Outcry prompts amendments to online IP protection bill http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/09/29/urnidgns852573C400693880002577AD006EE1DE.DTL ...."Aaron Swartz, executive director of Demand Progress, said Wednesday that the amendment does little to alleviate his concerns. While the elimination of one of the blacklists is welcome, the fact that ISPs, domain registrars and others are still required to block access to sites deemed as infringing by a court order is worrisome, he said"...
I first learned of COICA a few days ago from the article below: Censorship of the Internet Takes Center Stage in "Online Infringement" Bill: Legislative Analysis by Richard Esguerra 9-21-10 http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/censorship-internet-takes-center-stage-o... "Senator Patrick Leahy yesterday introduced the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" (COICA). This flawed bill would allow the Attorney General and the Department of Justice to break the Internet one domain at a time — by requiring domain registrars/registries, ISPs, DNS providers, and others to block Internet users from reaching certain websites. The bill would also create two Internet blacklists. The first is a list of all the websites hit with a censorship court order from the Attorney General. The second, more worrying, blacklist is a list of domain names that the Department of Justice determines — without judicial review — are "dedicated to infringing activities." The bill only requires blocking for domains in the first list, but strongly suggests that domains on the second list should be blocked as well by providing legal immunity for Internet intermediaries and DNS operators who decide to block domains on the second blacklist as well. (It's easy to predict that there will be tremendous pressure for Internet intermediaries of all stripes to block these "deemed infringing" sites on the second blacklist.)".... .."This is a censorship bill that runs roughshod over freedom of speech on the Internet. Free speech is vitally important to democracy, which is why the government is restricted from suppressing speech except in very specific,narrowly-tailored situations. But this bill is the polar opposite of narrow — not only in the broad way that it tries to define a site "dedicated to infringing activities," but also in the solution that it tries to impose — a block on a whole domain, and not just the infringing part of the site. We note that the DMCA already gives copyright owners legal tools to remove infringing material piece-by-piece,and to obtain injunctions requiring ISPs to block certain offshore infringing websites. The misuse of the existing DMCA provisions have had a tremendously damaging impact on fair use and free expression. By comparison, COICA streamlines and vastly expands this; it would allow the AG to shoot down a whole domain including all the blog posts, images, backups, and files underneath it. In other words, it's not just possible but probable that a great deal of legitimate, protected speech will be taken down in the name of copyright enforcement."... ..."The bill's imbalances threaten to complicate existing laws and policies. The bill includes poorly drafted definitions that threaten fair use online, endanger innovative backup services, and raises questions about how these new obligations on Internet intermediaries are intended to fit with existing US secondary liability rules and the DMCA copyright safe harbor regime. Moreover, it seems easy to get on the blacklist — the bill sets up a seemingly streamlined procedure for adding domains,(including a McCarthy-like procedure of public snitching) — but in contrast, it seems difficult to,get off the list, with a cumbersome process to have a blacklisted domain removed"... Additional links: An Open Letter From Internet Engineers to the Senate Judiciary Committee | Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/open-letter Government Puts The Hurt On The Internet - Security Blog - InformationWeek http://bit.ly/dg9VtO U.S. Senators Continue War On Internet with “Online Infringement” Bill « IP Brief http://www.ipbrief.net/2010/09/26/u-s-senators-continue-war-on-internet-with-... US Senators Propose Bill To Censor Any Sites The Justice Depatement Declares 'Pirate' Sites, Worldwide | Techdirt http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100920/12460811083/us-senators-propose-bil... Us bill favours the copyright cartels - The Inquirer http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1734319/us-favours-copyright-cartels Groups Urge Hearing On Online IP Bill - Tech Daily Dose - Tech Daily Dose http://techdailydose.nationaljournal.com/2010/09/groups-urge-hearing-on-onlin... PCWorld CDT Protests Bill Requiring Registrars to Enforce Copyright http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/206459/cdt_protests_bill_requir... Senate Needs to Rein in Copyright Bill | Center for Democracy & Technology http://www.cdt.org/blogs/andrew-mcdiarmid/senate-needs-rein-copyright-bill Tim Berners-Lee Comes Out Against COICA Censorship Bill; Shouldn't You? | Techdirt http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100927/10290611182/tim-berners-lee-comes-o... The bill could come up to the Judiciary Committee as early as Thursday.I strongly urge you to contact the members of the Judiciary Committee & urge them to vote no.Most of the members of the Judiciary Committee,(& two Senators who are not on the Committee:Bayh & Alexander),are also co-sponsors. The Committee members who are not co-sponsors are:Kyl,Cornyn & Sessions,(all Republicans),& Feingold,Specter,Whitehouse,Kaufman & Franken,(all Democrats). Of the bills co-sponsors four are Republicans:Alexander,(not on the Committee),as well as Coburn,Graham,Grassley & Hatch.The bills sponsor,(Leahy),& 7 of it's co-sponsors:Bayh,(not on the Committee),plus Cardin,Durbin,Feinstein,Klobuchar,Kohl & Schumer,are Democrats. I have included links to their contact pages on their websites as well as their D.C. office phone numbers. Senator Lamar Alexander: http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=OfficeLocations Washington D.C. Office: Phone: 202-224-4944 Senator Evan Bayh http://bayh.senate.gov/contact/ Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5623 Senator Benjamin L. Cardin: http://cardin.senate.gov/contact/ Washington D.C. Office Phone:202-224-4524 Senator Tom Coburn, M.D.: http://coburn.senate.gov/public/?p=OfficeLocations Washington D.C. Office Phone:202-224-5754 Senator John Cornyn http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=OfficeLocations Washington DC Office Phone:202-224-2934 Senator Richard J. Durbin http://durbin.senate.gov/contact.cfm Washington D.C. Office Phone:202-224-2152 Senator Russ Feingold: http://feingold.senate.gov/contact.html Washington D.C. Phone:202-224-5323 Senator Dianne Feinstein: http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs. Washington DC Office: Phone: (202) 224-384 Senator Al Franken: http://franken.senate.gov/?p=offices Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5641 Senator Lindsey Graham: http://lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.OfficeLocations Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5972 Sen.Charles Grassley: http://bit.ly/dm34mN Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-3744 Senator Orrin Hatch: http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Offices.Home Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-525 Senator Ted Kaufman: http://kaufman.senate.gov/services/contact/ Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5042 Senator Amy Klobuchar: http://bit.ly/caLavl Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-3244 Senator Herb kohl: http://bit.ly/dCOyao Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5653 Senator Jon Kyl: http://kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfm Washington D.C. Office: Phone: (202) 224-452 Senator Patrick Leahy: http://bit.ly/bGVi7I Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-4242 Senator Charles E. Schumer: http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/contact.cfm Washington D.C. Office: Phone:212-486-4430 Senator Jeff Sessions: http://sessions.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ConstituentServices.Of... Washington D.C. Office: Phone:(202) 224-4124 Senator Arlen Specter: http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.OfficeLocations Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-4254 Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: http://whitehouse.senate.gov/contact/ Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-2921
I first learned of COICA a few days ago from the article below: Censorship of the Internet Takes Center Stage in "Online Infringement" Bill: Legislative Analysis by Richard Esguerra 9-21-10 http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/censorship-internet-takes-center-stage-o... "Senator Patrick Leahy yesterday introduced the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" (COICA). This flawed bill would allow the Attorney General and the Department of Justice to break the Internet one domain at a time — by requiring domain registrars/registries, ISPs, DNS providers, and others to block Internet users from reaching certain websites. The bill would also create two Internet blacklists. The first is a list of all the websites hit with a censorship court order from the Attorney General. The second, more worrying, blacklist is a list of domain names that the Department of Justice determines — without judicial review — are "dedicated to infringing activities." The bill only requires blocking for domains in the first list, but strongly suggests that domains on the second list should be blocked as well by providing legal immunity for Internet intermediaries and DNS operators who decide to block domains on the second blacklist as well. (It's easy to predict that there will be tremendous pressure for Internet intermediaries of all stripes to block these "deemed infringing" sites on the second blacklist.)".... .."This is a censorship bill that runs roughshod over freedom of speech on the Internet. Free speech is vitally important to democracy, which is why the government is restricted from suppressing speech except in very specific,narrowly-tailored situations. But this bill is the polar opposite of narrow — not only in the broad way that it tries to define a site "dedicated to infringing activities," but also in the solution that it tries to impose — a block on a whole domain, and not just the infringing part of the site. We note that the DMCA already gives copyright owners legal tools to remove infringing material piece-by-piece,and to obtain injunctions requiring ISPs to block certain offshore infringing websites. The misuse of the existing DMCA provisions have had a tremendously damaging impact on fair use and free expression. By comparison, COICA streamlines and vastly expands this; it would allow the AG to shoot down a whole domain including all the blog posts, images, backups, and files underneath it. In other words, it's not just possible but probable that a great deal of legitimate, protected speech will be taken down in the name of copyright enforcement."... ..."The bill's imbalances threaten to complicate existing laws and policies. The bill includes poorly drafted definitions that threaten fair use online, endanger innovative backup services, and raises questions about how these new obligations on Internet intermediaries are intended to fit with existing US secondary liability rules and the DMCA copyright safe harbor regime. Moreover, it seems easy to get on the blacklist — the bill sets up a seemingly streamlined procedure for adding domains,(including a McCarthy-like procedure of public snitching) — but in contrast, it seems difficult to,get off the list, with a cumbersome process to have a blacklisted domain removed"... Additional links: An Open Letter From Internet Engineers to the Senate Judiciary Committee | Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/open-letter Government Puts The Hurt On The Internet - Security Blog - InformationWeek http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2010/09/government_puts.html;jsessionid=VEEY5D5OTDNU5QE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN?nomobile=1 U.S. Senators Continue War On Internet with “Online Infringement” Bill « IP Brief http://www.ipbrief.net/2010/09/26/u-s-senators-continue-war-on-internet-with-... US Senators Propose Bill To Censor Any Sites The Justice Depatement Declares 'Pirate' Sites, Worldwide | Techdirt http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100920/12460811083/us-senators-propose-bil... Us bill favours the copyright cartels - The Inquirer http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1734319/us-favours-copyright-cartels Groups Urge Hearing On Online IP Bill - Tech Daily Dose - Tech Daily Dose http://techdailydose.nationaljournal.com/2010/09/groups-urge-hearing-on-onlin... PCWorld CDT Protests Bill Requiring Registrars to Enforce Copyright http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/206459/cdt_protests_bill_requir... Senate Needs to Rein in Copyright Bill | Center for Democracy & Technology http://www.cdt.org/blogs/andrew-mcdiarmid/senate-needs-rein-copyright-bill Tim Berners-Lee Comes Out Against COICA Censorship Bill; Shouldn't You? | Techdirt http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100927/10290611182/tim-berners-lee-comes-o... The bill could come up to the Judiciary Committee as early as Thursday.I strongly urge you to contact the members of the Judiciary Committee & urge them to vote no.Most of the members of the Judiciary Committee,(& two Senators who are not on the Committee:Bayh & Alexander),are also co-sponsors. The Committee members who are not co-sponsors are:Kyl,Cornyn & Sessions,(all Republicans),& Feingold,Specter,Whitehouse,Kaufman & Franken,(all Democrats). Of the bills co-sponsors four are Republicans:Alexander,(not on the Committee),as well as Coburn,Graham,Grassley & Hatch.The bills sponsor,(Leahy),& 7 of it's co-sponsors:Bayh,(not on the Committee),plus Cardin,Durbin,Feinstein,Klobuchar,Kohl & Schumer,are Democrats. I have included links to their contact pages on their websites as well as their D.C. office phone numbers. Senator Lamar Alexander: http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=OfficeLocations Washington D.C. Office: Phone: 202-224-4944 Senator Evan Bayh http://bayh.senate.gov/contact/ Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5623 Senator Benjamin L. Cardin: http://cardin.senate.gov/contact/ Washington D.C. Office Phone:202-224-4524 Senator Tom Coburn, M.D.: http://coburn.senate.gov/public/?p=OfficeLocations Washington D.C. Office Phone:202-224-5754 Senator John Cornyn http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=OfficeLocations Washington DC Office Phone:202-224-2934 Senator Richard J. Durbin http://durbin.senate.gov/contact.cfm Washington D.C. Office Phone:202-224-2152 Senator Russ Feingold: http://feingold.senate.gov/contact.html Washington D.C. Phone:202-224-5323 Senator Dianne Feinstein: http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs. Washington DC Office: Phone: (202) 224-384 Senator Al Franken: http://franken.senate.gov/?p=offices Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5641 Senator Lindsey Graham: http://lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.OfficeLocations Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5972 Sen.Charles Grassley: http://grassley.senate.gov/iowa/Washington-DC-office.cfm Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-3744 Senator Orrin Hatch: http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Offices.Home Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-525 Senator Ted Kaufman: http://kaufman.senate.gov/services/contact/ Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5042 Senator Amy Klobuchar: :http://klobuchar.senate.gov/c ontactamy.cfm Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-3244 Senator Herb kohl: http://kohl.senate.gov/ Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-5653 Senator Jon Kyl: http://kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfm Washington D.C. Office: Phone: (202) 224-452 Senator Patrick Leahy: http://leahy.senate.gov/contact/ Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-4242 Senator Charles E. Schumer: http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/contact.cfm Washington D.C. Office: Phone:212-486-4430 Senator Jeff Sessions: http://sessions.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ConstituentServices.Of... Washington D.C. Office: Phone:(202) 224-4124 Senator Arlen Specter: http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.OfficeLocations Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-4254 Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: http://whitehouse.senate.gov/contact/ Washington D.C. Office: Phone:202-224-2921
RRD:U.S. Gov. again seeks to use preventive law to restrict our ability to preserve our privacy.One wonders why people might be skeptical of a Government which gave us: 1.Wiretaps on Dr.King 2.Watergate 3.The "Clipper Chip" 4.Bush's Total Information Awareness,(& At&t's apparent co-operation) 5.And Obama's assorted attacks on, (& open disdain for Freedom of Speech),along with his Orwellian Czar Cass Sunsteen U.S. Is Working to Ease Wiretaps on the Internet - NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html ..."The bill, which the Obama administration plans to submit to lawmakers next year, raises fresh questions about how to balance security needs with protecting privacy and fostering innovation. And because security services around the world face the same problem, it could set an example that is copied globally James X. Dempsey, vice president of the Center for Democracy and Technology an Internet policy group, said the proposal had “huge implications” and challenged “fundamental elements of the Internet revolution” — including its decentralized design“They are really asking for the authority to redesign services that take advantage of the unique, and now pervasive architecture of the Internet,” he said“They basically want to turn back the clock and make Internet services function the way that the telephone system used to function.”... ..."There is not yet agreement on important elements, like how to word statutory language defining who counts as a communications service provider, according to several officials familiar with the deliberations. But they want it to apply broadly including to companies that operate from servers abroad, like Research in Motion the Canadian maker of BlackBerry devices. In recent months, that company has come into conflict with the governments of Dubai and India over their inability to conduct surveillance of messages sent via its encrypted service"... ..."There is no public data about how often court-approved surveillance is frustrated because of a service’s technical design"... ..."To counter such problems, officials are coalescing around several of the proposal’s likely requirements"... * Communications services that encrypt messages must have a way to unscramble them * Foreign-based providers that do business inside the United States must install a domestic office capable of performing intercepts *Developers of software that enables peer-to-peer communication must redesign their service to allow interception"...
RRD:Unless there are genuine,legitimate reasons to dismiss these men this is INSANE! Sunni Awakening officers are kicked off police force in Iraq http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/26/AR20100926035... "Hundreds of police officers, formerly members of an American-backed Sunni paramilitary force, will be stripped of their ranks in the Sunni Arab province of Anbar, tribal leaders and Anbar police said Sunday. The officers called the move by Iraq's Interior Ministry, which oversees police, a threat to security in Anbar, once a stronghold of Sunni insurgent violence. In 2006, a group called the Awakening, some of them former insurgents, rose up with tribal and U.S. backing to battle al-Qaeda in Iraq."... ..."In 2007, the U.S. military transformed many of the Awakening members in Anbar into police officers. Now many such as these 410 men, are being stripped of their ranks, are being targeted by al-Qaeda in Iraq or think the Shiite-led government is trying to get rid of them"This committee in the Ministry of Interior is sectarian," said Ahmed Abu Risha, the head of the Awakening and a tribal leader in Anbar. "When you dismiss those who fought al-Qaeda in the streets, this is support for al-Qaeda. What I expect are dire consequences.".. ..."Tribal leaders and police officers in Anbar warned that the move could destabilize the province as a political deadlock continues more than six months after national parliamentary elections. They accused the Interior Ministry of demoting them and promoting unqualified outsiders in their stead. On Saturday, dozens of the men gathered at Abu Risha's headquarters in Anbar province to protest the order from the Interior Ministry issued last week. The order demanded that the men leave the force or stay on as beat officers."... ..."The group of officers demanded that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki rescind the order, calling it a "gift offered by the government on a gold platter" to al-Qaeda in Iraq"... ...."Officials at the Interior Ministry said the decision was made because the men were not qualified to hold the ranks they had. Many of them were never given the ranks in the first place, said Adnan al Asadi, deputy minister at the Interior Ministry in charge of administration and staffing"They did not graduate from a police or military academy," Asadi said"They have no education requirements and were not approved by the local government."...
...."Copyright holders already have the tools required to remove infringing content in the form of DCMA notices. Unlike DCMA which is used by copyright holders to specifically target infringing content, this bill uses the broad stroke of a government agency to shut down an entire site. Many questions remain.For example, at what point will Blogger or Tumblr be labeled as an infringing site and be shut down blacking out all content including those which are not infringing? Does the infringing material have to be 10% or 90% of the content?".... http://www.examiner.com/technology-in-san-francisco/the-combating-online-infr...
"ABUL, Afghanistan — International and Afghan troops anticipate heavy fighting as they continue an air and ground offensive Monday to rout insurgents around the city of Kandahar, an operation that is key to U.S. military strategy to turn around the nine-year war and prevent the Taliban from undermining the Afghan government"... http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hvWEqwq3CrRvaQCmt21MfoYhjZJ...
Censorship of the Internet Takes Center Stage in "Online Infringement" Bill | Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/censorship-internet-takes-center-stage-o... ..."Senator Patrick Leahy yesterday introduced the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" (COICA). This flawed bill would allow the Attorney General and the Department of Justice to break the Internet one domain at a time — by requiring domain registrars/registries, ISPs, DNS providers, and others to block Internet users from reaching certain websites. The bill would also create two Internet blacklists. The first is a list of all the websites hit with a censorship court order from the Attorney General. The second, more worrying, blacklist is a list of domain names that the Department of Justice determines — without judicial review — are "dedicated to infringing activities." The bill only requires blocking for domains in the first list, but strongly suggests that domains on the second list should be blocked as well by providing legal immunity for Internet intermediaries and DNS operators who decide to block domains on the second blacklist as well. (It's easy to predict that there will be tremendous pressure for Internet intermediaries of all stripes to block these "deemed infringing" sites on the second blacklist.)
A friend of mine D.B.Sloan raised a concern that I haven't thought of;Might Murkowski enraged at the Tea Party for her loss,seek revenge by supporting the DISCLOSE act. I doubt it:Murkowski is Mcconnell's protege,& Mcconnell is a staunch opponent of the DISCLOSE act.Still it can't hurt to call,& to remind her of her statement. Murkowski statement on DISCLOSE act: http://murkowski.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=ecd72784-6bf9-4f25-8342-2414aab12bd6 Murkowski's e-mail form: http://murkowski.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=EMailLisa Murkowski office locations: http://murkowski.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=OfficeLocations
Collins Likely To Oppose DISCLOSE Act - Hotline On Call http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/09/collins_likely.php ...."Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) was absent from the vote in July, but has since said he'll support the measure -- putting the Democrats at 59. With Collins and Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) opposing it bill, Democrats will need the support of Snowe."Though Sen. Collins supports campaign finance reform, she opposed this exact legislation earlier this year for several reasons," Kevin Kelley, a spokesman for Collins, told Hotline On Call. "She disappointed that the Democratic Leadership appears intent on bringing this legislation to the floor again."....
....."Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad warned the Obama administration today that if Iran's nuclear facilities are attacked, the U.S. will face a war that "would know no boundaries." The Iranian president, who is in New York for the annual meetings of the United Nations General Assembly, spoke at a breakfast meeting with reporters and editors at Manhattan's Warwick Hotel. He said that Iran is on the brink of becoming a nuclear power, and warned Israel and the U.S. against attacking its nuclear facilities. Asked about the possibility of a U.S.- supported Israeli air strike against Iran, the fiery Iranian leader said an attack would be considered an act of war, and suggested the U.S. is unprepared for the consequences. Such a war "would know no boundaries," Ahmedinejad said. "War is not just bombs." ...... ....."The Holocaust, Ahmedinejad said, was "a historical event used to create a pretext for war." Asking questions about the Holocaust, he said, should not to be equated with anti- Semitism. "We need to ask, where did this event occur, and why should the Palestinian people continue to suffer for it? I am not an anti-Semite. I am anti-Zionism," he said The Iranian president disputed suggestions that leaders of Iran's opposition movement are facing persecution or jail terms. "Those individuals face no problems, no difficulties," he said. "They are all free in fact."
How to Alienate Your Allies In Iran - Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/19/how-to-alienate-your-allies-in-iran.html ..."Attacks on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are coming from unexpected corners. As he arrives in New York to attend the United Nations General Assembly opening this week hardliners back home—including some who were once his close allies—are undercutting their former standard- bearer every chance they get"...
http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/09/14/2010-09-14_koran_burner_derek_... ...."If Fenton was fired for burning the Koran while off duty, his First Amendment rights probably were violated, Chris Dunn of the New York Civil Liberties Union said"The Supreme Court has recognized a constitutiona right to burn the flag. As reprehensible as it may be burning the Koran would be protected as well."...
Campaign finance showdown in works - TheHill.com http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/118535-campaign-finance-showdown-in-works ..."With a Republican takeover of Congress a distinct possibility come November advocates for greater limits on campaign spending believe they are facing a now-or possibly-never scenario for the legislation.With time running out, they are pinning their hopes on Maine GOP Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, two longtime champions of campaign finance reform"... ..."Under the bare-bones strategy, other provisions in the act, such as prohibitions on political spending by U.S. companies with 20 percent or more foreign ownership and some government contractors, would be left on the cutting-room floor. The vote would occur before senators leave Washington in October to campaign and could come as early as next week"... ..."Government watchdog groups had hoped the new stripped-down strategy would convince Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) to jump on board. But Brown shot down any chance of supporting the legislation Monday, even as Collins and Snowe kept their opinions close to the vest"...
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/09/14/justice-breyer-no-right-to-burn-korans-... ...,"Otherwise, Breyer’s argument would put government in charge of judging the qualitative value of all speech. Would speech urging an invasion of Pakistan be therefore criminalized, too? After all, it might cause Pakistanis somewhere to riot and people to die, even if the argument is largely discredited in contemporary American politics. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has already ruled on burnings as free speech. In both Texas v Johnson and US v Eichman, the court ruled that free speech trumped any offense and/or concerns about public safety raised by burning the American flag. In Johnson, the court spoke directly to this issue."....
http://www.wsmv.com/news/24972042/detail.html ...."The two men said they burned the books to defend the United States Constitution and the American people. It's a move that has been denounced by Christian groups, politicians and even some of their family members. Three women who have loved ones fighting abroad stood outside of Old's home holding up signs to protest the burnings"Somebody's got to stand up for the troops," said Ashley Parsons Parsons' husband is fighting in Afghanistan. This is his fifth tour of duty. She said she thinks it is shameful someone would take the anniversary of a national tragedy and do something that both the president and military leaders have said could endanger troops fighting abroad"I was livid," Parsons said. " I was very angry. was very angry, and I'm scared. I'm scared for my husband. I'm scared for my friends and husband. I'm scared for my friends and everybody who protects us." RRD:"Stand up for the troops"?!!!What does she think they are fighting for?Physical safety?They are fighting for the RIGHT to do the very thing she is protesting against!They are not fighting for the right of savages to censor us with death threats!To those who say that I should not condemn her because her husband is serving in the military,I say that she is dishonoring the memory of all the victims of both September 11 & our troops by committing the double injustice of blaming the Pastors & excusing Al-qaeda.If she disagrees with burning books she should say so while recognizing their right to do so & refusing to blame the Pastors for the crimes of terrorists.Who will attack our troops would not attack them before?Only illiterates who do not understand that we have free speech,& those who understand that we have such rights & wish us to lose them.Petreaus's claim is bizarre.Are the Northern Alliance suddenly going to join with their mortal enemies against us?This is the same idiocy which led Obama to deliver his condescending speech to "The Muslim World",a speech that was rightly criticized in many Muslim countries by people who asked e.g."Why is he delivering a speech to the Muslim World?Does he think we all think alike or have the same foreign policy issues with the U.S.?Why doesn't he deliver a speech to the Buddhist World,or the Christian World".Further as Ali Hirsi Ali has noted,Muslims should not be treated as homicidal children to be indulged.To which I would add that for every Muslim we see going berserk over the burning of the Quran,the Pope's statement,(quoting someone),that Islam is violent and irrational,(amusing given the inquisition et-al),&/or the Danish Cartoons et-al,hundreds of millions do not.Muslims have free will & can choose whether to follow the totalitarian aspects of their religion or not,(how totalitarian Islam is compared to other belief systems is not relevant here,even Communists & Neo-Nazis abstain from violence).Muslims w ho use violence against the innocent to suppress free speech are not victims they are,(depending on the context),either terrorists or criminals,& should be treated as such.
RRD:The argument: Morning Jay: The Dukakis Coalition, Leave Mike Castle Alone, Senate Polls, Cook's Dire Warning, and More! The Weekly Standard http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-coming-dem-pocalypse-senate-polls... ...."Republicans can peel back much of Obamacare through de-funding, but a full-blown repeal is probably going to require not only a new president but a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. That is a possibility, though it won’t be easy. The GOP is currently 19 seats short of a filibuster-proof majority, but this year polling averages sugges that the party is currently set to pick up 8 seats. Then in 2012, scores of Democrats are up for reelection: in California, Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia Washington, and Wisconsin The GOP just cannot win some of these seats, e.g. Hawaii, but if the Republicans are strong enough to take the White House in 2012, they will probably be on the attack in many of these states. I count 12 seats in state that either went for Bush in 2004 or for which Bush was campaigning heavily. An R+5 year could tip many of t hese seats to the GOP. So, it’s possible. But this also means that every seat counts.Mike Castle voted against ObamaCare, and he has co-sponsored the bill to repeal it. Is he really worth going after? A pickup of 19 seats in two years is a monumentally difficult task. It seems to me that at a time when the party needs every seat it can get, Castle can get one"... RRD:In my post on "Why Castle must be defeated whatever it takes" http://theneointellectual.wordpress.com/2010/09/07/why-mike-castle-must-be-de... I argued that Castle's election,given his horrendous record,would embolden the Rinos to defect,since they would know that there would be no consequence for their votes.I predicted that this could lead to a bi-partisan DISCLOSE act directed at protecting the establisment.(I made other arguments but that was the main one).Nothing in Cost's argument has changed my mind.He himself shows that that Republicans are likely to pick up 8 seats,2 short of what would be needed to gain a majority.He further ignores the fact that there would be little if any incentive for the leadership,(which as I argue in the article has waffled on full repeal),to stand up to the immense pressure to NOT repeal it from the beltway & the media if they believe that they can betray us with impunity. Cost does not take into account the danger of a Castle victory. Further he assumes that even if Castle votes for a full repeal,(which I doubt he will do when push comes to shove),that the other RINOS will as well.Why should they if they know that the National Review,The Weekly Standard et-al will come to their defense,(or are we to believe that the National Review et-al will suddenly abandon their "it's better to have someone with you 50% of the time than against you 100%). I also believe that he overestimates the importance of New England in getting enough votes to repeal Obamacare. Oh,& one minor point.How do we vote for/or support someone who voted for the DISCLOSE act & then turn around & again,(& correctly) condemn the DISCLOSE act as the closest thing to a 21st century alien & sedition act in memory.(Which it is)
http://www.aifdemocracy.org/news.php?id=6187 AIFD American Islamic Forum for Democracy FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE PHOENIX (September 3, 2010) - The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) takes deep exception with claims from PFC Nasser Abdo regarding his application for Conscientious Objector (CO) status from the U.S. Army. Abdo claims that his faith precludes him from serving "in throughout the United States Military and AIFD sees Abdo's traitorous public assertions as a slap in the face to all American Muslims especially those Muslims who fight in our armed forces for the liberty and freedom guaranteed by the American Constitution. Abdo's claims of conscientious objection clearly violate the requirements for CO status as delineated by DOD directive 1300.06. On August 21 2010, he treasonously told the foreign Islamist media arm, Al Jazeera,"Muslims. I don't believe I could sleep at night if I take part, in any way, in the killing of a Muslim." In his own published web statement he further states that "being a soldier i n the U.S. Army may not be permissible according to Islamic doctrine. It did not take me long to find an abundance of religious sources on the matter… fighting in an unjust war particularly against a fellow Muslim brother would be considered to be a form of disbelief or kufr" According to DOD directive 1300.06 (May 31, 2007), CO status is given to those enlisted who have "a firm, fixed and sincere objection to participation in war in any form or the bearing of arms, by reason of religious training and/or belief." CO status cannot be selective for any particular war. It is only against all war or any military service. Abdo entered the Army in April 2009 freely and knowing full well that he stood a significant chance of being deployed in one of two theaters of war. Abdo's statements clearly demonstrate that not only does he exploit the CO provision, but he is a traitor who clearly is serving his Islamist loyalties and beliefs about the "ummah" (the Muslim nation) above his sworn lo yalties to the United States and our security. His actions are a cowardly attempt to use his faith to make a political statement about wars in Muslim majority nations. Abdo further mixes in slanderous accusations of discrimination by his Army unit upon him for his religious beliefs. Among the religious experience of the vast majority of Muslims who have served in the US Military who found the time to perform our spiritual rituals. This is typical of the American Islamist technique of highlighting a false victimization in order to deflect from their own American and Islamic responsibilities. Rather than publicly repudiate the embarrassingly disloyal actions of Muslims like Abdo, Islamist groups like CAIR instead advertise their often baseless complaints in order to augment their narrative of hyperbolic Islamophobia. After the Fort Hood massacre, groups like CAIR feeding into the same anti-American narrative American Muslim responses to these public displays of disloyalty by Muslim un iformed soldiers like that of Abdo are critical in this war of ideas between our American democracy and transnational political Islam as embodied in groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. For example known Islamist apologist Muzammil Siddiqui representing the stridently Islamist, Islamic Law Council of North America told ABC News that there are a lot of good Muslims who are serving in the U.S. Army and a lot of other places." What Siddiqui does not answer and what leading Muslims should lead with is that Nasser Abdo does not represent American Muslims or the Islam we know. He represents the ideology of a traitor with allegiance to the ummah over allegiance to our nation. AIFD calls upon Mr. Siddiqui, his "Law Council" (aka Shariah council) and all American Muslim groups to repudiate the statements of Abdo which reflect upon all American Muslims and are used by Islamist propaganda arms like Al Jazeera to radicalize our youth.
"..The leading think-tank, the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), said Iran was taking a "minimalist" approach to its so-called Safeguards agreement with the nuclear nspectors, under which they are granted access to monitor the nuclear programme. The ISIS warned that Iran was "degrading" that Safeguards agreement to such an extent that there was now a danger of Iran diverting uranium into a bomb-making programme and of that remaining undetected for a significan period of time. Amongst the issues raising concern is Iran's policy on which inspectors to accept. The IAEA believes Iran is trying to exclude inspectors with a good knowledge of Iran's programme in favour of those with less experience of it".. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11223683
"..The leading think-tank, the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), said Iran was taking a "minimalist" approach to its so-called Safeguards agreement with the nuclear nspectors, under which they are granted access to monitor the nuclear programme. The ISIS warned that Iran was "degrading" that Safeguards agreement to such an extent that there was now a danger of Iran diverting uranium into a bomb-making programme and of that remaining undetected for a significan period of time. Amongst the issues raising concern is Iran's policy on which inspectors to accept. The IAEA believes Iran is trying to exclude inspectors with a good knowledge of Iran's programme in favour of those with less experience of it".. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11223683
"Physicians and ALL Concerned Citizens need to stand up and be counted -- opposing the implementation of ObamaCare. Come join the Texas Doctors Tea Party, Saturday, September 18 9am - 11pm, in Austin, Texas on the South Steps of the Texas State Capitol" http://www.doctorsteapartyaustin.com/
It is difficult to overstate the threat posed to the Tea Party & the cause of freedom should Mike Castle win the open Senate seat in Delaware.And it is a sad demonstration of the grip of pragmatism on the minds of some highly respected Conservative bloggers that they cannot see the forest from the trees on this issue.The first question one must ask is oneself is:what is my goal?Is my goal to protect individual rights,or is my goal to give Republicans control of the Senate?The first mistake made by many Conservatives is that they mistakenly believe gaining control of the Senate NOW is essential to achieving freedom.(I am excluding,of course,party hacks whose dreams consist of getting as many people with R's after their names into office as possible).In fact there is little that can be accomplished with control of the Senate so long as Obama remains President,(assuming,that is,that we do in fact gain control of the Senate,we could fail to win one,or more of the other seats,or we could gain control of the Senate only to lose it if Castle defects). Some will mention subpoena power.My response is:what will you subpoena?Do you actually believe that if there is some evidence of a crime that Obama will turn it over rather than destroy it? When,other than Nixon has a President ever been removed from office?Did impeachment remove Clinton?Did having subpoena power make any practical difference regarding Bush? This is a battle that will be won,(or lost,possibly),in 2012. Control of the schedules is a major benefit.If it happens.If it doesn't we risk disaster,(as I explain below).(And of course even if we gain control of the Senate,by electing Castle we will send the message to the GOP leadership that they need fear no consequences for their cowardice,if for example,they fail to fully repeal Obamacare if/when we have a Republican President). If their first mistake is overestimating the importance of taking the Senate in 2010,their second mistake is their failure to grasp the threat posed by Castle. What threat you ask?In order to understand the threat you must first understand what the DISCLOSE act is.See here for background: Stop the DISCLOSE act Hr5175: The Neointellectual: http://theneointellectual.wordpress.com/stop-the-disclose-act-hr5175/ Analysis of #DISCLOSE act #hr5175 #s3295 #tcot #tlot http://theneointellectual.wordpress.com/2010/06/25/analysis-of-disclose-act-h... Democrats Want to Regulate Bloggers & Shut Us Up Posted by Erick Erickson Redstate.com http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/05/20/democrats-want-to-regulate-bloggers-... Free Speech: Use It or Lose It :Paul Hsieh http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/free-speech-use-it-or-lose-it/ Update! Dems will stil push #DISCLOSE act even if they loose today’s vote #tcot#tlot #teaparty http://theneointellectual.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/update-dems-will-still-pus... And this article which shows that Brown may support a more "bi-partisan" bill. Brown will not rule out voting for a more fairly statist DISCLOSE act http://theneointellectual.wordpress.com/2010/07/15/brown-will-not-rule-out-voting-for-a-more-fairly-statist-disclose-act-tcot-tlot-rino-teaparty-s3295/ Schumer changes DISCLOSE act to make it more palatable to Snowe,Collins et-al http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/110401-schumer-files-new-version-of-campaign-finance-bill-to-court-centrists Dems will bring up DISCLOSE again in Sept & wage propaganda campaign in interim by RRD The Neointellectual. http://theneointellectual.wordpress.com/2010/07/28/dems-will-bring-up-disclos... The DISCLOSE act is not "just" another statist bill.It is a direct assault on the First Amendment,in fact,it is, (so far as I know),the most brazen & partisan assault on the First Amendment since the Alien & Sedition act.It is worse in some ways than Mccain-Feingold in it's one-sidedness & it's assault on bloggers(again see above).It received two Republican co-sponsors,(Walter Jones & Mike Castle),in the House & NONE in the Senate.Only TWO Republicans voted for it(Cao & Castle).Two. Castle's conservative supporters seem to be either ignorant of Castle's horrendous record(see more below),or are downplaying it. Let me emphasize this again:Castle voted to give the President the power to harrass & hound bloggers & the Tea Party.Snowe did not.Collins did not.Brown did not.Graham did not.Mccain did not.Only Castle & Cao did.This is the folly of pointing to Castle's ACU rating & comparing it to other Republicans.It is not the number of times he voted with or against the GOP,all issues are not of equal importance.If he voted with the GOP 99% of the time & voted for the DISCLOSE act THAT one vote would outweigh the others.Again he voted to give the President the power to declare war on the tea party movement.But,you say:If we control the Senate we won't have to worry about the DISCLOSE act,Mcconnell will never bring it up.Really?What makes you think that electing Castle is synonymous with gaining control of the Senate?Taking the Delaware seat is a necessary but not sufficient condition of taking the Senate.As I noted,it is quite possible that Castle could be elected & one of the other Repu blicans that the GOP is depending on will not be.This will leave us with a Democratic Senate AND Mike Castle.It is also possible that Castle could defect.Or use the threat of a defection to wield outsize influence. But you say even if we take Delaware,but not the Senate what's the worst that could happen.Oh,let's see: First the election of Castle sends the message to Snowe,Collins,Brown,that they have nothing to fear.They are free to cross the aisle to support the DISCLOSE act, (Or a watered down version designed to protect both the Dems & the GOP establisment). The result being a war on bloggers & the Tea Party.They can block repeal,(or a full repeal),even if the GOP does gain a majority.The GOP establisment will take Castle's election as a sign that they can backpedal on repeal,spending, anything. Why exactly do these people think that Snowe & Collins & Brown & Graham voted against the DISCLOSE act?Fear.Fear of a primary challenger.Fear of the Tea Party.But why should they fear the Tea Party,(or anyone else),if we send the message that voting for the DISCLOSE act,(i.e. declaring war on the Tea Party & the Constitution), will get you elevated from Congressman to Senator. See also: Centrist Republicans pin their political hopes on the class of ’10 - TheHill.com http://thehill.com/homenews/house/109965-centrists-pin-their-hopes-on-the-class-of-10 Electing Castle will unleash the RINOS.They will feel impunity to do almost anything,& why shouldn't they?After all they will have bloggers from the Weekly Standard,the National Review & Hotair coming to their defense playing down their record while hypocritically ripping the Dems to shreds for the same votes. The second likely effect is the further alienation of the Tea Party from the GOP.It is very difficult to persuade people who have actual,you know,convictions about the Constitution that the Republican party is redeemable if they nominate someone who voted for the DISCLOSE act,against the surge,& for a version of Murtha's "slow bleed" strategy.Castle also supported the Baker Iraq Study Groups bizarre "blame Israel First,last & always" argument that solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was somehow the key to victory in Iraq.He voted for Cap and Trade,& for Pelosi's ban on incandescent blubs.In one of the more ominous developments he is open to filibuster reform. See: Rep. Mike Castle on filibuster reform at StarkReports.com http://www.starkreports.com/2010/08/11/rep-mike-castle-on-filibuster-reform/ But changing the Senate rules requires 67 votes? See below: Dems try to change filibuster w/o 67 votes DISCLOSE http://theneointellectual.wordpress.com/2010/08/07/dems-try-to-change-filibuster-wo-67-votes-disclose-tcot-tlot-teaparty-2 The third danger is that the Democrats will try to push through legislation in a lame-duck session,whoever wins the Delaware seat, (unlike the other races), will be seated immediately.If Cap and Trade is to be passed it is better for it NOT to be "bi-partisan".And only O'Donnell will vote against it.(Castle would have to reverse his entire track to vote against it,& he would have to do so AFTER being sent the message that he can get away with anything & still be elected) Banking on Mike Castle By Jeff Poor http://spectator.org/archives/2010/08/17/banking-on-mike-castle Christine O’Donnell Money Bomb! August 9, 2010 http://theothermccain.com/2010/08/09/christine-odonnell-moneybomb/ Why Does RINO Mike Castle Want to ‘Kill Jobs and Drive Up Prices on and Drive Up Prices on Everything’? The Other Mccain : http://theothermccain.com/2010/07/26/why-does-rino-mike-castle-want-to-kill-j... At times I feel that lurking beneath the "vote for the Rino or you are to blame for what happens",argument is the face of John Mccain smirking while he says "where will they go". I sometimes wonder whether Castle's conservative supporters understand that we are,in many ways,as much at war with the Republican leadership in both the House & the Senate as we are with the Democrats.The difference being that the Democrats enact the laws & Republicans largely fight to keep the status quo & to walk rather than run towards a European style welfare state.With some notable exceptions such as Reagan in some cases they never seek to repeal & never will unless we push them to do it. See: Obamacare is here to stay: Chris Rowan http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/09/04/obamacare-is- here-to-stay/ Internal grumbling over Republican healthcare message intensifies message intensifies The Hill http://thehill.com/homenews/house/91047-internal-grumbling-on-gops-healthcare-message-intensifies Mccain's mission: A GOP makeover Politico http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27832.html Because I Can’t Resist: On McConnell’s Leadership Assurance: Melissa Clouthier http://libertypundits.net/article/because-i-cant-resist-on-mcconnells-leadership-assurance/ We will need to dethrone Boehner,Cantor,Mcconnell & Cornyn if we are to repeal obamacare.We are going to have to be prepared to risk or even LOSE seats if we are to have any check on these people at all.Castle's defeat far from being a pointless exercise actually has a very clear point.We are not your whores.If you cross us,(as Castle did),we will not only not support you we will bring you down. No I am not saying that I demand that a candidate support all my postions,(If I did I would be supporting a grand total of one candidate nationwide. i.e.: Stephen Bailey),but I DO DEMAND THAT THEY SUPPORT CERTAIN CORE ISSUES & THAT THEY NOT DECLARE WAR ON MY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.Any savvy negotiator knows that if you walk into a negotiation unprepared to just get up & walk away you're toast.In such a case your opponent will always have the upper hand.The establishment Republicans & the RINOS understand this(& have been playing us for suckers all this time).It's time the Tea Party learned it. See also: More links on Castle : Castle's voting record: http://www.castle.house.gov/IssuesList/Iraq110th.htm Castle on the ISG (James Baker's Iraq Study Group): http://www.castle.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=106659 ..."For this reason, I recently joined 44 other Members of Congress - Republicans and Democrats - in introducing legislation that crafts a clear-cut path forward in Iraq. By relying on key recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, this legislation represents the first truly bipartisan proposal for ending this conflict and bringing our troops home I believe that it is critical for the U.S. to undertake an intense diplomatic initiative to engage al nations in a collective effort to solve the hardes problems we are facing in the Middle East. This includes working with moderate Muslim countries in the region, to find a fair resolution to the Israeli Palestinian conflict. It also means talking to nation who have been agitators in the Middle East, like Syria and Iran, so that we may ease tensions and force these countries to become part of the solution".... Castle was one of 17 Republicans in The House who voted for a resolution condemning the surge: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/house/1/votes/99/ Castle was one of only six Republicans in The House to vote for a version of Murtha's "slow bleed" strategy. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2007-796 The Weekly Standard on "slow bleed" & the anti-surge resolution: The Democrats''Slow-Bleed' Strategy A disgraceful moment in Congress BY William Kristol February 26, 2007 http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/292ssqwn.asp Hotair's Allahpundit on Murtha's "slow bleed" Video: Murtha lays out the slow-bleed strategy http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/21/video-murtha-lays-out-the-slow-bleed-st... WaPo: Dem centrists revolt against the slow bleed http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/23/wapo-dem-centrists-revolt-against-the-s... Murtha “running the show” by Bryan http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/20/murtha-running-the-show/ "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a political party’s cynicism, cowardice irresponsibility and narcissism? Ask Jack Murtha, because that’s exactly what he’s askin of our troops fighting in Iraq" National Review Online on "slow bleed" War Power Game : http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/220021/war-power-game/rich-lowry Castle on repealing Obamacare: “While this president is in office,” said Castle, “repealing this full law is not realistic and not the best use of our efforts.”... From The Washington Independent : ...."party in the First State. Bu what does this mean? First, Castle won’t sign onto Rep. Michele Bachmann’s (R-Minn.) repeal bill which takes some air out of that campaign Second, Castle isn’t promising to support repeal if he makes it to the Senate in 2011. And that takes some air out of Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R-S.C.) campaign for a similar repeal bill. ".... Primary Challenger Goes After Rep. Mike Castle for Soft-Pedaling Chances of Health Care Reform Repeal By David Weigel 3/26/10 http://washingtonindependent.com/80610/primary-challenger-goes-after-rep-mike-castle-for-soft-pedaling-chances-of-health-care-reform-repeal Castle's "support" for repeal:maybe,someday I'll consider it Christine O'Donnell signs repealit pledge http://www.repealit.org/pledge/candidate?field_state_value_many_to_one=DE Castle did not And Christine O'Donnell: http://defundit.org/?page_id=6 Castle defends DC Gun ban as Constitutional & professes ignorance of the small arms treaty: Castle gets a F rating from NRA http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Michael_Castle_Gun_Control.htm A list of Mike Castle's stances on other issues: http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Michael_Castle.htm Human Events lists Castle at number 9 on their list of the top ten RINOS : "9. Rep. Michael Castle (Del.) As president of the moderate Republican Main Street Partnership and key player in the so-called Tuesday Group lunches, he is a ring-leader of RINOs.".. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=11129 Commentators on Mike Castle & Christine O'Donnell: Pro-O'Donnell & Anti-Castle: Mark Levin Takes The Battle To NRO:Dan Riehl http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/09/mark-levin-takes-the-battle-to-nro.html Oh, Great, Now We Have Sand "Castle" Conservatives, Too:Dan Riehl http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/09/oh-great-now-we-have-sand-castle-conservatives-too.html Mark Levin rips criticism of Christine O’Donnel Posted by therightscoop on Sep 2, 2010 http://www.therightscoop.com/mark-levin-rips-criticism-of-christine-odonnell?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=mark-levin-rips-criticism-of-christine-odonnell Mark Levin on O'Donnell vs. Castle: http://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-levin/perspective-boys-perspective/4267834... Mark Levin calls on other talk show hosts to help O'Donnell: http://bootmikecastle.com/2010/08/mark-levin-called-on-other-hosts-to-help-ch... Blue Hen Conservative:A conservative Delaware blogger. Pro-O'Donnell Anti-Castle http://bluehenconservative.blogspot.com/ Boot Mike Castle blog http://bootmikecastle.com/ The other Mccain: http://theothermccain.com/2010/09/02/delaware-castle-under-siege/ Christine O'Donnell defended by Jeffrey Lord http://spectator.org/blog/2010/09/03/christine-odonnell-defended Dan Riehl :My Response To Stephen Bainbridge's Ad Hominem Attack http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/09/my-response-to-stephen-bainbridges-ad-hominem-attack.html Chris Christie Whitman http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/09/chris-christie-whitman.html Reid Hopes For Castle's Cap And Trade Vote In Lame Duck Session http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/09/reids-hopes-fo... Dan Riehl :Figures Allah Couldn't Resist http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/09/figures-allah-couldnt-resist.html Michelle Malkin endorses O'Donnell: Delaware and the GOP need fresh blood : Christine O’Donnell for Senate http://michellemalkin.com/2010/08/30/delaware-and-the-gop-need-fresh-blood-ch... Mark Levin Supposed Wisdom http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=427547210945 Both Anti-O'Donnell & Castle: Pulling the Plug in Delaware: The Liberty.com and Christine O’Donnell Matter by Erick Erickson http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/09/03/pulling-the-plug-in-delaware-the-lib... Anti-O'Donnell &/or Pro-Castle : O'Donnell's Embarrassments By Quin Hillyer on 9.3.10 http://spectator.org/blog/2010/09/03/odonnells-embarrassments Who’s Backstabbing Who in Delaware? By Jim Geraghty National Review Online: http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/245596/whos-backstabbing-who-dela... Who Is Christine O'Donnell? The Tea Party backed Delaware Senate candidate talks to THE WEEKLY STANDARD. BY John McCormack http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/christine-odonnell-wont-rule-out-third-pa... The Delaware Conundrum, Part Four Powerline http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/09/027142.php?format=print Stay Classy, Christine O'Donnell Ace of Spades http://ace.mu.nu/archives/305288.php A Misguided Siege? Fred Bauer http://fredbauerblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/misguided-siege.html
"If the leaders of the region do not have the guts then the people of the region are capable of removing the Zionist regime from the world scene," he said."... ... "President Ahmadinejad said that direct peace talks which Western-backed Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas relaunched with Israel in Washington on Thursday after a 20-month hiatus were "doomed" to fail,"What do they want to negotiate about? Who are they representing? What are they going to talk about?" the Iranian president said of the Palestinian leadership"Who gave them the right to sell piece of Palestinian and? The people of Palestine and the people of the region will not allow them to sell even an inch of Palestinian soil to the enemy"The negotiations are stillborn and doomed."... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/7979496/Ahmadinejad...
...." the Netherlands' largest newspaper led its front page on Friday with a story on the speech by Feiz Muhammad The Sydney-born Muhammad has gained notoriety for, among other things, calling on young children to be radicalized and blaming rape victims for their own attacks. The paper posted an English-language audio clip in which he refers to Wilders as "this Satan, this devil this politician in Holland" and explains that anyone who talks about Islam like Wilders does should be executed by beheading. De Telegraaf did not say when the speech was given but said it and the Dutch secret service both had copies.According to his website, Muhammad is based in Malaysia"..., http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100903/wl_nm/us_dutch_wilders
