We've moved!
DakotaFreePress.com!

Social Icons

twitterfacebooklinkedinrss feed
Showing posts with label terrorism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label terrorism. Show all posts

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Ron Paul Is Right: Get TSA out of Our Pants!

Congressman Ron Paul is leading the Tea Party to the airport... and I'm going with him. The best libertarian in Congress is saying enough is enough when it comes to the daily sexaul harassment of innocent Americans at airports across the country. Rep. Paul is sponsoring HR 6416 to deny immunity to TSA employees for their pointless groping of citizens. Watch his statement from the House floor, last night, November 17:



I have not flown since October 2000. I got hot with an airport lackey back in 1995 just because he asked me to remove my belt. I honestly believe that if some poor yokel in a uniform at Joe Foss Field ran his hands over my wife or my daughter, I would say something that would get me arrested. Or I'd just deck him. (The clicking sound you hear is Cory Allen Heidelberger being typed into the TSA watchlist.)

Ron Paul is right. So's Bob Ellis. Uncle Sam, you can have a hand in my pocket, but not in my pants. The lame-duck Congress should pass HR 6416 before Thanksgiving, restore the Frouth Amendment, and reel back and retool airport security.

Saturday, November 6, 2010

Fr. Tyler: America Oppresses Catholics, History Indicts Protestants

Father Tyler in Rapid City marks Guy Fawkes Night with the provocative contention that the Catholic persecution against which Fawkes was rebelling is on a par with the intolerance American Catholics face today:

The Gunpowder Plot was the attempt of desperate men to be allowed the freedom to practice the faith demanded of them by their conscience.

I do not condone terrorism. I do not think blowing up the British Parliament was a good idea. It is helpful, however, to consider what drives a man to consider such extreme action. England claimed to permit a great deal of "tolerance" towards Catholics in those days. It is a mantra almost identical to the message of tolerance we hear today. By my estimation, this country tolerates faithful Catholics about the same way that England did in 1605 [Fr. Tyler Dennis, "Thumbing My Nose at England," Prairie Father, 2010.11.05].

As a member of the 1.6% minority of declared atheists in this country, I am perhaps insufficiently sensitive to the intolerance experienced by the largest Christian denomination in America and in the world. So let me ask you, pious readers: do you find the practice of your faith (Catholic or otherwise) so oppressed in America that you could be driven to Fawkesian rebellion?

The religious oppression wrought by King James leads Fr. Tyler to declare it "impossible to have a good grasp of history and remain a Protestant." Hmmm... wind the clock back a hundred years from King James, and don't we find the men of the Catholic Church engaged in such earthly corruption as to drive any conscientious historian out of the Catholic faith as well? Demand a history free of fallen men and earthly excess, and no church 'scapes whipping.

I think that was Luther's point (I'll check with my wife: she's studied history... and she's still in Lutheran seminary). None of us well acquit the institutions and faiths we represent. None of us are worth following. The only man for the faithful to follow (cue that preacher from the Old Time Gospel Hour) is a certain carpenter and fisher of men from Nazareth.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Mortenson: Withdraw 248 U.S. Soldiers, Fund All Afghan Higher Ed

Greg Mortenson at SDSU 2010.11.03A full house at Frost Arena greets Greg Mortenson as he preapres to speak at South Dakota State University, November 3, 2010
The Heidelbergers joined about 5000 other people at SDSU's Frost Arena last night. Nary a basketball in sight: we gathered to hear author, adventurer, humanitarian (and ELCA Lutheran!) Greg Mortenson talk about how to save the world one conversation and one school at a time.

The author of Three Cups of Tea and Stones into Schools offered a lot of practical and political insight into what's happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and what we Americans might do to make it better.

Mortenson is an Army veteran, so he has great respect for and understanding of the military. This old soldier said there is no military solution to ending the Taliban's terrorism and oppression of women in Afghanistan and Pakistan and bringing our soldiers home. Asking our 18-year-olds to be soldiers is hard enough; asking our young soldiers to be diplomats and humanitarians at the same time, says Mortenson, is an enormous burden. Building some sort of peace in Afghanistan and Pakistan requires something more.

The military gets this. Mortenson said that General Petreaus has made Three Cups of Tea, about Mortenson's efforts to build relationships with village elders and build schools for girls in Afghanistan and pakistan, required reading for senior military officials. The U.S. military also brings Mortenson to 28 military bases a year to conduct briefings for Afghanistan-bound troops on local culture.

Mortenson sees education, especially education for girls, as the key to peace throughout the world's poorer and less stable countries. Educating women leads to lower infant mortality, increased literacy, and a decrease in population growth. Mortenson says flatly that there are too many people on the planet (cue awkward shifting from some audience members). He says we can lessen the strain on our natural resources without any controversial policies. He's not mandating forced birth control or limits on family size. He believes letting girls go to school will result quite naturally and justly in those girls growing into women who assert their rights to control their destiny, to work and participate freely in the economy and culture, and to have fewer yet healthier children.

Mortenson puts into financial perspective how easy it would be for the U.S. and the West to shift from military to humanitarian solutions. President Obama doubled our troop presence in Afghanistan last year to 100,000 pairs of boots on the ground. At $100 billion a year, that's $1 million per soldier. Mortenson says he asked the Afghan minister of education to cite a dream budget for the country's higher education system. $248 million a year, said the minister. Bring 248 American soldiers home, and you'd have the money to fund all 24 of Afghanistan's universities, and then some.

Or try this: Bring five soldiers home. Use the corresponding five million dollars to build an Afghan version of South Dakota School of Mines and Technology. Train a new corps of Afghan engineers and geologists to lead the country's exploitation of newly discovered rare earth minerals and other ores that could be worth hundreds of billions. Let Afghanistan make itself rich, says Mortenson, with a meager investment in education.

Or why not aim even bigger: Mortenson says that worldwide, 120 million children are not in school. 78 million are girls. Millions of them are slaves, bought and sold to produce rice, soccer balls, fireworks, and many other things we use. Educating one child takes a few dollars a day in some places. Mortenson says spending $60 billion dollars over the next ten years would eradicate worldwide illiteracy. That's $6 billion a year—no small sum... but only 6% of what we spend each year making war in Afghanistan.

Mortenson said the Taliban fear education—an awkward position for such supposedly pious men, as Mortenson cites a line from Muhammad declaring the ink of the scholar holier than the blood of a martyr. Holy or not, smart people, especially smart women, are the enemy of their fear- and force-based power. Since 2007, the Taliban have destroyed 2400 schools, three quarters of them girls' schools.

But Mortenson says the Taliban have yet to destroy one of the schools he's helped start in the region, in large part because he gets the locals themselves to build the schools. And overall, Afghanistan's greatest success under American/NATO occupation is in education. Mortenson says that in 2000, 800,000 Afghan children, mostly boys, were in school. In 2010, nine million Afghan children are in school. 2.8 million of those children are girls. That's still a terrible imbalance, but it's enormous progress from when the Taliban held Kabul.

Typical political labels don't fit in this discussion. But for those of you blog readers addicted to such things, Mortenson is no big-government liberal. He said our initial top-down approach to rebuilding Afghanistan, the Bonn Agreement, failed because it was too centralized. Mortenson said the post-World War II Marshall Plan was "brilliant" because it was decentralized and provincialized. Mortenson said General Petreaus boils his model for building a healthy and peaceful Afghanistan down to three bullet points: listen, respect, and build relationships with the people, especially with the elders. Ultimately, said Mortenson, people in Afghanistan and Pakistan want the same things we do: they want their children to live, and they want their children to learn. We can help make that happen, but we will do it with brains, not bullets.

Monday, October 18, 2010

McCain, Thune Play Jack Bauer, Torch 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th Amendments

Is Bob Ellis trying to lure me in? Yesterday I grumbled about President Obama's continued abuse of the Fourth Amendment and wondered why the conservative shouters haven't added that point to their charge that the Constitution is hanging by a thread.

Comes now Sam Kephart, granted a guest column on Bob Ellis's Tea Party blog, to decry Fourth Amendment abuses advocated by, of all people, sponsoring Senator John McCain and co-sponsor Senator John Thune. Kephart alerts us to S. 3081, the Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act.

...S.3081 lacks clear definitions for the operational terms “material support,” “The potential intelligence value of the individual,” and the all-inclusive phrase “Such other matters as the President considers appropriate.” It’s Catch-22 with no way out.

Under this law as currently written, any U. S. citizen who is a war protester, publicly exhibits anti-government sentiments, is a Tea Party activist, or a political opponent of a given Administration could fall (or be made to fall) under one or more of its ill-defined and ambiguous conditions.

If the Feds believe you are committing a “suspicious activity” or “supporting hostilities,” you can be hauled off and held indefinitely in military custody with neither legal recourse nor due process. Your Constitutional rights to free speech and personal liberties would disappear with the stroke of a hidden pen [Sam Kephart, "S. 3081 and John Thune: National Security Trumps Essential Liberty," Dakota Voice, 2010.10.18].

McCain and Thune's legislation even goes so far as to prohibit the Justice Department from expending any funds to conduct trials for such "belligerents" in the regular judicial system. In other words, if you cheese off Uncle Sam, your judicial rights disappear. No warrants, no grand jury, no speedy and public trial, no jury of your peers. The government can throw you in a hole for as long as it deems "hostilities" to be in effect... which in the age of the global war on terror is forever.

S. 3081 was introduced on March 4 this year and hasn't moved from the Judiciary Committee since. Let's hope it stays that way. And let's hope we hear more from conservatives like Kephart who want to hold Senator Thune and the rest of Congress accountable for protecting all of our Constitutional freedoms from fear.

---------------------
p.s.: This isn't the first time Kephart has said things I dig. It's good to see Bob Ellis associates with at least one guy who can talk sense.

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Vets to Thune: Stand up to Terrorists, Stand up for Clean Energy

VoteVets.org shows the left can throw the war-on-terror punch, too, to support its political causes. They remind Senator Thune that if we really want to beat al-Qaida, we need to stop buying the oil that funds them... and politicians need to stop taking donations from companies doing business with countries that support terror:



I dig this ad... but I wonder: is there a smirk button on Photoshop, or are there graphics folks who make their living combing through news footage searching for politicians looking momentarily dorky (as we all do in snapshots)?

Friday, January 29, 2010

Hunhoff: Get State Money Out of International Evil

Senate Bill 134 is up. This legislation from Senator Stan Adelstein and Representative Dan Lederman would divest South Dakota investment funds from companies doing business with Iran.

Yanking our money from Iran is a good idea. But if we're going to engage in social investing, we should be concerned about any evil our money supports, whether it kills our soldiers in Iraq or women and children in Sudan.

With that in mind, I reprint a letter from Rep. Bernie Hunhoff to the Yankton County Observer, in which he discusses the need for a broader view on social investing that goes beyond the specific politics of Iran, as embodied in Senate Bill 21.

For The Observer

STATE INVESTMENTS SHOULDN'T SUPPORT TERRORISM AND GENOCIDE

By Rep. Bernie Hunhoff


Chol Atem of Yankton spoke to state legislators last year about the evil regime that continues to terrify the people of his native Sudan. The Mount Marty College student joined others who pleaded with the 2009 state legislature to stop investment of state monies in companies that support the Sudanese government. Chol is one of the "Lost Boys of Sudan" who had to flee their homes to avoid been killed or abducted by government-sponsored gangs of terrorists who have now murdered more than 300,000 people and caused two million to abandon their villages.

While the divestment bill did not pass last year, Chol's testimony still rings in the ears of many who heard him. And last week — in the opening days of the 2010 legislative session — we were able to pass a bill through a Senate committee that addresses our state's responsibility in foreign affairs. Hopefully the compromise language will continue to find support as it winds its way through the Senate and House.

The bill requires the State Investment Council (SIC) to establish a Social Activism Policy to deal with problem companies. Once the U.S. Congress identifies such companies, the state legislature would advise the SIC to apply the policy.

The SIC staff in Sioux Falls would then begin a process of "engagement," meaning they would alert the companies that South Dakotans won't tolerate such behavior and that they must end their relationships with certain governments. Engagement is considered an important step by many foreign affairs experts, and hopefully it will have an impact. If it does not, then the Social Activism Policy requires that the SIC apply a risk-factor to the targeted companies which would eventually lead to the divestment of that stock.

The SIC would report to the legislature annually on the success of the policy.

The compromise bill (Senate Bill 21) doesn't act quickly enough for some in the legislature, especially a group of lawmakers who want immediate divestment from three companies that do business with the dictators in Iran. But overnight divestment gives away the opportunity for engagement as a major stockholder. Some experts think engagement can be more effective than divestment, so long as there is a threat of divestment. Immediate divestment may garner big headlines, but does it change corporate behavior?

The compromise also addresses the opponents' concerns that states shouldn't dabble in foreign affairs. South Dakota legislators and our State Investment Council will only apply the Social Activism Policy when the U.S. Congress acts to identify problem companies. The Congress has already done so for both iran and Sudan.

The SIC board and staff are rightfully worried that any engagement and divestment law may eventually lead to other proposals. Should we invest more in value added agriculture plants or renewable energy companies that locate in South Dakota? Should we cease investments with tobacco companies?

Our proposed bill would prohibit those types of social investment initiatives, but establish a procedure that seeks to keep your state dollars from being used to murder, maim, terrorize and oppress people in other parts of the world.

If the bill passes we can thank Chol, who is now working at Hy-Vee in Yankton and hoping to attend law school. His trip to Pierre made a difference.

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Pickens Plan Back in Ads: Fight Turbans, Build Turbines?

So what does old oil man T. Boone Pickens have to say about our energy future? Wake the heck up!



T. Boone is back, advocating his plan to replace all the natural gas used to generate electricity with wind power and then use that natural gas to replace all the oil we use for transportation. Natural gas, says Pickens, is "cheap, cleaner, abundant, and it's ours."

Pickens takes a bite of the "Be afraid of terrorists" apple, telling reporters that the failed Christmas crotch bomber reminds that "we are still at war."

Tell you the truth, when it comes to fighting terrorists, I'd rather put up windmills than drop my pants at the airport.

-------------------------------
Related:
  • I appreciate Rep. Dan Lederman's effort to get South Dakota to yank its state investments in Iran. However, from the "tip of the iceberg" department, the U.S. imported 1.5 billion barrels of oil from other "dangerous or unstable" countries... and that doesn't include 435 million more barrels that year from Venezuela (and Republicans chide President Obama for talking to Hugo Chavez).
  • Oh, and did I say failed crotch bomber? NDSU prof Jarret Brachman says the jihadis think otherwise:

    "They have a fundamentally different understanding of what success is. For them, as long as they're in the fight, they've succeeded. As long as they're generating media attention, as long as this dominates our minds, they're winning. They don't have to actually execute the attack [Dr. Jarret Bachman, interview with Deborah Amos, NPR Morning Edition, 2010.01.14].

    It makes me nervous that I can think like a terrorist.

Monday, January 11, 2010

Stricherz Gets Bipartisan Support for "Stop South Dakota Iran Investment" Group

Patricia Stricherz has started a "Stop South Dakota Iran Investments" group on Facebook. That good Republican shares my view that our state government should not be investing funds in companies that do business with Iran, Sudan, and other state sponsors of terrorism and genocide.

The folks signing on to this group include a fair number of Stricherz's Republican friends, including Mr. Powers, who brought the Iran investment issue to my attention a couple weeks ago, and state Young Republican chair Kyle Jensen. But signatories include folks from the left side of the aisle as well, including myself and Matt McGovern.

State Representative Dan Lederman (R-16/Dakota Dunes) tells group members that he has a bill in works that will include the following:

Targeted divestment limited to foreign oil companies making substantial improvements to Iran's oil production infrastructure

Grace period for investment officers to divest for maximum return

Sunset clause in the event the company ceases prohibited activity or until Iran has satisfied United Nation and United Stae's call to halt funding terrorist organizations

Lederman's bill sounds like a better idea than Senate Bill 21, which is our investment fund managers' request that we citizens and our legislators keep our noses out of our business and not hinder their work with any "social investment" requirements.

Rep. Bernie Hunhoff (D-18/Yankton) offered divestment legislation last year that fell short by one vote in the Commerce Committee. Let's hope Lederman, Hunhoff, and the rest of the Legislature can work together to get it right this year and get South Dakota money out of Iran, Sudan, and other bad places.

------------------
Read more:
  • Randy Dockendorf speaks with Stricherz and Lederman in the Jan. 8 Yankton Press & Dakotan. Governor Rounds declines to offer an opinion (that would take leadership, wouldn't it?).
  • Stephen Rosenthal of Sioux Falls reminds us of several South Dakotans killed by roadside bombs, the very sort of terrorist devices funded by money trickling into Iran.

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

SB 21 Prohibits "Social Investment" Restrictions on SDRS Funds

Newly posted on the state legislature's website, a bill to inspire comity in the blogosphere: SB 21, which Pat Powers and I agree deserves a big "Do not pass." SB 21 is a prohibition on "social investing" restrictions on state investment funds.

Let the Wobbly Democrat in the room translate: SB 21 is big-government elitism. It's bureaucrats in Pierre telling you that they know better than you, and that lowly citizens (i.e., shareholders... i.e., the people who pay the money into the system and who pay those bureaucrats' hefty salaries) have no business telling them how to do their job. SB 21 says that the state will invest your money wherever it thinks it can turn the fastest buck, even if that means investing in places where your money may fund roadside bombs, political oppression, and genocide.

I look forward to hearing which of our legislators is willing to take the side of Iran and Sudan on this one. I also look forward to Rep. Dan Lederman's counter-legislation to put at least a drop of morality in our state investment system.

Saturday, January 2, 2010

Brooks: Security Fails, Terrorists Succeed -- Grow Up, America

David Brooks is my kind of conservative. If you haven't read his critique of airport security and our expectation that we can legislate and technologize our way to perfect security, you should. He calls much of the criticism of the system that let the pants bomber board that plane in Amsterdam "contemptuous and hysterical":

Various experts have gathered bits of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s biography. Since they can string the facts together to accurately predict the past, they thunder, the intelligence services should have been able to connect the dots to predict the future.

Dick Cheney argues that the error was caused by some ideological choice. Arlen Specter screams for more technology — full-body examining devices. “We thought that had been remedied,” said Senator Kit Bond, as if omniscience could be accomplished with legislation.

...For better or worse, over the past 50 years we have concentrated authority in centralized agencies and reduced the role of decentralized citizen action. We’ve done this in many spheres of life. Maybe that’s wise, maybe it’s not. But we shouldn’t imagine that these centralized institutions are going to work perfectly or even well most of the time. It would be nice if we reacted to their inevitable failures not with rabid denunciation and cynicism, but with a little resiliency, an awareness that human systems fail and bad things will happen and we don’t have to lose our heads every time they do [David Brooks, "The God That Fails," New York Times, 2009.12.31].

Brooks doesn't try to score political points: he offers equal criticism here for Republicans and Democrats. Everyone from Bush to Obama has bought into the notion that big government and big technology can solve all of our problems, and that if they produce anything less than perfect results, heads must roll.

Madison had 71 crimes over a four-month period, but we don't call for Chief Pulford's resignation or a complete overhaul of our "failing" police department. It's too bad we can't be similarly level-headed on airport security. A little British stiff upper lip might do more good than further investments in the diminishing returns of "Security Theater."

Friday, January 1, 2010

End South Dakota Investment in Terrorism

Pat Powers is right: this is an issue where we strip off the party labels and talk about doing the right thing.

Dakota War College spotlights a gross injustice in South Dakota's state investments. According to Powers, of the money we use to fund pensions for our state employees, 29% is invested with companies connected to terrorist states. Of 55 companies where we invest our money, 44 deal with Iran, 18 deal with Syria, 16 with Sudan, and 10 with Libya.

If you think President Obama is a menace for suggesting we talk with Iran, how do you feel about Pierre investing your money there?

Powers notes that the honchos of the state investment council and retirement system are pushing legislation to keep the Legislature from interfering with their investment decisions, even if those decisions are socially unsavory. He says State Rep. Dan Lederman is leading a group of legislators who will fight to get our money out of Iran.

Powers makes a clear call to all South Dakotans to get on board with terror-free investment of state dollars. I can't argue with that. Yes, social investing would create some more hassle for state investment officer Matt Clark. But he gets paid big bucks to do hard work like that. He also gets paid big bucks to do the will of the people of South Dakota. I suspect South Dakotans will agree that no marginal growth of our state investment fund is worth funding roadside bombs, political oppression, or genocide.

Keep an eye out for Lederman's bill... and morality in state investments.

Monday, December 28, 2009

Trobec: "Crotch Bomber" Means More Futile Airport Security

We have spent eight years constantly tightening airport security, and one loon can still manage to sneak exploding pants onto a plane. Now we take away blankets, don't let passengers move, and increase body searches. Can you say diminishing returns?

Frequent flyer Jay Trobec can: he agrees that more layers of airport security are futile "knee-jerk reactions" to the "crotch bomber":

The TSA announced the irritating, meaningless measures because it feels it has to do something - even when it is powerless to do anything meaningful. There will now be calls for those full-body scanners, the same ones that were criticized by civil rights and women’s groups because they allow screeners to see beneath clothing. A better idea would be to do what other countries do: profile. Take everyone whose passport isn’t attached to a documented, long-time history of law abiding behavior, and run them through additional screening including highly-invasive pat-downs. After all, 80 grams of explosive hidden in underpants is pretty hard to detect.

As I see it, we have three choices: full-body scanning that violates people’s privacy, profiling that violates people’s rights, or new TSA regulations that irritate everyone without providing one bit of actual protection [Jay Trobec, "Crotch Bomber Ignites TSA Lunacy," Jaystream, 2009.12.27].

If I were a terrrorist, I would view Friday's botched bombing as a smashing success. Instead of just killing a couple hundred people, I've used 80 grams of chemicals and one bumbling patsy to create ongoing daily inconvenience and invasion of privacy for over a million people, not to mention one more drag on the American economy. The terrorists are getting us to do their work for them. That's a real return on investment.

Meanwhile, prepare to fly naked... or in airport-issued spandex.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Blackwater Takes Tax Dollars, Produces No Results

The New York Times reports we paid Blackwater to help rub out al-Qaeda honchos:

The Central Intelligence Agency in 2004 hired outside contractors from the private security contractor Blackwater USA as part of a secret program to locate and assassinate top operatives of Al Qaeda, according to current and former government officials.

Executives from Blackwater, which has generated controversy because of its aggressive tactics in Iraq, helped the spy agency with planning, training and surveillance. The C.I.A. spent several million dollars on the program, which did not successfully capture or kill any terrorist suspects [Mark Mazzetti, "CIA Sought Blackwater's Help in Plan to Kill Jihadists," New York Times, 2009.08.19].


Gee, I guess the private sector doesn't outperform government.

NYTimes also notes that Blackwater has changed its name to XE Services. Nothing like fixing your problems by changing your name.

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Updating the Archives: Walker Bomb Threat Charges Go Nowhere

A while back (December 2007), I discussed the case of U.S. Marine Corps veteran Mark R. Walker, who was slapped with a rather tenuous charge of false reporting to authorities in connection with a flip comment he made to a bank teller about the contents of a package he was carrying. I don't recall anyone ever producing a good explanation of why it's a bank teller's business what a customer is taking to the post office. And I don't recall anyone following up with coverage of the trial or sentence.

That would be because there was no trial or sentence. I bumped into Mr. Walker in town the other day. (He was carrying a big backpack. I didn't even think to ask what was in it.) He says that when the whole fracas went down, he was at first inclined to go with the flow, plead, whatever. But when he realized the authorities wanted to make some sort of example on him, Walker took one simple action: he said he'd call his lawyer. That simple assertion of a basic right was all it took to make the authorities drip their flimsy homeland-hysteria case.

Walker was among the dozens laid off from Gehl last October. He plans to head up to Canada for university. And thanks to the GI Bill, you and I will fund his studies to become a planetary geologist. That's reasonable compensation for service to one's country. Now if we could just arrange compensation for treating a guy like a menace to society.

Friday, July 17, 2009

GOP House Candidate Wasson Responds: Lady Leaders O.K., Tiller Killer Also Terrorist

Newly declared GOP House candidate Thad Wasson is on a new media tear this week. He announces his candidacy on Dakota War College, gives Dakota Voice a lengthy interview, and now responds to the nagging questions of this leftist gadfly. Will Chris Nelson and other GOP contenders for Stepahnie Herseth Sandlin's seat be so vigorous in their pursuit of online press? We can only hope.

To my relief, Mr. Wasson has offered reasonable answers to two questions offered here to test just how deep (or crazy) his social conservatism may be. First, he says his church's position that women should not exercise authority over men applies only in church. He has no problem with women serving in secular leadership positions: to my list of powerful South Dakota women, he adds, "Margaret Thatcher from Great Britain was also a leader of men."

Second, Wasson responds to Angie B's sharp question yesterday about whether he considers the murderer of Dr. George Tiller a domestic terrorist. The candidate's position:

Yes, I consider the man who shot George Tiller a domestic terrorist. He could have killed many more in that church, I am glad that he was arrested [Thad Wasson, e-mail, 2009.07.16].

I can live with that answer, but I still can't swallow his characterization of the Greenpeace Rushmore protesters as domestic terrorists. His response reflects a bit too much of that familiar conservative fearfulness:

For the Mt. Rushmore attack, I hope it was only a stunt but it might have been a dry run for something worse. My concern is for the public, I would like Greenpeace to have their assets seized to pay for the court costs and damage to our National Monument [Wasson, e-mail, 2009.07.16].

Every statement Greenpeace has made has indicated they intended no harm to the monument. They took clear precautions to avoid such harm. To suggest they have "something worse" planned is unwarranted fearmongering... which makes Wasson a perfect fit with the Republican Party.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Obama Duly Wary on Iran: Ahmadinejad and Mousavi Not Too Different

Before we get all excited about expressing our forceful support for democratic uprisings in Iran (and believe me, I want to), let's remind ourselves why this fight between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi is more complicated than a nice Hollywood good-vs.-evil script. As Mr. Woodring appropriately reminds us, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the main opposition candidate around whom Tehran's street protesters are rallying, is connected with terrorist attacks on American soldiers. He was Iran's prime minister in the 1980s, when Iran orchestrated the terror campaign that included the 1983 Beirut bombing that killed 241 American soldiers and 58 French soldiers.

Former CIA Middle East field officer Bob Baer explains Mousavi's politics:

"When Mousavi was Prime Minister, he oversaw an office that ran operatives abroad, from Lebanon to Kuwait to Iraq," Baer continued.

"This was the heyday of [Ayatollah] Khomeini's theocratic vision, when Iran thought it really could export its revolution across the Middle East, providing money and arms to anyone who claimed he could upend the old order."

Baer added: "Mousavi was not only swept up into this delusion but also actively pursued it" [Jeff Stein, "Mousavi, Celebrated in Iranian Protests, Was the Butcher of Beirut," CQPolitics, 2009.06.22].

President Obama recognizes that there is not much difference on policy between the current regime and Mousavi. As ABC's Jake Tapper notes, Iran's nuclear program was restarted under Mousavi in 1987. He doesn't recognize Israel, and his response to a question about Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial feels slippery at best.

Supporting democracy is good, but we must also look at the practical results of that democracy. Hamas won the 2006 elections in Palestine, and we felt a little egg on our faces for having pushed for elections that produced results inimical to our interests. Sometimes I can't help wondering if some conservatives are pushing for a "more forceful" response from our president to the Iranian turmoil just so they can blame Obama for whichever pro-nuclear, anti-Israel candidate is in charge of Iran.

Sunday, June 7, 2009

Tiller Murder Suspect Says More Killings Planned: Time for Torture?

From AP, an hour ago:

The man charged in the shooting death of abortion provider Dr. George Tiller warned Sunday that more violence is possible.

Scott Roeder, being held on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated assault in Tiller's killing one week ago, called The Associated Press from the Sedgwick County jail.

Tiller, whose Wichita clinic was among only a few in the U.S. performing third-trimester abortions, was shot while serving as an usher at the Lutheran church he attended.

"I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal," Roeder said.

He would not elaborate [Roxana Hegeman, "Suspect in Kan. Doctor's Death Warns of Violence," AP via Google News, 2009.06.07].

It looks like we have Michael Sanborn's hypothetical come true: a suspected domestic terrorist in our custody declares he knows of more terrorist acts planned around the country. He refuses to talk to police, demanding his lawyer.

For those of you who believe torture is justified to protect Americans from terrorism, is it time to torture Scott Roeder to force him to tell us what he knows about future terrorist attacks?

Side question: should the AP stop taking this creep's calls? This media-hog is on a par with Osama bin Laden. Should a suspected terrorist like this have phone privileges that allow him to use the AP to issue further threats against the United States of America?

Friday, May 22, 2009

Waterboarding Is Torture: Shut Up and Watch

Hat tip to SD Humanist:

Chicago radio host Erich "Mancow" Muller said waterboarding wasn't torture. He agreed to have a U.S. Marine waterboard him live on air to prove it. Six seconds in, he changed his mind.



Waterboarding is torture.

Monday, April 20, 2009

Cybersecurity Act of 2009 Seeks Internet Shut-off Switch for President

U.S. Senate Bill 773, the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, offers several sensible responses to the real risks we face from foreign powers or terrorists who might attack us with hackers rather than nukes. Standards for cybersecurity professionals, regional cybersecurity centers to help small businesses (do I smell bacon for DSU?)... mostly sensible stuff. Mostly.

You can read the offical version of the bill at the U.S. Congress, but I recommend the OpenCongress.org version, where you can read and submit comments on specific portions of the bill with your fellow citizens. That capacity for interactivity and alternative voices is exactly why I don't like Section 18, Clause 2 of S. 773, which gives the President the following power:

...may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network.

When planes hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the President grounded all U.S. air travel. I can imagine a similar emergency where the best way to stop a cyber attack from doing more damage would be to shut down big chunks of the Internet, if not the whole thing. But would a massive shutdown of the Internet be the right response to a serious cyber attack? Shutting down Internet access would be much more immediately damaging to the U.S. economy than shutting down air travel, and that's exactly the kind of damage cyberattackers likely want to inflict.

What makes me more uneasy is the lack of definition of "cybersecurity emergency" and the breadth of the definition of "critical infrastructure." Basically, the President would have broad discretion to declare any situation an emergency and shut down any "state, local, and nongovernmental information systems and networks." This vagueness and breadth gives the President the power to shut down the most effective communications medium available to the alternative press and dissenters who might seek to challenge the government's version of the facts about an emergency or even organize (via blog, Facebook, etc.) rallies, tea parties, or other reponses to improper government action.

Even with a President I trust, I want clearer language in the bill to protect civil liberties. The bill has some civil liberties language (here, too), but the emergency powers are still too Big Brother for my taste. Perhaps Senator Thune or Senator Johnson can do us the favor or introducing an appropriate amendment (at least a definition, if not a move to strike) to protect online alternative press and dissent, even in times of crisis.

Friday, March 27, 2009

Priorities Check: Terrorism vs. Economy

As you head for your Friday coffee break, here are a couple questions that might spark some conversation:

1. Which headline would you rather see tomorrow?
  • Bin Laden Captured by U.S. Army
  • Recession Over
2. Which is the greater infringement on liberty?
  • Searching everyone, including Grandma, at the airport
  • Imposing regulations on hedge funds, private equity funds, bank holding companies, and insurance conglomerates