Looking for His glorious appearing! Titus 2:13

Administrative Area

login

password

You're (Probably) a Federal Criminal
Jul 23rd, 2009
Daily NewsFox News.com - Brian Walsh
Categories: Commentary;Warning

With all the attention that's been paid lately to long federal sentences for drug offenders, it's surprising that a far more troubling phenomenon has barely hit the media's radar screen. Every year, thousands of upstanding, responsible Americans run afoul of some incomprehensible federal law or regulation and end up serving time in federal prison.

What is especially disturbing is that it could happen to anyone at all -- and it has.

We should applaud Reps. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) and Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), then, for holding a bipartisan hearing today to examine how federal law can make a criminal out of anyone, for even the most mundane conduct.

Federal law in particular now criminalizes entire categories of activities that the average person would never dream would land him in prison. This is an inevitable result of the fact that the criminal law is no longer restricted to punishing inherently wrongful conduct -- such as murder, rape, robbery, and the like.

Moreover, under these new laws, the government can often secure a conviction without having to prove that the person accused even intended to commit a bad act, historically a protection against wrongful conviction.

Laws like this are dangerous in the hands of social engineers and ambitious lawmakers -- not to mention overzealous prosecutors -- bent on using government's greatest civilian power to punish any activity they dislike. So many thousands of criminal offenses are now in federal law that a prominent federal appeals court judge titled his recent essay on this overcriminalization problem, "You're (Probably) a Federal Criminal."

Consider small-time inventor and entrepreneur Krister Evertson, who will testify at today's hearing. Krister never had so much as a traffic ticket before he was run off the road near his mother's home in Wasilla, Alaska, by SWAT-armored federal agents in large black SUVs training automatic weapons on him.

Evertson, who had been working on clean-energy fuel cells since he was in high school, had no idea what he'd done wrong. It turned out that when he legally sold some sodium (part of his fuel-cell materials) to raise cash, he forgot to put a federally mandated safety sticker on the UPS package he sent to the lawful purchaser.

Krister's lack of a criminal record did nothing to prevent federal agents from ransacking his mother's home in their search for evidence on this oh-so-dangerous criminal.

The good news is that a federal jury in Alaska acquitted Krister of all charges. The jurors saw through the charges and realized that Krister had done nothing wrong.

The bad news, however, is that the feds apparently had it in for Krister. Federal criminal law is so broad that it gave prosecutors a convenient vehicle to use to get their man.

Two years after arresting him, the feds brought an entirely new criminal prosecution against Krister on entirely new grounds. They used the fact that before Krister moved back to Wasilla to care for his 80-year-old mother, he had safely and securely stored all of his fuel-cell materials in Salmon, Idaho.

According to the government, when Krister was in jail in Alaska due to the first unjust charges, he had "abandoned" his fuel-cell materials in Idaho. Unfortunately for Krister, federal lawmakers had included in the Resource Recovery and Conservation Act a provision making it a crime to abandon "hazardous waste." According to the trial judge, the law didn't require prosecutors to prove that Krister had intended to abandon the materials (he hadn't) or that they were waste at all -- in reality, they were quite valuable and properly stored away for future use.

With such a broad law, the second jury didn't have much of a choice, and it convicted him. He spent almost two years locked up with real criminals in a federal prison. After he testifies today, he will have to return to his halfway house in Idaho and serve another week before he is released.

The other hardened criminal whose story members of Congress will hear today is retiree George Norris. A longtime resident of Spring, Texas, Norris made the mistake of not knowing and keeping track of all of the details of federal and international law on endangered species -- mostly paperwork requirements -- before he decided to turn his orchid hobby into a small business. What was Norris's goal? To earn a little investment income while his wife neared retirement.

The Lacey Act is an example of the dangerous overbreadth of federal criminal law. Incredibly, Congress has made it a federal crime to violate any fish or wildlife law or regulation of any nation on earth.

Facing 10 years in federal prison, Norris pled guilty and served almost two. His wife, Kathy, describes the pain of losing their life savings to pay for attorneys and trying to explain to grandchildren why for so long Poppa George couldn't see them.

Federal criminal law did not get so badly broken overnight, and it will take hard work to get it fixed. It is encouraging that members of Congress such as Reps. Scott and Gohmert are now paying attention to the toll overcriminalization takes on ordinary Americans. Congress needs to begin fixing the damage it has done by starting to restore a more reasonable, limited and just federal criminal law. Today's hearing is an excellent first step.

Brian W. Walsh is Senior Legal Research Fellow in the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation (heritage.org).

Palestinians: We never recognized Israel!
Jul 23rd, 2009
Daily NewsIsrael Today
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel;Anti-Israel

Yet another senior Palestinian Authority official has insisted that media reports suggesting that the ruling Western-backed Fatah faction accepts Israel's right to exist, while the defiant Hamas movement does not is utter nonsense contrived to advance Western agendas in the region.

In an interview with Al-Quds Al-Arabi on Wednesday, Rafik Natsheh, a member of the powerful Fatah Central Committee, had this to say:

"Fatah does not recognize Israel's right to exist. All these reports about recognizing Israel are false. It's all media nonsense."

Natsheh's remarks came in response to reports that Fatah had recently asked Hamas to meet international requirements that it recognize Israel's right to exist so that a Palestinian national unity government could be formed.

"We don't ask other factions to recognize Israel because we in Fatah have never recognized Israel," he explained.

Natsheh, who also previously served as Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, was the second top Fatah official in recent months to admit that his party, so heralded in the West as "moderates" and "true peace partners," in fact has never met its most important peace obligation.

In March, Mohammed Dahlan, a top advisor to Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas and the former Fatah strongman in charge of Gaza, said on Palestinian Authority TV:

"I want to say for the thousandth time, in my own name and in the name of all of my fellow members of the Fatah movement: We do not demand that the Hamas movement recognize Israel. On the contrary, we demand of the Hamas movement not to recognize Israel, because the Fatah movement does not recognize Israel, even today."

Dahlan went on to explain that the Fatah-ruled Palestinian Authority only pays lip service to recognizing Israel in order to obtain assistance from the international community, both in the form of financial aid and political pressure on Israel.

Earlier this month, Kifah Radaydeh, deputy head of the Jerusalem chapter of Abbas' Fatah faction, sought to reassure Palestinians who worried increasingly active American involvement would actually bring an end to the conflict short of Israel's destruction.

Speaking on Palestinian Authority TV, Radaydeh noted:

"It has been said that we are negotiating for peace, but our goal has never been peace. Peace is a means; the goal is Palestine."

Obama nominee: Animals can sue people
Jul 23rd, 2009
Daily NewsOneNewsNow - Jim Brown
Categories: Today's Headlines;Warning

A consumer-freedom group says President Obama's nominee for "regulatory czar" is an "animal-rights zealot" who may make life difficult for hunters and meat-eaters.

Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) has placed a hold on the nomination of legal scholar Cass Sunstein to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the Office of Budget and Management. Cornyn is worried that the Harvard professor may push an aggressive animal-rights agenda in the White House. Sunstein has argued in favor of outlawing sport hunting and meat-eating, and written that animals should be allowed to file lawsuits "with human beings as their representatives."
 
David Martosko with the Center for Consumer Freedom shares Cornyn's concern.
 
"If Cass Sunstein is ultimately confirmed to be the regulatory czar, having an animal-rights zealot in that position for the first time could be problematic for Americans who love to hunt, who like seeing circuses, [who like] having animals, who like taking their kids to the zoo, who like feeding their children meat and milk at lunch time," he warns.
 
"This is a guy who I would think will use every means at his disposal to push the radical animal-rights agenda."
 
According to Martosko, Sunstein may one day be appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court -- so Senators Cornyn and Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) have both placed holds on Sunstein's nomination because they want the constitutional lawyer on the record now so that if he does something different they will be able to use it against him in a future confirmation hearing.

Obama Boomerang: Demand for Building Freeze Spurs Rush to Buy
Jul 23rd, 2009
Daily NewsArutz Sheva - Tzvi Ben Gadalyahu
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel

 
U.S. President Barack Obama’s attempt to freeze building for Jews in Judea and Samaria appears to be backfiring as real estate agency report a boom in new home sales in Maaleh Adumim, located several minutes east of Jerusalem.

The result is a further increase in the number of Jews living in Judea and Samaria, countering the intentions of the new American government.

The price of a three-bedroom apartment in Maaleh Adumin was $215,000 before President Obama’s campaign against Israel. The price for the same unit now is $244,000.

The city’s mayor Benny Kashriel said that all 450 apartment that are under construction, with previous government approval, are almost sold out. He vowed that Israel will not bow to American pressure against continued development. He told the American National Public Radio that “280,000 people in Judea and Samaria will be together against him, will demonstrate together and will not let our government compromise with him.”

Maaleh Adumim resident and American native Beth Gordon, who has been discussing buying property for her children, laughed at President Obama’s description of the city as a settlement.

“I ask people in the States, 'What do you think a settlement is?' And they say, 'I picture a caravan [mobile home without wheel on a hill.' And I say, 'You have to come to Maaleh Adumim and visit us!' “she told NPR. Her desire for her children to live nearby is part of the “natural growth” that U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has decried.

The bottom line for most people is money. The cost of housing in Maaleh Adumim and other communities in Judea and Samaria is far less than in Jerusalem, where the housing market is way beyond the reach of the average Israeli.

Real estate agent Ayalon Cohen told NPR the he is selling six to 10 units a month, comparable to the fastest-growing areas in Israel. "There's a lot of demand. A young couple that wants to buy in Jerusalem cannot afford to do so," Cohen says.

Obama and Israel
Jul 23rd, 2009
CommentaryAmericanThinker - Leo Rennert
Categories: Commentary;The Nation Of Israel;Anti-Israel

As President Obama's Mideast envoy, George Mitchell might have been expected to play the role of honest broker during last week's visits to Jerusalem and Ramallah, sounding out Israeli and Palestinian leaders about their views of the peace process, while keeping an open mind about eventual bridging proposals from the White House.But that's not what happened.  Instead of acting as a fair, even-handed mediator, Mitchell assumed the role of salesman, dictating in advance to Israel what concessions and compromsies Obama expected from the Jewish state, while leaving the Palestinian side off the hook in terms of its obligations to show some reciprocity, flexibility and pragmatism in any reneweal of negotiations.

The only solution to the conflict, Mitchell declared, is the two-state solution, which he presented with no strings attached.  According to Mitchell, creation of a Palestinian state, per se, will be the magic wand to bring peace to the region.  George W. Bush, the first American president to endorse Palestinian statehood, had a quite differnet plan -- the "road map," which conditions a Palestinian state on total, permanent cessation of Palestinian terrorism and anti-Israel incitement in Palestinian media, schools, libraries and mosques.  Or, as Bush put it, before there could be a Palestine, there had to be guarantees that it really would be "untainted by terrorism."  That stipulation is gone from the Obama/Mitchell playbook.

To make matters even worse for Israel, Mitchell kept assuring Palestinian leaders that the Arab "peace initiative" would become part and parcel of Washington's drive for a two-state solution.  The Arab plan actually is a prescription for the end of Israel as a Jewish state because it's predicated on a "right of return" for millions of Palestinian refugees and their descendants to flood back into Israel.  Drafted on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, it also would put under Palestinian rule all of Judaism's most sacred sites in the Holy Land -- Temple Mount where stood the First and Second Temples, the Western Wall, the Cave of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs -- every vestige of Jewish historial links in Jerusalem's Old City and Hebron.  Safeguarding these holy sites would be entrusted to the same Palestinians who have used Rachel's Tomb near Bethlehem for snipers' target practice and who destroyed Joseph's Tomb near Nablus.

Mitchell, in his actual role as Obama's salesman, skipped all these details.  Instead, he tried to mollify skeptical Israeli leaders by telling them that Obama wants a Palestinian state "alongside the Jewish state of Israel."  This, however, turned out to be empty sales talk.  No sooner had Mitchell moved to Ramallah than the Palestinian need to recognize Israel as a Jewish state disappeared from Mitchell's talking points.  In Ramallah, he focused entirely on Palestinian sovereignty -- with no strings attached. 

Thus, there was no challenge from Mitchell when Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, declared flatly that the Palestinians would never recognize Israel as a Jewish state.  Mitchell's silence in the face of Erekat's rejection of Israel as a Jewish state was perhaps the most revealing part of his trip.

Nor did Mitchell bother to acknowledge that the existence of two irreconcilable mini-Palestinian states -- Hamastan in Gaza and Fatahstan in the West Bank -- is the real obstacle to progress on the peace front -- not the security concerns of Israeli leaders who understandably are not eager to create a third terror front on their eastern border to supplement terror threats from Hezbollah in the north and Hamas in the south.

In fact, and not so coincidentally, as Mitchell spoke warm words to Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah. Hamas leaders surfaced from their hideouts in Gaza to proclaim that they would never, under any circumstances, recognize Israel -- another development that escaped Mitchell's notice.

From the cards Obama and Mitchell already have played, there are two possible conclusions for what's animating their Mideast diplomacy. It's based either on anti-Likud bias or sheer amateurishness.

Obama, in previous pronouncements, has gone out of his way to malign Likud leaders, seeing them as incompatible with peacemaking.  If he remains stuck in that rut, Mitchell's job is merely to set up Israel for a fall, while making points with the Arab world.

A more benign explanation is that Obama, when it comes to the Middle East, has created his own never-never land and blinds himself to any and all realities that don't fit his pure, peacemaking instincts.  Obama simply ignores hard, nitty-gritty boulders on his happy-talk gambol on the yellow-brick road to a Mideast Oz.

Call it Nikolas Sarkozy's take on Obama.  The French president, during a supposedly private dinner with members of the French parliament, gave them his less-than flattering assessment of Obama, according to leaks published by the Paris media and picked up by the New York Times.  Sarkozy gives Obama high marks for personal charisma, but faults him as a "weak, inexperienced" leader who "never ran a ministry in his life" before assuming the top post.  The French president confided that he invited Obama to join him in Normandy in June to mark the 65th anniversary of D-Day.  "I'm going to ask him to walk on the Channel," Sarkozy related, then added:  "and he'll do it."

Obama as amateur or Obama as viscerally anti-Likud, either way, to borrow Bette Davis' famous warning in All About Eve:  Israel better fasten its seat belt because it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Massive quake moves NZealand closer to Australia
Jul 23rd, 2009
Daily NewsAFP - David Brooks
Categories: Today's Headlines

WELLINGTON  – A massive 7.8 magnitude earthquake last week has moved the south of New Zealand closer to Australia, scientists said Wednesday.

With the countries separated by the 2,250-kilometre-wide (1,400-mile-wide) Tasman Sea, the 30 centimetre (12 inch) closing of the gap in New Zealand's southwest won't make much difference.

But earthquake scientist Ken Gledhill of GNS Science said the shift illustrated the huge force of the tremor, the biggest in the world so far this year.

"Basically, New Zealand just got a little bit bigger is another way to think about it," he told AFP.

While the southwest of the South Island moved about 30 centimetres closer to Australia, the east coast of the island moved only one centimetre westwards, he said.

The biggest quake in New Zealand in 78 years caused only slight damage to buildings and property when it struck the remote southwest Fiordland region of the South Island last Thursday.

A small tsunami was generated by the earthquake, with a tide gauge on the West Coast of New Zealand recording a wave of one metre.

"For a very large earthquake, although it was very widely felt, there were very few areas that were severely shaken," Gledhill said.

A large number of evangelical Christians gathered in Washington to stand up for Israel
Jul 23rd, 2009
News UpdateJimmy DeYoung
Categories: Jimmy DeYoung News

John Hagee, the leader of Christians United For Israel, told 4000 followers that the chief obstacle to peace in the Middle East is not Israelis living in Judea and Samaria but the regime in Tehran. Hagee charged President Obama with singling out Israel for concessions towards the establishment of a new Arab state within the current borders of Israel and he said that the United States is putting pressure on the wrong people.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, addressing the group via satellite, reminded them that now there are millions of Christians that stand with Israel because they want the truth to be known and peace in the holy land.

Jimmy's Prophetic Prospective on the News

There will come a day when Christians will no longer be able to stand up for the Jewish state of Israel - according to Bible prophecy.

The evangelical group, Christians United For Israel, is only one of many Christian organizations and, in fact, churches that have taken a stand for the Jewish state of Israel. This Christian support for Israel comes from and understanding of Bible prophecy that reveals that God still has a plan for the Jewish people. There is a segment of Christianity that believes God is finished with the Jews and that the Church has replaced the Jews in God's future plans and that is dangerously not correct. However, let me remind you that God's word does not say Christians must back the Israeli government, a very secular humanistic government, but, indeed, the Bible does teach us that we must stand with the Jewish people.

God does have a plan for the Jews as recorded in the prophetic passages of His word. 2500 years ago, the ancient Jewish prophet Ezekiel wrote that God would gather the Jews from every corner of the world and bring them into the land of their forefathers (Ezekiel 34:11-31). Ezekiel wrote of the land that God will give to the Jewish people and does speak of the disputed areas in Judea and Samaria. I hasten, however, to remind you that when the Jews are in the land of their forefathers, an alignment of nations will come to try to annihilate the Jews (Ezekiel 38). Before all of these prophecies are completely fulfilled Christians leave this Earth at the Rapture of the Church and will be unable to support Jews anymore.

Remember - Bible prophecy will be fulfilled.