Pentagon Refuses Military FlyOver: Christianity the Problem

by Maggie at Maggie’s Notebook

An organization in Idaho filed for permits for a military flyover, as they have done for 42 years. For 42 years the request was approved. In The Time of Obama, however, the Pentagon denied the God and Country Family Festival their ceremonial flyover.

Military FlyOver

Nampa, Idaho’s 43rd Annual Treasure Valley God and Country Festival applied for the FAA permit, which was approved. The next step was the Pentagon application, which was denied. The denial came because the event was “Christian in nature,” said the Pentagon, according to Reverend Patrick Mahoney on FOX News this morning, with Gretchen Carlson.

Spokespersons for the God and Country Family Festival say while their organization is definitely “Christian in nature,” but the flyover is a tribute “to the military and the freedoms that they stand for.

…we’re honoring the military when we do that flyover, and that’s why we do it. I think they made a bad decision.

Pam Baldwin, the executive director of The Interfaith Alliance of Idaho weighed in:

Everything is not about whether folks are Jews or Christians or Muslims,” she said. “If people are saying that, they’re probably looking for media attention or looking to disparage other faiths.”Baldwin questioned whether a flyover of the event would have been a prudent use of public resources, especially in light of the deep recession.

You know America, we must deal with this issue. The Constitution guarantees all Americans the freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. Non-believers and believers in other faiths are not free to take Christianity from us, or free to remove or deny the Christian principals that were integral to the founding of the United States and all of the history that brings us to today.

The mountain of evidence cannot be shoved under the rug, or worse yet, be overturned (amended) within our founding documents unless we allow it. This is not the time and place to reiterate such evidence, but perhaps we should define just what being a Christian nation means, since President Obama has denied our Christianity as he has traveled around the world. I’ll quote a Supreme Court justice from the best essay I have found on America’s “Christian nature.” The quote from WallBuilders is just a snippet of the documentation. I urge you to read the entire article, bookmark it for future reference and quote from it often:

Contemporary post-modern critics (including President Obama) who assert that America is not a Christian nation always refrain from offering any definition of what the term “Christian nation” means. So what is an accurate definition of that term as demonstrated by the American experience?

Contrary to what critics imply, a Christian nation is not one in which all citizens are Christians, or the laws require everyone to adhere to Christian theology, or all leaders are Christians, or any other such superficial measurement. As Supreme Court Justice David Brewer (1837-1910) explained:

[I]n what sense can [America] be called a Christian nation? Not in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or that the people are in any manner compelled to support it. On the contrary, the Constitution specifically provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Neither is it Christian in the sense that all its citizens are either in fact or name Christians. On the contrary, all religions have free scope within our borders. Numbers of our people profess other religions, and many reject all. Nor is it Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions. Nevertheless, we constantly speak of this republic as a Christian nation – in fact, as the leading Christian nation of the world. ⁸

So, if being a Christian nation is not based on any of the above criterion, then what makes America a Christian nation? According to Justice Brewer, America was “of all the nations in the world . . . most justly called a Christian nation” because Christianity “has so largely shaped and molded it.” ⁹

Back to the Treasure Valley God and Country Family Festival, no doubt we will begin hearing that the Pentagon doesn’t have the funds for the flyovers. Since Pentagon flyovers are always intended to salute our military and patriotism, and are usually accompanied by the National Anthem, I suggest we pull all the pork necessary from earmarks out of the budget and the stimulus to fund legitimate flyovers. Or cancel the Obama’s Wednesday night cocktail parties.

Blowing in the Wind

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse
fousesquawk





"...until they're forever banned....?


This July 4th, I was on the treadmill while our son was working in the garage on a cabinet. He had a tape going of Neil Young in concert. One of the songs was a rendition of "Blowing in the wind", a song written by Bob Dylan in the 1960s as a protest against war and injustice. It reminded me of that other hauntingly beautiful song of the 60s, "Where have all the flowers gone?" written by Pete Seeger as an anti-war song during the Viet Nam conflict. In both, the words are beautiful and mark their authors as great songwriters. Yet, when it comes to the subject of war, they are naive and simplistic. Let me tell you why on this day we commemorate our Independence, which was borne of a revolutionary war, and as we pause to honor our troops, past and present.

It is easy to talk of banning cannons (as Dylan does) or nuclear weapons as well. It is good to talk of outlawing war. But it is a Utopian vision that will never come to pass. What Dylan and Seeger have forgotten is that there will always be good and bad people in this world. Sometimes, extraordinarily bad people rise up to rule nations. Then you have bad nations with bad governments that mistreat their own people and usually, threaten and take over their neighbors.

Let's take Adolf Hitler, for example. One can write anti-war songs all day long and pass laws banning weapons and war in general. There was, indeed, a League of Nations in existence at the time, from which Hitler withdrew Germany. What did they do? What powers did they have to stop Hitler? It was up to the other European powers to stop Hitler. They chose not to-until he invaded Poland. World War Two was a war of survival for the Allies. We had to fight it, and we had to win it-both against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, two powerful nations ruled by evil governments. Had we not fought and won that war, no nation anywhere in the world would be living in freedom today-including those neutral nations like Switzerland and Sweden.

Today, we face other threats; Iran, North Korea, Islamic extremism. We are trying to deal with them in measured responses, but at some point, we may have to face them on the field of battle. (Of course, we are already fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.) Bob Dylan talked of banning weapons in "Blowing in the Wind". Seeger expressed the futility of sending soldiers off to fight wars in "Where have all the flowers gone?" Beautiful words, indeed. But are we not trying to ban "cannons" in Iran and North Korea (nuclear weapons)? If our current efforts through diplomacy and sanctions fail, what comes next? Do we wait until Seoul and Tokyo are wiped off the map and Tel Aviv as well? If that happens, do we continue to negotiate and pass sanctions in the UN? What then, Messers Dylan and Seeger? Or do we simply, in the name of peace, write off South Korea-a decent and developed nation and Israel and hope for the best in the "New World Order" to coin a phrase? Do you prefer to live under an international dictatorship?

Peace is grand, but war will never become a thing of the past, and anyone who thinks it will is naive. There is a lesson that the pacifist crowd has never learned; to quote Michael Medved, "pacifism never brings peace. What brings peace is a just and victorious war."

Happy 4th of July.

Independence Day 2009:The Theft of the American Dream

by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

July 4th, 2009 finds Americans in turmoil. We do not like the direction our country has taken, and we admit that it veered off the rails several administrations ago. While not every unconstitutional deed happened on President Obama's watch, never have we had a President so determined to shred our rule of law, the life blood of the Nation and at the time, the real life blood of our Founding Fathers.

Samuel Adams, James Madison, Ben Franklin, George Washington,
Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, John Adams

Never have we had a Congress so eager to let the tattered shreds of the Constitution that it allowed to be shredded in the first place, simply lie on the floor to be tread and tromped upon until the night crew comes along to clean up the mess, haul it out and pile it on the trash heap of what was once the American dream...the pursuit of happiness.

Never until now, have we had a Congress allow a President to steal our private industry, choose our light bulbs, our automobiles, our thermostat setting, our zoning laws, rate our homes before we can sell them, prohibit and shame us for travel, and appoint multiple Czars to avoid the dictates of the very Congress that is our system of checks and balances. Never have we had a Congress with such a small measure of selflessness.

The following are from the HBO production of John Adams. Each video and its message stands alone.

The Vote for a Free and Independent United States of America (Video)

Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson fine tune the Declaration of Independence (Video)

Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton discuss the U.S. Treasury (Video)

John Adams Speech before the Continental Congress - On Being Free (Video)

July 1st and 2nd, 1776: Toil, Blood and Treasure Needed

by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

This Independence Day Tribute will stay on top
Please scroll down for current posts

Our Constitution was made for only a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. -John Adams

Thank you to Andrew Colvin at The Constitution of the United States for the John Adams quote above.

*****

The following is an excerpt from David McCullough's book, John Adams. It takes the reader through the events of the two tense days when the weight of liberty weighed heavily on our Nation's founders. Much was at stake. Every vote counted. The rains pelted down. Caesar Rodney from the Delaware delegation was missing and his vote for the new republic was sorely needed. British warships were just off shore...

July 1st and 2nd, 1776 - John Adams

Monday, July 1, 1776, began hot and steamy in Philadelphia and before the morning was ended a full-scale storm would break....

John Adams: This morning is assigned the greatest debate of all,...A declaration, that these colonies are free and independent states,...May heaven prosper the newborn republic.

At ten o'clock, with the doors closed, John Hancock sounded the gavel. Richard Henry Lee's prior motion calling for independence was again read aloud;...Immediately, [John] Dickinson, gaunt and deathly pale, stood to be heard. With marked earnestness, he marshaled all past argument and reasoning against "premature" separation from Britain.

Dickinson: My conduct this day, I expect, will give the finishing blow to my once great...and now too diminished popularity....But thinking as I do on the subject of debate, silence would be guilt.

Then he sat down and all was silent except the rain...No one spoke, no one rose to answer him, until Adams at last "determined to speak"....Outside the wind picked up. The storm struck with thunder, lightning, and pelting rain. He spoke on steadily, making the case for independence as he had so often before. He was logical, positive, sensitive to the historic importance of the moment, and looking into the future, saw a new nation, a new time,...

To [Thomas] Jefferson, Adams was "not graceful nor elegant, nor remarkably fluent," but:

Thomas Jefferson:...[Adams] spoke with a power of thought and expression that moved us from our seats.

...when later that evening a preliminary vote was taken, four colonies unexpectedly held back, refusing to proclaim independence. Pennsylvania stood with John Dickinson and voted no. The New York delegates abstained, saying they favored the motion but lacked specific instructions. South Carolina, too,...voted no, while Delaware, with only two delegates present, was divided. The missing Delaware delegate was Caesar Rodney, one of the most ardent of the independence faction. Where he was or when he might reappear was unclear, but a rider had been sent racing off to find him.

...Edward Rutledge [moved] that a final vote be postponed until the next day, implying that for the sake of unanimity, South Carolina might change its mind, Adams and others immediately agreed. For while the nine (9) colonies supporting independence made a clear majority, it was hardly the show of solidarity that such a step ought to have.

That night, at the City Tavern and at the lodging houses of the delegates, it was extremely tense. The crux of the matter was the Pennsylvania delegation, for in the preliminary vote three of the seven Pennsylvania delegates had gone against John Dickinson and declared in the affirmative, and it was of utmost interest that one of the three, along with Franklin and John Morton, was James Wilson, who, though a friend and ally of Dickinson, had switched sides to vote for independence. The question now was how many of the rest who were in league with Dickinson would on the morrow continue to "vote point blank against the known and declared sense of their constituents."

To compound the tension that night, word reached Philadelphia of the sighting off New York of a hundred British [war] ships, the first arrivals of a fleet that would number over four hundred.

Tuesday, July 2...it appears that just as the doors to Congress were about to be closed at the usual hour of nine 'clock, Caesar Rodney, mud-spattered, "booted and spurred," made his dramatic entrance....Almost unimaginable, he had ridden eighty miles through the night, changing horses several times, to be there in time to cast his vote.

Yet more important even than the arrival of Rodney were two empty chairs among the Pennsylvania delegation. Refusing to vote for independence but understanding the need for Congress to speak with one voice, John Dickinson and Robert Morris has voluntarily absented themselves from the proceedings, thus swinging Pennsylvania behind independence by a vote of three to two. What private agreements had been made the night before, if any, who or how many had come to the State House that morning knowing what was afoot, no one recorded.

Outside, more rain threatened, and at about ten came another cloudburst....New York continued to abstain, but South Carolina, as hinted...joined the majority to make the decision unanimous in the sense that no colony stood opposed....

So, it was done, the break was made...on July 2 , 1776, in Philadelphia, the American colonies declared independence. If not all thirteen clocks had struck as one, twelve had, and with the other silent, the effect was the same.

John Adams...in the privacy of two long letters to Abigail: It ought to be commemorated as the Day of Deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other from this time forward forever more.

Lest she [Abigail] judge him overly "transported,' he said he was well aware of the:

...toil and blood and treasure that it will cost us to maintain this declaration.

[Wednesday, July 3, 1776]...But there could be no pause. There was too much still to be done. Congress had to review and approve the language of the drafted declaration before it could be made official. Deliberation of a different kind commenced at once, continuing through the next morning,...when mercifully the temperature had dropped ten degrees, broken by the storm of the previous day.

For Thomas Jefferson it became a painful ordeal, as change after change was called for and approximately a quarter of what he had written was cut entirely. Seated beside Benjamin Franklin, the young Virginian looked on in silence. He is not known to have uttered a word in protest, or in defense of what he had written. Later he would describe the opposition to his draft as being like "the ceaseless action of gravity weighing upon us night and day."

[Thursday, July 4] In later years the excessive summer heat of Philadelphia would frequently figure in accounts of Thursday, July 4, 1776. In fact, the day, like the one before, was pleasantly cool and comfortable. In Congress, discussion of the Declaration appears to have continued through the morning until about eleven o'clock, when debate was closed and the vote taken. Again, as on July 2, twelve colonies voted in the affirmative, while New York abstained. Again, John Dickinson was absent. It all went very smoothly.

Congress ordered that the document be authenticated and printed. But it would be another month before the engrossed copy was signed by the delegates. For now, only the President, John Hancock, and the Secretary of the Congress, Charles Thomson, fixed their signatures.

With passage of the declaration of Independence thus completed, and having thereby renounced allegiance to the King and proclaimed the birth of a new United States of America, the Congress proceeded directly to other business. Indeed, to all appearances, nothing happened in Congress on July 4, 1776.

[Friday, July 5, 1776] ...printer John Dunlap had broadside editions available and the delegates were busy sending copies to friends.

[Saturday, July 6, 1776]...the Pennsylvania Evening Post carried the full text on its first page.

[Monday, July 8, 1776] The great day of celebration came Monday,...at noon in the State House Yard, when the declaration was read aloud before an exuberant crow. With drums pounding, five battalions paraded through the city and "on the common, gave us the feu de joie [thirteen cannon blasts], notwithstanding the scarcity of powder,"...Bells rang through the day and into the night. There were bonfires at street corners. Houses were illuminated with candles in their windows. In the Supreme Court Room at the State House, as planned, a half dozen Philadelphians chosen for the honor took the King's Arms down from the wall and carried it off to be thrown on top of a huge fire and consumed in an instant, the blaze lighting the scene for blocks around.

[Friday, August 2, 1776] The actual signing of the document would not take place until Friday, August 2, after a fair copy had been elegantly engrossed on a single, giant sheet of parchment by Timothy Matlack, assistant to the secretary of Congress. Nothing was reported of the historic event. As with everything transacted within Congress, secrecy prevailed. To judge by what was in the newspapers and the correspondence of the delegates, the signing never took place.

In later years, Jefferson would entertain guests at Monticello with descriptions of black flies that so tormented the delegates, biting through their silk hose, that they had hurried the signing along as swiftly as possible. But at the time Jefferson wrote nothing of the occasion, nor did John Adams. In old age, trying to reconstruct events of that crowded summer, both men would stubbornly and incorrectly insist that the signing took place July 4.

Apparently there was no fuss or ceremony on August 2. The delegates simply came forward in turn and fixed their signatures...Like the others, Adams and Jefferson each signed with his own delegation, Adams on the right, in a clear and firm, plain hand, Jefferson at lower center with a signature more precise and elegant, but equally legible.

The fact that a signed document now existed, as well as the names of the signatories, was kept secret for the time being, as all were acutely aware that by taking up the pen and writing their names, they had committed treason, a point of considerably greater immediacy now, with the British army so near at hand.

"The Declaration of Independence has produced a new era in this part of America," wrote Benjamin Rush, [a signer]..."The militia of Pennsylvania seem to be actuated with a spirit more than Roman. Near 2,000 citizens of Philadelphia have lately marched to New York."...

Even those in Congress who had been so ardently opposed, now, by word or deed, committed themselves to the "Glorious Revolution."

By July 3, 9,000 troops led by General William Howe had landed on Staten Island, where hundreds of Tories were on hand to welcome them. Howe himself had gone ashore on July 2, the very day that Congress had voted for independence, and in the days following, up the Narrows between Staten Island and Long Island came ever more British sails, including an armada of 130 warships and transports from England....By mid-August, 32,000 fully equipped, highly trained thoroughly professional British and German (Hessian) soldiers - more than the entire population of Philadelphia - were ashore on Staten Island, supported by ten ships-of-the-line and twenty frigates, making in all the largest, most costly British overseas deployment ever until that time.

By contrast, the American army gathered in defense of New York, digging in on Manhattan and Long Island...Nathanael Greene, wrote to tell John Adams that in reality the American force might number 9,000; and as Adams knew, they had no naval support - not a single available warship or transport. When, on July 12, with the wind and tide in their favor, the British sent two men-of-war up the Hudson River to demonstrate who had control, there was nothing to stop them. as the huge ships passed upstream, American militia stood gawking onshore, which evoked an angry general order from Washington declaring such "unsoldierly conduct" could only give the enemy a low opinion of the American army.

Early on Thursday, August 22, an exceptionally clear, bright day in New York, the British commenced their invasion of Long Island....wave after wave,...small boats...transports...15,000 English, Scottish, and Hessian troops were rowed across the Narrows from Staten Island to land without opposition on the broad shoreline near Gravesend, eight miles to the rear of the American stronghold on Brooklyn Heights.

Contrary to basic military doctrine, Washington had divided his forces between Manhattan and Long Island. Expecting a second, larger British landing on Manhattan, he remained there, while on Long Island his battalions braced themselves for the assault. But for days the British command under General William Howe made no move in force, not until August 27, when a furious battle was fought to the southwest of Brooklyn Heights....Washington was by then on the scene with reinforcements....

But the inexperienced Americans were outnumbered, outflanked, and overwhelmed in only a few hours.

Through the night, under the cover of darkness, rain, and fog, Washington's army had been ferried across the mile-wide East River, through powerful currents, in every conceivable kind of small boat, most of them manned by Massachusetts fisherman - some 9,000 to 10,000 troops...all moving with utmost silence.

Taken from David McCullough's John Adams, (hardback, selected portions of pages 125-163).
End John Adams text.

*****

John Adams is an awe-inspiring read. I didn't put it down for days and have read it over several times. The book is much more than the "signing" and the "war" that would go on and on until America prevailed.

A last thought about John Adams from the late David McCullough (page 163):

Few Americans ever achieved so much of such value and consequence to their country in so little time. Above all, with his sense of urgency and unrelenting drive, Adams made the Declaration of Independence happen when it did. Had it come later, the course of events could have gone very differently.

Obama Goes To War

Cross-Posted at PoliticalVindication.com

News breaks that the Barack Obama administration has attacked the Taliban in the Helmand River valley of Afghanistan. At first glance, the preparation makes it look promising - from the Washington Post:

The operation will involve about 4,000 troops from the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade, which was dispatched to Afghanistan this year by President Obama to combat a growing Taliban insurgency in Helmand and other southern provinces. The Marines, along with an Army brigade that is scheduled to arrive later this summer, plan to push into pockets of the country where NATO forces have not had a presence. In many of those areas, the Taliban has evicted local police and government officials and taken power.

But then you read this:

Once Marine units arrive in their designated towns and villages, they have been instructed to build and live in small outposts among the local population. The brigade's commander, Brig. Gen. Lawrence D. Nicholson, said his Marines will focus their efforts on protecting civilians from the Taliban and on restoring Afghan government services, instead of mounting a series of hunt-and-kill missions against the insurgents.

"We're doing this very differently," Nicholson said to his senior officers a few hours before the mission began. "We're going to be with the people. We're not going to drive to work. We're going to walk to work."

Similar approaches have been tried in the eastern part of the country, but none has had the scope of the mission in Helmand, a vast province that is largely an arid moonscape save for a band of fertile land that lines the Helmand River. Poppies grown in that territory produce half the world's supply of opium and provide the Taliban with a valuable source of income.

And then this:

In meetings with his commanders at forward operating bases over the past three days, [Brig. Gen. Lawrence D. ]Nicholson acknowledged that focusing on governance and population security does not come as naturally to Marines as conducting offensive operations, but he told them it is essential that they focus on "reining in the pit bulls."

"We're not going to measure your success by the number of times your ammunition is resupplied. . . . Our success in this environment will be very much predicated on restraint," he told a group of officers from the 2nd Battalion, 8th Marines on Sunday. "You're going to drink lots of tea. You're going to eat lots of goat. Get to know the people. That's the reason why we're here."

Is this the New Marine Corp? Is that what our Brigadier Generals are going to sound like from now on? Barack Obama thinks the reason why the Taliban are still causing problems in Afghanistan is that no one trusts each other. He's going to convince the river population to stop growing poppies and start growing corn (which will fuel the cars he's going to sell them). By then he expects the Taliban to just give up, wandering away rejected by the Afghanis like a girl drops a boyfriend. Does Barack Obama have any respect for the enemy at all?

This isn't an army he's sending into a very dangerous situation - it's a leftist delusion armed with conflict resolution DVDs and a letter from the State Department. Don't misunderstand me - an offensive force attacking a region naturally tries to pacify their surroundings by befriending locals and passing out goodies. We gained control of Afghanistan after the fall of the capital Kabul using less than a thousand American soldiers in the country. We know how to network and create relationships on the ground. But there was always an obvious show of the "offensive" capabilities we could use. The article reveals a very un-Marine-like perspective - actually declaring ourselves easy targets. If what we have landing on the ground in Afghanistan is a reflection of the mysterious Obama Doctrine, it's time to fret. But we're announcing to the world our military isn't there to fight - what do you make of that?

It could be that Obama's just feeding the international beast - doling out propaganda so our soldiers can do those hunt-and-kill missions behind the scenes that will deliver justice to the Taliban. We'll know soon enough the truth, but let's all pray that Obama isn't endangering our soldiers for a loopy interpersonal communication approach to retraining head chopping fundamentalists into iPod sporting soy bean farmers. War is serious business -keep it simple. The military is for breaking things and killing the enemy. The State Department is for appeasement. The congress is for spending, and the presidency is for buying. The United Nations is for show and cheap prostitutes. Understanding the nature of those institutions will reveal the limits to their effectiveness in the mission you give them.

Pray for our soldiers tonight.

Whatever Happened to the Kang Nam?

A note from Radarsite: Despite its being at least as dangerous, in its global implications, as the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, and despite the fact that, according the rather ambiguous Korea Herald report quoted below, this looming maritime crisis still remains factually unresolved, we hear no more about it. Did the Kang Nam really turn around and head back home without discharging it deadly cargo? Did Kim Jong Ill really blink? Or as one skeptic suggests, did it already offload at some unknown port? Either way, thanks to the overwhelming event of Michael Jackson's demise, and various other more important stories, it seems that the Kang Nam crisis is no longer deemed newsworthy. It's off the front page. But it's not off our radar screen. Did the world just avert a major catastrophe? Or has the world just decided to look the other way?

We will follow up on this. - rg

------------------------------------------------

From the Korea Herald

Kang Nam may be heading back home

The Kang Nam, a North Korean ship suspected to be carrying illicit weapons or related material, may be headed back home, according to diplomatic sources here.

"The ship is near our waters. That is about all I can say," said one diplomatic source on the condition of anonymity.

Experts said this could mean that the ship is on its way back to North Korea, indicating that the latest United Nations Security Council sanctions are taking a toll on the reclusive communist state.

"If the ship is on its way back, it would mean that Resolution 1874 is taking effect and causing the North to retreat," said Kim Tae-woo, vice president of the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses.

It has been almost two weeks since the Kang Nam set sail on June 17, but Seoul has claimed it has no information on the whereabouts of the ship.

The Kang Nam is the first North Korean ship to come under international scrutiny since the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 1874 that strongly recommends member states to help search and ground North Korean ships suspected of carrying illicit weapons or related material.

Some observers said the Kang Nam may have already unloaded such items, but others said the North would wait until the last minute, as the weapons and materials constitute a vital source of funds for the impoverished regime.

Myanmar, the alleged destination of the Kang Nam, has recently told the foreign press that it would not allow the ship to disembark if it is found to be indeed carrying such items.

The government of Myanmar already has an idea of the items on the ship as the Kang Nam must declare them in advance, according to Foreign Ministry officials.

"The fact that the Myanmarese government has spoken out, if it has as some of the news reports claim, it indicates that the resolution is working," said one Foreign Ministry official.

The Myanmar Embassy here said it had no comment.

A United States destroyer - USS John McCain led by Capt. Jeffrey Kim - is reportedly close on the Kang Nam's tail. But the destroyer is not authorized to forcefully search the North Korean ship.

Due to these limits, critics have said the resolution needs to plug the loopholes by allowing such actions by the member states.

(jemmie@heraldm.com)


By Kim Ji-hyun

Lionheart News: All Charges Dropped in Luton

[From Maggie] I know many of you have been following Lionheart and his travails in his hometown of Luton, England. If you are not familiar with Lionheart and his blog, the thing you need to know is that he has had his life upended for more than a year-and-a-half by authorities, because he wrote about the threat of Islam to his hometown and his home country. His freedom of speech was threatened through arrest and interrogation. Here's the latest from Lionheart, and it's a hallelujah moment:

All charges against me "dropped"
by Lionheart
July 1, 2009

I have been on police bail for 18 months on suspicion of 'stirring up racial hatred' through written material on this blog.

Lionheart

When my impending arrest first came about, I was in America and was advised by several American organisations and respected individuals that I should apply for political asylum there, but decided after speaking to my lawyer Mr SBLM (not Anthony Bennett who turned on Mr & Mrs McCann), that the best plan of action was to return to Britain and go through the motions of arrest and interrogation.

I was arrested, interrogated, then released and have spent the last 18 months backwards and forwards on police bail, awaiting the CPS to decide whether or not they were going to charge me and put me on trial for my words.

My next bail date was Friday 3rd July, but I have just received news from my solicitor that all charges against me have been dropped, so there is no case to answer over my blog.

Freedom of Speech has won, over the politically correct brigade who have tried silencing me, and members from their pet project British Islam who have wanted me prosecuted and silenced from speaking out against them and their religion. British Islam is a threat to every man, woman and child upon the British Isles, based upon 1400 years of experience and knowledge, and people like me, have a right and responsibility to talk about it openly, freely and honestly without fear of state persecution, prosecution or imprisonment.

May God bless each and every person who has supported me over the past 18 months, and beyond.

The battle for the heart and soul of Great Britain has begun!

"Deus Vult"

End Lionheart post

Friends, if you do not know about Lionheart and what is happening in parts of the U.K. with Islamic extremism [terrorism] please take some time to browse through his archives. The charges against have been dropped but the people of Luton and surrounds will be still be fighting to save their cities. Visit Lionheart and be aware.