5-26-09

Why Louie Freeh and LHATE Have Manipulated Fewer Shootings Lately

I Ching - Is Louie Freeh, or a Louie Freeh type, and his band of thugs, LHATE, Louie's Hate America Team, responsible for the many non motive shootings going on in the USA?

24 Return exiting and entering; reordering personal affairs Chgs to 23 Stripping Away - Passive energy, Yin, is becoming pure, as Yang energy, forceful, is nearly exhausted

--- --- * ------
--- ---
--- ---
--- ---
--- ---
------ * --- ---

The month of March 2009 was deadly for Louie Freeh's LHATE manipulated shootings, at least 44 murdered in five or more separate incidents. The Rothschilds and Rockefellers picked Barack Obama as president to replace comrade Little George and as one would expect Obama has morphed ( a Paul Craig Roberts expression) to where his agenda is the same or more anti US Constitution than comrade Little George's. comrade Obama is expected by his bosses to toss the US Constitution and place the USA under Martial Law and rule us as Dictator for Life. comrade Obama must reign over the United States in a state of Civil War rooted in racism, elimination of the US Constitution, Military Tribunals, torture of Americans to illicit illogical confessions, secrete prisons and Guantanamo. Logic dictates the bad guys put Louie Freeh in charge of September 11, the anthrax murders, the DC sniper killings, and now they have him and his evil cell making war on the USA by manipulating hatred of Arabs, racism, and more shootings. Probably the main reason LHATE manipulated so many shootings in March was to coordinate with and advance Team Obama's propaganda that the Mexican drug war was being supplied guns from the United States. The Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen went to Mexico and offered Mexico a $1.4 billion dollar bribe in exchange for Mexico allowing the US military invade Mexico. Secretary of State Hillary went to Mexico to help sell Mexico on the importance of letting us invade Mexico and even comrade Obama went to Mexico. All the while LHATE was manipulating shooting spree after shooting spree to rattle Americans and scare them into tossing our right to own guns. April was a light month for manipulated shootings as the bad guys introduced Swine flu. Thank God Swine Flu has not become a major pandemic to date. Its importance is probably tied more to working the kinks out of the bad guys' plans to put the USA under biological Martial Law at a later date. The bad guys introduced us to the thought we must get flu shots which may mean the bad guys plan to force tainted flu shots on us to get their pandemic rocking and rolling. May 24, a shooting in Arizona, was possibly LHATE's most notable shooting manipulation since bloody March. There was an honorary degree for Obama flap concerning Obama's Arizona State commencement address and LHATE may have picked Arizona for a manipulated shooting in the hope of planting racism seeds here, there and yonder. Logic dictates one of the reasons the Rothschilds and Rockefellers picked Obama as president was they feel it will be easy to foment racism with him as president. The graduation shooting may be a follow the dots from a graduation, to Obama, to a shooting, to shooting (nation wide) as a cure for racism.

So logic dictates LHATE has cut back on manipulating shootings during the months of April and May because Team Obama cut back on getting gun control laws passed during April and May, and they wanted to focus on making Americans enemy combatants. Along with taking our guns away the bad guys are working hard to establish Americans as enemy combatants and terrorists. Obama's nearly first Executive Order keeps Bush's game of keeping the US Supreme Court away from ruling on comrade Little George's illegal Presidential Executive Order, which makes US citizens terrorists, enemy combatants, without civil rights, going. The Rothschild/Rockefeller LHATE manipulated a bogus terrorist plot in NYC. Quoting from a Robert Dreyfuss's article "A scary terrorist plot is announced. Then it's revealed that the suspects are a hapless bunch of ne'er-do-wells or run-of-the-mill thugs without the slightest connection to any terrorists at all, never mind to Al Qaeda. Finally, the last piece of the puzzle: the entire plot is revealed to have been cooked up by a scummy government agent-provocateur." Louie Freeh is from NYC and likes to manipulate communi$t propaganda in NYC. The fraudulent terrorist plot goes a long way to establish all Americans as terrorists. We can expect Louie Freeh's LHATE to manipulate many more home grown terrorist plots. Why? The bad guys are establishing Americans as enemy combatants, terrorists. Establishing Americans as enemy combatants will allow Team Obama to snatch Americans and try them in secrete in Military Tribunals, torture them at Guantanamo and get them to confess to anything they want confessed, steal their money, kill them or imprison them forever, and no one will know and Team Obama will not have violated any laws.

Another reason LHATE has slowed down their manipulated shootings is shootings are getting harder for them to manipulate. Investigators of shootings are seeing the same mode of operation. Some entity searching medical records for mentally ill, the use of the Internet to influence the shooter, pressure on the shooter, no motive for the shooting other than manipulation, the shooting located near military bases which work as safe houses for the manipulators, the shootings timed to political events, and the Justice Department taking over the investigation. Note how sloppy LHATE manipulated the NYC terrorist plot. One reason LHATE starts fires in California as terrorists acts is that it is easier for LHATE to burn houses down than manipulate shootings or bogus terrorist plots. It would hard to guess the size of Louie's budget, but it is huge. Keeping us guessing as to where Louie's thugs will hit next is the key to their success. Military bases and special ops are keys to their success as well.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/437864/yet_another_bogus_terror_plot?rel=hp_picks

Yet Another Bogus 'Terror' Plot posted by Robert Dreyfuss on 05/22/2009 @ 07:56am

By the now, it's maddeningly familiar. A scary terrorist plot is announced. Then it's revealed that the suspects are a hapless bunch of ne'er-do-wells or run-of-the-mill thugs without the slightest connection to any terrorists at all, never mind to Al Qaeda. Finally, the last piece of the puzzle: the entire plot is revealed to have been cooked up by a scummy government agent-provocateur.

I've seen this movie before.

In this case, the alleged perps -- Onta Williams, James Cromitie, David Williams, and Laguerre Payen -- were losers, ex-cons, drug addicts. Al Qaeda they're not. Without the assistance of the agent who entrapped them, they would never have dreamed of committing political violence, nor would they have had the slightest idea about where to acquire plastic explosives or a Stinger missile. That didn't stop prosecutors from acting as if they'd captured Osama bin Laden himself. Noted the Los Angeles Times:

Prosecutors called it the latest in a string of homegrown terrorism plots hatched after Sept. 11.

"It's hard to envision a more chilling plot," Assistant U.S. Atty. Eric Snyder said in court Thursday. He described all four suspects as "eager to bring death to Jews."

Actually, it's hard to imagine a stupider, less competent, and less important plot. The four losers were ensnared by a creepy FBI agent who hung around the mosque in upstate New York until he found what he was looking for. Here's the New York Times account:

Salahuddin Mustafa Muhammad, the imam at the mosque where the authorities say the confidential informant first encountered the men, said none of the men were active in the mosque. ...

Mr. Cromitie was there last June, and he met a stranger.

He had no way of knowing that the stranger's path to the mosque began in 2002, when he was arrested on federal charges of identity theft. He was sentenced to five years' probation, and became a confidential informant for the F.B.I. He began showing up at the mosque in Newburgh around 2007, Mr. Muhammad said.

The stranger's behavior aroused the imam's suspicions. He invited other worshipers to meals, and spoke of violence and jihad, so the imam said he steered clear of him.

"There was just something fishy about him," Mr. Muhammad said. Members "believed he was a government agent."

Mr. Muhammad said members of his congregation told him the man he believed was the informant offered at least one of them a substantial amount of money to join his "team."

So a creepy thug buttonholes people at a mosque, foaming at the mouth about violence and jihad? This is law enforcement? Just imagine if someone did this at a local church, or some synagogue. And the imam says the people "believed he was a government agent."

Preying on these losers, none of whom were apparently actual Muslims, the "confidential informant" orchestrated the acquisition of a disabled Stinger missile to shoot down military planes and cooked up a wild scheme about attacking a Jewish center in the Bronx.

It gets even more pathetic:

The only one of the four suspects who appears to have aroused any suspicion was Payen, a Haitian native who attended the Newburgh mosque. Assistant imam Hamid Rashada said his dishevelment and odd behavior disturbed some members, said the assistant imam, Hamid Rashada.

When Payen appeared in court, defense attorney Marilyn Reader described him as "intellectually challenged" and on medication for schizophrenia. The Associated Press said that when he was asked if he understood the proceedings, Payen replied: "Sort of."

Despite the pompous statements from Mayor Bloomberg of New York and other politicians, including Representative Peter King, the whole story is bogus. The four losers may have been inclined to violence, and they may have harbored a virulent strain of anti-Semitism. But it seems that the informant whipped up their violent tendencies and their hatred of Jews, cooked up the plot, incited them, arranged their purchase of weapons, and then had them busted. To ensure that it made headlines, the creepy informant claimed to be representing a Pakistani extremist group, Jaish-e Muhammad, a bona fide terrorist organization. He wasn't, of course.

It is disgusting and outrageous that the FBI is sending provocateurs into mosques.

The headlines reinforce the very fear that Dick Cheney is trying to stir up. The story strengthens the narrative that the "homeland" is under attack. It's not. As I've written repeatedly, since 9/11 not a single American has even been punched in the nose by an angry Muslim, as far as I can tell. Plot after plot -- the destruction of the Brooklyn Bridge! bombing the New York Subways! taking down the Sears Tower! bombing the Prudential building in Newark! -- proved to be utter nonsense.

An Obama Executive Order Is Designed to Keep US Citizens Terrorists, Enemy Combatants, Without Our Civil Rights

As Jacob G. Hornberger explains in his article,Obama and the al-Marri Case, the Bush Administration, "From 9/11 forward, the president wielded the power to take any American into custody as an enemy combatant terrorist and treat him accordingly — waterboarding, isolation, indefinite incarceration, etc. No jury trial. No Bill of Rights. No Constitution." This new presidential power given by Little George to himself allowed him, the president, to call us terrorists, declare us, Enemy Combatants without Civil rights. So far, until comrade Little George slimmed off the scene, the Bush Administration through legal maneuvering had been able to keep the US Supreme Court from ruling on the Padilla case and thus this illegal presidential order which eliminated our Civil Rights is still in force.

Obama's nearly first Executive Order keeps Bush's game of keeping the US Supreme Court away from ruling on comrade Little George's illegal Presidential Executive Order, which makes US citizens terrorists, enemy combatants, without civil rights, going. Obama is keeping Little George's scam going when Obama ordered the Justice Department to review the case of Ali Saleh al-Marri. Ali Saleh al-Marri's case is headed for the US Supreme Court. Logic dictates, since Obama has been put in Office by the Rothschilds and Rockefellers, as was comrade Little George, Obama does not want al-Marri's case heard by the US Supreme Court, just as Bush did not want al-Marri's case heard by the US Supreme Court, both presidents bad guy puppets. The communi$t$' game is to keep the al-Marri case away from the US Supreme Court, even if it means dropping the case against al-Marri. Bush got the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to rule against Padilla, and the American people have been terrorists, enemy combatants, without Civil Rights, ever since. The bad guys, including Obama, do not want the Civil Rights of the American people returned to them by the US Supreme Court. This is why one of Obama's first Executive Orders ordered the Justice Department to review the al-Marri case. Logic dictates it will be reviewed so legal maneuvering will take place so the al-Marri case does not go to the US Supreme Court.

http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2009-01-27.asp

Hornberger’s Blog
Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Obama and the al-Marri Case
by Jacob G. Hornberger

Among the executive orders President Obama issued upon assuming the presidency was one ordering the Justice Department to review the case of Ali Saleh al-Marri, a case that involves the enemy-combatant doctrine in terrorism cases that the U.S. government assumed after the 9/11 attacks. (For an extensive discussion of the importance of the al-Marri case, see “The al-Marri Case Affects Us All.”)

Here’s the issue in the al-Marri case. Prior to the 9/11 attacks, it was a well-established legal doctrine that terrorism is a crime. It’s listed in the federal criminal code as a criminal offense. Suspected terrorists have always been indicted and prosecuted in federal district court as criminals.

After the 9/11 attacks, however, and without even the semblance of a constitutional amendment, the Bush administration announced that the federal government would have the option of treating terrorism as either a crime or an act of war.

Many Americans cheered this assumption of power, some of them not realizing that it also applied to Americans. From 9/11 forward, the president wielded the power to take any American into custody as an enemy combatant terrorist and treat him accordingly — waterboarding, isolation, indefinite incarceration, etc. No jury trial. No Bill of Rights. No Constitution.

The president and the military applied the newly assumed enemy-combatant power to Jose Padilla, an American citizen, and to al-Marri, a citizen of Qatar, both of whom were arrested on American soil, which is considered part of the battlefield in the worldwide fight against terrorism.

The enemy-combatant power was upheld in the Padilla case by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguably the most conservative circuit in the nation. When Padilla was appealing that decision to the Supreme Court, the government suddenly and unexpectedly exercised its option to treat Padilla as a criminal defendant instead of as an enemy combatant. That clever legal maneuvering deprived the Supreme Court of ruling on the matter, leaving the Fourth Circuit’s decision intact. That decision could, of course, be relied upon if the government were to begin rounding up Americans during some major crisis in the future.

Al-Marri was being prosecuted in federal district court for criminal offenses when the federal government exercised its post-9/11 option to convert him to enemy-combatant status. On the government’s motion, the federal judge dismissed the criminal indictment — “with prejudice” — and al-Marri was whisked away to the same military dungeon in South Carolina where Padilla had been incarcerated as an enemy combatant. That’s where al-Marri has been for the past six years.

When the al-Marri case reached the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, not surprisingly the court once again upheld the enemy-combatant power. Al-Marri appealed and the Supreme Court recently accepted the case. Al-Marri has filed his appellate brief and the government’s brief is now pending. That’s where the case now sits.

The course that Obama and the Justice Department select will undoubtedly have major ramifications for the American people. While those ramifications might be positive in the short run, they might well be negative and ominous in the long run.

One option would be to simply transfer al-Marri to the federal courts for prosecution, thereby treating his offenses as crimes rather than as acts of war. If they do that, then the Supreme Court will be once again be deprived of the opportunity to firmly and unequivocally strike down the enemy-combatant doctrine. The Fourth Circuit decision upholding the doctrine will remain intact, ready to be relied upon whenever some future president decides to begin rounding up Americans in the midst of a big crisis. In other words, transferring al-Marri to the federal courts will result in the same situation as when U.S. officials transferred Padilla to the federal courts.

Transferring al-Marri to the federal courts for prosecution, however, could be problematic for prosecutors. Why? Because prosecutors would be barred from charging al-Marri with the same charges that formed the subject of the initial indictment against him. That’s because a dismissal “with prejudice” is a final adjudication of those charges under the double-jeopardy provisions of the Constitution.

Another option would be to simply release al-Marri. That again would mean that the Supreme Court would not review the case, thereby leaving the Fourth Circuit decision intact.

Another option would be to ask the Fourth Circuit to vacate its decision and enter a new judgment in favor of al-Marri. That option is problematic, however, because while a court will vacate a particular decision based on an agreement of the parties, that doesn’t mean it will enter a new and different opinion in the case. That is, while the Fourth Circuit might well vacate its decision in response to a request from the government, the possibility that the court will enter a new opinion that effectively says, “We were wrong about the enemy combatant doctrine” is nil.

Thus, unless the government proceeds forward with the al-Marri case, the Supreme Court will be denied the opportunity to reverse the Fourth Circuit’s decision upholding the enemy-combatant doctrine. Yet, it is difficult to believe that given its purported intention to move America in a different direction with respect to civil liberties, the Obama administration will in good conscience be able to proceed forward and ask the Court to uphold al-Marri’s detention.

The final option would be to ask the Supreme Court to enter a decision and opinion overruling the Fourth Circuit decision and striking down the enemy-combatant power. That, however, that option is problematic because the courts do not enter advisory opinions. The court is more likely to say to the government: If you believe that, then you have your remedy — release him or transfer him to the federal courts.

Thus, while al-Marri might well come out the winner in all this, the likelihood is that the American people and their freedom will come out the loser because that ominous Fourth Circuit opinion upholding the enemy-combatant power will remain intact for use by some future president in the midst of some major crisis.

Hornberger’s Blog Archives

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/24/arizona-graduation-party-_n_207131.html

Arizona Graduation Party Shooting Leaves 2 Dead, 4 Wounded
Arizona Graduation Party Shooting Leaves 2 Dead, 4 Wounded stumble reddit del.ico.us May 24, 2009 12:24 PM EST |

MESA, Ariz. — Two people were killed and six others _ two of them children _ were wounded in a shooting at a high school graduation party, police said Sunday.

A 37-year-old man was taken into custody after a four-hour standoff with police at a house in Mesa, east of Phoenix, Mesa Police Sgt. Ed Wessing said.

Preliminary information indicated that the suspect was an invited guest at the party who got into a physical fight with his ex-wife late Saturday, Wessing said.

The suspect allegedly went to his vehicle, got a gun, returned to the party and opened fire, killing his 38-year-old ex-wife and a 32-year-old man, Wessing said.

He said six others had minor injuries. They included a 10-year-old boy who was grazed on the head and an 8-year-old boy injured by bullet fragments.

Wessing said that when police arrived patrol cars were hit by gunfire and one officer was shot in the left arm. The officer's injuries weren't life-threatening and no other officers were hit.

http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/05/cheney-lies-in-defense-of-torture/

The lie Cheney told about A.Q. Khan

by Larisa Alexandrovna

Somewhere among the strategically placed references to September 11, 2001 and his unapologetic defense of torture, Dick Cheney managed to lie about a series of topics and events that are well documented. It is, after all, the electronic age and facts are not difficult to come by.

One must consider too what motivated the networks to carry a speech by a former Vice President in defense of torture. The ethics vacuum is mind-boggling.

We have come to a point where a former Vice President told the world that America tortures – but calls it something else - and the networks cover this as though it were a random stump speech, not the actual embarrassment and horror that it is. The facts too are missing, although only a few news outlets seem interested in the truth.

No One Could Have Imagined

Cheney says that the attacks of September 11, 2001 “caused everyone to take a serious second look at threats that had been gathering for a while and enemies whose plans were getting bolder and more sophisticated.”

On the contrary, the plans were not new and bold and were well documented by the Central Intelligence Agency. In fact, a month prior to the attacks, President Bush and Dick Cheney both received a briefing on the matter. The August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US,” is fairly clear. The PDB mentions the following:

A clandestine source said in 1998 that a Bin Laden cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [deleted text] service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar' Abd aI-Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers Bin Laden-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group or Bin Laden supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.
What did Bush do after receiving this briefing? He promptly went on vacation. It is unclear what Cheney did, but whatever it was, it had nothing to do with national security. In addition, torture was unneeded in obtaining this information. What was needed, however, was a White House interested in protecting our nation. It is therefore remarkable that Cheney continues to use 9/11 as a reason for his abuses of power, rather than be shamed by his indifference and negligence.

A.Q. Khan Network

Here is what he says about A.Q. Khan, the "father" of Pakistani nuclear weapons and a Middle East black market that sprang up around him:

This was the world in which al-Qaida was seeking nuclear technology and A.Q. Khan was selling nuclear technology on the black market. We had the anthrax attack from an unknown source. We had the training camps in Afghanistan and dictators like Saddam Hussein with known ties to Mideast terrorists.

--snip--

We did all of these things and, with bipartisan support, put all of these policies in place. It has resulted in serious blows against enemy operations: the takedown of the A.Q. Khan network and the dismantling of Libya's nuclear program.
Now let's look at the actual facts of this.

In 2007, BBC’s Newsnight and the Guardian reported the following:

The Bush administration thwarted investigations of Dr. A.Q. Khan, known as the "father" of Pakistan's atomic bomb. This week, Khan confessed to selling atomic secrets to Libya, North Korea, and Iran.

The Bush Administration has expressed shock at disclosures that Pakistan, our ally in the war on terror, has been running a nuclear secrets bazaar. In fact, according to the British news teams' sources within US intelligence agencies, shortly after President Bush's inauguration, his National Security Agency (NSA) effectively stymied the probe of Khan Research Laboratories, the Pakistani agency in charge of the bomb project. CIA and other agents told BBC they could not investigate the spread of 'Islamic Bombs' through Pakistan because funding appeared to originate in Saudi Arabia.
Moreover, in 2003 it was Cheney and his team, including his former Chief of Staff I. Scooter Libby, who outed a covert operation tracking some - at least minimally - of the A.Q. Khan network. I broke this story in 2005 and here is what I reported then:

According to current and former intelligence officials, Plame Wilson, who worked on the clandestine side of the CIA in the Directorate of Operations as a non-official cover (NOC) officer, was part of an operation tracking distribution and acquisition of weapons of mass destruction technology to and from Iran.

--snip--
While many have speculated that Plame was involved in monitoring the nuclear proliferation black market, specifically the proliferation activities of Pakistan's nuclear "father," A.Q. Khan, intelligence sources say that her team provided only minimal support in that area, focusing almost entirely on Iran.
Although I was told a good deal more than this, including her then-most recent work on Iraq, I was restricted by my sources to reporting ONLY about Iran and ONLY touching on Pakistan. The nature of the "minimal support" remains highly classified. I was also restricted from using certain words and still have not been released from that restriction.

The reason for why my sources insisted on these conditions was that although they had felt strongly that what Cheney had done was indeed treason, they also felt strongly that too much information would expose the operation further and cause additional damages to agency methods and sources.

What we do know is that a group of clandestine officers provided at least "minimal support" in monitoring the A.Q. Khan network. What we also know is that this operation was compromised because Dick Cheney's office had to silence a good, honest, few Americans from speaking out about the lies that led us into Iraq.

Yet Cheney claims success in taking down A.Q. Khan's network.

Yes, it boggles the mind. These are but two examples in a speech littered with such claims despite well documented facts. Imagine, too, the networks covered this for the world to see. What did they cover? The world saw a former Vice President giving a speech in defense of torture and lying about even the most basic, known facts of what the Bush administration has done. If he could so brazenly lie about topics such as these, what else is he lying about? What must the world think of us for giving this man a podium on national television? Worse still, there are many defending him, regardless of the truth and regardless of the illegality of torture.

Tags: A.Q. Khan, AEI Speech, August 6 PDB, Dick Cheney, Larisa Alexandrovna, Media Ethics, Propaganda, torture, Valerie Plame Wilson

http://www.atlargely.com/

May 23, 2009
The Department of Pre-Crime is now open....
Are you dark skinned and/or a Muslim? Well, welcome. The Department of Pre-Crime would like to incite you to violence, create a plot for you to vent that violence, and supply you with weapons to carry the plot out. Our recruiting officers will be at your nearest Mosque.

Investigative reporter Robert Dreyfuss has an excellent article up at Alternet about how the New York "terrorist" stopped or rather, set-up:

"So a creepy thug buttonholes people at a mosque, foaming at the mouth about violence and jihad? This is law enforcement? Just imagine if someone did this at a local church, or some synagogue. And the imam says the people "believed he was a government agent."

Preying on these losers, none of whom were apparently actual Muslims, the "confidential informant" orchestrated the acquisition of a disabled Stinger missile to shoot down military planes and cooked up a wild scheme about attacking a Jewish center in the Bronx."

Read the whole thing.

Links broken; Why?

August 4, 2008 Permalink

Jean C. Duley... tell us again...

Submitted by Robert Arend

by Larisa Alexandrovna: Okay, well the more research I do into the now infamous Ms. Jean C. Duley - the 'therapist' who filed a restraining order against the alleged anthrax attacks suspect Bruce E. Ivins - the more her story sounds like a whole load of crap.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/16942

Okay, well the more research I do into the now infamous Ms. Jean C. Duley - the "therapist" who filed a restraining order against the alleged anthrax attacks suspect Bruce E. Ivins - the more her story sounds like a whole load of crap.

Let's rehash Ms. Duley's role in the whole saga.

According to The Smoking Gun, documents they obtained and posted show that Ms. Duley filed a restraining order request against Bruce Ivins on July 24th. In that complaint, she wrote the following (the errors are hers):

client has a history dating to his graduate days of homicidal threats, actions, plans, threats & actions toward theripist. Dr. David Irwin his psychiatrist called him homicidal, sociopathic with clear intentions will testify with other details FBI involved, currently under investigation & will be charged with 5 capital murders. I have been subpoena to testify before a federal grand jury August 1, 2008 in Washington, D.C.

It is hard to know where to begin with this piece of work, but let us start with the obvious:

Continued: http://www.atlargely.com/2008/08/jean-c-duley-te.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/04/arizona_state_university_refus.html

April 10, 2009
Arizona State University refuses to give Obama honorary degree
Rick Moran
What's this? Someone in academia standing up to the emperor and telling him he has no clothes?

President Barack Obama may be delivering a commencement address at Arizona State University this Spring - one of three campuses where the president will send off the graduating classes of 2009 - but he won't be coming home with any degree.

While "it's common for universities to confer honorary degrees on commencement speakers,'' Dawn Teo writes from Tempe for the Huffington Post, "Arizona State says it has specific rules for recognizing academic achievement and Obama's 'body of work is yet to come.''

She cites ASU Media Relations Director Sharon Keeler as saying that Arizona's honorary degrees are given "for an achievement of eminence" and that the president was not considered for an honorary degree because his body of achievements, at this time, does not meet the criteria.

Author of two best-selling books, Teo notes of Obama's accomplishments, "developing one of the largest grassroots organizations in the world? Nothing special. Becoming the first African American President of the United States? Good, but nothing to write home about.''

A local paper notes that:

"Arizona State has handed out honorary doctorate degrees to pioneering scientists and college presidents, titans of oil and computer microchips, newspaper publishers and generous donors, a foreign communist educator and a successful movie director, the Post's correspondent notes. Not to mention Barry Goldwater.

They will change their minds by the end of the day.

Is there a difference between "achievement" and "accomplishment?" Getting elected president of the United States is a pretty significant achievement when you consider only 39 men previously were able to make the cut. (Cleveland served twice and Arthur, Ford, and Fillmore were never elected.) Bestselling author? The second book's popularity could be ascribed to his election as senator and leading Democratic party light - hardly a significant achievement. And he didn't build his grass roots organization, he had others who knew a helluva lot more about the internet than he do that.

Of course, previous to his election, he did nothing of note in his career either as senator or anywhere else.

Taken as a whole, it would be a close call and ASU decided - for the moment - not to. Besides does't it show a little disrespect for the office of president? Obama the man doesn't deserve it but how about the president of the United States?

Doesn't matter. They will cave on this issue or he won't come. And plenty of alumni might not like that.