Monthly Archives: July 2010

PFC Bradley Manning - Traitor

The Taliban has issued a warning to Afghans whose names might appear on the leaked Afghanistan war logs as informers for the Nato-led coalition.

The Telegraph UK.com By Robert Winnett in Washington 30 Jul 2010

In an interview with Channel 4 News, Zabihullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesman, said they were studying and investigating the report, adding “If they are US spies, then we know how to punish them.”

The warning came as the US military’s top officer, Admiral Mike Mullen said that Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, may already have blood on his hands following the leak of 92,000 classified documents relating to the war in Afghanistan by his website.

“Mr Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing, but the truth is they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family,” he said.

Information from the documents could reveal:
• Names and addresses of Afghans cooperating with Nato forces
• Precise GPS locations of Afghans
• Sources and methods of gathering intelligence

The US government has called in the FBI to help hunt those responsible for leaking tens of thousands of secret documents about the Afghanistan war.

Robert Gates, the US Defense Secretary, warned that sources identified in the documents now risked being “targeted for retribution” by insurgents in Afghanistan.

He pledged a “thorough, aggressive investigation” to identify the leakers and said that steps were being taken to restrict access to classified documents in future.

Bradley Manning, a 22-year old intelligence analyst, is the prime suspect in the leak inquiry. He is currently already in custody in Kuwait after being arrested for allegedly leaking other information earlier this year.

However, he was previously caught boasting that he had leaked tens of thousands of documents on the Afghan war to the Wikileaks website. The Pentagon suspects that Manning may have accomplices within the military.

Earlier this week, Wikileaks published 90,000 documents – mostly reports detailing operations by American and other allied forces in Afghanistan between 2004 and 2009. The website is threatening to publish thousands more documents.

In his first comments on the massive leak, Mr Gates said that “the battlefield consequences of the release of these documents are potentially severe and dangerous for our troops, our allies and Afghan partners, and may well damage our relationships and reputation in that key part of the world.” “Intelligence sources and methods, as well as military tactics, techniques and procedures will become known to our adversaries,” he added.

The defense secretary promised “a thorough, aggressive investigation to determine how this leak occurred, to identify the person or persons responsible, and to assess the content of the information compromised.”

Mr Gates promised to take steps to protect the lives of US service members as well as Afghans possibly exposed by the leaks.

The massive leak jeopardized the trust vital to gathering intelligence in the “field”, said Mr Gates, a former CIA director.

“We have considerable repair work to do,” he said.

To read the complete article and view a video, click here:
Telegraph UK article & Video

Shirley Sherrod

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Shirley Sherrod is going to sue Andrew Breitbart, she says. The liberal internets are all aTwitter with joy. Andy finally is going to get his comeuppance.

It is unclear what the grounds for the suit would be.

Defamation? For what, showing a two-minute clip of her speech, and not showing the rest of the speech (which Breitbart apparently did not have a copy of)? For calling her comments “racist” when she admitted in the speech, at a minimum, to formerly being a racist?

Interference with her employment? When she resigned and turned down the job when she was offered it after her resignation?

For portraying her in a false light? Really? I’d like to see the movie of her real light.

The legal issues — was she a public figure? — may not take this case past a motion to dismiss at the start of the case.

But, let’s say the lawsuit does get off the ground, and moves forward into discovery.

Will Sherrod assert that her reputation has been damaged? By claiming reputational harm, Sherrod opens up almost her entire life to scrutiny, which is why so many people are hesitant to assert a defamation claim.

Will Sherrod assert the loss of her job as damages? This would permit Breitbart to take depositions up the chain of command, from the person who made the infamous “pull over to the side of the road” phone call, to Tom Vilsack, to the people in the White House.

Now, I’m sure Breitbart does not want to be sued, even though he probably has insurance anyway, which at least would cover the defense costs.

But, if having to defend a suit of dubious merit allows Breitbart to put Sherrod’s life on trial, to conduct an inquiry into the NAACP and Sherrod’s connections in the movement, and to take the depositions of administration officials, that might just be a price Breitbart is happy to pay.

Sherrod is hoping to use the tool so finely forged by the Al Sharpton and the (Un) Reverend Jessie Jackson of alleging racism and then threatening this and that unless they are paid off, This worked for these two for decades but success in this nearly criminal enterprise hasn’t paid off all that well in recent times.

Me thinks that this could be a news feast for just about everyone that opposes the White House for one way or another the depositions would lead right to the Obama doorstep.

After all, the show must go on.

Friday, 7/30/10
(Note: U.S. District Judge Bolton’s decision in the AZ Law case was prominently featured in Central and South American newspapers and practically dominated press coverage in Mexico. In lieu of repeating these reports, we offer the following op/col (OpEd) by Mexican syndicated writer Sergio Sarmiento, whose works appear in 22 papers. The column is titled as shown below.)

Aliens

A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation revealed some days ago that 55% of U.S. citizens are in favor of Arizona Law SB1070 despite acknowledging that it will generate acts of discrimination. Only 40% oppose it. Many Mexicans have begun to tear their hair due to the law. The truth, nevertheless, is that we Mexicans discriminate more against aliens than do the Americans.

There are few studies about the attitude of Mexicans toward aliens. A poll by the Strategic Communications Cabinet in October 2009 pointed out that 38.1% of Mexicans consider that the number of aliens who live in the country is very high, versus 37.7% who say otherwise. What is surprising is that only 0.5% of the country’s residents were born abroad, a very small number. On the other hand, 12.6% of the population of the U.S. was born outside the country. It seems incredible that someone could suppose that there are too many aliens in Mexico.

If we speak about the rights of immigrants, 65.9% of Mexicans polled think that aliens don’t have any right to criticize what occurs in the country.
Granted that we Mexicans think that we are very tolerant, the minute percentage of the population born in other countries ought to alert us about our error. In Mexico there is an attitude of mistrust which at times becomes an open disdain toward aliens: Americans, Spaniards, Argentines, Chileans, Lebanese, Jews, Africans. We have immigration rules that would be unacceptable in almost any place of the world, such as the one that obligates an immigrant to live economically dependent of their Mexican spouse, instead of promoting their participation in the labor market. Equally discriminatory is the law that places a limit on the number of aliens that a firm may hire. Aliens are also forbidden to buy real estate on the border or on Mexico’s coasts (while Mexicans have invested tens of millions of dollars in U.S. properties.)

Social and racial discrimination is evident in the case of Central American and black immigrants. The difficulties for a technician or alien worker to obtain residence in Mexico are enormous no matter the benefits their work might have. On the other hand, the law provides that the penalty for the loss of employment by an alien is the immediate expulsion from the country, as if losing a job were a crime.

For decades, Mexicans whose father or mother was born outside the country could not be Presidents of the country. Granted that the restrictive legislation we had has been modified to allow for dual citizenship, Mexicans who have it are not allowed to occupy relevant public charges or have certain jobs, such as commercial aircraft pilot. Worst of all is that international studies show that migration, instead of depriving locals from employment, produces economic growth and prosperity for all.

Perhaps one could blame xenophobic attitudes on ignorance. However, what we can’t do is to question the United States about its laws when we have much more restrictive legislation that has resulted in the number of aliens in our country being one of the lowest in the world.

The temporary and partial suspension of some parts of Arizona Law SB1070 will not resolve the problem of the Mexican migrants. The only real solution is very simple. Let us make the necessary in depth economic reforms to allow us to be more productive. One of those reforms is to open our labor market instead of keeping it tied up with laws worse than those of the United States.

To read the full article, click here:
Non Hispanic Illegal Aliens

The Woman Got Prunes!

AN UNDERCOVER policewoman ended an hour-long hostage drama in Guangzhou, China, in three seconds.
She fired four shots and killed a robber, who was holding a woman hostage, after distracting him with a bottled drink.

Guangzhou Daily reported that the drama started after the 38-year-old man robbed a man near a train station on Tuesday at about 8pm.

The victim had resisted and the man used a knife to stab him before fleeing.

Police gave chase, but the man grabbed hold of a female passer-by near a bus stop and held her hostage in front of an ATM at about 8.25pm.
He wrapped his left arm around her neck while holding the knife at her throat.

Police cordoned off the area and hostage negotiators tried to talk the man out of harming the woman.

The man said he did not want to harm the hostage, but each time police officers tried to edge closer, he slashed the woman on her arm and leg.

The atmosphere became more tense after an hour of negotiations. The man had become more agitated after his requests for a gun and transportation to Hubei province were refused.

By then, the woman’s clothes were soaked in blood.

At 9.25pm, a plainclothes policewoman approached the pair and offered the man a bottled drink after he complained of being thirsty, but threw the bottled drink onto the ground near the man.

The man stepped forward and used his right leg to roll the bottle closer to him.

He then bent down to pick up the bottle and the policewoman seized her chance to draw her gun. She ran forward and fired a shot at the man without hesitation.

The man fell backwards, still holding on to the hostage. The policewoman then fired another three shots at the man at point-blank range, killing him.

The hostage was taken to a nearby hospital. She is in stable condition.

The man was reported to be a thief from Hubei and had been on the run from police there.

The 1.6m (just a hair short of 5’ 3”)-tall policewoman, known only as Ms Xiu, who later told Guangzhou Daily that while she had been with the police force for 27 years and had received training as a sniper, this was the first time she had fired a gun at someone.

Force

“We had to use force because we could not guarantee the hostage’s safety,” Ms Xiu, who is in her 40s, told the newspaper.

“My superiors told me to get a gun from the police van and I loaded it with six rounds and tucked it in my right trouser pocket.

“When he bent down to pick up the bottle, he left part of his right chest exposed. I aimed for that area.”

She added: “He was still moving after my first shot, so I moved in and fired another three shots.”

“I had only two thoughts in my mind – to ensure the safety of the hostage and to overcome the man.”

After making sure the hostage was all right, Ms Xiu handed in her weapon and returned to work at a police station.

When asked if she was worried about accidentally hitting the hostage, she said: “Failure was not an option.”

To view video that captures this hostage taker being brought to justice, Click here:
Hostage Taker Shoot-down

The Arizona Lawman’s News and Phoenix Police Gazette morns the loss of Chandler police Detective Carlos Ledesma, 34, a Gilbert husband and father of two. Detective Ledesma was slain in an exchange of gunfire in an undercover drug investigation, during which two other Chandler officers were injured; one is in critical but stable condition and the other has been treated and released from St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center.

The Arizona Lawman’s News and Phoenix Police Gazette extends it’s most sincere, heartfelt. sympathy to the family of Detective Ledesma, the Chandler Police Department, and all Arizona Law Enforcement.

Altogether, there are eight suspects, aged 25 to 40. Two suspects were killed, one has been hospitalized and five have been arrested on charges ranging from murder to possession of marijuana with the intent to sell.

Thadika Singleton, 38, John Webber, 37, Doarnell Jackson, 35, Jerry Wayne Cockhearn, 25, and Eldridge Gittens, 34 have been arrested.

Apparently this was a “buy” that went wrong—most probably because the suspects wanted to rob the undercover officers.

This all occurred in an area that is or is not known as “The Kitchen” just a little south of the notorious Lindo Park in Phoenix,

To read more, click here:
AZCent Article