WorldNetDaily News 10/09/2006
- Terror WMD feared in police poisoning
Hundreds of Iraqi officers, some bleeding from ears, others believed
dead, ill after breaking Ramadan fast
Posted: October 8, 2006 8:35 p.m. Eastern © 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Hundreds of Iraqi policemen fell sick from poisoning tonight at their
base in the southern part of the country after the evening meal
breaking their daily Ramadan fast, raising fears of a new type of
terrorist attack perhaps even involving chemical, biological or
An official with the Environment Ministry said 11 policemen had died.
That report was contradicted by the governor of Wasit province where
the poisoning took place. He told the Associated Press some of the
victims were in critical condition.
North Korea goes nuclear
Kim makes good on promise to conduct 1st atomic bomb test
Posted: October 8, 2006 11:15 p.m. Eastern © 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Defying worldwide appeals and threats of sanctions, North Korea
appears to have made good on a promise to conduct its first nuclear
A South Korean government official first reported a test had been
detected, according to South Korea's Yonhap news agency.
South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun later convened a meeting of top
security officials, the news agency said.
Israel on alert for Syrian attack
Security officials warn Damascus preparing its public for war
Posted: October 9, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern By Aaron Klein
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
JERUSALEM In spite of assertions by some officials here to the
contrary, Israel has placed its forces in the Golan Heights bordering
Syria on heightened alert for possible confrontations following a
series of statements by Syrian President Bashar Assad that his
military is preparing for war with the Jewish state, WND has learned.
Military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, say the
Israeli Defense Forces have fortified their positions in the Golan,
including increasing security at checkpoints and the stationing of
larger troop numbers at key areas throughout the territory.
Tancredo: Halt 'Security and Prosperity Partnership'
Congressman addresses 'North American Union' issue with commerce secretary
Posted: October 9, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern © 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
WASHINGTON Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., has asked Commerce Secretary
Carlos Gutierrez in a letter to suspend plans that would further a
proposal known as the "Security and Prosperity Partnership," until
Congress has a chance to examine its goals.
"I know the administration has given assurances that the SPP is not a
veiled effort to create a 'North American Union,' nor an effort
designed to dilute American sovereignty by entering into a European
Union-like arrangement with Canada and Mexico," said Tancredo,
chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.
"Unfortunately, however, [the SPP's] 'recommendations' seem to be at
odds with those assurances."
Tancredo, the author of "In Mortal Danger," which exposes what he sees
as the crisis of illegal immigration in the U.S., concluded, "As such,
I would ask that you consider suspending Commerce Department
participation in this tri-lateral effort."
Tancredo is one of four members of Congress who has signed on to a
resolution designed to express "the sense of Congress that the United
States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free
Trade Agreement Superhighway System or enter into a North American
Union with Mexico and Canada."
Several alarming "recommendations" from the U.S. component of the
"North American Competitive Council" suggested that the U.S., Canada
and Mexico "work toward acceptance of equivalent standards,
objectives, surveillance and enforcement," Tancredo noted.
In the section on pandemic control, the Council recommends that " all
borders and major roads remain open to allow the unimpeded flow of
domestic and international commerce."
Tancredo said the most troubling recommendations appear in the section
entitled "Improving Cross-Border Mobility (Goods/Services/People)." In
that section, the NACC recommends "the governments evaluate moving
customs processes further inland to take the pressure off the border,"
and to examine "harmonizing commercial processes for clearance of
The NACC goes even further, Tancredo said, by recommending "The
Secretary of DHS [Department of Homeland Security] set up a limited
short term pass program or otherwise facilitate people who come to the
border without documents," and that "... a reasonable grace period
should be established at border crossings during which time people
without documents are educated about their options and allowed to pass."
'Radical homosexuals' want to coerce compliance
Berkeley activists deprive Sea Scouts of First Amendment rights, brief
Posted: October 9, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern © 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
A decision by the city of Berkeley, Calif., to deprive the Sea Scouts
of a traditional benefit because their parent organization holds a
religious belief that does not allow homosexuals or atheists in
positions of leadership is being challenged before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Now the Thomas More Law Center has filed a legal brief in support of
the Sea Scouts, who are affiliated with the Boy Scouts of America, a
group that already has been before the Supreme Court where its right
to limit those in leadership to those who share its beliefs has been
"This is a clear example of how radical homosexuals using the powers
of government attempt to coerce compliance with their world views on
sex, marriage and religion," said Richard Thompson, president and
chief counsel for the Law Center.
The Sea Scouts are a public service organization serving area youth by
teaching them sailing skills, as well as carpentry and plumbing. Their
parent organization, the BSA, has a prohibition on homosexuals and
atheists in positions of leadership.
The original appeal was filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation and
contests the end of the 50-year connection between the Sea Scouts and
The case brief added by Thomas More also seeks to reverse the
California Supreme Court's opinion that said Berkeley could
discriminate against the Sea Scouts because of the group's beliefs.
The city provides free berthing privileges to other nonprofit groups
at a city marina, but withdrew that privilege from the Scouts, so it
now costs them about $6,000 a year for services other non-profits get
"Berkeley is penalizing the Sea Scouts for exercising their First
Amendment right of association in ways that city officials don't
like," said PLF attorney Harold Johnson, co-counsel in the case, in an
earlier WND report. "May government punish you, or fine you, or
subject you to second class treatment if you don't pass a politically
correct litmus test?"
It was the Supreme Court's "Boy Scouts of America v. Dale" in which
the high court recognized the Scout's policy as an exercise of
expressive association protected by the First Amendment.
However, the city of Berkeley said it would not be bound by that, and
it would require that the Sea Scouts "repudiate" the association with
BSA. When the Sea Scouts failed to meet that demand, the city decided
it wouldn't treat the Scouts as it does other groups.
The Law Center's new brief says the state Supreme Court's rejection of
the Scouts' right to expressive association places "an
unconstitutional condition" on the receipt of public benefits in
violation of the First Amendment.
"Berkeley may believe that the Sea Scouts should repudiate the BSA and
its decision to exclude gays and atheists in order to promote a
lifestyle that is 'morally straight' but the First Amendment prohibits
the government from denying benefits to citizens simply because they
refuse to abide by government orthodoxy," said Patrick Gillen, the Law
Center attorney on the case.
"Berkeley's effort to make the Sea Scouts pay for exercising their
right to expressive association should be struck down," he said.
The BSA, in an announcement about the case, said the "California
Supreme Court Ignores Constitutional Rights." It expressed "dismay"
that the court "chose to ignore United States Supreme Court precedent"
in order to deny the Sea Scouts First Amendment rights.
The Law Center is a public interest firm that defends and promotes the
religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the
sanctity of human life through education, litigation and other
A nuclear North Korea Posted: October 9, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern
I don't want to sound alarmist here, but North Korea has just
conducted its first nuclear weapons test.
This is not good.
Imagine Adolf Hitler with a nuclear weapon. That would be the moral
equivalent of Kim Jong-il with one. There is no difference.
Kim is a mass murderer, possibly on the scale of Hitler. The only
difference, so far, is that Kim has killed millions of his own people
through starvation, forced labor camps and executions more in the
style of Josef Stalin.
But Kim's dream, like his Stalinist father's, remains reunification of
his country through military force. His million-man-plus army, as
always, is massed near the border with South Korea, just waiting for
the right moment.
South Korea was destroyed once by invasion from the north. The city of
Seoul was leveled with conventional weapons. Kim wouldn't think
twice about using more efficient means, like nuclear, to do it again.
This is not just a matter of brinksmanship. The lives of millions
and not just Koreans hang in the balance.
I continue to be disturbed at U.S. policy regarding this crisis. Let
me put it bluntly: This is not a matter for the United Nations. It
will not be resolved there. Most of the world, including China, is not
going to help defuse the crisis. We have some allies notably Japan,
Taiwan and South Korea but Russia and China know North Korea's
nuclear weapons are not targeted in their direction. They are targeted
And, as the old saying goes: "One nuclear bomb can ruin your whole day."
Vague warnings alone will not stop North Korea from pursuing its
nuclear arsenal and deploying it. Threats of U.N. sanctions will not
deter Pyongyang. The U.S. needs to be very clear about the dire
consequences it alone will bring on North Korea because this is a
matter of national security for us, not just a threat to "world
peace." It's much more than a matter of "deep concern," as the U.S.
State Department has labeled it. It's a matter of life and death.
If we go the U.N. route again on this crisis, debates over resolutions
will take years. China will lead the U.S. to believe it will be an
ally, only to ensure Washington does not take unilateral action.
Ultimately, as is so often the case, China will reject any meaningful
multilateral action against North Korea just as it has with Iran.
Banking on China to join us is a mistake. It won't happen. China would
like nothing better than to see the U.S. knocked off as a superpower.
It would clear the field for its planned ascendancy on the world stage.
The West has made this mistake many times in the past. The clearest
example is Neville Chamberlain's trip to Munich. He asked Adolf Hitler
what he wanted how he could be "bought off." Hitler said all he
wanted was the Sudetenland. Chamberlain said he could have it. Then,
of course, Hitler took all of Czechoslovakia.
After the war, Chamberlain still didn't get it. He said everything
would have been just peachy if Hitler hadn't lied.
Well, guess what? That's what evil tyrants do. And, no matter how many
cheap gizmos you may have purchased from China in recent years, the
leadership there is every bit as evil and cunning as Hitler was.
We can't put our fate in their hands.
Here's what we need to do to stop North Korea:
* President Bush should announce that any missile launches from
North Korea whether labeled "tests" or not will be viewed as
nuclear first strike attempts against the U.S. and our allies. They
will be met with appropriate acts of retaliation, up to and including
targeted nuclear strikes.
* President Bush should announce that any such efforts to launch
missiles from North Korea will be monitored by satellite. When
missiles are readied for launch, the missile sites will be destroyed
* President Bush should announce that any more nuclear tests by
North Korea will be viewed as preparations for war against the U.S.,
Japan, South Korea and other allies and dealt with "harshly" and
immediately not through sanctions, but through military action. And
we must mean it.
In today's politically correct world, in which "multilateral
negotiations" are perceived as the key to solving every problem, these
recommendations may seem reckless and tough. In fact, they will
inevitably save the lives of millions.
Evil must be confronted and defeated. There is no option other than
to be defeated by it.
Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally
syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate.
Thanks for cleaning house, Democrats!
Posted: October 9, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern By Andrew Longman
That was President Bush's word for the conduct of Rep. Mark Foley, and
it is the correct one. Not only is it accurate, it is the morally
studious thing to say for lots of reasons. Democrats are promising
that the homosexual misdeeds of Capitol Hill Republicans will be put
out into public view before the election. There is a word for that, too.
Peggy Noonan noticed in a book she wrote a long time ago that lots of
the Republican staffers on the Hill who were promoting pro-family
causes were, actually, "total flaming lu-lus." This didn't sit well
with me, didn't seem to with her, and of course the great majority of
the supporters of pro-family causes would find it more than
incongruous that their traditional-marriage interests were being
represented by closeted homosexuals.
But look at what has happened to Mr. Foley. He's gone. I mean this guy
is gone. He is never going to have a political career again.
The pagan left seems to think that by exposing individuals who are
hypocrites and removing them from the public life of the GOP that this
somehow constitutes a scandal from which the GOP cannot recover.
Cheery as the birds in springtime, I happily disagree. Instead, this
all amounts to an ugly job Republicans cannot do for themselves. And
doing it at the midterm elections, instead of the presidential
contest, is also especially helpful.
Do you think you guys could get rid of the people under mafia
influence, on heavy drugs or embezzling public funds while you're at
it? I mean, now's the time to do it.
Imagine if the speaker of the House stood up and announced tomorrow
that the following 15 staffers and congressmen, all of whom were gay,
were being fired or voted on for removal from the House because of
homosexual e-mail they had been sending to people who were not their
spouses. Imagine if Hastert said Congressman so-and-so was going to be
put before the House Ethics Committee for engaging in some physical
acts with a stranger in a public place. What do you think would happen?
Why, the Democrats would go sub-orbital about "sexual McCarthyism" and
"puritanical witch hunts," and they would turn rocket-powered back
flips in defense of the newly liberal Republicans who were "under
fire" from "fundamentalists."
But now instead we have a praiseworthy situation wherein the Democrats
have decided to remove all the homosexual adulterers from the GOP in
such a way that makes it impossible for those people to ever be in
politics again and which makes it very unlikely that new closeted
homosexual members will run for election! Because non-closeted
homosexuals stand very little chance of being elected in the open for
the GOP, the Democrats are doing for the GOP what conservatives could
only dream of doing: denouncing and removing those who practice
immorality as a way of life.
The whole thing is desperately amusing because the Democrats are
convinced they are brilliantly clever.
In the end, the electorate will have a better time electing genuinely
pro-family, sexually moral people to Congress because the candidates
will be more trustable. While it is sad for the individuals harmed, it
is excellent that the truth about Foley and others is coming out. A
moral coherence will be brought to the party. I totally agree with the
Democratic strategists the homosexual adulterers must be removed
from the party! Isn't it amazing how it is "moral" and "forward
thinking" for a Democrat to say that, but if I were to say it outside
the friendly confines of this scandal, I would be universally panned
by the press?
The Democrats' fundamental miscalculation is their belief that
Americans vote for parties for Congress. In reality, they select
individuals and values. As such, yes, in each case where immorality is
exposed in a Republican candidate, they will need either to profoundly
repent or lose the election. But that's a temporary thing. And any
replacement for the Foleys of this year do you think they are going
to make a few pro-family commitments? Do you think a hedonist Democrat
or a socially conservative Democrat is more likely to replace Foley?
Is there a better method for bringing the Democratic Party back from
the abyss of hedonism?
The Republicans who runs for those seats next cycle, you can bet,
won't have a morally compromised life. And the fact that one or more
political career is, in fact, destroyed by sexual immorality means
that it will be more difficult for Democrats to live the same life-style.
So all in all, it's a wonderful thing when Democrats read and obey the
Bible in their hatred of sin. I hope they make it impossible for sin
to hide on Capitol Hill. Are they becoming fundamentalist?
"Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead
even expose them. " (Ephesians 5:11)
Andrew Longman is a Christian and an applied scientist.