I have now entered the Twilight Zone

I feel like I’ve entered the Twilight Zone when—on the same day—I not only agree with Dianne Feinstein, Patrick Leahy and John Kerry over against the former Republican Congress, but on another issue I find myself in agreement with Barbara Boxer and absolutely disgusted with the Bush administration! See LGF’s Outrage of the Day.

Cities prepared for disaster

Now that it’s been more than five years after 9/11 Americans have a right to expect that our city governments would be prepared to respond to major emergencies. We also have a right to think that Hurricane Katrina would have been a wake-up call to unprepared city officials.

A report by the Department of Homeland Security scheduled to be released Wednesday provides a list of the major U.S. cities which now "have emergency communications allowing police, fire and medical officials to coordinate fully during a crisis" (Reuters). Those cities are:

Washington DC
San Diego, CA
Columbus, OH
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN

That's it! I guess those of you who live in New York City, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta, Houston, Phoenix, Boston, Miami, etc. etc. are just out of luck. I think the elected officials in those cities should find themselves out of luck in the next elections.

Renewable energy and homeland security

Finally, one of our Senators "gets it"! Senator Norm Coleman recently called for "a commitment to renewable energy on scale of the U.S. effort that put a man on the moon in the 1960s."

I'd say it should be more like the Manhattan Project, but I won't quibble with that. We need to do whatever it takes to get off foreign oil as soon as humanly possible--includling Alaska drilling, off-shore drilling, increased use of coal, nuclear power plants, and development of renewable energy sources. Cutting our addiction to foreign oil--and cutting our funding to countries hostile to America--is a matter of national security.

Nancy Pelosi and homeland security

Behind all the smiles and the illusion of bi-partisanship between Speaker Pelosi and President Bush, others are telling a different story: The following are excerpts from Insighmag.com.

"Rep. Nancy Pelosi plans to sideline colleagues who are hawkish on national security in the Democratic leadership in the House."

"Democratic Party sources said as House Speaker, Ms. Pelosi plans to block moves that would place hawks into important chairmanships. The sources said a key casualty would be Rep. Jane Harman, a six-term member of Congress who has cooperated with Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee."

"Nancy Pelosi wants total party discipline," a source in the Democratic Party leadership said. "If you played ball with the Republicans during this session, then you're not going to be given an important chair in the next session."

"There is no seniority on the Intelligence Committee,' Ms. Pelosi said. 'The leader or the speaker can appoint a whole new set of people."

"The sources said the 61-year-old Ms. Harman, regarded as the best informed House Democrat on intelligence and technology issues, angered the liberal Ms. Pelosi by supporting the Bush administration’s policies on defense issues, particularly the war in Iraq and the Patriot Act. They said Ms. Pelosi has rebuffed lobbyists in the pro-Israel community and defense industry that sought a chairmanship for Ms. Harman."

For the entire article see Insightmag.com

Nancy Pelosi just doesn’t get it

The following are excerpts from a CNS News article on Dennis Hastert and Nancy Pelosi.

(CNSNews.com) – "The United States cannot win the global war on terror if U.S. leaders don't understand it -- and Rep. Nancy Pelosi does not understand it, House Speaker Dennis Hastert said on Tuesday."

"Hastert -- who holds the job that Pelosi is eager to assume -- was reacting to Pelosi's remarks on the CBS program ‘60 Minutes."

"Pelosi told CBS's Leslie Stahl that yes, there are terrorists in Iraq. ‘But that doesn't mean we stay there. They'll stay there as long as we're there. They're there because we're there,"
‘ she said."

"Hastert said the minority leader is wrong. The global war on terror is just that -- global, he said." 'Is the Democrat Minority Leader really turning a blind eye towards the countless number of terrorists that we are fighting in the streets and battlefields of Iraq and also in numerous countries around the world? Does she forget the nearly 3,000 victims of September 11th? The 201 victims of the Madrid train bombings? And the 52 victims of the London bomb attacks? These were all innocent victims of the Global War on Terror. And what about the countless others who have been saved because of our efforts?" (CNS News).

Mr. Hasert could have also mentioned that Israel's withdrawl from Lebanon in 2000 did not stop Hezbollah from continuing their attacks on Israel. And the fact that Israel pulled out of Gaza did not for a single day stop jihadists from continuing their attacks on Israel.

The kind of naiveté that thinks jihadists are just reasonable people with whom we can negotiate is one of the reasons Nancy Pelosi and many others on the Left are so dangerous. They just don’t get it!

Jihadists believe that Allah has commanded them to wage jihad and to bring the world into submission to Allah. They will not be satisfied when we pull out of Iraq. They would not be satisfied if we stopped supporting Israel. They would not be satisfied even if they were able to destroy Israel. Jihadists will either be stopped by force—or they will not be stopped at all.

NSA wiretapping

Last Sunday on Fox and Friends weekend Republican Congressperson Heather Wilson was introduced as the first Republican to break ranks with other Republicans over the NSA scandal. She cited the wiretapping of Martin Luther King as an example of how the government could not be trusted with wiretapping or domestic spying without oversight.

I agree with Ms. Wilson and quite frankly I’m amazed at how many conservatives have jumped on the President’s bandwagon on this issue. I wholeheartedly agree with wiretapping terrorists and I don’t even think the government should have to get permission beforehand to do it, not even if Americans are involved. But there must be some kind of oversight—even if only after the fact as FISA allows—to ensure that wiretapping or spying on Americans is only done with probable cause and legitimate purposes, and not just for the purpose of keeping tabs on, or silencing political opponents. Conservatives need to ask themselves whether they would want John Kerry or Hillary Clinton to have the authority to do wiretapping on Americans without oversight. Who knows, one of them may be president some day (heaven help us!)

U.S. Ports under new management

Later today, Dubai Ports World (DP World) is expected to finalize a $6.8 Billion purchase of a company that controls “significant operations” at ports in New York, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami, Philadelphia, and in New Jersey. DP World is based in the United Arab Emirates, a country which the State Department considerers to be a valuable ally in the war against terrorism, but was “an important operational and financial base” for the 911 hijackers. Nevertheless, the sale was apparently approved by the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment, a secretive government panel consisting of representatives from the departments of Treasury, Defense, Justice, Commerce, State and Homeland Security (Seattle Times).

Part of me says, “This deal has approval from Homeland Security—surely they know what they’re doing.” The other part of me says, “Are you crazy—like they knew what they were doing with Hurricane Katrina?!" Letting a middle-eastern Arab company take control of American sea ports appears, at least on the surface, to be a little like putting the proverbial fox in charge of the hen house.

Coretta Scott King funeral

At the funeral of Coretta Scott King yesterday, former President Jimmy Carter said: “The efforts of Martin and Coretta have changed America, they were not appreciated even at the highest level of government. It was difficult for them personally -- with the civil liberties of both husband and wife violated as they became the target of secret government wiretapping, other surveillance, and as you know, harassment from the FBI.”

President Carter makes a valid point. If the executive branch of government can unilaterally decide which Americans to spy on without oversight or review from the legislative or judicial branches, eventual abuse is almost certain. Of course Mr. Carter, being a Democrat who wishes to score political points against a Republican president, didn’t mention that this abuse against the Kings ocurred under a Democratic administration! But aside from that, was it really appropriate for Mr. Carter to turn a tribute to Ms. King into a political statement?

Homeland Security and FEMA

One of our country’s worst case scenarios is the explosion of a nuclear weapon at a major U.S. seaport. If that were to happen, many of the survivors will not be able to go home--ever. In such a nightmare scenario, people will need to be evacuated by the thousands, or even hundreds-of-thousands. I would hope that if I were in charge of FEMA or Homeland Security, I would have planned out scenarios for each major seaport which would involve putting thousands of people on busses, trucks, and helicopters, and taking them to giant Air Force transport planes which would be waiting at the nearest adequate runways. From there the victims could be flown to air bases around the country where they would be cared for in military hospitals, hangars and other facilities until they could be processed back into new jobs and homes.

Why was such a plan not implemented for Hurricane Katrina? The damage by Katrina was even more widespread than a nuclear bomb would have been, so I understand why people in rural areas have not been reached yet. I also understand why people stranded in their homes have not been reached yet. But what I don’t understand is why it took so long to help people in New Orleans who were congregated in large groups of hundreds or even thousands! I also don’t understand why rapid response military forces were not immediately deployed to New Orleans to stop the violence. Nor do I understand why more people aren’t being re-located to other cities like Houston.

I really want to believe the best about our government, but I’m not hearing convincing explanations from Homeland Security, FEMA or our president, who said that “a lot of people are working hard” (President Bush, 9/2/05). Of course they’re working hard. I’m not questioning the effort as much as I’m questioning the planning and strategy. It’s pretty sobering to think that the best plan our homeland security people seem to have had for a major disaster was send food and water into the disaster area! Of course we need to send food and water—to keep people alive long enough to evacuate them!

Michael Chertoff and Homeland Security

Last night I was just watching a Fox News interview with a doctor who had been trying to provide medical care in the Super Dome. He said he wanted to help, but he wouldn’t put his life in danger by going back again because the situation was so unstable. Others who were interviewed reported the same danger. There were also reports of large numbers of people leaving the Super Dome because it just wasn’t safe anymore. Then I turned the channel to ABC’s Primetime just in time to hear Michael Chertoff, the head of Homeland security say, the fact of the matter was that the Super Dome was secure! Today on the radio I’m hearing reports of rapes at the Super Dome! I’m finding it hard to avoid the conclusion that Secretary Chertoff is either just talking out of his ignorance, or is lying to us. Either way, something smells fishy at Homeland Security.