Justice Alito

Alito has just recieved enough votes to become the next supreme court justice!!!!

Hamas Without Veils

No more hiding behind the PA.

By Emanuele Ottolenghi

Contrary to initial responses, Hamas’s projected victory in the Palestinian parliamentary elections is a positive development. Not, as its apologists claim, because the proximity of power will favor a process of cooptation into parliamentary politics, and therefore strengthen the pragmatic wing of Hamas. There is no pragmatic wing in Hamas, and all differences within the movement — the armed wing and the political wing, Palestine Hamas and Hamas in Syria — are arguably tactical differences. No, the reason is, as Vladimir Ilich Lenin would put it, "worse is better."

Hamas’s favored outcome was not victory, but a strong showing that would leave Hamas with the best of both worlds: It would remain in opposition (or would be invited to join a coalition as a junior partner) but would impose severe limitations on the Fatah-led government on how to manage its relations with Israel. Hamas could thus claim to reject Oslo, decline to recognize the Palestinian Authority and its commitments under the Oslo accords and the roadmap, and continue to use its rising political clout and its military strength to sabotage any effort to revive the moribund peace process.

What victory does to Hamas is to put the movement into an impossible position. As preliminary reports emerge, Hamas has already asked Fatah to form a coalition and got a negative response. Prime Minister Abu Ala has resigned with his cabinet, and president Abu Mazen will now appoint Hamas to form the next government. From the shadows of ambiguity, where Hamas could afford — thanks to the moral and intellectual hypocrisy of those in the Western world who dismissed its incendiary rhetoric as tactics — to have the cake and eat it too. Now, no more. Had they won 30-35 percent of the seats, they could have stayed out of power but put enormous limits on the Palestinian Authority’s room to maneuver. By winning, they have to govern, which means they have to tell the world, very soon, a number of things.

They will have to show their true face now: No more masks, no more veils, no more double-speak. If the cooptation theory — favored by the International Crisis Group and by the former British MI-6 turned talking head, Alistair Crooke — were true, this is the time for Hamas to show what hides behind its veil.

As the government of the Palestinian Authority, now they will have to say whether they accept the roadmap.

They will have to take control over security and decide whether they use it to uphold the roadmap or to wage war.

There will be no excuses or ambiguities when Hamas fires rockets on Israel and launches suicide attacks against civilian targets. Until Tuesday, the PA could hide behind the excuse that they were not directly responsible and they could not rein in the "militants." Now the "militants" are the militia of the ruling party. They are one and the same with the Palestinian Authority. If they bomb Israel from Gaza — not under occupation anymore, and is therefore, technically, part of the Palestinian state the PLO proclaimed in Algiers in 1988, but never bothered to take responsibility for — that is an act of war, which can be responded to in kind, under the full cover of the internationally recognized right of self-defense. No more excuses that the Palestinians live under occupation, that the PA is too weak to disarm Hamas, that violence is not the policy of the PA. Hamas and the PA will be the same: What Hamas does is what the PA will stand for.

Continuing to pursue a violent path will automatically switch off all international aid. Perhaps Hamas intends to offset the resulting loss of revenue by hosting Holocaust-denial conferences in Gaza and terrorist training camps in Rafah, but it will still have to explain to the Palestinian public why it’s better to renounce public aid to wage war.

Meanwhile, Hamas will have to confront the Egyptians (and the Jordanians) and tell them what the PA under Hamas now stands for. And Egypt and Jordan will have to change course, accordingly. Egypt has an increased military presence along the Gaza border and several officers in Gaza to help "stabilize" the security situation — which so far has meant keeping the flames low enough not to bother Egypt but high enough not to let Israel off the hook completely. What will Egypt do now? Cooperate with Hamas in Gaza while it dreads Hamas’ twin, the Muslim Brotherhood, at home? Will it act more decisively to stop the ever growing flow of illegal weapons being smuggled into Gaza from the Sinai, or turn a blind eye even as the increased militancy in Gaza might embolden the Brotherhood in Egypt? No more ambiguity for Egypt either.

The Arab world will also be watching wearily. Hamas now will have to show to the Arab world that an Islamic party that wins a democratic election — everyone’s nightmarish scenario — is not as bad as it seems. For now, the Palestinians have chosen an Islamic option over a secular one. Let them have it. Let them enjoy life under Sharia. It is their choice — that is what self-determination is about — and we must respect it. After all, the spectacle of an Arab government that is defeated in a fair and free election, and that as a consequence resigns (resigns!), has no precedent in the Arab world. This is good news. Let’s have some more and put Hamas to the test of democracy: this experience will tell us if Islamists can embark on a road that leads to the Turkish model or whether Palestine will become a Sunni Iran. If democracy succeeds under Hamas’s leadership, there is a legitimate government in power that enjoys support and popularity in Palestine and might be more honest and more competent than its predecessor — not a difficult task, given the ineptitude of Fatah. Otherwise, we can tell once and for all that co-optation is not the way to moderation, but a recipe is self-defeating appeasement.

Hamas hoped that a narrow Fatah victory would allow Hamas to enter government in junior positions while pursuing violence against Israel — much like Hezbollah in Lebanon. Their victory forces them to make a choice now, and the international community, while respecting the democratic verdict of a fundamentally fair electoral process, must hold them to account. The issue is not whether Europe, the U.S., or Israel should talk to Hamas. The issue is whether there is anything to talk about with Hamas, and the burden of proof is on Hamas to demonstrate they are capable of becoming interlocutors. If Hamas meets the true test, namely accepting the road map, renouncing violence, disarming its own terror network, recognizing Israel and embracing the two-state solution, then no obstacle should remain for a dialogue with Hamas. Otherwise, they can taste Israeli steel, courtesy of the U.S. and the full backing of the EU of Israel’s right to defend itself.

Don’t hold your breath though.

In commenting on this electoral upheaval, Jerusalem Post’s editor David Horovitz has written
Some may seek comfort in the belief that an ascent to government could prompt a greater sense of responsibility, a move to moderation. But Hamas's intolerance is based on a perceived religious imperative. No believing Muslim, in the Hamas conception, can be reconciled to Jewish sovereignty in the Middle East. To deny that, for Hamas, is blasphemy. And that is the ideology to which the Palestinian people, for whatever reason and by their own free hand, have just tied their fate. That is the guiding ideology with which Israel and the West will now have to grapple.

The appeasers and the apologists are already cuing up to argue that Hamas has already embarked on the road to realism. But unless Hamas reneges on its ideology and endorses a new course, then Israel’s claim that there is no Palestinian partner is vindicated. The resulting Israeli policy of unilateralism is vindicated. Israel’s argument that the Palestinians do not want peace is vindicated. Israel’s argument that Islamists’ nuances and differences of opinion are just tactical, not strategic, is also vindicated. And the prospects of a Palestinian state will become even more remote.

The uniform message that the world gives Hamas should thus be: Take off your veil, and expose your true face for the entire world to see in the naked and transparent light of democracy.

Keeping the Faith

Diversity goals should include respect for religious identity.

By J. Stanley Oakes Jr.

Last year, Joshua Hochschild, a professor of medieval philosophy, converted to Roman Catholicism. Wheaton College, the elite evangelical institution where he taught, considered the situation and then fired him.

Earlier this month, Daniel Golden, a staff writer for the Wall Street Journal, picked up the story and revealed that Wheaton only hires "faculty who embody the institution's evangelical Protestant convictions." Hochschild was hired as a Protestant and then fired when he became a Catholic — precisely as the guiding mission of Wheaton College requires.

So why does this rate a full-page story in the Wall Street Journal? Isn't Wheaton fully within its prerogatives? Golden equivocates. He acknowledges that, technically, Wheaton is within it rights to fire someone who eschews Protestantism as "vaguely defined" and having "a weak scholarly tradition." But Golden accounts for Wheaton's decision as a "conservative reaction" against secular America. He doesn't say but strongly implies that a religious college that fires people of other faiths is intolerant and self-defeating. In sum, he believes that religious colleges are duty-bound to bend to the times.

Golden's unsympathetic account of Wheaton's decision to fire Hochschild resonates at the moment because of a peculiar twist in the Samuel Alito confirmation as a justice on the United States Supreme Court. Earlier this month, some Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee attempted to make much of Alito's minor involvement in a conservative campus group of Princeton — Concerned Alumni of Princeton (CAP) — in the early 1980s. Princeton alumni formed CAP to try to protect older college traditions against an onslaught of leftist ideology, so the Democrats peered into CAP documents in an effort to tag Alito with something sinister. Though their efforts to halt Alito's confirmation will fail (it already did in committee), this story from 20 years ago highlights a problem many of us have observed for decades, a problem not of conservative reaction but rather colleges and universities led by professors and administrators of bad faith.

Contrary to Golden, a religious college that sticks to its traditions is not — or at least not automatically — guilty of intolerance. Is it really intolerance as Golden intimates when Notre Dame's new president, Rev. John Jenkins, worries that almost half of the professors at his Catholic university are non-Catholic? Doesn't the institution, at some point, morph into a different school, either secular or something else, if most of its professors reject Catholic teachings?

And who is being small-minded at (Catholic) Boston College? Those who steward its legacy? Or those members of the faculty who are "resistant" to hiring anyone who is committed to the college's religious mission?

And what is going on at Baylor University when the provost undercuts the new president, John Lilly, by promising that he won't be allowed to interview new candidates for faculty positions?

To bolster his case, Golden invokes the prestigious Phi Beta Kappa Society, which, when asked about Hochschild's termination, affixed its seal of disapproval through its public relations person: "...the society wants to uphold what it sees as the values inherent in the liberal arts and sciences, such as tolerance for diverse points of view."

The honor society's view on diversity is knotty, as not one single evangelical college among the 102 that belong to the Council on Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU) has a chapter of their organization. As president of an evangelical college that is not a member of CCCU and one that has Roman Catholics teaching on its faculty, I do not pretend to speak on behalf of the Council, but it seems peculiar that an honor society which includes Quaker schools and Catholic institutions does not include evangelicals. Perhaps Phi Beta Kappa should think about evangelical colleges the way in which it thought about women and blacks more than a century ago when it opened up membership to them.

So which is it? Is a religious college that sticks to its mission guilty of following a familiar path of intolerance when it declines to employ its declared opponents? Or has Mr. Golden missed the subtler and more significant issue about institutions and organizations that distance themselves from their defining missions when those become unfashionable?

Upon closer examination, the Phi Beta Kappa Society has its own problems carrying on its founding purpose or even acknowledging that it has one. On its web site, the society excised the fact that the five College of William and Mary students who established the society in December of 1776, took an oath and summoned "the holy Evangelists of Almighty God" to attest their covenant. So is it any surprise that the society is uncomfortable affirming those institutions that make no apology for their religious roots?

Dealing with the purposes of the founders can be a mixed bag. Few organizations fulfill every detail of the original understanding. In some cases, this is due to a founder having held patently offensive views : For example Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, spoke about sterilizing the unfit. And Martin Luther held views that gave every appearance of being anti-Semitic.

But scrubbing the founders and their views from an institution can also become a form of re-shaping the past for the comfort and convenience of the present. Often our society seems determined to avoid the awkward fact that religious people — most of whom look very much like the evangelicals of today — founded the oldest and most prestigious colleges and universities in America.

Harvard University, for example, was established in 1636 to "train a literate clergy." In its earliest rules, the mission was clearly laid out: "Let every student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed, to consider well [that] the maine end of his life and studies is to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternall life, Jn. 17:3, and therefore to lay Christ in the bottome, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and Learning." Unbeknownst to most people, including Harvard alumni, the original name for its graduates was the "Sons of the Prophets" (meaning the Biblical prophets), which was later changed to the "Sons of Harvard." And the motto on the school seal is still the Latin equivalent of "For Christ and his Church."

Similar commitments underpin the founding of Dartmouth, Princeton, Yale, and most of the best schools in America — but none of these schools even pretends to be interested in the purposes and mission of its founders.

This litany of examples should be enough for us to see that we are amply provided with the kind of schools Golden approves: those that treat their original missions as a dead letter. In the name of diversity, however, we might make room for the few that do take their original purposes seriously.

In 1994, while still a Yale undergraduate, Professor Hochschild wrote an elegant and perceptive article for The Yale Free Press entitled "Corpus Yalensis," in which he portrayed Yale as little more than a corpse, with its buildings bereft of its mission. "She is destroyed," Hochschild lamented, "her spirit separated from her body. Those who remember her life are left to wonder whether her spirit could survive the separation, and, if so immortal, whether the body will admit to resurrection."

If Hochschild concluded that Yale should be criticized for abandoning its ancient purpose, one might think that he would, despite losing his job over it, stand behind Wheaton for courageously affirming its commitment to its own founding principles. Unfortunately, Hochschild doesn't see it that way. He told Golden, "I see no reason why I should be dismissed from the College upon joining the Roman Catholic church." Not so long ago, he could think of one.

Save Haleigh

By Michelle Malkin

I have a question for the hordes of bleeding-heart Hollywood stars who joined the "Save Tookie" brigade, who bowed their heads in prayer with ex-Crip gangster Snoop Dogg and the Rev. Jesse Jackson and pleaded to protect convicted Death Row murderer Stanley "Tookie" Williams, and who lobbied so hard for the government to err on the side of life.

Where are you now?

In Boston, an innocent girl was sentenced to death by the state. Her name is Haleigh Poutre. Last fall, she was hospitalized after her stepfather allegedly burned her and beat her unconscious with a baseball bat. Haleigh was kept alive by a feeding tube and ventilator. Doctors said she was "virtually brain dead." They said she was in a "persistent vegetative state." The medical professionals pronounced her "hopeless."

Less than three weeks after Haleigh's hospitalization, the Massachusetts Department of Social Services was raring to remove Haleigh's feeding and breathing tubes. Even her biological mother (who had been deemed unfit to care for Haleigh and whose former boyfriend was accused of sexually abusing the child) wanted her to be put to death. The only person who wanted Haleigh alive was her stepfather, who will likely be charged with murder if Haleigh dies.

Earlier this month, the Massachusetts' Supreme Court ruled in favor of killing Haleigh, saying it was "unthinkable" to give the power to make a life-and-death decision to the man accused of putting Haleigh in a coma. Instead, the court did something just as unthinkable: It handed over that power over life and death to the same child welfare agency that had failed time and time and time again to protect Haleigh from her abusers in the first place. According to the Boston Herald, a report by her court-appointed guardian showed that the Department of Social Services had received 17 reports of abuse or neglect involving Haleigh in the three years before her adoptive mother and stepfather were charged with pummeling her into a coma.

"State can let beaten girl die," the headlines trumpeted. But there was just one small complication for all of those who, for whatever reason, were in such a rush to "let Haleigh die:"

Haleigh is fighting to live.

As state officials prepared to remove Haleigh's life support, the supposedly impossible happened. She began breathing on her own, responding to stimuli, and showing signs of emerging from what the medical establishment had deemed her hopeless condition. Everyone had given up on Haleigh — except Haleigh. ''There has been a change in her condition," announced a DSS spokeswoman, Denise Monteiro. ''The vegetative state may not be a total vegetative state."

Unbelievably, the state had weaned Haleigh off her breathing tube before the state supreme court had made its ruling — but the government failed to inform the court of the development. Haleigh's medical records and the social service agency's brief remain sealed.

Politicians in Massachusetts are vowing full-scale investigations of the state's incompetent child welfare bureaucrats. But where's the accountability for the medical experts whose faulty diagnosis led to Haleigh's court-approved death sentence? Will they step forward and reveal themselves? Will they explain how they erred? Will they apologize?

It was The Experts' unequivocal assessments that led the court to declare Haleigh in "an irreversible vegetative state" and to assert that "the child could not see, hear, feel, or respond." Now, they admit they were wrong. And now, Haleigh's life depends on the whims of a hopeless government agency that didn't think the court needed to know that the child was breathing on her own.

Haleigh's story is a wake-up call to "right-to-die" ideologues who recklessly put such unlimited trust in the medical profession and Nanny State. With such uncertainty surrounding persistent vegetative state diagnoses, the presumption must be in favor of life. Yet, the "right to die" lobby's mantra seems to be: When in doubt, pull it out.

While Haleigh clings to life, I've pondered how we might help persuade the plug-pullers to delay the child's state-sanctioned death sentence. I propose nominating her for a Nobel Prize. It bought Tookie Williams five extra years.

Jamie Foxx and Susan Sarandon, will you join me?

U.S.-Mexico Drug Tunnel Discovered

With tougher drug enforcement above ground, authorities say traffickers along the U.S.-Mexican border were forced to dig deep below ground instead.

Inside a five-foot-wide tunnel, with just enough room for an adult to stand, authorities say they discovered two tons of marijuana this week, and what they believe was a passageway for drug trade.

The 2,400-foot long tunnel is lengthier than most of the 21 cross-border tunnels that have been discovered since authorities began keeping track after the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said.

"It was like being in a cavern or a cave," said Michael Unzueta, customs special agent in charge in San Diego.

The tunnel had a pulley system on the Mexican side, which began near the Tijuana airport, and ended in a warehouse on the U.S. side, authorities said. Inside, it had a cement floor and lights mounted on one of the hard soil walls.

John Fernandes, special agent in charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration's San Diego office, said he suspected the tunnel was the work of Tijuana's Arellano-Felix drug smuggling syndicate or another well-known drug cartel. He said tougher enforcement aboveground had forced smugglers to dig below.

The tunnel's discovery prompted the U.S. Attorney's office in San Diego to open a criminal investigation, said Lauren Mack, a spokeswoman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The tunnel exited into a large, two-story white cinderblock warehouse in an industrial San Diego neighborhood near the border.

A green sign over the door said V&F Distributors LLC. County records listed the building's owner as Helen Park of Long Beach. The phone rang unanswered Thursday at her home.

Mexican authorities found the entrance about 100 yards south of the border on Tuesday, and officers on the U.S. side found the exit Wednesday. Mexican officials allowed reporters and photographers, including an Associated Press photographer, into the tunnel late Wednesday.

Four tunnels have been discovered this month in the Tijuana-San Diego area, including a more primitive tunnel that was also found Wednesday when a U.S. Border Patrol vehicle struck a sinkhole.

Girl's strangling death ruled accidental

On the day that friends and family gathered at the wake for 6-year-old Kaitlyn Dorothy Hassard, Suffolk police said her death indeed was a tragic accident: Autopsy results seem to indicate she was asphyxiated while playing with her family's golden retriever in the backyard of her Manorville home, Suffolk police said yesterday.

Last night at the O.B. Davis Funeral Home in Miller Place, family members and friends embraced in the parlor, near the child's coffin.

Some wept openly. Dozens of mourners came to pay their respects, waiting in a line that extended through the parlor far into the hallway.

Earlier yesterday, Homicide Squad Det. Lt. Jack Fitzpatrick said police are ruling Kaitlyn's death on Tuesday an accident. It didn't appear that Jesse, the 18-month-old dog, attacked Kaitlyn, but rather that the dog was simply playing with her, he said.

Yesterday, the 70-pound retriever who had nipped at Kaitlyn's scarf while they played was in the Brookhaven Town animal shelter. Somehow, Suffolk detectives said, Jesse latched onto the scarf, tightening the blue cloth until it strangled the little girl.

The Hassards could not be reached for comment yesterday. "They're very private people," family spokesman James Talamini said.

Yesterday morning, staff at South Street School in Manorville, where Kaitlyn was in kindergarten, gathered her artwork to put on display inside the funeral home for her wake last night, principal Robin Barbera said.

The family will continue to receive visitors at the funeral home from 2 to 4 p.m. and 7 to 9 p.m. today. A funeral Mass will be said 10 a.m. tomorrow at the Saints Peter and Paul Catholic Church in Manorville.

"We're still numb," Barbera said of students and staff.

Barbera said she spoke with Kaitlyn's mother, Korey Hassard, yesterday morning, who was "devastated."

Hassard told Barbera a fund has been established for donations to be made in lieu of flowers. Checks can be mailed to the Kaitlyn Dorothy Hassard Memorial Fund, P.O. Box 628, Manorville, NY 11949.

Starving woman curses God, dies in her sleep

A starving Kenyan woman placed a powerful tribal curse on God, accusing him of sending famine, and died in her sleep, local newspapers said Thursday.

The woman from eastern Kenya's drought-ravaged Kangundo district decided to invoke a dreaded oath from the Kamba community, famed for its potent witchcraft, media reports said.

"Whoever brought this famine, let him perish," the woman chanted, striking a cooking pot with a stick.

"She accomplished the feat at 10 a.m. and waited for the results, but God's wrath struck at night. She died peacefully in her sleep," the Kenya Times newspaper said.

Poor rains for three years running have left more than 3.5 million Kenyans on the edge of starvation, prompting President Mwai Kibaki to declare the drought a national disaster.

Atheist accuses priest of illegally saying Jesus existed

Opening arguments were set to begin today in the case of an Italian priest who was accused by an atheist of breaking two Italian laws by asserting that Jesus Christ existed.

Lawyers for the prelate, the Rev. Enrico Righi, and his accuser, Luigi Cascioli, headed into the close-door hearing in the courtroom in Viterbo, north of Rome, to learn whether the judge would dismiss the case or order Righi to stand trial.

Cascioli filed a criminal complaint against his old schoolmate Righi in 2002 after Righi wrote in a parish bulletin that Jesus did indeed exist, and that he was born of a couple named Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem and lived in Nazareth.

Cascioli claims that Righi violated two Italian laws by making the assertion: so-called "abuse of popular belief" in which someone fraudulently deceives people; and "impersonation" in which someone gains by attributing a false name to someone.

Abbas to Ask Hamas to Form Next Government

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas asked Hamas on Friday to form a new government after his vanquished Fatah Party rejected a role in the Cabinet and Israel ruled out peace talks in what could be the first steps to isolate the militant group after its election victory.

Acting Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni appealed to the international community not to legitimize a Palestinian government led by Hamas, saying elections are not a "laundry" for terrorist groups.

Speaking to reporters, Livni said Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip last summer opened a window of opportunity in peace efforts between Israel and the Palestinians. With the election of Hamas, she said, "the Palestinians slammed it shut."

The United States and some European nations said Hamas must renounce violence and drop its demand to destroy Israel.

"If your platform is the destruction of Israel, it means you're not a partner in peace, and we're interested in peace," President Bush said. Similar statements came from other parts of the world.

Former President Carter said the United States, by law, would have to cut off direct funding to the Palestinian Authority as soon as Hamas takes control, but it should look for other ways to give money to the Palestinians, such as through the United Nations. Hamas has been branded a terrorist group by the U.S. and Europe.

"United States law would require that the money would be cut off if Hamas is in the government, so that's a foregone conclusion," Carter told The Associated Press.

European parliament members spoke of the possibility that donors would cut off vital aid to pressure Hamas to moderate its hard-line positions.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is to meet in London on Monday with U.N., Russian and European leaders as the so-called "Quartet" of would-be international peacemakers evaluates the results and tries to decide how to proceed.

Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said he had asked Abbas, who is Fatah's chief, to meet Sunday to discuss forming a new government. Abbas' office said no appointment has been made yet, and Abbas said separately that he would ask Hamas to lead the next government.

Israel was unprepared for the Hamas landslide. Foreign and defense ministry scenarios had put such a stunning blow to the long-ruling Fatah as a low probability, officials said.

But after the rout, acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert quickly ruled out talks.

"The state of Israel will not negotiate with a Palestinian administration if even part of it is an armed terrorist organization calling for the destruction of the state of Israel," Olmert said.

Fatah, turned out of office by Palestinians angry over its corrupt and inefficient government, offered no help to Hamas, catapulted into leadership after its first foray into parliamentary politics.

Fatah leaders decided late Thursday not to enter a joint government with Hamas.

Hamas does not need Fatah — it won 76 of the 132 seats in parliament, a clear majority. Fatah, the undisputed ruler of Palestinian politics for four decades, got only 43. But Fatah could help Hamas by serving as a a conduit for talks with Israel.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia of Fatah and his Cabinet resigned Thursday to make room for a Hamas government.

Thousands of angry Fatah supporters marched in Gaza City early Friday, firing rifles in the air and demanding that Fatah leaders resign, while backing their decision to stay out of a Hamas government.

Minor incidents marred an otherwise peaceful political revolution. A large crowd of Hamas supporters briefly clashed with Fatah loyalists outside the Palestinian parliament in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Thursday, with both sides throwing stones after Fatah activists pulled a Hamas flag from the building.

On Friday, three people were injured after an argument between about 20 Hamas and Fatah loyalists degenerated into gunfire and rock-throwing. One man was treated for moderate gunshot wounds and two for minor injuries caused by rocks, witnesses and hospital officials said.

Hamas ideology does not recognize the presence of a Jewish state in an Islamic Middle East. In recent years, however, some Hamas leaders have grudgingly accepted the idea of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, as long as it is understood to be only a stage toward freeing all of Palestine — including Israel.

Avi Dichter, a former Israeli security services chief, said he didn't expect terror to rise once Hamas takes over.

"The moment they become partner to the Palestinian government, reality will become a lot more complicated for them than it was when they were a terror organization alone," Dichter told Army Radio.

"I think it would be illogical — even insane — for them to toe the extremist line they have been following until now," he added. "I think we need to wait and see if common sense dictates."

Economic constraints are also likely to curb Hamas' extremism. With the Palestinian Authority dependent on foreign aid for its survival and on Israel for day-to-day needs such as electricity, water and the movement of people and goods, Hamas will have a hard time ignoring international calls to renounce violence.

Carter said the United States should increase its donations to U.N. and other aid groups earmarked for the Palestinians to make up for the cut in direct aid "so that the people can still continue to have food and shelter and health care and education."

The U.S. Consulate in Jerusalem said the United States gave the Palestinian Authority $400 million in direct aid last year.

Carter met Friday with Abbas, who told him that the Palestinian Authority did not even have enough money to pay salaries at the end of the month, even with foreign aid.

If the aid is cut off, "it would create an element of chaos unless the money is made up by other sources," he said. "If the Arab countries come through and the European countries continue to help and maybe Japan, they could continue to operate."

Hamas leaders themselves have hinted that despite their hard-line ideology, they will be pragmatic and not disrupt daily life in the territories they are about to rule.

"We will not let our position adversely affect the daily life of our people," a Hamas leader, Osama Hamdan, declared.

Hillary Clinton Nixes 'Radical Ideologue' Sam Alito

2008 presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton announced Wednesday that she will vote against the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, accusing him of having a "radical ideology" and a record of insensitivity to the civil rights of African Americans and women.

In a speech on the Senate floor Mrs. Clinton warned that if Alito is allowed to join the High Court, "decades of progress would fall prey to his radical ideology, jeopardizing not only civil rights, civil liberties, health and safety and environmental protections, but also fundamental rights like the right to privacy."

In a bid to paint Judge Alito as bigoted, Mrs. Clinton went so far as to invoke the landmark school desegregation case, Brown v. Board of Education, along with another civil rights case, before complaining:

"I think we need judges who will maintain that forward progress and despite his distinguished academic credentials, Judge Alito has not shown himself to be that kind of judge."

Mrs. Clinton repeatedly pounded away on what she described as a poor civil rights record, saying at one point:

"In fact, in the vast majority of civil rights cases, Judge Alito has sided with those who would infringe on the civil rights of Americans."

Returning to her "progress" theme, the former first lady also warned: "I fear that Judge Alito will roll back decades of progress and roll over when confronted with an administration too willing to flaunt the rules and looking for a rubber stamp."

In a bit of supreme irony, Mrs. Clinton also insisted that Judge Alito "has not demonstrated a proper respect for the rule of law" before concluding: "I, therefore, cannot give my consent to his confirmation."

Incursions Spark Tension on U.S.-Mexico Border

Armed Mexican government personnel made five unauthorized incursions into the U.S. in the last three months of 2005, according to confidential Department of Homeland Security records.

The incursions involved police officers or soldiers in military vehicles and were among 231 such incidents recorded by the U.S. Border Patrol in the past 10 years, the Los Angeles Times reports.

"It's clear you're dealing with a large number of incursions by bona-fide Mexican military units, based on the tactics and the equipment being used," said T.J. Bonner, a Border Patrol veteran and president of the National Border Patrol Council, the agents' union.

Bonner told the Washington Times that it was "common knowledge" along the border that some Mexican military units, federal and state police and former Mexican soldiers are paid by smugglers to protect shipments of cocaine and other drugs into the U.S.

Incidents in the Homeland Security records include Mexican helicopters flying north into U.S. airspace near El Paso, Tex., for about 15 minutes; five Mexican officials armed with assault rifles entering the country near El Centro, Calif., and returning without incident; and two Mexican police officers observed on the U.S. side of the border near Yuma, Ariz.

Details of the incidents emerged "as authorities on both sides of the border scrambled to investigate a dangerous confrontation Monday in Texas," the LA Times reported.

A confidential Border Patrol summary of the incident said it began when county sheriff's deputies and state troopers tried to stop three vehicles on an interstate highway southeast of El Paso. The three vehicles made a run for the border, the report said.

One vehicle, a black 2006 Cadillac Escalade loaded with nearly 1,500 pounds of marijuana, was abandoned near the border, said Hudspeth County Sheriff Arvin West.

As deputies approached the river they saw a Mexican military Humvee – equipped with a .50-caliber machine gun – on the U.S. side, West disclosed. A second vehicle got stuck in shallow water in the Rio Grande, while the third made it back to Mexico.

"The Humvee attempted to push and pull [the stuck vehicle] toward Mexico to no avail," the Border Patrol report states.

At that point, Mexican soldiers and civilians began unloading marijuana from the stranded vehicle. About 20 Mexican personnel in military uniforms, with insignias on their caps, pointed automatic rifles at about half a dozen sheriff's deputies and state troopers.

"They were daring my guys to make a move," West said.

The uniformed men burned the vehicle after it had been unloaded, then returned to Mexico.

Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said in an interview Wednesday that the incident in Texas was "about as serious as it gets" and noted that dozens of incursions have been reported in his state.

Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., called this week for U.S. troops to be deployed along the border to counter armed incursions.

And as NewsMax reported earlier, Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz., has demanded that the State Department take "immediate diplomatic action" to stop Mexican incursions.

Mexico Halts Border Maps Hand-Out

Mexico will suspend its plan to distribute maps to migrants wanting to cross the U.S. border illegally, but an official said Thursday the decision was not made because of American pressure.

Miguel Angel Paredes, spokesman for the federal Human Rights Commission, said the government wanted to "rethink" its plan because human rights officials in border states expressed concern that the maps would show anti-immigrant groups — like the Minutemen civilian patrols — where migrants likely would gather.

"This would be practically like telling the Minutemen where the migrants are going to be," Paredes said. "We are going to rethink this, so that we wouldn't almost be handing them over to groups that attack migrants."

On Wednesday, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the United States opposed the plan "in the strongest terms." He said the effort would lead more people to cross the border, "leading to more migrant deaths and the further enrichment of the criminal human trafficking rings."

Paredes was asked if the Mexican decision was a response to U.S. pressure.

"No, we are not responding to that," he said. "We have not taken that into account."

The commission, a Mexican government-funded agency with independent powers, originally said it would print and pay for at least 70,000 maps showing highways, rescue beacons and water tanks in the Arizona desert.

The posters were to have been distributed in border towns and through human rights offices in Mexico starting in March, when illegal border crossings are usually high.

The commission denied the maps would encourage illegal immigration, saying instead they would help guide those in trouble.

Now, the group will "seek other ways" to help migrants, Paredes said.

The map dispute follows a string of other diplomatic rows involving the U.S.-Mexico border.

U.S. border states say they are fed up with illegal migration and drug trafficking and are pressuring the U.S. government to boost protection, including by extending a wall along the common frontier, something Mexico bitterly resents.

Mexico is angry about U.S. civilian groups that have organized patrols along the border and has accused them of attacking migrants.

However, there is little evidence of that and the groups seldom — if ever — target water tanks or rescue beacons.

One of the most well-known groups, the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, placed a link to the maps on its Web site but did not advocate using them to find illegal migrants.

The posters were designed by the Tucson, Ariz.-based rights group Humane Borders, which operates several desert water stations. The group previously distributed about 100 posters in the Mexican border town of Sasabe.

Some of the posters have warnings, such as: "Don't go. There isn't enough water."

However, officials conceded many migrants were unlikely to heed the advice.

Hillary Clinton Revives Hillarycare, Opposes HSAs

Sen. Hillary Clinton is reviving her disastrous health care reform crusade, saying she intends to "fix" President Bush's Medicare prescription drug plan, then adding: "I'm determined to do the same with access to affordable health care as well."

In an email sent to supporters on Monday, the former first lady blasts Bush's proposal for private health savings accounts, warning: "Just as they did with their Medicare Drug bill, the Bush Administration is putting the special interests first and wishing everybody else the best of luck."

Clinton declared that she knows a thing or two about the subject at hand, reminding: "Now, I've had some experience with health care. I know that making health care more accessible for every American family will not be easy."

Then, in rhetoric that could have been lifted from her 1994 Hillarycare campaign, Mrs. Clinton complained:

"There are now over 45 million uninsured Americans. There are over 13 million uninsured children . . . Premiums are rising at over twice the rate of inflation and the number of employers offering coverage is dropping."
In another Hillarycare flashback, Mrs. Clinton tells her supporters: "This is a national crisis and a flat-out moral failing."

The top Democrat announced that she's "hosting a roundtable on health care this week in Rochester, New York -- the first in a series" - and asked her supporters to email her office with their own health care horror stories.

Hillary concludes her health care missive by declaring: "We need to make sure all Americans and their representatives know the truth about how our present health care policies are impacting you and your family."

ACLU: Let Boy Wear Skirts to School

A 17-year-old high school student - a male - may wear a skirt to school under an agreement worked out by the American Civil Liberties Union.

Michael Coviello, a senior at Hasbrouck Heights School in New Jersey, said he is wearing a skirt to school "to bring attention to the fact that the [school's] ban on shorts doesn't make sense."

Coviello's school district prohibits students from wearing shorts to class between Oct. 1 and April 15. Corviello called the policy arbitrary and unfair.

"It is discriminatory for the school dress code to allow skirts but not shorts," Corviello said.

Michael's mother agreed. Laura Coviello contacted the ACLU-NJ after the principal told Michael to stop wearing skirts and kilts to class.

"I'm relieved that the dress policy will be enforced equally and that Michael won't be punished for expressing his disagreement with the school's dress policy," Ms. Coviello said in a press release put out by ACLU-NJ.

On January 3, 2006, the ACLU-NJ sent a letter to the school superintendent explaining that the school district's dress policy must be enforced equally. Because the policy allows students to wear skirts, all students - not just girls - should be able to wear skirts that comply with the policy, ACLU-NJ argued.

The ACLU-NJ also insisted hat Coviello's decision to wear skirts was expressive conduct that is protected by the First Amendment. At a meeting last week, the district agreed that Michael would be allowed to wear skirts in the future.

"This is the right outcome," said Jeanne LoCicero, the ACLU-NJ staff attorney who handled the case.

"Michael is courageous for challenging the school policy by defying societal norms and for standing up to protest a senseless, discriminatory school policy."

The Hasbrouck Heights high school student-parent handbook states, "Shorts may only be worn from September 1 to October 1 and from April 15 to the close of school. Dresses, skirts or shorts must be appropriate in length. The principal or his/her designee will determine appropriate length. The principal or his/her designee may extend these dates on a day-to-day basis if weather becomes unseasonably hot."

The handbook also says, "The principal or his/her designee is responsible for determining the appropriateness of a pupil's attire."

New York City Plans ‘Ring of Steel'

New York city is preparing to turn lower Manhattan into a "ring of steel" - to protect the nation's financial center from another major terrorist attack.

Mindful that the worst domestic terror event ever to take place on American soil occurred at the World Trade Center complex in New York's financial district, New York police are taking steps to protect the vital area. The New York Stock Exchange, for example, finds its home on Wall Street.

The "Wall Street Journal" reported Wednesday that the city's police force is modeling its security plans after London's so-called "ring of steel," a system of encircling narrow roads, few points of ingress and egress, and battalions of closed-circuit TV cameras.

New York law enforcement officials have been given special tours of the London safeguards and are reportedly considering building a similar security ring around lower Manhattan.

Paul Browne, the New York Police Department's (NYPD's) deputy commissioner of public information, is quoted by the "Journal" as saying that while it's "still too early in the process" to comment on specifics, police officials are indeed mulling the London model – with a special eye to more closed-circuit TVs in lower Manhattan and limiting and controlling entrances and exits into and out of the district.

Today, London, reacting mostly to the Irish Republican Army bombings of the early 1990s, features 16 entry and 12 exit points where the roads were narrowed and marked with iron posts painted red, white and black.

At each entry point, a camera scans license plates and sends the data to a computerized system that can flag wanted vehicles and notify a control room at police headquarters within seconds.

Last year, alone, the system screened 37 million plates and identified 91,000 positive matches for vehicles that were suspect.

Thus far, officials have not disclosed which, if any, lower Manhattan streets would be narrowed to create that district's own "ring of steel."

But the "Journal" cites a law enforcement official close to the situation as saying the NYPD's "ring of steel" plans may extend to midtown Manhattan as well.

As to cameras, New York City has already embraced them as key security tools:

A project launched in October of 2004 to install 1,000 closed-circuit cameras with 3,000 sensors in the subway system is well underway with expected completion in 2008.

A state-of-the-art command center to monitor the subway cameras in real time is also underway.

The subway cameras augment the already-in-place 3,100 closed-circuit cameras in 12 housing projects - with additional cameras in select parts of the city, including lower Manhattan.

New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly is on record as favoring the installation of yet more cameras, devices created that dramatically reduce crime rates in the housing projects.

Meanwhile, New York City Metropolitan Transit Authority's new chief - FBI veteran and former head of the New York field office, Lewis Schiliro - has promised to examine emergency response plans, including evacuations and locked subway doors.

"We are going to look at all that," he said.

Lower Manhattan boasts the densest concentration of subway service in America, with 18 lines and 19 stations. The collapse of the World Trade Center towers destroyed the Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) train's World Trade Center station and the eastern end of the PATH tunnel. There was also extensive damage to subway tunnels and stations.

"In creating the plan for the World Trade Center site, we are looking at best practices around the globe as we seek to create a new state-of-the-art security model," James Kallstrom, counterterrorism adviser to New York Gov. George Pataki and designer of the new World Trade Center site's security plans, announced in a recent statement.

Team Unearths Statue of Egypt's Queen Ti

A Johns Hopkins University archaeological team has unearthed a statue of Queen Ti, one of the most important women in ancient Egypt and wife of Pharaoh Amenhotep III, Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities announced Monday.

The statue, mostly intact, was found under a statue of Amenhotep III in the sprawling Karnak Temple in Luxor, which was a royal city in ancient Egypt.

Ti was the first queen of Egypt to have her name appear on official acts alongside that of her husband. She was known for her influence in state affairs in the reigns of both her husband (1417-1379 B.C.) and of her son, Akhenaton, (1379-1362 B.C.) during a time of prosperity and power in the 18th dynasty. Her son is remembered for being the first pharaoh to advocate monotheism.

Ti, of Nubian heritage, is believed to be the grandmother of Tutankhamun, perhaps the most famous ruler of ancient Egypt.

Amenhotep III, who ruled for 38 years, made a basic change in the history of ancient Egypt when he named his wife, Ti, as queen against the tradition that his sister should be queen.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Message From FRofA: Picture above is not the actual statue that was unearthed. http://wysinger.homestead.com/tiyi2.jpg image of a statue of Queen Ti.

Japanese Rocket Lifts Off From Island

After repeated delays, a Japanese H-2A rocket lifted off from its launchpad Tuesday carrying a four-ton observation satellite.

The launch of the Japanese-developed H-2A from the remote island of Tanegashima in southern Japan had to be rescheduled three times because of trouble with sensing equipment and bad weather.

But on Tuesday the black-and-orange rocket blasted off into a clear sky, carrying the Advanced Land Observation Satellite. The probe which has three earth sensors that can obtain terrain data for maps and make all-weather observations of the Asia-Pacific region.

Success will clear the way for the launching of two spy satellites by March 2007 to monitor North Korea and other trouble spots.

That program, approved after North Korea launched a missile over Japan's main island in 1998, began with the liftoff of two spy satellites in March 2003. Tokyo put aside $2 billion for the project, prompting protests from North Korea that Tokyo was triggering a regional arms race.

Ears once breathed, Swedish fossil research shows

A Swedish study of 370-million-year-old fossil fish has shown that ears probably first developed as respiratory organs, one of the researchers on the project said.

The fossils "show how the ear developed in detail as a complex process of steps ... and that the (first development) had to do with breathing," Per Ahlberg of Uppsala University, north of Stockholm, told AFP.

Intrigued by how ears in the first land crawlers developed, Ahlberg and colleague Martin Brazeau have studied ear-like features in fossils of pre-historic fish called Panderichthys.

"The Panderichthys is the closest relation to early land crawlers of all the fish fossils we know," Ahlberg said.

While land crawlers have a middle ear, which is needed to amplify the relatively weak sound waves that travel through the air to the eardrum, sea creatures have no eardrums and only need an inner ear to hear the much stronger sound waves that travel through water.

Where land animals have a middle ear, ancient fish had spiracle cavities resembling the blowholes in modern-day sharks and stingrays.

In the Panderichthys, the bony structure around this cavity was wider than in previous species and closely resembled a middle ear cavity. However, it clearly had nothing to do with hearing, Ahlberg said.

"It is clear that this transformation had nothing to do with hearing since there is still no connection to the inner ear. So there must have been another reason why this transformation took place. A natural explanation is that this had to do with breathing," he said.

While previous research had indicated that the middle ear developed rapidly in land crawlers, Ahlberg and Brazeau's study, which was published in the science journal Nature this week, shows a more gradual evolution of hearing.

"Interestingly, if you look at the earliest land crawlers, their middle ear appears to have the same shape as in the Panderichthys, and since they don't appear to have had eardrums, it's probable that they too still breathed through their ears," Ahlberg said.

"I would guess that in the earliest land animals, the breathing function is still there, but a hearing function also gradually begins to develop."

The Swedish researchers findings run counter to claims by proponents of creationism that sensory organs are so complex that they must have been designed by a higher power.

"All research revealing evolution is a slap in the face of creationism, but our results are especially interesting since evolution first is drawn in one direction ... and then in another. It's hard to believe that if God wanted to design an ear, this is the way He'd go about it," Ahlberg said.

Alito Nomination Goes to Full Senate

The Judiciary Committee favorably recommended Samuel Alito's Supreme Court nomination to the full Senate on a party-line vote Tuesday, ensuring prospects the conservative jurist will join the high court bench.

All 10 Republicans voted for Alito, while all eight Democrats voted against him. The partisan vote was almost preordained, with 15 of the 18 senators announcing their votes even before the committee's session began.

The full Senate expects to take a final vote on Alito's nomination before the end of the week, said Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., the committee chairman. That vote is also expected to follow along party lines, with only one Democrat — Ben Nelson of Nebraska — coming out so far in support of Alito. Republicans hold the balance of power in the Senate 55-44, with one independent.

Senate Republicans say Alito is a good choice for the nation's highest court.

"Like America's founders, Judge Alito clearly believes in self-government, that the people and not judges should make law, and that judges have an important role but must know and stay in their proper place," said Sen. Orrin Hatch (news, bio, voting record), R-Utah.

But Democrats are fretting that the 55-year-old jurist and former lawyer for the Reagan administration will swing the court to the right and help overturn precedent-setting decisions like Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court's abortion rights case, although he refused to talk about that decision at his confirmation hearing.

"He still believes that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion, but does not want to tell the American people because he knows how unpopular that view is," said Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y.

In a statement after the vote, the White House said: "The negative tone, relentless attacks and distortion of Judge Alitos career confirmed what we already knew from the hearings: Judge Alito had an open mind but the Democrats, beholden to their interest groups, did not."

"Democrats have repeatedly twisted and distorted Judge Alito's positions to the point where they are unrecognizable," said spokesman Stephen Schmidt. "Democrats' relentless politicization of a process that has traditionally been above partisan politics is disappointing."

Alito was picked last October by President Bush to replace the retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. She was the high court's first female member, and a key swing vote on contentious issues such as abortion, affirmative action and the death penalty during her career on the court.

Alito was the White House's second choice for that seat. White House counsel Harriet Miers withdrew from consideration last year after conservative criticism of her nomination.

Republicans and Democrats are preparing to use the partisan battle over judicial nominations as a campaign issue in the midterm election this year. Republicans say the Democratic filibuster of lower-court judges helped them knock off former Democratic Senate leader Tom Daschle of Sout Dakota two years ago.

If Democrats want to make judges a campaign issue, "we welcome that debate on our side. We'll clean your clock," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C.

And Sen. Jon Kyl (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., warned that Republicans would remember the party-line Alito vote in future Supreme Court nominations, considering several Republicans voted for Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who were nominated by President Clinton.

"It is simply unrealistic to think that one party would put itself at a disadvantage by eschewing political considerations while the other party almost unanimously applies such considerations," Kyl said. "So I say to my Democratic friends: Think carefully about what is being done today. Its impact will be felt well beyond this particular nominee."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., said things are different from when the Senate considered Breyer and Ginsburg, who were confirmed 87-9 and 96-3 respectively. "There was not the polarization within America that is there today, and not the defined move to take this court in a singular direction," Feinstein said.

Liberal groups are pushing hard to get as many Democrats as possible to vote against Alito on the Senate floor. Anti-Alito protesters holding "Oppose Alito, Save Roe" and "Stop Alito" signs lined up outside the U.S. Capitol, hoping to sway some votes.

"Judge Alito's record as a professional — both as a Justice Department official and as a judge — reflects something more than a neutral judicial philosophy," said Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis. He noted that Alito has refused to call the Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision "settled law."

Alito's record "suggests a judge who has strong views on a variety of issues, and uses the law to impose those views," Kohl said.

But Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the committee's chairman and an abortion rights moderate, said he voted for Alito after questioning him on abortion at the confirmation hearings.

"On the issue of a woman's right to choose," he said, "it is my judgment that he went as far as he could go. He emphasized the factor of stare decisis and precedents, and the reliance factor."

Martin Luther King Day Meets Unexpected Resistance

by Isaiah Z. Sterrett

ADMITTEDLY, the Golden Globes are not of great importance. The idea that they’re “Hollywood’s biggest party,” as the blathering entertainment press likes to pretend, is preposterous. Regardless of how pitiful the Academy Awards sometimes are, the Oscar remains the most important American symbol of legitimate achievement in American film. The Golden Globes are merely an imitation.

Still, the Globes ceremony is on television every year. Consequently, those who may appear on the Globes telecast have a responsibility to employ at least the level of responsibility that, say, a four-year-old would. That means that racism is a no-no—even for people who have made their livings on racism, such as “comedian” Chris Rock. Sarcastically instructing a group of people that they “only have to be nice to black people for two more hours” counts as racism.

Chris Rock is occasionally humorous, but so are oncologists. This does not make cancer funny. For Chris Rock to grin at an international audience and suggest that white people find racial equality troublesome is offensive and a lie.

I will not spend time listing, for the thousandth time, the historical heroes who risked their lives to fight for civil rights for African Americans. But I will note that they existed—and exist today. One person who has not fought for civil rights is Chris Rock. He would probably be quick to align himself with Rosa Parks and Dr. King, for example, but, unlike Parks and King—actual heroes—Rock has spent his career upholding bigotry.

For readers lucky enough to have avoided Rock, I’ve compiled some quotations from his standup acts, “Bigger and Blacker,” and “Never Scared”:

--“If you’re white and under 21, I am headin’ for the hills.”

--“Is it me, or is Jermaine [Jackson] the craziest ni**er you ever you seen in your life?”

--“I think Bush sent that girl to Kobe’s room.”

--“Bush lied to me, they all lied to me.”

--“There was a lot of accepted racism when the war started.”

--“Shaq is rich. The white man that signs his check is wealthy.”

--“Only the white man can profit from pain.”

As the vigilant reader will observe, Chris Rock is approximately as funny as a plane crash—which probably underestimates the humor of plane crashes. Funny or not, however, Chris Rock has a clear history of racist ideals—which is not illegal, but is certainly, unquestionably immoral.

Of course, as wrong as Rock is—and as wrong as the Hollywood Foreign Press was to give him an audience—he is not an elected official. Hillary “Plantation” Clinton, soon to be fired by the people of New York, is.

It doesn’t really bother me that Hillary used an allusion to the antebellum South. That’s not the point. The problem is that she used such an allusion to compare Republicans to slave owners. Though Sen. Clinton has never actually owned slaves herself, she claims to love her party—a party which was once openly supportive of slavery on moral and practical grounds. That is not so much blatantly offensive as it is pathetic and delusional.

In a similar vein, creating the third part in a trio of racist fervor, we had Mayor Nagin of New Orleans announcing that his city will soon be a “Chocolate City.” As the Philadelphia Inquirer dryly editorialized, “God must want New Orleans to be a chocolate sundae. After all, He put a nut on top.”

I wish that Martin Luther King Day this year had been about the tolerance and racial equality King championed. But it wasn’t. It was about Chris Rock hallucinating racism, Hillary Clinton manufacturing racism, and Mayor Nagin condoning racism.

So much for Dr. King’s dream.

US rejects bin Laden truce offer

The United States has rejected a truce offer from Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, and despite a threat of more attacks on US soil, authorities said they will not raise the national alert level.

"We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business," the White House responded Thursday to bin Laden's truce offer.

The terrorist mastermind made the proposal in an audiotape broadcast by the Al-Jazeera satellite television network, and authenticated by the CIA, in which bin Laden warned of pending attacks in the "heartland" of the United States.

A Department of Homeland Security spokesman told The New York Times that there were no plans to raise the US alert level, which now stands at "yellow," or "elevated," the middle of five stages.

Bin Laden also offered a "long-term truce" if Washington withdrew its military presence from Iraq and Afghanistan -- the latter his former safe haven until US forces ousted his Taliban allies after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Vice President Dick Cheney on Thursday said the message showed that the terrorist network had been driven "underground" and was now unable to produce video messages, but warned the group was still lethal.

Asked about bin Laden's truce offer, Cheney told Fox News Channel that it sounded like "a ploy" and that "this is not an organization that is ever going to sit down and sign a truce. I think you have to destroy them. It's the only way to deal with them."

While the vice president did not vouch for the authenticity of the tape, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) analysts believe it was bin Laden's voice on the tape, according to a CIA official who requested anonymity.

Bin Laden, whom some US intelligence officials say is holed up in a remote mountainous region on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, had not been heard from since another recorded message in December 2004.

In April 2004, a few weeks after the Marid train bombings that killed 191 people, bin Laden in a videotaped message also offered a truce to Europeans if they stopped attacking Muslims.

US officials were unsure when the latest message had been recorded, and Cheney said another question was whether it had been "pieced together" from past statements.

Asked whether killing bin Laden would lessen the threat from al-Qaeda, Cheney said "we'd still have problems" with the network because it does not rely on a centralized leadership.

Cheney also warned in a speech right as bin Laden's message was broadcast that while "the enemy that struck on 9/11 is weakened and fractured, it is still lethal."

"Obviously no one can guarantee that we won't be hit again, but our nation has been protected by more than luck," he said in a reference to the avalanche of security measures imposed after September 11 in every major US city.

"It is no accident that we have not been hit for more than four years," Cheney added.

While some of Bush's Republicans and many opposition Democrats have criticized some of those measures, there was unanimity in rejecting any talk of truce with Al-Qaeda across the US political landscape.

"We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business. We must not stop until they are defeated," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

"The terrorists started this war. And the president made it clear that we will end it at a time and place of our choosing."

Democratic party chairman Howard Dean told Fox News: "You don't negotiate with terrorists. These people have killed 3,000 Americans, there is no truce with Al-Qaeda, and there never will be. You can't trust them."

The message came as Pakistani authorities sought to identify four suspected Al-Qaeda members killed in a US air strike last week that angered many in Pakistan. The White House has refused to comment on the attack.

One of the dead was a son-in-law of bin Laden's main deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and another was a bomb expert on the US wanted list, according to US television network ABC and the Pakistani newspaper Dawn. Both quoted Pakistani intelligence.

Pakistani authorities confirmed that some foreigners were among the 18 people killed in the attack and General Peter Pace, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Thursday "I have no reason to doubt what the Pakistan government is saying."

Convicted Sex Offender Employed at the Hawaii State Legislature - Again

Gay rights activist Leon Rouse keeps landing on his feet, thanks to a handful of Hawaii lawmakers – all from Hawaii's majority party – who appear to have a soft spot for the convicted sex offender.

Currently, Rouse, who has always maintained he is innocent of sexual misconduct, is employed as a committee clerk by the chair of the Senate Health Committee, Roz Baker, a Democrat from Maui.

Rouse was serving as the office manager for freshman Rep. Rida Cabanilla, D-Waipahu, when he became the focus of a series of high-profile news reports during the 2005 legislative session.

Several lawmakers, including Democrat Sen. Brian Kanno, had attempted to coerce Norwegian Cruise Lines into paying off Rouse after he was reportedly fired for sexual harassment – even though Rouse had previously been convicted and served 8 years in prison in the Philippines for having sex with an underage boy.

The news reports about Rouse kept coming during the 2005 Legislative session. Hawaii voters learned several lawmakers aggressively lobbied and threatened Norwegian Cruise Lines with legislation requiring the company to pay additional taxes, if Rouse was not compensated.

Kanno asked his colleagues, both House and Senate elected officials, to sign a letter demanding that the company rehire Rouse or pay him restitution and travel expenses. The letter dated August 24, 2004, to Norwegian Cruise Line, was signed by Democrat Senators Kanno, Baker, Suzanne Chun Oakland, Brian Taniguchi and Carol Fukunaga – all chairs of their respective committees. In addition, House Chairs Roy Takumi, Kenneth Hiraki and Eric Hamakawa signed the letter.

Kanno also introduced a resolution requiring the cruise line to detail its sexual harassment policy, and demanded that the State Department of Taxation consider mandating the cruise line pay Hawaii’s 7.25 percent hotel room tax. The Senate members who signed the resolution include: Sens. Carol Fukunaga, Roz Baker, Brian Kanno, Gary Hooser, Clarence Nishihara, Ron Menor, Russell Kokubun, Kalani English, Colleen Hanabusa and Brian Taniguchi.

Rep. Colleen Meyer, R-Kaaawa, in an op-ed in Hawaii Reporter, said "State Sen. Brian Kanno, D-Kapolei, inappropriately aided accused sexual harasser Leon Rouse by telling Norwegian Cruise Lines (NCL), a company trying to protect its employees, what to do. And by advocating for the alleged sexual harasser, Sen. Kanno exploited his Senate power position."

Senate Republicans asked the Senate President, Robert Bunda, D-Waialua, to force Kanno to step down as chair of the labor committee – he refused. The Senate Republicans also filed a complaint against Kanno for his actions, asking the State Ethics Commission to determine whether Kanno abused his position and power as a lawmaker. To date, the State Ethics Commission has not issued its ruling.

Kanno reportedly helped to get Rouse a job with the apparently unsuspecting Cabanilla. Rouse resigned from that office manager position in April 2005 when he admitted he had not told Cabanilla of his conviction in the Philippines.

Hawaii Reporter retained an attorney in the Philippines to obtain authentic and certified court records of the of the Rouse proceedings. A portion of these records detail the accusations against him:

"On or about the 4th day of October 1995, in the City of Laoag, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the herein accused did then and there, willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously by using his adult influence and promising to pay 200 pesos ($3.79 US), engage one Godfrey Domingo, a male child who is below 18 years of age, as in fact he is 15 years old, for lascivious acts and committed said acts by masturbating and sucking the penis of the child and inserting his penis into the anus of the child all of which acts were committed by the accused on said child at Room 205 of the Pichay Lodging House at Laoag City, but which acts although already performed by the accused on the child was discontinued due to the intervention of the police who apprehended the accused who was then naked and in the company of Godfrey Domingo who was also naked in Room 205 of the Pichay Lodging House."

According to the Philippines court records, police had been searching for a foreigner who was said to be soliciting sex from young boys, and were given a tip that Rouse was at the hotel. They forced their way into the room after confirming with hotel management that Rouse was inside with a young boy. He was arrested for the violation of the country’s child abuse law, and Domingo, in the presence of his parents, admitted he’d performed sex acts for money. Rouse was convicted, but appealed his case all the way to the Supreme Court where his conviction stood.

Rouse has always maintained his innocence in regards to the conviction against him. With the help of several highly placed politicians, he appealed to the United Nations for help, claiming he was set up and unfairly treated. The United Nations Human Rights Committee sided with Rouse issuing a written report that said its investigators agreed Rouse was mistreated. They also said Rouse did not receive proper medical attention, was arrested without a warrant and was not fairly tried because the child was not present for cross-examination, rather his sworn statement obtained by police was used in court.

See the full UN Human Rights Committee report here: http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/CCPR.C.84.D.1089.2002.En?OpenDocument

Rouse did not return calls to Hawaii Reporter about his position with the Senate.

Democrats Leahy, Salazar to Oppose Alito

Two Democrats who supported Chief Justice John Roberts said Thursday they would oppose Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito in next week's Senate vote.

The conservative judge is expected to be confirmed, but with fewer votes than the 78 Roberts got in September.

Democratic Sens. Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Ken Salazar of Colorado both questioned whether Alito would be independent of President Bush and the executive branch in his future rulings.

"At a time when the president is seizing unprecedented power, the Supreme Court needs to act as a check and to provide balance," Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in a speech at Georgetown University's law school. "Based on the hearing and his record, I have no confidence that Judge Alito would provide that check and balance."

Added Salazar in a statement: "Judge Alito would place too much power in the hands of the president of the United States, at the cost of the protective system of checks and balances built into our Constitution.

The Judiciary Committee, which has 10 Republicans and eight Democrats _ is expected to approve Alito's nomination Tuesday in a party-line vote. The full Senate is expected to debate and vote on the nomination that same week, with its Republican majority confirming the federal appeals judge.

Leahy, Salazar and Max Baucus of Montana _ who announced his opposition to Alito on Wednesday _ were three of the 22 Democrats who voted for Roberts' confirmation as the replacement for the late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, a conservative.

Alito is not expected to get that much support from the Senate's 44-member Democratic caucus. He was picked by Bush as the replacement for retiring moderate Sandra Day O'Connor, who was the swing vote on contentious issues such as abortion and affirmative action during her career on the court.

Several other Democrats are opposing Alito, including Tom Harkin of Iowa, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Barbara Mikulski of Maryland.

Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska is the only Democrat to announce that he will vote for Alito's confirmation next week. He also voted for Roberts' confirmation.

None of the Senate's 55 Republicans have announced opposition to Alito. Most _if not all _ of them are expected to vote for his confirmation. They all voted for Roberts.

Independent Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont has not announced how he'll vote.

Alito is continuing to visit senators, spending time Thursday with Tom Carper, D-Del., and new Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J. Carper and Menendez have not taken positions on Alito's nomination. "I have reservations," Menendez said.

Sens. John Sununu, R-N.H., and John Warner, R-Va., announced their support for Alito after meeting with him Thursday.

"He understands the law and the Constitution extremely well, and I think one of the abilities he showed was to clearly describe how he ruled, why he ruled, and what factors were critical to particular cases," Sununu said. "That's an indication that his service on the court and his view of the Constitution is rooted in principle."

Added Warner: "In my view, Judge Alito's strong record and experience, coupled with his appearance before the Judiciary Committee, eliminates any question of the existence of extraordinary circumstances that would justify denying him confirmation by the Senate."

Peter King: Hillary Clinton Playing 'Cheap Racial Politics'

House Homeland Security Committee chairman Peter King accused Sen. Hillary Clinton on Monday of playing "cheap racial politics" when she said at a Martin Luther King Day tribute that the GOP-controlled House of Representatives was run like a "plantation."

"It's wrong to use the word 'plantation' in any political context because it's cheap racial politics," Rep. King told WMAL Washington, D.C. radio host Steve Malzberg. "But to do it on Martin Luther King Day is really disgraceful."

King said the former first lady was clearly trying to paint the GOP as "slaveowners." "It's a cheap way to throw race in and to somehow call Republicans racist and then be able to duck it later on if people call her on it," he told Malzberg.

The New York Republican accused Mrs. Clinton of trivializing the King Day commemoration, saying, "there are certain things that go beyond the pale and you know they're wrong and it speaks for itself and this is one of those cases."

Rep. King, however, was even more upset at former Vice President Al Gore, who earlier in the day had accused President Bush of repeatedly breaking the law by wiretapping terrorists without a court order.

"To try to criminalize this in a time of war is an absolute disgrace," he complained. "As the former vice president of the United States, Gore's conduct is inexcusable."

Ted Kennedy Drops Club, Hypocrisy Clear

After ripping Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito for what Senator Ted Kennedy called "troubling" ties to a social club at Princeton University, Kennedy is distancing himself from his own curious ties to a club at Harvard University.

As previously reported by NewsMax, Kennedy is a member of The Owl Club, a social club for Harvard alumni that bans women from membership. Ironically, the Owl Club, long reviled at Harvard as "sexist," was evicted from the campus in 1984 for violating federal anti-discrimination laws authored by Kennedy.

According to the Boston Herald, Kennedy was questioned on his status as an Owl Club member by Boston TV station WHDH. Kennedy said, "I'm not a member; I continue to pay about $100."

However, according to the membership directory of the Owl Club, Kennedy updated his personal information as recently as September 7.

When told by the TV reporter that the Owl Club discriminates against women, Kennedy said, "I shouldn't be and I'm going to get out as fast as I can."

Kennedy's hypocritical attack on Alito over his membership in CAP would come as no surprise to readers of the blockbuster new book "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy" by bestselling author Peter Schweizer.

In his book Schweizer discloses that while Kennedy has fought for the estate tax and spoken out against tax shelters, he has repeatedly benefited from an intricate web of trusts and private foundations that have shielded most of his family's fortune from the IRS.

One Kennedy family trust wasn't even set up in the U.S., but in Fiji.

Schweizer also reveals that while Kennedy has championed the development of alternate energy sources, he opposed a plan to build a wind-power generating facility to provide clean, cheap power to Cape Cod.

The reason: The wind turbines would be positioned off the coast from the Kennedy compound in Hyannis, in one of the family's favorite yachting and sailing areas.

Rob Reiner Suspected of Airing Illegal Ads

Taxpayer groups are demanding that taxpayer-funded ads, which are currently airing in California on radio and TV and appearing in major newspapers, be immediately pulled.

Rob Reiner is the Hollywood figure behind a Golden State initiative that is looking to have the state provide universal preschool and have the taxpayers once again foot the bill. The proposition has already qualified for the June 2006 ballot.

The actor-director knows how to work the proposition system. He's done it in the past. Rumors about his potential political aspirations continue to circulate.

It is illegal in California to use taxpayer funds to support ballot initiatives. But evidently the $18 million ad campaign that sings the praises of preschool is being paid for with just that.

Reiner has typically held fast to the wealthy Hollywood lib position of forcing working class folks to fork over their hard-earned money to pay for pet socialist projects.

How does he expect the new state-run preschool bureaucracy to be financed? By getting a sizable enough number of voters to vote for what could lead to another tax increase.

"I think most people would see this as a black-and-white issue, there's not much gray here," said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

"Rob Reiner should do the right thing and pull the ads immediately," said Larry McCarthy, president of the California Taxpayers' Association. "He needs to step in to prevent even the whiff of political impropriety."

The Left Coast Report smells what's up and believes that rather than a faint whiff it's more like a major stink.

Golden Globe Gaieties

In contrast with the Academy Awards where approximately 6,000 voters pick the winners, about 80 members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association determine the outcome of the Golden Globes.

The Globes are thought to be fairly reliable predictors of the Oscars. We'll have to wait until March 5 to see if the pattern holds true.

The 63rd Annual Golden Globe Awards show proved to be a politically charged affair. The first award set the tone for the evening. It went to George Clooney for Best Supporting Actor in a Motion Picture for his performance in "Syriana."

During his acceptance speech, Clooney said, "I thought Paul Giamatti was gonna win ... this is early. I haven't had a drink yet."

Then he added what has come to be the perfunctory political reference. Clooney said: "I want to thank Jack Abramoff ... you know, just because. First one up, get the ball rolling."

Rachel Weisz took home the Supporting Actress prize for "The Constant Gardener," a liberally distorted conspiracy thriller.

Geena Davis won Best Actress in a TV Show for the incessantly promoted Hillary conditioner, "Commander In Chief."

Davis focused on the cuddly woman-as-president theme in her carefully prepared acceptance speech. She said, "As I was coming in, I felt a tug on my skirt and it was a little girl 8 or 10 in her first party dress and she said, ?Because of you, I want to be president some day.'

The audience responded with a collective "Awwwww" and Davis added, "Well, that didn't really happen. But it could have."

An awards show these days wouldn't be complete without a drug reference. Leave it to last year's Oscar host Chris Rock to do the dishonors.

While introducing the nominees for Best Actress in a TV Series, Rock explained that Mary-Louise Parker of "Weeds" "plays a suburban mom who deals dope." He added the commentary, "Ain't that what America's all about? Yeah."

Parker was up against four of the "Desperate Housewives" stars. Rock quipped, "You kinda feel sorry for Louise Parker. ...'Desperate Housewives' is one of the biggest shows on the planet and 'Weeds' is only watched by Snoop Doggy Dogg."

Much to Rock's and everyone else's amazement, Parker beat out the four inquisitive residents of Wisteria Lane.

As expected, the most politically correct flick, "Brokeback Mountain," snagged the biggest awards. The "unconventional" cowboy film won Best Picture-Drama, Best Director for Ang Lee, Best Screenplay and Best Song. (The song was co-written by Bernie Taupin, titled "A Love That Will Never Grow Old.")

Ang Lee's win makes underdogs of George Clooney and Woody Allen for the Best Director Oscar.

Adding to the gender-jumbled theme of the evening was Felicity Huffman's Best Actress in a Drama win for her role as a male who seeks to become a female in "Transamerica."

Philip Seymour Hoffman took the award for Best Actor in a Drama for "Capote."

The Globes picked the anti-American "Paradise Now," a sympathetic portrayal of suicide bombers, as the Best Foreign Language film.

In an apparent aberration, "Walk the Line" was the big winner in the Motion Picture Musical or Comedy category. The Johnny Cash biopic won Best Picture, Best Actor for Joaquin Phoenix and Best Actress for Reese Witherspoon.

The Left Coast Report says watching the awards show, I thought now more than ever, cinematically speaking, we're not in Kansas anymore. And likewise the Kansas farmhouse is swirling farther and farther away from Hollywood.

George Clooney Takes Credit for John Kerry's 2004 Loss

When it comes to self-absorption, Hollywood reigns supreme.

But George Clooney seems to have taken the narcissism level up another notch.

Clooney recently revealed that when it comes to election results the single most important factor in winning or losing is the presence of, well, George Clooney.

According to Ireland Online, the actor-director believes that John Kerry lost the 2004 U.S. presidential race because Clooney turned down an invitation to ride on Kerry's election choo-choo.

"Kerry asked me to ride on his train - he had a train going cross-country after he was nominated and some actors went on board. I called him and explained that I couldn't do it," Clooney said, adding, "I'd hurt him. I'd actually caused him harm at the polls."

Carville: Don't 'Bet the Farm' on Hillary

Hillary Clinton may run for president in 2008 but, says Democratic political strategist James Carville, "I wouldn’t bet the farm” on it.

Carville, in a wide-ranging interview with NewsMax, said the Democratic Party "has a disease” that has been seriously misdiagnosed by party leaders and supporters.

Though he didn’t elaborate on Hillary Clinton’s possible – some say likely - candidacy, Carville did comment on another possible Democratic candidate for the White House.

Speaking about Bill Richardson, Carville said the New Mexico governor is a "charming man” but he has yet to answer some core questions about why he wants to be president.

"You want to be president because ... ‘I would be the first Hispanic president’ is not sufficient,” Carville says. "Where’s the Bill Richardson the man, what motivates him, what drives him, what is it that ‘you’ believe to solve our problems? So I know he’s a charming, smart guy but I don’t know who he is until he fills it in.”

And what about the Republican ticket for 08?

"For the first time in my lifetime, and I think I’m right on this, with the possible exception of 1964, we don’t know who the Republican candidate is going to be. And every [time] at this point, pretty much, we had a pretty good, clear idea of who’s the favorite,” Carville says.

Regarding a possible "Dick Morris fantasy” that would have Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as the GOP candidate in 2008, Carville was skeptical – and sarcastic as always.

He said Rice is "not going to run” despite being "hard-working, diligent and smart.”

With mocking wit, Carville added: "What’s her rationale? That she’s the architect of the Iraq war?”

Big Security Council Members Agree on Iran

AP

Russia and China agreed with the United States and its European allies Monday that Iran must fully suspend its nuclear program, but the countries stopped short of demanding referral to the U.N. Security Council, Britain's Foreign Office said.

In a conciliatory statement, Iran's ambassador to Moscow praised a Russian proposal to move the Iranian uranium enrichment program to its territory — a step that could resolve the deadlock over Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

Russian President Vladimir Putin also urged caution in dealing with the Iranian nuclear issue, saying that Tehran might still agree to the Russian offer and warning "it's necessary to work carefully and avoid any sharp, erroneous moves."

Britain, France and Germany, backed by Washington, want Iran to be referred to the Security Council, which can impose sanctions.

But Russia and China, which have close commercial ties with Iran, have resisted such a move in the past and could stymie efforts against Tehran as veto-wielding members of the U.N. body.

The British Foreign Office said all five permanent members of the Security Council — the U.S., Britain, France, Russia and China — and Germany had shown "serious concern over Iranian moves to restart uranium enrichment activities."

They agreed on the need for Iran to "return to full suspension," according to the statement.

Diplomats from Britain, France and Germany also informed officials from Russia, China and the United States that they plan to call for an emergency board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency next month. The 35-nation IAEA board, which could refer the issue to the Security Council, will discuss what action to take against Iran.

Representatives of the six countries held a daylong meeting in London in a bid to reach consensus over what action to take after Iran removed U.N. seals from its main uranium enrichment facility last week and resumed research on nuclear fuel, including small-scale enrichment, after a 2 1/2-year freeze.

The move alarmed the West, which fears Iran intends to build an atomic bomb. Iran claims its program is peaceful, intended only to produce electricity and it has threatened to end cooperation the U.N. nuclear watchdog if it is brought before the Security Council.

The Russian proposal would ensure oversight so that uranium would be enriched only as much as is needed for use in nuclear power plants and not to the higher level required for weapons.

"As far as Russia's proposal is concerned, we consider it constructive and are carefully studying it. This is a good initiative to resolve the situation. We believe that Iran and Russia should find a way out of this jointly," Iran's ambassador to Moscow, Gholamreza Ansari, said in comments translated into Russian and shown on state Channel One television.

Putin, speaking in Moscow after a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, said Moscow's position is "very close" to that of the U.S. and the European Union. But he added that "it's necessary to work carefully and avoid any sharp, erroneous moves."

European diplomats have said in recent days there are signs that Russia, which is deeply involved in building Iranian reactors for power generation, is leaning toward referral. Putin's comments, though, seemed to suggest he was still looking for other alternatives.

China, which is highly dependent on Iranian oil, has warned that hauling Iran before the Security Council would escalate the situation.

The Foreign Ministry in Beijing took a cautious tone.

"China believes that under the current situation, all relevant sides should remain restrained and stick to solving the Iranian nuclear issue through negotiations," the ministry said in a statement.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the vote on referral "ought to be as soon as possible."

"We've got to finally demonstrate to Iran that it can't with impunity just cast aside the just demands of the international community," Rice said Sunday during a trip to Africa.

Speaking before Monday's talks in London, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said the "onus is on Iran" to prove its program is peaceful. He said the international community's confidence had been "sorely undermined by a history of concealment and deception" by Iran.

Straw said the dialogue with Russia and China was of "crucial importance."

British Prime Minister Tony Blair's official spokesman said the London talks signaled "growing international concern at the behavior of the Iranian government and at ... the words of the Iranian president," who has called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and said the Nazi Holocaust a "myth."

Iranian state radio, meanwhile, reported that the government had allocated the equivalent of $215 million for the construction of what would be its second and third nuclear power plants. Iran plans to build 20 more nuclear plants, and Russia has offered to build some of them.

Straw reiterated that military action against Iran is not an option.

He also said sanctions were not inevitable even if the nuclear dispute is referred to the Security Council, saying other countries had complied with council demands without the need for sanctions.