with the help of German scientists has been turning out gas from coal for more than 20 years, and some American companies are planning their own installations. Wainerdi and Krammer hope that the Nazi documents will show the way for other firms to avoid whatever mistakes the Germans made and design plants more efficiently. Says Krammer: "Why re-invent the wheel?"

Alas, they made oil from coal.

Still, Time was in admiration. Of course this is an article written before the invention of ‘Global Warming.’

To be fair (or at least more accurate) synthetic fuel was first developed by Friedrich Bergius in 1913, in Germany.

For which he got a Nobel Prize.

Those were the days.

Poll Shows Clean Energy Act Could Force Nearly 20 Percent of Manufacturers to Close

The cap-and-trade based system, pushed by the Obama administration and passed by the U.S. House, could cause energy costs to skyrocket and fuel more unemployment

Critics of the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation that narrowly passed the U.S. House of Representatives say energy costs will skyrocket if the bill – as it stands now – becomes law. Manufacturing & Technology eJournal asked readers what actions they were most likely take at their company to offset the inevitable increases in energy costs.

AND THE RESPONSES WEREN’T VERY ENCOURAGING

*More than 17 percent of those who answered said they would have to shut down their business because there is no way they could handle the kinds of increases being predicted.

The unscientific poll taken of Manufacturing & Technology eJournal readers from June 28th through July 1st drew 943 responses.

OTHER CHOICES INCLUDED:

*Would raise the price of my product or service to customers (22 percent);

*A combination of price increases, personnel cuts and reductions in pay and benefits (20 percent);

*Switch to a 4-day workweek (15 percent);

*Layoff workers (14.5 percent).

*Only nine percent said they would do their best to absorb the energy costs increases without making any changes.

In a statement to Manufacturing & Technology eJournal, U.S. Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY) said he would fight the legislation in the Senate.

"The Cap and Trade Bill that passed the House is a jobs killer bill plain and simple,’ Bunning said. "The legislation is essentially an energy tax hike on small businesses, and will raise electricity costs in Kentucky ninety percent by the year 2035. President Obama’s pledge to not raise taxes on people making less than $250,000 a year is thrown out the window with his support of this tax-raising legislation.’

Other U.S. Senators from Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky and Michigan have been asked to comment on the poll and if they planned to support or fight the legislation when it comes before the Senate. Look for their responses soon.

Sure, this is a poll that only samples a small number of people who have a vested interest.

That makes it just like every other poll the media trumpets from the rooftops.

Meanwhile, here is more good news for the economy.

From a relieved Reuters:

Congressman Henry Waxman headed back to work

Thu Jul 2

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – U.S. Representative Henry Waxman, hospitalized in Los Angeles for a fainting spell days after spearheading House passage of a landmark climate change bill, will be back at work on Capitol Hill next week, a spokeswoman said on Thursday.

Doctors at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, where Waxman, 69, was admitted on Tuesday after collapsing in his district office, planned to discharge the veteran California Democrat on Thursday, spokeswoman Karen Lightfoot said.

Waxman had returned to Los Angeles after leading the effort that on Friday won House passage of legislation to slash greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming, a major part of President Barack Obama’s domestic agenda.

Waxman underwent "routine testing" while hospitalized and was feeling fine by the next day, Lightfoot said, but she offered no information about what led to his fainting spell.

"He is in good health and will be back to work in Washington next week," Lightfoot said in a statement…

What a hero.

Green Power Takes Root in the Chinese Desert

By KEITH BRADSHER

July 3, 2009

DUNHUANG, China — As the United States takes its first steps toward mandating that power companies generate more electricity from renewable sources, China already has a similar requirement and is investing billions to remake itself into a green energy superpower.

Through a combination of carrots and sticks, Beijing is starting to change how this country generates energy. Although coal remains the biggest energy source and is almost certain to stay that way, the rise of renewable energy, especially wind power, is helping to slow China’s steep growth in emissions of global warming gases.

While the House of Representatives approved a requirement last week that American utilities generate more of their power from renewable sources of energy, and the Senate will consider similar proposals over the summer, China imposed such a requirement almost two years ago.

This year China is on track to pass the United States as the world’s largest market for wind turbines — after doubling wind power capacity in each of the last four years. State-owned power companies are competing to see which can build solar plants fastest, though these projects are much smaller than the wind projects. And other green energy projects, like burning farm waste to generate electricity, are sprouting up.

This oasis town deep in the Gobi Desert along the famed Silk Road and the surrounding wilderness of beige sand dunes and vast gravel wastelands has become a center of China’s drive to lead the world in wind and solar energy.

A series of projects is under construction on the nearly lifeless plateau to the southeast of Dunhuang, including one of six immense wind power projects now being built around China, each with the capacity of more than 16 large coal-fired power plants.

Each of the six projects “totally dwarfs anything else, anywhere else in the world,” said Steve Sawyer, the secretary general of the Global Wind Energy Council, an industry group in Brussels.

Some top Chinese regulators even worry that Beijing’s mandates are pushing companies too far too fast. The companies may be deliberately underbidding for the right to build new projects and then planning to go back to the government later and demand compensation once the projects lose money.

“The problem is we have so many stupid enterprises,” said Li Junfeng, who is the deputy director general for energy research at China’s top economic planning agency and the secretary general of the government-run Renewable Energy Industries Association.

HSBC predicts that China will invest more money in renewable energy and nuclear power between now and 2020 than in coal-fired and oil-fired electricity…

A big impetus was the government’s requirement, issued in September 2007, that large power companies generate at least 3 percent of their electricity by the end of 2010 from renewable sources. The calculation excludes hydroelectric power, which already accounts for 21 percent of Chinese power, and nuclear power, which accounts for 1.1 percent.

Chinese companies must generate 8 percent of their power from renewable sources other than hydroelectric by the end of 2020.

The House bill in the United States resembles China’s approach in imposing a renewable energy standard on large electricity providers. But the details make it hard to compare standards. The House bill requires large electricity providers in the United States to derive at least 15 percent of their energy by 2020 from a combination of energy savings and renewable energy — including hydroelectric dams built since 1992…

At the same time, the Ministry of Environmental Protection has temporarily banned three of the country’s five main power companies from building more coal-fired power plants, punishment for their failure to comply with environmental regulations at existing coal-fired plants…

But technical obstacles to renewable energy are popping up. Sandstorms in Dunhuang in the spring, for instance, will cover solar panels and render them useless until they are cleaned after each storm by squads of workers using feather brushes to avoid scratching the panels, a process expected to take two days…

This is the latest entry in the New York Times series of articles asking ‘why can’t we be more like the Communist Chinese.

Why can’t we have a command economy run by a small band of unelected oligarchs?

And, as always, The Times takes everything the Chinese government tells them as gospel:

[S]six immense wind power projects now being built around China, each with the capacity of more than 16 large coal-fired power plants…

Does any sane person believe this? Or this:

HSBC predicts that China will invest more money in renewable energy and nuclear power between now and 2020 than in coal-fired and oil-fired electricity…

If so, why is China still building two coal-fired power plants a week?

Some top Chinese regulators even worry that Beijing’s mandates are pushing companies too far too fast. The companies may be deliberately underbidding for the right to build new projects and then planning to go back to the government later and demand compensation once the projects lose money.

“The problem is we have so many stupid enterprises,” said Li Junfeng…

Don’t worry.

That could never happen here.

Big Pay Packages Return to Wall Street

Compensation on Track to Soar as Earnings Recover From Crisis; ‘Like It’s 2007 Again’

By AARON LUCCHETTI

JULY 2, 2009

Business is back on Wall Street. If the good times continue to roll, lofty pay packages may be set for a comeback as well.

Based on analysts’ earnings forecasts for 2009, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. is on track to pay out as much as $20 billion this year, or about $700,000 per employee. That would be nearly double the firm’s $363,000 average last year, and slightly higher than the $661,000 for the average Goldman employee in fiscal 2007, according to analyst estimates reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Morgan Stanley, the only other huge U.S. securities firm left as an independent company, will likely pay out $11 billion to $14 billion in compensation and benefits this year, analysts predict. On a per-employee basis, payouts are expected to exceed last year’s average of $262,000. Howard Chen, an analyst at Credit Suisse, projects that the company’s average pay will come close to the $340,000 paid out by Morgan Stanley in fiscal 2007.

Some of the most lucrative pay packages are being offered in businesses that are improving, such as junk-bond trading. Jobs and pay remain iffy in areas like asset-backed securities where markets remain frozen. Russ Gerson, who runs an executive-recruiting firm that fills jobs on Wall Street, says it is too soon to tell if the strong results from securities firms in the first and second quarters will translate into huge paychecks at the end of the year. "All this euphoria about bonuses is based on the expectation that the business is returning to normal and that we will be in a robust environment again. If the fourth quarter is significantly down, I would expect bonuses not to recover too much from 2008 levels," he said.

Whether the higher payouts occur will depend on whether Wall Street earnings continue to recover from last year’s bruising losses on troubled assets and bad trading bets. If the market’s resilience since early March fades or a new crisis erupts, then securities firms would likely set aside far less to pay their employees than they did in this year’s first two quarters. Firms can set aside money for compensation and then decide not to pay it later.

Still, the comeback in compensation so far this year shows how hard it is for Wall Street to break its old habits. Repaying last year’s capital infusions from the government freed Goldman, Morgan Stanley and other big financial firms from curbs on compensation. Meanwhile, non-U.S. banks that didn’t get Troubled Asset Relief Program funds are becoming increasingly aggressive…

The recent increases in compensation reflect efforts by Wall Street executives to keep pay high enough to remain competitive but low enough to avoid the wrath of angry lawmakers. In at least one case, bank executives or their representatives have discussed pay with the Obama administration’s pay czar Kenneth Feinberg ahead of time, seeking to head off any public reprimand, according to a person familiar with the meetings.

A Treasury spokesman said Mr. Feinberg "has just begun his process for reviewing compensation at the seven firms receiving exceptional assistance; he has yet to approve any plans."

While Wall Street firms remain loath to cap pay levels, some are changing the mix of salary and bonus, partly in response to the financial crisis and added scrutiny from Washington. Some are boosting salaries and adding more stock, as well as so-called "clawback" provisions aimed at tying employee pay packages more closely to the long-term fortunes of their firms. As a rule, securities firms pay out about 50% of revenue in compensation…

Goldman, which has suffered less than most of its rivals since the credit crisis began in 2007, remains committed to using bonuses, increasingly from stock, to reward its top performers. Still, the firm is trying to carefully manage compensation, perks and other expenses that could be criticized…

How is this possible?

Obviously, Mr. Obama will have to re-double his efforts to kill Wall Street, and capitalism in general.

Paging Mr. Feinberg.

A man carries a coffin on which is written "IMF politics" next to an EU flag on which is written "20 million unemployed"

Eurozone unemployment hits 10-year high

BRUSSELS (AFP) — The unemployment rate in the 16 euro countries climbed to a 10-year high of 9.5 percent in May as companies cut jobs to survive Europe’s worst post-war recession, according to EU data on Thursday.

Some 273,000 jobs were lost across the eurozone in May as the unemployment rate rose to the highest point since May 1999, the European Union’s Eurostat data agency estimated…

Although activity in the recession-hit European economy is beginning to pick up, many companies are still shedding workers to adjust to slack demand for their goods and services in Europe and abroad.

The May eurozone unemployment rate was up from 9.3 percent in April and 7.4 percent in May 2008.

Meanwhile, in the 27-nation EU the unemployment rate rose in May to 8.9 percent, hitting the highest level since June 2005 as 385,000 jobs were lost…

A major headache for European politicians for decades, unemployment had been steadily falling ahead of the current downturn, reaching a record low of 7.2 percent in March 2008.

However, with the rapid deterioration in the economy, the unemployment rate has steadily climbed higher since then.

Isn’t it wonderful? We are just like Europe.

The Democrats must be so pleased.

Still, when was the last time that unemployment in the United States matched that of Europe?

(Click to enlarge.)

Probably not in our lifetimes.

By the way, the above chart is from this article by the New York Times:

U.S. Jobless Rate Likely to Pass Europe’s

By FLOYD NORRIS
Published: May 22, 2009

FOR many years, unemployment in the United States was lower than in Western Europe, a fact often cited by people who argued that the flexibility inherent in the American system — it is easier to both hire and fire workers than in many European countries — produced more jobs.

That is no longer the case. Unemployment in the United States has risen to European averages, and seems likely to pass them when international data for April is calculated.

“The current economic crisis,” wrote John Schmitt, Hye Jin Rho and Shawn Fremstad of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a research organization in Washington, “has turned the case for the U.S. model almost entirely on its head.” …

The Times only brought this up to show how wrong it is to think the US business model is better than socialist Europe’s.

Talk about turning things on their heads.

(Click to enlarge.)

467K jobs cut in June; jobless rate at 9.5 percent

By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON – Employers cut a larger-than-expected 467,000 jobs in June, driving the unemployment rate up to a 26-year high of 9.5 percent, suggesting that the economy’s road to recovery will be bumpy.

The Labor Department report, released Thursday, showed that even as the recession flashes signs of easing, companies likely will want to keep a lid on costs and be wary of hiring until they feel certain the economy is on solid ground.

June’s payroll reductions were deeper than the 363,000 that economists expected.

However, the rise in the unemployment rate from 9.4 percent in May wasn’t as sharp as the expected 9.6 percent. Still, many economists predict the jobless rate will hit 10 percent this year, and keep rising into next year, before falling back.

All told, 14.7 million people were unemployed in June.

If laid-off workers who have given up looking for new jobs or have settled for part-time work are included, the unemployment rate would have been 16.5 percent in June, the highest on records dating to 1994.

"We were on the road of things getting less bad in the jobs market, and that has been temporarily waylaid," said economist Ken Mayland, president of ClearView Economics. "But this doesn’t change my view that the recession will end later this year. We’re probably two months away."

Since the recession began in December 2007, the economy has lost a net total of 6.5 million jobs…

Even with higher pace of job cuts in June, the report indicates that the worst of the layoffs have passed. The deepest job cuts of the recession came in January, when 741,000 jobs vanished, the most in any month since 1949.

And there was some other encouraging job news Thursday.

In a separate report, the department said the number of newly laid-off workers filing applications for unemployment benefits fell last week to 614,000, in line with economists’ predictions. The number of people continuing to draw benefits unexpectedly dropped to 6.7 million…

(Click to enlarge.)

It really is laughable, the knots that our watchdog media tie themselves into – trying to spin bad economic news:

Employers cut a larger-than-expected 467,000 jobs in June…

However, the rise in the unemployment rate from 9.4 percent in May wasn’t as sharp as the expected 9.6 percent.

Which is it, AP?

Of course these economic experts are always surprised when the economy doesn’t react the way that the AP and the rest of the media want it to react.

(Which, under Bush, meant that the economy would go down. And under Obama, it would go up.)

Since the recession began in December 2007, the economy has lost a net total of 6.5 million jobs.

Once again, the AP repeats the preposterous lie that the US has been in a recession since December 2007, which is one year longer than the actual truth:

This is done to try to put more of the blame on the previous administration.

Even though a glance at the charts from the US Bureau Of Labor Statistics will correct any misapprehension about exactly who is losing jobs here.

Note too, that these labor statistic charts are not something that we would ever see from our watchdog media. Even though they are free and available to the media.

Why is that?

Our watchdog media changed the long-standing definition of ‘recession’ so as to claim that we were in a recession a year before we actually were.

And now they are doing their level best to pretend that we are no longer in a recession, even though it is getting worse.

Even with higher pace of job cuts in June, the report indicates that the worst of the layoffs have passed…

And there was some other encouraging job news Thursday…

The number of people continuing to draw benefits unexpectedly dropped to 6.7 million…

The AP never stop serving their DNC masters.

From the Politico:

Washington Post sells access, $25,000+

By: Mike Allen
July 2, 2009

For $25,000 to $250,000, The Washington Post has offered lobbyists and association executives off-the-record, non-confrontational access to "those powerful few": Obama administration officials, members of Congress, and — at first — even the paper’s own reporters and editors.

The astonishing offer was detailed in a flier circulated Wednesday to a health care lobbyist, who provided it to a reporter because the lobbyist said he felt it was a conflict for the paper to charge for access to, as the flier says, its “health care reporting and editorial staff."

With the newsroom in an uproar after POLITICO reported the solicitation, Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli said this morning that he was "appalled" by the plan and said the newsroom will not participate.

"It suggests that access to Washington Post journalists was available for purchase," Brauchli told The Post’s media reporter, Howard Kurtz. The proposal "promises we would suspend our usual skeptical questioning because it appears to offer, in exchange for sponsorships, the good name of The Washington Post."

Earlier this morning, Brauchili said in a staffwide e-mail that the newsroom would not participate in the first of the planned events — a dinner scheduled July 21 at the home of Publisher and Chief Executive Officer Katharine Weymouth. Brauchli,was named on the flier as one of the "Hosts and Discussion Leaders."

The offer — which essentially turns a news organization into a facilitator for private lobbyist-official encounters — was a new sign of the lengths to which news organizations will go to find revenue at a time when most newspapers are struggling for survival.

And it’s a turn of the times that a lobbyist is scolding The Washington Post for its ethical practices.

"Underwriting Opportunity: An evening with the right people can alter the debate," says the one-page flier. "Underwrite and participate in this intimate and exclusive Washington Post Salon, an off-the-record dinner and discussion at the home of CEO and Publisher Katharine Weymouth. … Bring your organization’s CEO or executive director literally to the table. Interact with key Obama administration and congressional leaders."

Kris Coratti, communications director of Washington Post Media, a division of The Washington Post Company, said: "The flier circulated this morning came out of a business division for conferences and events, and the newsroom was unaware of such communication. It went out before it was properly vetted, and this draft does not represent what the company’s vision for these dinners are, which is meant to be an independent, policy-oriented event for newsmakers.

"As written, the newsroom could not participate in an event like this. We do believe there is an opportunity to have a conferences and events business, and that The Post should be leading these conversations in Washington, big or small, while maintaining journalistic integrity. The newsroom will participate where appropriate."

In his e-mail to the newsroom, labeled "Newsroom Independence," Brauchli wrote: "Colleagues, A flyer was distributed this week offering an ‘underwriting opportunity’ for a dinner on health-care reform, in which the news department had been asked to participate. The language in the flyer and the description of the event preclude our participation.

"We will not participate in events where promises are made that in exchange for money The Post will offer access to newsroom personnel or will refrain from confrontational questioning. Our independence from advertisers or sponsors is inviolable. There is a long tradition of news organizations hosting conferences and events, and we believe The Post, including the newsroom, can do these things in ways that are consistent with our values."

The flier says: “Spirited? Yes. Confrontational? No. The relaxed setting in the home of Katharine Weymouth assures it. What is guaranteed is a collegial evening, with Obama administration officials, Congress members, business leaders, advocacy leaders and other select minds typically on the guest list of 20 or less. …

“Offered at $25,000 per sponsor, per Salon. Maximum of two sponsors per Salon. Underwriters’ CEO or Executive Director participates in the discussion. Underwriters appreciatively acknowledged in printed invitations and at the dinner. Annual series sponsorship of 11 Salons offered at $250,000 … Hosts and Discussion Leaders … Health-care reporting and editorial staff members of The Washington Post … An exclusive opportunity to participate in the health-care reform debate among the select few who will actually get it done. … A Washington Post Salon … July 21, 2009 6:30 p.m. …

"Washington Post Salons are extensions of The Washington Post brand of journalistic inquiry into the issues, a unique opportunity for stakeholders to hear and be heard," the flier says. "At the core is a critical topic of our day. Dinner and a volley of ideas unfold in an evening of intelligent, news-driven and off-the-record conversation. … By bringing together those powerful few in business and policy-making who are forwarding, legislating and reporting on the issues, Washington Post Salons give life to the debate. Be at this nexus of business and policy with your underwriting of Washington Post Salons."

The first "Salon" is titled "Health-Care Reform: Better or Worse for Americans? The reform and funding debate."

This is the most blatant proof yet of the axis of corruption between the government, special interests, and the mainstream media that exists in Washington.

The real divide of American politics is not Democrats versus Republicans, or liberals versus conservatives – but the entrenched political class versus the American people.

(Thanks to Pat for the heads up.)

  Update!

An update from the red-faced Washington Post:

Post Publisher Cancels Plans for Off-the-Record ‘Salons’

By Howard Kurtz
Thursday, July 2, 2009

Washington Post Publisher Katharine Weymouth today canceled plans for a series of policy dinners at her home after learning that marketing fliers offered lobbyists access to Obama administration officials, members of Congress and Post journalists in exchange for payments as high as $250,000.

"Absolutely, I’m disappointed," Weymouth, the chief executive of Washington Post Media, said in an interview. "This should never have happened. The fliers got out and weren’t vetted. They didn’t represent at all what we were attempting to do. We’re not going to do any dinners that would impugn the integrity of the newsroom."

Moments earlier, Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli said in a separate interview that he was "appalled" by the plan, and he insisted before the cancellation that the newsroom would not participate.

"It suggests that access to Washington Post journalists was available for purchase," Brauchli said. The proposal "promises we would suspend our usual skeptical questioning because it appears to offer, in exchange for sponsorships, the good name of The Washington Post." …

"We do not offer access to the newsroom for money," Brauchli said. "We just are not in that business." He told the staff in an e-mail that the newsroom would have no part of this plan, writing: "Our independence from advertisers or sponsors is inviolable." …

Two Post executives familiar with the planning, who declined to be identified discussing internal planning, said the fliers appear to be the product of overzealous marketing executives. The fliers were overseen by Charles Pelton, a Post executive hired this year as a conference organizer. He was not immediately available for comment.

White House communications director Anita Dunn said today that The Post Co. had approached officials at the Health and Human Services Department to participate in a Weymouth dinner later this month. But, she said, "no senior Obama administration officials had accepted any invitation for the ’salon.’"

Weymouth knew of the plans to host small dinners at her home and to charge lobbying and trade organizations for participation. But, one of the executives said, she believed that there would be multiple sponsors, to minimize any appearance of charging for access, and that the newsroom would be in charge of the scope and content of any dinners in which Post reporters and editors participated.

Brauchli said he had been involved in discussions, stretching back to last year, about newsroom participation in conferences of the sort commonly staged by major news organizations.

But he said he made clear to the company’s marketing officials that Post journalists would participate only if they could substantially control the nature of any such conference. Brauchli said he was blindsided by the wording of these fliers and that they are an embarrassment to the newspaper.

"We expressed our concerns and are disappointed by this outcome," he said of the previous meetings with Post executives. "I would ascribe it to a lack of effective communication internally." Brauchli told the staff in his memo that the newsroom would participate in conferences or forums only "in ways that are consistent with our values."

The aggressively worded pitch gives the impression that The Post is selling access to special interests, not just to administration officials and lawmakers — which raises a separate set of questions about cozy relationships — but to the people who produce the newspaper. The Post often raises questions about whether corporations, unions and trade associations receive access or favors in return for campaign contributions to political candidates…

This is some rapid-fire damage control.

But the bell cannot be un-rung.

We now know how the Washington Post sees their role.

The aggressively worded pitch gives the impression that The Post is selling access to special interests, not just to administration officials and lawmakers…

You see, it was just a false ‘impression.’

By the way, Ms. Waymouth is the granddaughter and namesake of long-time Washington Post chairwoman and publisher Katharine Graham.

From a loose-lipped CNN:

Taliban capture U.S. soldier

KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) — A U.S. soldier has been captured by militants in Afghanistan, the U.S. military and the Taliban said Thursday.

The unidentified soldier has been missing since Tuesday. U.S. forces are exhausting all resources to find the soldier, the military said.

"We are not providing any further details at this time, in order to protect the welfare of the soldier," a military statement said.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for the abduction. The U.S. soldier was kidnapped along with three Afghan soldiers, Taliban commander Mulvi Sangeen said.

The U.S. soldier visited a military post in the Yousaf Khel district and got drunk, Sangeen said. He was ambushed while returning to his car and was taken to a safe place, Sangeen said.

CNN could not independently verify Sangeen’s claims.

A source with the U.S. military denied the claim that the soldier was drunk.

"The Taliban are known for lying and what they are claiming are not true," the source said.

The soldier’s family has been informed, the military said.

Our watchdog media suppressed the story of the New York Times reporter’s kidnapping by the Taliban.

(Click to enlarge.)

But when it is a US soldier, not only does our watchdog media decide not to suppress this news, but they claim he was caught because he was drunk.

What media bias?

  Update!

And now we have this from the Associated Press, via the shameless hypocrites at the aforementioned New York Times:

U.S. Soldier Captured in Afghanistan

July 2, 2009

KABUL (AP) — An American soldier, who disappeared after walking off his base in eastern Afghanistan with three Afghan counterparts, is believed captured, officials said Thursday.

Spokeswoman Capt. Elizabeth Mathias said the soldier disappeared Tuesday.

”We understand him to be have been captured by militant forces. We have all available resources out there looking for him and hopefully providing for his safe return,” Mathias said.

Mathias did not provide details on the soldier, the location where he was captured or the circumstances…

”We are not providing further details to protect the soldier’s well-being,” she said…

The soldier was noticed missing during a routine check of the unit on Tuesday and was first listed as ”duty status whereabouts unknown,” a U.S. defense official said on condition of anonymity.

It wasn’t until Thursday that officials said publicly that he was missing and described him as ”believed captured.” Details of such incidents are routinely held very tightly by the military as it works to retrieve a missing or captured soldier without giving away any information to captors.

Initial reports indicated that the soldier was off duty at the time he went missing, having just completed a shift, the official said on condition of anonymity because details are still sketchy…

You see, the Associated Press got an anonymous official to leak them the details off the record.

Hypocrisy – from the AP and the New York Times?

The hell you say.

(Thanks to Howard Roark for the heads up.)

From those allies of terrorists everywhere, Amnesty International:

[Amnesty International photo and caption:] A woman and a child made homeless after the destruction of their home, Gaza, January 2009.

Impunity for war crimes in Gaza and southern Israel a recipe for further civilian suffering

2 July 2009

Israeli forces killed hundreds of unarmed Palestinian civilians and destroyed thousands of homes in Gaza in attacks which breached the laws of war, Amnesty International concluded in a new report published on Thursday. Operation ‘Cast Lead’: 22 days of death and destruction, is the first comprehensive report to be published on the conflict, which took place earlier this year.

"Israel’s failure to properly investigate its forces’ conduct in Gaza, including war crimes, and its continuing refusal to cooperate with the UN international independent fact-finding mission headed by Richard Goldstone, is evidence of its intention to avoid public scrutiny and accountability," said Donatella Rovera, who headed a field research mission to Gaza and southern Israel during and after the conflict.

"The international community, led by the UN Security Council, must use all its leverage to ensure that Israel cooperates fully with the Goldstone inquiry, which now offers the best means to establish the truth."

The Amnesty International report documents Israel’s use of battlefield weapons against a civilian population trapped in Gaza, with no means of escape and is based on evidence gathered by Amnesty International delegates, including a military expert, during field research in January and February.

The report shows that Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups fired hundreds of rockets into southern Israel, killing three Israeli civilians, injuring scores and driving thousands from their homes. "Such unlawful attacks constitute war crimes and are unacceptable," added Donatella Rovera.

The scale and intensity of the attacks on Gaza were unprecedented. Some 300 children and hundreds of other unarmed civilians who took no part in the conflict were among the 1,400 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces.

Most were killed with high-precision weapons, relying on surveillance drones which have exceptionally good optics, allowing those observing to see their targets in detail. Others were killed with imprecise weapons, including artillery shells carrying white phosphorus – not previously used in Gaza – which should never be used in densely populated areas.

Amnesty International found that the victims of the attacks it investigated were not caught in the crossfire during battles between Palestinian militants and Israeli forces, nor were they shielding militants or other military objects. Many were killed when their homes were bombed while they slept. Others were sitting in their yard or hanging the laundry on the roof. Children were struck while playing in their bedrooms or on the roof, or near their homes. Paramedics and ambulances were repeatedly attacked while attempting to rescue the wounded or recover the dead.

"The deaths of so many children and other civilians cannot be dismissed simply as ‘collateral damage’, as argued by Israel," said Donatella Rovera. "Many questions remain to be answered about these attacks and about the fact that the strikes continued unabated despite the rising civilian death toll."

More than 3,000 homes were destroyed and some 20,000 damaged in Israeli attacks which reduced entire neighbourhoods of Gaza to rubble and left an already dire economic situation in ruins. Much of the destruction was wanton and could not be justified on grounds of "military necessity".

The Israeli army has not responded to Amnesty International’s repeated requests over the past five months for information on specific cases detailed in the report and for meetings to discuss the organization’s findings.

"For its part, Hamas has continued to justify the rocket attacks launched daily by its fighters and by other Palestinian armed groups into towns and villages in southern Israel during the 22-day conflict. Though less lethal, these attacks, using unguided rockets which cannot be directed at specific targets, violated  international humanitarian law and cannot be justified under any circumstance," said Donatella Rovera.

In addition to locally made Qassam rockets, Palestinian militants often fired longer-range Grad-type rockets smuggled into Gaza via the tunnels on the Egyptian border, which reached deeper into Israel and placed many more Israeli civilians at risk.

"Five months on, neither side has shown any inclination to change its practices and abide by international humanitarian law, raising the prospect that civilians will again bear the brunt if fighting resumes," said Donatella Rovera.

Under international law, states have a responsibility to exercise universal jurisdiction and start criminal investigations in national courts, wherever there is sufficient evidence of war crimes or other crimes under international law, to arrest and bring to justice alleged perpetrators.

"Those responsible for war crimes and other serious violations must not be allowed to escape accountability and justice," said Donatella Rovera.

Among other recommendations, the report calls on states to suspend all transfers of military equipment, assistance and munitions to Israel, Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups until there is no longer a substantial risk that such equipment will be used to commit serious violations of international law.

It calls on Israel to commit not to carry out direct, indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks on civilians; or use artillery, mortars and white phosphorus weapons in densely populated areas; and to end its blockade on the Gaza Strip, which is collectively punishing the entire population.

The report urges Hamas to renounce its policy of unlawful rocket attacks against civilian population centres in Israel and to prevent other armed groups from carrying out such attacks.

[Amnesty International photo and caption:] Paramedics with destroyed medical equipment and fragments of US-made missiles which killed three colleagues in Gaza City.

It is telling to note that this ‘report’ is accompanied by a gallery of 15 photographs. But not one of the photos shows any of the damage in Israel from the Hamas rockets.

Also note that Amnesty International is in effect demanding War Crimes trials for Israel – to be conducted by the United Nations.

Under international law, states have a responsibility to exercise universal jurisdiction and start criminal investigations in national courts, wherever there is sufficient evidence of war crimes or other crimes under international law, to arrest and bring to justice alleged perpetrators.

"Those responsible for war crimes and other serious violations must not be allowed to escape accountability and justice," said Donatella Rovera.

And yet Amnesty does not try to pretend to any objectivity by calling for a similar investigation of Hamas or the Palestinians.

Again the question arises, why does Amnesty International have any credibility whatsoever?

In this photo taken Sunday, June 14, 2009 Former Guantanamo detainees Khelil Mamut, right, and Salahidin Abdulahat, take a swim on the shore of Bermuda.

ACLU Says Government Used False Confessions

By Del Quentin Wilber
Thursday, July 2, 2009

The American Civil Liberties Union yesterday accused the Obama administration of using statements elicited through torture to justify the confinement of a detainee it represents at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The ACLU is asking a federal judge to throw out those statements and others made by Mohammed Jawad, an Afghan who may have been as young as 12 when he was captured. His attorney argued that Jawad was abused in U.S. custody, threatened and subjected to intense sleep deprivation.

"The government’s continued reliance on evidence gained by torture and other abuse violates centuries of U.S. law and suggests the current administration is not really serious about breaking with the past," said ACLU lawyer Jonathan Hafetz, who is representing Jawad in a lawsuit challenging his detention…

In court papers, the Justice Department alleges that Jawad threw a grenade into a vehicle containing two U.S. Special Forces soldiers and their Afghan interpreter on Dec. 17, 2002. Jawad was also associated with a group tied to Osama bin Laden, the government alleges.

After the grenade attack, Jawad was picked up by Afghan police, according to military and federal court records.

During U.S. military commission hearings on his case, a judge found that Afghan interrogators threatened to kill Jawad and his family if he did not confess to playing a role in the attack. Jawad then admitted to participating in the attack, wrote the judge, Army Col. Stephen R. Henley.

Later the same night, he was questioned by U.S. Special Forces and confessed again, Henley wrote.

In November, Henley found that the first set of statements were elicited through "physical intimidation and threats of death" and that Jawad’s fears "had not dissipated by the second confession." He ruled that prosecutors could not use either of the confessions during military commission proceedings.

Despite Henley’s ruling, Hafetz said the Justice Department wants to use those very confessions to justify Jawad’s detention in the detainee’s lawsuit before U.S. District Judge Ellen S. Huvelle.

Hafetz said he is also asking Huvelle to suppress other statements Jawad made to interrogators at the U.S. military prisons at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay. Those statements were tainted, Hafetz said, because Jawad was beaten, forced into painful "stress positions," and chained to a wall and deprived of sleep in Bagram. At Guantanamo, Jawad was interrogated more than 50 times and subjected to sleep deprivation, Hafetz said.

Jawad’s situation received attention last year when a military prosecutor abruptly quit his post, saying that the case was riddled with problems and that the prisoner had suffered physical and psychological mistreatment while in custody.

That former prosecutor, Darrel Vandeveld, later filed a declaration supporting Jawad’s challenge to his confinement in a federal lawsuit.

"It is my opinion, based on my extensive knowledge of the case, that there is no credible evidence or legal basis to justify Mr. Jawad’s detention," Vandeveld wrote.

This is just the next step in the artufly constructed pas de deux between the ACLU and their handmaidens in the Obama Justice Department.

As we noted a couple of days ago, the Obama’s handpicked lawyers at the DOJ are already arguing that all of the testimony from the terrorists held in Guantanamo was only gained through coercion.

And, consequently, practically all of it should be thrown out.

Which mean that the remaining Guantanamo prisoners should be released as free men – and probably eventually paid damages.

The American Civil Liberties Union yesterday accused the Obama administration of using statements elicited through torture to justify the confinement of a detainee it represents at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The ACLU is asking a federal judge to throw out those statements and others made by Mohammed Jawad, an Afghan…

Does it ever occur to anyone to ask what the ACLU is doing defending an Afghan citizen against the people of the United States?

Lest we forget, the ACLU is a taxpayer supported 501c3 ‘charity.’

By law they are supposed to be prevented from doing anything that would encourage people to break the laws of the United States.

501c3s are not even supposed to have dealing with anyone who would even encourage lawbreaking in the US.

At the very least cannot it not be admitted that the terrorists currently detainee in Guantanamo were encouraging people to break the laws of the US?

Why does the ACLU still enjoy its tax exempt status?

In a more just world, they would have found themselves behind bars long ago.