piper17

You mean something aside from being an ugly color pattern? "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

From "Flopping Aces" Blog: Why should any attorney stick their neck out when Democrats are threatening to prosecute them? Andrew C. McCarthy (bio)is the former Assistant United States Attorney in New York who prosecuted the 1993 bombers of the World Trade Center. He was recently asked to participate in a meeting to discuss Obama’s Task Force on Detention Policy to determine the fate of terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Here is his reply: By email (to the Counterterrorism Division) and by regular mail: The Honorable Eric H. Holder, Jr. Attorney General of the United States United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20530-0001 Dear Attorney General Holder: This letter is respectfully submitted to inform you that I must decline the invitation to participate in the May 4 roundtable meeting the President’s Task Force on Detention Policy is convening with current and former prosecutors involved in international terrorism cases. An invitation was extended to me by trial lawyers from the Counterterrorism Section, who are members of the Task Force, which you are leading. The invitation email (of April 14) indicates that the meeting is part of an ongoing effort to identify lawful policies on the detention and disposition of alien enemy combatants—or what the Department now calls “individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations.” I admire the lawyers of the Counterterrorism Division, and I do not question their good faith. Nevertheless, it is quite clear—most recently, from your provocative remarks on Wednesday in Germany—that the Obama administration has already settled on a policy of releasing trained jihadists (including releasing some of them into the United States). Whatever the good intentions of the organizers, the meeting will obviously be used by the administration to claim that its policy was arrived at in consultation with current and former government officials experienced in terrorism cases and national security issues. I deeply disagree with this policy, which I believe is a violation of federal law and a betrayal of the president’s first obligation to protect the American people. Under the circumstances, I think the better course is to register my dissent, rather than be used as a prop. Moreover, in light of public statements by both you and the President, it is dismayingly clear that, under your leadership, the Justice Department takes the position that a lawyer who in good faith offers legal advice to government policy makers—like the government lawyers who offered good faith advice on interrogation policy—may be subject to investigation and prosecution for the content of that advice, in addition to empty but professionally damaging accusations of ethical misconduct. Given that stance, any prudent lawyer would have to hesitate before offering advice to the government. Beyond that, as elucidated in my writing (including my proposal for a new national security court, which I understand the Task Force has perused), I believe alien enemy combatants should be detained at Guantanamo Bay (or a facility like it) until the conclusion of hostilities. This national defense measure is deeply rooted in the venerable laws of war and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2004 Hamdi case. Yet, as recently as Wednesday, you asserted that, in your considered judgment, such notions violate America’s “commitment to the rule of law.” Indeed, you elaborated, “Nothing symbolizes our [adminstration’s] new course more than our decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay…. President Obama believes, and I strongly agree, that Guantanamo has come to represent a time and an approach that we want to put behind us: a disregard for our centuries-long respect for the rule of law[.]” (Emphasis added.) Given your policy of conducting ruinous criminal and ethics investigations of lawyers over the advice they offer the government, and your specific position that the wartime detention I would endorse is tantamount to a violation of law, it makes little sense for me to attend the Task Force meeting. After all, my choice would be to remain silent or risk jeopardizing myself. For what it may be worth, I will say this much. For eight years, we have had a robust debate in the United States about how to handle alien terrorists captured during a defensive war authorized by Congress after nearly 3000 of our fellow Americans were annihilated. Essentially, there have been two camps. One calls for prosecution in the civilian criminal justice system, the strategy used throughout the 1990s. The other calls for a military justice approach of combatant detention and war-crimes prosecutions by military commission. Because each theory has its downsides, many commentators, myself included, have proposed a third way: a hybrid system, designed for the realities of modern international terrorism—a new system that would address the needs to protect our classified defense secrets and to assure Americans, as well as our allies, that we are detaining the right people. There are differences in these various proposals. But their proponents, and adherents to both the military and civilian justice approaches, have all agreed on at least one thing: Foreign terrorists trained to execute mass-murder attacks cannot simply be released while the war ensues and Americans are still being targeted. We have already released too many jihadists who, as night follows day, have resumed plotting to kill Americans. Indeed, according to recent reports, a released Guantanamo detainee is now leading Taliban combat operations in Afghanistan, where President Obama has just sent additional American forces. The Obama campaign smeared Guantanamo Bay as a human rights blight. Consistent with that hyperbolic rhetoric, the President began his administration by promising to close the detention camp within a year. The President did this even though he and you (a) agree Gitmo is a top-flight prison facility, (b) acknowledge that our nation is still at war, and (c) concede that many Gitmo detainees are extremely dangerous terrorists who cannot be tried under civilian court rules. Patently, the commitment to close Guantanamo Bay within a year was made without a plan for what to do with these detainees who cannot be tried. Consequently, the Detention Policy Task Force is not an effort to arrive at the best policy. It is an effort to justify a bad policy that has already been adopted: to wit, the Obama administration policy to release trained terrorists outright if that’s what it takes to close Gitmo by January. Obviously, I am powerless to stop the administration from releasing top al Qaeda operatives who planned mass-murder attacks against American cities—like Binyam Mohammed (the accomplice of “Dirty Bomber” Jose Padilla) whom the administration recently transferred to Britain, where he is now at liberty and living on public assistance. I am similarly powerless to stop the administration from admitting into the United States such alien jihadists as the 17 remaining Uighur detainees. According to National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, the Uighurs will apparently live freely, on American taxpayer assistance, despite the facts that they are affiliated with a terrorist organization and have received terrorist paramilitary training. Under federal immigration law (the 2005 REAL ID Act), those facts render them excludable from the United States. The Uighurs’ impending release is thus a remarkable development given the Obama administration’s propensity to deride its predecessor’s purported insensitivity to the rule of law. I am, in addition, powerless to stop the President, as he takes these reckless steps, from touting his Detention Policy Task Force as a demonstration of his national security seriousness. But I can decline to participate in the charade. Finally, let me repeat that I respect and admire the dedication of Justice Department lawyers, whom I have tirelessly defended since I retired in 2003 as a chief assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York. It was a unique honor to serve for nearly twenty years as a federal prosecutor, under administrations of both parties. It was as proud a day as I have ever had when the trial team I led was awarded the Attorney General’s Exceptional Service Award in 1996, after we secured the convictions of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and his underlings for waging a terrorist war against the United States. I particularly appreciated receiving the award from Attorney General Reno—as I recounted in Willful Blindness, my book about the case, without her steadfastness against opposition from short-sighted government officials who wanted to release him, the “blind sheikh” would never have been indicted, much less convicted and so deservedly sentenced to life-imprisonment. In any event, I’ve always believed defending our nation is a duty of citizenship, not ideology. Thus, my conservative political views aside, I’ve made myself available to liberal and conservative groups, to Democrats and Republicans, who’ve thought tapping my experience would be beneficial. It pains me to decline your invitation, but the attendant circumstances leave no other option. Very truly yours, Andrew C. McCarthy cc:Sylvia T. Kaser and John DePue National Security Division, Counterterrorism Section "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

A house in Deland, FL. Great prices, low mortgage rates, no state income tax, etc. It seems to be a good time to retire...or semi-retire! "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

"VERY vulnerable to fire and great loss of life"???? Are you saying that there are peoiple in NYC with the capability of shooting down a 747? If that is true, then what is being done to locate those persons and weapons???? AND, how could this be in a city that bans almost all personal weapons??? "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Repaid? Surely, you jest. Obama and the Dems are going to give Chysler ANOTHER $8.2 billion....more money into a black hole, never to be seen again by the taxpayers of the country. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Sounds like Scotty took his Lodestar streaking act on the road. I received your new book from Amazon today and started reading it at lunch. Damn good, so far. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

...assuming the Dems won't dump him for their own candidate. He is more than a little long-in-the-tooth and not in the best of health. He was a registered Democrat when he first became involved in politics. He was involved in the Warren Commission and developed the "single bullet" theory. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Something else has come to mind; was the F-16 the photo bird for the photo op? It seems that an F-16 is an unusual choice for this task because the photographer (assuming this was a two-seat version of an F-16) would be shooting through a curved canopy...not the best for high-quality, high resolution photos I shouldn't think. Thoughts, anyone? "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Get his butt back up to New England? No way! We are all better off with Scotty down in Florida! I still remember Scotty standing stark naked in the open door of Lodestar N7070 as it took off over the CT River at Turners Falls with some representative of Mass. Aero taking in that view. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

What do "they", whoever "they" are, plan to do with these "kickass pictures". Is this the best use of a 747 and an F-16? I wonder what the cost was to the taxpayer for aircraft usage, fuel, maintenance, crew, maintenance support personnel, etc just so someone could have a photo of an "Air Force One" flying by the Statue of Liberty. It seems to me that our tax money could be spent a bit more wisely. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

This country has thrown more money down that rat hole in NYC that is the UN HQ than any other country in the world...probably more than all of them combined. Check out what countries pay what in dues. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

They certainly don't seem to have any problem spending dues....the problem is on what they squander the money. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

JOHN LOTT: Uh Oh…Team Obama Claims Americans Use TOO MUCH Health Care By John R. Lott, Jr. Senior Research Scientist, University of Maryland/Author, “Freedomnomics” “If you got health insurance, then you can keep it . . . and we won’t do anything about that,” at least that was what President Obama promised during the campaign last year. Well, add that to a very long list of broken campaign promises, including: cutting government spending, reducing the deficit, and “no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.” Just as bad, on Friday it was revealed that Obama and the Democrats have no problem pushing through Senate votes on these radical health care changes that strip away normal procedural protections for those who oppose such changes. Last Sunday on “Meet the Press,” Larry Summers, Obama’s chief economic adviser, let the cat out of the bag on health care. In explaining why universal health care wasn’t going to increase the deficit, Summers said that people are just getting too much unnecessary care. Summers claimed: “whether it’s tonsillectomies or hysterectomies . . . procedures are done three times as frequently [in some parts of the country than others] and there’s no benefit in terms of the health of the population. And by doing the right kind of cost-effectiveness, by making the right kinds of investments and protection, some experts that we — estimate that we could take as much as $700 billion a year out of our health care system.” This sure seems like rationing. Total health care expenditures in the United States in 2008 came to $2.4 trillion, implying that Summers believes that the proper government regulations can cut health care expenditures by almost 30 percent. That would cut back health care a lot. Summers softened the blow by saying that right now the government wouldn’t have to cut expenditures by more than a third of that $700 billion. Tonsillectomies have primarily been done because of acute or chronic throat pain. Where different people are willing to draw the line between pain and surgery is a choice that we have traditionally left up to patients, but unless you know something about the patient’s preferences it is hard to claim that a surgery was a “mistake.” The selective use of statistics by Summers and others in the Obama administration is startling. In 2000, New York had 501 abortions per 1,000 live births, Wyoming had 1. New York had 31 abortions per 1,000 women, Wyoming had fewer than 1. Abortion procedures rarely involve the health of the mother. Yet, presumably, Summers wouldn’t argue that these gaps, which are 10 to 167 times greater than the 3-to-1 ratio that so upsets him for other procedures, imply that abortions should be rationed. It’s strange that the Democratic Party, a group that doesn’t think the government should intervene between a doctor and a woman when it comes to determining whether or not to have an abortion, appears to have no problem in telling doctors whether they can perform “tonsillectomies or hysterectomies.” Ironically, the Obama administration isn’t confident enough that they can simply explain to people what medical procedures they should have. If people are getting costly, unnecessary procedures, don’t you think that the insurance companies would already have learned about it? For anyone who thinks that insurance companies are too stingy, the Obama administration has a news flash: insurance companies have been paying for too much health care. But the Obama administration apparently doesn’t think that they can simply convince people of the value of their advice. Sadly, Summers and the rest of the Obama administration have no problem forcing people to do what they think best. Yet, not only is Obama going to break his promise on interfering with these decisions, he has no problem with forcing this change on people. Democrats have apparently figured out a way to pass health care legislation without mustering the 60 votes normally needed to pass things in the Senate. To do this, health care won’t be voted on as a separate piece of legislation, but as part of the budget. The proposals also won’t be voted on in the Senate when the budget legislation is first brought up, but only after the final budget bill has gone through the process of “reconciliation” with the House. Possibly Americans should ask Canadians and Brits –- people who have long suffered from rationing — how happy they are with central government decisions on eliminating “unnecessary” health care. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Gee, I thought the United Nations was going to take care of the Darfur situation. Do you mean they haven't? What a surprise. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Yep...follow the money. The money trail certainly seems to lead to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. I wonder if they will have the decency to hang themselves. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

You could just as easily say that the power over others is why some people go into academia...that and they can't make it in the real world. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

You mean like reading the speech of the visiting head of state instead of his own??? "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Sounds like the one I was on at the Hills with Nate Pond flying and yelling at us to get out as the A/C was stalling. I was "semi-weightless" as I tried to get to the door....but those Lodestars could really climb. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=94134; Is it the same one as the one in the foreground here? "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Why does it bother you that "right wingers" laugh at Obama's reliance on the teleprompter and sometimes refer to him as the "wizard of ahs"? "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Oh well, it's only $1.8 Billion...it's not like it's in the $trillions: "The IRS allowed more than 1 million foreigners -- many of them in the U.S. illegally -- to improperly claim $1.8 billion in child tax credits in 2007, a government investigator said Thursday. The Internal Revenue Service allowed the tax credits even though the workers did not provide Social Security numbers on their tax returns, J. Russell George, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, said in a report. The workers instead used government-issued tax identification numbers, which are available to immigrants for certain tax-filing purposes -- regardless of their legal status -- but are not valid for employment in the U.S. The issue highlights a weakness in current law, according to the report. Federal law does not require a Social Security number to receive the $1,000 child tax credit, which is available to workers, even if they don't make enough money to pay any federal income taxes. But a Social Security number is required to work and earn wages in the U.S., the report said. "As it now stands, the payment of federal funds through this tax benefit appears to provide an additional incentive for aliens to enter, reside and work in the U.S. without authorization, which contradicts federal law and policy to remove such incentives," the report said. The Internal Revenue Service said it supports efforts to require Social Security numbers to receive the child tax credit. In the meantime, the IRS has stepped up efforts to ensure that immigrants do not improperly obtain Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers, the agency said in a written response to the report. The IRS also said the Social Security Administration is working to ensure that workers have valid Social Security numbers." "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

and is healthcare considered "the general Welfare"? My dictionary defines welfare as "health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being. Organized efforts by a community or an organization for the betterment of the poor. Public relief. I still don't see where the federal government is to provide healthcare for all. Promoting or providing the "general Welfare" would seem to be the creation of a general state where the individuals can achieve health, happiness, or prosperity" - ie "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

The airlines seem to have been able to work the issue of trained and armed airline pilots bringing firearms into other countries so why not shipping companies doing likewise? "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

The US Constitution in Article 1 Section 8 says that Congress has the power "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and offenses against the Law of Nations. That would seem to cover the actions of the US Navy in the Gulf of Aden this past weekend. While reading the remained of the Constitution, I didn't come across any section that authorized Congress to provide health care for all. While it is the responsibility of Congress to "promote" the general welfare..it doesn't say it provides it. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

"I went to bed as a conservative and woke up a threat to national security" Saw this as a Tea Party sign and got a chuckle. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling