Marc Thiessen, visiting scholar at the Hoover Institute and former chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush writes today in the Washington Post - - -
In releasing highly classified documents on the CIA interrogation program last week, President Obama declared that the techniques used to question captured terrorists "did not make us safer." This is patently false. The proof is in the memos Obama made public -- in sections that have gone virtually unreported in the media.
Consider the Justice Department memo of May 30, 2005. It notes that "the CIA believes 'the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.' . . . In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including [Khalid Sheik Mohammed] and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques."
The memo continues: "Before the CIA used enhanced techniques . . . KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will find out.' " Once the techniques were applied, "interrogations have led to specific, actionable intelligence, as well as a general increase in the amount of intelligence regarding al Qaeda and its affiliates."
Specifically, interrogation with enhanced techniques "led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the 'Second Wave,' 'to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into' a building in Los Angeles." KSM later acknowledged before a military commission at Guantanamo Bay that the target was the Library Tower, the tallest building on the West Coast.
The memo explains that "information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discovery of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemmah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the 'Second Wave.' "
In other words, without enhanced interrogations, there could be a hole in the ground in Los Angeles to match the one in New York. …
There’s a lot more to Thiessen’s op-ed before he closes making the same point Tarheel Hawkeye made here yesterday - - -
President Obama's decision to release these documents is one of the most dangerous and irresponsible acts ever by an American president during a time of war -- and Americans may die as a result.
The entire op-ed’s here.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Interrogation Techniques Saved Lives
After CNN Reporter Lost It Live, What Then?
Remember CNN's Susan Roesgen who got mad at Chicago tea party participants and wound up attacking them and Fox News? That YouTube video's in this post.
This video shows what happened after CNN cut away from live coverage. A woman confronts Roesgen. There's quite a bit of back and forth. CNN reportedly has tried to remove copies of this video from YouTube.
Mike Williams' Obama Watch - Apr. 21, 2009
Wesley Pruden, editor emeritus of The Washington Times, on Obama’s “excellent adventure in Trinidad and Tobago”:
The president's critics ought to lighten up. We should give him credit for not knowing any better. (He was "finished" and "polished" at Harvard, after all.) Barack Obama is an accident of history, a street hustler from the South Side of Chicago with the gift of gab who landed on the world stage like a whale beached at the whim of a storm, the wrong man at the right time….
This one’s a keeper. Ralph Peters has similar thoughts at the New York Post.
Mike
Monday, April 20, 2009
The Churchill Series - Apr. 20, 2009
(One of a series of weekday posts about the life of Winston S. Churchill.)
On October 5, 1929, Churchill, his brother, Jack, and their sons, Randolph and Johnny, left Chicago by overnight train for New York.
While in New York they stayed at the Plaza Hotel (yes, the Neil Simon “Plaza Suite” hotel). A few days after their arrival Randolph and Johnny sailed for England and their schools.
Winston and Jack did not leave New York until October 30. Thus, Churchill was in New York when the Great Crash occurred.
In a moment Martin Gilbert will recount some of what Churchill did between October 6 and October 24, the date generally agreed to be the one on which the Great Crash began.
Now Gilbert:
[For some days Churchill worked ] on the many articles he was committed to write for newspapers and magazines in both Britain and the United States. He had contracted to write twenty-two magazine articles. “all involving heavy work on return,” he telegraphed to Clementine.In a footnote Gilbert reports Churchill earned for the twenty-two articles the equivalent in 2005 dollars of $3 million which he calculates as almost $160,000 per article.
The work was indeed to be heavy, but his remuneration made him the highest-paid journalist of the day in either Britain or the United States, for these twenty-two articles were to earn him an astonishing 40,000 pounds.
Churchill also found time to visit Washington where he was invited to the White House and met President Herbert Hoover. Churchill also toured Civil War battlefields in Northern Virginia.
Tomorrow, we’ll read some of Churchill’s eyewitness account of New York at the time of the Crash.
___________________________________________
Martin Gilbert, Churchill and America. (pgs. 119- 123)
Latest On Obama’s Release of Memos
Fox News reports - - -
President Obama on Monday pledged his "full support" to the CIA, assuring the covert agency he would vigorously protect the security and identities of its members after his administration last week released classified memos on interrogation techniques.
The release drew criticism from former CIA directors including Michael Hayden, who worried that the disclosure of Justice Department memos would have a chilling effect on agents' ability to operate in the field.
But Obama, in his first public visit to the agency's Langley headquarters, voiced unwavering support for the CIA as he stood beside Director Leon Panetta.
The rest of Fox’s report’s here.
JinC Regular Tarheel Hawkeye comments
I haven't commented on the Obama fiscal policies because I really don't have much expertise in that area.President Obama not only needs to speak to the very real harms Tarheel Hawkeye’s mentioned. He also needs to explain why he released only memos revealing what methods the U. S. has used while still keeping classified memos that reveal we gained critical information that apparently helped protect Americans and others.
On the other hand, I have a great deal of experience in the intelligence field: twelve years in clandestine collection activities in Asia, nine of those years in an undercover capacity; twenty years as a counterintelligence officer; and 13 years as a senior counterintelligence and anti-terrorist analyst.
I join with all the former directors of the CIA in condemning Obama's release of the documents pertaining to interrogation of terrorists.
He has not only unnecessarily revealed sensitive classified information, but has also made perfectly clear to our enemies just how far we can go in dealing with captured terrorists.
This colossal blunder has another result: it will make our field operatives gun-shy and could well result in the deaths of our troops.
In short, there was absolutely nothing to be gained by this foolish act except to make a few leftist political hacks feel good about themselves.
This from Fox News just minutes ago - - -
Now that the memos showing the rulings of interrogation techniques have been released, the Obama administration should release additional documents that show what the interrogations yielded, former Vice President Dick Cheney told FOX News on Monday.
In an interview with FOX News' Sean Hannity to be aired on "Hannity" Monday night, Cheney questioned the point of releasing the legal decisions behind the interrogations but not the outcome of them.
"One of the things that I find a little bit disturbing about this recent disclosure is they put out the legal memos, the memos that the CIA got from the Office of Legal Counsel, but they didn't put out the memos that showed the success of the effort," Cheney said.
Cheney said he's asked that the documents be declassified because he has remained silent on the confidential information, but he knows how successful the interrogation process was and wants the rest of the country to understand.
"I haven't talked about it, but I know specifically of reports that I read, that I saw, that lay out what we learned through the interrogation process and what the consequences were for the country," Cheney said.
"I've now formally asked the CIA to take steps to declassify those memos so we can lay them out there and the American people have a chance to see what we obtained and what we learned and how good the intelligence was."
The rest of this latest Fox story’s here.
Folks, I’ll be watching Hannity tonight and posting tomorrow.
UK, Others Walk Out On Ahmadmejad’s Anti-Semitic Rant
Posted at The Times of London’s Web site - - -
British delegates joined a dramatic diplomatic walkout today when President Ahmadinejad of Iran told a major UN conference against racism that the state of Israel had been founded "on the pretext of Jewish suffering" during the Second World War.
Around 20 delegates, including envoys from the UK, France, and Finland stood up and left the room at what was considered an anti-Semitic remark by the Iranian leader, who has repeatedly called for Israel to be wiped off the map.
Nine Western countries including Israel and the United States had already decided to boycott the conference entirely because its draft declaration endorsed the conclusions of an anti-racism conference in South Africa eight years ago in which Islamic nations pushed through a text equating Zionism with racism.
The rest to The Times’ story’s here.
President Obama should take note of what the UK, France, Finland and the rest did today.
It’s what he should have done during Leftist Ortega’s anti-American rant in Port-of-Spain.
Mike Williams Obama Watch - Apr. 20, 2009
Two years ago Harry Reid declared the war in Iraq lost. Today he is still the Senate majority leader, but some of the natives are getting restless. Kyle-Anne Shiver:
This mounting anger, aimed at the tyranny of a federal government -- completely off-the-rails of its Constitutionally-framed limited scope and power -- may be surfacing now due to a tipping in the fragile balance that was upheld during the G.W. Bush presidency. What was that fragile balance between our quietly continuing our personal business and our taking to the streets?
One thing and one thing only, in my opinion. As long as the federal government is doing the one job of protecting our national security and standing up for us in the face of the world's sleights, we will take a great deal of folderol from our elected officials. We will suffer the profligate spending and invasions on our personal freedoms when we - at the very least - believe our leaders are stridently bent on protecting our interests and our children from harm.
When a president cuts both those legs off at the knees, as President Obama has shamelessly done for 100 days, then frustration boils over into national protest….
Bush did protect us. Iraq, as it’s currently unfolding, is a strategic success, while Afghanistan/Pakistan remains a very difficult operational problem. And despite what Reid, Pelosi, Obama and their MSM enablers told us, Bush was mindful of our laws all along. David Rivkin and Lee Casey:
The four memos on CIA interrogation released by the White House last week reveal a cautious and conservative Justice Department advising a CIA that cared deeply about staying within the law. Far from "green lighting" torture -- or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees -- the memos detail the actual techniques used and the many measures taken to ensure that interrogations did not cause severe pain or degradation….
Obama, on the other hand, seems more mindful of his campaign rhetoric:
The release of these opinions was unnecessary as a legal matter, and is unsound as a matter of policy. Its effect will be to invite the kind of institutional timidity and fear of recrimination that weakened intelligence gathering in the past, and that we came sorely to regret on Sept. 11, 2001….
Plus this:
White House lawyers are refusing to accept the findings of an inter-agency committee that the Uighur Chinese Muslims held at Guantanamo Bay are too dangerous to release inside the U.S., according to Pentagon sources familiar with the action.
This action -- coupled with the release of previously top secret legal opinions on harsh interrogation methods -- demonstrates the Obama administration’s willingness to ignore reality….
White House lawyers are refusing to accept the findings of an inter-agency committee! What if this were Bush and the committee had recommended the release of the Uighurs? Can you imagine the outrage from Obama, Reid, Pelosi and the MSM? At least Obama hasn’t given up in Afghanistan/Pakistan yet.
Well, if nothing else, the Tea Party Movement has shown us how partisan our MSM really is. Kyle-Ann Shiver, again:
In all my years of watching news coverage in America, I don't believe I have ever witnessed more condescending, amateurish, purely politicized reporting than what just transpired among the liberal MSM covering America's Tax Day Tea Parties. The Tea Parties represented a very significant news event.
Whenever close to 300,000 middle-class Americans put their productive lives on hold on a midweek workday, make original signs with their own hands, and travel miles and miles to stand with other private citizens just to demonstrate their anger with government, in more than 300 cities from coast to coast and everywhere in between, that's NEWS….
Apparently a lot of us agree. As the MSM (the dead tree part at least) gears up to recoup payments from online readers to help offset their plunging revenues, we conservatives can be forgiven for hoping that their liberal bias and this Internet seppuku will ultimately prove terminal. Former N&O reporter G.D. Gearino:
The underlying assumptions of this movement [charge for Internet access]are (1) that news is a proprietary product, and (2) that giving readers free access to news stories online is a radical departure from the past. Both assumptions are wrong.
The first problem is that news is a free-range commodity, belonging to no one and everyone — especially these days. We’re bombarded with news. As a result, any newspaper which hides its online content behind a pay wall will end up being like a bottled water manufacturer: It will have to convince consumers that its product is vastly better than the free stuff that’s widely available. (Slate’s Jack Shafer has a smart analysis of that reality here.)
The second problem — call it the problem that dares not whisper its name — is that newspapers having been giving away their content for years….
Gearino’s posting (and comments) are well worth a read if you have some time.
Mike
Safe Lax Suits Discovery Bet
At Liestoppers Meeting there’s been an interesting discussion concerning what might happen if a federal court in
__________________________
For almost two years the public’s had the impression the securing in March 2006 of a nontestimonial order (NTO) directing the white members of the Men’s Duke lacrosse team to provide DNA samples and submit to police face and torso photographing was something the DA’s office and DPD agreed upon and secured through their collaborative efforts.
But now, thanks to reporter Ray Gronberg’s Jan. 9 Durham Herald Sun story, [ reg. req'd; and today I kept getting a "trouble now" message. No surprise. The H-S archives site is very poorly maintained.] we’re learning there are disputes between the DA’s office and DPD and within the DA’s office as to who did what to secure it.
Here are the relevant portions of Gronberg’s story, followed by my comments:
From the Jan. 9 Durham H-S - - -
http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-914213.cfm
[…] At the heart of the matter is material taken from the notes of lacrosse case lead detective Ben Himan, and notes and a deposition from Durham police Sgt. Mark Gottlieb.
They referred to Cline's role in the creation of a non-testimonial order, or NTO, that allowed police to take photographs of and collect DNA evidence from 46 of the 47 members of the Duke lacrosse team.
Cline denied that she had any role in writing the order.
"The record will indicate that David Saacks did it," she said. Saacks is the interim district attorney but was an assistant DA at that time. "I didn't prepare any paperwork on that case. Nothing at all. I've never even seen or laid hands on a non-testimonial order."
She said, "I remember Gottlieb asked me about a non-testimonial order, and I told him I was not available."
But when asked by The Herald-Sun whether she'd asked police to draft the non-testimonial order, Cline responded, "I don't recall."
Himan's notes and Gottlieb's deposition indicate that police consulted Cline on March 22, 2006, after they learned players, on the advice of attorneys, wouldn't show up that day for a scheduled meeting with investigators.
As soon as that was clear, Himan contacted Cline, who handled most sexual-assault cases for the district attorney's office.
Himan -- who turned over his notes to defense lawyers in May of 2006 -- reported that the conversation took place at about 4:15 p.m. He said Cline urged police to secure the order.
"I went to Assistant District Attorney Tracey Cline and spoke to her about our case," Himan said, summarizing what happened. "She stated that we should do the non-testimonial on the players including upper-torso pictures, current mug shots and cheek swabbings."
Gottlieb's notes -- turned over to the defense in July of 2006 -- backed Himan's account.
"I spoke to [Police Attorney] Toni Smith and notified her that Investigator Himan spoke with ADA Tracey Cline. Ms. Cline asked them to draw up the NTO so the DA's office could present it to a judge in the morning. [Smith] stated follow the directions of the DA's office since they are the ones conducting the possible future prosecution."
The sergeant's deposition -- given to N.C. State Bar investigators as they assembled evidence for then-District Attorney Mike Nifong's eventual disbarment -- echoed his notes.
"I had actually spoke with Ms. Smith and Investigator Himan spoke with the District Attorney's office, Ms. Cline, and they decided to -- the district attorney's office thought it was a good idea [--] to go ahead and do a non-testimonial, and I assisted Investigator Himan in preparing it," Gottlieb told bar investigators.
Himan and Gottlieb worked on the order overnight and had it ready for a judge's signature the morning of March 23, 2006. Cline, however, wasn't available to help the detectives get it signed. Himan said he turned to Saacks, who presented the draft order to Superior Court Judge Ronald Stephens.
Asked for comment, Saacks backed up the accounts offered by Himan and Gottlieb, and at least part of Cline's. He said the detectives first went to Cline.
"They just called her and asked her what they should do," Saacks said. "When they came to me, they said they had already talked to Tracey about it. But she wasn't available that morning, so I took it through court."
He said police -- and not anyone in the DA's office -- drafted the order. The only change made to the draft, once it was presented to Saacks, was one that helped authorities bypass a rule that normally gives targets of an NTO three days to challenge it in court.
Saacks said he didn't know whether police suggested the order or whether Cline "brought it up" when she talked to them.
The detectives' use of the order was controversial from the outset because lawyers questioned whether authorities had probable cause to demand DNA samples from 46 players.
One Durham lawyer, Tom Loflin, told The Herald-Sun in March 2006 that the order was "mammothly unconstitutional" and a "dragnet fishing expedition."
In one of two civil-rights lawsuits pending against the city, Durham lawyer Bob Ekstrand alleged that police lied in the affidavit supporting the order because they knew they couldn't establish that all 46 of the players had attended the team party that touched off the case. [A third - sometimes called "the Cooper suit" after lead attorney Charles Cooper - was subsequently filed on behalf of 38 lacrosse players and some of their family members.]
The suit also contended that Himan and Gottlieb requested the NTO to retaliate against the players for refusing to show up at the planning meeting to answer questions.
Cline is widely expected to run for district attorney this spring. [She did run, won and is now DA.]
END OF GRONBERG’S STORY
*****************************************************************
Some comments:
Everyone following this case knew that if discovery proceeded in the civil suits, at some point the DA’s office and DPD would clash and offer different versions of key events, big-time denials and relentless blame-shifting.
But it was expected that would begin over disputes between what Himan and Gottlieb were saying versus what Nifong was saying.
We have something different here: Given that the “official story” (which I dispute here) is that Nifong knew nothing about the NTO until after it was signed, what Gronberg reports doesn’t at least for now involve Nifong.
What we have right now is DPD (Himan and Gottlieb directly and attorney Toni Smith indirectly by virtue of Gottlieb’s assertions) directly challenging what ADA Cline is saying.
Somebody’s got to be very wrong here in what she/he/they is/are saying about extraordinarily important matters.
The dispute Gronberg describes is basically about NTO “ownership.”
Each agency is denying it “owns” the NTO.
That suggests to me, and I’m sure to many of you, how “toxic” are the events involving the preparation of the NTO.
The DA’s office and DPD have known of the NTO’s “toxicity” for almost two years but the possibility that discovery in the not too distant future will force both agencies to face examination concerning “toxic” matters is no doubt troubling both agencies as well as Cline’s election supporters.
I admire the way Gronberg handled this story. Whether he got a leak or just dug in the existing documents, he presented both agencies speaking to the same matters so their contradictions stand out.
A lot of reporters duck doing that. They’d rather write two successive pieces: one from each side. The pieces are promos for each side and the reporter doesn’t have to worry about the DA’s office or the police getting mad at him or her.
I give Gronberg a big “hat tip” for following up with Cline so that he was able to tell us:
when asked by The Herald-Sun whether she'd asked police to draft the non-testimonial order, Cline responded, "I don't recall."That’s news reporting!
Be sure to visit Liestoppers Forum. Bloggers and citizen journalists there are all over this story. [Liestoppers was subsequently hacked and its posts and discussions could not be retrieved. That was a great loss for those who did such splendid work there, for the many commenters who added to many posts, and for readers who appreciated outstanding blogging.]
I encourage you to read the comment thread of Who "Owns" That "Toxic" NTO.
Chronicle’s Muddled Tancredo Silencing Editorial
Last Tuesday Leftist protesters at UNC – Chapel Hill disrupted former Congressman Tom Tancredo’s talk, forcing its cancellation and his departure from campus under police escort. The protesters also threatened (“we know where you sleep”) the students who invited Tancredo to UNC.
Today, The Chronicle editorial board gave the Duke community its thinking about those events in an editorial titled: “Protest within rights but off-base.”
As the title suggests, TC’s editorial is a muddle.
Here’s part of it:
… By chanting, shouting, waving signs, breaking a window and obscuring the podium with a huge banner, the protesters prevented Tancredo from airing his views. This activity should be admonished.The entire editorial’s here.
It is not to say, however, that the protesters did not in general have the right to act as they did. It is crucial to note that they have the freedom of expression and, except for breaking a window, were engaging in the American tradition of free speech through protest.
In the wake of the incident, to deny or to forget that the protesters had this right would be to water down one of the rights that make this country and its academic institutions great. …
On the editorial’s comment thread a commenter ID’ing as Duke Alum (second comment) cuts through TC’s muddle. (excerpt):
I think that we need to understand that 'protesting' does not constitute interrupting, disrupting, shutting down. This is an abomination of the act of protest in a civilized forum.Many reading the editorial will be wondering what they teach these days in Duke’s History and Political Science Departments.
Hopefully, UNC will deal with this inappropriate behavior within its honors code with significant consequences so that future 'protests' will take the form that does not intimidate, does not put others at risk and does not shut down speech. They have a chance to show meaningful leadership. …
I’d take that further and ask: what were they teaching in the editorial board members’ middle and high schools?
Sunday, April 19, 2009
N&O’s Editors’ Blog’s A Very Quiet Place
Publisher Orage Quarles III and top editors at the McClatchy Company’s liberal/leftist Raleigh News & Observer say they’re excited about all the readers who are showing up at the N&O’s 40-plus blogs.
This morning I visited the Editors’ Blog which the N&O describes as the blog where:
Top editors answer questions and talk about The N&O's print and online news reporting. Contributors are John Drescher, executive editor, and senior editors Dan Barkin, Steve Riley and Linda Williams.Two things got my attention.
First - How few posts the 4 top N&O editors have put up in recent weeks.
Would you believe only 7 since Mar. 17? How about only 10 since Mar. 3?
Second - Can you guess how many readers commented during the 7 weeks since Mar. 3?
The answer’s one.
The reader posted on Mar. 3 to express satisfaction with changes at the comics page.
Since then there's not been a single reader comment.
Four editors, 10 posts and 1 comment in 7 weeks!
McClatchy CEO Gary Pruitt says his company has a bright future on the Internet. He boasts about the online journalism training McClatchy’s given its people and their skills as bloggers. He’s said more than once he’s proud of how McClatchy editors engage readers in what he calls “interactive journalism.”
Others disagree with Pruitt’s talk of McClatchy's bright future on the Internet. They say the company’s been badly managed for years, including doing a very poor job of adapting to the “new journalism Internet world.”
Many of the company's critics believe McClatchy’s future, at least under the present management, is not on the Internet, but in bankruptcy court.
JinC Regulars know I agree with those who say McClatchy’s headed for bankruptcy.
Today’s visit to the Editors’ Blog did nothing to change my mind.
Mike Williams' Obama Watch - Apr. 18, 2009
Take a look at this picture:
That’s Hugo Chavez, Venezuela’s president for life. He’s a Marxist revolutionary. So is Obama’s terrorist pal and political sponsor, Bill Ayres. Now connect those dots with the DHS’s recent assault on conservatives and the MSM’s treatment of the Tea Parties. Then read Ralph Peters.
In my days in naval aviation we had this saying – I’m scared ****less, and I’m fearless.
Mike
Campus Leftists Hate Free Speech
We saw an example of that a few days ago at UNC-Chapel Hill when Leftists prevented former Congressman Tom Tancredo from speaking and threatened the students who’d invited him to campus.
In a WSJ column David Horowitz tells us more about campus Leftists’ hatred of free speech - - -
I arrived in Austin, Texas, one evening recently to give a speech about academic freedom at the university there. Entering the hall where I was to give my speech, I was greeted -- if that's the word -- by a raucous protest organized by a professor and self-styled Bolshevik, Dana Cloud.
Forty protesters hoisted placards high in the air and robotically chanted "Down With Horowitz," "Racist Go Home," and "No More Witch-hunts."
Fortunately, a spokesperson for the administration was present to threaten the disrupters with arrest if they continued on this course. (The threat was administered very carefully, with three formal warnings before any action could be taken.) This quieted the crowd enough that I could begin my talk, which proceeded without further serious incident.
Even so, there were occasional heckles and demonstrative cheers from the group when I mentioned the name of Sami Al-Arian ( whose organization, Palestine Islamic Jihad, is responsible for the deaths of more than 100 innocent victims in the Middle East), Black Panther Huey Newton (convicted of killing an Oakland police officer in 1967, although he was eventually released on a technicality), or when I uttered the word "communist" -- even though I did so to remind the audience that communists killed 120 million people in the last century trying to implement Marx's ideas.
Among the organizations participating in these outbursts were the International Socialist Organization, whose goal is the establishment of a "dictatorship of the proletariat" in the United States; Iranians for Peace and Justice, supporters of Hezbollah and Hamas; and Campus Progress, the unofficial college arm of the Democratic Party.
One of the local members of Campus Progress had written a column in the campus newspaper attacking me in advance of my talk, and defending Sami Al-Arian as a victim of political persecution.
The conservative students who invited me to the University of Texas told me that organizations such as the Muslim Students Association routinely join with College Democrats in protests against the state of Israel. …
There’s more before Horowitz’s closes with - - -
I don't know of a single leftist speaker among the thousands who visit campuses every term who has been obstructed or attacked by conservative students, who are too decent and too tolerant to do that.
The entire evening in Texas reminded me of the late Orianna Fallaci's observation that what we are facing in the post-9/11 world is not a "clash of civilizations," but a clash of civilization versus barbarism.
Horowitz’s entire column’s here.
A friend who sent the heads up to the column said - - -
This opinion piece by David Horowitz in today's WSJ is very relevant to the Tancredo incident at UNC. As we've discussed previously, the first chapter in Horowitz's latest book -- " One Party Classroom " -- deals exclusively with Duke's radical left professors. ...
Folks, you can learn more at Amazon about "One-Party Classroom: How Radical Professors at America's Top Colleges Are Indoctrinating Students and Undermining Our Democracy" (Crown Forum, 2009).
And "thanks" go to my friend for the heads up.
Clueless at McClatchy’s Raleigh N&O
McClatchy’s liberal/leftist Raleigh News & Observer’s executive editor John Drescher’s column today,
”Happiness is a warm readership,”begins:
The people have spoken: You like us. You really like us.What’s caused all the bow-wowing at a newspaper that’s recently been forced to downsize, outsource, and let employees go?
Drescher explains - - -
… In March, Raleigh-based Public Policy Polling asked North Carolina voters what they thought of The News & Observer and our sister McClatchy paper, The Charlotte Observer.
Statewide, 31 percent of voters had a favorable opinion of The N&O; 15 percent viewed it negatively. The rest were not sure. The Charlotte Observer was viewed favorably by 25 percent and unfavorably by 16 percent. …
Public Policy Polling works for Democrats but did not have a client on this poll, said Tom Jensen, communications director. He said the firm conducted the poll for the public interest.
In the Triangle, 63 percent of respondents viewed The N&O favorably and 16 percent had an unfavorable view, for "a net review" of plus 47. The Charlotte Observer also scored well in its main readership area.
The firm said President Barack Obama is the most popular politician in North Carolina, and his net review is plus 13.
"The News & Observer and The Charlotte Observer are more popular than the president, the governor or anyone else we poll about on a statewide basis," Jensen said.
In evaluating The N&O, neither race nor gender seemed to matter much among Triangle voters [The Triangle is home to most of the N&O’s print readers. – JinC]. Party affiliation did. Of Democrats, 72 percent viewed the paper favorably, as did 67 percent of independents. But only 51 percent of Republicans had a favorable opinion of The N&O, compared to 27 percent unfavorable.
"Republicans still like The N&O more than they dislike it," Jensen said. "Maybe you hear more from the squeaky wheels, but by and large you hear from across party lines people like what the paper is doing." …
Drescher’s entire column’s here.
***************************************************
My comments:
Well, well.
Of Reps. polled in the Triangle, 51% gave the N&O a favorable rating which means 49% didn’t.
But that doesn’t dampen Drescher’s happiness because
"Republicans still like The N&O more than they dislike it," Jensen said. "Maybe you hear more from the squeaky wheels, but by and large you hear from across party lines people like what the paper is doing."Why didn't Drescher express any concern that about half the Republicans polled wouldn’t give the N&O a favorable rating? [Neither Drescher nor PPP’s post reporting the poll described the scale used to determine voter ratings. – JinC]
Drescher also expresses no concern that 33% of Inds. and 27% of Dems in the Triangle wouldn't give the N&O a favorable rating.
Seems like there are a lot of "squeaky wheels" in the Triangle, and they're not only Republicans.
But editor John Drescher’s just happy the N&O has a “warm readership.”
Talk about clueless! What must sensible N&O employees whose jobs are on the line have thought today when they read their executive editor's "Happiness" column?
PPP’s post includes this:
There is actually much less of a political divide for the Observer than there is for the N&O.Drescher doesn’t mention that.
I’ve left the following comment on Drescher's column’s thread.
From PPP's Mar. 27 post:
"There is a pretty significant party divide in those numbers, with 72% of Democrats but only 51% of Republicans across the [Triangle] region giving the paper good reviews. 67% of independents are positive as well. ...
"There is actually much less of a political divide for the Observer than there is for the N&O."
John, why do you think there's more of a political divide over the N&O than the CO?
Of Triangle voters polled, the N&O fails to get "good reviews" from 28% of Dems, 33% of Inds, & 49% of Reps.
Those results set the N&O to bow-wowing about "happiness" and "a warm readership."
Why? Shouldn’t they concern you?
John in Carolina
Friday, April 17, 2009
The Churchill Series - Apr. 16, 2009
(One of a series of weekday posts about the life of Winston S. Churchill.)
On October 2, 1929, Churchill, along with his son, Randolph, his brother, Jack, and Jack’s son, Johnny, arrived by train in Chicago. They were met there by an old friend of Churchill’s, Bernard Baruch, one of America’s wealthiest men and an advisor to President.
Baruch put his private rail car at the disposal of the Churchill party for its trip to New York, where they would be Baruch’s guest at the Plaza Hotel on 59th Street and 5th Avenue.
Before leaving Chicago, Churchill gave a speech in which he stressed the importance of naval cooperation between America and Britain. He said he believed if the two fleets were ever used together it would be “for the preservation of peace.”
Such a speech may seem like pretty tame stuff to us today, but at the time it was quite a bold speech. Isolationist sentiment was very strong in America. So was anti-British sentiment, especially in cities like Chicago which had large numbers of Irish and Irish-Americans.
The city’s Mayor, William “Big Bill” Thompson, often told audiences that King George V was “America’s greatest enemy.” Thompson had a standard campaign pledge: “If I ever meet King George, I’ll punch him in the nose for all of us.”
One of the constants of Churchill’s public career was his commitment, in words and deeds, to a strong, active Anglo-American union. For close to a century now, that allience has led the fight to preserve and expand freedom and civilization.
The more we study Churchill’s life, the more we realize how much we owe him.
Monday's post finds Churchill in New York when the Great Crash of 1929 occurs.
Here in central Carolina the sun is shining, the weather is beautiful and the dogwoods are in full bloom.
I hope things are good where you are. Have a nice weekend.
John
__________________________________
Martin Gilbert, Churchill and America (pgs. 118-120), contains the information in this post except that relating to the pugnacious Mayor "Big Bill" Thompson. For that, call up a search engine and enter: Chicago Mayor England King.
JinC “Editors'” Bravo Zulu Work Earns “Well Done”
In WaPo's Phillips' Rescue Stories (subsequently updated) I saluted with a “Well done” the SEALs for their extraordinary actions which led to Captain Phillips' rescue.
Tarheel Hawkeye, a former Navy men, let me know SEALs are saluted with Bravo Zulu. I appreciated the heads up and updated the post. Since I couldn’t find on the net why Bravo Zulu is used to salute SEALs, I asked for help.
In response, some good things happened on the post thread which I want to now acknowledge here on the main page.
GPrestonian commented:
John, Bravo Zulu (the 'B' hoisted above the 'Z' flag) is a long-standing international naval signal meaning 'Well Done'.That’s the right answer although I wasn’t sure of that because Tarheel Hawkeye offered a different answer.
But later TH corrected and Danvers weighed in with “more of the story" which you can read below the star line.
Lessons to take from what happened - - -
I’m right when I say readers often know much more about many things than I do.
JinC “editors’” outstanding work makes this blog much better than it would otherwise be. They certainly earned a “well done” for this latest episode.
The “editors’” work is an example of the power of open sourcing on the Net. Also, of the Net’s “reach.” Danvers, for example, did his “editing” in South Africa.
The “editors” gave a splendid example of why, if MSM reporters, editors and publishers are going to operate on the Net, they shouldn’t try to fool the public or fail to admit they’re wrong when they indisputably are. There are people out there who will nail them if they try fooling the public or refuse to admit they’re wrong when they obviously are.
Two last things I’ll mention - - -
GPrestonian hadn’t commented here in a long while, so I was delighted to see the comment and know GPrestonian still visits.
TH’s quick and public correction of his initial mistake was full and gracious; just what we wish more “real” MSMers would do.
Now to Danvers’ material.
*************************************************
From Wikipedia entry BRAVO ZULU
snip
......
In the U.S. Navy signal code, used before ACP 175, "well done" was signaled as TVG, or "Tare Victor George" in the U.S. radio alphabet of that time. ACP 175 was organized in the general manner of other signal books, that is, starting with 1-flag signals, then 2-flag and so on. The 2-flag signals were organized by general subject, starting with AA, AB, AC, ... AZ, BA, BB, BC, ... BZ, and so on. The B- signals were called "Administrative" signals, and dealt with miscellaneous matters of administration and housekeeping. The last signal on the "Administrative" page was BZ, standing for "well done".
snip
From www.navy.mil/
The term originates from the Allied Signals Book (ATP 1), which in the aggregate is for official use only. Signals are sent as letters and/or numbers, which have meanings by themselves sometimes or in certain combinations. A single table in ATP 1 is called "governing groups," that is, the entire signal that follows the governing group is to be performed according to the "governor." The letter "B" indicates this table, and the second letter (A through Z) gives more specific information. For example, "BA" might mean "You have permission to . . . (do whatever the rest of the flashing light, flag hoist or radio transmission says) "BZ" happens to be the last item in the governing groups table. It means "well done".
Mike Williams' Obama Watch - Apr. 17, 2009
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
That’s our 10th Amendment. Gov. Rick Perry of Texas:
“My hope is that America and Washington in particular pays attention [to the Tea Party Movement]. We’ve got a great union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, who knows what may come of that.”
And:
“Texas is a unique place. When we came into the union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that.”
AWR Hawkins at Pajamas Media:
The idea of secession gets under the skin of liberals like few other things can. And this is so because secession trumps their power grabs. When someone like Perry says his state has the right to leave the union if the federal government doesn’t uphold their end of the bargain, it’s a [6] stark reminder that “the federal government exists by and for the states, not the other way around.”
Rick Moran at American Thinker:
When the left talks about "The Bill of Rights" they don't mean what you and I believe it to mean. Where we rightly believe that the Bill of Rights refers to the first ten amendments to the Constitution, the left gets awfully choosy and picks out the amendments they agree with (1st, 4th, 5th, 6th) and either ignore the rest or, as in the case of the 2nd and 10th amendments, undermine them every chance they get….
With the federal government trying to dictate to the states through the stimulus bill what programs they must adopt - even when federal money won't pay for them after a few years - several governors have put their foot down and refused to go along. And they are basing their opposition on their right granted by the 10th amendment….
Moran concludes:
I'm thinking this might be a direction - one of them anyway - the Tea Party Movement might want to consider going. More state control is an implied goal of the Tea Party Movement anyway and getting state politicians on record that they support the 10th Amendment would be a good way to focus the energy generated by the nationwide protests on Wednesday.
Regardless, reasserting state control where possible is a fine conservative principle that politicians should be reminded of constantly.
I think Gov. Perry’s oblique reference to secession is very unfortunate. But the notion that Obama and the Dems are maneuvering well outside the Constitution is cause for some very sober reflection. As is this.
Mike
Thursday, April 16, 2009
The Churchill Series - Apr. 16, 2009
(One of a series of weekday posts about the life of Winston S. Churchill.)
In late September, 1929 Churchill, along with his son, Randolph, his brother, Jack, and Jack’s son, Johnny, left California on the last leg of a three-month trip that had taken them across Canada and down the West coast to California. Ahead of them was the last leg of their trip: a train journey to New York and a visit there and along parts of the East coast before sailing home to England.
The party traveled as far as Chicago in the private rail car of Charles Schwab, President of Bethlehem Steel Company. Churchill and Schwab had met during WWI when Churchill was First Lord of the Admiralty and Schwab’s company made submarines for the Royal Navy.
One of the Churchill's first stops along the way was at the Grand Canyon where Churchill had arranged for their car to be parked by the canyon's South rim. This allowed the party to stay twenty-four hours at the canyon before hitching the car to a Chicago-bound train the following day. Thus Churchill and his party had plenty of time to explore the canyon.
There’s something else I can’t document but don’t doubt helps explain the twenty-four hour stay at the canyon. I believe Churchill, by 1929 a skilled amateur painter extraordinarily sensitive to color, wanted to see the canyon’s varied rock and sand strata change hues, even colors, as the sun and moon played on them.
Churchill later wrote Clementine a description of the canyon’s great depth and colors which he said could be “scarcely exaggerated.”
From the Grand Canyon the party continued its journey through the Rockies and across the plains. For most of the trip, Churchill worked on newspaper and magazine articles.
Tomorrow, Churchill gives a speech in Chicago, changes trains, and heads for New York.
___________________________
Martin Gilbert, Churchill and America (pgs. 118-119)
Shutting Down For The Night
I promised two posts for tonight I won't complete and post.
I'm sorry about that. Things have gotten hectic.
But I'll post them tomorrow.
I hope you're back.
Thanks for your understanding.
John
Just Dems Being Dems
PATHETIC: “Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) blasted ‘tea party’ protests yesterday, labeling the activities ‘despicable’ and ’shameful.’”
Ironic: “The husband of an Illinois congresswoman pleaded guilty Wednesday to tax violations and bank fraud for writing rubber checks and failing to collect withholding tax from an employee. Robert Creamer, a political consultant married to four-term U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky, could face four years in prison on the two felony counts when he is sentenced Dec. 21.”
____________________
The above is a Glenn Reynolds post today at Instapundit.
Who's surprised Schakowsky and other Democrats, like their MSM allies, are lashing out and ridiculing peaceful citizens protesting government by tax-and-spend liberals like the scoundrels Chris ("I didn't know") Dodd, Charlie Rangel, Pete Stark, Speaker Nancy ("I promise to clean things up") Pelosi, Chuck ("The American people don't care.") Schumer, Jack Murtha, Kwame Kilpatrick, Eiot Spitzer and Barney ("So what!) Frank?
Hat tip: AC
CNN Reporter Loses It Live
Here's the YouTube clip of CNN reporter Susan Roesgen at a Chicago tea party losing it when an interviewee who won't go along with her liberal spin. She winds up attacking the peaceful protesters as anti-government and incited by Fox News.
Some bloggers are saying today Roesgen is America's "worst reporter." I think she's better described as typical of most MSM reporters in terms of her political bent and not as good at most of her peers at holding her temper.
If you haven't seen the clip take a look and decide for yourself.
Hat tip: The Real McCain