The Laughing Wolf

The facts are that Susan Lindauer has been arrested and charged with being an unregistered agent and violations of financial regulations. She has not been charged with being a spy or anything else on that level.

The facts are that she also got her start as a reporter working for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. The reaction of said paper was to go with a story headlined Accused Spy Is Cousin Of Bush Staffer. Her work at the paper got a brief mention buried in the middle of a string of jobs starting with Fortune and ending most prominently with Fox. In fact, they went out of their way to mention Fox at least twice, and ended with the now-obligatory quote about how she appeared to be an ordinary person, with the implication that of course they could not be guilty. No discussion of her work at the paper, and a blatant attempt to bury the same. No surprise.

No surprise either that almost all of the major media has gone with the “Republican” distant relation slant, ignoring the fact that he helped bring her down, and/or presented it without mentioning that she was a long-time Democratic staffer. For some good info on this, go check out the links here, here, and here. Whizbang is offering up not only that, but some good info that details her involvement in the Lockerbie trial.

The New Media is working to get the story right, though there is some sloppiness that needs to be corrected. She has not been charged with spying. She has been charged with working with Iraqi Intelligence as an unregistered agent, and with violations of financial transaction statutes. Now, other charges can be filed later, but this is a start and we do need to make clear that agent does not have to mean spy. What does matter is aid and comfort, and when, where, how, and to whom matter very much. Eugene Volokh has some comments here.

The Old Media is screwing itself into the ground on this one, and it is quite likely to hurt it severely in the long run. Attempts to go back and change things to pretend otherwise are not helping, and are being noted and logged. The American public has a long history of doing things like pulling for the underdog, and also of being very unforgiving of those it perceives as having lied to it in order to protect themselves.

This also ties in very strongly to work done by Blogfather Joe Katzman on Saddam’s Media War. If you have not read these stories, you need to go do so. Now. This is important.

Hat tips this morning go to Blogfather Joe and Cardinal Puppilieu, who have both done an outstanding job of pointing the way to a lot of good information.

This story is likely to be the tip of the iceberg, and there is probably more to it as well. Keep a close eye on it, as digging into it may well reveal some very nasty things. Nasty enough that she may not be the only one charged, and that the charges and penalties may go very high indeed.

-30-

Back in 1976, I took part in a National Science Foundation Summer Studies Program that focused on energy and national policy. I had heard of the power grid, and in my somewhat anal retentive mind saw it as a neat organized grid just like you found on grid paper. Boy, was I ever wrong.

The national power grid is really an international power grid, and rather than being one grid, it is a collection of regional and local grids patched together in a variety of fashions. The technology involved varies wildly, from some small parts with the latest and greatest, to significant portions that are using technology more than a half century out of date.

In biological organisms, hybridization usually brings a stronger system. In technological hybridization the same thing can occur, but it is far more likely that the result will be far weaker. Imagine trying to put together a computer network where each unit is a stand-alone system using different configurations and operating systems. Then you start to get a picture of the power grid.

Now, it really is not that bleak, but the fact is that major portions of that grid have not had the improvements needed to keep pace with the changes in the world. We now are far more dependent on electrical power than at any time in history. Not only are lights, heating and air systems, water pumps, gas pumps, and related systems needing electricity, the basic control systems for most things in our life require it as well. Computers are not merely on our desktop, and sometimes even controlling our home, they are in almost every appliance and modern convenience today.

You may think that if you have a gas stove, that a power failure might not affect you. Yet, if it is a modern, energy-efficient system, you would be wrong. Even gas stoves that have piezoelectric starters usually have a control system that requires outside power. Eliminate that power, and the stove will not cut on nor in many cases can you manually cut it on because of the built-in safety features.

This is but one example of how dependent we are on electricity. There are multitudes more, but I think the point has been made.

Yet, at the same time as demand has increased along with critical dependency, the power system as a whole has been not merely neglected, but deliberately stymied for years. With many groups, anything that a power company or provider wants is automatically evil, no matter what. It is almost a tenet of some environmental groups that power anything is bad for the environment. With others, it is an attempt to gouge the consumer, disrupt the view, etc. As a result, needed new transmission lines are disallowed; hardware upgrades at plants are blocked; operating and transmission system improvements do not occur; and, new sources of power are eliminated.

Take a look at the construction of new power plants as an example. Take a look at how many are being built, how many are needed, how many were planned but cancelled, and how many are planned. Then take a look at how long it takes just to get approval for a new plant, much less bring it on line. Then take a look at the new plants as a function of time, and then compare that to the rate of demand increase. It is not a pretty picture.

Now that you have done that, start looking at the associated systems. How many new transmission lines have gone up? How many do the companies say are needed? What is the rate of improvement in systems and hardware? How many have you opposed directly or indirectly?

Yes, power companies are out to make money and some have been greedy pigs. At the same time, they do have the right to make a nice profit and have the funds to plow back into the business to make improvements. In many cases, this has not been done. Some of it is the fault of the businesses involved, because they have made bad decisions and put a higher profit ahead of needed reinvestment. Some of the fault lies with us, the consumers, and the regulatory boards that are in place that prevent rate hikes and other related issues that would provide the funds needed. Activists, management, government, and consumer: we all share in the responsibility for the neglect.

We also share responsibility for the lack of preparedness. As individuals and as business entities, how many had basic flashlights or emergency lighting of any sort in our homes or offices? How many had some form of UPS for computer or other critical systems? Emergency water for drinking and cooling, or even for flushing a toilet? A plan for what to do if there were a blackout?

Back in 1976, I was stunned at the number of businesses, high-rise buildings, and others that had little or no preparedness. Even some of those places that had systems did not have working systems, as tests showed. It is not enough just to have such, you have to maintain it and you have to test it. I remember well one such test out at NASA that took out power for a much longer period of time than planned when the emergency backup system did not work.

Today, I see it as being as bad or worse. Our dependency has increased and our preparations have – in my opinion – decreased. Just look at New York, where major hotels had people leaving to sleep on the street because there was no ventilation, no way to open the windows, and no way for most to get up to the top floor rooms where the heat was building up the worst anyway.

The good news of the day is that what happened appears not to be terrorism, though it may have just given them a heck of a nudge towards a vulnerable target. It also does not appear to have been a lightening strike in Niagara, a fire near New York, or other rumored point of start. The best speculation so far appears to be that it started in the mid-west, but that is still speculation. It may be several days before the event can be traced and time-lined.

The good news is compounded by the way in which most people took the event: there were very few problems and those isolated. Most people joined together, made the best of a bad situation, and some even appear to have had a good time from what is being shown on network news this morning. Somehow, rather than this being a disaster that set people at each other, in the wake of 9-11 it brought people together, and brought out the best in many or most. That is an incredibly good thing to see.

If we truly want to prevent this from being a problem again, either through chance or by terrorist design, we need to begin paying attention to the grid. The things that are needed to bring everything up to date should be identified, costs set, and appropriate rate hikes or re-allocations made. Where money is already being set aside for improvements, it would be good to be sure that it is actually going for such and not into some bit of political pork.

Despite all, we do have the best power (and health and a few other things) system in the world. Now we just need to make it the best it can be, so that the lights will remain on and our advances in all areas can continue.

-30-

That photo, which went out without a full explanation and made it appear that indiscriminate executions were the order of the day by the evil South Vietnamese regime helped turn the tide of public opinion in America against the war. It was a powerful image, and is used in texts and classrooms today in almost every photo or journalism school around.

Ramirez used this image as the basis of a cartoon attacking those who were trying to “assassinate” Bush over 16 words. It was a powerful and effective cartoon, and it clearly showed the artist’s opinion of those doing the attacking.

Somehow, however, it appears that the Secret Service is concerned that the cartoon somehow depicts a real threat to Bush, and that it constitutes the same thing as writing or calling in a threat to kill the President.

Give me a frelling break. Only someone with less than a room temperature IQ could possibly get that from the cartoon. Only someone chronically unfit to wear a badge of any sort, even as a dog catcher, could possibly decide that this was a “threat” worthy of investigation.

Someone at the Secret Service needs to go. Whether that is Agent Peter J. Damos or someone – or even several someones – above him is immaterial. When time and resources are wasted on an idiocy such as this, that is the thing criminal. And just plain stupid.

The march is on. We have the Secret Service investigating an editorial cartoon that supports the President. We have the FBI investigating a man for reading a leftist editorial. What’s next, investigating Snoopy for FAA violations or being a terrorist for all the strafing runs he’s done on his dog house?

This type of idiocy is why people are concerned, and justifiably so, with the Patriot Act and other homeland security measures being undertaken. We get assurances that all will be well, that there will be reason and care. What we get are these types of things, which destroy Citizen confidence and undermine real efforts at public safety.

To restore public confidence, steps need to be taken. The people responsible for these idiotic shenanigans, or otherwise took part in them, need to be fired (managers) and suspended (agents). There is no excuse for, or legal defense of, taking part in such patently absurd and illegal actions.

-30-

One interesting thing was her finish, when she said that "I am an American soldier too!" were her words then and now. Exactly what happened to her we may never know, and if some things are true I hope they are never publically confirmed, for she deserves better. Others can and will come out, and those words combined with the Bronze Star, lead me to suspect that the Wag The Lynch idiots really missed it in the same way the BBC missed and dismissed the American entry into Baghdad. We will see.

For now, she is almost home with just a few parades and such to endure. Her thanks to those who helped her, from Iraq to the man who would not let her quit physical therapy, were moving. Her tribute to her friend and fallen colleague heartfelt.

Endure them, and enjoy them as much as you are able to. There are hard days ahead, just as there are hard days behind you. Your home has changed, and is not as it was. Your hometown is the same. Most importantly, you have changed and nothing will be quite the same. With work and time, however, you can and will make it better even if different.

Those words are hard and cruel, even if true. Forgive my saying them, though they need to be said. For now, simply allow me to say

"Welcome home, Jessica."

Laughing Wolf

They think that two of the bodies are that of Uday and Qusay, and a third is that of Qusay's teenage son. The latter two are likely the most important in many respects, since Uday did not have nearly as much power as he did psychopathy. Qusay, on the other hand, enjoyed is father's favor, was head of the Republican Guard, and had other important posts and duties.

The White House is being smart on this, and apparently will not say anything or allow anything to be said on the record until DNA and other forensics can be run. I imagine that they will do a full forensics workup including dental, X-rays, DNA, and any other tests they can think of to do. It still will not be enough to convince some, here or there, but if done right it will work for most thinking people.

Meantime, there is a lot of evidence that says there was something of importance there. You don't have the firepower described unless you have something of high value in the place. Surely not the firepower to stop and hold Task Force 20 and/or the 101st. Someone obviously got a bit fed up and used TOWs and other resources to breech the compound so troops could get in, and then used heavy fiepower as needed. The location, the owner, and other factors also add to the idea that someone or something of value was there.

For now, we wait as doing things right takes time. I sincerely hope that they do things by the book from a scientific as well as a SOP point of view, so that no one can pick at it later. Not that it will stop some people, especially if they see a political advantage, but it does make it easier to rebut them.

UPDATE 2: CENTCOM says that it was indeed them, even though the DNA and related work is not yet done. I do hope this is true, but will feel better when full forensics can back up the apparent eyewitness identifications.

This person claimed that “…bombing two countries back to the stone age (say what you will, but the ***collateral*** damage in Afganastan and Iraq has been estimated at over 10,000 people).” Maybe it was, if you count all enemy combatants as civilians. As I pointed out in my response there, even the worst case estimates by people who don’t like us only put casualties at around 3,000 in Iraq, and there is debate over that figure since it may include FS “troops” in it.

This would be very bad, except that Saddam was killing more than 5,000 of his own people each year. There are no accurate figures that I have for the mass murders in Afghanistan under the taliban but I am willing to entertain bets that it was more than a few.

As for the stone age: where exactly? Tora Bora? Already there guy, all we did was clean out some caves and provide new building material (and hopefully some fertilizer).

Someone comes into your home, attacks you, kills members of your family, and is stopped from doing worse by something unexpected (grounding the planes anyone? Remember what was found on some planes that were grounded?), and swears to come back and finish the job later. What do you do?

Apparently, we need to all understand them, and show them and the rest of the world that we are good people and that they should not hate us (just our leaders).

Tell you what, you go do it. Go to Iran, go to Iraq, go to Indonesia, go to any country where they hate us and there have been problems. Go over there, preach, and try to convert. Show them we are good people. Let’s see how far you get, and how much fun it is given the lack of freedoms in those places. Afghanistan and Iran were not exactly garden spots before we went in, and at least now the demonstrators and their families won’t be killed simply for demonstrating, only when they attack us. Or when they screw up in bomb making class in the local mosque.

I have been around the world a bit, and one thing it does do is make me appreciate so very much the freedoms we have here. The opportunity, the ability to take initiative, and so much more. I was also incredibly lucky on 9-11 in that the people I knew in New York, including one who was supposed to be in the Towers, were not there and did survive. So many others were not so fortunate.

You don’t have the first frelling clue. We worked damned hard to MINIMIZE the casualties, they did not and do not. We did not deliberately target civilians, they did and still do. We have undertaken a massive effort to improve, educate, and uplift, they worked hard at tearing down so that they lived well while their populations lived in conditions I doubt you could take for five minutes, much less a lifetime. Go look at some verifiable, certifiable facts; get educated. Then talk.

For Now, Understand This: They have sworn to kill us as a nation, as an ideology, and as individuals. What else do we need to understand? This is war, they declared it, we will finish it.

I will reaffirm life on 9-11, and if Ifni smiles on me it will be in the most basic and fun way possible. I will remember those who died, what happened, and why it happened. Then, I will continue to do all I can to fight those who attacked me and mine. They want war to the finish, so they shall have it. What they have sown, they shall reap.

-30-

She was independent, stubborn, feisty, and from all accounts a wonderful friend and a formidable foe. She wore pants in days when it just was not done; presented strong and well rounded female characters in a time when that just was not done either; refused to follow the sexual mores of her time; and, even found her true love in a married man. Add to this talent, drive, and all the other things that made her a complex personage, and you had something truly wonderful.

A favorite movie of mine was “Bringing Up Baby” because it showed the comedic side of her so well. Indeed, the movie may well have been a bit of a spoof of her bull-headedness and other foibles. If so, she gleefully took to it and turned it into something special. She was also wonderful in “The African Queen” though her role and Bogart’s were a bit of a departure from the book.

To my mind she was sexy not merely for a lithe body that was too androgynous for its time, but for the mind and soul that inhabited it. She was beauty, strength, intelligence, and independence. That, my friends, is true sexiness.

Thank you, Katharine Hepburn, for being all that you were. Thank you for the enjoyment, the laughter, and the tears. Thank you for the thought you provoked, and for being such an excellent role model of the independent and ornery American.

-30-

But what exactly is he protecting them against? These camps, sponsored under the auspices of the American Association for Nude Recreation, are extremely well supervised. Because they are held at AANR affiliated clubs, known problem adults do not get in. Any adult who does get in is monitored, and the kids are very good at reporting anything suspicious. The fact is, most nudist/naturist children seem to have a better eye for problem adults than other kids.

Could it be that he is protecting them from sex and all its assorted nastiness? Take a look at the statistics regarding rape, date rape, sexually transmitted disease, teenage pregnancy, and other such problems and see where nudist/naturist children (or adults for that matter) stand in those categories. Again, they are on the right side of the curve in this regards. Nudity does not equate with sex. I am reminded of the old saw about nude and neked. Nude is fine and nothing is going on, neked is when you are up to no good. Some people automatically assume that nude is neked, when this is not the case.

Ah, I get it now. It is the psychological damage of seeing each other naked. The horror of being unashamed of your own body, of accepting that other people are different in a variety of ways, of understanding that clothes can be far more titillating than simply being nude. Why, it might just undermine all the guilt and psychoses that much of society loves to place on the human spirit, so that they have a healthy regard for the body, for sex, and more.

Gee, there is not rampant sexual exploitation of the kids; they are not engaging in wanton lust amongst themselves; they clock out far better than their peers in terms of problems physical and psychological; and, they seem to clock out ahead in other areas as well. So what is the problem?

Could it have anything to do with a senate race that the good representative has entered? Could this be nothing more than a cynical manipulation of a story – complete with botched or slanted presentations by a media drooling over the salacious nature of the topic – for nothing more than political gain? Given the lack of research and lack of interest in doing any research, objective or otherwise, expressed by Foley, one does have to wonder.

Could it be also an aspect of transference? The representative is said to have likened the naked kids to gasoline and fire in terms of sex. This says a great deal about Mr. Foley and his psyche, rather than it does about the kids and the camps. To my mind, it says in fact nothing good about the representative.

Could it also have anything to do with an apparent outing of the representative? While he has refused to discuss his orientation, stories here and here are just a couple of the ones in recent weeks that have focused on this issue. The heat from these stories and constant questioning by reporters was growing, and a growing problem for his candidacy. Again, one is forced to ask if his seizing of this non-controversy controversy is nothing more than cynical political manipulation to take the heat off the other controversy that is dogging him.

If it is indeed nothing more than cynical manipulation, Representative Foley would not be the first politician to wrap himself in the flag and the cry “for the children” to stage a witch hunt. We have seen it before in a variety of guises, from the non-existent mass molestations in day care to various stories of crack babies used as a rallying cry to pass more laws. Or, it has been used as a call to action, such as Waco where the government went in at least in part to save the children, and burned them to save them.

The problem with all of this is a little thing called the Constitution. It is easy to demonize so-called fringe groups, from homosexuals to those of a different religious belief. Yet, those beliefs, activities, and such are protected. There is no part of the Constitution that says you must be in lock-step with the rest of society, that those “fringe” elements are fair game. They have been and often are, and that is the travesty and the shame of our system that it far too often fails them.

The fact is, whether you like it or not, the families involved have the right to be nude in their homes, in their parks, and in other appropriate areas. If you don’t want to see it, don’t go to them. Don’t go to a nude beach and then call the police because you were offended, because you chose to be so. They, the parents and the children, have the right to decide how they want to live, what they want to believe, and how they will do. Deal with it. Live with it. Learn from it.

The facts of the matter are that there is no demonstrable harm to the children. In fact, the body of evidence points the other way, rather clearly. The children can and do benefit on a variety of levels. Even if not, people have the right to make their own choices, even if they are not good ones. No law, no part of the Constitution says we can only make smart choices, and that others will decide for us what is good, right, or smart. Instead, it says we have the right to make our own choices.

There are many reasons to question Representative Foley’s conduct in this case. His actions are just as disquieting as the comments made by Dr. Frist, and about as idiotic. The good news is, we do live in a free society and even with The Media doing its usual job on fairness, balance, and accuracy, the rule of law still stands. What we need to do now is be sure that no one, particularly a politician in a tight spot, tries to enact a bad law or bad law enforcement for all the wrong reasons.

-30-

UPDATE: A new post on this topic has been posted.

I faxed a letter to Governor Granholm, who had been requested to get up off her duff and get involved by several organizations. Faxing and mailing work best, as e-mail is most often ignored by politicians. The reply I got deserves quite a fisking, and I have shared it around with some other bloggers. The hope had been to do a coordinated fisk, but that went out the window, so here is mine:

Thank you for taking the time to express your concerns regarding the well being of children whom the court has placed under the supervision of the Family Independence Agency (FIA). Your willingness to speak up shows your commitment to Michigan's children.

Ah, yes. The children of the state, the empire. Very clearly, not the children of the parents, but of the state. Thank you for making that clear. I also love the name of the agency, with its clear implication of independence from the birth/real family.

As you may know, the FIA has the responsibility of overseeing the state's foster care system and relies upon the involvement of its citizenry as a key partner in identifying and preventing child abuse and neglect. The FIA takes all such concerns very seriously and is taking proactive steps to strengthen child welfare practices across the state. You should also know that Child Protective Services investigates each specific concern to ensure child safety and well being. Ultimately, we are all committed to protecting the best interest of all child placements under auspices of the states' foster care system.

Yep, the snitch lines for anonymous informants, the seizure of children and placing them in the system. Of course, the bounty placed on each child has nothing whatsoever to do with this desire to be so proactive. And ensuring child safety means breaking up families to suit, and placing the children in homes with known sex offenders. After all, it is through these placements that the bounties get paid, and all agencies and such get their cuts. This only happens with placements, however, and not if the children stay with the family.

Please be advised that each child who is in foster care through the state of Michigan is provided with a system of checks and balances for their care, all of which work together to ensure safety and well being. First, each foster child has a court appointed lawyer guardian ad litem to represent the best interest of the child in court. Second, each parent is allowed to have legal representation. Third, either the local prosecuting attorney and/or the Attorney General's Office are involved in each case to ensure child safety and well being. Fourth, each foster child as an agency social worker assigned to ensure that the best interest of the child is at the forefront of case decisions. All of these partners in protection provide reports to the court. The court considers all the facts and the recommendations made by the involved parties. Ultimately, the court makes the final decision about the direction that each case should take.

A system of checks and balances which very clearly is not working. Starting with “investigators” got upset that the family went to church each Sunday, and then lied in their report. A system that is more interested in removing the children and doing what brings in money, rather than what is right for the children. A system of checks and balances that, again, places children in with convicted sex offenders, despite that child’s own concerns for their safety, much less the family’s concerns. How nice of you to grant the parents a right they already have under the constitution, that of legal representation. No mention, however, of how this is provided or not provided by the state, and not really appreciated in many cased. What happens if the family can’t afford the representation? Also, are the social workers provided the same ones who lied in their report? And who does the prosecuting attorney represent: The State, the children in who’s names this horror is allegedly being done, or the parents? Where does the money come from to pay for this time, and does the state get additional money for such from the Clinton law? Also, how willing is the court to believe outside parties, particularly the parents, when the officers of the state have a vested interest in removing the children from the parents? About a $10,500 per child interest, plus other monies from the Fed?

While we recognize that the Crowton custody matter is a highly publicized case and others have revealed specific details, we must honor our legal obligation to protect confidential information. Public Act 238 of 1975 prohibits the FIA from releasing confidential case information to the general public. Nevertheless, be assured that the FIA takes your concerns seriously and will act on relevant information in a manner that serves the best interest of the children and family. Additionally, FIA also actively works with and involves the Office of the Children Ombudsman (OCO), which is an independent office established by law to review the actions of the FIA in child welfare cases. Any family or citizen can request an independent review of FIA or private agency cases by the OCO.

Gee, even though the Crowton’s have implicitly and explicitly waived that right and asked you to release details, get up off your duff and exercise your command responsibilities, much less your moral ones, and get involved? Nice cop out. As for the ODC, is that also funded under the child placement bounty act? Is it truly independent? What happens if it find lying and other criminal misdeeds on the part of the state and its agents?

Thank you again for your concern and involvement.

Jennifer M. Granholm
Governor

Politicalese for “shut up and go away, I am not going to get involved.”

Well Governor, you have to get involved. Every outside agency and organization, along with the family and friends of the family, have asked you to do so. As I pointed out before, there are clear problems here and they are happening on your watch, under your command. It is you who bears ultimate moral and legal responsibility for this, and you need to deal with this. What is happening is a travesty of justice, and if you want to retain any semblance of deserving the post you hold and the responsibilities that come with it, you will get involved and do the right thing.

This letter, obviously composed by a flunky who just does not get the new political and communications reality, serves to emphasize the poor response of the governor and the government in this case. I urge each and every reader to go research the case, and let the governor how you feel via fax and regular mail. Let’s put a spotlight on this until justice truly is done.

-30-

Whatever else may be said about him, he was a man of strong courage and integrity. He held strong beliefs and would stick with them no matter what, just as he stood by those he believed in for whatever reason. His courage was demonstrated in many ways, not the least of which was serving, in his 40s, in the military and taking part in the D-Day invasion. Not only did he take part, but he was one of the ones crazy enough and courageous enough to go in by glider.

But what I will hold him up for the most is that he showed that people can, will, and do change for the better. This is a debate, nay, argument I have with some people. The fact is, we all make mistakes. Some are minor, some are major, but what truly matters is not that we made the mistake but how we deal with the mistake. Particularly if it is a mistake of the mind, be it an idea or an entire philosophy.

With those, it is very easy to deny a mistake was made and cling even more tightly to the thing in question. We close our minds, turn off all thought, reason, and soul and will deny the evidence physical, mental, or spiritual. We cling to the belief as if it were a talisman, we continue to not merely dislike a person but hate them. We do this not because of what they are, but because they stand as proof that we were wrong and that can never be admitted, so the hate grows.

Yes, Strom Thurmond was a racist and a bigot for a large part of his life. He did a remarkable feat of filibustering against the civil rights act, to the point of going into the steam room before he started so that he would not have to go to the restroom during the 24 hour plus session.

Yet, later in life he opened his mind at least somewhat and changed his position. He then became the first Southern senator to hire a black aide, and did what he felt was now right to do. He also pursued this new course with the same courage, determination, and integrity that he approached all things.

His “true” commitment to such will be debated by others, as will the overall record of his life and work. This is not an insignificant body and I rather suspect that it will be a hundred years or so before an objective analysis can be made, so I make no such attempt here.

For me, the greatest legacy he leaves behind is that he showed it is possible for people to change, to grow, and to do so for good. Strom Thurmond also showed that having the courage and integrity of ones convictions does not mean clinging to false ideas, but rather facing those ideas, determining their shortcomings, and changing so as to discard that which is false or wrong, and bringing in that which is true and good. This is the hardest thing a Man, male or female, can do and by comparison it is easy to charge someone with a gun in their hands. It is so much harder, and far more scary, to face yourself and to have the courage to charge.

Strom Thurmond had that courage, and the integrity to carry through. It is a challenge not merely to the colleagues left behind, but to all of us as well.

-30-

It was this flame that led her to flee, knowing that certain death awaited her if she failed. It was courage of the highest order that led her to place her faith in a country that she had not seen since she was five, even though that country was represented the State Department that at the least abandoned her to her fate, and had failed in its duty to so many other women.

It is with incredible sadness that I write that she was forced to leave without her two children. Her work now is to secure their release, and their freedom, and you can click here to read some of her words. Please do, as they are some of the most inspiring I have heard in some time. Our work is to examine what has happened, find ways to prevent these travesties from ever happening again, and to force those who are legally and morally responsible for her plight and the plight of other women and children to accept their responsibilities.

A number of congresscritters are highly upset with the State Department, as they well should be. While the idea has not made it to print where I have seen it, I both hope and call for Congressional investigations of not merely these incidents but others that reflect poorly on State.

I had hopes that when Colin Powell took over that he had been given the same instructions as several other agency heads: clean house. It is painfully obvious that the house has not been cleaned at Foggy Bottom, and that such is long overdue. There are ways to do this despite civil service protections, and if it means abolishing the department and starting over, well, that need not be such a bad thing.

Another point to consider is that diplomatic immunity and respect for laws is both a necessary thing and a concept that requires reciprocity. The House of Saud has made it clear that they do not respect our laws, with child custody being just the tip of that iceberg. If our laws are to be flaunted, there is no reason that we should respect theirs.

I would say that this point has escaped the attention of the lace panty brigade, but I think they understand it very well. The fact is, they don’t care because they are too busy playing a game that mere plebians could not possibly understand. Indeed, mere messy citizens all to often complicate the game and that simply cannot be allowed. After all, the game is what is important, not little things like law or national interest.

The Saudi’s do not respect our laws. They have contributed to terrorism on many levels, and the lines about contributing to humanitarian efforts and not terrorism do not hold up to examination. I will say that I do not think they lie on a technical basis, but it is also clear that they have studied at the Bill Clinton school of “define is” to create terms and phrases that just barely avoid the issue.

The winds are blowing colder towards Saudi Arabia right now, and that is a good thing. For a good crisp wind is needed to clean things out. Congress, and the President, need to send a similar wind down Foggy Bottom way as well, so that the much needed cleaning can take place there as well.

Meantime, despite State, the rest of us can find ways to help Sarah and the others who were not as lucky as she. We can pitch in and help in a variety of ways, from donations to political pressure. If that political pressure includes messages to our elected representatives and leaders to clean house, that is fine too.

-30-

I became interested in the man courtesy of a spoof in a James Bond film, in which someone portraying him made a brief appearance. Sir Denis played into such things with a great sense of humor, such as a long-running spoof of his correspondence with a friend who was also editor of the Daily Telegraph.

This is a devastating loss to Lady Thatcher, who’s own health has not been up to snuff of late. My thoughts go out to her and to their family.

-30-

Since there has been some confusion, let me state that this is not the case of a woman who married a Saudi and then encountered problems. Sarah was a child of a union between an American woman and a Saudi male, who later divorced. At age five according to reports, Sarah was sent on a parental visit, which may or may not have been court ordered (citations have been difficult obtain), and the father then refused to return her. Since he was in Saudi Arabia at the time, it was not a case for the police. It was a case for the lace panty brigade at Foggy Bottom.

According to the mother, who has appeared on Fox and other news shows, she was denied help by the State Department. She claims that she was told flat out that they would not help because they did not want to jeopardize relations with a critical ally.

I have little problem believing this, or some of the tales that have come out since Sarah made it to a consulate and sought sanctuary. While America was founded on individual liberty and rights, the State Department has obviated such since the early 1900s with the rise of what is known as Wilsonian Democracy. If you are not familiar with this term, when you finish reading this, go to the main page and click on U.S.S. Clueless Essential Links and read up. You will be glad you did.

After Independence, America did not have the might to fight England or other powers, but eventually did so anyway with impressments of seamen as the root cause of the war. What is now known as the War of 1812 was much more widely known for many years as
“The War of Jenkin’s Ear” over a particular incident that pushed us into war. It was the problems with attacks on individual Americans, and American shipping, that added the words “to the shores of Tripoli” to the Marine Hymn.

Yet this has changed and the 1900s saw many shameful and cowardly acts by the State Department, which failed miserably and utterly in many cases to defend individual Americans around the world. In the late 1900s, much of this took place when we did not want to upset allies or potential allies, and gave them leave to rape, torture, and murder American citizens who were inconvenient to them.

This history does colour my judgment towards the present situation. Given the back history of State, I can easily believe that neither it nor its career personnel would be willing to act in the best interest of an individual citizen. Most especially if it was inconvenient or might upset someone still considered an ally.
Okay, so we have a little girl who is kidnapped and a State Department that in no way, shape, or form would do anything about this clearly illegal act. Damn custody decrees, damn the fact that the kid was an American Citizen and therefore their boss, and damn all. They had to protect the best interests of the government, forgetting that we are the Government.

Fast forward 18 or so years, to a girl who is now a woman. A woman who reports abuse of various stripes by her father and her stepmother. A woman who was forced to marry a man chosen for her by her father. A woman who by Saudi law could not refuse him sex after a marriage to which she did not agree. A woman who cannot file rape charges as a result of non-consensual sex because of Saudi “law.” A woman who risked death by contacting her mother through the internet despite being forbidden to do so, but grabbed an opportunity and made the most of it. A woman who begged for help, and then did something that took massive courage: She fled and requested sanctuary at the closest American consulate.

She did this knowing that if caught that she would be punished, most likely by loosing her life. She did this despite having to do it on her own, since according to news interviews the consulate was not a taxi service and could not be bothered with picking up a Citizen who was in danger and needed help.

Despite the disinterest of the consulate, she did indeed make it with her two children in tow. This is where tales differ, and differ widely. According to her and her mother, she was denied food for a while because she did not have any money to buy it. Her mother was told by a consular official to wire money so she could get things. She was made to meet with Saudi officials on ten minute or less notice who demanded her return and the return of her children. She was then allegedly forced by a consular official to sign a document giving up her children to her husband and/or the Saudi government as a condition of her being allowed to leave. Other things are alleged, though to be fair State has a very different version of events.

Knee-jerk reactions aside, there are some strong questions here. Leaving aside the abandonment of an American Citizen to kidnapping, rape, and more, there are some legal questions that need answering. I attempted to get some help on this, but Eugene Volokh is swamped and was unable to recommend anyone else to contact. I contacted Steve at Little Tiny Lies, but the questions are outside his prevue.

So, what you are going to get are my takes on Constitutional law and a few more questions.

First, there is no doubt in my mind that Sarah was and remains and American Citizen. She was born of an American mother and was apparently born on United States Territory, thus making her a full, natural born Citizen. For those not familiar with that phrase, it means someone born on U.S. soil. American citizens can be born overseas, but unless they are born on U.S. soil, they can never be President. I came to know of this through the children of an uncle who was stationed overseas with the military. They tried hard to have all their children on U.S. soil to preserve that right, but were not able to do it for at least one of them.

Second, since she is an American Citizen, Sarah’s children should be American Citizens as well, even if born overseas and as the result of a forced marriage/rape. If this is not so, and you are a lawyer, please do let me know.

Third, the matter of custody should therefore be a province of the courts since the children are technically dual nationals as I understand it. Again, if this is not correct, please do let me know.

I bring up some of this because of a column by Wendy McElroy, in which she discusses the advisability of getting involved with what amounts to a custody dispute. Yet, I feel that while it is a custody dispute, that there are other matters that make it much more.

It is about the right of an American Citizen, Sarah Saga, to the protections guaranteed her by the Constitution and denied to her by the Department of State for reasons of political expediency.

It is about the rights of her children, who appear to my eye to meet the qualifications of citizenship, to those same protections

It is about doing what is right, not what is easy.

The Chamberlain brigade is already beginning a counter-spin to the tale and in all fairness I must admit that they may be telling the truth in some or all of it. Based on my experiences, and the history of this organization and recent actions and attitudes within it, I do have some strong doubts, however.

Yes, Sarah has been told she is free to leave at any time, but that she may not take her children with her. If the law says that they are not citizens, and if she was not forced into signing the forfeiture document but did so willingly and without coercion of any sort, then she must leave without them, no matter how heartbreaking it may be.

If, on the other hand, the children are Citizens, and/or the document was signed under any form of coercion, then they need to leave with her. The military has had a dictum long lost to State, we don’t leave anyone behind. If they have any claim on citizenship, then they must come out with her. The courts can then decide on custody and more, and the history of Saudi Arabia should be brought into the equation. If it takes military action to bring this about, then so be it.

It is far past time that the Department of State began attending to the responsibilities it owes to the Citizens who are its bosses and its Government. This case is as good a point as any.

-30-

UPDATE

Let’s tackle the easy one first. What makes a story news? Simple, it has impact or importance to society as a whole, or at least to the majority of the particular segment of the public that consumes your product, be it a broadcast or a magazine. Importance can be summed up as death, fire, flood, famine, earthquake, or other ravage of nature or man. It means that resources are damaged or lost, that transportation and/or communication are damaged or destroyed, and that the public business – commerce and otherwise – will be disrupted.

Human interest stories were originally done as ways to illustrate pure news. The human touch resonated with the reader, then later with the listener/viewer. They then moved into a full genre of their own, independent of the news of the day, for good and for ill. For the good in that they can bring things to the surface that need to be dealt with, and for the ill in that they allow a great deal of manipulation to take place without a good system of checks and balances. For every Cooke or Blair caught, there are likely many more who use or abuse the system to manipulate towards a particular viewpoint. The system is all too often more lax on human interest than