August 2007

Today marked the release of all the South Korean missionaries held hostage by the Taliban terrorists (h/t: Michelle Malkin). Why did the terrorists hold the seven remaining hostages for an additional day? I believe they wanted to see what kind of response the hostage release received from the media. If it didn’t go their way or if thought they could gain some new advantage, they’d still have some leverage. Just more game-playing.

Now it appears the Church that sent the missionaries to Afghanistan will be charged by the South Korean government for the expense of transporting them home.

According to the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade,

The government will first request compensation for the cost of airfare, the transfer of dead bodies, and expenses for the transportation and medical treatment of the captives.”

The chief pastor of the Bundang-based church said the church will reimburse the government for all costs associated with transporting the dead bodies and freed hostages home. The pastor made the commitment after the government said it would seek compensation from the church since all expenses were paid by taxpayer money.

First taken hostage by Taliban, then robbed by their own government. South Korea has the twelfth largest economy in the world! How cheap can you be?!?

MORE: Tel-Chai Nation

UPDATE: South Korean officials hint at recouping expenses from the hostages themselves (h/t: Hot Air).

Twelve of the nineteen South Korean hostages held by the Taliban have been released. The hostages were released into the care of the International Committee of the Red Cross in small groups at three different locations in central Afghanistan. The Taliban said they would release the seven remaining hostages within the next few days.

At first, South Korea had vowed not to engage in direct talks with Taliban terrorists who had threatened to kill the missionary hostages. However, following the murder of two of the hostages as a result of failed negotiations between the terrorists and the Afghan government late last month, the South Korean government began direct negotiations with the kidnappers.

Of course, this is good news for the missionaries and their families and I’m happy they’re safe. Still, although the hostages-for-prisoners deal fell through, the Taliban can still claim victory.

They certainly didn’t lose, did they?

The South Koreans have reached an agreement with the Taliban kidnappers to free the 19 remaining Christian missionary hostages (h/t: Michelle Malkin).

The deal: In exchange for the hostages, South Korea will withdraw its troops stationed in Afghanistan by year’s end and impose a ban on its Christian nationals’ missionary activities in Afghanistan.

The message: Kidnapping and murdering foreigners works!

MORE: Hot Air; The Jawa Report; Little Green Footballs

An open letter to Martin Lewis of The Huffington Post:

Dear Mr. Lewis,

I’ve read your follow-up article to the open letter you wrote to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Pace. You’re now referring to that open letter as “tongue and cheek” and “satire,” with comparisons to Jonathan Swift’s “Gulliver.” Not only were you embarrassingly wrong in your interpretation of the UCMJ, your failure to recant or stand by your assertions is cowardly. Your new assertion that the letter is satirical is contradicted by your responses to numerous commenters. In fact, here are seven of your defense responses:

===========MARTIN RESPONDS==========

“Of course this does not in any way lessen General Pace’s authority to act. That particular phrase was not the cornerstone of my case. Merely an adjunct. The combination of Articles 7, 133 and 134 provide the authority for General Pace to save his nation.”

“I ask General Pace to do two things. One is to relieve the President of his command as Commander-In-Chief. The other is to place the President under military arrest. It is arguable as to the conflict between the Constitution and the Uniform Code Of Military Justice. One of the important legal ramifications of My Lai was the obligation to relieve a senior officer of his/her command in exceptional circumstances. If General Pace was performing a military imperative in a peaceful, non-threatening manner and simply informed Mr. Bush that he was being relieved of his military command, there would be no justification for the Secret Service to act as you suggest. Whatever the ultimate consequence, the impact of such a courageous and noble act on behalf of his nation, would be significant.”

“There is a vast difference between arresting someone and the outcome of a court martial. I have not advocated that General Pace “court martial” Bush. Nor could he. I have suggested that he relieve him of his command - which would automatically trigger a court martial. At which Bush’s status would be decided. So your analogy is moot.”

“I am most certainly not proposing sedition. I am saying that General Pace has an authority - be it military, moral or notional - to use his position as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to announce that he is relieving the President of his role as Commander-In-Chief. It may not carry weight over the President’s power. But the symobilsm [sic] of such an act in defense of America’s beleagured and abused armed forces could resonate loudly.”

“Would it have been mutiny or sedition to refuse the orders of Lieutenant Calley at My Lai? Only a court martial could decide that. Anyway - I don’t wish General Pace to overthow [sic] the civil authority of Mr. Bush or commit any illegal act. A statement - even notional - that for the protection of the Armed Forces who he is sworn to protect - that he is relieving Mr. Bush of his command - would send a sgnal [sic] that he cares about his country above all else. Sometimes it takes one person to be noble…”

“I do NOT suggest or advocate any such action. On the contrary - I expressly say that the General must NOT undertake any mutinous or seditious act. Publicly expressing that he is relieving Mr. Bush of his command would be a noble gesture - not an actual seizure of power. An avowal of his duty to protect the brave armed forces from abuse.”

“Like at least 70% of people in the USA, I long for the return of decent, constitutionally respectful government in the US. But I utterly reject any calls for that being achieved with force or illegal actions. General Pace will do what his conscience dictates. Or not. But he knows what a Gentleman is. And he knows what Gentlemanly Conduct is…”

Furthermore, it wasn’t until one of your readers suggested your work was satire that you jumped on the bandwagon…

thgrant (See profile | I’m a fan of thgrant)
Lewis’ argument is full of nuance, so it is difficult to understand. He wants Pace or Petreus [sic] to act on their conscience, yet not do anything illegal. What a rational for seizing power, and typical of so many leftist attitudes. Arrest all who disagree with us. Stop taking away our civil rights. (I hope the irony is apparent to most readers.)

==========MARTIN RESPONDS=========

I wouldn’t count on it. Most of the right-wing-nuts who have read this column seem to be oblivious to irony and satire…

Your responses from this point on attribute your piece to satire. You’re not fooling anyone, Mr. Lewis. I don’t have a problem with anyone who expresses an opinion, as long as it’s an educated one. I also enjoy the opportunity to debate an issue. If someone should sway me with their argument, I would accept their position and concede that I was wrong. You could’ve done this, but instead chose to hide behind the literary curtain of “satire.” Your action equates to nothing more than a lame excuse.

The difference between your piece and Swift’s is that “Gulliver’s Travels” was recognized as satire. Your own words illustrate that you didn’t believe your letter was satirical. No, Mr. Lewis, you were serious.

Sincerely,

- Jake Olden Shy

MORE: Hot Air; The Colossus

Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) says a terror attack on U.S. soil prior to next year’s election would be a boon for the Republicans. She made this statement while campaigning in Concord, New Hampshire:

“It’s a horrible prospect to ask yourself, ‘What if? What if?’ But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world.”

Also Clinton explained that she’d beaten back the GOP’s negative attacks for years and, therefore, is “the best of the Democrats to deal with that.”

What?!?

Jumping the gun a bit, ain’t we, Senator? I mean, you’re putting a political spin on an event that hasn’t occurred and (hopefully) never will. It appears that you’re setting the stage to blame the GOP should we fall victim to another attack, as if its a certainty. Ah, perhaps you think the Republicans are planning on staging something between now and then? Yep, I’m sure a terror attack is priority one in the GOP’s efforts to reclaim Congress and again win the Presidency.

We need your political paranoia in the White House? I think not.

You’re ridiculous!

In an open letter to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Martin Lewis of The Huffington Post, is calling on General Peter Pace to arrest the President for “conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.” Mr. Lewis cites the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) as the law giving the military the authority to arrest its commander-in-chief.

I’ve never in my life heard of anything more asinine!

I don’t expect members of the civilian population to understand the military as an organization. This is especially true when considering the unique justice system used by the U.S. military. I understand this ignorance because a civilian doesn’t serve in the military and doesn’t have experience with the UCMJ. However, I can’t accept as ignorance the position taken by Mr. Lewis. He is a journalist and his job is to speak in facts. Even when writing an opinion piece like the article referenced, if his opinion isn’t based on factual information, any assertions he makes are moot. No, Mr. Lewis isn’t allowed the benefit of ignorance; he is stupid!

Mr. Lewis believes Articles 133 and 134 of the UCMJ give General Pace the authority to arrest the President.

Article 133, Conduct Unbecoming An Officer And A Gentleman, states,

Any commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

The elements are:

1. That the accused did or omitted to do certain acts; and
2. That, in the circumstances, these acts or omissions constituted conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman.

The key to this article is in who it applies to. This article specifically applies to someone who is an “officer” and a “gentleman.” This article applies to any commissioned officer, cadet or midshipman. A commissioned officer is confirmed by Congress to serve as an officer in the military. Contrast this with a noncommissioned officer who simply enlists in the military. Cadets and Midshipmen are students studying to be officers, such as those in the service academies. A commissioned officer is also expected to be a “gentleman,” who has a duty to avoid dishonest acts, displays of indecency, lawlessness, dealing unfairly, indecorum, injustice, or acts of cruelty. An officer and a gentleman who commits such acts violates article 133 and is subject to courts martial.

Article 134, General Article, states,

Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.

Article 134 is considered to be a “catch-all” for various offenses that aren’t necessarily covered by the other articles in the UCMJ. Article 134 offenses include disloyal statements, unclean equipment, improper wear of military uniform, abuse of public animals, adultery, bigamy, bribery, fraternization, etc. This article applies to all those serving in the U.S. military.

It is true, as Mr. Lewis states, quoting Article 7 of the UCMJ, that

“commissioned officers, warrant officers, petty officers, and noncommissioned officers” are “authorized under regulations governing the armed forces to apprehend persons subject to this chapter or to trial thereunder may do so upon reasonable belief that an offense has been committed and that the person apprehended committed it.”

The key words in that portion of the article are “persons subject to this chapter.” This means the aforementioned officers only have authority to apprehend persons subject to the UCMJ. Article 2 of the UCMJ lists those who are subject to the UCMJ:

1. Members of a regular component of the armed forces (i.e. active duty military)
2. Cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipman.
3. Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard when in Federal Service.
4. Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.
5. Retired members of a reserve component who are receiving hospitalization from an armed force.
6. Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.
7. Persons in custody of the armed forces serving a sentence imposed by a court-martial.
8. Members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Public Health Service, and other organizations, when assigned to and serving with the armed forces.
9. Prisoners of war in custody of the armed forces.
10. In time of war, persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field.
11. Subject to any treaty or agreement which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons serving with, employed by, or accompanying the armed forces outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.
12. Subject to any treaty or agreement t which the United States is or may be a party to any accepted rule of international law, persons within an area leased by or otherwise reserved or acquired for use of the United States which is under the control of the Secretary concerned and which is outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

Where does it say, “The President of the United States”? Guess what, Mr. Lewis, it doesn’t! General Pace has no more authority to arrest the President than he does to arrest you.

However, the The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition, defines a coup d’état as

A quick and decisive seizure of governmental power by a strong military or political group. In contrast to a revolution, a coup d’état, or coup, does not involve a mass uprising. Rather, in the typical coup, a small group of politicians or generals arrests the incumbent leaders, seizes the national radio and television services, and proclaims itself in power. Coup d’état is French for “stroke of the state” or “blow to the government.”

emphasis added

Isn’t that exactly what you’re asking for, Mr. Lewis? Funny, if you had suggested this in Saddam Hussain’s Iraq, you’d have been shot! Thank heavens you’re in America! Right?

More: Captain’s Quarters; Hot Air; Wake up America!; Stop the ACLU; Rhymes with Right; The Moderate Voice; Daily Pundit; Hegemonic Pundit; Blue Crab Boulevard; The American Mind; Q&O

UPDATE:

PHOTO: Day by Day Cartoon by Chris Muir

(h/t: memeorandum) In preparation for Gen Petraeus progress report (among others) next month, the Pentagon has established a 24/7 communications desk to disseminate information about U.S. efforts in Iraq.

Of course, some (Democrats and the MSM?) suggested the Pentagon was using the communications desk as a message machine or propaganda tool, but dismissed the accusations by explaining its purpose of timely and efficient gathering and distributing information from eight time-zones away. According to Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell,

“I would not characterize it as a war room,” … “It’s far less sinister than that. It’s more like a library…create[d] [as] a central clearinghouse of information so we can pull in all that is coming out of Baghdad and Iraq and have it come into one point, so we can better be able to share it with people who are interested.”

So, why not a “war-room”? Why shouldn’t the military have the opportunity to correct the record when biased news agencies put out inaccurate information about the U.S. in the Middle East? Who better than those making the story to tell the story?

I think an information war-room is an appropriate description and this info hub should be considered as such. The Pentagon’s info hub is a good idea and too long in coming if you ask me. Frankly, I’m looking forward to more positive information from the area–info that I don’t have to search for!

And while I’m at it–I don’t have a problem with the term “propaganda” either. According to the U.S. History Encyclopedia, propaganda is “the deliberate use of information, images, and ideas to affect public opinion.” Propaganda was disseminated during WWII to boost the morale of U.S. citizens and garner support for the cause (remember “Rosie the Riveter”?). Was there something wrong with this? Propaganda is not necessarily a bad thing, unless it propagates outright lies (hello, MSM).

Author and journalist, Elizabeth Drew, said,

“Propaganda has a bad name, but its root meaning is simply to disseminate through a medium, and all writing therefore is propaganda for something. It’s a seeding of the self in the consciousness of others.”

More: check out Wake Up America!–Spree always has a lot to say about the MSM and their information machine…

I was recently asked, “What one thing would you say has had the most profound effect on telecommunications in the past fifty years?”

The general answer around the table was, as one might imagine, “the Internet.” I thought about this for a moment and realized this answer was too simple. Citing the Internet as having the most profound effect on telecommunications is akin to comparing the impact of oxygen to mankind.

Without a doubt, the Internet has had a profound effect, but more specifically I believe it was the introduction of the Mosaic browser, that has had the most profound effect on telecommunications in the past fifty years. On March 14, 1993, Marc Andreessen and Eric Bina of the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) Software Development Group introduced the Mosaic 0.10 for X-windows. Mosaic was (is) a simple, yet powerful graphical browser that allowed users to essentially travel through the world of electronic information using a point-and-click interface. Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) was developed between 1989 to 1991, but it didn’t really take off until there was a useful browser to display inline images. With the introduction of the Mosaic browser the internet exploded with activity. The browser for the fist time brought the world wide web to the common man. One didn’t have to possess programming knowledge to access information on the internet because the complex methods used to extract the information were hidden within the browser application. What’s more, Mosaic was free for non-commercial use.

Also, about the time Andreessen and Bina were introducing Mosaic to the world, Congressman Rick Boucher authored a law, which allowed the first commercial traffic on the Internet. These two events led to the enormous growth of online business (e-commerce). The Internet provided an unprecedented opportunity on a global basis for businesses to interact with and reach out to customers without limitations such as physical location or time zone. The overwhelming success of e-commerce would not have been possible at that point-in-time without the Mosaic browser. According to the Computer Desktop Encyclopedia, Mosaic was “the app that caused the web to explode.”

Mosaic…the biggest thing to happen to telecommunications in 50 years!

President Bush asked those impatient and frustrated by the Iraq War to take a long view of the conflict, promising history would prove the naysayers wrong.

In his speech to the VFW in Kansas, Bush compared the Iraq war to previous US conflicts in Asia pointing out that these had lost popular support, but eventually proved their worth.

According to the President,

“The ideals and interests that led America to help the Japanese turn defeat into democracy are the same that lead us to remain engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq. … “The defense strategy that refused to hand the South Koreans over to a totalitarian neighbor helped raise up an Asian Tiger.”

Bush also cited Vietnam as a cautionary tale for those urging troop withdrawals today. This notion was summarily dismissed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who said,

“President Bush’s attempt to compare the war in Iraq to past military conflicts in East Asia ignores the fundamental difference,” … “Our nation was misled… blah, blah, blah…”

Yep, same old song-and-dance from Senator Harry, who is missing (as always) the point. The bottom line is that we lost our will in Viet Nam, essentially lost the war and the area remains unstable. We’re now losing our will in Iraq and this loss of heart, I’m afraid, will be more dire than Viet Nam ever was. There is nothing more dangerous to the safety and security of the free world than Islamic fundamentalism and what we do (or don’t do) in Iraq and Afghanistan will determine the fate of the world!

Russia returned to its former Col War posturing with the deployment of 14 bomber aircraft on patrols outside Russian airspace earlier today, marking the permanent return to a Soviet-era practice.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said,

“…strategic missile carriers, support planes, and tanker aircraft took off from seven Russian airfields in various parts of the country at 00:00, Moscow time, [2000 GMT Thursday] on August 17. Combat duty has begun.”

Putin indicated the resumption of flights was a response to security threats posed by other military powers, and this new (old) posturing is permanent. Explaining Russia’s resumption of strategic flights, Putin told reporters at joint military exercises with China and four Central Asian states in Russia’s Ural mountains:

“In 1992, Russia unilaterally ended flights by its strategic aircraft to distant military patrol areas. Unfortunately, our example was not followed by everyone.”

“Flights by other countries’ strategic aircraft continue and this creates certain problems for ensuring the security of the Russian Federation.”

Putin’s revival of this policy gave a new generation of U.S. fighter pilots an opportunity to experience a former Cold War ritual, when a Russian bomber flew over a U.S. military base on the Pacific island of Guam. The Russian pilots “exchanged smiles” with U.S. pilots who had scrambled to track it, said Maj. Gen. Pavel Androsov, head of long-range aviation in the Russian air force. “Yesterday we revived this tradition, and two of our young crews paid a visit to the area of the [U.S. Pacific Naval Activities] base of Guam,” he said.

This is certainly an interesting turn of events, though not surprising. Watch closely.

Hall of Famer, Cal Ripkin, Jr., was called on by the State Department to serve as a Goodwill Ambassador. According to the State Department, as a special sports envoy, Cal will “promote cross-cultural dialog and increase understanding of the United States by sharing his impressive personal story and life experiences,” as well as reach out to a “worldwide audience of young people while visiting their schools and clubs, hosting baseball skills clinics, and sharing the keys to his success: character, hard work and perseverance.”

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice formally announced Cal’s appointment and referencing his record of 2,632 consecutive games said, “Cal, I assume that whenever I call you, you’re going to be hard at work for America.” His work begins in October with a visit to China!

Regarding his appointment, Cal said, “This isn’t a political statement for me, necessarily,… This is about kids … and using baseball for good reasons. I know it is not probably going to be easy in some environments. Sport — baseball in particular — is very magical. It can go across cultural lines.”

I’ve said it before, Cal Ripkin Jr. is a class act! He’s a sports figure that kids can look up to and he brings honor to the game of baseball. He’s what every man should strive to be.

Congrats, Cal!

The Taliban has freed two South Korean women it previously held hostage. Taliban spokesman, Qari Mohammad Yousuf, described the release as “a gesture of good faith to the Korean government and United Nations…” now they “want the U.N. and Korean authorities to consider Taliban prisoners, and [they] want to hear a good decision from them.”

(What?!?)

By releasing 2 of the remaining 21 hostages, the Taliban is acting in good faith? And their generosity ought to be reciprocated by the release of criminals?

(Maybe in the bizarro Taliban land!)

I hope that this veil of good will is interpreted for what it is — a desperate attempt by the Taliban to garner sympathy for their cause and attain victory by their despicable act.

Don’t give in! The price is too high!

More: Michelle Malkin; Tel-Chai Nation

Since Congress didn’t act, the Departments of Homeland Security and Commerce announced they would increase action against illegal immigration. Among other measures, they proposed rules requiring employers to fire people whose social security numbers don’t match government records. Employers who still retain these people after 90 days would be fined.

About time! Although I can’t help but wonder why the Bush administration is suddenly getting serious about enforcing immigration law. Is it a result of the grassroots effort to derail the shameless immigration reform bill both Congress and the Bush administration was trying to shove down our throats? or is this an attempt by the Bush administration to pressure Congress to press forward with the flawed immigration reform so obviously favored by the President?

Still, there are an awful lot of illegals who work without a social security number. You see them lined up in various locations in every city. Men from various companies pull up and pick workers like so many apples from a tree. These illegals work for cash under the table and without benefit or recourse should they be injured on the job.

What do we do about these illegals?

…these employers?

More: Thought Cops

(h/t: Spree at Wake up America!) Walt Edwards, a 1950’s Border Patrol veteran and participant in President Eisenhower’s Operation Wetback in 1954 says the government today could do a much better job of sealing the border and controlling illegal immigration.

According to Edwards, “When we start enforcing the law, these various businesses are, on their own, going to replace their [illegal] workforce with a legal workforce.”

Rather than build a fence at the border, Border Patrol veterans say these actions should have a higher priority:

1. End the current practice of taking captured Mexican aliens to the border and releasing them. Instead, deport them deep into Mexico, where return to the US would be more costly.
2. Crack down hard on employers who hire illegals. Without jobs, the aliens won’t come.
3. End “catch and release” for non-Mexican aliens. It is common for illegal migrants not from Mexico to be set free after their arrest if they promise to appear later before a judge. Few show up.

John Dillin of the Christian Science Monitor writes,

The Patrol veterans say enforcement could also be aided by a legalized guest- worker program that permits Mexicans to register in their country for temporary jobs in the US. Eisenhower’s team ran such a program. It permitted up to 400,000 Mexicans a year to enter the US for various agriculture jobs that lasted for 12 to 52 weeks.

While Congress is just spinning their wheels, we’re learning that the encouragement and use of illegal labor has dire consequences. Check out what Michelle Malkin and Hot Air have to say.

Barry Bonds moved into the top spot last night, passing Hammerin’ Hank Aaron, as the all-time home run leader. Bond’s hit his record-breaking dinger (his 22nd of the season) over the right-field fence, in the bottom of the 5th inning, off a 3-2 fastball thrown by Washington Nationals Mike Bacsik.

Hank Aaron, to my surprise, offered his congratulations via a video message played to a home town crowd in the Giants’ AT&T stadium in a small ceremony after Bonds crossed home plate…

It still doesn’t change the fact that Bonds’ achievement is tainted by his use of steroids and his home run count in the record books should be marked by a very prominent asterisk (756*).

Apple’s new iMac went on sale today! These sleek new iMacs come with a brushed-aluminum shell and glass screen. The new design resembles the iPhone and replaces the mostly plastic casing previously used. Steve Jobs says the change in materials will give the computers a clearer display and a nicer appearance. The new iMacs are still a bit pricey, starting at $1,199 for a 20″ display and $1,799 for a 24,” and although still more expensive than low-end Windows PCs, Apple says they compare favorably with higher-quality PCs.

With the new iMac, Apple returns to its roots, shifting the focus from fancy gadgetry such as the iPod and iPhone. The new aluminum-and-glass look reflects the company’s emphasis on design and aesthetics. A revamped line of consumer software for the Mac used for creating home movies, Web pages and other content is intended to further distinguish Macs from rival PCs running Microsoft’s Windows operating system.

More: Apple Insider.

Bonds hit his 755th home run tonight in Petco Park, the home of the San Diego Padres, tying Hark Aaron’s all-time record. Bonds hit his dinger over the left field fence, in the top of the second, off a 2-1 fastball thrown by Padres’ Clay Hensley.

{ yawn }

UPDATE:

Aug 5, 2007-9:08am: Baseball commissioner, Bud Selig, made the following statement last night after Bonds hit his homer and left the game for a pinch runner:

“No matter what anybody thinks of the controversy surrounding this event, Mr. Bonds’ achievement is noteworthy and remarkable. As I said previously, out of respect for the tradition of the game, the magnitude of the record and the fact all citizens in this country are innocent until proven guilty, either I or a representative of my office will attend the next few games and make every attempt to observe the breaking of the all-time home run record.”

However, when asked two weeks ago if he thought Bonds record was legitimate, Selig wouldn’t take a position.

Hank Aaron’s position is very clear: He didn’t attend the game because he doesn’t want to validate Bonds’ achievement with his presence. Aaron has disassociated himself from Bonds since 2003 when Bonds was implicated in documents obtained by law enforcement from a facility involved in steroid distribution. By not attending Bonds’ games, Aaron is making a definitive statement about Bonds’ claim to the home run record. Aaron told The Associated Press on Monday that his refusal to comment on Bonds was his comment.

Caving to pressure from the White House, the Senate voted to give the President more warrantless wiretapping power. Under the threat of losing their summer vacation, the Senate essentially “expanded the government’s authority to intercept without a court order the phone calls and e-mails of people in the United States who are communicating with people overseas” (Washington Post).

By a vote of 60-28, the Republican measure passed after Democrats failed to rally support for closer court oversight of government surveillance. The major change to the bill is the elimination of the condition that requiring the government to have a reasonable belief that one party to a call or email is a member of or affiliated with a terrorist organization. This measure grants new authority to the attorney general and the director of national intelligence to make that determination.

My concern: This bill gives the government authority to monitor ordinary Americans. For example, my wife and I have family living overseas and this new bill allows the National Security Agency to listen in on our conversations or read our email–without our consent and without a court order! I realize this isn’t the intent, but I’m always concerned about the potential for abuse, and although I support my government in this action, I do so with a eye toward skepticism.

More: Wake up America!; Captain’s Quarters.

“The bill updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA. It gives the government leeway to intercept, without warrants, communications between foreigners that are routed through equipment in U.S., provided that “foreign intelligence information” is at stake. President Bush describes the effort as an anti-terrorist program, but the bill is not limited to terror suspects and could have wider applications, some lawmakers said” (Wall Street Journal). - emphasis added

Aug 5, 2007-9:49pm: Today, President Bush attached his signature to the warrantless wiretapping bill; it is now the law of the land. In a written statement, Bush said,

“This law gives our intelligence professionals this greater flexibility while closing a dangerous gap in our intelligence-gathering activities that threatened to weaken our defenses.” (CNN)

Maybe. Congress has set a time-limit on the new law, requiring a revisit in 6 months. Watch closely how the government applies this law during that time!

SIRIUS Satellite Radio will, sometime this summer, launch a new music channel featuring the Grateful Dead. The Grateful Dead Channel will feature studio and live music, and interviews, spanning the band’s 30 year career. In addition to music from unreleased concert recordings, the band’s remaining members, Bob Weir, Mickey Hart, Phil Lesh and Bob Kreutzman, will provide commentary.

Sirius invites fans to join in…

Be Part of The Grateful Dead Channel
The Grateful Dead Channel is going to take form based on your suggestions… and your favorite Grateful Dead memories. Call [...] and share your thoughts on what should happen on The Grateful Dead Channel. Plus, tell us about your favorite Dead show… or your favorite Dead song… and keep listening because The Grateful Dead Channel will be ever evolving.

The Grateful Dead Channel “Sneak Preview” is on SIRIUS’ JAM ON! (ch17) from August 1-9. Right now I’m listening to a concert recorded on June 19, 1980 from the West High Auditorium in Anchorage, AK!

(“Drink all day and rock all night; Law come to get you if you don’t walk right…” I love this song!)

Anyway…

Interestingly enough, the SIRIUS “sneak peak” was launched on Jerry Garcia’s birthday, but there was no mention of that fact in the promo material…