BMAT Moral Action Committee Watchman Report #63 12/23/2005BMAT Moral Action Committee Watchman Report #63 12/23/2005
Click on an article to view OR scroll through the document:
That 'Bah, Humbug!' Bunch says they are trying to be "inclusive
California State University Administrator Declares Christmas 'Forbidden'
Critic Believes Narnia Emphasizes Human Ability over God's Redemptive Work
California City That Gave Recognition to Gay Marriage Was Wrong
Chris Smith's Human Trafficking Victims Protection Act to Become Law
Judge Says Intelligent Design Has no Place in Public Schools
American Family Association Considers Restoring Ford Boycott Over New Homosexual Ads
Congress Passes Smith's Life Saving Cord Blood Legislation and will be Signed by President Bush
White House Protest of Military's Anti-Christian Chaplain Policy
Saudi $20 Million Promotes Islam While Covering Over Persecution against Christians
All Major U.S. Media Lean Left Except Fox News and Washington Times, UCLA Study Finds
Holding Hillary Accountable for Campaign finance fraud of $1.2 million in her 2000 Senate Campaign
House Approves Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act
American agency constructing roads in village ruled by terror organization Hamas
New Emblem Paves Way for Israel to Join the International Red Cross
Dec. 22 2005 Christian Wire Service
Values Group Hails Unanimous Decision
CINCINNATI, In an astounding return to judicial interpretation of the actual text of the United States Constitution, a unanimous panel of the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Tuesday issued an historic decision declaring that "the First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state."
In upholding a Kentucky county's right to display the Ten Commandments, the panel called the American Civil Liberties Union's repeated claims to the contrary "extra-constitutional" and "tiresome
"Patriotic Americans should observe a day of prayer and thanksgiving for this stunning and historic reversal of half a century of misinformation and judicial distortion of the document that protects our religious freedoms," said Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan.
"We are particularly excited that such an historic, factual, and truth-based decision is now a controlling precedent for the federal Court of Appeals that rules on all Michigan cases," Glenn said.
6th Circuit Judge Richard Suhrheinrich wrote in the unanimous decision: "The ACLU makes repeated reference to the 'separation of church and state.' This extra-constitutional construct has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state. Our nation's history is replete with governmental acknowledgment and in some cases, accommodation of religion."
The words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the U.S. Constitution, though according to polls, a majority of Americans have been misled to believe that they do
Read: Same Ten Commandments -- Different Outcome in Kentucky -- in this Watchman Report
Dec. 21, 2005 Al Kamen the Washington Post
Amid the intense controversy over the appropriate greetings to be made this time of year, the nation's governors have overwhelmingly opted for "Happy Holidays" greetings over "Merry Christmas" in their annual cards.
An in-depth Stateline.org survey concluded that 37 of the nation's 50 governors chose the more generic "holidays" formula, nine went for the more traditional Christmas greetings and four haven't sent official cards at all.
Being politicians, many governors opted for subtle inclusions of religion, the survey found, with "at least a dozen -- including eight with generic holiday greetings" -- mixing in a bit of religion. For example, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger 's card doesn't say "Merry Christmas," but it features a decorated Christmas tree he painted.
Some, such as Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour 's card, don't say "Merry Christmas," but the card is dated Christmas 2005. Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell , who is Jewish, has a card that says "Season's Greetings" but includes a picture of a decorated tree and the photo is dated Christmas 2005.
Maryland Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. is by far the "most prolific" card sender, mailing about 40,000 greetings. The shortest official card mailer is North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven , who sent 287 cards -- all to members of the North Dakota National Guard on duty in Iraq and Germany, or going to Afghanistan.
The survey found three governors -- from Minnesota, Nevada and New Mexico -- in what it called the "bah, humbug" category, since they aren't sending official cards. A fourth governor, Louisiana's Kathleen Babineaux Blanco , hadn't decided whether to send greetings.
Dec. 18 2005 Family Research Council
A whopping 97 percent of Americans don't mind public references to Christmas, a new Gallup Poll reports. And even non-believers don't mind. A mere 8 percent of non-Christians and 5 percent of those who identify themselves as having "no faith" report that they are bothered by advertising or other public statements that mention Christmas. So who are these grinches who are trying to steal Christmas? FOX News' John Gibson does a very good job of identifying them in his new book, The War on Christmas. The liberal outfits ACLU and People for the American Way (PFAW) are prominent in the effort to drive out Christmas.
Not surprisingly, these groups also find Judge Sam Alito a menace. Defenders of the Happy Holidays theme always say they are trying to be "inclusive." But who are they excluding? Lydia Saad of the Gallup News Service is not very surprised by the latest poll results. "One reason for the broad acceptance of 'merry Christmas' is that the vast majority of Americans are Christians," she says. She noted that 84 percent of Americans self-identify as Christian. And fully 95 percent of the country celebrates Christmas. This demonstrates that it is Merry Christmas and not the neutered Happy Holidays that is truly inclusive.
Dec. 16, 2005 Nathan Burchfiel CNSNews.com
An administrator at California State University, Sacramento has banned decorations pertaining to Christmas and the 4th of July, among other holidays, from her office because they represent "religious discrimination" and "ethnic insensitivity."
"Time has come to recognize that religious discrimination, as well as ethnic insensitivity to certain holidays, is forbidden," Patricia Sonntag, director of the Office of Services to Students with Disabilities, stated in the directive she e-mailed to members of her staff on Dec. 9.
Cybercast News Service obtained the directive from the non-profit Catholic League, which "defends the right of Catholics ... to participate in American public life without defamation or discrimination," according to its website. The content of the e-mail was confirmed by the university.
The memo specifically names Christmas, Thanksgiving, Halloween, Valentine's Day, the 4th of July, St. Patrick's Day and Easter as the most offensive holidays, but Sonntag adds that they are "off the top of the list," implying that there may be others.
She wrote that the ban was being implemented "in order to avoid offending someone else" because Sacramento State is "a secular university and we are a public service area that has a diverse employee and student populations [sic] even in our private offices."
Sonntag noted that she is "the worst offender and celebrant," and apologized "if this offends anyone, but it is time to start the new year differently."
A Nov. 28 profile of Sonntag in the university's faculty and staff newsletter stated that she and her office "Have been the cornerstone of equality and progress here on campus."
But the university associate vice president for public affairs, Frank Whitlatch, distanced the university from Sonntag's policy, saying in a prepared statement that it "was well-intentioned but strays from the established practice."
He stated that the university "has no guidelines prohibiting holiday decorations," aside from the responsibility of supervisors, "to ensure that employees do not spend an unreasonable amount of work time decorating."
Whitlatch echoed Sonntag's sentiments that Sacramento State "is a public entity ... and employees do not endorse specific religious beliefs while on the job."
Catholic League president Bill Donohue called the policy a violation of free speech rights. "It never occurs to these secular supremacists that it is their aversion to anything religious - or patriotic - that accounts for their desire to muzzle free speech."
| QUOTEWORTHY: ------ "The belief in a God All Powerful wise and good, is so essential to the moral order of the world and to the happiness of man, that arguments which enforce it cannot be drawn from too many sources nor adapted with too much solicitude to the different characters and capacities impressed with it." -- James Madison |
Dec. 16, 2005 Jim Brown Agape Press
While many evangelicals are praising Disney's The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe as an overtly Christian movie, one Christian author claims the film twists more biblical truth than it alludes to.
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe opened last week after months of hype and publicity from the film's producers and speculation by entertainment gurus and the general public. One of the primary concerns, at least among evangelical Christians, was: Will it remain true to author C.S. Lewis's desire to illustrate the sacrificial love and victorious resurrection of Christ in a fantasy world called "Narnia"?
By almost all accounts, the movie -- several years in the making -- met the test. Associated Press reported this week that film fans of all ages have praised not just the quality and excitement of the movie, but also its faithfulness to Lewis's Christian message. Based on the author's children's classic, the film outdistanced all challengers on its opening weekend, selling an estimated $67 million worth of tickets -- more than the next nine most popular films combined.
But while some in evangelical circles are attempting to use The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe as an evangelism tool, Christian author Berit Kjos predicts the movie will not help lost people find Jesus Christ. She believes the film is focused more on the empowerment of the four children featured in the movie than on the character Aslan the Lion or on Christ's finished work on the cross.
"The movie emphasizes not God's work or Aslan's work even, but the emphasis is on the children -- on humans saving themselves and saving the world," she says. The author cites a line in the movie which says "there's a prophecy that two sons of Adam and daughters of Eve will appear and defeat the White Witch and put an end to this hundred-year winter."
Kjos contends that statement places the focus on human ability instead of divine power. "These are the children; we're not talking about Aslan here," she explains. "Aslan saves Edmund apparently, but the children did the actual saving, according to these statements."
Kjos, who has written a three-part critique of The Chronicles of Narnia, believes the new movie presents a twisted gospel message and is deceiving many Christians. Again, she cites an episode from the film, this one in which Aslan, before being killed on an altar, tells the character Peter, "The future of Narnia rests on your courage."
"Now here we're not talking about the courage imparted to Peter through the Holy Spirit," she says. "We're talking about Peter's own self-sufficiency apart from any gift of God or even any faith in God."
Kjos warns Christians not to embrace the film as a picture of biblical truth, noting that Lewis himself denied the assumption that The Chronicles of Narnia was a Christian allegory. According to the author, "our wise God has a far different view of the human imagination than either [J.R.R.] Tolkien or Lewis, and He is well aware of its power to inflate lies and distort the truth."
Dec. 19 2005 American Family Association
Writer for new series is practicing homosexual
NBC is promoting the network's mid-season replacement series "The Book of Daniel" with language that implies it is a serious drama about Christian people and Christian faith. The main character is Daniel Webster, a drug-addicted Episcopal priest whose wife depends heavily on her mid-day martinis.
Webster regularly sees and talks with a very unconventional white-robed, bearded Jesus. The Webster family is rounded out by a 23-year-old homosexual Republican son, a 16-year-old daughter who is a drug dealer, and a 16-year-old adopted son who is having sex with the bishop's daughter.
At the office, his lesbian secretary is sleeping with his sister-in-law.
Network hype – and the mainstream media call it "edgy," "challenging" and "courageous." The hour-long limited drama series will debut January 6 with back-to-back episodes and will air on Friday nights. The writer for the series is a practicing homosexual.
The homosexual son will be network prime-time's only regular male homosexual character in a drama series.
Those at NBC responsible for this program consider it a good, religiously oriented show typical of Christian families.
Please use the link below to send a letter to NBC Chairman Bob Wright.
Dec. 21 2005 Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst Citizen Link
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of appeals court rules an Ohio display is constitutional.
Cincinnati, OH
the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a courthouse display today which is essentially identical to the one struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in last summer's McCreary County case. The difference turned on religious motivation -- or in this case, the lack thereof.
The decision was notable for its rejection of the ACLU's argument that the ACLU was offended:
"And the ACLU, an organization whose mission is 'to ensure that . . . the government (is kept) out of the religion business,' does not embody the reasonable person," the opinion read.
Then the court went on to kick a hole in the old "separation of church and state" mantra:
"The ACLU's argument contains three fundamental flaws. First, the ACLU makes repeated reference to 'the separation of church and state.' This extra-constitutional construct has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state."
And, reasonably enough, the court said that a public display of the Ten Commandments does not equal a government endorsement of religion: "We will not presume endorsement from the mere display of the Ten Commandments. If the reasonable observer perceived all government references to the Deity as endorsements, then many of our Nation's cherished traditions would be unconstitutional, including the Declaration of Independence and the national motto.
"The Mercer County KY display has a secular purpose. Unlike McCreary County KY, there is nothing in the legislative history or implementation that tends to prove a religious purpose. Nor does the display have the effect of endorsing religion. The display is therefore constitutional as a matter of law."
Now, if someone could just explain to me how identical displays in separate counties should constitutionally receive different treatment because of the subjective intent of the people that authorized them, then -- well, never mind, it's not really explainable.
Dec. 21 2005 Citizen link
A judge in Santa Clara County, Calif., ruled Monday that San Jose's recognition of same-sex "marriages" from out-of-state is illegal.
In 2004 the San Jose City Council made the decision to recognize the gay marriages of its employees.
Superior Court Judge Mary Jo Levinger ruled that, by doing so, the city was in direct violation of California's Defense of Marriage Act -- approved by voters in 2000 -- which defines marriage as a union of one man and one woman.
"This court hereby finds and declares the San Jose City Council's March 9, 2004 approval of Mayor Gonzales and Councilmember Yeager's recommendations that the City of San Jose recognize all marriages of City employees certified by other jurisdictions is contrary to California law and is therefore preempted," she said. "Furthermore, only marriages between a man and a woman may be recognized by the City of San Jose."
Dec. 16 2005 Free Market Foundation
Three family planning clinics, which contract with abortions providers, are scheduled to close at the end of January. This victory is due to state legislation, which passed in 2003, that cut funding to family planning clinics that either performed abortions or contracted with doctors affiliated with abortion providers. The money was instead given as grants to clinics that provided compassionate alternatives to abortion, such as counseling, prenatal care and information on adoption.
January's family planning clinic closures come two years after the initial legislation passed due to a lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood, which finally lost in its last federal appeal. Free Market's legal division provided critical legal support to defend the statue.
Although abortion advocates argue that women will have no other alternative after the three clinic closures, there are still multiple pro-life, pregnancy help centers open in the DFW area, such as Carenet. Basically, tax money will just no longer be used to promote abortions as a method of birth control.
The three clinic closures include Garland, Grand Prairie and north Oak Cliff. Four others still remain open- Oak Lawn, south Oak Cliff, East Dallas and southeast Dallas.
Dec. 21 2005 Phyllis Schlafly Report
Federal judges have just hit parents with a triple-whammy. Two appellate courts held that parents have no right to stop offensive, privacy-invading interrogation of their own children in public schools, and in a third case the Supreme Court indicated that it is not going to do anything to protect parents' rights concerning schools.
It has become painfully clear that many courts have adopted the notion that the "village" (i.e., in these cases, the schools) should raise children. Judges prefer to side with schools and against parents.
When a New Jersey mother was horrified to learn that her daughter and classmates had been asked how many times they tried to kill themselves, she filed suit to protect the rights of parents and pupils. She won on the first appeal to the Third Circuit in C.N. v. Ridgewood Board of Education, but the school was relentless in litigation to assert its primary authority and the court finally ruled in favor of the school.
At issue was a 156-question survey called "Profiles of Student Life: Attitudes and Behaviors," which probed students about their personal lives and activities. The survey included questions about sex, drugs, suicide, incriminating behavior, spirituality, tolerance, and other personal matters.
Questions 92-93 in this survey given to Ridgewood children demanded to know "how many times" they "had used cocaine" in their lives, or during the last 12 months, and the answer choices were 0, 1, 2, 3-5, 6-9, 10-19, 20-39, and 40+. This gave students the false impression that casual use of cocaine is common and acceptable.
Misleading questions can have a powerful effect. Our legal system recognizes this by providing dozens of reasons for lawyers to object to questions in court in order to protect their witnesses from having to answer improper questions.
Children lack the maturity to tell the difference between questions they should or should not answer. Children are trained in school that they must answer the teacher's questions or face discipline or a poor grade.
Ask an adult when he stopped beating his wife and expect to be told to get lost. Ask a child in the classroom how often he takes drugs or has sex, and the child will think he ought to answer.
But judges who routinely uphold lawyers' objections to improper questions in court think it is okay to ask offensive questions of children in school. In the Ridgewood decision, the court agreed with the parents that the students' participation in the survey may have been mandatory, and conceded that the leading questions could be suggestive to students, but nevertheless ruled that parents' and pupils' rights were not violated.
The Ninth Circuit went even further, marking the school door as the line where parents' rights end and the "village" takes over. In Fields v. Palmdale School District in November, the judges ruled that the right of parents "does not extend beyond the threshold of the school door."
Just last Term, the Supreme Court devoted time and energy to a silly lawsuit over the replacement of a male teacher as coach of a girls' basketball team. When a teacher has a complaint, the Supreme Court springs to attention; but when a parent has a complaint about indoctrination of her child, the Court doesn't even want to hear about it.
In the same 30 days as the Ridgewood and Palmdale cases, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to review another parental rights case in Crowley v. McKinney. The High Court is spending its time this Term on a slew of cases about prisoners' rights (even about the alleged right of prisoners to read pornographic magazines) rather than hear a single case about parents' rights to raise their children.
In Crowley v. McKinney, the Seventh Circuit ruled against the parent, saying that the school has a constitutional right of "the autonomy of educational institutions." The parent had appealed to the Supreme Court to recognize the "settled law" of Pierce v. Society of Sisters, which in 1925 recognized the constitutional right of parents to control the education of their own children.
Even though recognizing the Supreme Court's holding in Pierce that "Oregon's project of forcing all children to attend public schools implied hostility to private education that had no footing in American traditions or educational policy," the Seventh Circuit ignored its application to the current case. Does forcing children to answer questions about sex, drugs and suicide have a "footing in American traditions"? of course not.
It hasn't grabbed the attention of the Supreme Court that the Third, Seventh and Ninth Circuits have ignored the settled law of Pierce. You can bet the High Court would take a case that requires testing schoolchildren for use of illegal drugs, yet the Court refuses to face the issue of requiring schoolchildren to participate in a classroom survey that suggests doing drugs is normal behavior.
Teachers are not required to answer these intrusive questions, so why are our children? Evidently parents are the only ones who do not benefit from equal protection of the law
Dec. 22 Christian Wire Service
Soon-to-be Law Strengthens and Expands Human Trafficking Laws, Combats Domestic Trafficking and Targets Sex Trade Industry
WASHINGTON, In a bipartisan vote, the Senate overwhelmingly passed Rep. Chris Smith's (R-NJ) Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) of 2005 (HR 972), legislation that strengthens the nation's current trafficking law (also authored by Smith in 2000) and authorizes new funds for investigation and prosecution of domestic trafficking within the United States. Smith has had four major bills pass through Congress in its final weeks, putting him at the top of the most active and successful legislators in the United States.
The TVPRA reinforces that the United States will continue to lead the global battle against modern-day human slavery. According to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the bill will provide $361 million over the next two years to combat trafficking. President Bush will sign the legislation; making it the third Smith authored human trafficking law.
"With this new law, the United States assumed a leadership role in combating the modern day slavery known as human trafficking," said Smith who was the author of that landmark trafficking law (Public Law 106-386). "Make no mistake, this legislation is about protecting women, since the majority of the victims of this abhorrent crime are young girls and women."
"The 2005 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act and provides law enforcement with the necessary tools to continue the liberation the unfortunate women and children who are forced into this horror."
Each year, an estimated 600,000-800,000 people are trafficked across international borders. It is estimated that millions more are trafficked internally within the borders of countries. In the past four years, twice as many people in the United States have been prosecuted and convicted for trafficking then in the prior 4-year period. Worldwide, more than 3,000 traffickers were convicted last year - an increase from the previous year. These numbers reflect an increasing number of countries acquiring the laws necessary to combat trafficking and having the political will to implement those laws.
Smith's bill reauthorizes and expands appropriations for anti-trafficking programs in the United States and abroad and offers solutions to specific scenarios where additional initiatives are needed to combat trafficking problem, such as in peacekeeping missions. For the first time, programs geared toward reducing the demand for commercial sex in the United States and preventing human trafficking of US citizens within our own borders are authorized, and new funding will be provided to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to combat both domestic and international trafficking.
Smith worked with Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-OH) to craft an amendment creating a $25 million grant program for local law enforcement to investigate and prosecute human trafficking (and related offenses) and includes initiatives to attack the demand for prostitution, which fuels sex trafficking.
The TVPRA, in its entirety, enables prosecution in the United States of trafficking offenses committed by federal employees and contractors and amends the United States Code to strengthen the use of money laundering, racketeering and civil and criminal forfeiture statutes against traffickers. In addition, the Department of Justice is directed to conduct a biennial analysis of trafficking and commercial sex acts statistics inside the United States.
"With a crime as abhorrent as human trafficking, it is essential that the United States takes the lead and that includes within our own borders," said Smith, whose original law was recently the focus of a Lifetime miniseries starring Mira Sorvino entitled 'Human Trafficking.' "We must work to target the criminals - slaveholders - who force these young children and women into unimaginable horrors."
Smith's bill also addressed the American and foreign victims of human trafficking and includes provisions to help reintegrate them to a normal life. It authorizes a grants program for non-governmental organization victim service providers, establishes programs for residential rehabilitation facilities and promotes access to information about federally funded services for victims.
"The 2005 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act strengthens and expands our efforts and allows law enforcement to continue to liberate the women and children who are forced and coerced into slavery," said Smith, who has fought for human and victims rights since coming to Congress. "With this new law, the victims of this terrible crime know they are not forgotten."
Dec. 21 2005 Wendy Cloyd, assistant editor Citizen Link
U.S. District Court Judge John Jones ruled today that intelligent design has no place in public school science classes, calling it religion in disguise. And teachers should not disparage evolution
The landmark case, Kitzmiller v. Dover School District, was a test of whether the theory of intelligent design (ID) -- the idea that some aspects of biology are too complicated to attribute to random chance -- could even be mentioned as an alternative to the theory of evolution.
Jones concluded that letting public school students know about ID violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
"We have concluded that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents," Jones wrote in his decision. "To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an un-testable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions."
Tom Minnery, senior vice president of government and public policy at Focus on the Family Action, reacted to the ruling with dissatisfaction.
"Judge John Jones has become party to the charade presented by the American Civil Liberties Union in the Kitzmiller case by deciding that local school boards cannot inform students that the Darwinian Theory is just that -- a theory," he said. "Most unfortunately, this case underscores what was obvious from the beginning – that any theory challenging Darwinism is hysterically opposed by the left as an unconstitutional establishment of religion.
"Intelligent design is not a religious theory. The First Amendment is the true loser today," he added.
While Jones struck a blow to schools' ability to teach ID in science classes, he didn't stop there. He also denigrated the school board members who sought to provide students with the alternative.
"The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the
Board who voted for the ID Policy," he wrote. "It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy."
David Napierskie, who was recently voted off the Dover School Board, said it is clear that simply having a religious background is enough to encourage some judges to dismiss testimony as tainted.
"It's a sad statement with regard to academic freedom," he said. "My question to the ACLU is: when are they going to attack the Constitution of the United States and say that it is wrong because the Founding Fathers were all religious? Are they going to say, just because they were religious in nature, that the Constitution itself must be somehow biased?
"It is the same thing with the intelligent-design issue," he said. "The debate over the (school board science curriculum) statements had nothing with regards to religion. At the end of the day, those four paragraphs had nothing religious in them at all."
Casey Luskin, program officer for public policy and legal affairs at the Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture, said the case denies the free speech rights of teachers, who now cannot present the science of ID.
"A legal ruling cannot change the fact that there is digital code in our DNA and it can't remove molecular machines from the cell," he said. "So you can't change the facts of biology by a legal decree and the cell remains strong evidence of intelligent design."
Not only did the judge overreach, he said, but his decision is unconstitutional.
"The judge actually says something incredible. He says that evolution and religion should not conflict," Luskin said "And that may be true. It is perfectly fine if people want to believe that God used evolution to create.
But the government and the court have no business reaching their hands in and telling religious people what should and should not conflict with their religious belief."
Dec. 20 Christian Wire ServiceContact: Kathleen Campbell, Campbell Public Relations, 877-540-6022, kcampbell@thecompletesolution.com
News Advisory, Dec. 20 Christian Wire Service Proponents of 'intelligent design' were dealt a blow when District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that ID was a religious idea with a covert agenda and therefore unconstitutional.
"Leading proponents of 'intelligent design' claim that judges and justices are motivated by an anti-Christian bias and a misguided application of the United States Constitution," says Dr. Hugh Ross, astronomer, founder and president of the science/faith organization, Reasons To Believe. "In the context of scientific credibility, these court judgments against 'intelligent design' cannot be construed as the audacious judicial moves many people make them out to be."
"As currently formulated, 'intelligent design' is not science," says internationally respected biochemist, Dr. Fazale 'Fuz' Rana. "It is not testable and does not make predictions about future scientific discoveries." Dr. Rana is the Vice President for Science Apologetics at Reasons To Believe and a leading expert in origin of life research.
"At Reasons To Believe, our team of scientists has developed a theory for creation that embraces the latest scientific advances. It is fully testable, falsifiable, and successfully predicts the current discoveries in origin of life research."
Dr. Ross and Dr. Rana present their testable model for creation in The Creator and the Cosmos and their two new books, Origins of Life: Biblical and Evolutionary Models Face Off and Who Was Adam? A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man. For the first time in over 80 years, this model catapults the evolution/creation controversy to an all new level--from science vs. religion to science vs science.
The late Dr. Richard Smalley, Nobel Prize winning chemist, had this to say about Origins of Life and Who Was Adam: "Evolution has just been dealt its death blow. After reading Origins of Life, with my background in chemistry and physics, it is clear evolution could not have occurred. The new book, Who Was Adam, is the silver bullet that puts the evolutionary model to death."
"With the creation model approach every scientific idea is encouraged to participate in this process to see which theory best fits the emerging data," says Dr. Rana. "With this cutting edge program, where advancing scientific discoveries determine which model's predictions are successful, no philosophical or religious perspective is denied access."
"While many scientists are of the opinion that science and faith don't mix," continues Dr. Hugh Ross, "the team of scientists at Reasons To Believe is dedicated to reaching the scientific community with the understanding that science and Scripture firmly support and even help advance one another. After all, science is the search for truth. We must be willing to follow the trail of evidence wherever it leads."
Dec. 21, 2005 Randy Hall CNSNews.com
A conservative organization that earlier this month called off a six-month boycott of the Ford Motor Company is considering new action against the corporation for violating its agreement not to advertise in "lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT)" media outlets.
"We had an agreement with Ford, worked out in good faith," said Donald Wildmon, chairman of the American Family Association (AFA). "Unfortunately, some Ford Motor Company officials made the decision to violate the good faith agreement. We are now considering our response to the violation."
As Cybercast News Service previously reported, the AFA launched a boycott of Ford this past May because of the company's support for the homosexual agenda and homosexual marriage.
Dec. 17 2005 Christian Wire Service
WASHINGTON, The House of Representatives today voted to pass HR 2520 - the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act - written by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ). The non-controversial legislation had earlier passed the House of Representatives in May by a vote of 431-1 and was slightly altered before passage by the Senate late night. The bill will now be signed into law by President Bush.
Umbilical cords are a rich, non-controversial source of stem cells. Currently hospitals throw millions of them away each year because the infrastructure required to properly collect and store them is not available. When signed into law by President Bush, the bill will increase the number of cord blood units and cord blood stem cells available for treating patients and expanding research will greatly increase.
Smith's bill provides a total of $265 million for life-saving stem cell therapeutic therapy, cord blood and bone marrow treatment. The legislation authorizes $79 million dollars for the collection of cord blood stem cells with the goal of reaching a total inventory of 150,000 units, making matched stem cells available to treat more than 90 percent of patients, with a particular focus on providing genetic diversity. It also reauthorizes the national bone marrow transplant system at $186 million over the next 5 years and combines both systems - cord blood and bone marrow - under a new program to provide an easy, single access point for information for doctors and patients.
The national program would promote stem cell research by requiring participating cord blood banks to donate units that are not suitable for transplant to researchers who are working on new applications for cord blood stem cells. In addition, for the first time, a nationwide stem cell transplantation system would be established.
Thousands have been successfully treated with cord blood stem cells for more than 67 diseases including Leukemia and Sickle Cell Anemia. The infusion of federal funds will make this medical miracle available to thousands more and will ensure that research continues so that this source of stem cells can treat many other debilitating diseases.
Rep. Smith issued the following statement after Congress passed his bill:
"We will now be able to turn medical waste - umbilical cords and placentas - into medical miracles for huge numbers of very sick and terminally ill patients, who suffer from such maladies as leukemia and sickle cell anemia.
"Cord blood stem cells are already treating patients and now, for the first time ever, my bill will establish a nationwide stem cell transplantation system once it becomes law.
"My bill also reauthorizes the national bone marrow transplant system and combines both systems under a new program to provide an easy, single access point for information for doctors and patients, and for the purpose of collecting and analyzing outcomes data.
"It occurred to me while driving to work this afternoon that it is especially fitting, that during these days of holiness and religious significance, that Congress sends to the President a bill designed to effectuate cures from some of the most devastating diseases and cancers on earth.
"Not only has God in His infinite wisdom and goodness created the placenta and umbilical cord to nurture and protect the precious life of an unborn child, but now we know that another gift awaits us immediately after birth, something very special is left behind - cord blood that is rich with stem cells.
"Indeed, one of the best kept secrets in America today is that umbilical cord blood stem cells and adult stem cells are curing people of a myriad of terrible conditions and diseases."
Dec 21 2005 Citizen Link
Experts say Casinos will rebuild without tax breaks and most are already up and running.
Both houses of Congress have approved nearly $8 billion in tax relief for Gulf Coast businesses affected by Hurricane Katrina. However, it will not be extended to casinos – as well as liquor stores, massage parlors and racetracks.
Unfortunately, the casinos may still benefit from an exception in the bill.
The Gulf Opportunity Zone Act, H.R. 4440, passed the House 415-4 on Dec. 7, then cleared the Senate by unanimous consent on Friday, Dec. 16. President Bush is expected to sign it.
Barrett Duke, vice president for public policy and research at the National Coalition Against Legalized
Gambling, said it's a sign that Congress understands casinos don't need any more money.
"They are so flush with cash they don't need the benefits like many other businesses need them," he said.
"Congress made the right call and decided it just wasn't appropriate to subsidize those kinds of businesses."
Casinos did have support from Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., who wanted the tax credits for casinos in his state, but he ran into resistance after Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., pointed out that most casinos are already back up and running.
Chad Hills, gambling analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said casinos are flourishing. "This is a $73 billion industry and they can easily rebuild," he said. "They will rebuild regardless of whether they get tax exemptions or not." Hills said the tax relief, unfortunately, does have one exception that will benefit casinos.
"I'm not thrilled about the hotels and restaurants attached to the casinos getting the tax breaks," he said. "It's certainly better than getting casinos themselves tax breaks."
Dec. 21 2005 Citizen Link
Some say states are not doing enough to prevent teens from smoking.
Tobacco companies are spending $28 on marketing for every $1 states spend to fight smoking, according to a study by the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids.
Matt Myers, president of the Campaign, said states have collected money ostensibly to help people stop smoking, but the funds are going to other efforts -- many totally unrelated to tobacco.
"States are using these funds for every short-term politically popular purpose they can find," he said, "from short-term filling of state-budget shortfalls, even funding things like golf carts."
Myers said that there has been no significant decline in smoking among high-school students. He blamed state cuts in prevention funding.
While some states have tried to counter the marketing campaigns of the tobacco companies, Cass Wheeler, chief executive officer of the American Heart Association, said a few aren't doing anything.
"There are five states and the District of Columbia that are in the 'Hall of Shame,' "she said "They're not providing any significant funding for tobacco prevention. That's Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Tennessee. Shame on them."
Myers said voters are the only ones who can hold states accountable and see that money is spent on anti-tobacco programs.
Dec. 19 2005 Family Research Council
Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) backed a "compromise" that will allow Katrina relief monies to rebuild the hotels where casinos operate. He says he can fix "what little damage" is done by this measure. Challenged, the senator said he'd stack his Southern Baptist credentials against anyone on the House side. I have to ask how many Southern Baptist preachers will back the senator in this obvious shell game. I've personally witnessed the devastation--as great to families as that from any storm--caused by addiction to gambling. Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) had first raised the issue of carving out casinos, massage parlors, liquor stores, and other questionable enterprises from Katrina relief funding. We thank Congressman Wolf for his tireless efforts. Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) and Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), who serves as Education
Committee Chairman, have gone all out for displaced children's school needs. Emergency Katrina relief education funding was tucked into the 2006 Department of Defense appropriations bill, which passed. Up to $6,000 will be provided for displaced students whose parents choose private or religious schools. Students with disabilities may qualify for up to $7,500. Private and religious schools that have opened their doors to hurricane evacuees will not have to jump over the hurdles that Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) tried to put in place. Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) is holding up a badly needed House-passed bill to stop international sex trafficking. Biden wants to force U.S. taxpayers to pay for abortions overseas. Kudos to Sen. Bill Frist on the passage of his bill to protect the Boy Scouts. It assures that the Scouts will not be ousted from any military facilities where they have been given access.
Dec. 19 Christian Wire Service
WASHINGTON, On Tuesday, December 20, at 10:00 AM, clergy leaders representing numerous denominations will hold a news conference in front of the White House to protest the escalating crisis surrounding military chaplains who are forbidden from ending their public prayers "in the name of Jesus."
The group will ask President Bush to issue and executive order directing that chaplains of all faith traditions be allowed to pray according to their own religious beliefs and practices.
"This new policy of the military is an outrage. We now have well documented proof of this blatant violation of First Amendment guarantees. It is an egregious insult to the good men and women of every religious persuasion who serve in the chaplain corps," said Rev. Rob Schenck, an Evangelical minister and president of the National Clergy Council. Rev. Schenck is also a board member of the Evangelical Church Alliance, an official endorser of military chaplains.
The Reverend Patrick J. Mahoney, a Presbyterian minister and director of the Christian Defense Coalition, said, "Sadly, we are witnessing a growing hostility toward expressions of faith in the public square. It is important the public be reminded that the First Amendment promises freedom 'of' religion not freedom 'from' religion. We call upon President Bush to issue this Executive Order, allowing each military chaplain to pray according to their respective faith tradition, to ensure that religious freedom and the First Amendment are honored and protected." Pluralism and tolerance toward religion is not the removal of faith from the public square. Rather, it is allowing expressions of public faith without government favoritism or intimidation."
UPDATE: Dec. 20 2005 Action Alert
Chaplain Klingenschmitt, states, "Today I'm beginning a hunger strike, and this communion bread will be my last meal, as I call upon the President to protect religious freedom and issue an executive order allowing chaplains to pray according to their faith traditions. All this week I will praying in front of the White House at 6:00 p.m. for President Bush to have the courage to sign this order."
Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, comments, "I join with Chaplain Klingenschmitt in this hunger strike as we stand for religious freedom and challenge President Bush to issue an executive order allowing chaplains to pray according to their faith traditions. By forbidding Rev. Klingenschmitt to pray in the Name of Jesus, the government is crushing the First Amendment and trampling on religious liberty. It should never be the role of government to dictate to Americans or clergy on how they are to pray."
The Moral Action Committee of the BMA of Texas request: you call President Bush at the capital switchboard number: 202-224-3121 in response to Chaplain Klingenschmitt's First Amendment rights being violated. President Bush has the power to fix it -- and we need to ask him to do so, I believe he wants to and we must be able to pray in the name of Jesus publicly! You may use this response:
I am asking President Bush to help every Chaplain to be allowed to pray according to the guidelines of their own faith as set forth by US Code Title 10 Section 6031. I feel all Christians, military or not have the right to pray in the name of Jesus Christ.
Howard Wilson Chairman of the Moral Action Committee of the BMA of Texas
hwilson@texasmoralaction.org
Dec. 16 Christian Wire Service
WASHINGTON, Dec. 16 Christian Wire Service Saudi Arabian Prince Allaweed's $20 million donation to Harvard and Georgetown for Islamic studies and to promote Islamic/Christian understanding is an act of supreme hypocrisy and duplicity. Perhaps the only thing more shameful than the Prince offering these gifts with a straight face is Harvard and Georgetown's gracious acceptance of them.
At home, Saudi Arabia has a zero tolerance policy towards any religion except Islam. It has a long record of arresting, imprisoning and torturing those involved in Christianity. Just ten years ago, Christians were even subject to execution.
In Saudi Arabia, children are indoctrinated throughout their educational journey in the hatred of Jews, Christians and the United States. At the same time, Saudis spend hundreds of millions of dollars annually in the United States for positive press and for influence in the United States Congress. Their message is that they are America's constant friends.
Behind the United States' back, however, the Saudis have been spreading hatred around the world. Anywhere Islamic radicalism and violence are present -- from Nigeria to Sudan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Indonesia -- the hand of the Saudis is evident. They have spent billions for mosques, Islamic boarding schools, and Imams in these countries and elsewhere, including in the United States. Their money is an inroad for their hatred and philosophical control. Their aim is to spread their hatred, period.
In the United States, the Saudis distributed Islamic materials through their embassies that instructed new immigrant Muslims not to mix, greet, or become involved with Jews, Christians, or any other infidels. These booklets instruct visitors and immigrants to hate Americans. In fact, the Saudi government forbids Muslims from becoming American citizens, joining the U.S. military, or supporting Americans in any way.
Mayor Giuliani chose not to accept gifts from Saudi Arabia for the rebuilding of lower Manhattan post-9/11. Georgetown and Harvard would be wise to do the same if they wish to take a stand in keeping with their name and status.
As far as the prince is concerned, we would suggest that if he truly wishes to make a difference in Islamic-Christian relations that he should start at home with the cessation of arrests and beatings of Christians. If he wants Americans to learn more about Islam in a positive light, he should revise the educational materials that Saudis are raised on that teach them to hate the Jew, the Christian, and the American.
Dec. 19, 2005 Hilary White LifeSiteNews.com
BRUSSELS, The European Union’s Executive Commission has threatened to take the Spanish government to court if it does not agree to start charging the Catholic Church sales tax on the goods it buys.
Spain’s socialist government, which since its election has engaged in a project of erasing from law and public life all indications of the Catholic character of the country, is unlikely to demure. The EU has said that a special tax exemption breaks European tax law. Currently, the Church in Spain receives a portion of tax revenues under a 1979 agreement between Spain and the Vatican.
In the last two years, Spain has legalized homosexual unions and established new rules allowing easier divorce. Embryonic stem cell research is now legal and the practice of abortion has few realistic restrictions. Since the legalization of abortion, according to statistics released earlier this year by the Superior Council of Scientific Research, the abortion rate has reached 80,000 per year despite it still being technically illegal.
While the great majority of Spaniards continue to call themselves Catholic, the influence of the Church continues to recede. Direct attacks on the Church under the socialists started immediately with the elimination of religious education in schools.
In 2004, the homosexual activist group the Popular Gay Platform launched a legal suit against Spanish Catholic Primate Cardinal Antonio Maria Rouco Varela for a sermon he gave against the imposition of homosexual “marriage.”
Dec. 19, 2005 LifeSiteNews.com
WASHINGTON, while the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.
These are just a few of the findings from a UCLA-led study, which is believed to be the first successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them accordingly.
Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal.
Only Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and The Washington Times scored right of the average U.S. voter.
"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said Tim Groseclose, a UCLA political scientist and the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are."
"Overall, the major media outlets are quite moderate compared to members of Congress, but even so, there is a quantifiable and significant bias in that nearly all of them lean to the left," said co-author Jeffrey Milyo, University of Missouri economist and public policy scholar.
The results appear in the latest issue of the Quarterly Journal of Economics, which will become available in mid-December.
Nov. 30 2005 From the Desk of Peter Paul Re: Paul v. Clinton et al,
Earlier this year, the federal government prosecuted Hillary Clinton's campaign finance chairman, David Rosen for election fraud, in a case based on my "whistle-blowing."
Rosen was not convicted. However, jurors publicly stated that they believed that there had been wrongdoing committed by Hillary Clinton's 2000 Senate Campaign, but they were not convinced that Rosen was behind it. I agree with the jury's conclusion that a "higher up" was involved. I know that "higher up" is Hillary Clinton. I know, because the $1.2 million in-kind contribution that Hillary Clinton hid from the voters of New York and the Federal Election Commission was my personal contribution to her campaign. I know that she caused false statements to be made to the Washington Post, and three fraudulent reports to the Federal Election Commission, in order to hide my identity and the amount that I contributed, in violation of various Federal laws.
Although only David Rosen was criminally prosecuted for her actions, Hillary Clinton is currently a defendant in the first ever civil lawsuit against a Senator and a President for fraud--the historic civil suit I have pending in a California Superior Court. The Clintons conspired to use a business deal that I was negotiating with President Clinton to induce me to become Hillary's largest contributor through three fund-raisers I produced and underwrote. This included the largest fundraising event of her campaign, the Hollywood Gala Farewell Salute to President Clinton, which was the centerpiece of the Rosen criminal trial.
The biggest legal defeat experienced by the Clintons, since Paula Jones won the right to sue a sitting President, has been the validation of my civil fraud suit against both Clintons by the California Supreme Court, when it rejected David Kendall's appeals to throw my case out. On October 14, 2005, a California Court of Appeal again denied a request by Mr. Kendall that Senator Clinton be dismissed as a defendant from the case. Now I am poised to begin discovery and prepare for a trial of both Clintons on the subject that will expose Hillary Clinton's personal misconduct in orchestrating the campaign finance fraud that assured her election to the U.S. Senate.
Dec. 19 2005 Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)
Many thanks for all of your hard work last week! Thanks to your relentless phone calls, several very important strengthening amendments were added to Judiciary Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner's (R-WI) border security bill! (See below for a list of these amendments)
The House passed H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act, last Friday by a 239-182 vote (Roll no. 661). The following strengthening amendments were adopted:
H.AMDT.648 by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) was agreed to by a 260-159 vote (Roll no. 640). This amendment mandates the construction of specific security fencing, including lights and cameras, along the Southwest border for the purposes of gaining operational control of the border. Fencing has been designated in sectors that have the highest number of immigrant deaths, instances of drug smuggling and illegal border crossings. It also includes a requirement for the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study on the use of physical barriers along the Northern border.
H.AMDT.650 by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) was agreed to by a 273-148 vote (Roll no. 653). This amendment eliminates the visa lottery program.
H.AMDT.658 by Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-GA) was approved by a 237-180 vote (Roll no. 656). Norwood's amendment reaffirms state and local law enforcement's existing inherent authority to assist in the enforcement of immigration law, provides training on this issue at no cost to the local agency, and provides increases and additional resources to help assist in the enforcement of immigration laws.
H.AMDT.654 by Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) was agreed to by voice vote. This amendment seeks to establish a hard deadline to achieve operational control over the entire international land and maritime borders of the United States. Operational control entails the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States.
H.AMDT.661 by Rep. Sue Myrick (R-NC) passed by voice vote. This amendment requires the removal of an illegal alien on the first conviction of drunk driving.
H.AMDT.662 and H.AMDT.663 by Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) passed by voice vote. H.AMDT.662 increases penalties for document fraud and for crimes of violence and drug trafficking offenses committed by illegal aliens. H.AMDT.663 Adds human trafficking and human smuggling to the list of predicate acts under the federal money laundering statute.
H.AMDT.668 by Rep. Jim Ryun (R-KS) passed by voice vote. This amendment establishes the Oath of Renunciation and Allegiance as federal law so that it cannot be changed without an act of Congress. It also requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, in cooperation with the Secretary of State, to notify a foreign embassy of which a new citizen was a citizen or subject that the citizen has renounced allegiance to that foreign country and sworn allegiance to the United States.
H.AMDT.669 by Rep. Edward Royce (R-CA) passed by voice vote. This amendment requires no immigration benefit be granted until an FBI fingerprint check has been submitted and the results show that the alien does not have a criminal or immigration history that would render him or her ineligible for the benefit.
Unfortunately, H.AMDT.667 by Rep. John Sullivan (R-OK) failed by a 163-251 vote (Roll no. 659) and Rep. Tom Tancredo's (R-CO) amendment to prohibit sanctuary policies that protect illegal aliens was withdrawn. Sullivan's H.AMDT.667 sought to require all non-citizens who enter or exit the country to be processed through the automated entry-exit control system Congress mandated in 1996. Tancredo's amendment would have prohibited the Attorney General from allocating funds under the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program to any state or local government which maintains a sanctuary policy that protects and hides illegal aliens from detection, in violation of federal law (8USC 1373). It also would have required the Attorney General to report annually to Congress on which state and local governments maintain sanctuary policies.
Another major disappointment was that two very important amendments were not made in order for consideration. These include an amendment by Rep. Nathan Deal (R-GA) that would have ended the anchor baby loophole that grants birthright citizenship to children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens, and an amendment by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) to plug loopholes in the worksite verification system included in the underlying bill.
The Road Ahead
Taking a longer view of this legislation and its prospects for the future, it remains to be seen whether Congress will meet widespread public expectations that immigration law enforcement will finally be addressed seriously.
The bill passed by the House on Friday takes some steps towards addressing the key issue of immigration law enforcement. However, what marks this bill's significance is more to be found in what it did not include than what it did. Perhaps more importantly, such serious and thoughtful legislators as Reps. Charlie Norwood (R-GA) and J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) have cautioned that this bill is a "Trojan horse" that will ultimately carry the amnesty-guestworker program that is widely expected to pass the Senate early next year. We will keep you posted on developments, but it is well to be prepared for a battle royal next year.
Immigration Increase Dropped from Budget Reconciliation Bill Dec. 19 2005 (FAIR)
In other legislative news: the final budget reconciliation package, approved last night by the House, did not include immigration provisions that would have increased legal immigration by as much as 350,000 a year. Those provisions were dropped from the legislation before final passage. This is a great victory for everyone who took action to kill the Specter plan which sought to balance the budget by selling American jobs to foreign workers and increasing immigration in exchange for revenue raised by immigration-related fees.
Dec. 08, 2005 Jeff Johnson CNSNews.com
Illegal aliens who work under borrowed, stolen or fraudulent Social Security numbers could collect retirement benefits based on their illegal earnings as the result of a Bush administration plan. Critics charge the federal government has grossly underestimated the cost of the proposal, which they believe could run be billions of dollars per year.
Congress is expected to vote on some combination of proposed changes to immigration laws according to sources working with the House Homeland Security and Judiciary committees. While members have not been able to reach agreement on the details of a temporary or "guest worker" program advocated by President Bush, the White House might use the legislative opportunity to seek approval for an International Social Security Agreement with Mexico, something it has wanted for more than two years.
Mark Kirkorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, told Cybercast News Service that the arrangements, usually called "totalization agreements," with industrialized countries like Canada, the United Kingdom and even France are beneficial. But those benefits, he argued, would not come from an agreement with Mexico.
"Without totalization the combined Social Security tax rate that U.S. employers and employees working in foreign countries must pay often approaches 40 percent or more of total payroll," Barnhart testified.
In March of 2003, the SSA's Office of the Chief Actuary estimated that a totalization agreement with Mexico would cost the U.S. $78 million in the first year, growing to $650 million (in constant 2002 dollars) by 2050. That determination assumed that the initial number of newly eligible Mexican recipients would be equal to the 50,000 beneficiaries then living in Mexico, and that the eligible number would grow to only 300,000 over the next 48 years.
"If the president gets his way and [those illegal aliens are] legalized, and he submits this totalization agreement to Congress," Kirkorian warned, "then all of the illegal aliens who get this 'amnesty' that he wants, get to count all of their Social Security payments when they were illegal toward their eventual retirement."
"What they want is for illegal aliens who 'adjust' to some kind of legal status to be able to count their illegal work toward Social Security," Kirkorian said. "That's not up for contention, that's just a fact. The Social Security Administration negotiated the agreement, already, with Mexico."
A March 2003 report by the Social Security Administration's Office of the Inspector General (SSA-OIG) validates Kirkorian's concern.
"SSA's practice allows non-citizens to work illegally in the U.S. economy for a number of years, eventually acquire a valid SSN and have these earnings posted to their valid SSNs, and then receive [Social Security] benefits as a result of those earnings," the inspector general reported. "SSA does not consider the work-authorization status of the individual when they earned the wages; it only considers whether the individual can prove he or she paid Federal Insurance Contribution Act (FICA) taxes as part of this work."
"If these Mexican non-citizens are also working in the United States illegally, and an amnesty and/or totalization agreement occurs," the report warned, "SSA potentially may need to reinstate a large volume of [Social Security taxes paid under false or fraudulent account numbers] based on earlier unauthorized work."
Marti Dinerstein, president of Immigration Matters, also criticized the SSA in a September 2004 report entitled "Social Security 'Totalization' - Examining a Lopsided Agreement with Mexico," for using Canada as the model for its Mexican totalization cost estimates.
"The estimated number of Canadians living in the United States is 820,000," Dinerstein wrote. "Given the fact that a totalization agreement would cover not just Mexican workers but also their spouses and dependents, it is highly likely that over time, potentially millions of people would receive U.S. Social Security benefits and the cost would be in the billions of dollars."
"It's pretty ludicrous, frankly," Kirkorian concluded. "Mexico is just not the kind of country that you should be having this kind of agreement with."
Dec. 20, 2005 Aaron Klein WorldNetDaily.com
JERUSALEM – While the United States House of Representatives passed a resolution calling for a halt in funding to the Palestinians if Hamas wins upcoming parliamentary elections, the U.S. government is currently in the process of funding a Gaza town run by Hamas.
The U.S. Agency for International Development, in conjunction with the Islamic Development Bank, reportedly contributed $392,000 for construction of roads and public facilities in Bani Suhaila, a Gaza village outside the populated Palestinian city of Khan Yunis.
U.S. AID has contracted a company specializing in road development and will oversee the road construction project, a spokesman for the agency told WND.
Israel Resource News Agency and Middle East Newsline reported the mayor of Bani Suhaila, Hamas activist Abdul Khader Al Rokab, told the Palestinian media he expects additional funds from U.S. AID for development of other projects in his municipality.
Hamas earlier this month won 13 out of 14 seats in Bani Suhaila's local municipal elections. According to Israeli security sources, the terror group has long maintained a civilian infrastructure in the area consisting of Hamas-owned shopping centers, medical clinics and other public facilities.
Dr. Mahmoud al-Zahar, Hamas' Gaza chief, told WND his group is "absolutely in charge in Bani Suhaila. The Palestinian people have voted and told us in an open and fair manner that they want us to represent them and their interests."
Anna Litvak, a public affairs officer for U.S. AID's regional headquarters in Tel Aviv, told WND development of Bani Suhaila was in the works long before Hamas won the town's elections.
"Leaderships change all the time," said Litvak. "We are here to benefit the Palestinian people, not Palestinian groups. We don't want to deal with Hamas."
Asked if her agency will call off its Bani Suhaila development initiatives now that Hamas rules the municipality, Litvak replied, "The fact that the project is now located in a municipality run by Hamas doesn't change things."
WND has learned U.S. AID also is involved in development projects in Hamas-run sections of Khan Yunis, Gaza City, Nablus and Jenin.
Friday, Congress passed a resolution in a vote of 397 to 17 saying it would freeze aid to the PA if Hamas wins parliamentary elections currently scheduled for Jan. 25. The terror group swept this month's local elections throughout Gaza and in many Judea and Samaria towns.
Congress further demanded Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas dismantle the various Palestinian terror groups before elections are held.
The European Union, the largest Western donor to the PA, also hinted it may halt contributions if Hamas wins in the elections.
EU Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana told reporters in Tel Aviv, "It is very difficult that parties that do not condemn violence ... without changing those positions can be partners for the future.''
Security officials say since Israel's withdrawal from Gaza this past summer Hamas gunmen on the ground have taken charge of many Gaza Strip neighborhoods.
As WND first reported, in what many expelled Jewish Gaza residents called the "ultimate insult," Hamas leaders said they turned Neve Dekalim, the former Jewish capital of Gaza, into a "martyr training camp" and have used the territory to launch rockets into Israel.
Hamas leader al-Zaha told WND Israel's Gaza withdrawal is a victory for "resistance operations," and he vowed to continue "operations" against the Jewish state until "all territories" are liberated.
Hamas, classified by the State Department and the European Union as a terrorist organization, is responsible for thousands of deadly shooting attacks, a large number of suicide bombings and has fired over 300 rockets and mortars into Israeli towns.
Among Hamas' most notorious attacks are the "Passover massacre" in a Netanya hotel in 2002 in which 30 civilians celebrating the Jewish holiday were killed, the 2002 "Patt Junction bombing" of a Jerusalem bus killing 19 civilians, and the bombings in 2002 and 2003 of Jerusalem bus numbers 20 and 2, killing a combined 34 civilians, among scores of other large-scale suicide attacks.
If you'd like to sound off on this issue, please take part in the WorldNetDaily poll.
Dec. 08, 2005 Julie Stahl CNSNews.com Jerusalem Bureau Chief
After decades of struggling for recognition and membership in the international Red Cross movement, Israel is close to its goal.
An international gathering in Geneva accepted a new humanitarian emblem on Thursday -- despite Syrian objections -- paving the way for Israel to join the international body.
Two-thirds of the 192 signatories of the Geneva Conventions voted to create a new internationally recognized and neutral symbol in addition to the cross and the crescent.
The new symbol is a crystal -- a red diamond with a white interior. It will have the same protected status as the Red Cross and Red Crescent in the international arena. Israel -- or any other member country - may insert its own symbol into the crystal or use it as is.
Israel welcomed the decision to adopt the new symbol.
"This decision today is going to correct a historic injustice whereby Israeli society was excluded from an international [humanitarian body]," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev.
"We see this as an important step [forward]," said Regev. "In many international bodies, Israel has been treated as a second-class citizen."
A founder of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Henri Dunant, was a Christian Zionist who campaigned for the establishment of a Jewish state, and Regev said the International Committee of the Red Cross was "returning to its roots."
The American Red Cross, which has advocated full membership for Israel for years, issued a statement saying it was "extremely pleased" by the decision to adopt the third symbol, which lays the groundwork for Israel to become a full voting member of the Red Cross Movement.
To protest Israel's exclusion, the American Red Cross has withheld $35 million in dues it owes to the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.
Israel will become a full member in the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies after the Federation convenes -- probably next year -- to incorporate the new emblem.
Merry Christmas
From the Moral Action
Committee
of the BMA of Texas
Howard Wilson hwilson@Texasmoralaction.org