Friday, May 15, 2009


By Paul Proctor
May 13, 2009

It’s time to prepare for hard times, my friends. And, if you’re a bible believing, Christ-following Christian, I believe the coming years will be particularly troublesome. I say “bible-believing, Christ-following Christian” because our degenerating culture has all but stripped the biblical definition of the word “Christian” from today’s collective conscience so that it has lost much of it’s scriptural meaning, even among many of today’s attending church members.

The enemies of Christ have clearly risen to great power in this country and are, as I write, busy endeavoring to finish off what remains of the church for the purpose of replacing it with a god and religion more suitable for global government. Though they may well in time take possession of the many debt-heavy mega churches and other grand houses of worship around the country in order to turn them into federally-subsidized community centers for faith-based social services, they won’t be successful at completely silencing or eliminating the true body of Christ who will likely be forced to abandon them in order to keep hearing and proclaiming God’s Word uncensored. Unless the Lord Himself intervenes to alter the current course of events, those now in power will most certainly rule over us for a season – and an arduous one at that.

Considering the unbiblical and unconstitutional legislation at hand, it’s looking more and more like faithful Christians could soon be viewed as enemies of the state for no other reason than having believed, proclaimed and obeyed the Word of God. Not only is the church being attacked from without, it is also being undermined from within by charlatans who would transform it into something more spiritually pliable, socially useful and dialectically accommodating.

I believe Christians will again and again be called upon to choose whom we will serve in the coming days in ways that will bring more persecution and suffering than we are accustomed to, requiring a spiritual farsightedness and desire for the eternal things of God over the temporal rewards of this world.

We need to be ready. We need to be willing. And we need to be empowered, not by the mere passion of patriotic zeal, but by the Holy Spirit of God and His Word. It is not we against them – it is an angry and rebellious world against God, and we would do well to remember that when the devil comes knocking at our door demanding more tolerance, diversity and unity.

Vengeance is not ours – that belongs to the Lord, as He clearly states in His Word. Those who live by the sword will surely die by it – again, not my words – His.

When our Constitution and Bill of Rights are completely discarded for the New World Order, there will be no going back to the way things were. There will only be the Word of God to edify, encourage, inspire and sustain us through the hard times ahead. Those who understand and appreciate the power of that Word know very well what I’m talking about. Those who don’t will ignore it at their own peril because to them, it is foolishness.

Best we get into His Word now more earnestly and take it to heart in preparation for a time when bibles are no longer allowed or even legal, than get caught spiritually ignorant and scripturally unarmed when temptation and tribulation come.

“For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.“ – Hebrews 4:12

© 2009 Paul Proctor - All Rights Reserve

Monday, May 11, 2009

Trickle-Down Corruption
The real scandal.

By Jonah Goldberg

Some days you have to ask yourself: My God, what if these people were Republicans?

Democrats took back Congress in 2006 and the presidency in 2008 in no small part because of their ability to bang their spoons on their high chairs about what they called the Republican “culture of corruption.” Their choreographed outrage was coordinated with the precision of a North Korean missile-launch pageant. And, to be fair, they had a point. The GOP did have its legitimate embarrassments. California Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham and lobbyist Jack Abramoff were fair game, and so was Rep. Mark Foley, the twisted Florida congressman who allegedly wanted male congressional pages cleaned and perfumed and brought to his tent, as it were.

Of course, it wasn’t as if Democrats were without sin. Louisiana Rep. William Jefferson was indicted on fraud, bribery, and corruption charges in 2007, after an investigation unearthed, among other things, $90,000 in his freezer. Then–New York governor Eliot Spitzer was busted in a prostitution scandal.

But that’s all yesterday’s news. Let’s look at the here and now. Barack Obama, who vowed he’d provide a transparent administration staffed with disinterested public servants with the self-restraint of Roman castrati, appointed an admitted tax cheat to run the Treasury Department — and he’s hardly the only one in the administration.

New York representative Charles Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, is under investigation for, among other things, failing to report income from his Caribbean villa. Meanwhile, Sen. Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, got sweetheart deals from subprime lender Countrywide and has yet to adequately explain his too-good-to-be-true deal on his million-dollar “cottage” in Ireland, which he may have gotten in exchange for finagling a pardon (from President Clinton) for a felon. Oh, Dodd also secretly protected those AIG bonuses that raised such a ruckus.

Rep. Jack Murtha of Pennsylvania, Nancy Pelosi’s moral authority on military matters during the Iraq war, has been revealed as a kleptomaniac of sorts, delivering as much of the federal budget as possible to various cronies and lobbyists.

Former senator John Edwards, who had an affair even as he was scoring Oprah-points as the supportive husband during his wife’s battle with breast cancer, is being investigated by the feds for the improper use of campaign funds. It looks like the silky-haired champion of the little guys may have used their donations to bribe the alleged “baby mama” into silence.

And it would be a shame to let it pass that Obama’s Senate seat was put up for sale by the then-governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich. A congressional ethics board is investigating whether Illinois Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. tried to buy it.

But you know what? We ain’t seen nothing yet. For starters, the real corruption isn’t what the media are ignoring or downplaying as isolated incidents. It’s what the media are hailing as strokes of bold, inspirational leadership. The White House, as a matter of policy, is rewriting legal contracts, picking winners (mostly labor unions and mortgage defaulters) and singling out losers (evil “speculators”), while much of the media continue to ponder whether Obama is already a greater president than FDR.

If a Republican administration, staffed with cronies from Goldman Sachs and Citibank, were cutting special deals for its political allies, I suspect we’d be hearing fewer FDR analogies and more nouns ending with the suffix “gate.”

Take Obama’s “car czar,” Steven Rattner. According to ABC’s Jake Tapper, Rattner is accused of threatening to use the White House to smear a Chrysler creditor if it refused to back the administration’s Chrysler bankruptcy plan. He’s also connected to a massive pension-fund scandal involving the investment firm he used to run. It’s alleged that Rattner’s firm bought the less-than-worthless DVD distribution rights to the achingly awful film Chooch — produced by the brother of an official in the New York comptroller’s office — as a thinly veiled bribe to gain access to New York pensions funds. Chooch, by the way, is Italian slang for “jackass,” which just happens to be the Democrats’ mascot.

More to the point, political corruption is inevitable whenever you give hacks — of either party — too much discretion over public funds. Businesses look to Washington for profits instead of to the market. The thing is, this has become the governing philosophy of the Democratic party, from banking and cars to health care and now student loans. The federal government is taking over, and the culture of corruption inevitably trickles down. That in itself should be a scandal. Call it “Choochgate.”

— Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online and the author of Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning. © 2009 Tribune Media Services, Inc.
'Hate crimes' fate now up to people
Congressman: 'If you don't raise enough stink, there's not a chance of stopping it'

Posted: May 09, 2009
12:25 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh


U.S. Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Texas

A Texas member of Congress is warning Americans that unless they act – and act now – the nation soon will have a "hate crimes" law that actually was written so that it protects pedophiles and others with alternative sexual orientations such as voyeurism and exhibitionism.

"If you guys don't raise enough stink there's not chance of stopping it," U.S. Rep. Louis Gohmert said today on a radio program with WND columnist Janet Porter. She's the chief of the Faith2Action Christian ministry and has coordinated a campaign to allow citizens to send overnight letters to members of the U.S. Senate expressing opposition to the plan.

Already well over 2,000 people have utilized the procedures and more than 200,000 letters have been dispatched to members of the Senate.

"It's entirely in the hands of your listeners and people across the country," Gohmert told Porter. "If you guys put up a strong enough fight, that will give backbone enough to the 41 or 42 in the Senate to say we don't want to have our names on that."

WND has reported multiple times on the developing legislation – a plan that failed under President George W. Bush when he determined it was unnecessary and most likely unconstitutional.

An analysis by Shawn D. Akers, policy analyst with Liberty Counsel, said the proposal, formally known as H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act bill in the House and S. 909 in the Senate, would create new federal penalties against those whose "victims" were chosen based on an "actual or perceived… sexual orientation, gender identity."

The audio of the interview with Gohmert, who repeatedly has tried to correct some of the more egregious difficulties he sees in the bill, has been embedded here:

He warned Porter during the interview that even her introduction of him, and references to the different sexual orientations, could be restricted if the plan becomes law.

"You can't talk like that once this becomes law," he said.

He said the foundational problem with the bill is that it is based on lies: it assumes there's an epidemic of crimes in the United States – especially actions that cross state lines – that is targeting those alternative sexual lifestyles.

"When you base a law on lies, you're going to have a bad law," he said. "This 'Pedophilia Protection Act,' a 'hate crimes' bill, is based on the representation that there's a epidemic of crimes based on bias and prejudice. It turns out there are fewer crimes now than there were 10 years ago."

He said he fought in committee and in the House, where it was approved 249-175, to correct some of the failings, including his repeated requests for definitions in the bill for terms such as "sexual orientation."

Majority Democrats refused, he said. He said that leaves the definition up to a standard definition in the medical field, which includes hundreds of "philias" and "isms" and would be protected.

Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., a "hate crimes" supporter, confirmed that worry, saying:

This bill addresses our resolve to end violence based on prejudice and to guarantee that all Americans regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability or all of these 'philias' and fetishes and 'ism's' that were put forward need not live in fear because of who they are. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule…"
President Obama, supported strongly during his campaign by homosexual advocates, appears ready to respond to their desires.

"I urge members on both sides of the aisle to act on this important civil rights issue by passing this legislation to protect all of our citizens from violent acts of intolerance," he said.

But Gohmert pointed out that if an exhibitionist flashes a woman, and she responds by slapping him with her purse, he has probably committed a misdemeanor while she has committed a federal felony hate crime.

"That's how ludicrous this situation is," Gohmert said.

According to published reports, the Senate Judiciary committee may be holding a hearing on the bill on Tuesday.

For only $10.95, any member of the public can send letters to all 100 senators, individually addressed and "signed" by the sender. The letters ask for a written response and call for opposition to the bill, including by filibuster if necessary.

According to a staunch critic on "hate crimes" provisions, Rev. Ted Pike, "This is a 'hearing' to which no witnesses will probably be called. No troublesome Republican debate or amendments may be allowed."

Akers' analysis said the bill would result in the federalization of "virtually every sexual crime in the United States." And he said it appears to be part of an agenda that would relegate pro-family and traditional marriage advocates into the ranks of "terrorists." Critics also hvae expressed alarm because in committee hearings Democrats admitted that a Christian pastor could be prosecuted under the law if he spoke biblically against homosexuality, someone heard the comments and then committed a crime.

"Under [the plan] the speech of a criminal defendant and the mere membership of the defendant in a given group may be used as evidence of his or her biased motive," Akers said.

He said there's already an effort afoot in the U.S. to list those pro-family organizations "alongside several neo-Nazi groups … to create guilt by the artificial manufactured appearance of association."

The letter to senators being promoted by Porter, in part, says:

"I am writing to urge you to do all in your power to oppose passage of S.909, also known as 'The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.'

"Passage of this bill by the U.S. Senate would be reckless and irresponsible not only because of the 'chilling effect' it would have on First Amendment-guaranteed rights to free speech, but also because it would provide, for the first time ever, special legal protections for pedophiles and other sexual offenders.

"If there was ever a time for the Senate to stand and fight with a filibuster, that time is now. We are calling for members of the Senate, Republicans and Democrats alike, to stop S. 909.
"While the bill's supporters have very effectively framed the bill as one that will protect victims from criminal acts, the bill actually has very little to do with protection," Akers wrote.

"The bill does not merely provide stiffer penalties for certain crimes but, rather, represents a substantive and fundamental shift away from the American ideas of free speech and God-given immutable equality and toward the European ideas of state approved speech, state endorsed morality, state-given egality," he said.

Foremost, the bill simply ignores the 14th Amendment requirements that all citizens be protected equally, providing special protections for homosexuals and others with alternative sexual lifestyle choices, he said.

Matt Barber, also of Liberty Counsel, wrote in a commentary, "Not only is this legislation constitutionally dubious on First Amendment grounds, and a prima facie violation of Fourteenth Amendment required 'equal protection of the laws;' it also flies in the face of the Tenth Amendment, which explicitly limits the federal government's authority in such matters to those powers delegated by the U.S. Constitution."

Find out how homosexuality as a "civil right" was sold to America, in the best-selling "Marketing of Evil."

"To illustrate the point, one need look only to the most famous supposed 'hate crimes' victim of all, Matthew Shepard, who, as it later turned out, was killed during a robbery for drug money gone awry.," he wrote. "This fact notwithstanding, the left continues to disgracefully politicize Shepard's memory by claiming he was murdered simply for being 'gay.' … The bizarre irony is palpable. The two thugs who killed Shepard are currently serving life sentences for their crimes – and rightfully so – in the complete absence of any discriminatory and unnecessary 'hate crimes' legislation," he said.

During arguments in the House while the plan was being adopted, lawmakers pointed out the representatives were voting for protection for "all 547 forms of sexual deviancy or 'paraphilias' listed by the American Psychiatric Association."

Porter cited the amendment offering from Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, in committee that was very simple:

The term sexual orientation as used in this act or any amendments to this act does not include pedophilia.
But majority Democrats refused to accept it.

"Having reviewed cases as an appellate judge, I know that when the legislature has the chance to include a definition and refuses, then what we look at is the plain meaning of those words," explained Gohmert. "The plain meaning of sexual orientation is anything to which someone is orientated. That could include exhibitionism, it could include necrophilia (sexual arousal/activity with a corpse) … it could include Urophilia (sexual arousal associated with urine), voyeurism. You see someone spying on you changing clothes and you hit them, they've committed a misdemeanor, you've committed a federal felony under this bill. It is so wrong."

Send your letter of opposition now to all 100 senators by overnight delivery.
Of bakeries, burglars and Congress' bad bills

Posted: May 11, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

Last week all over the Internet news and in the inbox at my website were reports about a bakery in Croatia that used a life-size photo of me to ward off burglars who were weekly ransacking the business. The message under my photo in the store's window says, "This shop is under the protection of Chuck Norris."

First, I am very honored to help reduce crime anywhere on the planet, even from a photo. (How we all wish it were always that easy!) But it's not just pastries I want to protect, but the posterity or upcoming generations of America and the world.

I'm a parent and grandparent, and, like you, I'm very concerned about the world our children and grandchildren will inherit and belong. Consider the world we have handed down to them. How do we expect future generations to be or act when they are raised in a culture that is hedonistic, self-centered, greedy, disconnected from its founders, void of moral absolutes, irreligious, with a diminishing regard for human life and value? Often being abandoned by parents, shunned by peers, and shaped by super-peers (as psychologists now call the media), I believe they face some of the greatest and most unique challenges faced by youth in any generation.

Consider these statistics that speak of the obstacles that confront them from infancy through the teenage years. In 2007, MySpace found more than 29,000 registered sex offenders on its site. Teenage pregnancies in the U.S. (52.1 for every 1,000 of those ages 15-19) are the highest in the developed world (four times the European Union average). Every day 6,000 students drop out of the approximately 94,000 public schools in America. Approximately 25 percent of kids are overweight or obese, and most parents don't even know it. According to the Barna Research Group, 30 percent of parents say it is a "major challenge" to help their children become more spiritual. Juvenile violent crime has increased 48 percent in just the last 11 years. (I've counted at least 14 different murderous gun sprees at academic settings across our nation just since 2000, resulting in at least 60 fatalities and dozens more wounded.) The FBI estimates more than 100,000 children and young women are trafficked in America today, ranging from 9 to 19 years of age, with the average age being 11." Need I say more?

Our Founding Fathers simply never could have imagined such rampant degradation and utter disarray among younger generations. Proof of that is seen in Ben Franklin's 1787 pamphlet, "Information to those who would remove to America," which was a guide for Europeans who were considering relocation to America. In it Ben exclaimed, "Hence bad examples [of] youth are more rare in America, which must be comfortable consideration to parents." Can you picture a politician saying that today, "bad examples of youth are more rare in America"? He or she would become the ridicule of pundits and politicians alike.

One way we can fight right now for our founders' America is by joining the several hundred thousand Americans who have already voiced their opposition of the passage of S. 909 in the Senate, formally known as H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, in the House, because in the end it could not only criminalize opinions (an unconstitutional act) but also provide elevated protection to pedophiles. Is that how we want our government protecting our children and the Constitution? You can voice your opposition to all 100 senators by clicking here.

I've felt honored to be reconnected to the younger generations through the Chuck Norris fact proliferation. I hear from thousands every year, listen to their concerns, and do my best to carry their concerns to appropriate parties to implement change.

It doesn't take a sociologist to realize the next generation of young people (to bear the baton of America) is wearing unique and heavy burdens. They are called the Millennials – 47 million young adults between the ages of 18 and 29.

These are young people who have grown up with technology. They use it for everything from listening to music, to getting jobs, to ordering everything they need, to dating and communicating with everyone they know and want to know. They are tired of wars, rumors of wars, and America's mentality that it must save the world. They prefer to feed the poor and encourage the downtrodden. They believe that charity begins at home. (The Lord knows we have millions of people in America that need our assistance.) Their primary fight is socially conscious service. To them, government is some gargantuan gargoyle that is spiraling out of control.

The Millennials have so much to offer our world. If we're going to win our culture wars, we need the Millennials to do it. If we are going to reawaken and restore America, we need the Millennials' help. There is no way around it. We need to re-engage with our young people, and them with us, to build a brighter future and better tomorrow.

Whether at work, in a college classroom, or a community event, can you identify someone to whom you can reach out and begin to build that generational bridge?

If you think protecting a bakery in Croatia is impressive, try protecting a youth in America from the onslaught of our cultural maladies. If you do, it's you who will be the superhero.

Sunday, May 10, 2009

A truly Moranic idea
Exclusive: Joseph Farah skewers congressman over bill to establish government academy

Posted: May 09, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

By Joseph Farah

As if the federal government were not growing fast enough under Barack Obama and the Democratic leadership of Congress, one of the dumbest members of the House has introduced a bill that would, at your expense, train a whole new breed of public employees who would be recruited by the president and members of Congress.

It's called the "Tuition-Free Public Service Academy Bill" sponsored by the aptly named Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va.

You might remember Moran was the guy who blamed the then-impending Iraq war on American Jews.

"If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this," he said. "The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going, and I think they should."

Now his latest bright idea is creation of a government-worker mill "modeled after the current military service academies at West Point, Annapolis and Colorado Springs."

Get "Taking America Back," Joseph Farah's manifesto for moral renewal, sovereignty and self-reliance.

As he puts it, the bill "would create an undergraduate institution designed to cultivate and groom a new generation of young leaders dedicated to public service. The Public Service Academy would offer four years of tuition-free education in exchange for five years of civilian service following graduation. Eligible fields of service would include public education, public health, law enforcement and government."

This $205-million-a-year idea is so misbegotten on so many levels it's almost impossible to know where to start critiquing it. Let me count the ways:

It's not the business of the federal government to be involved in education with the exception of training up military leaders.

There are plenty of people already qualified for all the jobs listed for the foreseeable future and beyond – too many, in fact.

It's nothing but another jobs program to be directed by the federal government, which is at least 10,000 times bigger than it should be already.

It's another perk to hand out for incumbent politicians to help ensure re-election.

It's yet another way for the federal government to insinuate itself inappropriately in state and local government and law enforcement.

In case you didn't notice, the federal government is broke – spending money that hasn't yet been earned by anyone and won't be for generations to come.
I'm sure there are many more reasons to oppose this Moranic idea – one that was admittedly first hatched by Hillary Clinton and Arlen Specter.

What is it about "limited government" that these people don't understand?

What is it about the Constitution that is so hard to understand?

What is it about "enumerated powers" that is so hard to understand?

Sad to say the bill already has 33 co-sponsors. Also sad to say is there is almost no chance this boondoggle will be defeated with the Democrats firmly in control of the House and Senate. Sad to say this sounds a lot like Barack Obama's idea for a "civilian national security force" to be as well-funded as the combined U.S. military services – a mysterious and insidious idea he breathed life into during his campaign for the presidency.

Guess who gets to nominate the students? The president and each member of Congress.

These guys want control of everything – and this is just the latest illustration of how they intend to get it.

They not only want everyone in servitude to the state, but they want to oversee the training of their serfs. And they want what is left of the productive sector of society to pay for it.

This legislative travesty is already in committee and has bipartisan support.

Can you imagine there are Republicans dumb enough or corrupt enough or compromised enough to support a plan like this – even with Specter now ensconced on the portside of the aisle?

Good heavens!

What will be left of this country's freedom when this bunch is through?

Shummer60 - If we turn our backs on God's chosen we will face servere judgement!

Has Obama cut off information to Israel?
Lack of communication 'not normal practice'

Posted: May 10, 2009
6:10 pm Eastern

By Aaron Klein


Barack Obama

JERUSALEM – Unlike the Bush administration, the staff of President Obama is not coordinating its policy on Iran or the greater Middle East with Israel and has not been informing the Jewish state of its plans or recent diplomatic developments in area, according to sources in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office.

The silence extends to U.S. talks with the Palestinians, the sources said.

"Our intention and our hope as we go to Washington is to establish close intimate cooperative relationships on these sensitive matters," a top Netanyahu official told WND yesterday.

The official was speaking about Netanyahu's May 18th visit to the White House.

According to other sources in the prime minister's office, Israel has been obtaining the vast majority of its information regarding U.S. plans and advances for the Middle East from third parties, mostly European diplomats.

This is in stark contrast to Bush's eight-year presidency, during which the White House and State Department routinely briefed Israeli counterparts on Middle East affairs to the extent that the majority of official U.S. and Israeli statements on various policy issues were heavily coordinated.

(Story continues below)

A recent example of the Obama administration leaving Israel in the dark was information received by Jerusalem officials of a U.S. deadline of October for Iran to show progress in talks over their nuclear program. That deadline was apparently set by Obama's Middle East envoy Dennis Ross.

The information of the deadline - first reported by Haaretz yesterday and confirmed by WND - was discovered in Jerusalem not via U.S. sources but from third party European diplomats who were briefed on the matter.

"Right now there is next to no communication coming to us from the White House," said a source in Netanyahu's office.

The source warned against interpreting the matter as evidencing an anti-Israel bias from the Obama administration.

"Look, there is a new administration in the U.S. and a new one here (in Israel)," the source said. "There hasn't been so much time yet to establish channels."

Still, the source noted the extent of the blackout on information from the U.S. was "not usual practice."

A second source said the lack of communication between Israel and America extends to Israeli-Palestinian affairs. That source described a meeting last month between Netanyahu and another of Obama's Middle East envoys, George Mitchell. The source said the meeting largely was a one-way street, with the prime minister sharing his intended approach to Syria and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He said Mitchell outlined Obama's overall strategy for the region, but did not update Netanyahu on any talks with the Palestinians or specifics of Obama's intentions.

"Other than the Mitchell meeting, basically there wasn't much other communication at all, period," said the second source. "And we were not informed beforehand of policy statements that were made by Obama or his administration regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including statements Obama made after meeting Jordan's King Abdullah (last month)."

Obama trumpets 'anti-Israel' Arab plan

WND's source said one thing Mitchell did convey to Netanyahu was Obama's alleged plan to help create a Palestinian state in hopes of normalizing relations between Israel and the Arab world in line with the "Arab Peace Initiative." The source said Mitchell relayed that Obama's Middle East strategy would be based on the concept of the "initiative" but with security guarantees for Israel.

Following scores of denials he would trumpet the plan, Obama in January hailed the Arab initiative, which offers normalization of ties with the Jewish state in exchange for extreme Israeli concessions.

In an interview with an Arab television network – his first formal interview as president – Obama stated:

"Well, here's what I think is important. Look at the proposal that was put forth by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. ... I might not agree with every aspect of the proposal, but it took great courage to put forward something that is as significant as that. I think that there are ideas across the region of how we might pursue peace. I do think that it is impossible for us to think only in terms of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and not think in terms of what's happening with Syria or Iran or Lebanon or Afghanistan and Pakistan."

Since then, Obama and his team have trumpeted the plan several more times, including during a meeting last month with Jordan's Abdullah.

The Arab Initiative, originally proposed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in 2002 and later adopted by the Arab League, states that Israel would receive "normal relations" with the Arab world in exchange for a full withdrawal from the entire Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights and eastern Jerusalem, which includes the Temple Mount.

The West Bank contains important Jewish biblical sites and borders central Israeli population centers, while the Golan Heights looks down on Israeli civilian zones and was twice used by Syria to mount ground invasions into the Jewish state.

The Arab plan also demands the imposition of a non-binding U.N. resolution that calls for so-called Palestinian refugees who wish to move inside Israel to be permitted to do so at the "earliest practicable date."

Palestinians have long demanded the "right of return" for millions of "refugees," a formula Israeli officials across the political spectrum warn is code for Israel's destruction by flooding the Jewish state with millions of Arabs, thereby changing its demographics.

When Arab countries attacked the Jewish state after its creation in 1948, some 725,000 Arabs living within Israel's borders fled or were expelled from the area that became Israel. Also at that time, about 820,000 Jews were expelled from Arab countries or fled following rampant persecution.

While most Jewish refugees were absorbed by Israel and other countries, the majority of Palestinian Arabs have been maintained in 59 U.N.-run camps that do not seek to settle the Arabs elsewhere. There are currently about 4 million Arabs who claim Palestinian refugee status with the U.N., including children and grandchildren of the original fleeing Arabs, Arabs living full-time in Jordan and Arabs who long ago emigrated throughout the Middle East and to the West.
'Electronic Police State' report cites U.S.
Ultimate Big Brother 'basics are in place'

Posted: May 10, 2009
9:05 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh


In what may be the first assessment of its kind, a private company that offers a range of privacy products for computers and other technology is ranking the United States No. 6 in the world for having the most aggressive procedures for monitoring residents electronically.

The report, called The Electronic Police State, assesses the status of governmental surveillance in 52 nations around the globe for 2008.

The document was released Cryptohippie, Inc., which was set up in 2007 through the acquisition of several little-known but highly regarded providers of privacy technologies.

Not surprisingly, China and North Korea ranked No. 1 and No. 2, with Belarus and Russia following up. But the United Kingdom ranked fifth followed by the United States.

"Most of us are aware that our governments monitor nearly every form of electronic communication. We are also aware of private companies doing the same. This strikes most of us as slightly troubling, but very few of us say or do much about it. There are two primary reasons for this," the report said.

"We really don't see how it is going to hurt us. Mass surveillance is certainly a new, odd, and perhaps an ominous thing, but we just don't see a complete picture or a smoking gun," the report continued. Also, "We are constantly surrounded with messages that say, 'Only crazy people complain about the government.'"

Company spokesman Paul Rosenberg told WND the biggest obstacle, however, is that the image of a "police state" dredges up visions of Nazi Germany's thugs breaking down doors in the middle of the night and hauling people off to blacked-out trains or Stalin's USSR rounding up "offenders" for imprisonment.

"That's how things worked during your grandfather's war – that is not how things work now," the report said. "An electronic police state is quiet, even unseen. All of its legal actions are supported by abundant evidence. It looks pristine," the report said.

To create the rankings, which also included Singapore, Israel, France and Germany in the top 10, his organization searched its worldwide sources for information, checked against a number of other published reports, and assigned a value of 1 to 5 to 17 different factors:

Daily documents: How much is required day-to-day for residents to present state-issued identity documents or registration.

Border issues: What is demanded for a border entry.

Financial tracking: The state's ability to search and record financial transactions.

Gag orders: The penalties for revealing to someone else the state is searching their records.

Anti-crypto laws: Bans on cryptography.

Constitutional protections: Either a lack of protections or someone overriding them.

Data storage: The state's ability to record and keep what it uncovers.

Data search: The processes to search through data.

ISP data retention: The demand for ISPs to save customers' records.

Telephone data retention: States' requirements for communications companies to record and save records.

Cell phone records: The saving and using of cell phone users' records.

Medical records: Demands from states that medical records retain information.

Enforcement: The state's ability to use force (SWAT teams) to seize someone.

Habeus corpus: Either an absence of such rights or someone overriding them.

Police-Intel barrier: the absence of a barrier between police and intelligence organizations.

Covert hacking: State operatives meddling in data on private computers covertly.

Loose warrants: Warrants that are being issued without careful review of police claims by a truly independent judge.
The listings of China, North Korea, Belarus and Russia, all known for their repression of freedom, weren't surprising. Nor was the listing of the United Kingdom with its recent programs to copy and store virtually every telephone call, e-mail and text message within its borders.

But Rosenberg said there's more going on in the United States than many believe want to believe.

The nation's "basic system of gathering evidence and sorting it later is really dangerous," he said. "It's permanent. It's not going to go away."

It goes so far that a person's alcohol consumption actually could be tracked by government agents, if they chose, through credit card documentation, he told WND.

"In an Electronic Police State, every surveillance camera recording, every e-mail you send, every Internet site you surf, every post you make, every check you write, every credit card swipe, every cell phone ping… are all criminal evidence, and they are held in searchable databases, for a long, long time," the report said.

"Whoever holds this evidence can make you look very, very bad whenever they care enough to do so. You can be prosecuted whenever they feel like it – the evidence is already in their database," the report continued. "Perhaps you trust that your ruler will only use his evidence archives to hurt bad people. Will you also trust his successor? Do you also trust all of his subordinates, every government worker and every policeman?

"If some leader behaves badly, will you really stand up to oppose him or her? Would you still do it if he had all the e-mails you sent when you were depressed? Or if she has records of every porn site you've ever surfed? Or if he knows every phone call you've ever made? Or if she knows everyone you've ever sent money to?" the report asks.

"This system hasn't yet reached its full shape, but all of the basics are in place and it is not far from complete in some places," the report said.

Rosenberg told WND the organization also sought input on the status of electronic surveillance around the world from organizations including the the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Reporters Without Borders, Freedom House, the Ludwig von Mises Institute and The Heritage Foundation.

Following the top 10 were: 11. Malaysia, 12. Ireland, 13. United Kingdom, Scotland, 14. Netherlands, 15. South Korea, 16. Ukraine, 17. Belgium, 18. Australia, 19. Japan, 20. New Zealand, 21. Austria, 22. Norway, 23. India, 24. Italy, 25. Taiwan, 26. Denmark, 27. Hungary, 28. Greece, 29. Canada, 30. Switzerland, 31. Slovenia, 32. Poland, 33. Finland, 34. Sweden, 35. Latvia, 36. Lithuania, 37. Cyprus, 38. Malta, 39. Estonia, 40. Czech Republic, 41. Iceland, 42. South Africa, 43. Spain, 44. Portugal, 45. Luxembourg, 46. Argentina, 47. Romania, 48. Thailand, 49. Bulgaria, 50. Brazil, 51. Mexico, 52. Philippines.