Downed US Seals may have gotten too close to Bin Laden

THE first sign of trouble was a radio message requesting immediate extraction. A four-man team of US Navy Seal commandos had run into heavy enemy fire on a remote, thickly forested trail in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan.

Trouble turned to disaster when a US special forces helicopter carrying 16 men was shot down as it landed at the scene, killing all on board. Almost two weeks later, a mission that led to the worst US combat losses in Afghanistan since the invasion in 2001 has turned into an extraordinary manhunt. It has also opened an intriguing new front in the coalition’s battle against terrorism.

The story of Operation Red Wing, a US-led search for Taliban and Al-Qaeda guerrillas in the mountain wilderness of Kunar province, contains remarkable human drama and an unresolved military mystery.

For five days amid the hostile peaks and ravines along Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan, a lone American commando eluded the guerrillas who had killed at least two of his colleagues and destroyed the Chinook helicopter.

When the unnamed Seal finally collapsed from exhaustion he was found by a friendly Afghan villager who summoned US forces. The subsequent search for his colleagues turned up two bodies and the manhunt for the fourth commando continues this weekend despite claims by Taliban guerrillas yesterday that he had been captured and beheaded.

“We killed him at 11 o’clock today; we killed him using a knife and chopped off his head,” declared Abdul Latif Hakimi, a Taliban spokesman who has made several false claims in the past.

Yet whatever the final death toll from the worst incident in the history of the Seals — the Sea Air Land Commandos — there were tantalising hints that the original mission had been far from routine.

According to former special forces officers and other military sources, the four-man Seal strike team may have come too close to one of the US-led coalition’s highest-priority targets — perhaps Mullah Muhammad Omar, the former Taliban leader, or even Osama Bin Laden, the leader of Al-Qaeda. Other military sources suggested the target was a regional Taliban commander suspected of links with Al-Qaeda.

More than 300 US troops were yesterday combing the area for signs of the missing commando and the militants who apparently used a portable rocket-propelled grenade launcher to destroy the Chinook.

Other helicopters and remotecontrolled aerial drones were flying over deep, inaccessible valleys. Rainstorms were slowing the search, and there was a danger of growing local hostility after claims that up to 25 civilians died when US aircraft bombed a compound in Kunar province last weekend.

US officials insisted the compound was used by militants and one spokesman said the attack with precision guided weapons was part of an “intelligence-driven” operation.

But Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan’s pro-US president, warned Washington that civilian casualties could erode public support for the coalition.

It was late in the evening of Tuesday, June 28, that Lieutenant Michael Murphy and the three members of his specialist team reported an encounter with the enemy.

Pentagon spokesmen said Murphy’s unit was engaged in general reconnaissance as part of a sweep through the region amid fears that the Taliban and Al-Qaeda have quietly been regrouping and are preparing for an Iraq-style insurgency.

Yet other special forces sources noted that small Seal units like Murphy’s are primarily designed for concealment and stealth, which indicated a more specific mission.

“Its insertion represented an extraordinary risk,” said the author of an influential military blog known as Wretchard. “They would be operating in an area known to be a stronghold of the Taliban, where any contact with the enemy automatically meant they would be grossly overmatched.”

Another source noted that Murphy’s unit bore all the hallmarks of a long-range sniper team sent to hunt down a particular target. US Navy Seals are trained to spend long periods operating clandestinely.

“The fact that the US did not send in several hundred troops for a sweep instead of the four-man recon team strongly suggests the team’s mission was to fix a very high target before it could flee from an airmobile assault,” Wretchard said.

Whatever the team’s real objective, it found itself trapped in heavy rain with darkness falling. Seal veterans boast that they never call for help unless absolutely desperate. Exactly what befell Murphy and his team remains unknown, but commanders at Bagram airbase near Kabul wasted no time in dispatching eight more Seals on a helicopter crewed by eight members of an elite army unit.

As it was coming in to land in the Waigal valley, near the provincial capital of Asadabad, the helicopter was struck by what officers believe was a rocket-propelled grenade fired from the cover of nearby trees.

Lieutenant-General James Conway, chief of operations at the Pentagon, described it as a “pretty lucky shot” but when communications with the Chinook were lost, commanders were taking no chances. The next wave of troops landed a safe distance away and took 24 hours to reach the site, where it was confirmed that all 16 men on the helicopter had died.

For the four Seals on the ground, a desperate battle for survival had begun. Their story may not be told in full until the fate of the fourth member of the team is clear — the one Seal who survived has been debriefed by military officers but the Pentagon has released only the barest outline of his story for fear of compromising continuing operations in the area.

From the details released, it appears that the Seals may have dumped their backpacks to move faster on steep terrain. Former special forces sources said that when facing a superior enemy, the commandos would give each other covering fire as they mounted a phased retreat.

Coalition commanders acknowledge that for all their superior weaponry and communications, US forces are at a disadvantage in fighting in the Afghan mountains.

At some point in the mountain battle, Murphy, 29, was killed. So was Petty Officer Danny Dietz, 25. But at least one of the four Seals survived.

When he was found last weekend he was several miles from the helicopter wreckage. A friendly tribal elder notified authorities that he was caring for a wounded American. The commando was airlifted to Bagram, where his injuries were said not to be life-threatening.

US officials have not yet explained how the surviving Seal might have become separated from his missing colleague. The two dead commandos were said to have been “killed in action”.

To some US military sources, the strength of the force sent into the area suggested more than a simple search for a soldier who has been missing for 11 days. The manhunt may be providing cover for what might have been the original mission — to track down an elusive “high value” target who may once again be about to slip away.

God Bless,
Dan'L

An introduction to Private Investigators
We are a Professional Private Investigation firm, specializing in Corporate, Child Custody, Surveillance, and Fraud Investigations. We have our various collections, just like you do, much of which was acquired through eBay. They are all displayed in our Corporate Offices in Omaha, Nebraska. Our operatives and our clients enjoy the many aspects of investigative memorabilia, and everyone has a story to tell. We're no different than anyone else, when it comes to our interests, and we have our heroes, too.

Please don't buy the stereotype that . . . .
Hollywood and the television industry has given, of our profession! We are the stop-gap in American Society that allows you to discriminate between right and wrong, good and evil, righteousness and indifference. The professional investigators who meet licensing qualifications, are REAL professionals, who don't steal people's identities, they don't go from motel to motel, looking for domestic improprieties, and they aren't the good looking guys and gals, driving the latest in sports car style, wearing the Hawaiian shirts, or lacking supportive undergarments, and tapping phones, telling the police how to do their jobs, or making politicians nervous. We are the people who look into the fraudsters who steal from their employers, the malingerers who drive up insurance rates, and the criminal defendants, who really DIDN'T do it! We are the people who find the deadbeat parents and help their children to collect their due. We are the folks who help to find the biological parents of many adoptees. We are the ones who keep your insurance company in line, because we are seekers of the truth. We only observe and report. We simply ask a question and perform an investigation. The folks in Hollywood would have you believe that we begin with a conclusion, and go out and try to prove it. They couldn't be further from the truth.

Please don't buy into what you see on "The Practice," "Chicago Hope," "Picket Fences," "Snoops," "Magnum PI," "Charlie's Angels," "Rockford Files," or any of the others. They all work within a framework of 22 minutes every half hour, and try to keep everyone's interest. Most of the time, our job is very boring and sometimes we need our collectibles to stay interested in coming to work tomorrow. We work very hard for our clients, and provide the evidence they need to prove their point, in most cases. Our involvement in the political commentary arena allows us to enjoy a different side of life, where many of our clients have never participated. We try our best to keep them focused on the best things this country has to offer.

Just remember, . . . No matter which side of the political isle you dwell, the United States Constitution preserves your RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH, and it allows for a complete defense of anything the government, or anyone else, says you've done, or said, or been involved in, or with, actively, or inactively. Within the workings of that great document we, as a Nation, have built the Greatest Country this planet has ever known.

Let's keep it that way!

Thanx for visiting!

God Bless,
Dan'L

New Screenplay Idea

So there I was, listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio, late last year, during the build up to the election, and I hear the Godfather of Amplitude Modulation make one of the best points ever, on the SwiftBoat Vets vs. John F. Kerry story.

The only time the mainstream media ever mentioned the swift vets is when they think they've found a way to weaken them and bolster Kerry. But when that happened, the SwiftBoat vets responded and either held strong or find their position improved. Senator John Forbes Kerry, (D-MA), on the other hand, seems to have developed a huge problem by that time. His version of what happened 35 years ago - including things that were supposedly "seared" into his memory - changed more often than his position on Iraq.

To paraphrase Mr. Limbaugh, of the two sides, Kerry was the only one changing his story. For some reason this reminded me of the 80's flick 'The Neverending Story' (a movie that had two sequels - which you wouldn't think a never ending story would need). Then I figured that the John F. Kerry movie version would be a little different - it would be a magical Ever-Changing Story. A movie you could watch over and over again, because each time you saw it, it would be different. Wasn't that a fun election??

God Bless,
Dan'L

Rep. Nancy Pelosi is in trouble

As House Democratic Leader, she is primed to go after House Majority Leader Tom DeLay for his ethical lapses. She has called for an investigation of a $70,000 trip made by Delay, his wife and aides to the United Kingdom, possibly bankrolled by a lobbyist. Others have assailed Delay for a 2001 trip to South Korea funded by a registered foreign agent.

But a funny thing happened on Pelosi's way to hers ethics coup: She ran afoul of the same rules she hurls at Tom Delay.

As The Washington Post reported, last week Pelosi filed delinquent reports for three trips she herself accepted from outside sponsors. The biggie was a week-long 1999 trip to Taiwan, paid for by the Chinese National Association of Industry and Commerce. The tab for Pelosi and her husband: about $8,000.

Just last month, Pelosi spokeswoman Jennifer Crider told Roll Call that Pelosi's "position is that the rules are clear; people need to follow them." Within days, Pelosi had to re-file because she failed to follow these "clear" rules.

Here's another glitch: A senior aide to Pelosi, Eddie Charmaine Manansala, went on a 2004 $9,887 trip sponsored by the same Korea-U.S. Exchange Council -- then failed to file the mandated paperwork until a reporter asked about the trip.

And while Pelosi bashes GOP ethics, PoliticalMoneyLine, a data firm, crunched the numbers and found that in the last five years, Democrats took 3,458 privately funded junkets, while Republicans took 2,666.

PoliticalMoneyLine quipped: "Join Congress -- See the World."

Are these trips unethical or illegal?? I'll answer the second part first. House rules prohibit junkets funded by lobbyists. But it's not clear that there has been a rules violation if a congressman was not aware that a lobbyist paid for the trip.

What's more, the Korea-U.S. Exchange Council wasn't registered as a foreign agent when the Delay trip was planned. In fact, the group registered as a foreign agent only days before Delay and company departed -- three years before Pelosi's aide trekked Seoul-ward.

Are these trips ethical?? Consider DeLay's Seoul trip and Pelosi's Taiwan travel to fall into gray territory. On the one hand, elected officials see a new part of the world; on the other hand, they see what their sponsors want them to see.

Ken Boehm of the conservative watchdog the National Legal and Policy Center noted a big hole in House rules: "The dirty little secret is that it's legal if it's sponsored by a nonprofit. It's not legal if it's sponsored by the lobbyist." But lobbyists can be on charity boards or join the junkets.

Besides, whether you call them lobbyists or not, these groups have a clear agenda. Taiwanese or Korean, they want to boost commerce with their countries.

In a March press conference, Pelosi said that "every trip should be subjected to scrutiny." She also erroneously asserted, "we all have to be careful about whom we receive invitations from, and I haven't taken any trips."

Certainly, Delay's 2000 U.K. trip flunks the smell test. Even if it was legal, it suggests an arrogance and sense of entitlement that says Delay looks at public office, not so much as public service, but as privileged rank.

"There's a difference in degree here," Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly noted, especially if Delay solicited the trip.

I cannot help myself, but I must agree. There is a big difference in degree. But there is not a big difference in the level of opportunism between Delay and Pelosi. (Is this what it feels like to parse things out, like the Democrats??)

As Ed Patru of the National Republican Congressional Committee noted, Pelosi has made "ethics the centerpiece of the Democratic Party's message," yet she is the only "the only minority leader who has been hit with fines for fund-raising violations."

Daly wasn't sure if Pelosi was the only minority leader to be fined. That's nice.

Pelosi spent seven years in House ethics committees. Nonetheless, . . . . the Federal Election Commission fined her after Team Pelosi created a second political action committee to skirt a $5,000 gift limit. "The main reason for the creation of the second PAC, frankly, was to give twice as much dollars," her treasurer, Leo McCarthy, told Roll Call.

(Daly argued that some at the FEC told McCarthy the second PAC was kosher, a charge the FEC has denied.) Tom Delay should be in hotter water.

But he is not because Pelosi's hits on him are so opportunistic, you can't take them seriously. Her office notes that the U.S. Korean group was a registered foreign agent -- even after a Pelosi aide traveled on that foreign agent's dime, and didn't report it. She says she supports ethics rules, then tries to skirt them.

It's that kind of talk that leads Americans to hate Washington. Some politicians have so little shame, they're happy to give ethics a bad name. Thanks Nancy!!

HOW ABOUT GUANTANAMO NOW??

Given the outrage over the (in all liklihood) Islamic terror bombings in London, will we continue to hear the outrage from Democrat Party and the Euro-cowards over the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba??

Let's take a quick look at the situation, shall we?? Down at Guantanamo, we're housing these animals in a state-of-the-art prison, complete with three, (very costly), square meals a day, a free Koran and a really nice prayer rug. We're treating these Islamic terrorists better than they've ever been treated. But that's not how the left-over-from-the-sixties, anti-war, blame-America-first crowd on the left sees it.

To those folks, the United States is evil, and if we're running a prison for terrorists, then it must be a Gulag. After all, the heroic Senator Richard Durban said so, himself, didn't he?? They've been getting away with quite a lot of statements in the press criticizing us.

But now, with these terrorist bombings in London, and dozens of innocent citizens dead, . . . does anyone think they'll shut up?? Most INTELLECTUALLY-HONEST, THINKING people aren't going to be too receptive to the idea of worrying about the living conditions and judicial recourse of terrorists at a cushy prison in Cuba when innocent commuters are being blown up during rush hour in London.

Then again, . . . . somebody might stick their neck out there. Some Democrat who admires Durban, or Kennedy, or Biden, will probably say the bombings in London are Bush's fault, . . . "after all, he's the one who made them mad. We should appease them at all costs, . . . you know?? Let's just turn the Gitmo terrorists loose, . . ." and then sit back to see where they'll strike, next. Morons seem to abound, around these events!!

God Bless,
Dan'L

Saddam's Anti-U.S. Top Lawyer Quits

Saddam Hussein's chief lawyer quit the Iraqi dictator's Jordan-based legal team, saying Thursday that some of the team's American members were trying to control the defense and tone down his criticisms of the U.S. presence in Iraq. Ziad al-Khasawneh told The Associated Press that he tendered his resignation in a telephone call Tuesday to Saddam's wife, Sajida, who is believed to be in Yemen.

"I told her I was resigning because some American lawyers in the defense team want to take control of it and isolate their Arab counterparts," said al-Khasawneh, an Arab nationalist who has often expressed support for Iraqi resistance. Among the Americans on the team are former U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark.

Al-Khasawneh said Clark and Curtis Doebbler, another American lawyer helping defend Saddam, were "upset with my statements and have often asked me to refrain from criticizing the American occupation of Iraq and the U.S.-backed Iraqi government."

Saddam's legal team includes 1,500 volunteers and at least 22 lead lawyers who come from several countries, including the United States, France, Jordan, Iraq and Libya. A date for the trial of Saddam, who was captured by U.S. troops in December 2003, has not been set.

He said Saddam's eldest daughter, Raghad, favors the Americans and non-Arabs on the team. "She wants American and other foreign lawyers to be in control, not the Arabs, because she thinks they will win the case and free her father."

Al-Khasawneh said Raghad was allegedly seeking to exchange the Jordan-based legal team with an international Emergency Committee for Iraq, which was announced last month in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The committee seeks to ensure a fair trial for Saddam and other officials of the former Iraqi government that was ousted by U.S. forces two years ago, said former Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohamad, announcing the committee. Besides Mahathir, other co-chairs include Clark, former Algerian President Ahmed Ben Bella and former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas.

Raghad rejected the suggestion that she was trying to isolate the Arab lawyers on the team. There "are no differences between Arab and foreign lawyers," she said in a statement written in English and sent to The Associated Press.

Al-Khasawneh's resignation was "unfortunate" because he "provided significant contribution" to the legal team, Raghad said.

The international Emergency Committee for Iraq would not replace Saddam's legal team, she said, but provide "political support." Raghad also said the defense team would refrain from making any more public statements.

"The legal advice we have is to limit public statements as much as possible," her statement said.
Al-Khasawneh said Raghad has allegedly removed all files related to Saddam's defense from his office. "I was away in Libya when she did all that without my knowledge," he said.

Al-Khasawneh became Saddam's chief lawyer last November, weeks after the dictator's family dismissed Mohammed al-Rashdan, a prominent Jordanian lawyer who led the defense team, accusing him of seeking fame in the high-profile case that has drawn world attention.
 

TOO MANY AMERICANS HAVE FORGOTTEN . . . .
IT COULD HAPPEN HERE. NO . . .
IT COULD HAPPEN HERE . . . .
. . . . NO, . . . . . . IT WILL HAPPEN HERE.

Be Calm. Think Logically, (between your EARS, you dolts -- NOT between your NIPPLES!). London has now become the second major European city to have a train bombing by Islamic terrorists. You might be watching all of this on TV and feel a bit removed from it all. You might be telling yourself in the back of your mind, "I'm probably safe."

This is what they call a good old-fashioned false sense of security.

Consider the following:

As a former CIA official points out in the reading assignments, the internal security apparatus of the United States is nowhere near as advanced as it is in Britain. We're sitting ducks. We just don't have as many police and as much surveillance as they have in a place like Britain. When you have as much freedom, as Americans, that's just the way it is. So, . . . Not that we should have, but it just makes the point. Great Britain is an island.

We're not. Our borders are wide open. Any Muslim terrorist looking to bomb a city in the United States could waltz right in from Canada or Mexico without any problem at all. By the way, did you know there are large stretches of the Canadian border that are unmanned?? You can just walk right across.

On top of that, Canada's immigration laws are extremely lax. Pretty much all you have to do is come into their country from some place else and declare yourself a refugee, and you're in. Canada has a large Muslim population for this very reason. It's easy to get in. Look around your city. Is there anything to prevent some follower of Islam from boarding a bus and leaving behind a bag with a bomb?? Anything to prevent a jihadist from walking into the center of a busy shopping mall and pulling the cord on a homicide bomb?? Nope, . . . absolutely nothing!! We've either been lucky, since the Eleventh of September of 2001, or our National Security folks have been doing a yeoman's job of protecting our sorry butts.

Sadly, it's only a matter of time before some spot(s) in America joins the ranks of those places in London and Madrid.

God Bless,
Dan'L

Here's another shot of the '38 Plymouth!

How much will this map change in 2008?

From our perspective, only the name will change!

Judge Returns the Majority of Rush Limbaugh's Medical Records to His Attorney

January 6, 2004

MIAMI, FL - July 6, 2005 -- Roy Black, Rush Limbaugh's attorney, issued the following statement regarding the release today of some of Rush Limbaugh's medical records to investigators and the return of most of the records to Mr. Limbaugh.

I am confident that the State Attorney will find nothing in these records to support a charge of doctor shopping, because there was no doctor shopping. The records show that Mr. Limbaugh received legitimate medical treatment for legitimate medical reasons.

We are grateful to Judge Barkdull for providing the review of the records for relevancy that we requested. Most of the records were returned to me today, and were not given to the prosecutors. This proves our point that the State's wholesale seizure of Mr. Limbaugh's medical records was improper.

The prescription records that are in the search warrant affidavits should be put in perspective. Of the 2,130 pills prescribed, only 1,863 were painkillers, and of those only 1,733 were for hydrocodone. These were to be taken over a period of 217 days, from the date of the first prescription until 30 days from the date of the last prescription. The dose averages out to a little over eight pills a day, which is not excessive and is in fact a lawful dose.

Ninety-two percent of the pain medication was prescribed by two doctors who were treating Mr. Limbaugh for back pain. They work in the same office from the same medical file, and there could be no doctor shopping between them. One of these doctors also prescribed 117 pills of a drug used to treat high blood pressure or to help wean patients off of painkillers.

The other two doctors are the California surgeon who implanted the cochlear implant to restore Mr. Limbaugh's hearing and a Florida doctor he was seeing for follow up on the surgery. Of the 180 pills prescribed by the surgeon, 100 were vitamin pills. Of the 110 pills prescribed by the fourth doctor, 50 were non-painkillers prescribed for tinnitus, ringing in the ears.

The bottom line is that these prescription records might tell a story, but it is not a story of doctor shopping. We continue to believe that Mr. Limbaugh is being pursued by overzealous prosecutors and that he should not be charged with any crime.

We also continue to believe that the search warrants were issued based on faulty and misleading statements from investigators and that the search was improper under both state and federal law. If necessary, we will renew our motion to suppress all of the records at a later date.

God Bless,
Dan'L

SENATOR CHARLES (CHUCK) SCHUMER CAUGHT ON CELLPHONE: 'WE ARE GOING TO WAR' OVER SUPREME COURT

From the Drudge Report:

Senate Judiciary Committee member Chuck Schumer got busy plotting away on the cellphone aboard a Washington, DC-New York Amtrak -- plotting Democrat strategy for the upcoming Supreme Court battle.

Schumer promised a fight over whoever the President's nominee was: "'It's not about an individual judge' It's about how it affects the overall makeup of the court."

The chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee was overheard on a long cellphone conversation with an unknown political ally, and the DRUDGE REPORT was there!

Schumer proudly declared: "We are contemplating how we are going to go to war over this."

Schumer went on to say how hard it was to predict how a Supreme Court justice would turn out: "Even William Rehnquist is more moderate than they expected. The only ones that resulted how they predicted were [Antonin] Scalia and [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg. So most of the time they've gotten their picks wrong, and that's what we want to do to them again."

Schumer later went on to mock the "Gang of 14" judicial filibuster deal and said it wasn't relevant in the Supreme Court debate.

"A Priscilla Owen or Janice Rogers Brown style appointment may not have been extraordinary to the appellate court but may be extraordinary to the Supreme Court."

By the time the train hit New Jersey, Schumer shifted gears and called his friend and "Gang of 14" member, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham.

The two talked in a very friendly manner about doing an event sometime this week together.

(Copyright 2005 by Drudge Report)

Obviously, a part of the mainstream Democrat Party, and as Karl Rove says, "Nothing more need be said!"

God Bless,
Dan'L

R.I.P ADMIRAL JAMES STOCKDALE

Most people will remember James Stockdale as Ross Perot's running mate in 1992 when he famously said at one of the debates "Who am I? Why am I here?" Stockdale passed away yesterday at the age of 81.

But Stockdale should be remembered for much more, including his heroism during the Vietnam War. After being shot down in Vietnam, he spent 7 years in the Hanoi Hilton, four of which were spent in solitary confinement and another two in leg irons. He had become a leader of the other POW's there and the North Vietnamese didn't like this too much. They tortured him repeatedly. His back was broken. His shoulders were twisted out of their sockets. To avoid appearing in a propaganda film, he mutilated himself with a wooden stool. To protest harsh treatment of prisoners, he broke out a window and slashed his wrists.

Vice Admiral James Bond Stockdale, USN, retired, served on active duty in the regular Navy for 37 years, most of those years at sea as a fighter pilot aboard aircraft carriers. Shot down on his third combat tour over North Vietnam, he was the senior naval service prisoner of war in Hanoi for 7-1/2 years - tortured 15 times, in solitary confinement for four years, leg irons for two.

During his navy career, his shore duty consisted of three years as a test pilot and test pilot school instructor at Patuxent River, Maryland; two years as a graduate student at Stanford University; one year in the Pentagon; and, finally, two years as The President of the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island.

Upon his retirement from the Navy in 1979, the Secretary of the Navy established the Vice Admiral James Stockdale Award for Inspirational Leadership which is presented annually to two commanding officers, one in the Atlantic Fleet and one in the Pacific. In 1989, Monmouth College in his native State of Illinois, from which he entered the Naval Academy, named its student union "Stockdale Center." The following year he was made a 1990 Laureate of the Abraham Lincoln Academy of Illinois in ceremonies at the University of Chicago. He is an Honorary Fellow in the Society of Experimental Test Pilots. In 1993 he was inducted into the Carrier Aviation Hall of Fame, and in 1995 was enshrined in the U.S. Naval Aviation Hall of Honor at the National Museum of Naval Aviation in Pensacola, Florida.

Vice Admiral Stockdale holds 26 combat decorations, including two Purple Hearts, two Distinguished Flying Crosses, three Distinguished Service Medals, four Silver Star Medals, and the Congressional Medal of Honor . He is the only three- or four-star officer in the history of the U.S. Navy to wear both aviator wings and the Congressional Medal of Honor. He's worthy of being remembered for so much more than being the running-mate of the little dictator from Texas, Ross Perot.

God Bless,
Dan'L

Industry groups respond to Senate identity theft act

Washington DC -- July 05, 2005 -- (Posted at 16:45 Hours, EDT)

The following is excerpted from a response by Joseph Ricci on behalf of the mentioned organizations, relating to the introduction of the U.S. Senate's Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2005. To summarize, the Act would increase criminal penalties for identity theft, and would require companies to protect sensitive information about its customers."While the National Council of Investigation and Security Services (NCISS) and the Coalition of Security Associations for Privacy Protection support many of the provisions of this and other legislation, there are specific sections that would make it extremely costly for the judicial system, legal community, law enforcement, corporate security and private citizens to conduct daily business typically supported through the efforts of the nation's nearly 60,000 investigators.For example, Section 501 would prevent private investigators from accessing information which we need in order to serve the U.S. judicial system.

The bill's prohibition on the sale of Social Security numbers would limit our ability to locate witnesses, prevent fraud, locate heirs and pension beneficiaries and assist victims of identity theft. Certainly, these are unintended consequences of the legislation; however they will negatively impact the U.S. judicial system by making it less fair and its decisions less enforceable. The proposed legislation permits law enforcement to maintain access to Social Security numbers, while prohibiting the same access to investigators working for defense counsel. This delineation will put defendants at a further disadvantage in attempting to locate exculpatory witnesses.We believe that this well-intentioned legislation needs to be thoroughly reviewed, and not enacted solely to respond immediately to an avalanche of publicity. We support several provisions in the legislation, including increased penalties for identity thieves and prohibitions on using Social Security numbers on certain documents.

But private investigators are not to blame for the recent security breaches. The challenge for the 109th Congress is to enact legislation that responds to security breaches without adopting provisions that will be counterproductive to the fight against identity theft by damaging both the civil and criminal justice systems."

God Bless,
Dan'L

Live 8 is finally OVER!
DEFEATING POVERTY IN AFRICA

Happy Birthday, America!! What a GREAT holiday!! Millions of Americans celebrating the very freedom they fear, and that really nice man, Bob Geldoff is telling us evil Americans what we should be doing with the money we work so hard for!! Why, we should be sending it to Africa, that's what. What's wrong with these people??

Here's an idea -- let's thank God that Live 8 is done and over, -- kapput!! What a bunch of sanctimonious, self-righteous, arrogant, narcissistic jerk-offs. They top off their great multi-venue circle-jerk Sunday with a demand that the United States of America cough up some more money for something they refer to as "aid and justice for Africa."

These rock stars have a goal, (in some cases, beyond the goal of avoiding soap and water). They are now demanding that the evil United States cough up 0.7% of its gross domestic product and send it to Africa. What these complete wastes of protoplasm don't grasp is that the 0.7% isn't theirs to demand or theirs to distribute as they see fit. That money belongs to the men and women of the United States who got up every morning and went out, and damned well, earned it.

Personally, I don't give a flying poop, just how much of our money they think should be sent to Africa. I dare say that the average security guard in Shenandoah, Iowa donates a greater percentage of his earnings to charity than do these characterless rock stars.

And just what is it about the continent of Africa?? Here is a continent with an incredible abundance of natural resources -- and a history that speaks to nothing but poverty. So, these Live 8 guitar players want to do something about poverty in Africa?? Maybe they should be demanding the return of land in Zimbabwe to the white farmers from whom it was stolen!! Just a few decades ago Zimbabwe was one of Africa's richest breadbaskets. Zimbabwean farmers fed their own country and many of their neighboring countries with the food from their farms and ranches.

Then along comes their new exalted ruler, . . . the great Robert Mugabe. He sends his goon squads out to steal the land from the white farmers -- murdering many of them -- and turns those farms over to his criminal soldiers. What happens next?? Hunger, that's what. Now Zimbabwe can't even feed its own people, let alone the citizens of neighboring African countries.
To make matters worse, Mugabe is now engaged in a campaign to destroy the homes of poor citizens in Zimbabwe's capitol so that they will move back out into the bush where they won't be so visible and problematic. So, . . . did you hear one of these rock stars even hint that the United States should do something about Mugabe? Are you kidding? Sure, they like want to fight like poverty and like all that, . . . but that doesn't mean that they're ever going to like say one like negative word about any of the like dictators who like, . . . steal so much of the aid money and like, . . . . keep their own people in poverty.

Oh, yeah, . . . and here's something else that these brilliant rock-stars you won't hear about. I'm talking about the birth rate in Africa. In Africa, as in America and in so many other parts of the world, the people who can least afford to raise children are the people with the highest pregnancy rates. It is considered to be gravely politically incorrect in America to ever suggest that a woman who cannot afford to raise a child should do something to prevent pregnancy. It seems you can't address this situation in Africa either. The solution for African women having children they can't afford to raise is to go to the United States and confiscate the money needed to raise them.

The problems faced by Africa are, by and large, cultural in nature. Though our illustrious rock stars wouldn't touch this, the dominant African culture is one of irresponsible reproduction, tribal warfare, submission to dictatorial despots, anti-capitalistic governments and unprotected sex leading to rampant disease. Live 8 isn't going to change this, and either is confiscating more American wealth to be poured into this mess.

The answer to African poverty may well be to shed this burden of political correctness and to start calling the shots over there as we see them. I can just hear the libs crying over that idea. If these intellectually superior, (read: "dishonest"), rock stars really want to do something about poverty and justice in Africa a good first step might be to ask the Western world to forcibly remove Robert Mugabe from power in Zimbabwe and return the farming land to its rightful owners.

Yeah, like the great guitar players in the halucinations will be thinking that's going to happen.

God Bless,
Dan'L

Here's a shot of a good friend's 38 Plymouth tudor sedan. It has a Chrysler 360 engine, and a torsion bar suspension, with disk brakes. The car is a great driver and ton of fun. 

Here's a shot of the 1969 Dodge SuperBee, that I owned, when my son was born. He'll be thirty-five next year. He owned a similar one, when he got out of high school, but it was WAAAAY to much car for someone 18 years old. (I was all of 22, when I bought it, new) It was a great car, but NOT one for a guy working his tail off, to raise a family. I sold it, in the summer of 1971, with less than 4000 miles, (a few of them, accumilated on the drag strip), and it had NEVER been driven in the rain. It got rained on, at the track, on three occasions, but was in much better condition when I sold it, than it was, the day I took delivery, with 7.2 miles on the odometer. Golly, what I wouldn't give, to have that machine back in my garage!

HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!

While you're cookin' hotdogs, burgers, ribs, or those other things that'll kill you, watching NASCAR, the parades and/or the fireworks today, maybe, . . . just maybe, . . . you could ask yourself whether you would have been with the majority or the minority on July 4th, 1776.

The majority?? Those were the colonists who were perfectly happy, thank you very much, to live under British control. The minority?? Those were the people dedicated the idea of freedom and personal liberty, the people who were willing to put all that they had at risk . . . . even their lives . . . . for the cause of independence.

Oh! You can't quite figure out which side you would have been on in 1776??

Well, . . . here's one way to figure it out. Did you have an opinion on President Bush's attempt to create privately owned and controlled accounts within Social Security?? If you approved of the plan you would have been with the minority in 1776. If you opposed the plan, congratulations! . . . If the thought behind the reason we celebrate with fireworks doesn't choke you up, just a little bit, . . . you and your ilk have been running with the majority for over 230 years.

God Bless You, America!
Dan'L

Who's the REAL Prevaricator??

Democrat leaders, preparing their response and rebuttal to the President's speech even before he delivered it, said he should concede he made mistakes as a means to reclaiming credibility on Iraq -- as if they actually want him to have greater credibility.

In the same breath they say he lied to get us into war -- an offense so grave that some of them are advocating he be impeached over it. While national Democrat politicians have long been confused over the distinction between intentional wrongs and mistakes -- thanks to Bill Clinton successfully depicting his pre-meditated transgressions as mistakes -- isn't it clear that if President Bush lied to get us into the war, he didn't merely make a mistake? Bill Clinton would have to verify that fact, if he were asked the hard questions.

But let's explore this beyond semantics. As everyone should know by now, President Bush based his decision to attack on intelligence information provided to him and which he didn't pressure the intelligence agencies to exaggerate. The intelligence agencies of most other nations, including those who, nevertheless, refused to join us against Iraq, concurred that Saddam was amassing WMD stockpiles. To ignore this evidence is sheer stupidity, . . . or a calculated exclusion, in hopes that the American Democrat base constituent will join the effort.

This assessment was bolstered by Saddam's intractable behavior in persistently defying U.N. weapons inspectors as if he had something to hide and repeatedly violating all U.N. resolutions. He had the burden of proving he had disposed of the WMD he demonstrably had, and used, on his own people, but instead submitted a bogus 12,000-page document, virtually inviting us to attack.

President Bush believed -- and the evidence confirms -- that Saddam's Iraq was a safe haven for international terrorists not unlike Afghanistan under the Taliban.

Credible reports have emerged that some of his henchmen were present at 9/11 planning meetings. But Democrats contend that our failure to find Saddam's WMD stockpiles after we deposed him proves that President Bush lied about their existence in the first place.

President Bush's reliance on the best available intelligence, though it may have turned out to be incorrect, doesn't make him a liar or prove that he made a mistake in attacking. He would have made a huge mistake had he failed to act on the information he had, especially considering Saddam's self-incriminating behavior. Sinister conspiracy stories of conspiracies and manipulation of intelligence data are absurd, until viable evidence is brought forth, and at that point, Republican leadership will join the impeachment efforts.

As I've written before, in a local newspaper, (See Daily Nonpareil archives), Democrats are the ones who are lying when they say they weren't relying on the very same intelligence in supporting the Iraq war resolution. And they are lying when they falsely accuse President George W. Bush of lying about the intelligence.

Among the worst of them is Senator John F. Kerry, (D-MA), who still pathetically clings to the fantasy that he can be president someday. In his latest lurch for relevance -- on "Larry King Live" -- he again accused President Bush of deceiving the American people, this time by constantly switching his rationale for attacking Iraq: from WMD, to spreading democracy, to suppressing a "hotbed of terrorism.

"But it's Kerry who's been doing the misleading. From the very beginning, President Bush's rationale for attacking Iraq was that under Saddam, she was our enemy in the global war on terror and a threat -- indirect and direct -- to our national security. The three reasons Kerry cites are not incompatible, but of a piece.

President Bush (and practically ALL Democratic Leaders, at that time), believed Saddam was amassing WMD and acting in concert with Islamic terrorists. And, . . . he's always had a vision that the spread of freedom and democracy in the Middle East would be a natural antidote to the proliferation of terrorism. That's not why we attacked Iraq, because we are not in the business of gratuitous nation building, but it's a potentially glorious byproduct that we shouldn't underestimate and is certainly consistent with our national interests and war aims.

No matter how incapable Kerry's Democrats are of comprehending this, 9/11 confirmed that Islamic radicals throughout the world are at war with the United States. The terrorist threat is not localized to Osama and the Taliban in Afghanistan. As we've said from the beginning, this isn't a law enforcement action, against criminals. This is a WAR, and it's against the terrorists of the world. It's better to have the war's front in some far corner of the world, BEFORE it ends up in those same Democrats' backyards, so they could carp about why we didn't take care of it, when we had the opportunity. The Democrats' ridiculous mantra that we concentrate our resources only on capturing Saddam reveals how radically they misapprehend the global scope of this war.

Saddam had been begging to be removed, for years; and George W. Bush neither lied nor made a mistake in removing him. Those same Democrats were right there supporting his action, when he took it, but changed their minds later on, in order to make the attempt to gain the upper political hand. Bush would be making an absurd, yet catastrophic mistake if he acceded to the Democrats' suicidal demand that we announce a withdrawal date for our troops in Iraq or take other action to undermine our purpose -- and the purpose of the Iraqi people -- there, in the battle zone.

While I'm sure President Bush appreciates all their unsolicited advice and carping, Democrats might be well advised to clean up their own house for a change. Instead of gloating over the president's inconsistent poll numbers, and their ability to manipulate them, through the assistance of their willing co-conspirators in the mainstream media, they might wake up to the sobering fact that they are the ones who have been losing elections and need help in the credibility department, especially concerning the spelling, as well as the accurate definition of the term "National Security."

But until they demonstrate some level of comprehension about the global reach and gravity of this war on terror, quit exploiting every morsel of negative news flowing from Iraq for political purposes and start supporting our cause, it's hard to envision a scenario where Americans will entrust them with safeguarding our national security.

God Bless,
Dan'L

Supreme Court dismantles Fifth Amendment



This image depicts two photos of the doors that cover the threshold of the United States Supreme Court's Main Chamber. This week, just before they began their summer break, the Justices ruled on the public display of the Ten Commandments, both inside, and outside public buildings, owned and maintained by the goverment. These two photos show the doorway to the room where all open court hearings are held. It's amazing that they can send down a ruling saying that images of the Ten Commandments cannot be displayed, alone, in any government buildings. What's WRONG with these guys?? It's even more amazing, when they decide that the term "public use" actually means "public purpose" removing all doubt about private property ownership, and the very core of democracy, worldwide. How do we seel the concept to the Iraqis, when we don't have it down, back home, just yet??

What do YOU think??

God Bless,
Dan'L

Ask Me if I Care About the Koran in the Commode

First, Newsweek pulled a "Dan Rather" on us, running a fabricated story just because they wanted it to be true. They told the world that an American guard at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention center had ripped pages from a prisoner's Koran and flushed it down a toilet. As a result, innocent people died when practitioners of Islam rioted in protest in Afghanistan.

Oops, said Newsweek, it seems we can't back up our story. Oh well, . . . it's probably true; we just can't prove it. (Isn't it convenient for Newsweek that the media now have "Deep Throat" to talk about so they can revel in their glory days and divert our attention from their criminal negligence.)

The lie heard round the world about the flushed Koran has caused convulsions in the Bush administration and forced the Pentagon to launch an investigation of unfounded allegations contained in an unsubstantiated story. The results of said investigation are now in, and it seems there are at least five incidents of "mishandling" of the Koran at Gitmo.

Well, guess what? I don't care!

Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we?? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001?? Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania?? Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning death that day, or didn't they??

And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? Well, I don't. I don't care at all.

I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.

I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia.

I'll care when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi tells the world he is sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling, slashed throat. (Does anyone seriously believe that had Nick asked for a Bible, he would have had one provided by his captors??)

I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques. Don't we still call that kind of cowardice, "chickenshit," here in America?? Why would it be any different, over there??

God Bless,
Dan'L

Fort Bragg Aftermath (Why can't the press figure it out?)

Can you believe that the extremist left is upset with the number of times the President mentioned September 11, 2001 in his most recent speach? I can.

Okay, . . . Here’s what's at work here. The extremists know that the American people still harbor harsh feelings toward the Islamic terrorists who killed 3000 of their countrymen on 9/11. The left also knows that the American people will not have any kind feelings toward anyone with any connection, no matter how tenuous, with the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks.

Since the left is placing its hopes on any possible electoral gains in 2006 to discrediting Bush's actions in Iraq, they know that they must stand steadfast in their battle to use whatever means necessary, even lies, to make sure that nobody -- and certainly not the president -- is allowed to connect Iraq and Saddam Hussein with Osama bin Laden or Al Qaeda.

The truth is that there is no shortage of evidence that there were contacts between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Contracts?? No! Contacts?? Certainly! And, many of Saddam's papers, recovered by the USMC, go to prove that connections DID exist. I'll go through a few sources for this stuff, right here on VRWC, but in the mean time, here's one source you might want to take a look at , . . . It's an excellent article appearing on the online edition of National Review. Andrew McCarthy makes the case that "It's All About 9/11" Yes, there's a link there, . . . as detailed on the NR website, . . . . But I would not recommend this article to any of you leftists out there who can't handle the truth about this matter. There's also an excellent editorial on the National Review website, (check the archives, if you cannot find it), "The Day that binds" which puts forth the premise that you simply cannot make the case for the removal of Saddam without reference to 9/11. Of course, . . . . the extreme left grabs that goal post, and moves it, while it tries to make the case that the National Review is some kind of right wing voice. Okay, . . . we'll give you that, . . . but let's get back to the evidence, . . . and, then, . . . what about Newsweek?

The troubling question here is that in light of all of the documented evidence that there were contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda, . . . and the evidence that some of Saddam's henchmen might have participated in the early planning of the 9/11 attacks, why do so-called "journalists" actually write or state things like "everybody knows that there was no connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda" or "It's been proven that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11?"

These people have access to the same information that I do or that you do . . . Information that shows those connections existed. They can't plead stupidity. The information is out there. It's in the report from David Kay. It's in the 9/11 Commission report . . . it's there, yet its existence is continuously denied by so many in the mainstream media. Why?? Where do they THINK that Serin Gas came from, when it was found in those artillary shells??

Well . . . let's try to answer the big "why??"

As I said, it can't be ignorance. So what's at work here?? How about bias?? Could it be that these "journalists" are consciously practicing the "big lie" technique?? Even though they know better, do they constantly make absolute statements such as "Everybody knows that there's no connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda" in an attempt to convince the American people of something that they know full well isn't true?? And why would they do that?? To carry forth an anti-Bush-Administration agenda??

I can’t figure it out, but it’s really silly to expect intellectually-honest, thinking Americans to buy in.

God Bless,
Dan'L

TEDDY KENNEDY . . . . BY THE NUMBERS

Senator Teddy (Chappaquidic) Kennedy has also picked up on the "mad with power" theme: Kennedy has placed his name on a poisonous little fund-raising letter that has been mailed to hundreds of thousands of voters around the country. In that letter the good Senator Kennedy parrots the current Democratic line . . . . that the Republicans are trying to gain "absolute power" over our government. In that mailer Kennedy says that "The far right knows no bounds, and neither does their lust for unchecked power.

Kennedy then puts forth "13 numbers that tell how bad George Bush and the Republicans have been for America."

I'm not going to go through all 13 of Kennedy's enumerations here . . . . but I'll cover just a few of them to set up a point I wish to make about Kennedy's little numbers game. Here we go on a brief mystical Kennedy ride through the alcoholic fog, . . . (ya know, I once got suspended for calling a fellow cop "an alcoholic," because cops aren't supposed to make physiological diagnoses, such as that, . . . but I'm no longer encumbered by such restraints!), so here ya go:

No. 3: $1 billion -- how much the Bush Administration has under funded domestic port security.

Now .. if you are possessed of the least bit of intellectually-honest curiosity -- in other words, if you didn't attend certain government schools -- you might well, want to know just how one will determine that something is "under-funded." Well, Mr. Insensitivity is here to answer your question.

Step 1. Demand increased government spending for some friendly constituent group or political stronghold.

Step 2. When the Republican congress refuses to meet your funding goals, immediately make a finding that your friendly constituent group or political stronghold is "under funded." Two easy steps .. and you have No. 3 on Senator Chappaquidic's list.

No. 5: $98 billion -- how much the Bush Administration has under funded first responders since 9/11.

Same deal --- ask for the money, and when the money isn't forthcoming, scream "under funded!"

No. 11: 20,000 -- the number of premature deaths annually resulting from the Republicans gutting the Clean Air Act.

Bear in mind that the Bush administration has done absolutely nothing that will cause our air to become dirtier. The Clean Air Act has not been gutted. Some moves have been made that will allow some power plants to make minor repairs that would allow a more efficient generation of electrical power with virtually no increase in pollution levels per kilowatt hour generated. Under the Clinton rules these plants would have either had to operate without the needed repairs, thus producing more, not less pollution per kilowatt hour, shut down, or undergo repairs and renovations so expensive that the price of electricity would have gone up appreciably. This is known as "gutting the Clean Air Act?"



Okay, . . . Now it's my turn. Here's Ted Kennedy, by the numbers. Or, . . . should I say by the number.

No. 1. One (1) -- the number of young women who have died by suffocation in the back seat of Ted Kennedy's car as it sits in four feet of water after having run off a bridge on Martha's Vineyard while Teddy Kennedy, who was driving, when the car ran off the bridge, wanders aimlessly up and down the highway trying to figure out a way to save his political future when news of the dead girl finally hits the newspapers.

See how easy this is?? Of course, my offering can stand up to any quest for the truth, while Kennedy's cannot. Golly, what I wouldn't have given to have been there, to conduct a complete reconstruction of that accident, by the numbers. Too bad that has never been done, by a competent accident reconstructionist.

So, . . . keep your eyes and ears open. Until this theme is replaced with another one you will hear more and more about the Republicans mad, diabolical quest for absolute power! It's strictly up to you, whether you buy into the mantra, or not.

God Bless,
Dan'L

Specific to Private Investigators:

It is crunch time for our profession.


S. 1332, The Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2005 will be heard and discussed in Washington before the next Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on Thursday July 14th, the same day as our NCISS Hit the Hill campaign. Right now there is no exemption for PIs to access SSNs. In additional there are several other bills that are threats. Even though the Judiciary committee members will likely not be available in the morning of July 15th, possibly they will in the afternoon. But there are all the other members of Congress that will vote on the final bill and we need to educate them as to why we need access.

WE NEED YOU TO COME TO WASHINGTON DC for our Hit the Hill campaign to meet with members of Congress or their legislative staff. It is fairly easy to set up appointment. We will also give you a half hour primer from our lobbyist in the morning when we all meet and will provide you handouts. July 14th is the date, if you have some frequent flyer miles, use them and stay over in Washington one night and it will not be that much out of your pocket and an investment in your future.

It is sad really that each year we have the same people doing the work, we call them the "dirty thirty". Typically we may have 30-40 people show up when there are 50,000 investigators in the U.S.

Now that there is going to be a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court you will hear a lot of political rhetoric from members of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary as well as from other members of Congress. But remember, they still have S. 1332 awaiting their votes and if we are not there to let them know of our concern this piece of legislation or one equally as bad will be pushed through.

When a bill is passed in the next few months with or without language that protects our access, it is going to have a lot to do with how many in the profession cared enough to get really involved in this fight. Forget about Choicepoint and the data providers right now, the real issue is threatening legislation. Are you going to sit back and let it happen?

Many say they are too busy...I am busy also running an agency with clients built up over twenty years and I may lose money but I like to fight for the tools of my trade. Hopefully many of you do also and will show up in D.C. too.

Please go to our website http://www.blogger.com/ and look on the right side for the link for more information under "NCISS Identity Theft Seminar". You are welcome to attend the all day seminar on Friday July 15th for free. Police are often reluctant to take on identity theft cases because of jurisdictional issues; we are trying to educate politicians in Washington DC that often private investigators are called upon by victims to investigate identity theft and we therefore must have access to personal identifiers.

I'd be happy to discuss (email preferably to BPM1@Bellsouth.net ) with anyone who is thinking of going but feels uneasy about speaking to Congressional staff or feels they don't know enough about the issue. You know the issue which is how you use personal identifiers like SSNs everyday to assist you in investigations. I can assure you it in not difficult and most of the time you are speaking with a young staffer who relays the info to his/her boss. Typically you visit an office for less than 15 minutes but that visit can be crucial.

WE NEED NUMBERS IN WASHINGTON TO SWAY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

It's time to get involved or be left behind.


Brian P. McGuinness, President
NCISS - National Council of Investigation and Security Services

P.S. If you can not come to Washington won't you please help us continue our fight ? We will need more funds in our Legislative Committee war chest. Checks may be made payable to NCISS Legislative Fund and mailed to NCISS at 7501 Sparrows Point Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21219.




THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF NCISS


Brian's correct, everyone. We owe it to our valued clients to be able to conduct their investigations on the very same levels as are currently used by Law Enforcement Professionals and other branches of government. Public Records aside, access to personal data is something no investigative arm can do without. Say, for example, we are to be appointed to either the criminal or civil defense of someone, we cannot, and will not, be able to adequately investigate the allegations of the government, or adversarial parties, if we aren't allowed an exemption to the rules that are being proposed by S1332.

In the past, it was Senators Diane Feinstein, and Richard Shelby, who addressed the issue of "identity theft," and the sale of Social Security Numbers, but we managed to convince them that the "unintended consequences" of their proposed legislation, would be devastating to their constituents, through the diminished ability to learn and deal with the truth, and to have truth available to them, as the work-product of a professional investigative effort, if the need should arise to go into the justice system. We also convinced those same Senators, and their contributors among the Trial Attorneys, that locating witnesses would become more expensive, ten-fold. Now we have to re-fight the same issues, because companies like Lexis/Nexus, ChoicePoint and KnowX had tremendous breaches to their security, and lost vast amounts of personal information associated with millions of Americans.

Although some of us have used ChoicePoint and KnowX, among others, like Lexis/Nexus and FindLaw, we have never abused those privileges, and still find ourselves lumped in, with other third-party users, like check-cashing companies, pawn shops, and used car dealers. We need to wake the common sense oriented, among these Senators, and have similar amendments added to S1332, just as we did with the Driver's Privacy Protection Law, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Fire up your fax machines and send your personalized letter to BOTH of your senators. For those licensed in multiple states, like Evidence, Inc., send them to all appropriate Senators representing your client lists.

God Bless,
Dan'L

Dan Larsen is the Director of Operations for Evidence, Inc. A private Investigation specialist since his retirement, after twenty years in Law Enforcement in 1988.

His Curriculum Vitea shows that he's a past-president (1999 - 2003) of the Iowa Association of Private Investigators, (IAPI), and former co-chair, (2001-2003) of the National Council of Investigative and Security Specialists, (NCISS), State Association Advisory Board, (SAAB). He's been licensed as a Private Investigator in at least two states, for over 17 years. Dan's positions on this blog do NOT represent his ability as an investigator, (so leave your vile insults, and personal attacks at the door, please), but DOES represent his state of mind and general approach to many of the various issues which effect his clients.

Here's a nice example of the motherlode of Dick Tracy Collectibles. Read my blog for the motherlode of political rant! Don't agree?? Too bad! Start your own darned blog!! Or, you can rail against me, (for a couple of you, I'm sure you'll understand!), and let me know where you stand. Please respond. My intellectually-honest, liberal fodder has been dwindling, of late!  

CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS??

Illinois Democratic Senator Dick Durbin draws a comparison between American armed forces and Nazis, Stalin's murderers and Pol Pots butchers, and Democrats are silent.

Then along comes Mr. Karl Rove. He's the guy every Democrat loves to hate.

And, you must bear in mind here, in reading my commentary, that those Democrats probably hate Karl Rove more than any other living breathing human being. They believe Rove the man to be solely responsible for their electoral loss in 2000 and again in 2004. And, he may very well be, . . . Second, of course, to George W. Bush!

So Karl Rove speaks to the Conservative Party of New York about a website and an organization under the 527 Rule, which is called "MoveOn.org," and Ol' Karl has something to say about how liberals reacted to 9/11. Rove said "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."

Oh my! Were the Democrats upset! (Remember that these are the folks who want you to believe that they all voted AGAINST the invasion in Iraq!)

The same cast of characters that had nothing to say about Durbin's remarks sure had a lot to say about Karl Rove. San Francisco's Nancy Pelosi, the House Minority Leader said that Republican charges that Democrats were undermining the war on terror with their criticism of administration policies amounted to an act of desperation.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said that "Karl Rove should immediately and fully apologize for his remarks or he should resign, I hope the president will join me in repudiating these remarks.

"Hillary had to weigh in of course: "I would hope that you and other members of the administration would immediately repudiate such an insulting comment from a high-ranking official in the president's inner circle." Hillary has a lot of room to talk, doncha think?? (But then, even though she won't admit it, she DOES look to Senator Teddy Chappaquidic, for advice, from time to time)

Other Democrats called Rove's remarks "Vulgar and nauseating."Bear in mind ... these are the same Democrats who had nothing to say about Durbin's comparison of American men and women in uniform to Nazis. But let someone say that liberals lack the will to fight to fight terrorism .. and all hell breaks loose.

By the way .. .Rove had it about right. And he wasn't through with his slam on the left. He also had something to say about Dick Durbin. "Let me just put this in fairly simple terms: Al Jazeera now broadcasts the words of Senator Durbin to the Mideast, certainly putting our troops in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals."

Atta boy, Karl.Rove also denounced Sen. Dick Durbin's comments comparing interrogation at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp to the methods of Nazis and other repressive regimes. He said the statements have been broadcast throughout the Middle East, putting U.S. troops in greater danger.

The democrat from Illinois has since apologized for the remarks. (NOT! He simply extended his "heartfelt apologies" by saying: "Mr. President, I've come to understand that was a poor choice of words, . . . . Last Friday, I tried to make this very clear that I understood that those analogies - the Nazis, Soviets, and others - were poorly chosen. I issued a release, which I thought made my intentions and my innermost feelings as clear as I possibly could, . . ." Apparently, the Union Boys, back home, didn't LIKE it so much, and told Dickie's office they'd remember it, when re-election rolls around! Anyone who thought they saw an apology is acutely partisan, to the point of stupidity!)

The best part is that the whole thing can be summarized in Karl's words: "No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals," Rove said.

That was last week, . . . NOW we have the retirement and impending appointment of a Supreme Court Justice, after Sandra Day O'Connor announced her intention to retire, last Friday morning. One must wonder about the Senators called the "WildCat Fouteen," and how they'll respond to this new revelation. I can't wait for their response, if Bush calls out the name of a true constructionist, (which the moron, Arlen Spector, (R-PA), calls "codewords for Conservative."

Tell, me, PLEASE! When did we quit teaching that our government was comprised of three branches, and the concepts of that idea are surrounded by a "check-and-balance" system of government, and that the United States Constitution is made up of words from the English language, and that each of them has a meaning, and comprise certain ideas, principles, concepts, and law, and that the document isn't flexible, . . . unless and until it is modified through a certain statutory procedure. When did our high schools lose track of those issues?? Was it when we begain teaching sex ed?? I know that Driver's ed suffered because of the banana/condom issues, (blamed on time constraints, at the time, by educators nation wide), but did we also move the Civics classes to the opional lists, and then slowly phase them out, too??

God Bless,
Dan'L