May 31 - Jimmy Carter has some explaining to do. Judi McLeod of Canada Free Press reveals that the Censure Carter Committee has uncovered a paper trail which, it is alleged, traces funds from the Saudi Bin Laden Group to Carter.

From The film the world never viewed: Fahrenheit Jimmy Carter:

A paper trail shows that more than $1 million has been funneled from Bakr M. Bin Laden on behalf of the Saudi Bin Laden Group to The Carter Center.

[...]

"An investigation by the Censure Carter Committee into the financing for The Carter Center of Atlanta, Georgia founded by President Carter and his wife to advance his "Blame America First" policies reveals that over $1,000,000 has been funneled from Bakr M. Bin Laden for the Saudi Bin Laden Group to the Carter Center," says Censure Carter.Com in a mainstream media-ignored recent media release.

"In fact, an online report accuses former President Carter of meeting with 10 of Osama Bin LadenÂ’s brothers early in 2000, Carter and his wife, Rosalyn followed up their meeting with a breakfast with Bakr Bin Laden in September 2000 and secured the first $200,000 towards the more than $1 million that has been received by the Carter Center."

I think there is a general assumption that Jimmy Carter lost his mind after the Tehran Embassy takeover and doomed rescue attempt. He's become much like that elderly woman you see on the street corner -- the one with several large message buttons pinned to her coat passing passing out leaflets produced by The Nut Factory.

But he's also family, so you let him button-hole you for the obligatory 10-minutes on Thanksgiving until you can escape.

But no degree of diminished capacity could absolve Carter of not going public after Sept. 11 to explain that he had accepted funds from a highly questionable source nor excuse his failure to return the money to the Saudi Bin Laden Group after Sept. 11.

Unfortunately for Carter, another respected American, Rudy Giuliani, set the standard when, right after Sept. 11, he refused a donation for New York City from a Saudi prince.

We'll see if the U.S. news media picks up on this story; in the meantime, the Censure Carter Committee is raising money for ads to be aired on television.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 398 words, total size 3 kb.

May 31 - I feel as though my fingers have been poised over this keyboard for 3 days now, groping for words and trying to cut through the mingled humility, gratitude, and guilt that this day inspires.

I did not volunteer to serve my country in my youth. I believed, as do so many now, that it was better to work for peace. I had the feeling that, in ways I could not articulate even then, a general desire for peace could spread from belligerent nation to belligerent nation until we defeated all the warmongers.

I guess I believed that peace would spread by osmosis.

It's easy enough to laugh at such naivete now, yet my generation was inspired by Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. King: two men who successfully challenged two great nations in the cause of freedom, and they had done so not only without violence but by intentionally using non-violent methods. What we failed to take into account, though, was that both Gandhi and Dr. King knew that they were dealing with countries that, despite their flaws, believed in justice and thus would respond justly.

So, in our innocence, we believed communism wasn't evil but just a different economic system that offered hope to the Third World, and all the facts as to the deadliness of Stalin's gulags and the terrible death toll of Mao's cultural revolution were dismissed as American propaganda.

There were so many questions we should have asked about Russian and Chinese involvement but didn't, nor did we consider the Russian and Chinese propaganda machines. So we sang "Down by the Riverside" and "Last Night I Had the Strangest Dream" and protested the War in Vietnam, the draft, racial inequality and supported all the progressive things because we were so open-minded. We believed we were rescuing America from McCarthyism and the military-industrial complex. We believed ourselves pure.

When the U.S. finally withdrew from Vietnam, we felt proud because we had restored self-determination to the Vietnamese people who hated us and wanted nothing more than to be reunited with their Northern brethren.

And then we saw scenes like this one:

Marines throwing Vietnames back over American Embassy wall in Saigon

And there were other images: Vietnamese clinging to helicopter skids, and helicopters being shoved overboard to make room aboard carriers for as many people as could fit, and reading in the newspapers about the unspeakable horrors those people endured crammed on open flight decks and others who had boarded rickety boats rather than live under communism. Many of them in fact died -- of thirst, starvation, disease, and by drowning when their boats capsized in stormy seas.

The heartbreaking stories of the boat people forced thinking people to wonder why there was such a flood of refugees and the possibile answers were unsettling.

All this shook my sense of confident righteousness -- and then the shocking reality of Pol Pot's Utopia demolished it:

Life under the Khmer Rouge for 1.6 million souls

[Aside: The above is one grim picture, yet it is not entirely of an ugly past: were the bones of all those Iraqis beheaded, shot or blown apart by Zarqawi and others stacked in a pile, how high would it be?]

It was troubling, but maybe the "warmongers" were right after all. Maybe people didn't want to live under communism. Maybe communism really was evil and enslaved people. Maybe its spread had to be stopped. Maybe, just maybe we had been wrong.

And yet, despite our well-meant but unbearably foolish innocence, we were more fortunate than we could ever have imagined because those we had dismissed as brainwashed victims of U.S. propaganda remained vigilantly at the walls to protect us from the very dangers we had laughed off as simple-minded attempts at fear-mongering.

The American soldier stands between us and the monsters and often, because we are a compassionate people, he stands between people of other lands and the monsters. He has done so in Europe, the South Pacific, Africa, Korea, Panama, Grenada, Somalia, Vietnam, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq, and too many places to count and too, because it is the right thing to do, has brought aid to people in far away countries devastated by tsunamais, earthquakes, and other natural disasters.

It is a curious thing, that calling to serve in a military and humanitarian capacity, and we are blessed that so many answer it.

I am humble because my youthful idealism was so misdirected, I am grateful because the men and women of the American military continue to protect me, my family, and billions of people in the world from monsters I once believed did not exist, and I feel guilty because, although I am wiser, the Pentagon thinks I am too old to serve so I can't make up for the foolishness of my younger years.

Neither words written nor spoken can ever repay this nation's debt to those souls lost in struggles to secure and protect our nation and our values, but we can vow to keep faith with them and, in the words of Lincoln, "highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain. . . that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. . . and that government of the people. . .by the people. . .for the people. . . shall not perish from the earth."

And, if you haven't done so yet, go here and, in the name of those who gave their lives to secure your freedom, take advantage of the ways available at that site to show your gratitude to those who now serve.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:32 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 900 words, total size 7 kb.

May 30 - Yes, I remember My Lai. In fact, I'm old enough to actually remember My Lai -- as well as the subsequent court-martials and sentences that were handed down because following orders then, as now, were not grounds upon which U.S. military personnel can base their defense.

But I also remember Jenin. After much of the media and pundits denounced Israel, the U.N. reported the following:

Palestinians had claimed that between 400 and 500 people had been killed, fighters and civilians together. They had also claimed a number of summary executions and the transfer of corpses to an unknown place outside the city of Jenin.

The number of Palestinian fatalities, on the basis of bodies recovered to date, in Jenin and the refugee camp in this military operation can be estimated at around 55. Of those, a number were civilians, four were women and two children. There were 23 Israeli fatalities in the fighting operations in Jenin.

However tempting it may be to denounce unproven allegations, I'm willing to wait because, just as happened with My Lai, the Ongoing Probes Will Yield Facts About Haditha Incident.

Not speculation, allegations and rumours but facts.

As a sidenote, many of those in the media (ahem, Haroon Siddiqui and Toronto Star) did not apologize to Israel for their hysterical condemnations after the Jenin fraud was exposed. That failure, by any reasonable yardstick, is what separates propaganda from honest news reporting.

Posted by: Debbye at 09:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 246 words, total size 2 kb.

May 30 - John methodically outlines 22 Problems With The Senate's Illegal Immigration Bill and I'm adding a 23rd:

23. Why should we trust the Senate to see to the enforcement of their own proposals -- weak as they may be -- to improve security at the border?

Been there, swallowed that.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:30 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.

May 29 - Memorial Day is one holiday that gained new relevance since the Sept. 11 attacks. It is more painful, it is more grateful, and it is more humbling.

We Were Soldiers was aired on (American) television last night and it was an experience that won't be easy to shake off.

As always, Mudville Gazette has several excellent posts commemorating those who made the ultimate sacrifice.

Although I realize that Memorial Day is being celebrated today stateside, my heart insists that Memorial Day is on Wednesday. Maybe that's due to the fact that it's not a holiday up here and I am supposed to go to work tonight (I hope) or maybe I really am in my dotage. but I've elected to honour our fallen on May 31st.

12:46 - I'll never be able to write anything so eloquent and direct as Christopher Hitchins has:

... the insoluble problem: how to estimate the value of those whose lives were cruelly cut off before victory was in sight. It is sometimes rather lazily said that these soldiers "gave" their lives. It would be equally apt, if more blunt, to say that they had their lives taken.

[...]

This Memorial Day, one might think particularly of those of our fallen who also guarded polling-places, opened schools and clinics, and excavated mass graves. They represent the highest form of the citizen, and every man and woman among them was a volunteer. This plain statement requires no further rhetoric.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.

May 28 - There's a sensible way to do things and then there's the government's way, and the lengthy, convoluted methods of the latter are probably what gave rise to the American joke "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."

Americans want border security, but Congress has chosen, most probably in order to avoid dealing with providing genuine border security, to merge the issues of border security with the details of dealing with those already illegally in the U.S. (There's little point of berating the president over this; it is clearly an issue for the legislature to deal with. Separation of powers, and all that.)

But it's no secret that the biggest headache of any branch of the U.S. government is attempting to govern independent-minded Americans, and those tough, sturdy people who showed that "illegal aliens can be stopped with dedicated volunteers sitting in lawn chairs for 30 days" have a new project. While Congress is posturing, the enterprising folks of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corp. are building a fence, or, as Michelle Malkin terms it, DO-IT-YOURSELF BORDER CONTROL:

At present, six private land owners have partnered with the Minutemen for the commencement of construction of border fencing on their land. Surveillance cameras on the fencing will be monitored via computer by registered Minutemen across the country. We have chosen a fence design that is based on the Israeli fences in Gaza and on the West Bank that have cut terrorist attacks there by 95% or more. ...

Actions that spring from grassroots organizations have a unique power that baffles politicians accustomed to striding through what is termed "halls of power" and who believe everything must be pondered, considered, debated, locked up in committee; in short, action is to be deferred by any means necessary and brother do they have a lot of means.

In true Wonderland fashion, they often succeed in making inaction appear to be action, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time and once the Minuteman sunk their first metaphorical posthole it became self-evident that a fence could indeed be built because one is being built, and furthermore renders the 320 miles the Senate graciously allowed pitifully meagre compared to the relative ease with which one could be built from the Gulf to the Pacific.

We reached the damned moon within a decade. What's 2,000, or even 5,000 miles, compared to that?

It seems to me that mobilizing the National Guard to build a fence makes eminent sense. Perhaps some savvy governor will chose to go that route? Now that would be sweet and, I believe, it would be legal should they receive permission from landowners along the border.

If you can donate money to this worthy Minuteman cause, go here.

(Via Newsbeat1.)

Posted by: Debbye at 02:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 490 words, total size 3 kb.

May 26 - Sorry about the downtime -- I had some trouble with the computer so took it into the shop, and it turned out "the" problem was actually a number of issues.

Oh well, they got fixed. I'm poorer, but I think the new video card in particular resolved a lot of other little problems. I hope.

On more relevant issues: I don't get Mexican President Vicente Fox. The boast that the United States (and Canada) get the best and brightest from other countries is not an idle one, and one would think, if he truly wants to see Mexico advance, that he would regard the steady outflow of ambitious, energetic people with dismay.

It doesn't matter, really, because the American people are no longer buying the "defer and delay" tactics of the past 20 years from our government. The reluctant urgency by the Senate to at least appear to resolve immigration issues has been sharply challenged by the nervous House of Representatives who are scrambling to give some semblence of leadership yet who are merely following We, the People, who are determined the laws be upheld and the borders be secured. We don't always get to set the agenda but this is one of those wonderful times when the wisdom of having fixed, two-year terms for House members proves sound.

Yes, they will continue to try to wriggle of the hook, so the pressure has to kept on.

As for the Senate, I did use the down time to some advantage. I began to re-read a book from my university days, The Federalist Era (1789-1801) by John C. Miller, and find it both aggravating and comforting that the Senate was as supercilious then as it is now.

Miller writes than when the "great experiment" was launched, the Senate appointed a special committee which recommended that the proper title for the President should be "His Highness the President of the United States and Protector of the Rights of the Same" and he should be properly addressed as "His Excellency" or "His Elective Majesty."

Bush-bashers will doubtless see the above as an opening and thus miss the point: at a time when the country desperately needed to establish institutions and precedents for the governance of the infant nation, the Senate was more concerned about pomp and ceremony.

We are so used to think of our Senate in modern terms that we forget that the body after which it was consciously modeled was composed of patricians and their primary concern was remain aloof from the common man even as they placated the citizens of Rome with bread and circuses.

This week, though, the circus moved back to the House of Representatives, the members of which seem to believe that they too are above the law. Although they have been appeased, Tuning Spork has an interesting theory about the real reason behind the evacuation of the Rayburn Building after a report of gunfire -- which is now being attributed to noises orginating from a construction crew? Hmm.

Day-um, the screen looks good. The problem had developed so gradually that I hadn't realize how the view had degraded. It just goes to show: you can't beat clarity.

More tomorrow, and a good albeit bittersweet Memorial Day weekend to everyone.

Never forget those who serve.

May 27 - 18:01 Ah, this explains everything. Members of Congress are not only tone-deaf but suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder (or should that be we are suffering from their narcissism?)

Maybe we should try something different and elect adults to Congress come November.

Posted by: Debbye at 04:50 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 601 words, total size 4 kb.

May 17 - I had expressed curiosity in my post about the president's speech on immigration as to exactly what he meant by continuing to "work co-operatively" with the government of Mexico to control the southern border.

Evidently, co-operate means to do nothing because Mexico is threatening lawsuits over Guard:

Mexico warned Tuesday it would file lawsuits in U.S. courts if National Guard troops detain migrants on the border and some officials said they fear the crackdown will force illegal crossers into more perilous areas to avoid detection.

Just build a wall, Mr. President, and let's stop the appeasment game.

17:07 - Looks like the Senate at least was listening: Powerline reports that the Sessions amendment, which requires building 370 miles of fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers along the southern border, passed the Senate by a fairly wide margin: 83 - 16. I suspect the House might pass the amendment as well - more of them are up for re-election.

20:10 - Bill O'Reilly just threatened to instigate a boycott of Mexican goods and travel there should the Mexican government pursue their threat to sue the U.S. government. The assumption that it's just rhetoric is speculation, and, after Sept. 11, I think we're stupid not to take people at their word.

The U.S. State Dept. routinely issues travel advisories -- the Mexican government should adopt a similar approach if they are truly in earnest about protecting Mexican citizens.

Posted by: Debbye at 06:58 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

May 15 - I had to attend a meeting tonight so didn't hear the speech but the transcript of the president's speech calling for legislation to reform immigration laws is here and no, I was not impressed by a speech that was short on action but at the end, he did score some points for those still willing to listen.

He placed securing the border in the the lead-off position thus acknowledging that problem is the biggest national weakness as well as the biggest concern of Americans. Nevertheless, the plan proposed is to continue to have no concrete means to stop the flow. Deploying the national guard seems much like window dressing given the mission objectives:

So in coordination with governors, up to 6,000 Guard members will be deployed to our southern border. The Border Patrol will remain in the lead. The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems, analyzing intelligence, installing fences and vehicle barriers, building patrol roads, and providing training. Guard units will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities -- that duty will be done by the Border Patrol.

It was interesting that he inserted that we would not "militarize" the border by which it could be inferred that we won't be building the North American equivalent of Hadrian's Wall but I have a feeling that it is precisely at that point that he probably lost much of his audience. Americans are fed up, and when we get like that we aren't in the mood to hear vagaries in place of firm, decisive action.

In truth, I think many Americans would like to see a structure on the border that makes it clear that we regard maintaining control over who enters our country seriously. I don't think we could countenance killing those who try to enter but we want them stopped cold.

Continuing to "work co-operatively" with Mexico pre-supposes either that the Mexican government is currently co-operating (most believe they aren't) or that the status quo is as good as it is likely to get. I believe most Americans find that unacceptable and would prefer to see the president honestly lay out the difficulties with the Mexican government rather than pretend they don't exist.

Ending the catch and release system would be an improvement and instituting a temporary worker program with tamper-proof identification cards is a future regulatory device for immigration control but what about those now in the country?

You see, this is where I diverge from those who want them deported. Those who have the guts to pack up and leave everything they know in order to face an uncertain future in the U.S. on the chance they can build better lives are in fact of the stuff of which we are made. The difference is that our ancestors passed through Ellis or Angel Islands and although technology rarely made criminal background checks possible, names were recorded, papers stamped and given to the new arrivals, and there were stringent (for the day) health exams with sometimes heartbreaking results when someone who failed was sent back.

Some of those people who entered were political refugees and a small number of them continued their activities - among the most notorious were the anarchists who planted bombs and the infamous "deranged anarchist" (or so history notes him) who killed President McKinley - and then too Americans became fed up and demanded the federal government take action by deporting the "troublemakers."

We've been through this before and despite the problems we survived and we thrived. One key difference, however, between now and the past is that nobody seriously entertained the notion that the school curriculum be taught in Italian or Gaelic, and the expectation was that those moving here would speak English and strive to become Americans by learning and accepting the heritage of the U.S.A. It worked, the proof being the many great Americans we study in history classes who are not definitely not of Anglo-Saxon origin.

That brings us to the dilemma of how to deal with the millions already here. That portion of the speech spelled out a recognition that this is America, English is the recognized language in schools and in the public sphere, and we cherish our heritage and are willing to share it. The rest can be summarized fairly neatly as Compromise, Compromise, Compromise. That's not a bad thing: our ability to compromise has guided the Union through many inflammatory issues but the compromise has to stick. Sadly, both houses in Congress have been more adroit at ducking substantive issues of late and grabbing the cheap headlines than providing leadership (Dubai port contract, anyone?) and I suspect I'm not the only one who understands that there's a serious flaw when new legislation is passed to obscure the fact that current laws are not enforced.

The fact that unemployment is so low would seem to argue that indeed those working and living in the U.S. are -- despite their undocumented status -- contributing to the wealth of the nation, and although payroll taxes are not being deducted and paid on their behalf, they are paying taxes through their rents and sales taxes on purchases.

Getting co-operation from the states and towns is going to be another problem but the taxpayer, also known as the electorate, may well have the final word depending on how local candidates present the issues and choices.

The Minutemen project gave tangible evidence of the growing unrest by Americans at the government's lethargic response to the porous border. It's not necessarily a bad thing when the people take the lead in the face of government inaction, but Congress has had that "deer in the headlights" look for well over a year and people on all sides of this issue have noticed and the vacillations and grandstanding has diminished respect for the legislature.

That diminished respect may be the true casualty of this crisis. We have a respect for our institutions that invariably transcends those who are elected or appointed to them, but the polls indicate so deep a disappointment in Congress and the Presidency as to be dangerous at a time of war when leadership is not only desirable but mandatory.

[No, I'm not going to address the demonstrators and boycotters. This is going to sound harsh but a monumental error of principle was made when ANSWER took over leadership of their cause; although the president was right to remind us of those who have fought for this country valiantly and courageously in order to obtain American citizenship, those few names pale in comparison with the hundreds of thousands we saw demonstrating and holding up traffic - not only on a weekday but also a schoolday - under the auspices of ANSWER's political agenda. Even stupider are plans to hold demonstrations on Wednesday in response to the president's speech. ANSWER's goal is to create an image of much put-upon victims, and they won't hestitate to turn people into victims in order to realize that goal.

Hispanics need to regain control over their cause and get better leaders. Maybe then the issue can be discussed with people who are serious about a just and fair resolution. Until then, we're discussing this with ... ANSWER.]

04:26 - Well worth staying awake for: John poses those Questions Not Answered by Bush's Illegal Immigration speech.

Posted by: Debbye at 01:42 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 1093 words, total size 8 kb.

May 10 - 'Ardent Sentry' Testing U.S., Canadian Crisis Response:

WASHINGTON, May 10, 2006 – More than 5,000 U.S. and Canadian servicemembers are working with authorities in five U.S. states and two Canadian provinces [Ontario and New Brunswick] to test their response capabilities to crises ranging from a major hurricane to a terrorist attack to a pandemic flu outbreak.

Ardent Sentry 2006, a two-week U.S. Northern Command exercise, kicked off May 8 to test military support to federal, provincial, state and local authorities while continuing to support the Defense Department's homeland defense mission, according to Air Force Lt. Col. Eric Butterbaugh, a NORTHCOM and North American Aerospace Defense Command spokesman. The Canadian part of the exercise began May 1 and continues through May 12.

[...]

While testing the military's interagency coordination, the exercise also focuses on its ability to operate with the Canadian government and the newly established Canada Command, NORTHCOM's Canadian counterpart, Kucharek said.

"This is the first major exercise which will allow Canada Command to train with federal and provincial departments and agencies," said Gordon O'Connor, Canada's national defense minister. "Exercises such as Ardent Sentry 2006 help ensure we respond to domestic threats and natural disasters in a coordinated manner." It also will promote "cross-border information sharing" between Canada Command and NORTHCOM, he said.

Posted by: Debbye at 06:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 2 kb.

May 2 - The ninth rule of Fight Club is you do not posts videos of Fight Club on the internet.

Video Of Son In Local Fight Club Fuels Father's Fears.

Posted by: Debbye at 02:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.

May 1 - I needed to see the movie because I needed to pay tribute to the passengers and crew of Flight 93. It was really that simple.

The theatre seemed empty -- only about a quarter full. Many attended alone. The audience was silent even before the lights were lowered and remained hushed as they filed out after the movie. It was respectful and eerie.

The movie did not cause me to "relive Sept. 11" but rather to live through those elements which we learned of days afterward. I did find a curious solace in the reminder that the air controllers, FAA and even the military comprehended the magnitude and intent of events at the same moment as did we all.

The movie did not renew my rage so much as intensify the burden I accepted when I first learned of the defiant and desperate choice the passengers and crew made to retake the plane and avert another attack -- when I instictively knew that I needed to be among those who, in the words of Lincoln, would be "dedicated to the great task remaining before us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion."

Each will take something different from United 93 and no, I really haven't adequate words for what I took, but there are two essays that do: Right Wing Prof masterfully takes us from the movie to the Shanksville memorial and Gerard Vanderleun invokes a different scene at another site: those early memorials in New York constructed from flyers of the missing on fences and candlewax on sidewalks. I think much is said about the events within the movie by the descriptions and pictures of the imprompteau tributes at both sites which ache of loss and resound in thanks far more poignantly than any architect or committee could impose, and therein too lies the power of the movie: the only offering is one of stark events which do not condescend to explain or rationalize, and thus it respects the ordinary person.

Gerard's awed definition of heroism encompasses the firefighters and police as well as those on Flight 93 whose response to danger was to act, and it's much too good not to quote:

What I know in my heart, but what always escapes my understanding until something like this film renews it, is that heroism is a virtue that most often appears among us not descending from some mythic pantheon, but rising up out of the ordinary earth and ordinary hearts when the moment calls for actions extraordinary.

(Right wing prof link via a succinct but brilliant entry at It comes in pints .)

Posted by: Debbye at 09:21 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 517 words, total size 3 kb.