I don’t love George Clooney’s idiotic politics, but his insane hotness and general acting ability make him far more tolerable to me. Tolerable enough that I’ll watch him in certain movies. The same cannot be said for Alec Baldwin. (He’s probably the sole reason I don’t watch 30 Rock. Well, also, Jane Krakowski annoys me.) Or Sean Penn. Or what’s-his-name, except for The Shawshank Redemption.

Anyway, yes, I find Mr. Clooney beyond hot. He’s one of those guys that just gets hotter with age. Seriously. On The Facts of Life? Not hot. Kind of gross. (Maybe that was just the mullet, though.) ER? Very, very attractive. Now? Drool-inducing.

His new movie, Up in the Air, interested me from the trailer. But the real reason I’m really looking forward to seeing it? Yeah, that would be Anna Kendrick. She is incredible. There is lots of buzz — and I’m talking credible buzz from people in the know — that she could get an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actress. At the age of 25. For her first starring role. Not too shabby for a girl most people only know from her blink-and-miss-it roles in Twilight and New Moon. (Her zombie rant to Kristen Stewart in New Moon, however, is still one of my favorite scenes, throw-away or not.)

Get to know her. She’ll be around for a while.

So yesterday one of my oldest and favoritest (yes, I know, not a word — my blog, remember?) friends, Marcia, and I drove up to Austin for the day. It was awesome.

Originally we were going to stop in San Marcos so I could walk around drooling in the Crate & Barrel outlet, but the parking lots were insane. Since we didn’t really feel like parking 12.5 miles away from our intended destination, we decided to scrap Crate & Barrel and jump back on 35N to Round Rock to walk around drooling in IKEA. (Round Rock is just north of Austin.)

I seriously haven’t been to IKEA since I went with my friend, Shelby, back in 1999 when she still lived in Chicago. I love it and am so ecstatic that San Antonio is finally getting one of our own. M and I followed the arrows and checked out the entire store. I bought some adorable miniature stuffed animals for 49 cents apiece for Kailin, Emily, & Elijah — blue elephant for Em, pink hippo for K, green-spotted alligator for Eli — and we each got awesome wrapping paper for 99 cents a roll.

We were going to partake of the awesome cinnamon rolls, but we decided to eat an early dinner instead, and so headed back to Austin.

If you’re not a Texas native and/or don’t watch Diners, Drive-Ins & Dives on Food Network, you probably haven’t heard of Magnolia Cafe. It’s divine. They make the most fabulous gingerbread pancakes ever. They’re ginormous. Seriously, they cover the entire plate. We both got those (M added chocolate chips to hers) and coffee. Perfect. Dinner.

Magnolia Cafe - S. Congress

After dinner, we headed to the movie theater. We’d picked the Alamo Drafthouse on S. Lamar because of its proximity to Magnolia, but when we got there, the next three showings of New Moon were sold out. Not being from Austin, we were a bit perplexed — we had no idea where other theaters were. But I pulled out my phone and utilized the Windows Live search option, which provided me theaters in the Austin area showing NM, their addresses, and all show times. We picked a larger theater showing it on several screens, plugged the address into my Sprint Navigation feature, and Colleen, the super-nifty computerized voice, told us turn-by-turn how to get to the theater. At one point, she even rerouted us to avoid traffic. I love technology.

Even though this was my fourth time seeing New Moon, I enjoyed it as much as I did the first time. I know I’ve said this ad nauseum, but it really is SO MUCH BETTER than Twilight. (Although nothing will ever top the vampire baseball scene.) This was M’s first time, and she loved it as much as I did. And we both had to remind ourselves several times that Taylor Lautner is frakking jailbait.

After the movie let out, we went back to South Congress so we could buy scrumptious cupcakes at Hey, Cupcake!, which is this adorable silver trailer parked on the side of the road that sells fresh-baked cupcakes every day. I got red velvet with cream cheese frosting and M got a snowcap, which is chocolate with white buttercream frosting. We walked a couple blocks down to Jo’s, an outdoor coffee shop, and got lattes, and then hit the road back to SA.

All in all, it was a most splendiferous day. I enjoyed it immensely.

Kailin and Emily are sound asleep in the living room, cozy in flannel pajamas and snuggled under blankets and quilts. This year the weather’s cooperating and we’ll have a brisk Thanksgiving – lows in the 40s, highs in the upper 60s. I love Texas in the fall!

I’m thankful, as always, for my family. I got to spend time with three of my nieces and one nephew this evening, and, as always, it was the highlight of my day. I love those kids. I look forward to seeing them plus Elijah tomorrow; I look forward to seeing Ava and Sutton when they come to visit for Christmas; I can’t wait to see who God has picked for their newest sibling. I’m so proud of my brother and his wife and am thankful that their hearts were open to God’s calling that they adopt a child with special needs from China.

I’m thankful that we are truly one nation under God, even if we currently have a president and Congress who choose not to acknowledge that fact. They don’t have to — our history and our roots are clear.

Happy Thanksgiving!

The Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving

by Margaret Manning, Ravi Zacharias International Ministries

“In everything give thanks; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus” (I Thessalonians 5:18).

This year in the United States, perhaps more than any other, the national exhortation to give thanks seems cruel and inapplicable.  Unemployment is at its highest in the U.S. since the 1980’s, giving to charity is at its lowest in many sectors, and the news around the world makes us wonder if it is even possible to give thanks for anything.  Yet, praise and thanksgiving—even from those who struggle in circumstances where we would be stretched to find any reason for praise—are always becoming and indicate a gratefulness that transcends material bounty and benefit.

For ancient Israel, the concept of thanksgiving was explicitly tied to remembering all that God had done on their behalf.  The people were told to remember the God who “brought them out of the land of Egypt” and to remember “the days of old” when the Lord found them “in a desert land, and in the howling waste of a wilderness; He encircled them, He cared for them, He guarded them as the pupil of His eye” (Deuteronomy 5:15; 32:7-12).  The psalmists remind the people to “remember that God was their rock, and the Most High God their Redeemer” (Psalm 78:35), and Job cries out in defiant praise after losing everything, “The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away.  Blessed be the name of the Lord” (Job 1:21).

A spirit of thanksgiving marked the earliest followers of Jesus as well.  These early believers were so overjoyed at the Spirit’s work among them that they shared meals, their property and possessions, and were continually praising God (Acts 2:42-47).  Paul exhorted the Philippian Christians to offer their prayers and supplications “with thanksgiving” (Philippians 4:6), and the endless song around the throne of heaven in Revelation sounds the chorus for “blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever” (Revelation 7:12).  Indeed, it is the will of God, from beginning to end, for us to give thanks and praise.

Our national day of Thanksgiving in the United States calls our particular attention to offering thanks, and it was good and fitting for our earliest leaders to have thought it important for the entire nation to stop and give thanks.  Written in 1782, one of the earliest declarations concerning the day of Thanksgiving read:

“The United States in Congress assembled, taking into their consideration the many instances of divine goodness to these States:—– Do hereby recommend to the inhabitants of these States in general, the observation of THURSDAY the twenty-eight day of NOVEMBER next, as a day of solemn THANKSGIVING to GOD for all his mercies: and they do further recommend to all ranks, to testify to their gratitude to GOD for his goodness, by a cheerful obedience of his laws, and by promoting, each in his station, and by his influence, the practice of true and undefiled religion, which is the great foundation of public prosperity and national happiness.”(1)

This declaration reflects that the mark of any great nation, like the distinction of God’s people in Scripture, is in thanksgiving.  Thanksgiving is God’s will for God’s people because when we give thanks for the faithfulness of God, there is no room for jealousy of what others have, no room for complaining about what we lack.  Even in times of deepest sorrow, there is a joy that rises up within the heart to praise even with tears.  Thanksgiving makes the heart full of gladness, which overflows our lives and spills out into acts of kindness and generosity.  When we are grateful, we cannot help but share our gratitude.  And this is the will of God for our lives.

I am grateful for a day set apart to focus on thanksgiving, but I am challenged to live into God’s will for my life by giving thanks in everything every day of the year.  As the author of the letter to the Hebrews sums up: “Through God then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God that is the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name.  And do not neglect doing good and sharing; for with such sacrifices God is pleased.”(2)

(1) Thanksgiving Proclamation, State of New-Hampshire, Committee of Safety, Exeter, November 1, 1782.

(2) Hebrews 13:15-16.

It’s been one of those weekends.

Scratch that.

It’s been one of those weeks.

Highly emotional people who also tend to over-identify with pop culturish stuff such as myself should really pace themselves when it comes to the angst.

I sobbed my way through 2012 on Tuesday. I couldn’t help it — of all the apocalyptic end-of-the-world movies, it was the most realistic. Either way, seeing St. Peter’s Basilica crumble, its dome toppling over onto the mass of faithful crowded in St. Peter’s Square, is sobering — as is watching the John F. Kennedy caught up in a massive tsunami wash over the White House.

I watched New Moon in back-to-back showings on Friday. New Moon is my second-to-last favorite book of the series for the exact reason it’s Kristen Stewart’s favorite — it is the most emotional. As she described it in some interview I saw this week, Bella is at her absolute highest and her absolute lowest in a matter of a couple of chapters. I still have only read it all the way through once. The second time I picked it up, I avoided all the Bella-lying-in-a-catatonic-heap-on-the-forest-floor stuff and skipped ahead to the part where Alice comes back. Trust me — the movie gets it almost as gut-wrenching. I was skeptical after seeing the forest scenes in the trailer, but the trailer doesn’t do the actual scene justice in the least. It is really pretty heart-rending. For some reason, when Kristen cries, I cry. I think it has to do with Speak.

This afternoon I watched four straight episodes of The OC that I hadn’t seen. (I abandoned the show shortly after Season 3 began.) Of course, they were really angst-ridden, and worse (for me), they were Seth-and-Summer angst-ridden. Instead of putting something happy on, I watched the entire disc.

I’ve been listening to Dashboard Confessional’s newest album, Alter the Ending. Chris Carraba is perhaps the king of emo music, and Ending is no different than his early work. It’s great, but it’s a bit depressing.

Also I can’t stop listening to one of my newest favorite songs, “Chemistry of a Car Crash,” by Shiny Toy Guns. Cheerful it isn’t. I love it.

Perhaps while I’m at it I should go watch all 64 episodes of Veronica Mars in a row. That should numb me for a while.

These violent delights have violent ends / And in their triumph die, like fire and powder, / Which, as they kiss, consume. (Romeo and Juliet, Act 2, Sc. 6)

I usually see movies that I like several times while they’re still in the theater; that’s nothing new. However, I haven’t seen a movie twice on the same day since Scream.

Today, that changed.

I went and saw New Moon, the sequel to Twilight, with great anticipation. From what I’d heard in interviews with new director Chris Weitz and from several cast members, it was much better than the first installment of the saga. For one thing, the budget was significantly larger, but a new director brings an entirely different approach and look to a movie.

That was definitely the case with Weitz. I always appreciated Catherine Hardwicke’s enthusiasm for Twilight, but her finished product felt off somehow in certain areas. I know they were constrained by a very limited budget, and that’s why certain plot arcs seemed so rushed — most notably, the fact that Bella and Edward went from barely knowing one another to wanting to die for each other in, like, 10 minutes — and I gave the movie quite a lot of leeway.

Though New Moon is not much longer than Twilight, Weitz did so much more than Hardwicke did in sheer storytelling. He used gimmicks like radio broadcasts and a series of voiced-over emails from Bella to Alice’s canceled email account to move the plot along and provide pertinent details.

The CGI work was fantastic. I was worried about extended scenes involving the wolves, but I was pleasantly surprised.

I was always extremely happy with the casting. The guys playing Quil, Embry & Jared were obviously chosen more for their Native American ancestry than their acting talent, but they only have a few lines each, so it wasn’t too much of a distraction. Chaske Spencer (Sam Uley) and Alex Meraz (Paul) are frakking hot. Seriously hot. Good acting, too. I also liked Tinsel Korey, who plays Emily, Sam’s scarred fiancee.

I know that Bella’s friends aren’t exactly like they are in the book — no Lauren; Eric’s role is basically Eric and Ben combined; very little Tyler after the van scene in Twilight; etc. But I really like Mike Welch (Mike), Justin Chon (Eric), Christian Serratos (Angela), and Anna Kendrick (Jessica) — especially Anna Kendrick. Her interpretation of her character made me actually like Jessica — because Jessica in the books is not all that likeable. (An aside, I recently saw a preview for her new movie, Up in the Air, also starring George Clooney and Vera Fermiga, and it looks really good.)

Same with Taylor Lautner, honestly. I’ve never been a huge Jacob fan, especially after he’s such a douche at the end of Eclipse, but Taylor is so awesome that he makes me actually like Jake and feel just the tiniest bit sorry for him. And holy crap. When they say he bulked up for the role, they are so understating it. The kid is ginormous. He is so incredibly defined. I can see why Taylor Swift is so taken with him.

The Volturri were fantastic. I’ll admit — I wasn’t sure when I heard that Dakota Fanning had been cast as the sadistic Jane, but wow. She was amazing. I was able to pick them all out before names were said — Aro, portrayed magnificently by Michael Sheen; Marcus; Caius; Demetri; Felix; and of course, Jane and her twin brother, Alec, played by Cameron Bright. I think the PTB did exceptionally well at breathing life into these particularly creepy characters of Stephenie Meyer’s.

The Cullens, with the exception of Alice, aren’t in the movie much, but the birthday party scene was really well done. I don’t like Jasper’s new hair, but whatever. Also, there’s a really poignant exchange between Bella and Carlisle while he’s stitching up her arm after Edward throws her into the table to avoid Jasper’s attack. I don’t remember it being quite so memorable in the book, but Peter Facinelli and Kristen Stewart did an excellent job. It was actually very touching.

I adore Ashley Greene. I’ve thought she and Kristen were perfectly cast from the very beginning. I was especially looking forward to New Moon because Alice’s role is so much bigger than it was in Twilight. We really get a sense of the relationship between Alice and Edward, and also Alice and Bella.

Rob is Rob. I love Edward. I’m not crazy about Rob, but he does a good enough job in the role. I just wouldn’t swoon (at all) if he walked by me on the street. (Kellan Lutz or Jackson Rathbone, on the other hand…)

I thought Kristen did a good job as Bella in Twilight; I thought she was so much deeper in the role in New Moon, which points to the better director in Chris Weitz. He was able to get so much more emotion out of her than she exhibited before.

Another aspect that I liked so much more this time around was the makeup. Edward didn’t look like he was wearing theatrical powder and lipstick the whole time. The vampires’ eyes were much more realistic — and much closer to the way they’re described in the books. Kristen’s hair and makeup were better. The costuming was better — especially Ashley Greene’s.

I felt New Moon moved a lot more smoothly and succintly than Twilight did. Alexandre Desplat’s score was alternately beautiful, haunting, forlorn, and suspenseful. While I really liked Twilight’s soundtrack, I especially love New Moon’s. Death Cab’s “Meet Me On the Equinox,” which they wrote especially for the movie, is awesome. Other exceptional contributions come from The Killers, Muse, Ok Go, Bon Iver, Black Rebel Motorcycle Club, and several artists I hadn’t been familiar with before now, like Lykke Li and Thom York.

I really loved New Moon. I never once glanced at my watch or felt like my attention was wandering, nor did I ever feel the story lagged. I was fully engaged with what was taking place onscreen, and that is always the hallmark of a great movie.

I promised Kevin and Mia and their cousins I’d take them to see it Thanksgiving night; I’m going to Austin next weekend with my friend to see it; and another friend wants to see it with me, so I figure I’ll see it in the theater at least three more times.

It’ll be worth it.

Paul (Alex Meraz), Embry (Kiowa Gordon), Sam (Chaske Spencer), Jake (Taylor Lautner) & Jared (Bronson Pelletier)

Bella (Kristen Stewart) & Edward (Rob Pattinson)

Alice (Ashley Greene) & Bella

Eric (Justin Chon), Mike (Mike Welch), Jessica (Anna Kendrick) & Angela (Christian Serratos)

Aro (Michael Sheen), Caius (Jaime Campbell Bower) & Alec (Cameron Bright)

Jane (Dakota Fanning), Edward & Alice

Demetri (Charlie Bewley) & Alice

Charlie (Billy Burke) & Bella

All said and done I stand alone
Amongst remains of a life I should not own;
It takes all I am to believe in the mercy that covers me…

I just woke up from the most random of random dreams. None of it made sense. Nothing flowed. People just…appeared. One of those people was my sister. She just appeared, out of nowhere, and, of all things wanted to know my favorite song out of every song out there.

At first, I protested that I loved music too much to have just one favorite, but seconds later realized that I did, in fact, have a “favorite of favorites.” It’s “Worlds Apart” by Jars of Clay, the final song on their debut album, which premiered in 1994.

Fifteen years later, it is still as evocative and profound as it was then. And though I’ve heard it dozens and dozens of times, when it gets to the bridge, the tears slide down my cheeks every time.

I was singing it in my mind as I woke up this morning, and it made me think of my grace vs. karma post yesterday. I am more baffled than ever how anyone who lives in reality rather than the delusion of wishful thinking could believe that karma could possibly exist.

Is it fair that there are children dying of hunger and AIDS and the most heinous abuse imaginable — and often that which is not imaginable? Karma would say that those children did something to earn those afflictions.

Is it fair that there are men whose hearts are so perverted by a “peaceful” religion that demands its followers cut off the heads of the infidels and pour hot oil down their throats that they walk into a room on an Army base and mow down 44 people, killing 14 of them, in the name of that religion?

Is it fair that my grandmother’s brain is so diseased by Alzheimer’s that she melts down and yells hateful, harmful things at my mother, who has sacrificed so much to care for her?

No. It’s not fair. There is no karmic balance in a world where, often times, the good suffer and the bad prosper.

Which is why I’m glad that we’re dependent on a God of grace. There are those who would take the above scenarios and use them to convict a loving God who seems absent in the worst of times.

But that’s, sadly, what happens when we live in a fallen world. It’s what happens when we have a God who loved us so very much that, despite knowing every single bad thing that would ever happen, He chose to give us free will. Don’t you think He could’ve snapped His fingers and eradicated sin? Don’t you think He could’ve just made us all love Him? Of course. But would you rather have someone love you because they’re forced to, or because they choose to? God wanted our love to be genuine and not coerced, and so He gave us free will, even knowing that it would one day cost Him the live of His son.

My friend Steve commented on my last post about “spiritual” karma, and I understand what he meant. Except that are there any of us out there who deserve heaven on their own merit? There aren’t. Not even Billy Graham and Mother Teresa, the most virtuous people with whom I could come up.

Romans 3:23 tells us that we have all fallen short. All of us. And if Billy Graham falls short, how much further away do I fall? A great deal, let me tell you.

Thankfully we have Romans 5:8, which assures us that even while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Christ’s atonement is the great equalizer, and accepting it — and Him — allows me to one day stand shoulder to shoulder with Billy Graham…and Jeffrey Dahmer.

That’s right. I said Jeffrey Dahmer. The serial killer.

Because it is said that while he was in prison, he learned of Christ’s love, death, and forgiveness, and he confessed his sins and made Christ his savior. Which means that when he was killed by another inmate, he went to heaven.

I’m sure there are those out there who would be appalled by that fact. And I’m so glad they’re not judging me, because they obviously have forgotten Ephesians 2:8-9, which says, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith — and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God — not by works, lest any man should boast…”

We cannot earn our way to heaven, and we cannot sin our way out of it, once we have accepted Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf and made Him Lord of our lives.

Which brings me back to my weird dream and my favorite song.

It so aptly describes me. And I am so glad that we have the grace of a loving God, which takes our world apart.

“Worlds Apart” — Jars of Clay
I am the only one to blame for this
Somehow it all ends up the same
Soaring on the wings of selfish pride
I flew too high and like Icarus I collide
With a world I try so hard to leave behind
To rid myself of all but love, to give and die

To turn away and not become
Another nail to pierce the skin of one who loves
more deeply than the oceans,
more abundant than the tears
Of a world embracing every heartache

Can I be the one to sacrifice
Or grip the spear and watch the blood and water flow

Take my world apart
I am on my knees
Take my world apart
Broken on my knees

All said and done I stand alone
Amongst remains of a life I should not own
It takes all I am to believe
In the mercy that covers me

Did you really have to die for me?
All I am for all you are
Because what I need and what I believe are worlds apart

I look beyond the empty cross
forgetting what my life has cost
and wipe away the crimson stains
and dull the nails that still remain
More and more I need you now,
I owe you more each passing hour
the battle between grace and pride
I gave up not so long ago
So steal my heart and take the pain
and wash the feet and cleanse my pride
take the selfish, take the weak,
and all the things I cannot hide
take the beauty, take my tears
my sin-soaked heart and make it yours
take my world all apart
take it now, take it now
and serve the ones that I despise
speak the words I can’t deny
watch the world I used to love
fall to dust and blown away
I look beyond the empty cross
forgetting what my life has cost
so wipe away the crimson stains
and dull the nails that still remain
so steal my heart and take the pain
take the selfish, take the weak
and all the things I cannot hide
take the beauty, take my tears
take my world apart, take my world apart
I pray, I pray, I pray
take my world apart…

Kevin and Mia’s older brother, Keenan, asked me a few weeks ago if I a) knew what karma was, and b) if I believed in it.

I said that yes, I knew what karma was — that it was basically the idea of do good, and good happens to you; do bad, and you get what you deserve — and that no, I didn’t believe it, because it was an absolute contradiction to Christianity and the concept of grace.

Oh, sure, there are Christians out there who believe in karma, and it always really baffles me. And then I think about the fact that there are those out there who believe Jesus was a good man, a prophet, even the Son of God — but they don’t subscribe to the rest of Christianity. I would imagine that’s how “Christians” also believe in karma.

I put quotations around “Christian” because it has become such a one-word-fits-all determinant in our culture. I know people who view “religious” people as either Catholic or Christian. They obviously don’t understand the terminology and view Christianity as a religion. It’s not. It’s a lifestyle. For example, Sean Hannity professes Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior, and he attends a Catholic church. That makes him both a Catholic and a Christian.

Other professing Christ-followers attend Baptist churches. Presbyterian churches. Methodist churches. Those are denominations. As I said before, Christianity is a lifestyle orchestrated around the fact that one has, as Romans 10:9 says, “confessed with [his] mouth Jesus is Lord and believed in [his] heart that God raised Him from the dead.”

After Adam and Eve chose to exercise their free will and believe Satan (in serpent form) rather than God, therefore ushering sin into the world, mankind was separated from God. In the Old Testament, sacrifices were required to atone for that sin and to establish a connection with a Holy God who cannot tolerate nor look upon sin.

God established a new covenant when He sent His son, Jesus, as the ultimate sacrifice. All that was required of us was to accept that sacrifice, confess our sins, and claim Jesus as our savior. There is no other way into heaven. None. Jesus Himself said in John 14:6, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No man comes to the Father except through me.”

As Acts 4:12 says of Jesus, “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”

There is nothing we did or could ever do to earn salvation. Nothing. That is the very definition of grace. God’s love is, in fact, very conditional. He is holy. He is just. He is perfect. He cannot tolerate anything else. But because He is also unfailingly loving, He provided the conditions Himself, through the shed blood of His son, so that we might spend eternity with Him.

Karma teaches that if you live your life a certain way, either good things or bad things will happen. But that is not true. We are all guilty of wrongdoing. We are all deserving of punishment. There is no amount of good deeds we could do to atone for the bad that we’ve done.

Karma teaches “what goes around, comes around.”

Grace says, “even though you don’t deserve this, I’m giving it to you anyway.” Grace gives us the reward even though we deserve the punishment.

It took me a while to start watching Criminal Minds because I’m embarrassed to admit I listened to Matt Roush of TV Guide, who has this inexplicable hatred of the show. Now that I’ve seen every episode – most of them more than once, thanks to ion and A&E syndication – I honestly don’t understand his rather harsh criticism.

I can’t remember why I decided to watch a random Season 2 episode. Probably because it started off with a trio of high school soccer players, and I love soccer. It paid my bills for five or six years.

Anyway, I’m so glad I kept watching. Not only is it, in my opinion, one of the best episodes of the entire series, but it remains my favorite. It’s haunting and chilling and tragic and stomach-turning, but it is excellent.

This is one of the very, very few cases where I would argue against any type of prosecution of the two girls because they were clearly driven out of their minds by the days of sensory deprivation and psychological torture to which they were subjected. They cannot be blamed for choosing self-preservation.

I found this video on YouTube not long after I saw “North Mammon,” and it is an excellent tribute to the episode. Breaking Benjamin’s “Breath” is the perfect backdrop, matching the haunting tragedy of the story.

Great post today over at Conservatives4Palin. As usual, the “non-biased” media is foaming at the mouth over Governor Sarah Palin’s forthcoming book, Going Rogue: An American Life, out Tuesday. It’s becoming embarrassing. For them. But they’re too arrogant and inflicted with Palin Derangement Syndrome (certainly similar to the Bush Derangement Syndrome that still plagues so many liberals) to notice.

Fact-checking the fact-checkers
File this one under “Quit Making Stuff Up.” It took us all day, but we assembled the definitive debunking of the 11 Associated Press “fact-checkers.” Might we suggest a new profession for these folks?

As the always brilliant Mark Steyn pointed out:

That’s 11 writers for a 695-word report. What on? Obamacare? The Iranian nuke program? The upcoming trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?

No, the Associated Press assigned 11 writers to “fact-check” Sarah Palin’s new book…

Hey, don’t be too hard on the AP. CNN is also into fact-checking… SNL skits that are “mean” to Obama.

Here’s some real fact-checking. Fasten your seat belts…

On Governor Palin’s 2006 Campaign Financing

AP “FACTS”: “Of the roughly $1.3 million she raised for her primary and general election campaigns for governor, more than half came from people and political action committees giving at least $500, according to an AP analysis of her campaign finance reports. The maximum that individual donors could give was $1,000; $2,000 for a PAC.

Of the rest, about $76,000 came from Republican Party committees.”

THE TRUTH: Had the AP looked more closely at those “Republican Party” contributions, it might have discovered that most of the money came from eight different Alaska Republican women’s clubs – in other words, grassroots donors. The Republican women’s groups conduct year-round grassroots fundraising, from monthly luncheons to garage sales, and it was completely understandable that they would support a Republican woman gubernatorial candidate.

The Alaska Federation of Republican Women and seven different state women’s clubs (in Ketchikan, Sitka, Juneau, Kenai, Mat-Su, Fairbanks, and two in Anchorage) contributed $44,500 total. The remainder of the AP’s quoted $76,000 was money returned to the party chairman, contributions from district Republican organizations, and $20,000 from “in-kind” contributions/support from the state party.

The Governor’s campaign filed 31 financial reports with the Alaska Public Office Commission – all accurate and on time. It’s telling that the AP has the time to pour through tens of thousands of individual transactions line by line in the various reports, but fails to note these facts.

On Governor Palin’s Position on Bailouts and the Stimulus

AP “FACTS”: “Palin is blurring the lines between Obama’s stimulus plan — a $787 billion package of tax cuts, state aid, social programs and government contracts — and the federal bailout that Republican presidential candidate John McCain voted for and President George W. Bush signed.

Palin’s views on bailouts appeared to evolve as McCain’s vice presidential running mate. In September 2008, she said ‘taxpayers cannot be looked to as the bailout, as the solution, to the problems on Wall Street.’ A week later, she said ‘ultimately what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy.’

During the vice presidential debate in October, Palin praised McCain for being ‘instrumental in bringing folks together’ to pass the $700 billion bailout. After that, she said ‘it is a time of crisis and government did have to step in.’”

THE TRUTH: Apparently she is being slammed for supporting something that most people supported at the time because we were all told by almost every economist that if we didn’t support it the sky would fall and the country would look like that 2012 movie trailer. Oh yeah, and she was McCain’s running mate at the time too — would have been just ducky to have his VP on TV saying, “Maverick Two disapproves of what Maverick One is supporting.”

As for the stimulus, Governor Palin has consistently voiced her disapproval of the “porkulus” and she got hammered relentlessly for turning down stimulus dollars. Her veto of those dollars was eventually overturned by the legislature. She took a principled stance all along, and no one can re-write history on that.

In regards to bailouts after TARP, this is what Governor Palin told Wolf Blitzer on November 14, 2008:

“…the federal government must play an appropriate role in shoring up some of these industries that are hurting and will ultimately hurt our entire economy and the world’s economy if there aren’t some better decisions being made. But we also have to start shifting some debate here in our country and start talking about personal responsibility and responsibility of management in some of these corporations and companies so that from henceforth it’s not assumed that the federal government is going to be bailing out everybody who is going to soon line up, Wolf, for more taxpayer assistance.”

On Governor Palin’s Assertion that Reagan Faced A Worse Recession and Reagan’s Prescription for Getting Out of Recession

AP “FACTS”: “The estate tax, which some call the death tax, was not repealed under Reagan and capital gains taxes are lower now than when Reagan was president.

Economists overwhelmingly say the current recession is far worse. The recession Reagan faced lasted for 16 months; this one is in its 23rd month. The recession of the early 1980s did not have a financial meltdown. Unemployment peaked at 10.8 percent, worse than the October 2009 high of 10.2 percent, but the jobless rate is still expected to climb.”

THE TRUTH: According to Richard Rahn, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and chairman of the Institute for Global Economic Growth, “President Reagan inherited an economic situation even worse than the one President Obama has. When Reagan took office, the economy had been in recession for about a year, the unemployment rate was almost identical to today’s, but the labor force participation rate was smaller, and inflation was out of control.”

Mr. Rahn has also noted: “Both President Reagan and President Obama inherited an economy suffering from a year of no growth, along with rising unemployment. (The numbers are almost identical.) But Mr. Reagan faced a far direr situation in that inflation was in the double digits and the prime interest rate was at 20 percent. In contrast, Mr. Obama inherited an economy in which inflation was falling (in fact, inflation has been close to zero for this year) and interest rates were very low.”

The unemployment rate in November 1982 was 10.8%. Our current unemployment rate is 10.2%.

The first quarter of 1982 was the worst of the Reagan recession as the economy shrank 6.4%. So far, the economy has shrunk 6.3% in the fourth quarter of 2008 and 5.7% in the first quarter of 2009.

Governor Palin believes in Reagan’s supply side policies of cutting taxes and reining in spending. She never said anything about Reagan and the death tax. She was speaking about solutions to today’s economic troubles using the supply side lessons of the Reagan years.

On Governor Palin’s Natural Gas Pipeline (AGIA)

AP “FACT”: “Palin characterized the pipeline deal the same way before an AP investigation found her team crafted terms that favored only a few independent pipeline companies and ultimately benefited a company with ties to her administration, TransCanada Corp. Despite promises and legal guidance not to talk directly with potential bidders during the process, Palin had meetings or phone calls with nearly every major candidate, including TransCanada.”

THE TRUTH: This AP story from the last election was completely debunked by Alaska media and rightfully referred to as a “hit piece” by a Democrat lawmaker who supported the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA). AGIA was a bi-partisan effort that passed by a 58-1 vote. It was open, transparent, and the guidelines were very clear.

On Governor Palin’s Administration

AP “FACT”: “Palin ignores her own ‘revolving door’ issue in office; the leader of her own pipeline team was a former lobbyist for a subsidiary of TransCanada, the company that ended up winning the rights to build the pipeline.”

THE TRUTH: Many of the Governor’s gasline team drew upon private sector experiences to bring great insight to their roles in government – whether through economic, legal or development issues. The suggestion here is that the previous jobs held by the Governor’s staff influenced decisions. They did not. And in fact the Governor and her gasline team ensured a thoroughly objective process by providing researched recommendations made with public input while leaving all decisions in the hands of the legislature. Those decisions were overwhelmingly approved.

Additionally, the Governor personally witnessed from the previous administration the dangerous pattern of having state employees go immediately from handling state negotiations into private sector jobs concerning the same subjects, and she moved to put an end to that practice among staff, including those who worked on the gasline.

On Governor Palin’s Days on the Wasilla City Council

AP “FACT”: “As Wasilla mayor, Palin pressed for a special zoning exception so she could sell her family’s $327,000 house, then did not keep a promise to remove a potential fire hazard on the property.

She asked the city council to loosen rules for snow machine races when she and her husband owned a snow machine store, and cast a tie-breaking vote to exempt taxes on aircraft when her father-in-law owned one. But she stepped away from the table in 1997 when the council considered a grant for the Iron Dog snow machine race in which her husband competes.”

THE TRUTH: When the Palins purchased their prior home in Wasilla, it was already in violation of the “special zoning” rule. Such rules have always been only loosely enforced in Alaska. The home wasn’t in violation of any zoning regulation when it was originally built, but subsequent construction around it changed that. The Palins applied for a setback variance in order to sell their home. This is very common in Wasilla and elsewhere. There was nothing at all out of the ordinary about it, and it certainly did not involve any favoritism. The “potential fire hazard” in question was a carport that the Palins offered to tear down, but the new owner wanted it left alone.

Todd Palin’s old snowmachine store was located in Big Lake, which is 20 miles outside of the Wasilla city limits. Governor Palin’s father-in-law lives in Dillingham, which is about 450 miles away from Wasilla. The plane in question was not even registered in his name.

On Obama’s Cap-and-Tax Plan

AP “FACT”: “She correctly quotes a comment attributed to Obama in January 2008, when he told San Francisco Chronicle editors that under his cap-and-trade climate proposal, ‘electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket’ as utilities are forced to retrofit coal burning power plants to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

Obama has argued since then that climate legislation can blunt the cost to consumers. Democratic legislation now before Congress calls for a variety of measures aimed at mitigating consumer costs. Several studies predict average household costs probably would be $100 to $145 a year.”

THE TRUTH: As even the AP notes, Governor Palin correctly quoted Obama’s statement that “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

And despite how the AP would like to spin it, the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Bill would make prices skyrocket. As Ben Lieberman of the Heritage Foundation notes:

“…the higher energy costs kick in as soon as the bill’s provisions take effect in 2012. For a household of four, energy costs go up $436 that year, and they eventually reach $1,241 in 2035 and average $829 annually over that span. Electricity costs go up 90 percent by 2035, gasoline by 58 percent, and natural gas by 55 percent by 2035. The cumulative higher energy costs for a family of four by then will be nearly $20,000.

But direct energy costs are only part of the consumer impact. Nearly everything goes up, since higher energy costs raise production costs. If you look at the total cost of Waxman-Markey, it works out to an average of $2,979 annually from 2012-2035 for a household of four. By 2035 alone, the total cost is over $4,600.”

On the Exxon Valdez Decision

AP “FACT”: “That response is at odds with her reaction at the time to the ruling, which resolved the long-running case by reducing punitive damages for victims to $500 million from $2.5 billion. Environmentalists and plaintiffs’ lawyers decried the ruling as a slap at the victims and Palin herself said she was ‘extremely disappointed.’ She said the justices had gutted a jury decision favoring higher damage awards, the Anchorage Daily News reported. ‘It’s tragic that so many Alaska fishermen and their families have had their lives put on hold waiting for this decision,’ she said, noting many had died ‘while waiting for justice.’”

THE TRUTH: Governor Palin writes in her book: “As governor I directed our attorney general to file an amicus brief on behalf of plaintiffs in the case, and, thanks to Alaska’s able attorneys arguing in front of the highest court in our land, in 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the people. Finally, Alaskans could recover some of their losses.”

That is correct. Alaskans were able to recover some of their losses. However, it was also a tragedy of delayed justice. Alaskans had waited for nearly 20 years, and the Court reduced the amount of punitive damages for the victims.

Governor Palin voiced her support for the $2.5 billion in punitive damages in a press conference with the victims of the Exxon Valdez spill the day before oral arguments were heard. Naturally, she was disappointed that the Court reduced the amount to $500 million – which was especially painful coming as it did after many years of litigation in which some of the victims passed away without ever receiving justice. Even after the Court gutted the punitive damages award, Exxon argued that they shouldn’t have to pay interest on it.

However, it is a matter of record that the Supreme Court did, in fact, rule “in favor of the people.” The “disappointment” was in the reduction of the award and in the delay in justice.

Governor Palin’s immediate reaction to the decision expressed this frustration and disappointment. She said: “I am extremely disappointed with today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. While the decision brings some degree of closure to Alaskans suffering from 19 years of litigation and delay, the Court gutted the jury’s decision on punitive damages. It is tragic that so many Alaska fishermen and their families have had their lives put on hold waiting for this decision. My heart goes out to those affected, especially the families of the thousands of Alaskans who passed away while waiting for justice.”

On Alaska’s Earmarks

AP “FACT”: “Alaska is also one of the states most dependent on federal subsidies, receiving much more assistance from Washington than it pays in federal taxes. A study for the nonpartisan Tax Foundation found that in 2005, the state received $1.84 for every dollar it sent to Washington.”

THE TRUTH: There is no question that as a very young state Alaska requires more help with infrastructure funding to catch up with the rest of the Lower 48. However, Governor Palin was not governor in 2005. As governor, she reduced Alaska’s earmark requests by nearly 85%.

On Governor Palin’s Frugality in Her Personal Expenses While in Office

AP “FACTS”: “Although travel records indicate [Governor Palin] usually opted for less-pricey hotels while governor, Palin and daughter Bristol stayed five days and four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House luxury hotel (robes and slippers come standard) overlooking New York City’s Central Park for a five-hour women’s leadership conference in October 2007. With air fare, the cost to Alaska was well over $3,000. Event organizers said Palin asked if she could bring her daughter. The governor billed her state more than $20,000 for her children’s travel, including to events where they had not been invited, and in some cases later amended expense reports to specify that they had been on official business.”

THE TRUTH: The AP proves Governor Palin’s point by noting that she “usually opted for less-pricey hotels.”

The First Family’s travel was processed by the Administrative Services Department, whose director served under the previous governor. Governor Palin followed the same protocol that past governors had followed. The one obvious difference, however, is that Governor Palin and her family spent less than her two predecessors. In fact, she spent over $913,000 less on personal expenses in her first two years than former Governor Frank Murkowski did his last two years.

“Amending” the reports was not done to hide anything. It was standard practice for Governor Palin’s security personnel to submit the initial trip requests with the basic details of the trip to the Administrative Services Department. Later, the rest of the trip details would be added by the Governor’s personal staff.

And, by the way, perhaps someone could tell us how to find a cheap and safe hotel in New York City. And does anyone think she took a 9 hour flight to the east coast and didn’t do any other business. Riiight. Maybe we can ask Andree McLeod for the Governor’s calendar for that day, seeing as how Andree wasted hundreds of hours of work time of state personnel for her FOIA requests of the Governor’s emails, calendars, and, ah… we don’t know… Piper’s finger paintings.

The simple fact is that Governor Palin and her family spent significantly less than the prior two administrations despite having a much larger family. That is a fact. Clearly frugality was important to her.

On Governor Palin’s Interview with Vogue

AP “FACT”: “Says she tried to talk about national security and energy independence in her interview with Vogue magazine but the interviewer wanted her to pivot from hydropower to high fashion.

THE FACTS are somewhat in dispute. Vogue contributing editor Rebecca Johnson said Palin did not go on about hydropower. ‘She just kept talking about drilling for oil.’”

THE TRUTH: Governor Palin wanted to talk about resource development. The Vogue contributing editor confirms this. Hydropower is one of many alternative sources of energy used in Alaska. “…hydropower to high fashion” is used as a turn of phrase. Are they really this obtuse?

On Governor Palin’s “Ambitions”

AP “FACT”: “Few politicians own up to wanting high office for the power and prestige of it, and in this respect, Palin fits the conventional mold. But ‘Going Rogue’ has all the characteristics of a pre-campaign manifesto, the requisite autobiography of the future candidate.”

THE TRUTH: We didn’t realize writing a book was a declaration of anything other than the desire to tell one’s story.

Oh yeah, and one more thing…

We got a tip from our very own reliable anonymous source. Apparently the McCain campaign racked up legal costs in Alaska and said repeatedly it would pay for them. When the bill was discussed and submitted, according to the campaign’s wishes, it was turned down after the election and officials said the campaign would have paid if the campaign had won. Among the dollars – nearly $50,000 for vetting. Charming. Again, we ask you folks to consider this: When has the McCain staffers ever behaved honorably or honestly to this woman? Never.

We’ll keep you posted of more facts.

Oh yeah, be sure to read her book. We believe in letting her speak for herself without these McCain “staffers” playing their CYA games. They ran the worst campaign since… well, Bob Dole (nah, Dole was better. At least he had Kemp). The only bright spot during the last election was Sarah Palin. We voted for her, and only for her.

The Obama Administration’s decision to allow 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to stand civilian trial in New York City is disgusting, insulting, and a slap in the face to all of the families who lost loved ones in the worst terrorist attack on US soil.

I guess we shouldn’t be surprised due to the fact that the word “terrorism” or any variation thereof cannot be spoken in official White House rhetoric or by its lapdog press corps.

My utter disdain for this man and his contingent of sycophants grows in leaps and bounds by the day. We’ve already had one terror attack on his watch — I shudder to think what’s to come.

If you harbor even the slightest bit of patriotism and love for this country, you will join with the families of the 9/11 victims and voice your outrage to this administration.

November 9, 2009

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear President Obama:

On September 11, 2001, the entire world watched as 19 men hijacked four commercial airliners, attacking passengers and killing crew members, and then turned the fully-fueled planes into missiles, flying them into the World Trade Center twin towers, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. 3,000 of our fellow human beings died in two hours. The nation’s commercial aviation system ground to a halt. Lower Manhattan was turned into a war zone, shutting down the New York Stock Exchange for days and causing tens of thousands of residents and workers to be displaced. In nine months, an estimated 50,000 rescue and recovery workers willingly exposed themselves to toxic conditions to dig out the ravaged remains of their fellow citizens buried in 1.8 million tons of twisted steel and concrete.

The American people were rightly outraged by this act of war. Whether the cause was retribution or simple recognition of our common humanity, the words “Never Forget” were invoked in tearful or angry rectitude, defiantly written in the dust of Ground Zero or humbly penned on makeshift memorials erected all across the land. The country was united in its determination that these acts should not go unmarked and unpunished.

Eight long years have passed since that dark and terrible day. Sadly, some have forgotten the promises we made to those whose lives were taken in such a cruel and vicious manner.

We have not forgotten. We are the husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, sons, daughters, sisters, brothers and other family members of the victims of these depraved and barbaric attacks, and we feel a profound obligation to ensure that justice is done on their behalf. It is incomprehensible to us that members of the United States Congress would propose that the same men who today refer to the murder of our loved ones as a “blessed day” and who targeted the United States Capitol for the same kind of destruction that was wrought in New York, Virginia and Pennsylvania, should be the beneficiaries of a social compact of which they are not a part, do not recognize, and which they seek to destroy: the United States Constitution.

We adamantly oppose prosecuting the 9/11 conspirators in Article III courts, which would provide them with the very rights that may make it possible for them to escape the justice which they so richly deserve. We believe that military commissions, which have a long and honorable history in this country dating back to the Revolutionary War, are the appropriate legal forum for the individuals who declared war on America. With utter disdain for all norms of decency and humanity, and in defiance of the laws of warfare accepted by all civilized nations, these individuals targeted tens of thousands of civilian non-combatants, brutally killing 3,000 men, women and children, injuring thousands more, and terrorizing millions.

It is morally offensive to offer Constitutional protections to individuals charged with murdering 3,000 individuals, in essence, to jeopardize justice for war crimes victims, in order to make an appeal to the Muslim world. The use of Article III courts after the 1993 World Trade Center attack didn’t stop any of the subsequent terrorist plots, including the attack on Khobar Towers, 19 Americans killed, the 1998 East African Embassy bombing, 212 killed, the USS Cole bombing, 17 sailors killed. The attacks of 9/11 were a resounding rebuke to the view that federal courts were an appropriate counterterrorism strategy. Afterward, we didn’t send law enforcement personnel to apprehend the perpetrators, we sent the United States military, who captured them and held them pursuant to the 2001 Authorization of the Use of Military Force (AUMF).

The American people do not support the use of our cherished federal courts as a stage by the “mastermind of 9/11″ and his co-conspirators to condemn this nation and rally their fellow terrorists the world over. As one New York City police detective, who lost 60 fellow officers on 9/11, told members of the Department of Justice’s Detainee Policy Task Force at a meeting last June, “You people are out of touch. You need to hear the locker room conversations of the people who patrol your streets and fight your wars.”

On May 21, you stated that military commissions, promulgated by congressional legislation and recently reformed with even greater protections for defendants, are a legal and appropriate forum to try individuals captured pursuant the 2001 AUMF, passed by Congress in response to the attack on America. Nevertheless, you announced a new policy requiring that Al-Qaeda terrorists should be tried in Article III courts “whenever feasible.”

We strongly object to the creation of a two-tier system of justice for terrorists in which those responsible for the death of thousands on 9/11 will be treated as common criminals and afforded the kind of platinum due process accorded American citizens, yet members of Al Qaeda who aspire to kill Americans but who do not yet have blood on their hands, will be treated as war criminals. To date, you have offered no explanation or justification for this contradiction, even as you readily acknowledge that the 9/11 conspirators, now designated “unprivileged enemy belligerents,” are appropriately accused of war crimes. We believe that this two-tier system, in which war criminals receive more due process protections than would-be war criminals, will be mocked and rejected in the court of world opinion as an ill-conceived contrivance aimed, not at justice, but at the appearance moral authority.

The public has a right to know that prosecuting the 9/11 conspirators in federal courts will result in a plethora of legal and procedural problems that will severely limit or even jeopardize the successful prosecution of their cases. Ordinary criminal trials do not allow for the exigencies associated with combatants captured in war, in which evidence is not collected with CSI-type chain-of-custody standards. None of the 9/11 conspirators were given the Miranda warnings mandated in Article III courts. Prosecutors contend that the lengthy, self-incriminating tutorials Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others gave to CIA interrogators about 9/11 and other terrorist operations–called “pivotal for the war against Al-Qaeda” in a recently released, declassified 2005 CIA report–may be excluded in federal trials. Further, unlike military commissions, all of the 9/11 cases will be vulnerable in federal court to defense motions that their prosecutions violate the Speedy Trial Act. Indeed, the judge presiding in the case of Ahmed Ghailani, accused of participating in the 1998 bombing of the American Embassy in Kenya, killing 212 people, has asked for that issue to be briefed by the defense. Ghailani was indicted in 1998, captured in Pakistan in 2004, and held at Guantanamo Bay until 2009.

Additionally, federal rules risk that classified evidence protected in military commissions would be exposed in criminal trials, revealing intelligence sources and methods and compromising foreign partners, who will be unwilling to join with the United States in future secret or covert operations if doing so will risk exposure in the dangerous and hostile communities where they operate. This poses a clear and present danger to the public. The safety and security of the American people is the President’s highest duty.

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal that “the challenges of terrorism trials are overwhelming.” Mr. Mukasey, formerly a federal judge in the Southern District of New York, presided over the multi-defendant terrorism prosecution of Sheikh Omar Abel Rahman, the cell that attacked the World Trade Center in 1993 and conspired to attack other New York landmarks. In addition to the evidentiary problems cited above, he expressed concern about courthouse and jail facility security, the need for anonymous jurors to be escorted under armed guard, the enormous costs associated with the use of U.S. marshals necessarily deployed from other jurisdictions, and the danger to the community which, he says, will become a target for homegrown terrorist sympathizers–like the recent Fort Hood shooter–or embedded Al Qaeda cells.

Finally, there is the sickening prospect of men like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed being brought to the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan, or the courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia, just a few blocks away from the scene of carnage eight years ago, being given a Constitutionally mandated platform upon which he can mock his victims, exult in the suffering of their families, condemn the judge and his own lawyers, and rally his followers to continue jihad against the men and women of the U.S. military, fighting and dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan on behalf of us all.

There is no guarantee that Mr. Mohammed and his co-conspirators will plead guilty, as in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, whose prosecution nevertheless took four years, and who is currently attempting to recant that plea. Their attorneys will be given wide latitude to mount a defense that turns the trial into a shameful circus aimed at vilifying agents of the CIA for alleged acts of “torture,” casting the American government and our valiant military as a force of evil instead of a force for good in places of the Muslim world where Al Qaeda and the Taliban are waging a brutal war against them and the local populations. For the families of those who died on September 11, the most obscene aspect of giving Constitutional protections to those who planned the attacks with the intent of inflicting maximum terror on their victims in the last moments of their lives will be the opportunities this affords defense lawyers to cast their clients as victims.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-conspirators are asking to plead guilty, now, before a duly-constituted military commission. Mr. President, the families of their victims have a right to know, why don’t you let them?

Respectfully submitted,

Tim Sumner
Brother-in-law of FDNY Joseph G. Leavey, 45, Ladder 15, WTC

Debra Burlingame
Sister of Captain Charles F. Burlingame III, pilot, American Flt. 77, Pentagon

CLICK HERE to add your name with ours.