I couldn’t find a satisfactory commie picture of the IVAW alone, so this one will have to do. From The Two Malcontents.

The marxist IVAW plan is to bring their dog and pony show before the House Progressive Caucus, since their original efforts in Maryland didn’t go over so well. The next phase is to go over and sing to the choir in Washington; their dutiful fellow pink-o comrades in the Progressive Caucus. (Rep. Dennis Kucinich, co-chairman)

Take a look at the organizations that support the Congressional Progressive Caucus (Circus). It should give you an idea of the 70 or so Congressional members of this caucus(circus) and how they spend their time:

“An array of national progressive organizations will work to support the efforts of the caucus, including the Institute for Policy Studies, The Nation magazine, MoveOn.org, National Priorities Project, Jobs with Justice, Peace Action, Americans for Democratic Action, and Progressive Democrats of America. Also co-sponsoring the kickoff event were the NAACP, ACLU, Progressive Majority, League of United Latin American Citizens, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, National Council of La Raza, Hip Hop Caucus, Human Rights Campaign, Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs, and the National Hip Hop Political Convention. The CPC has long maintained cordial ties with the Democratic Socialists of America, which hosted its website during the 1990s.”

Until 1999 the Progressive Caucus worked in open partnership with Democratic Socialists of America. After the press reported on this link, the connections suddenly vanished from both organizations’ websites. -Discover the Networks

The eyes and ears of thousands will be inspecting closely every word spoken by IVAW testifiers since, according to IVAW press release, the Congressional testimony is billed as being under “oath”. A few calls for “proof” (date, time, place, witnesses, leadership, and unit involved) would be appropriate…generalities may be satisfying to a gullible media or politically correct congress, but when our warriors and nation’s policies are potentially defamed and distorted, only facts and credible evidence will be acceptable.

There was nothing of substance reported at the WSII National Labor College event so we can expect the IVAW tilted crystal ball to fabricate additional fantasy, if this appearance actually occurs.

Information as to where and when of the testimony is listed below in a IVAW press release.

Media Advisory: May 5, 2008

Contact: Francesca Lo Basso, 215-498-3347, media@ivaw.org

Winter Soldier on the Hill: Iraq Veterans to Testify Before Congress on Failure of Troop Surge

WHAT: Winter Soldier on the Hill

WHO: Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) & The Congressional Progressive Caucus

WHEN: May 15, 2008, 9:30am-12:30pm

WHERE: 2261 Rayburn House Office Building

WHY: To present eyewitness accounts of the Iraq occupation to Congress.

Washington, DC - On May 15, members of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) will testify under oath before Congress about their eyewitness accounts of the military occupation of Iraq. Testifiers will include veterans who served during the surge.

This testimony represents a shift from reports to Congress from high-level commanders and political appointees to direct accounts from boots-on-the-ground soldiers and Marines about the situation in Iraq. Testifiers will detail the ineffectiveness of the “troop surge,” the dehumanization, abuse and killing of innocent Iraqi civilians, and the breakdown of the military as a result of the ongoing occupation of Iraq.

Testifiers will include Luis Montalvan, who served two tours in Iraq as an Army Captain; Jason Washburn, a US Marine Corps Infantry Rifleman who served three tours in Iraq; and Kristofer Goldsmith, who served in the Army as an Artillery Forward Observer in Sadr City, Iraq.

“The time has come for Congress to hear about the occupation from the soldiers and Marines who have seen it first-hand. Petraeus continues to repeat the administration’s talking points while ignoring what the soldiers on the ground know: the Iraq occupation is not working,” said Kelly Dougherty, a former Military Police Sergeant in Iraq and Executive Director of IVAW.

Winter Soldier on the Hill is a continuation of Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan (WSIA), held at the National Labor College from March 13-16, 2008. Named after Thomas Paine’s reference to soldiers who stand up for their country in its darkest hours, WSIA gathered over 250 members of IVAW and collected over 30 hours of testimony regarding the negative impact of the Iraq occupation on the military - including an overburdened Veterans’ Administration, demoralized service members and a crumbling military infrastructure.

Iraq Veterans Against the War was founded in 2004 to give those who have served in the military since September 11, 2001 a way to come together and speak out against an unjust, illegal and unwinnable occupation. Today, IVAW has over 1,000 members in 43 states, Washington, D.C. and Canada and on military bases overseas.

From Colonel Riley (USA, Ret) through email.

More at the Sniper here and here, here

GOE has created another petition (http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ivawtruthintestimony/) asking the CPC to verifiy any info that the IVAW brings to them. This petition reads about the same as the petition that was circulated for the Senate Armed Services Committee. The CPC is more of an ad-hoc group than any sort of official committee, but since we’ve been out in front of IVAW on this, we should probably stay there.

Please circulate this petition among your mailing lists.

Although all things considered, I’m not sure how much good it will do beyond show them that we’re watching every move they make.

The bodies of John Young and Ronald Withrow were found in or near Basra. The fate of the others is yet unknown. John Young was with Crescent Security and Ronald Withrow was with JPI Worldwide.

Pray for their families, and also for the families of the other contractors who were kidnapped in 2006:

Paul Reuben of Minneapolis
Jonathon Cote of Getzville, N.Y.
Joshua Munns of Redding, Calif.
Bert Nussbaumer of Vienna, Austria.

Malkin has a nice roundup post on this.

Update: More bodies found.

An even sadder update 3/27/08: Josh Munns and Paul Reuben’s remains have been identified. They are awaiting the test results on a third body that’s been recovered.

May God help their families through this terrible time.

And we’re worried about who we’re going to put in office? People have been fooled into thinking their votes mean something….I’m convinced right now there is no difference between the democrats and the republicans - they’re both for earmarks, bigger government, amnesty for aliens, legislate our freedoms because of the global warming sham, etc.

The UN is playing a familiar tune.

The Islamic propaganda machine has turned Western democratic values inside out to the Islamists’ advantage. Cloaking themselves in the rhetoric of multiculturalism and tolerance, Islamists succeeded in getting the United Nations General Assembly to pass a resolution late last year condemning the defamation of religions – but the only religion mentioned in the resolution was Islam. This follows in the wake of a declaration by the UN “expert” on racism, who told the UN Human Rights Council last September that “Islamophobia today is the most serious form of religious defamation” and constituted a threat to world peace.

What “racism” has to do with Islam, we don’t know.

It is insane to suggest we subordinate ourselves to an alien system of beliefs which deny each of us the right to speak our mind. This is forcing people to “respect” Islam, no matter what crimes against humanity are carried out in its name. Is it defamation of Islam to point out how Islam and the Qu’ran are used to justify honor killings, murdering innocent civilians, misogyny and suppression of free speech?

Playing on “enlightened” Westerners’ guilt and their fear of being branded Islamophobes, the Islamists managed to silence any vigorous defense of the virtues of free expression and freedom of conscience.

It is to be expected. This superiority complex has been demonstrated numerous times; the most recent example is Robert Spencer’s visit at Jihad Watch by CAIR’s representative, Ahmed Bedier.

Next the Islamists intend to leverage their UN resolution to pressure Western countries into adopting blasphemy statutes aimed at protecting their religion from “hurtful” or “defamatory” remarks of any kind. A spokesperson for the Organization of Islamic Conference, the 57-member state group that pushed for the defamation resolution, said last March that there is “a dire need to fill the judicial vacuum of deficiency in dealing with the question of respect for religions” and demanded “effective and legally binding measures for combating defamation of all religions.” In their conception of “Truth,” since Islam is the only true religion and Islam forbids Muslims to criticize their religion in any way, it would simply make no sense to allow the lesser among us who are infidels to show any disrespect to Islam.

And that is precisely how they view us; as ‘the lesser among us’. Heh. So much for that multicultural morally equivalent view that ‘all religions are the same’.

I listened to Atlas’ blogtalk radio program with Lionheart this morning, and it was shocking - because even a year ago, Lionheart was facing problems in Britain for the important work he was doing. He was speaking to Pam from Israel - and said THEN that he couldn’t go back home to Britain.

We’re seeing similar things happening here in the US. Diane West at the Washington Times gives us a very good historical breakdown of the left’s complicity with the enemy, leading up to the firing of Stephen Coughlin:

The year is 1942. The place, the Pentagon. A Berlin-born aide to the U.S. deputy secretary of defense has learned that a military intelligence officer has not only read Hitler’s Mein Kampf, but is lecturing senior officers about Hitler’s heretofore unexamined goals of world domination.

This schweinhunt must go. At least, that’s what the German-born staffer thinks. Did I mention he’s fluent in German? That’s partly why the Deputy SecDef relies so heavily on his aide’s judgment on all things German, particularly when it comes to the War on Nazism’s German outreach program. This program brings Nazi apologists into the inner sanctum of the American war machine…

Sound crazy?

Not really. Joe Kennedy insisted to FDR that Hitler was not a threat; and he shared Hitler’s anti-semitism. The American left seems to have a history of siding with the enemy in our wars.

Travel forward to 1973. The Deputy SecDef’s Soviet-born, Russian-speaking aide is gunning for the one intelligence officer who has boned up on Marx, Engels and Soviet military doctrine. Why? Because the officer refuses to “soften” his brief on communist ideology, and is presenting it to the military leadership — now hearing it for the first time since the Cold War began. If communist plans for global domination become common knowledge, the aide realizes, gazing thoughtfully at a poster-size photo of Soviet mouthpiece Vladimir Posner on his office wall, the Pentagon will change strategy and halt the U.S.S.R. outreach program, which gives commie symps Pentagon access…

Totally outlandish, right?

Not really, when you consider Robert Hansen and Aldrich Ames. Or Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the Venona Cables, etc.

Once upon a time, yes. But this month, this newspaper’s Bill Gertz reported on a not entirely dissimilar real-life version of such fictions, the termination of Maj. Stephen Coughlin (USAR). Mr. Coughlin, a lawyer and reserve military intelligence officer, has been the Pentagon’s sole specialist on Islamic law charged with lecturing senior officers on jihad doctrine — military leaders who have been fighting the so-called war on terror for years without an inkling of Islamic ideology. His contract with the Joint Staff will end in March, Mr. Gertz wrote, because Mr. Coughlin “had run afoul of a key aide” to the Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England.

That “key aide” is Cmdr. Hesham Islam (USN ret.), an Egyptian-born, Arabic-speaking Muslim whom Gordon England describes as “my interlocutor” and “personal, close confidante.” According to Mr. Gertz, Mr. England’s interlocutor and confidante confronted Stephen Coughlin seeking “to have Mr. Coughlin soften his views of Islamist extremism.” Note the irony in this choice of words. “Islamist” and “extremism” — like “Islamofascism” and other euphemisms —are words that draw a PC curtain over mainstream Islam. They effectively shield the religion and its tenets from the scrutiny necessary to assess the ideology driving our jihadist enemies. Of course, lifting that PC curtain on Islam and its jihadist tenets is precisely the effect of Stephen Coughlin’s Pentagon brief. It goes against what political correctness tells us; it also goes against what Islamic advocacy groups tell us.

For example, Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), is someone who advocates decoupling the word “Islamic” from the word “terrorism” for discussions of, well, Islamic terrorism. Why mention this? ISNA is a group that has been strenuously “outreached” by Mr. England’s Pentagon even as the Justice Department has officially labeled it a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Wonder if Mr. England ever thought much about the large picture of Miss.Mattson — head of ISNA, an unindicted co-conspirator in a federal terrorism trial last year — hanging amid the photos on Hesham Islam’s office wall.

What Hesham Islam wanted from Stephen Coughlin was a softer interpretation of Islamic law and jihad, and, as Mr. Gertz reported, in the process he slurred Mr. Coughlin as “a Christian zealot or extremist ‘with a pen.’ ” Now Mr. Coughlin is out.

This high-level effort to, in effect, deny the connection between Islamic law and what the military calls the “enemy threat doctrine” should ring bells, not just in the military, but in Congress, which obviously has Pentagon oversight responsibilities. And what about the FBI? When a citizen is denounced as a “Christian zealot or extremist” shortly before his government contract is dropped, has a civil rights violation occurred?

More questions. Why is the deputy secretary of defense engaged in Muslim “outreach”? And how good (safe) is his “outreach” advice if, for example, it brings ISNA into a bizarro relationship with the Pentagon, and sends a longtime apologist for assorted terrorists, Muslim Public Affairs Council’s Salam Al-Marayati, on a Pentagon-sponsored trip to Guantanamo Bay? When such advice brings the military’s woefully belated education on jihad to a halt, it becomes shockingly clear that the Pentagon is more concerned with political correctness than protecting the nation.

Dan Pipes at Townhall.com

In that article, he details the amazingly obscene amounts of money Americans are unknowingly giving to the PLO because of Condoleeza Rice and the US government’s total cluelessness.

An indication of how clueless this is is clearly depicted in this graph showing the number of homocide deaths in relation to donations.

As Pipes points out:

The correlation is even clearer when the aid of one year is superimposed on the homicides of a year later:

In brief, each $1.25 million or so of budgetary support aid translates into a death within the year. As Stotsky notes, “These statistics do not mean that foreign aid causes violence; but they do raise questions about the effectiveness of using foreign donations to promote moderation and combat terrorism.”

Those are expensive hits if you think about it. The mafia would do it for less.

Pipes wrote about this in 2001, saying this “is tantamount to sending the enemy resources while fighting is still under way – not a hugely bright idea.”

Rather than further funding Palestinian bellicosity, Western states, starting with Israel, should cut off all funds to the Palestinian Authority.

This is elementary and pure common sense…but our government has taken a complete departure from common sense where the war on terror is concerned. You can’t hold hands with the enemy at the same time you’re supposedly fighting them.

Naturally the media coverage would be biased in the direction of gun control… and against people being able to defend themselves. Read the article, It’s by John Lott.

also, see the post here on his blog. john notes on a separate post that google search results don’t bring up anything that would indicate that these shootings are occurring in ‘gun-free zones’. he asks “why?”, but i think that’s merely a rhetorical question.

On another post, he indicates that US Today ran a poll asking if the 2nd Amendment gives us the ‘right to bear arms’. Of course, most people - unless they’re absolutely clueless (and there are a few of them in those results [about 1449 out of 72,475]) - understand that yes, that’s what the 2nd Amendment that the media ignores, guarantees us. It’s the 2nd Amendment, after all, one of the top guarantees in our government documents.

These are the results after I took the test:

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Stop the ACLU, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Right Truth, The Pet Haven Blog, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Chuck Adkins, Pursuing Holiness, The Uncooperative Radio Show! Special Weekend!, Adeline and Hazel, , third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, CommonSenseAmerica, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Church and State, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Random Yak, 123beta, Adam’s Blog, , Big Dog’s Weblog, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, , Nuke’s, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Faultline USA, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Global American Discourse, High Desert Wanderer, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

How odd.

Congress has been dawdling all year on a tax bill, and as a result, millions of early filers could have to wait extra weeks for refunds that averaged last year at $2,291.

The Internal Revenue Service is looking hard at delaying the start of its filing season, set to kick off on Jan. 14, if Congress fails to pass legislation in the next two weeks. At issue is how to handle what could be a dramatic increase in the number of people facing a higher alternative minimum tax.

What it boils down to, is -approximately half of taxpayers with adjusted gross incomes in the $75,000-$100,000 range will be affected by the “Alternative Minimum Tax” this year; which is a huge tax increase.

The alternative minimum tax was passed in 1969 and was aimed at about 155 very wealthy families who used deductions to avoid paying any federal income tax. The AMT disallows certain deductions and credits. It was not adjusted for inflation; as a result, over the years it has hit a growing number of middle-income taxpayers.

More than 4 million were subject to it in the 2006 tax year, and that could soar to 25 million this year without congressional action.

We just need to go to the FAIRTAX and stop monkeying around with all of this.

X posted at Cao2

By PETE YOST - Associated Press Writer - Nov 12, 2007

It seems several million went missing and somebody sued.

WASHINGTON - A federal judge Monday ordered the White House to preserve copies of all its e-mails, a move that Bush administration lawyers had argued strongly against.

U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy directed the Executive Office of the President to safeguard the material in response to two lawsuits that seek to determine whether the White House has destroyed e-mails in violation of federal law.

The White House is seeking dismissal of the lawsuits brought by two private groups — Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Government and the National Security Archive.

The disappearance of 5 million White House e-mails

Judge OKs calls for intel officials to discuss talks with pro-Israel lobbyists

AP - updated 1:37 p.m. MT, Fri., Nov. 2, 2007

WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and more than a dozen other current and former intelligence officials must testify about their conversations with pro-Israel lobbyists, a federal judge ruled Friday in an espionage case.

Criminals or Diplomats?

By CHRISTINE HAUSER CONCORD, NH, Oct. 29

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton came under pointed attack Monday by her two main rivals for the Democratic nomination, who said she was not being direct on Social Security and also suggested she was too cozy …

The rivals, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, in campaign appearances in Iowa and here, took on Mrs. Clinton by name, escalating their attacks on her a day before they were to share a stage at the Democratic debate in Philadelphia.

Mr. Obama, in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, said Mrs. Clinton had evaded a direct answer on the politically delicate question of how to strengthen Social Security.

“You might remember this came up at the last presidential debate,” Mr. Obama said. “And when Senator Clinton was asked about it, she wouldn’t say what she thinks we should do. And the other day, here in Iowa, she skipped another chance to give a direct answer on this.”

She’s not alone in ducking the issue, of course

By Jim Davenport, Associated Press Writer - October 29, 2007

COLUMBIA, S.C. – A Grammy-winning singer whose role in a Barack Obama campaign event riled gay activists served as master of ceremonies of a gospel concert promoting the Democratic presidential hopeful Sunday night.

Barack Obama is defending himself amongst the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender) community. Obama has to choose between keeping his gospel singer and oppose Gays or ditching the singer and angering Black Christians.

Obama did not attend the event, but in a video played for more than 2,000 at the Township Auditorium he called the evening’s acts “inspirational talent” that were among his favorites.

How could you possibly want this IDIOT as a President?

(AP) Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo said Monday he will not seek re-election to his Colorado seat in the House in 2008.

Long-Shot GOP Presidential Contender Will Retire From Congress After Term Is Up

Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., voted in 2006 for 700 miles of fencing along the US-Mexican border. He has questioned other candidates’ commitment to border security.

He will continue his long-shot bid for the White House.

The five-term lawmaker said illegal immigration, his core issue, now has national prominence and he doesn’t need to remain in Congress to promote it.

“The issue now has a life of its own and it doesn’t need one particular person to champion it,” he said.

“I feel my job, my task, has been completed. And I am very much at peace with the idea that if I’m not elected president then I won’t be running” for another term in Congress, he said.

CBS News carries the story

House bill — Homeowners could sue Wall Street
The New York Times - October 22, 2007

Rep Barney Frank (D-Lite) introduces a bill that would allow homeowners to sue mortgage lenders for giving them loans that they never had a realistic chance of repaying. Personal Responsibility?

WASHINGTON - House Democrats introduced legislation on Monday that would for the first time let homeowners sue Wall Street firms for relief from mortgages that the borrowers never had a realistic chance of repaying.

>>> Critics warn the bill could chill and freeze a huge source of capital <<<

Okay — now I’m really pissed and angry … what the hell is this country coming to???

I, as a Former United States Marine who proudly served this country am one very highly pissed-off S.O.B. about this and wish that someone would tell me to my face I can’t fold the AMERICAN FLAG AT ANY UNITED STATES CEMETERY — and, your sorry-ass had better practice falling down for at least 6 months prior to telling me that!!!

Flag-folding recitations for vets banned because of religious content - Associated Press OneNewsNow.com October 26, 2007

RIVERSIDE,California - Complaints about religious content have led to a ban on flag-folding recitations by Veterans Administration employees and volunteers at all 125 national cemeteries. It all started because of one complaint about the ceremony at Riverside National Cemetery in California.

During thousands of military burials, the volunteers have folded the American flag 13 times and recited the significance of every fold to survivors. For example, the 12th fold glorifies “God the Father, the Son and Holy Ghost.”

The complaint revolved around the narration in the 11th fold, which celebrates Jewish war veterans and “glorifies the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.”

The National Cemetery Administration decided to ban the entire recital at all national cemeteries. Details of the complaint weren’t disclosed.

>>> IT’S A “SLAP IN THE FACE” TO EVERY UNITED STATES VETERAN!!! < <<

PUT A STOP TO THIS INSANITY OF OUR AMERICAN HISTORY / LAND and ...
>>> SIGN THIS PETITION!!! <<<

Nick Juliano - October 12, 2007

That boot you feel on your neck? That’s the top one percent of America — Income inequality worst since 1920s, according to IRS data.

The super-rich are gobbling up an ever larger piece of the economic pie, and the poor are seeing their share of earnings shrink: new IRS data shows the top 1 percent of Americans are claiming a larger share of national income than at any time since before the Great Depression.

The top percentile of wealthy Americans earned 21.2 percent of all income in 2005, up from 19 percent in 2004, according to new Internal Revenue Service data published in the Wall Street Journal Friday.

John “HANOI FONDA” Skerry is the chamber’s richest member with an estimated net worth of $750 million

This is ABSOLUTE BULL$HIT — look at all the kids and gangs who have weapons and use them specifically to kill people at random … WE VETS ARE THE MOTHER-FUCKERS WHO WERE TRAINED HOW TO USE THEM!!!

VETERANS DISARMAMENT ACT TO BAR VETS FROM OWNING GUNS

By Larry Pratt - September 22, 2007 — News With Views

Hundreds of thousands of veterans — from Vietnam through Operation Iraqi Freedom — are at risk of being banned from buying firearms if legislation that is pending in Congress gets enacted.

How?

The Veterans Disarmament Act – which has already passed the House — would place any veteran who has ever been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) on the Federal Gun Ban List.

This is exactly what President Billy-Bob Kluck did over seven years ago when his administration illegitimately added some 83,000 veterans into the National Information Criminal System (NICS system) – prohibiting them from purchasing firearms, simply because of afflictions like PTSD.

The proposed ban is actually broader. Anyone who is diagnosed as being a tiny danger to himself or others would have his gun rights taken away … forever. It is section 102(b)(1)(C)(iv) in HR 2640 that provides for dumping raw medical records into the system. Those names — like the 83,000 records mentioned above — will then, by law, serve as the basis for gun banning.

No wonder the Military Order of the Purple Heart is opposed to this legislation.

The House bill, HR 2640, is being sponsored by one of the most flaming anti-Second Amendment Representatives in Congress: Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY). Another liberal anti-gunner, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), is sponsoring the bill in the Senate.

Proponents of the bill say that helpful amendments have been made so that any veteran who gets his name on the NICS list can seek an expungement.

But whenever you talk about expunging names from the Brady NICS system, you’re talking about a procedure that has always been a long shot. Right now, there are NO EXPUNGEMENTS of law-abiding Americans names that are taking place under federal level. Why? Because the expungement process which already exists has been blocked for over a decade by a “funds cut-off” engineered by another anti-gunner, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY).

So how will this bill make things even worse? Well, two legal terms are radically redefined in the Veterans Disarmament Act to carry out this vicious attack on veterans gun rights.

One term relates to who is classified a “mental defective.” Forty years ago that term meant one was adjudicated “not guilty” in a court of law by reason of insanity. But under the Veterans Disarmament Act, “mental defective” has been stretched to include anyone whom a psychiatrist determines might be a tiny danger to self or others.

The second term is “adjudicate.” In the past, one could only lose one’s gun rights through an adjudication by a judge, magistrate or court — meaning conviction after a trial. Adjudication could only occur in a court with all the protections of due process, including the right to face one’s accuser. Now, adjudication in HR 2640 would include a finding by “a court, commission, committee or other authorized person” (namely, a psychiatrist).

Forget the fact that people with PTSD have the same violent crime rate as the rest of us. Vietnam vets with PTSD have had careers and obtained permits to carry firearms concealed. It will now be enough for a psychiatric diagnosis (a “determination” in the language of the bill) to get a veteran barred ­for life ­ from owning guns.

Think of what this bill would do to veterans. If a robber grabs your wallet and takes everything in it, but gives you back $5 to take the bus home, would you call that a financial enhancement? If not, then we should not let HR 2640 supporters call the permission to seek an expungement an enhancement, when prior to this bill, veterans could not legitimately be denied their gun rights after being diagnosed with PTSD.

Veterans with PTSD should not be put in a position to seek an expungement. They have not been convicted (after a trial with due process) of doing anything wrong. If a veteran is thought to be a threat to self or others, there should be a real trial, not an opinion (called a diagnosis) by a psychiatrist.

If members of Congress do not hear from soldiers (active duty and retired) in large numbers, along with the rest of the public, the Veterans Disarmament Act — misleadingly titled by Rep. McCarthy as the NICS Improvement Amendments Act — will send this message to veterans: “No good deed goes unpunished.”

Another view — Not Anti-Veteran …

Doesn’t say anything about PTSD!

Confusion – The confusion over H.R. 2640 and veterans, especially veterans with PTSD, began in 2000 when the VA gave the names of between 83,000 and 89,000 veterans to the NICS database. The names were of veterans who had been committed to VA psychiatric wards or who had been adjudicated as a mental defective. This was required of all government agencies.

Some thought that any veteran with a mental health issue ended up on the NICS list. That is an absurd assumption. If a veteran tries to quit smoking and goes to VA smoking cessation classes, they are in a mental health program because nicotine is considered an addictive substance. The same applies for those seeking treatment for alcohol or drug abuse. And, we know, these veterans did not end up in the NICS database.

Neither current law nor H.R. 2640 would put any person, including veterans, who have sought psychiatric treatment or voluntarily checked themselves into a psychiatric unit on the NICS list. This includes those with PTSD, those seeking treatment for alcohol or drug abuse and those who have voluntarily sought help and been admitted for observation, sometimes termed a voluntary commitment.

N.R.A. – The confusion over H.R. 2640 and veterans, especially veterans with PTSD, began in 2000 when the VA gave the names of between 83,000 and 89,000 veterans to the NICS database. The names were of veterans who had been committed to VA psychiatric wards or who had been adjudicated as a mental defective. This was required of all government agencies.

Some thought that any veteran with a mental health issue ended up on the NICS list. That is an absurd assumption. If a veteran tries to quit smoking and goes to VA smoking cessation classes, they are in a mental health program because nicotine is considered an addictive substance. The same applies for those seeking treatment for alcohol or drug abuse. And, we know, these veterans did not end up in the NICS database.

Neither current law nor H.R. 2640 would put any person, including veterans, who have sought psychiatric treatment or voluntarily checked themselves into a psychiatric unit on the NICS list. This includes those with PTSD, those seeking treatment for alcohol or drug abuse and those who have voluntarily sought help and been admitted for observation, sometimes termed a voluntary commitment.

The confusion over H.R. 2640 and veterans, especially veterans with PTSD, began in 2000 when the VA gave the names of between 83,000 and 89,000 veterans to the NICS database. The names were of veterans who had been committed to VA psychiatric wards or who had been adjudicated as a mental defective. This was required of all government agencies.

Some thought that any veteran with a mental health issue ended up on the NICS list. That is an absurd assumption. If a veteran tries to quit smoking and goes to VA smoking cessation classes, they are in a mental health program because nicotine is considered an addictive substance. The same applies for those seeking treatment for alcohol or drug abuse. And, we know, these veterans did not end up in the NICS database.

Neither current law nor H.R. 2640 would put any person, including veterans, who have sought psychiatric treatment or voluntarily checked themselves into a psychiatric unit on the NICS list. This includes those with PTSD, those seeking treatment for alcohol or drug abuse and those who have voluntarily sought help and been admitted for observation, sometimes termed a voluntary commitment.

The bottom line for veterans concerned about H.R. 2640 is to just use some common sense. Read the legislation. You may not agree with it. But, if you’re a veteran or you have been diagnosed with PTSD, don’t worry, they aren’t coming for your firearms. The NRA put it correctly when they said, H.R. 2640 is NOT gun control legislation. It IS … legislation designed to end inequities in the current laws that have unfairly prevented many from purchasing firearms and ammo.

Something else to read

Something else from the NRA

Here’s a quote from the above article:

Does H.R. 2640 ban guns for anyone who’s ever seen a psychiatrist or received any other mental health treatment?

Absolutely not — H.R. 2640 doesn’t ban anyone from owning guns–it only makes records available on those who are already “prohibited persons.”

When it comes to mental health conditions, the only people who can’t own a gun under federal law are those who have “been adjudicated as a mental defective or … been committed to any mental institution.” Regulations from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) define those terms too broadly in some ways, but narrowly in others. H.R. 2640 refers to those definitions, but only to help agencies figure out what records to provide to NICS; it doesn’t ban anyone new from buying or owning a gun.

Some critics of H.R. 2640 claim that BATFE’s regulation would impose a gun ban based on any psychiatrist’s diagnosis that a person “s a danger to himself or to others . . . or . . . [l]acks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.” But that’s not true, because basic legal definitions mean that an “adjudication” can only come from a court or similar body. As cosponsor Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) said in the Congressional Record, adjudication is a formal process, “not just a doctor’s notes on a patient’s charts.”

Finally, of course, ordinary doctors records–whether on mental health or anything else–are private under federal and state laws, as well as longstanding legal and medical tradition.

“The confidentiality between a doctor and patient is sacred, and we do not intend to breach it, ” said Rep. Dingell.

Two VA articles on this –

V.A. Article 1 | V.A. Article 2

By Sarah Wheaton

Newt Gingrich has sent so many hints pointing in so many different directions that we’re dizzy trying to follow them all. But now, it appears, he’s made up his mind.

Rick Tyler, Mr. Gingrich’s spokesman, confirmed today that the former Republican House speaker has decided against a presidential run in 2008.

Mr. Gingrich was “presented with legal advice this morning,” said Mr. Tyler in a quick phone interview. “There was a choice presented.”

The choice was to remain chairman of his political action committee, American Solutions, or to allow advisers to move forward with an exploratory committee. But he could not, legally, do both, Mr. Tyler explained.

“So Mr. Gingrich made a choice to remain a citizen activist,” he said.

The Political Caucus

Ruling Points To Search Warrants Without Probable Cause

PORTLAND, Ore. – Two provisions of the USA Patriot Act are unconstitutional because they allow search warrants to be issued without a showing of probable cause, a federal judge ruled Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as amended by the Patriot Act, “now permits the executive branch of government to conduct surveillance and searches of American citizens without satisfying the probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment.”

Portland attorney Brandon Mayfield sought the ruling in a lawsuit against the federal government after he was mistakenly linked by the FBI to the Madrid train bombings that killed 191 people in 2004.

She seriously needs Anal Sex by a Horse

Yahoo! News asks Democratic candidates questions others are afraid to ask.

Even Bill-ary Kluck Opens Her Stupid Mouth