Obama’s War on English

Obama’s War on English

by Riley Hunter

In an age when a waiter is a server, an actresses is a female actor, and a dubiously-competent socialist cult leader is an American president, it was only a matter of time before the “Global War on Terror” became an “Overseas Contingency Operation” (OCO). Thus Spoke Zarathustra this week via a memo sent to the Pentagon and select speech writers, officially establishing Team Obama’s redesigned terminology. The War is over, long live the Operation! This should show the road-side bombers, suicide bombers, bombers-in-burqas, snipers-for-Allah, and other assorted, blood-thirsty, Jihadist savages that the US really means business now. Victory through euphemism!

The unveiling of OCO capped-off a terror euphemism trifecta for the administration. Previously, the Justice Department scrapped the ghastly “enemy combatant” to describe war prisoners in favor of the much more uplifting, “detainee.” Additionally, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano─who may be the only member of the administration more intellectually troubled than Tim Geitner─rebranded terrorism as “man-caused disaster.” (To review: mail carrier; police officer; business person; but man-caused disaster… maybe the errant sexism has something to do with Ms. Napolitano’s romantic leanings.)

Ever sensitive to the plight of our illegally invading friends from the south, Ms. Napolitano also refuses to use the term “illegal immigrant.” In an administration where the Secretary of Treasury is a tax cheat, it’s only fitting that the Security of Homeland Security does not wish to tarnish the image of people who illegally raid our country and pillage our resources.

Words are very important to B. Hussein Obama─they don’t describe the narrative, they structure it. In college, he transformed himself from Barry—a hackneyed disgrace of a name befitting lounge singers and kid actors—to Barack, instantly making him exotic and interesting (a Barry snorting coke is a hapless junkie, but a Barack snorting coke is a conflicted soul seeking to open his mind, especially if he’s wearing a kente kufi hat while snorting). During the campaign, two little, but very important, bumper-sticker and t-shirt friendly words helped solidify his candidacy. Thanks to Hope and Change, Barry didn’t have to leak anyone’s kinky, sealed divorce papers to the media to get elected this time.

When more than one word has to be produced, Barry defers to his teleprompter to ensure rigid semantic integrity and to minimize his brain’s default proclivity of generating “uhhhhhs” and “ummmms.” In a recent speech before a requisitely awed group of business leaders, the teleprompter displayed the following gem, which The Father of the $1.2 trillion stimulus package voiced with contemplative gravitas: “I don’t like the idea of spending more government money, nor am I interested in expanding government’s role.” The statement wasn’t followed by a “NOT!” or a “PSYCH!” or even a “FACE!” Just more contemplative gravitas.

In Barry’s bizzaro world, reality in and of itself doesn’t matter. Words make the reality. Words matter. Teleprompters matter. The biggest spending bill in American history never happened if Barry calls it a “stimulus.” But if it did happen, Barry never agreed to the bonuses. But if he did agree to the bonuses, he did so unknowingly.

In the first half of the 20th century, Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf cobbled together a theory of linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity which would eventually become the unwitting foundation of the PC movement. In a nutshell, Sapir-Whorf believed that language determines thought, not vice versa. So call a prison a “correctional facility,” and the inmates should be so overcome by the warm fuzzies that they wouldn’t rape each other as much as when they thought they were stuck in a mere “prison.” Likewise, call welfare expansion a “tax cut” and more people will vote for you. I doubt Barry read much Sapir/Whorf, but many of the same ideas are discussed in different terms by his favorite community organizer, Saul Alinsky, and his favorite unicorn wrangler, Karl Marx.

Marx believed words may be used to confuse and control the dolts, rubes and twits who constitute the governed. An effective leader could introduce new words─or alternative definitions and combinations of old words─into the lexicon, and thereby induce the unlearning of old belief systems and the learning of new ones. Change the culture through words─one of the planks of the Cultural Marxist platform. As Fred Barnes points out, BHO has already redefined “fleeting”: the quarter century of unprecedented economic growth which began in the first term of the Reagan presidency was “fleeting prosperity” according to our noble leader. “The Reagan Recovery is urban legend, my children, now don your purple Nikes and listen unto me…”

Moreover, the War on Terror was that dummy Bush. General Secretary of the Central Committee President Obama doesn’t deal with wars or terror, he deals with contingencies and operations. You say, “potato,” I say, “potato.” You say, “that sleeveless dress really shows off Michelle’s toned arms,” I say, “pre-menopausal hot flash relief.” You say, “sensitive language soothes the people,” I say, “social engineering through verbal eugenics.”

To distance the current administration from the words of the former administration is predictable, to do so from the words of the Founding Fathers is creepy. Whether conscious or not, the end game of the current administration is to redefine the US Constitution in its own socialist, state-must-save-the-proles image. Now hopechange means abhorrent stimulus and bailout packages. Soon it may mean government-run health care or restrictions on how much gas and electricity citizens can use. The more Barry’s Obonics seep out of the teleprompter and into pop culture, the easier the administration’s task to remake America becomes.

Maybe Barry was stoned the day the English teacher pointed out that George Orwell was a warning, not a blueprint.

Bachmann bill would ban global currency

Bachmann bill would ban global currency

Posted using ShareThis

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/22366be8-157c-11de-b9a9-0000779fd2ac.html

Rage at AIG bonus pay-out is no excuse
Published: March 20 2009 20:22 | Last updated: March 20 2009 20:22

Politicians acting in haste rarely act wisely, least of all when guided by rage. In response to outrage over retention bonuses paid to employees of AIG – the failed insurer, now mostly owned by the government, which has received tens of billions in public support – the US House of Representatives rushed to pass a punitive tax aiming to claw the bonuses back. It would apply to all groups receiving help under the government’s financial stability plan, not just AIG. A similar measure is before the Senate.

The outcry over these bonuses is entirely understandable, though less than fully thought through. Understandable or otherwise, the response smacks more of banana republic than good government.

The country is furious at the idea of rewarding the very people, in AIG’s now notorious financial products arm, who helped sink both their company and the wider economy. Yet these bonuses were paid not as a reward for past performance, which would indeed be absurd, but to retain people deemed necessary to the unwinding of its mistakes. That reasoning offends against the principle of fairness, but if one is more interested in stabilising the economy than striking back at supposed culprits, it should not be dismissed out of hand.

In AIG’s case, the US government is now the de facto owner. As such it has rights and responsibilities, and it should attend more conscientiously to both. The Treasury should decide whether the bonuses are necessary to retain people essential to the success of its stabilisation plan. If they are, much as one may recoil at the idea, the bonuses should be paid: the cost pales in comparison to the vastly larger sums at stake. If not, the people who received them – those who have not already left, that is – should be told to return them or be fired. The government is within its rights as a new owner to set new terms for its employees.

The legislative blunderbuss about to be discharged by Congress, on the other hand, is likely to blow up in taxpayers’ faces. It forbids the case-by-case judgments on pay which are necessary to ensure that the stabilisation plan succeeds. And it expresses the tyrannical principle that Congress can use the tax code to void contracts that the executive branch has consented to, after the fact and with retrospective force. The measure is constitutionally dubious, as Congress well knows. All these considerations have been set aside for the purpose of venting the country’s anger. It is an abdication of responsibility.

Barack Obama, asked whether he approves of this law, has declined to answer. It would have been better if things had not come to this pass, he says. Quite so, and indeed there are lessons here about the conditions that must be attached to future assistance. But things have come to this pass – and the administration must resist this bad new law.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

Tax Wall Street bankers in haste, repent at leisure

Tax Wall Street bankers in haste, repent at leisure
March 20, 2009 1:12am

Beware any financial legislation that passes the House of Representatives rapidly when both the Democrats and Republicans are angry. It will cause a heap of unintended consequences.

That was true of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and it may be even more true of the House’s bill to impose a 90 per cent tax on bonuses earned by employees of large banks that have taken US government capital. It is an ill-conceived and over-hasty piece of populism.
The mistake has been to broaden a bill prompted by employees of AIG Financial Products to the entire set of large Tarp recipients.

I have been very critical of Wall Street pay practices, including in my column this week about AIG’s retention bonuses, and I backed Mr Obama’s curbs on compensation for senior executives. I think the big Wall Street firms have been dismally slow to wake up to the implications of having the government as a significant shareholder.

But there are several reasons why the House bill, if it is followed in the Senate and signed by Barack Obama (neither of which is certain) would make bad law.

First, it is retroactive. The banks that took government capital injections under the Troubled Assets Relief last year did so at the urging of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury. Many of them clearly needed the capital but others, such as Goldman Sachs, might have got by without it.

Imposing strict conditions on pay on banks that took a public investment of $5bn or more - Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, AIG, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, Goldman, PNC and US Bancorp - will undermine trust in the Treasury when it is badly needed.

Second, it is arbitrary. The House, unsurprisingly, has set a lower limit that excludes many banks based in House districts across the country. What is the logic, for example, in leaving out SunTrust, which gained $4.9bn in government capital and escapes the provision entirely?

It is also arbitrary in applying only to US citizens or people employed either in the US or by US entities. This may well have the bizarre result of making it less painful for AIG Financial Products - the original target - than for the Wall Street banks.

Many of the AIG Financial Products employees are London-based and I assume that quite a few of them are not US citizens. If the unit is a UK entity, which it appears to be, then the Internal Revenue Service will be unable to withhold tax on what are UK-sourced earnings.

Then there is the fact that it applies only to bonuses paid from January 1 onwards. This arbitrarily favours banks that paid 2008 bonuses before the end of the year - Merrill Lynch, for example - and penalises the others. It makes John Thain look far-sighted for bringing the Merrill bonuses forward.

Third, and most importantly, it creates a set of bad incentives. Goldman has already talked about wanting to return the $10bn in Tarp funding as quickly as possible, as has Ken Lewis of Bank of America and others. If I read the bill correctly, Goldman could escape this trap now by paying the Treasury $5.1bn.

Those institutions that can escape the 90 per cent bonus tax will now want to do so quickly, which will mean raising capital simply to return money to the government. But that goes against the whole point of the Tarp scheme, which is to ensure they have sufficient capital to keep lending.

Another incentive problem is that it could cause an employee rush for the exits at these institutions. An orderly reduction of risk-taking and excessive compensation on Wall Street is desirable, as I have said elsewhere. This bill threatens to make the process chaotic.

The best thing for the US economy is to have a steady adjustment of over-leverage and financial excess, not to have these banks struggling to escape the government’s embrace before they lose employees not only to hedge funds and private equity but any company that can pay more than $250,000 a year.

The best solution for the Senate and the administration is to curtail the scope of the House bill and refocus it on AIG Financial Products, which was what the fuss was originally about. A populist measure feels great at the time but the hangover tends to be painful.

March 20, 2009 1:12am in Finance

Senators push for bonus clawback

Senators push for bonus clawback
By Tom Braithwaite and Andrew Ward in Washington

Published: March 20 2009 18:16 | Last updated: March 20 2009 23:28

Senators are preparing a final push next week to impose a punitive tax on bonuses at bailed-out financial institutions such as AIG, the troubled insurance group.

But as Wall Street braces itself for a draconian clampdown on its pay culture, the legislation could yet stall amid criticism that it might undermine the government’s financial rescue programme and even violate the ­constitution.

On Thursday the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill to impose a 90 per cent tax on the bonuses of employees earning more than $250,000 (€184,000, £173,000) at companies that received more than $5bn in bail-out money.

Originally aimed at AIG, which has taken $170bn in taxpayer money and paid $165m in bonuses, the measure would also affect other institutions including Citigroup, JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs.

The Senate is working on similar legislation involving a 70 per cent tax on bonuses at a broader range of institutions – half to be paid by employees and half by companies – but it remains uncertain whether it has enough support to force its way through a crowded legislative agenda.

A Democratic aide to the Senate leadership said senators were divided between those wishing to push through fast-track legislation and others backing a slower process, including committee hearings, which could see momentum fade as the initial wave of anger over the AIG bonuses subsidies.

President Barack Obama has voiced broad support for congressional efforts to reign in Wall Street pay but stopped short of endorsing legislation to impose retro­active bonus taxes.

“I understand Congress’s frustrations,” he told Jay Leno, the chat-show host. “But I think that the best way to handle this is to make sure that you’ve closed the door before the horse gets out of the barn.”

Recriminations intensified on Friday over the AIG bonuses as Democrats traded blame for an affair that threatens serious damage to the Obama administration.

The White House was again forced to defend Tim Geithner, the beleaguered Treasury secretary, as fresh doubts emerged over when he first learned of the AIG bonuses and why he did not try to stop them.

Maxine Waters, a Democratic congresswoman, expressed exasperation at the administration’s handling of the controversy, saying: “Maybe the president is not up to speed on what is going on.”

The Treasury department acknowledged that Mr Geithner had been questioned on the bonuses in a congressional hearing a week before the White House had previously said he first learned of them. There was also mounting scrutiny of the administration’s role in watering down a provision in the stimulus bill last month that could have blocked the payouts.

Republicans tried to keep the focus on Democratic infighting to mask their own party’s turmoil over the bonus saga, as they struggled to reach consensus over the tax proposals.

The mooted legislation offends the anti-tax principles of many conservatives but Republicans are reluctant to be seen blocking measures to recoup bonuses that have caused a wave of populist anger.

“At least some Republicans made clear that they are not going to allow this to go ripping through the Senate,” said Tom Mann, a senior fellow in governance issues at Brookings Institution, the think-tank. “At the very least they will use their procedural [tools] to hold off any votes for a period of time and use that as a medium for blaming the Democrats for what they did or failed to do earlier.”

Critics say a retroactive tax on bonuses is unfair and potentially counter-productive if it discourages other institutions from participating in government attempts to rebuild the financial system. Supporters of the committee route argue that such a controversial piece of law should be considered with a cool head after the political passion has died down.

The Democratic leadership in the Senate has a very short window to push through a vote before the Easter recess. Bankers will be hoping that the Senate has not, by then, imposed on them an involuntary Lenten fast by taking away their bonuses.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

Banker fury over tax ‘witch-hunt’

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4ff2f77e-1584-11de-b9a9-0000779fd2ac.html

Banker fury over tax ‘witch-hunt’
By FT reporters

Published: March 20 2009 19:39 | Last updated: March 20 2009 23:32

Bankers on Wall Street and in Europe have struck back against moves by US lawmakers to slap punitive taxes on bonuses paid to high earners at bailed-out institutions.

Senior executives on both sides of the Atlantic on Friday warned of an exodus of talent from some of the biggest names in US finance, saying the “anti-American” measures smacked of “a McCarthy witch-hunt” that would send the country “back to the stone age”.

There were fears that the backlash triggered by AIG’s payment of $165m in bonuses to executives responsible for losses that forced a $170bn taxpayer-funded rescue would have devastating consequences for the largest banks.

“Finance is one of America’s great industries, and they’re destroying it,” said one banker at a firm that has accepted public money. “This happened out of haste and anger over AIG, but we’re not like AIG.”

The banker added: “It’s like a McCarthy witch-hunt...This is the most profoundly anti- American thing I’ve ever seen.”

Vikram Pandit, Citigroup’s chief executive, told employees in a memo that some anger about executive compensation was “warranted”. But he hit out against the idea of a special tax. “The work we have all done to try to stabilise the financial system and to get this economy moving again would be significantly set back if we lose our talented people because Congress imposes a special tax on financial services employees,” he wrote.

Some policymakers expressed concern that banks may try to break out of the government’s embrace by paying back public capital even if the price is a more severe credit squeeze.

They also fear that financial institutions may decide not to take part in public-private partnerships to finance credit markets and acquire toxic assets.

The outcry followed Thursday’s approval by the House of Representatives of a bill that would impose 90 per cent tax on bonuses to employees whose gross income exceeded $250,000 at bailed-out firms.

Next week the Senate will also consider a hefty tax on bail-out bonuses amid calls for an investigation into who was responsible for allowing the pay-outs. Some senators are calling for a committee hearing on a bill that would impose a 70 per cent tax at bailed-out institutions, half paid by employees and half by companies, arguing that a delay would help cool political anger.

“There are three big industries where the US has global leadership: financial services, media and technology. Introducing this 90 per cent tax is like taking one of those industries out the back and shooting it,” said a top Wall Street executive.

In Frankfurt one employee at a US investment bank said the new tax measures would “send [the US] back to the stone age”.

“Commodity traders are already moving to companies like BP where they can make as much money as they used to,” said another banker at a US firm.

Bankers at Deutsche Bank said it could benefit from the proposed legislation by poaching its US rivals’ most talented employees.

Reporting by Lina Saigol in London, Julie MacIntosh and Saskia Scholtes in New York, Tom Braithwaite in Washington and James Wilson in Frankfurt
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

Anger As Dog Is Tied Up And Left To Starve

Evil. Cruelty beyond measure. May this person suffer the same fate a thousand times in hell!


Anger As Dog Is Tied Up And Left To Starve

11:21am UK, Wednesday March 18, 2009

A pet owner tied a dog to a fence post and left it to starve to death in an incident described by an animal charity as one of the worst cases of cruelty ever seen.

The body of a female Mastiff was discovered in woodland at the Kinnaird Park Estate in Brechin, Angus by a worker at a nearby farm.

The muzzled dog was found tethered to a barbed wire fence with blue twine.

A post mortem on the animal showed it could have taken up to two weeks for her to die from starvation and dehydration.

The dog had desperately tried to eat soil and fragments of wood in a bid to stay alive.

Senior inspector at the Scottish animal charity SPCA Mark Lumgair said: "This poor dog has been made to suffer unimaginable cruelty over a prolonged period of time."

Abandoning an animal is an offence which could result in a fine of up to £5,000 and six months in prison.

Click here to see a horrific picture of the dead animal.

Mr Lumgair told Sky News Online: "In cases of extreme cruelty we would always push for a ban on these people ever looking after animals again."

Anyone with information should contact the Scottish SPCA animal helpline on 03000 999 999.

:: A dog died after it was kicked into the air by a man who was angry after its pensioner owner stumbled and fell onto his car.

The tan-coloured miniature pinscher, which was being walked by a 72-year-old man, was attacked in Woodley, near Reading in Berkshire.

Chaplain at Hospice by the Sea in Boca Raton resigns over ban on word 'God'

This is getting to be obscene, how can you ban God?!?

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/community/news/bocaraton/sfl-flphospice0318pnmar18,0,5601993.story

Chaplain at Hospice by the Sea in Boca Raton resigns over ban on word 'God'
Ban on word 'God' at meetings has chilling effect, she says
By Howard Goodman | South Florida Sun-Sentinel
March 18, 2009
A chaplain at Hospice by the Sea in Boca Raton has resigned, she says, over a ban on use of the words "God" or "Lord" in public settings.

Chaplains still speak freely of the Almighty in private sessions with patients or families but, the Rev. Mirta Signorelli said: "I can't do chaplain's work if I can't say 'God' — if I'm scripted."

Hospice CEO Paula Alderson said the ban on religious references applies only to the inspirational messages that chaplains deliver in staff meetings. The hospice remains fully comfortable with ministers, priests and rabbis offering religious counsel to the dying and grieving.

"I was sensitive to the fact that we don't impose religion on our staff, and that it is not appropriate in the context of a staff meeting to use certain phrases or 'God' or 'Holy Father,' because some of our staff don't believe at all," Alderson said.



Signorelli, of Royal Palm Beach, said the hospice policy has a chilling effect that goes beyond the monthly staff meetings. She would have to watch her language, she said, when leading a prayer in the hospice chapel, when meeting patients in the public setting of a nursing home and in weekly patient conferences with doctors, nurses and social workers.

"If you take God away from me," she said, "it's like taking a medical tool away from a nurse."

A devout Christian who acquired a master's degree in theology after a career as a psychologist, running a program for abused and neglected children, Signorelli has been ministering to the dying for 13 years. She worked at the Hospice of Palm Beach County before moving seven years ago to Hospice by the Sea, a community-based nonprofit organization that cares for terminally ill patients in Palm Beach and Broward counties.

Signorelli said that she and other chaplains were told Feb. 23 to "cease and desist from using God in prayers."

Signorelli said her supervisor recently singled her out for delivering a spiritual reflection in the chapel that included the word "Lord" and had "a Christian connotation."

"But that was the 23rd Psalm," Signorelli said — not, strictly speaking, Christian, as it appears in the Old Testament.

"And I am well aware that there were people from the Jewish tradition in attendance. I didn't say Jesus or Allah or Jehovah. I used 'Lord' and 'God,' which I think are politically correct. I think that's as generic as you can get."

Signorelli resigned Feb. 25.

None of the six other chaplains objected to the ban on God's name, she said.

Alderson said she was surprised by Signorelli's reaction to what she characterized as a minor administrative directive aimed solely at improving the decorum of monthly staff meetings, where the desired tone from a chaplain should be motivational, not religious.

Alderson said it started after she asked a chaplain — not Signorelli — to say something "inspirational" and "thought-provoking" at a staff meeting. The remarks did not strike the secular tone she wanted, Alderson said. So, "I issued some guidelines."

Guidelines from HealthCare Chaplaincy, a multi-faith organization, state that professional chaplains should "reach across faith group boundaries and not proselytize." But they don't tell chaplains to refrain from speaking about God.

"I hope this is some sort of misunderstanding," said Rita Kaufman, spokeswoman for the Association of Professional Chaplains, based in Schaumburg, Ill.

Hospice of Palm Beach County has not barred "God," marketing director Karen Stearns said. It does direct chaplains to be sensitive to patients' religious sensibilities.

Likewise, a ban on the word "God" was new to Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, a religious-freedom organization based in Orlando.

"That seems quite bizarre, and a significant restriction on her freedom of speech," Staver said.

Noting that spirituality has been linked to mortality and morbidity rates, Staver added: "To excise God from someone who is a grief counselor seems to be an extreme and uncalled-for response."

Hospice by the Sea, founded in 1979, provides services to about 500 patients every day on an annual budget of $35 million. Most revenue comes from Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance, along with about $2.5 million a year in donations and grants, according to Philanthropic Research Inc.

Howard Goodman can be reached at hgoodman@SunSentinel.com or 561-243-6638.

Sherrif Joe

Sherrif Joe, one of the countries best, and now under attack - again!



Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, left, orders approximately 200 convicted illegal immigrants handcuffed together and moved into a separate area of Tent City, inmates behind Arpaio, for incarceration until their sentences are served and they are deported to their home countries Wednesday, Feb. 4, 2009, in Phoenix.


http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=44899

Justice Dept. Investigates Arizona Sheriff for Enforcing Immigration Law
Thursday, March 12, 2009
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer


(CNSNews.com) - The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office in Arizona following requests by congressional Democrats and allegations by liberal activists that the department has violated the civil rights of illegal aliens.

Reps. John Conyers (D-Mich.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), and Robert Scott (D-Va.) requested the investigation, and activists groups such as National Day Laborer Organizer Network and ACORN launched petition drives and rallies in support of the probe.

The investigation focuses on Sheriff Joe Arpaio and dozens of officers under his command who were trained through the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Agreements of Cooperation in Communities to Enhance Safety and Security (ACCESS), which partners federal and local law enforcement to enforce immigration laws. (The Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement division is known popularly as ICE.)

In a letter dated March 10, 2009, Loretta Smith, acting assistant attorney general at the DOJ, detailed what her department would be investigating:

"This is to inform you that the United States Department of Justice is commencing an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (''MCSO'') pursuant to the pattern or practice provisions of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994,42 U.S.C. §14141 ("Section 14141") and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968,42 U.S.C. § 3789d ("Safe Streets Act"), and pursuant to the prohibitions against national origin discrimination in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-7 ("Title Yr') and the Safe Streets Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3789d(c)."

The letter continues: "The investigation will focus on alleged patterns or practices of discriminatory police practices and unconstitutional searches and seizures conducted by the MCSO, and on allegations of national origin discrimination, including failure to provide meaningful access to MCSO services for limited English proficient (LEP) individuals."

"In conducting the investigation, we will seek to determine whether there are violations of the above laws by the MCSO," the letter says.

Sheriff Arpaio's efforts to enforce immigration laws have been the focus of previous criticism, but Arpaio has defended his department and the results his ICE-trained officers have netted.

Concerning the DOJ’s investigation, Arpaio told CNSNews.com: “I will not back down. What I am doing is upholding the laws of the state of Arizona, and I will not be persuaded to turn my back on my oath of office as sheriff of this county.”

In an August 2008 press release, Arpaio's office detailed those results.

"While the Sheriff’s illegal immigration and human smuggling operations conducted on the streets and roadways here have netted nearly 2,300 arrests, another very successful effort to locate illegal aliens has been quietly happening inside Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s jails," the release said.

It continues: "Despite the growing criticism of the Sheriff’s illegal immigration fight by some valley politicians and activists, Sheriff Arpaio says 60 detention officers trained by ICE officials have conducted over 106,000 interviews and investigations of inmates booked into jail since April of 2007.

"In those 18 months, 16,000 inmates were determined to be illegal aliens. Either they have already been deported or will be deported after being tried and/or serving their sentences for crimes committed in the valley. The work being done be Arpaio’s detention staff is a likely contributor to the recent reduction in crime in the valley,” the press release added.

"That number of 16,000 represents a full one-third (1/3) of all inmates in the United States who have had holds placed on them after being identified by jail or prison officials as illegal aliens."

The press release goes on to say that 20 percent of inmates in the Maricopa County Jail are illegal aliens and that of those, 2,000 illegal aliens - 70 percent - were arrested for felony crimes.

Those felony crimes committed included the following: forgery, 12 percent; kidnapping, 10 percent; aggravated assault, 7 percent; driving under the influence, 7 percent; drug charges, 27 percent; robbery, 3 percent; murder, 3 percent; and theft, 4 percent.

The Democratic Congress members have also asked Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to launch an investigation into the training provided by ICE.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like this story? Then sign up to receive our free daily E-Brief newsletter: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/subscribe.aspx

Byzantine Monestary Found http://news.aol.com/article/byzantine-monastery-found-in-israel/379893

http://news.aol.com/article/byzantine-monastery-found-in-israel/379893

Very exciting! Though how aweful about the vandalism.



Farmers Find Ancient Monastery
By Deb Krajnak, CNN

(March 11) -- After a group of Israeli farmers sought last year to expand their property in the hills near Jerusalem, they discovered an archeological gem beneath the dirt.

A team led by Daniel Ein Mor barely had to scratch the surface before finding the remains of a Byzantine monastery, he told CNN on Wednesday.

"The excavation at Nes-Harim supplements our knowledge about the nature of the Christian-Byzantine settlement in the rural areas between the main cities in this part of the country during the Byzantine period," including Jerusalem, Mor said.
The church is believed to have been built in the late fifth or sixth century, and is decorated with "breathtakingly beautiful mosaics," according to a description from the Israel Antiquities Authority, which hired Mor.

He said studying coins and pottery pieces will help determine the church's age more accurately. Other monastic sites have been excavated in the region, which was part of the Byzantine Empire.

For Mor, who is studying for a master's degree at the Institute of Archeology in Jerusalem, the excavation was a great opportunity because he already had been surveying nearby cliffs to document Byzantine monastic settlements where residents were cave-dwellers, he told CNN.

"So for me, it was fascinating," he said, referring to the excavation. "It was very close to what I had been working on."

The excavation site, surrounded by oak trees and farming terraces, is near Moshav Nes-Harim, 5 miles west of Jerusalem.

The digging began in November and is being done in phases, Mor said.
"Prior to the excavation, we discerned unusually large quantities of pottery shards from the Byzantine period and thousands of mosaic tesserae" scattered on the ground, he said.

The digging has been shallow, he said -- reaching only about 7 feet deep. The highest preserved wall is only 4 feet. This is common, according to Mor, because over the centuries such monasteries have been plundered and their building stones reused.

The digging seems to mark the center of the site, which covers about 15 dunams, or four acres, along the slope of a spur that descends toward Nahal Dolev, according to Mor.

During the first few weeks, the team exposed the church's narthex, the broad entrance at the front of the church, whose floor is covered with colorful mosaics in geometric patterns, he said.

"Unfortunately, at the conclusion of the excavation this mosaic was defaced and almost completely destroyed by unknown vandals," Mor said.

In the second phase of digging, the team discovered the apse -- the curved area at the end of the church, behind the choir -- the nave, parts of an aisle and two rooms on the north and south. In the southern room, which has a mosaic floor decorated with concentric circles, the mosaics spell out a dedicatory inscription, Mor said.
It says, "O Lord God of Saint Theodorus, protect Antonius and Theodosia the illustres, Theophylactus and John the priest" and asks the Lord to remember Mary and John ... and have pity on Stephen."

The excavators also partly exposed a complex wine press, said Mor. Grapes grow well in the region, and it's likely the monks sold the wine.

After the church was no longer used for religious purposes, it was abandoned, then likely used for light industry by a non-Christian population, who removed many of the mosaics, and stones from the walls. There are indications that stones were burned to extract lime, Mor said. He said a kiln was found near the church, and Muslim pottery has been found at the site.

The team has exposed only about one-third of the monastery, and there are discussions over whether to continue, Mor said.

"We are considering finishing and opening the site to the public, but don't know for sure," he said.