Chinese Dissident, Chen Guangcheng, Arrives in New York City

This is great news that he will be able to get his law degree while here on a fellowship.  Then he can decide what his next course of action will be.  Cannot even fathom what must have been going through his mind when he was able to speak to the people gathered.  This is what America is all about -- that beacon of light is still shining as we are witnessing the cooperation from China when most would have bet money that he would never have landed in America.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton set the right tone followed up by other State Department officials.  Even though he is on a fellowship and did not seek asylum in three to four years the climate can change.  It is the fact that our State Department today took the right steps without being confrontational to get him to the United States.  They deserve praise for a job well done!

Dissident From China Arrives in U.S., Ending an Ordeal 

Dave Sanders for The New York TimesChen Guangcheng, the blind Chinese dissident, arriving in New York on Saturday shortly after he landed at Newark Airport. 

By THOMAS KAPLAN, ANDREW JACOBS and STEVEN LEE MYERSPublished: May 19, 2012 

Chen Guangcheng, the blind legal advocate who recently sought refuge in the American Embassy in Beijing, arrived in the heart of Greenwich Village on Saturday, holding the kind of open-air news conference that he could have never imagined while under virtual house arrest in China.

After a daylong and hastily arranged flight from Beijing, Mr. Chen stood on crutches — with a lawyer at his side and facing spectators cordoned off by the police — and addressed a throng of reporters. He said he was grateful to the American Embassy and the Chinese government, which allowed him to leave China, and thanked Chinese officials for “dealing with the situation with restraint and calm.”

“I hope to see that they continue to open discourse and earn the respect and trust of the people,” said Mr. Chen, one of China’s most prominent dissidents, who spoke through a translator near the New York University apartment tower that will become his home.

It was not clear weeks ago that China would permit Mr. Chen to leave, and the United States’ role in his evading the authorities threatened to cause a diplomatic breach just as American officials were seeking China’s cooperation on a range of economic and security issues it considers crucial.

Mr. Chen’s departure from Beijing on Saturday, and the arduous negotiations that led up to it, appeared to reflect careful calculations in both countries that the episode was not worth jeopardizing relations. The Chinese, who were initially infuriated and complained bitterly about what they considered interference in their internal affairs, in the end quietly engaged with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and a team of diplomats to defuse the situation.

The trip to New York ended an improbable journey that began in late April, when despite his lack of sight, Mr. Chen scaled the walls around his house, sneaked past the guards who held him captive and was whisked to Beijing by a human rights activist. American officials agreed to provide at least temporary shelter, but the pickup almost went awry: Chinese security cars trailed their vehicle, forcing them to sweep Mr. Chen into their car from another vehicle and race through the streets of the capital to the embassy.

But the drama did not end there. Mr. Chen decided more than a week later to stay in China, only to change his mind several hours later when American officials left him at a hospital and friends expressed fears for his safety. That led to renewed negotiations and eventually to Saturday’s release.

Now, after years of isolation — his every move at his home recorded by surveillance cameras — and serving time in a Chinese jail, Mr. Chen found himself at the center of a media frenzy generated by his release.

But the sudden ability to speak out was bittersweet, which he acknowledged in an interview on the plane. China has a pattern of allowing some especially vocal dissidents to leave the country in order to minimize the impact of their activism at home, and it is unclear if he will be able to effect change as easily from so far away, while he studies at New York University.

“I don’t really feel that happy, but rather sentimental,” he said in the brief interview. “After all the suffering for years, I don’t have those tearful moments anymore, but I do feel something inside.”

He looked calm, but his hands shook as he talked about leaving a country he has tried to change from within for years. 

“I’m very clear what kind of role I’m playing right now,” he said. “Opportunity and risk exist at the same time.” 

In Washington, the State Department praised the Chinese government in a statement that reflected the United States’ handling of the case from the start: understated and nonconfrontational, despite the emotions and high stakes involved for both countries. “We also express our appreciation for the manner in which we were able to resolve this matter and to support Mr. Chen’s desire to study in the U.S. and pursue his goals,” the State Department’s spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, said.

Her statement referred to the complex understanding — the Chinese were loath to call it a deal — in which Mr. Chen will be allowed to attend law school on a fellowship rather than seek asylum, which the authorities in Beijing would have considered an affront. School officials said they had already stocked a faculty apartment with Chinese food and new furniture for him.  

Excerpt:  Read More at the New York Times       

EPA trying to Scuttle Keystone XL Oil Pipeline from Canada to Oklahoma to Port Arthur, TX,

We received this press release from Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin's Office yesterday with the details about the oil pipeline and the fact that the EPA pressured Secretary of State Clinton into not signing the agreement thus delaying for months new job growth or as Obama puts it 'shovel ready' jobs.  So why the delay?  Three letters tell the story when it comes to Oklahoma and Texas -- EPA who has put both states in their target zone to stop growth.  We believe the WSJ editorial perfectly sums up what is happening:

The Keystone XL pipeline is another case in which the Obama Administration's ideology clashes with its professed goal of job creation. Why do jobs always lose?

When the EPA gets involved, you can be sure that job creation is not at the top of their list.  They would rather protect insects, lizards, and the like then provide jobs for people.  One of their missions seems to be to put oil and gas domestic drilling out of business.  This is an agency out of control that needs its wings clipped and frankly put back under a cabinet department instead of being a dictator agency which Obama loves to see.  

With all the trouble that Oklahoma and Texas have had with the EPA, we cannot believe we still see media saying that Obama has a chance of winning in Texas.  That is one of the biggest lies being told by the Obama media yet. as most Texans know they are in the target zone of the Obama Administration and have no desire to see four more years of Obama.  Polls from Democrat Public Policy Polling who way over sample Dems does not equate to votes, but it gives the Obama media a source for their stories.  When is the last time they polled in the south Texas Hill Country?

Governor Fallin and our two Senators Coburn and Inhofe are fighting back against the Obama Administration.  When we first moved to Oklahoma in 1997, it was Governor Keating along with Senators Inhofe and Nickles fighting Clinton and the EPA.  Today three names have changed but the policies of a Democrat Administration and the EPA may be actually worse under Obama than Clinton which speaks volumes of how bad Obama is as President.  He talks job creation while at the same time his Secretary of State is holding up job creation by not approving this pipeline based on irrational facts that don't come close to the truth.

This email from Governor Fallin yesterday gives the facts about what is happening and lays the blame squarely on the Obama Administration where it belongs:

Today the Wall Street Journal added its voice to the effort to have the Keystone XL oil pipeline – which would connect Canadian oil supplies to those in Oklahoma and ultimately Port Arthur, Texas – approved by the Obama Administration. As Governor Fallin wrote (in a letter co-penned by Oklahoma Senators Jim Inhofe and Tom Coburn and attached to this email), “the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline is expected to build Oklahoma’s economy by adding $1.2 billion in new spending, increase personal income by $874 million, provide additional state and local tax revenues of more than $25 million, and add more than $1 billion in increased Gross State Product.”

The pipeline continues to be a job-source in waiting as well as a tremendous opportunity to increase the supply of American energy. As the WSJ writes:  

With 9.1% unemployment and gasoline prices in the stratosphere, President Obama must sometimes wish that some big corporation would suddenly show up and offer a shovel-ready, multibillion-dollar project to create 100,000 jobs and reduce U.S. reliance on oil from dictatorships. 

Oh, wait. His Secretary of State has had that offer sitting on her desk since she was sworn in. The trouble is that the Administration can't approve it without upsetting its anti-fossil fuel constituency. And so the proposal sits. … 

… The Keystone XL pipeline is another case in which the Obama Administration's ideology clashes with its professed goal of job creation. Why do jobs always lose?

We invite you to read the full editorial below:

REVIEW & OUTLOOK
JULY 7, 2011
Jobs in the Pipeline

The EPA tries to scuttle oil transport from Canada's tar sands.

With 9.1% unemployment and gasoline prices in the stratosphere, President Obama must sometimes wish that some big corporation would suddenly show up and offer a shovel-ready, multibillion-dollar project to create 100,000 jobs and reduce U.S. reliance on oil from dictatorships.

Oh, wait. His Secretary of State has had that offer sitting on her desk since she was sworn in. The trouble is that the Administration can't approve it without upsetting its anti-fossil fuel constituency. And so the proposal sits.  

In September 2008 TransCanada applied to build a new pipeline—the Keystone XL—to bring diluted bitumen from the oil-rich tar sands of Alberta to thirsty American refineries on the Gulf Coast. It is hardly a radical proposal. Canadian crude has been flowing to the U.S. for decades. Another Canadian company—Enbridge—operates the Clipper pipeline across the Canadian border to Chicago. In July 2010 TransCanada began operating its Keystone pipeline from Alberta to Cushing, Oklahoma, which is a major storage and pricing depot.  

The Keystone XL would cut a slightly different path, through the American heartland to Port Arthur, Texas. Judging from its past experience and that of Enbridge, TransCanada expected that permitting would take roughly 23 months. Thirty-three months, two State Department studies and 208,000 public comments later, TransCanada is still waiting. On current trend, the company will be lucky to get its permit by January, or after 40 months. But even that is far from certain.  

If Mr. Obama were drawing up a plan from scratch to boost union employment and deflate Iranian-ally Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, it might look like the Keystone XL. TransCanada estimates that building the pipeline will mean more than $20 billion—$13 billion from TransCanada itself—in investment and 13,000 new American jobs in construction and related manufacturing. The company also expects more than 118,000 "spin-off" jobs during the two years of construction. 

TransCanada says it has signed building contracts with four major U.S. unions. It projects that construction will generate $600 million in new state and local tax revenue and that over its life the pipeline will generate another $5.2 billion in property taxes. The Energy Policy Research Foundation in Washington estimates that by linking to the XL, oil producers in North Dakota's Bakken region will enjoy efficiency gains of between $36.5 million and $146 million annually. Lower transport costs will mean savings for Gulf Coast refiners of $473 million annually if the pipeline meets conservative expectations of shipping 400,000 barrels per day.  

Today those refineries are highly dependent on imports from Mexico and Venezuela, which have decreased output in recent years. TransCanada would help to provide Gulf Coast refiners with a more reliable source of supply from a U.S. ally.  

None of this is lost on the State Department, which must approve the project because it crosses the U.S. border. Its first environmental impact statement, in April 2010, found that the XL would meet industry standards and not significantly affect the environment. Without the pipeline, State said, the U.S. would not be able to benefit from cost-efficient Western Canadian oil and "would remain dependent upon unstable foreign oil supplies." 

Hillary Clinton indicated early on that she was inclined to allow it and so it seemed the company would get its permit after a 90-day comment period. But the Environmental Protection Agency raised a stink and State acquiesced to a "supplemental" statement, which took months to prepare. On June 6, at the end of another 90-day comment period, the EPA stamped the report "inadequate" and sent State a nine-page letter with objections, which, no surprise, would require years of further study.

You could be forgiven for thinking that this must have something to do with pipeline safety. But pipelines remain the statistically safest way to transport oil, pipeline accident rates have fallen sharply, and technology has improved reaction time to leaks and the ability to contain them.
Friday's Exxon pipeline leak of up to 1,000 barrels along the Yellowstone River in Montana is a case in point. Any spill is unfortunate, but Exxon says it has put 150 workers on clean-up duty, has asked local residents to identify further damage, and has flown in 90,000 feet of absorbent boom, 3,000 absorbent pads and 2,200 feet of containment boom. TransCanada points out that for river crossings the XL will be 25-feet underground versus Exxon's eight feet (laid 20 years ago) and will feature other state-of-the-art safety enhancements. 

***
So why the EPA push back? Ask the Natural Resources Defense Council. "This is really a campaign against tar sands expansion rather than a single pipeline," Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, director of the council's international program, told the New York Times last month. The EPA's June 6 letter echoes that point. It complains at length about the "[green house gas]-intensive" tar sands and frets about what Canadians are doing to migratory birds.  

U.S. greens loathe oil, and the tar sands has become the next Alaska in green mythology. We get that. But what about jobs and growth? The U.S. economy needs a stable and affordable energy supply and, according to Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA), Canada's tar sands oil from "wells to wheels" isn't any "dirtier" than Nigerian light or California or Middle East heavy crude. 

The Keystone XL pipeline is another case in which the Obama Administration's ideology clashes with its professed goal of job creation. Why do jobs always lose?

Here is the letter from April 19, 2011 to Secretary of State Clinton and still no answer:

The Honorable Hillary Clinton
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 2050 

Dear Madam Secretary: 

The present situation in Libya, and its impact on global energy markets, underscores the increasing importance of satisfying U.S. energy demands with resources from politically stable regions of the world. The Keystone XL pipeline, which seeks to connect Canada’s rich oil sands to U.S. refineries along the Gulf Coast, is critically important in this effort. We write to urge your support and expeditious approval of a cross-border permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, which critically enables the construction of the section of the line connecting Cushing, Oklahoma to the Gulf Coast. 

Oklahoma is the nation's third-largest producer of natural gas, sixth-largest producer of crude oil, has the third greatest number of active drilling rigs, and ranks fifth in crude oil reserves. As a whole, the oil energy industry contributes $23 billion to Oklahoma's gross domestic product. Oklahoma has one of the fastest growing economies in the nation, ranking among the top states in per capita income growth and gross domestic product growth. The $7 billion, privately funded Keystone XL Pipeline is the kind of energy infrastructure project that keeps Oklahoma strong in these times of national economic uncertainty. 

According to an independent study, the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline is expected to build Oklahoma’s economy by adding $1.2 billion in new spending, increase personal income by $874 million, provide additional state and local tax revenues of more than $25 million, and add more than $1 billion in increased Gross State Product. The study further concluded that once the pipeline is operational, Oklahoma could see more than $667 million in property taxes to county and other local governments during the operating life of the pipeline. 

What’s good for the residents of Oklahoma can be good for all Americans. According to independent studies, the Keystone XL pipeline will add more than 250,000 permanent jobs for U.S. workers and add more than $100 billion in annual total expenditures to the U.S. economy. During the construction phase of the expansion, Keystone will generate more than $585 million in state and local taxes for the states along the pipeline route and stimulate more than $20 billion in new spending for the U.S. economy. 

With millions of barrels of crude oil flowing into Oklahoma’s Cushing Hub each day, Oklahoma plays a vital role in the distribution of crude oil supplies throughout the U.S. The Cushing Hub serves as the price point for West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude, which is used to set equivalent prices for crude oil produced in Oklahoma and other nearby states and which has historically been considered the global benchmark for crude oil. Due to a significant increase in inbound crude oil supplies from oil sand production in Canada and the northern U.S., crude oil supplies at the Cushing Hub have outpaced outgoing pipeline capacity, glutting local oil markets and distorting crude oil prices throughout the U.S. Keystone XL presents an opportunity to restore marketplace transparency in a way that could eliminate arbitrage opportunities and positively affect the price consumers ultimately pay for refined products. 

The proposed Keystone XL pipeline can provide a beneficial solution. Presently, construction is planned for two phases: a northern segment extending from Alberta, Canada to Steele City, Nebraska and a southern segment extending from Cushing, Oklahoma to Houston and Port Arthur, Texas. The proposed pipeline will be capable of providing the U.S. with an additional 500,000 barrels of crude oil each day. These additional volumes of North American crude oil are vital to America as it looks to secure its future.

Yet, if these additional supplies are delivered without first ensuring adequate outgoing pipeline capacity from Cushing, it will only exacerbate present bottlenecks and price distortions. It is therefore critically important that construction of the pipeline commence with the Southern segment. Only by first ensuring adequate outgoing pipeline capacity from Cushing will America be able to realize the full potential of Keystone XL. 

The Keystone XL pipeline presents a tremendous opportunity to America. If approved, the proposed pipeline would become an integral component in ensuring America’s energy supply. We strongly encourage you to consider the economic impacts and national security interests that this proposal implicates..

Thank you for your consideration and attention to this important issue. 

Sincerely,
/s/
Mary Fallin
Governor
State of Oklahoma

James M. Inhofe
US Senator
State of Oklahoma 

Tom A. Coburn, M.D.
US Senator
State of Oklahoma

The question of the day is "Does Obama want job creation" and the answer from Oklahoma and Texas would be not if it is going to take place in our two states.  That is the only reasonable answer we can come up when all the facts are presented.

We do encourage Obama to campaign in Texas and Oklahoma so we can win more seats!

Cables Obtained by WikiLeaks Shine Light Into Secret Diplomatic Channels

WikiLeaks on Twitter said they released the documents to El Pais, Le Monde, Speigel, Guardian & NYT. Some websites are going after the NY Times but in this instance if they didn't release the information, foreign papers would have gone ahead without them. Looks like they worked together to release the information at the same time.  We believe the NY Times made a smart move to get the information out here in the States and not be filtered through foreign newspapers. Most of the documents released cover the last three years although a few are said to go back much earlier.

What a coincidence in that forty years ago Daniel Ellsberg who was a military analyst released the "Pentagon Papers" which sent shock waves through the military community and the White House.  We didn't believe those should have been released as he took an oath to never divulge security.  He broke that oath because he was part of the anti-war crowd who would do anything possible to embarrass the Government including breaking the law.

In late 1969 - with the assistance of his former RAND Corporation colleague, Anthony Russo — Ellsberg secretly made several sets of photocopies of the classified documents to which he had access; these later became known as the Pentagon Papers. As an editor of the New York Times was to write much later, these documents "demonstrated, among other things, that the Johnson Administration had systematically lied, not only to the public but also to Congress, about a subject of transcendent national interest and significance". They revealed that the government had knowledge, early on, that the war would not likely be won, and that continuing the war would lead to many times more casualties than was ever admitted publicly. Further, the papers showed the government had lied to Congress and the public. (Wikipedia)

There is no excuse for someone getting these State Department documents and releasing them or the earlier documents on Afghanistan this summer or the "Pentagon Papers" all of which were released for some one's agenda with no thought to the harm it might cause. It is troubling that security can be broken that easily at the State Department  to allow access to documents that were classified for a reason. If this group, Wiki Leaks, founded by Julian Assange who is also their spokesman, didn't have someone on the inside at the State Department, would be shocked. We find it hard to believe that the person arrested for the original leak of documents from Afghanistan, Bradley Manning, US Army intelligence analyst who is being court martialed, would have access to the State Department documents.

The fact that this correspondence has been leaked doesn't speak well of the Department of State.  Cannot believe over the years what people have put in correspondence, but then most figured the documents were classified and would not be released. We agree with Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) that the greatest harm is the loss of trust by governments dealing with the United States. How many countries trust us anyway after the last few years with the Obama Administration? One thing the documents do show is that Obama was not interesting in furthering relationships with Europe but preferred to work with the Far East which should send chills up your spine.

"I think the greatest harm ... is the loss of trust that other governments will have in dealing with the United States of America," Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, told "Good Morning America" today. Wikileaks founder Julian Assange "is putting into danger our foreign policy and perhaps the lives of certain Americans around the world." (ABC News

Agree 100% with Senators Lyndsey Graham (R-SC) and Clare McKaskill (D-MO) that the leakers of these documents should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Releasing classified documents is against the law, but will the Holder Department of Justice step in to help. Frankly the DOJ couldn't even win a case in civilian court against a terrorist so we have little faith they will do anything now.

Having worked around classified, find it so hard to believe that any organization would be so careless about their security. Think it is time to clean out the State Department and start over. For years leaks have been happening from the State Department against our own Department of Defense (DoD) as they did their power plays when they sensed that the DoD and National Security Advisor were getting more power.

The arrogance shown by many of our Secretaries of State has been mind boggling over the years. The people get that appointment and it goes to their head in most instances. Maybe if the Secretary of State would stay home more and concentrate on making the State Department a functional organization, we would be better off. The current Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, has logged countless miles on AF planes traveling around the world and what is there to show for all the travel? She doesn't even travel with the President on his foreign trips which is strange. Career diplomats who are firmly entrenched in the State Department hierarchy since the Carter years have not helped the perception of arrogance and power plays out of this group.

Leaking the material is deplorable," Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, a Republican, told Fox News. "The people at WikiLeaks could have blood on their hands ... People who do this are low on the food chain as far as I'm concerned. If you can prosecute them, let's try."

His Democratic colleague Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri agreed with him and said she hoped "we can find out where this is coming from and go after them with the force of law". She added that "the people who do these document leaks need to do a gut check about their patriotism".

Representative Peter King of New York, a life-long supporter of Sinn Fein, the political wing of the IRA, called on Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, to designate WikiLeaks a "Foreign Terrorist Organisation" outlawed in the US.

"WikiLeaks presents a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States. I strongly urge you to work within the Administration to use every offensive capability of the U.S. government to prevent further damaging releases by WikiLeaks," he said in a statement.

The Pentagon blasted WikiLeaks for its "reckless" dump of classified documents and said it was taking steps to bolster security of classified U.S. military networks. (London Telegraph

When reading the article from the NY Times, we are aghast at some of what was written. Anyone with an ounce of brains should know not to put some of these comments down on paper. These cables/messages speak poorly of the leadership at the State Department and in the Administration. Would fire Hillary Clinton in a heartbeat after this release of documents. Always thought she was over her head at the State Department and this proves that fact. We don't believe that Obama has the nerve to fire her over these leaks because he is afraid she will run against him for President.

Wonder who is going to be asked to fall on their sword for this failure of security?

Cables Obtained by WikiLeaks Shine Light Into Secret Diplomatic Channels
By SCOTT SHANE and ANDREW W. LEHREN
Published: November 28, 2010

WASHINGTON — A cache of a quarter-million confidential American diplomatic cables, most of them from the past three years, provides an unprecedented look at back-room bargaining by embassies around the world, brutally candid views of foreign leaders and frank assessments of nuclear and terrorist threats.

Some of the cables, made available to The New York Times and several other news organizations, were written as recently as late February, revealing the Obama administration’s exchanges over crises and conflicts. The material was originally obtained by WikiLeaks, an organization devoted to revealing secret documents. WikiLeaks posted 220 cables, some redacted to protect diplomatic sources, in the first installment of the archive on its Web site on Sunday.

The disclosure of the cables is sending shudders through the diplomatic establishment, and could strain relations with some countries, influencing international affairs in ways that are impossible to predict.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and American ambassadors around the world have been contacting foreign officials in recent days to alert them to the expected disclosures. A statement from the White House on Sunday said: “We condemn in the strongest terms the unauthorized disclosure of classified documents and sensitive national security information.”

The White House said the release of what it called “stolen cables” to several publications was a “reckless and dangerous action” and warned that some cables, if released in full, could disrupt American operations abroad and put the work and even lives of confidential sources of American diplomats at risk. The statement noted that reports often include “candid and often incomplete information” whose disclosure could “deeply impact not only U.S. foreign policy interests, but those of our allies and friends around the world.”

The cables, a huge sampling of the daily traffic between the State Department and some 270 embassies and consulates, amount to a secret chronicle of the United States’ relations with the world in an age of war and terrorism. Among their revelations, to be detailed in The Times in coming days:

¶ A dangerous standoff with Pakistan over nuclear fuel: Since 2007, the United States has mounted a highly secret effort, so far unsuccessful, to remove from a Pakistani research reactor highly enriched uranium that American officials fear could be diverted for use in an illicit nuclear device. In May 2009, Ambassador Anne W. Patterson reported that Pakistan was refusing to schedule a visit by American technical experts because, as a Pakistani official said, “if the local media got word of the fuel removal, ‘they certainly would portray it as the United States taking Pakistan’s nuclear weapons,’ he argued.”

¶ Thinking about an eventual collapse of North Korea: American and South Korean officials have discussed the prospects for a unified Korea, should the North’s economic troubles and political transition lead the state to implode. The South Koreans even considered commercial inducements to China, according to the American ambassador to Seoul. She told Washington in February that South Korean officials believe that the right business deals would “help salve” China’s “concerns about living with a reunified Korea” that is in a “benign alliance” with the United States.

¶ Bargaining to empty the Guantánamo Bay prison: When American diplomats pressed other countries to resettle detainees, they became reluctant players in a State Department version of “Let’s Make a Deal.” Slovenia was told to take a prisoner if it wanted to meet with President Obama, while the island nation of Kiribati was offered incentives worth millions of dollars to take in Chinese Muslim detainees, cables from diplomats recounted. The Americans, meanwhile, suggested that accepting more prisoners would be “a low-cost way for Belgium to attain prominence in Europe.”

¶ Suspicions of corruption in the Afghan government: When Afghanistan’s vice president visited the United Arab Emirates last year, local authorities working with the Drug Enforcement Administration discovered that he was carrying $52 million in cash. With wry understatement, a cable from the American Embassy in Kabul called the money “a significant amount” that the official, Ahmed Zia Massoud, “was ultimately allowed to keep without revealing the money’s origin or destination.” (Mr. Massoud denies taking any money out of Afghanistan.)

¶ A global computer hacking effort: China’s Politburo directed the intrusion into Google’s computer systems in that country, a Chinese contact told the American Embassy in Beijing in January, one cable reported. The Google hacking was part of a coordinated campaign of computer sabotage carried out by government operatives, private security experts and Internet outlaws recruited by the Chinese government. They have broken into American government computers and those of Western allies, the Dalai Lama and American businesses since 2002, cables said.

¶ Mixed records against terrorism: Saudi donors remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like Al Qaeda, and the tiny Persian Gulf state of Qatar, a generous host to the American military for years, was the “worst in the region” in counterterrorism efforts, according to a State Department cable last December. Qatar’s security service was “hesitant to act against known terrorists out of concern for appearing to be aligned with the U.S. and provoking reprisals,” the cable said.

Excerpt: Read More at NY Times

Hillary Clinton's Department of State Submits Report to UN Human Rights Commissioner Mentioning Arizona Law

UPDATE:  Click here for copy of Governor Brewer's letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
____________

Cannot fathom the anger that Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona, Senator McCain, and the Legislature along with Arizona residents are feeling right now toward Obama, Hillary, and the State Department. To mention one of our States in a report to the United Nations on Human Rights is beyond despicable. This whole bunch of liberal, progressive Democrats have reached a new low.

"A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world," the report says. "The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined."

For those  who thought Hillary would make a better President than Obama, think again. She may turn out to be the worst Secretary of State to go along with Obama the worst President in modern times. She thinks nothing of signing our rights away to the UN or playing up to our enemies but then she did a good job of that as First Lady with Arafat's wife, Suha .   Following the terrorist speech of Suha Arafat where she accused Israel of poisoning Palestinians, Hillary gave her a hug and kiss.

It took Hillary Clinton a full 24 hours before she condemned parts of the speech. Who does she answer to now? Obama who also plays up to our enemies and disses our allies. Now we have this from the Hillary State Department talking about Arizona and human rights when the law specifically forbids racial profiling. Maybe if she took the time to read the law instead of wasting our tax dollars flying around the world, she would know what the Arizona Immigration Law says but then she might not be able to comprehend the meaning of 'prohibit' which is a wee bit longer the the word 'is' her husband used during his testimony on Monicagate.

It never stops with this group of wanna be dictators. Does Obama want the UN to decide so he can blame them. Hillary, being the 'world's smartest woman' according to her adoring media, missed the boat on this one as well as a lot of other items since becoming Secretary of State. Maybe the media needs to revise their 'world's smartest woman' mantra for Hillary.

Brewer condemns report to UN mentioning Ariz. law

By JONATHAN J. COOPER, Associated Press Writer Jonathan J. Cooper, Associated Press Writer – Fri Aug 27, 10:57 pm ET
PHOENIX – Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer demanded Friday that a reference to the state's controversial immigration law be removed from a State Department report to the United Nations' human rights commissioner.

The U.S. included its legal challenge to the law on a list of ways the federal government is protecting human rights.

In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Brewer says it is "downright offensive" that a state law would be included in the report, which was drafted as part of a UN review of human rights in all member nations every four years.

"The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a state of the United States to 'review' by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional," Brewer wrote.

Arizona's law generally requires police officer enforcing other laws to investigate the immigration status of people they suspect are illegal immigrants.

Critics say it would lead officers to target Hispanics. Supporters, including Brewer, say the law prohibits racial profiling and other human rights abuses.

The U.S. Justice Department sued to block the measure, arguing federal law trumps the state's authority to enforce immigration laws.

A federal judge in July sided with the Justice Department and blocked enforcement of the law's most controversial provisions a day before it was scheduled to take effect.

Excerpt:  Read More at Yahoo News

Hillary Clinton's U.S. State Department is Building .. Mosques?

Once again the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is wasting our tax dollars. This time it is on building or refurbishing Islamic Mosques which is actually against Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations which prohibits using USAID funds for “inherently religious activities." We would expect that an Islamic Mosque would fall in the "inherently religious activity" category but that doesn't seem to have stopped the State Department.

Has anyone seen an accounting of how our taxpayer dollars are being spent by Ms. Clinton at the State Department? Would bet a fairly high amount is spent on her pet projects like the Clintons did when they were in the White House. Trip to Africa comes to mind with the vast number of 'close' friends they took with them or their trip to China. Now that she is Secretary of State she can fund all kinds of projects like it is coming out of her checkbook, but it is our tax dollars. The Clintons have no more regard for our taxpayer dollars than the Obamas who are bankrupting this Country.

The next time you see a billboard with President Bush's face asking "Do you miss me yet?" feel free to say "YES!" We didn't always agree with some things he did like his plan for immigration, but we found him to be an honest man who believed in the inherent good of people. Problem is he extended that to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama who like nothing better than to trash Pres Bush. Also missing former Secretary of State Condi Rice who understood foreign affairs versus the current SoS Clinton who just wants to pass out money and play up to our enemies.

Guess we shouldn't be shocked that the good friend of Arafat's wife, Hillary, is using State Department money to help build and refurbish mosques. Something to remember if Hillary decides to run for President again.

U.S. State Department is Building… Mosques
Posted by Candace de Russy Aug 12th 2010 at 2:24 am

What else is the State Department larding out, at hard-pressed taxpayers’ expense, to facilitate “understanding” with the Muslim world?


What else, that is, in addition to Ground-Zero-Mega-Mosque Imam Rauf’s likely fund-raising gig in five, oil rich countries?

Just as it has greatly, very greatly, disturbed 68% of you registered voters to learn of plans to build a $100 million dollar mosque financed perhaps by the very ones who underwrote the 9/11 slaughter, it will likely disturb you to learn that the State Department has been hard at work – on your dime – rebuilding of mosques in foreign countries.

The Washington Times reports:

In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque’s namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country’s Byzantine rulers.

For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of “Muslim triumphalism” glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument – and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.

By what lights is U.S. citizens’ money being used to preserve and advance Islam? What of First Amendment considerations about the use of public moneys for religious worship? Our government claims murkiness on these issues but nonetheless forges ahead in constructing mosque abroad:

In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were “uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution” when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.

Casting uncertainty to the winds, our government proceeded to rebuild the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, in the anticipation of such benefits as “stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups.”

But here’s the rub:

Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for “inherently religious activities.”

The Times is right: “It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.”

Our taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promulgate Islam. Nor should it be spent on a tour for Rauf that endows him with both access and the U.S. stamp of approval.

Source: http://bigpeace.com/cderussy/2010/08/12/u-s-state-department-is-building-mosques/

Tax Dollars at Work: US State Department is Building ... Mosques

Once again the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is wasting our tax dollars. This time it is on building or refurbishing Islamic Mosques which is actually against Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations which prohibits using USAID funds for “inherently religious activities." We would expect that an Islamic Mosque would fall in the "inherently religious activity" category but that doesn't seem to have stopped the State Department.

Has anyone seen an accounting of how our taxpayer dollars are being spent by Ms. Clinton at the State Department? Would bet a fairly high amount is spent on her pet projects like the Clintons did when they were in the White House. Trip to Africa comes to mind with the vast number of 'close' friends they took with them or their trip to China. Now that she is Secretary of State she can fund all kinds of projects like it is coming out of her checkbook, but it is our tax dollars. The Clintons have no more regard for our taxpayer dollars than the Obamas who are bankrupting this Country.

The next time you see a billboard with President Bush's face asking "Do you miss me yet?" feel free to say "YES!" We didn't always agree with some things he did like his plan for immigration, but we found him to be an honest man who believed in the inherent good of people. Problem is he extended that to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama who like nothing better than to trash Pres Bush. Also missing former Secretary of State Condi Rice who understood foreign affairs versus the current SoS Clinton who just wants to pass out money and play up to our enemies.

Guess we shouldn't be shocked that the good friend of Arafat's wife, Hillary, is using State Department money to help build and refurbish mosques. Something to remember if Hillary decides to run for President again.

U.S. State Department is Building… Mosques
Posted by Candace de Russy Aug 12th 2010 at 2:24 am

What else is the State Department larding out, at hard-pressed taxpayers’ expense, to facilitate “understanding” with the Muslim world?


What else, that is, in addition to Ground-Zero-Mega-Mosque Imam Rauf’s likely fund-raising gig in five, oil rich countries?

Just as it has greatly, very greatly, disturbed 68% of you registered voters to learn of plans to build a $100 million dollar mosque financed perhaps by the very ones who underwrote the 9/11 slaughter, it will likely disturb you to learn that the State Department has been hard at work – on your dime – rebuilding of mosques in foreign countries.

The Washington Times reports:

In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque’s namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country’s Byzantine rulers.

For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of “Muslim triumphalism” glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument – and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.

By what lights is U.S. citizens’ money being used to preserve and advance Islam? What of First Amendment considerations about the use of public moneys for religious worship? Our government claims murkiness on these issues but nonetheless forges ahead in constructing mosque abroad:

In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were “uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution” when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.

Casting uncertainty to the winds, our government proceeded to rebuild the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, in the anticipation of such benefits as “stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups.”

But here’s the rub:

Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for “inherently religious activities.”

The Times is right: “It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.”

Our taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promulgate Islam. Nor should it be spent on a tour for Rauf that endows him with both access and the U.S. stamp of approval.

Source: http://bigpeace.com/cderussy/2010/08/12/u-s-state-department-is-building-mosques/

US State Dept Sends Mosque Imam to Mideast

Feisal Abdul Rauf, the Imam of the Ground Zero Mosque is going to be representing the United States in the Middle East and the taxpayers of America are picking up the tab. This man will not acknowledge Hamas is a terrorist organization and believes 9/11 was partly caused by US policies. Yet the State Department is sending him to the Middle East? What's he going to do there? Raise more money for the Ground Zero Mosque they want to break ground for on 9/11 and shove it in our face?

You want to gag, read the following paragraph which comes from the Hillary State Department:

“He is a distinguished Muslim cleric,” said State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley. “We do have a program whereby, through our Educational and Cultural Affairs Bureau here at the State Department, we send people from Muslim communities here in this country around the world to help people overseas understand our society and the role of religion within our society.”

Guess after Hillary Clinton played up to Arafat's wife, Soho, we shouldn't be too shocked at this, but we are. Why are the taxpayers picking up the tab and why is this man representing the United States? Just a reminder for anyone who thinks Hillary would be different from Obama when it comes to taking sides of the Arab countries over the Israel:

Hillary Clinton kisses Soho Arafat
after Soha's terrorist speech
January 2011 cannot come soon enough for the taxpayers of this Country so all these trips on our nickle can be curtailed. Our Country is in serious financial condition and we have to learn we are picking up the tab for this Iman after learning about the trip of Michelle Obama to Spain which estimates of the cost are continuing to rise and are closer to over $1M than the $375,000K they tried to tell us it cost.

US State Dept Sends Mosque Imam to Mideast
August 9, 2010 - 7:01 PM by: Jake Gibson

WASHINGTON– State Department officials on Monday confirmed Feisal Abdul Rauf, the Imam of the so-called Ground Zero Mosque, will soon be going on a trip of the Middle East and the U.S. government will be picking up the tab.

The planned construction of a mosque near Ground Zero in New York City has set off a contentious national debate over religious freedom in the U.S., drawing impassioned opposition from some families of 9/11 victims.

Rauf has emerged as a controversial figure because of his refusal to acknowledge Hamas as a terrorist organization, which is how the U.S. government classifies the group. The imam also has been quoted as saying U.S. foreign policy was in part responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

(snip)

Rauf and his partners are preparing to build a $100 million Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero, where on September 11, 2001 two airliners hijacked by al-Qaeda terrorists, slammed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center, killing nearly 3,000 innocents.

The project, known as Park 51, cleared a final hurdle on August 3rd, when decision by New York City’s Landmarks Preservation Commission cleared the way for construction. The tower could span up to 15 stories and will house a mosque, a 500-seat auditorium and a pool.

The State Department has not yet divulged a detailed itinerary of Rauf’s trip, although Arab media is reporting he will visit the oil rich states of Saudi Arabia, The United Arab Emirates and Abu Dhabi.

“It is to foster greater understanding and outreach around the world, among… Muslim- majority communities,” said Crowley. “We've done this many, many times, with many leading figures… over the past few years.”

The project has also drawn outspoken criticism from Sarah Palin who famously tweeted, “Peace-seeking Muslims, pls understand, Ground Zero mosque is UNNECESSARY provocation. It stabs hearts.”

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has forcefully defended the project as a symbol of America’s religious tolerance.

Read more: Fox News

Obama Sanctions Hondurans, Consoles Zelaya, and Props Up Chavez

Pajamas Media
Sept. 5, 2009
Dan Miller

According to an article in the Los Angeles Times on September 4, the United States has announced a major cutoff in aid to Honduras, saying that it had terminated “more than $30 million” which had previously been suspended. The announcement added that:
"It may eliminate as much as $200 million more if Honduras does not restore democratic rule and reinstate President Manuel Zelaya, who was ousted in a coup."

In addition, the United States also threatened on September 3 to “withhold recognition of the new president who emerges from elections scheduled in November” unless Zelaya is reinstated prior to the election. Mr. Zelaya understood Secretary Clinton to have been more emphatic. He said that he "appreciated that Mrs. Clinton had “made it clear” the U.S. wouldn’t recognize any government arising from elections held by the interim government."

The United States had earlier started revoking visas “of members and supporters of the de facto regime. It had previously canceled four officials’ visas and stopped issuing new tourist and business visas to Hondurans.”

The situation is confusing. The “more than $30 million” termination of aid announced on September 3 probably refers to a further but undefined step with regard to the earlier “suspension” of aid noted on the same day by a State Department spokesman as “about $35 million in aid,” which “had been temporarily suspended after the coup.”

The earlier aid “suspension” apparently occurred on July 2. The difference between “suspension” and “termination” of aid is less than crystal clear. It is also unclear when, and even whether, the “about $35 million” aid termination will be followed by the threatened additional $200 million aid cut-off...

(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...

COMMENTS: What part of the fact this was not a coup which the rest of the world is waking up to does this Administration not understand? The former President went against the Honduran Constitution and was lawfully removed. What does Obama and Hillary do? They side with the legally ousted President Zelaya against the legitimate Government. What part of Impeachment do they not understand? Wait Hillary was against her husband being removed from office when he lied. Is that what is driving her? Failure to acknowledge a Constitution of another Country whose Congress and Supreme Court actually removed Zelaya after finding him guilty makes no sense except if you are socialist aka Communist leaning.

This President supports dictators over legitimate Governments which should get him impeached before this is all over especially if he thinks he can stay in office forever like the other dictators in the hemisphere. Time to cut of monetary support to ACORN voter fraud people and put an end the voter fraud of the Democrats to ensure we have legitimate people elected.

UPDATE:
Honduras targets deposed leader over expenses (Obama/Hillary on the wrong side against Honduras and refuse to recognize this is not a coup)

(AFP) – 2 hours ago

TEGUCIGALPA — Honduras' de facto government attacked deposed President Manual Zelaya on Saturday for wasting six million dollars of public funds on horses, vacations and Harley Davidson motorcycles.

Government officials distributed a lengthy list of what they claimed were Zelaya's pet luxury items, including cash for the upkeep of his horses as well as airline tickets, jewelry, the use of a private helicopter, and his own top-of-the-range motorbike, local media reported.

In an audit of Zelaya's expenses by judicial authorities, the mustachioed leader -- who was ushered out of the country on June 28 in a military-backed coup -- also spent money on expensive wines renting high-end real estate.

"By next week the High Court of Auditors will provide a report on each part of the investigation, and whether a criminal prosecution is appropriate," said Renan Sagastume, the presiding judge for Honduras' Superior Court of Auditors.

Meanwhile Honduras' interim government said it would suspend visa-free travel with Brazil for diplomats and other officials.

(Excerpt) Click here for Full Article

UPDATE:

The Honduran Constitution may be amended in any way except three. No amendment can ever change (1) the country's borders, (2) the rules that limit a president to a single four-year term and (3) the requirement that presidential administrations must "succeed one another" in a "republican form of government."

Article 239 of the Constitution specifically states that any president who so much as proposes the permissibility of reelection "shall cease forthwith" in his duties, and Article 4 provides that any "infraction" of the succession rules constitutes treason. The rules are so tight because these are terribly serious issues for Honduras, which lived under decades of military rule. The U.S. State Department terminated a broad range of assistance to the government of Honduras, charging the de facto regime and continuing failure to restore democratic, constitutional rule to Honduras (remember- they DID follow their constitution).

The State Dept. goes on to say that they will restore the terminated assistance upon a return to democratic, constitutional governance in Honduras. Their normally scheduled presidential election will be in November. But, the State Department says "we would not be able to support the outcome of the scheduled elections." I don't understand WHY people are not up in arms over this. Make sure that people are aware...

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2009/sept/128608.htm