Gore TV Facing 2 Lawsuits

A cable television network co-founded by former Vice President Al Gore is facing at least two lawsuits challenging its use of the name Current TV.

A Maryland company is suing in federal court in Cincinnati claiming trademark infringement. Minnesota Public Radio has made a similar complaint in a Minneapolis court.

"This is a straight-forward case of trademark infringement," according to briefs filed last month in U.S. District Court by Current Communications Group of Germantown, Md., a provider of broadband Internet services that relies on a Cincinnati company to help distribute its service.

Current Communications contends that it had registered several variations of "Current" trademarks before Current TV was introduced in April 2005.

Minnesota Public Radio claimed in a suit filed earlier this month that it applied to register "The Current" as a trademark four months before Gore's network changed its name to Current TV.

Gore's company bought Newsworld International, a 24-hour cable network, from Canadian Broadcasting Corp. in May 2004 and had planned to use the name "INdTV" and aim programming at 20-somethings, according to the Cincinnati lawsuit.

Current TV, based in San Francisco, features alternative news and "citizen journalism" pieces, many submitted by amateurs who send in video. According to its web site, viewers contribute about one-third of the station's content.

A message seeking comment from Current TV on the Cincinnati lawsuit was not immediately returned. Earlier, the company issued a statement in response to the MPR lawsuit saying more than 300 U.S. businesses use the word "current" in their name.

"We know of no consumers who confuse us with Minnesota Public Radio, and we can't imagine that anybody ever would," the statement said.

Kuwait Donates Another $25 Million for Katrina Relief

Representatives of Kuwait Dr. Hilal Al-Sayer, and Sheikh Salem Abdullah Al-Sabah, have delivered a $25 million check for the Hurricane Katrina relief fund, the second installment of a donation that will total $500 million.

The check was delivered to the chairman of the board of governors of the Red Cross, Bonnie McElveen-Hunter, Thursday morning at the Red Cross' landmark headquarters building near the White House.

"This gift represents the true friendship that the people of Kuwait feel for the people of the United States," Jack McGuire, president and CEO of the American Red Cross, told NewsMax.

McElveen-Hunter noted to NewsMax the historic nature of the gift, saying, "This is the largest ever from an international society. We've been partners before, but this time we are the recipient."

The overall Kuwaiti pledge is the single largest donation given to help the victims of hurricane Katrina.

McElveen-Hunter went on to note that the American Red Cross had 220,000 "boots on the ground" in the Katrina/Rita/Wilma ravaged areas. She added that that was more than the number of troops on the ground in Iraq.

Of the total Kuwait government pledge of $500 million, $400 million is in the form of oil products, with the remaining $100 million in cash. Thursday's check represents the second $25 million cash installment – the first having been formally presented to former presidents George Bush and Bill Clinton, who were appointed to spearhead contributions to Katrina relief.

Representatives of Kuwait further explained that another $2.8 million donation had come directly from the "people of Kuwait" this past November and is over and above the formal pledge of the Kuwait government.

At the time of the government pledge, Kuwait energy minister Sheikh Ahmad al-Fahd al-Sabah explained, "It's our duty as Kuwaitis to stand by our friends to lighten the humanitarian misery and as a payback for the many situations during which Washington helped us through the significant relations between the two friendly countries."

Kuwait is in fact one of the U.S.'s strongest allies in the Middle East, due to the U.S. protection of Kuwait in 1991 during the Gulf War.

In her remarks to the Kuwait ambassador and Red Crescent representative, McElveen-Hunter noted the special relationship between the two countries, saying, "You were there for us."

According to Al-Sayer, vice president of the Kuwait Red Crescent Society, the organization is a voluntary humanitarian society providing help and assistance to the most vulnerable people without any discrimination to nationality, gender, color, race, religion or political beliefs.

The Kuwait Red Crescent Society (KRCS) assumed a leading role in responding to the tsunami catastrophe, which hit the Indonesian Sumatra region - also reaching Sri Lanka, India, the Maldives Islands and Thailand.

KRCS also has provided relief some $16 million worth of relief supplies to victims of the Pakistan earthquakes disaster of August 2005.

Al-Sayer recounted Thursday his experience going through U.S. Customs during his visit this week to Washington D.C.

In response to an official's inquiry as to whether he was carrying more than $10,000 on his person, al-Sayer made a startling confession: Yes, he was carrying a check for $25 million.

Award-Winning Guantanamo Doc Was Staged

To absolutely no one's surprise, Michael Winterbottom's "Road to Guantanamo" documentary picked up a Silver Bear award for Best Director at the recent Berlin Film Festival - with the award being shared by Winterbottom and co-director Mat Whitecross. Word also comes from Variety that the film is apparently a very hot commodity at the European Film Market.

More surprising is what we learned recently after reading a review of the film from Hollywood Reporter's reliably left-leaning Kirk Honeycutt. Apparently quite a lot of this explosive "documentary" was staged! Imagine that. Here's Honeycutt's review:

"A tough, compelling, must-see movie, 'The Road to Guantanamo' ... certainly exposes the Bush Administration's repeated assertions of their humane treatment of Islamic prisoners at extra-legal detention centers as a lie.

"The film mixes staged and archival footage with recreations of the interviews with the three surviving men. Annoyingly, film does come without a writing credit, presumably because interviews supplied the stories, but clearly someone structured the events."

Boy, that sure is annoying, Kirk! Maybe if the film featured a writing credit, people could actually press the writer to validate the claims made by the film. Honeycutt continues by telling the story of how the men got to Guantanamo, where they are "held in detention for over two years, systematically tortured and accused of all sorts of crimes."

He continues: "Working on a budget a little over $2 million, Winterbottom and Whitecross superbly recreate these experiences at locations in Britain, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran. There is little time for character or relationship development as events hit these young men fast. Similarly, the bullying American and British interrogators are all interchangeable.

"The film doesn't really plead a political cause or moral crusade as shown in persuasive dramatic terms what happened to these lads. It makes no attempt to enlarge the story beyond these men or to verify any of their claims. Continually, President Bush refers detainees at Guantanamo as 'bad people.' Clearly, these three were not."

We like Honeycutt's line stating that "Winterbottom and Whitecross superbly recreate these experiences at locations in Britain, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran." How does Honeycutt know this? Because the film's press kit tells him that? Or perhaps because Kirk was there, himself?

It's also comforting to read that the film "makes no attempt to enlarge the story beyond these men or to verify any of their claims." Now that's great documentary work! How come this didn't win for best film?

We're wondering what would happen if an openly conservative filmmaker did a documentary "recreating" Dick Cheney's hunting accident, and showed the film to the assembled world media at the Berlin Film Festival - without any writing credit. Why do we think such a filmmaker would be run out on a rail?

Bavarians Down on Hate-America Film?

At least folks in Bavaria aren't too thrilled about the new hate-America screed "Valley of the Wolves - Iraq" being shown in their theaters. We read this recently, from WENN:

"The premier of the German state of Bavaria has called upon German cinema owners to stop showing the Turkish movie 'Valley of the Wolves - Iraq,' which depicts U.S. soldiers in Iraq as murderous villains. In an interview with the Bild am Sonntag, Edmund Stoiber described the film as a 'racist and anti-Western hate film' and charged that it was intended to sow 'hate and mistrust against the West.' -

"According to The Washington Post, the U.S. Army has warned service members abroad to stay away from theaters showing the movie and 'avoid getting into discussions about [it] with people you don't know.'"

If and when this film ever arrives in West LA, of course, it will be interesting to see whether anybody notices or cares.

Jason Apuzzo and Govindini Murty are NewsMax columnists, filmmakers, and co-directors of the Liberty Film Festival.

Bolton Blasts U.N. 'Sex and Corruption'

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said Saturday that the world body is hobbled "by bad management, by sex and corruption" and a lack of confidence in its ability to carry out missions.

John Bolton also criticized the U.N.'s budget, noting that two-thirds of members pay only 20 percent of the cost.

"We find an organization that is deeply troubled by bad management, by sex and corruption and by a growing lack of confidence in its ability to carry out missions that are given to them," Bolton told an audience at a Columbia Law School symposium held by the Federalist Society, a conservative law organization.

Bolton, a longtime critic of the U.N., has been leading U.S. efforts to reform the United Nations after the oil-for-food scandal and sex scandals involving U.N. peacekeepers.

The oil-for-food program, established in 1996 with Iraq's economy crippled by sanctions, allowed Saddam Hussein to sell oil in exchange for humanitarian goods meant for his people.

An inquiry by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker found that Saddam sold oil to foreign countries in hopes of getting their support for lifting U.N. sanctions, and enriched himself by $1.8 billion through a kickback scheme. Companies and politicians essentially paid him for the right to do business, circumventing the U.N. program.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Thursday is expected to unveil his major overhaul for management reform for the United Nations.

Bolton on Saturday also described the U.N. as inept for not being able to stop Iran's nuclear development and "devaluing the IAEA," the International Atomic Energy Agency.

"Through all of this, the U.S. has been encouraged by Europe to pursue action through the U.N.," Bolton said, adding that patience of the administration was wearing thin.

Bolton was given a recess appointment by President Bush as ambassador to the United Nations on Aug. 1 after failing to win confirmation in the U.S. Senate. Because of the recess appointment, Bolton's term expires when the current Congress concludes on Jan. 3, 2007.

Bolton — who has a reputation for brilliance, obstinacy and speaking his mind — said in 1994 that it wouldn't make a "bit of difference" if the United Nations lost the top 10 stories from its 39-story headquarters.

ABC: Fred Thompson Signs On as Paul Harvey Substitute

It's pretty clear that ABC Radio is preparing former Senator Fred Thompson to replace radio legend Paul Harvey.

The 87-year-old Harvey has made no announcement about retiring, but financial analysts have complained that ABC has not made adequate plans for his departure.

On Friday, ABC News Radio, America's largest commercial radio news organization, officially named former Senator Fred Thompson to the position of Special Program Host and Senior Analyst beginning in the Spring of 2006.

Thompson, a Republican from Tennessee, well-known for his acting roles on television's Law & Order, will be based from ABC News Radio's Washington, D.C. bureau.

Thompson will host ABC News Radio specials and programs. He will provide commentary and analysis of politics, policy, national security, and current affairs.

The release also noted that Thompson will also fill-in for Paul Harvey when the legendary radio host is on vacation.

"Senator Thompson's contribution to ABC News Radio will offer our affiliates additional depth from a recognized and trusted public figure," said David Westin, President of ABC News.

A practicing attorney, Thompson has been a figure on the national political stage since the 1970s when he served as minority counsel to the Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities ("Watergate Committee") from 1973-1974. He was later elected as a Republican to the United States Senate from Tennessee in the November 8, 1994, special election to fill the unexpired portion of the term ending January 3, 1997, left vacant by the resignation of Albert Gore, Jr. Thompson served in the Senate until 2003.

"We are thrilled to welcome Senator Thompson to the ABC Radio family and look forward to developing a variety of exciting projects that will benefit from his depth of talent," said John McConnell, Senior Vice President of Programming, ABC Radio Networks.

"Throughout my life, radio has always held a certain fascination for me, and I am very eager to lend my efforts to ABC News Radio," Thompson said. "I look forward to working with the experienced team at ABC News."

Senator Thompson was Chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee. He also served on the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee. During his public career, Thompson has been a frequent guest on virtually every national radio and television news broadcast.

"Senator Thompson will host his first program this Memorial Day, focusing on America's brave servicemen and women," said Steve Jones, Vice President and General Manager of ABC News Radio.

Thompson began his motion picture career in 1985 and has appeared in numerous television episodes and motion pictures, including The Hunt for Red October (1990), Cape Fear (1991) and In the Line of Fire (1993). Thompson is noted for his portrayals of authoritative characters. Thompson holds a B.A. from Memphis State University and a J.D. degree from Vanderbilt University 1967.

'Da Vinci Code' Legal Battle Begins

"The Da Vinci Code" drama opens Monday -- but not in theaters.

The best-selling novel and soon-to-be film is at the center of a court challenge in which two men claim author Dan Brown ripped off their ideas.

According to Agence France-Presse, Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh are suing their own publisher, Random House, claiming Brown's book draws heavily on their 1982 best seller, "Holy Blood, Holy Grail."

Brown's 2003 book has sold more than 30 million copies worldwide and earned him $78.5 million in one year, instantly making the writer one of the world's richest.

Baigent and Leigh's book tackles theories that Jesus and Mary Magdalene married, had a child, and the blood line continues to the present day -- with the Catholic Church aware of the discovery and trying to suppress it.

A third author, Henry Lincoln, is not part of the lawsuit.

Brown's book, which combines thriller, detective and conspiracy theory genres, explores similar themes about the Vatican covering up the true story of Jesus.

The novel has been translated into 44 languages and has drawn criticism from the Roman Catholic Church and historians.

If Baigent and Leigh are successful and obtain injunctions preventing the use of their material, it could threaten the British release of the film adaptation of "The Da Vinci Code."

The big-screen version, costing $100 million and starring two-time Oscar winner Tom Hanks, Sir Ian McKellen and Audrey Tatou and Jean Reno, is scheduled to open on May 19.

The English High Court case is expected to last up to two weeks, barring a settlement. It is also likely to clarify the extent to which an author can use other people's research under existing copyright laws.

Brown acknowledges the theories of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" in his novel. The villain is called Sir Leigh Teabing, a name that bears a remarkable resemblance to Baigent's and Leigh's surnames.

Top moments of Winter Olympics

ESPN.com

Normally, there is one event that stands out and defines the Olympics. Tonya Harding and Nancy Kerrigan skating in Lillehammer, Cathy Freeman winning in Sydney, the shot putters crying with joy in the ancient stadium at Olympia in 2004.

But Torino was more of a collection of moments, like the day ESPN.com's Jim Caple went to seven events in one day. Here is a compilation of our Olympic staff's top moments.

Kwan withdraws from Games
The first time I saw Michelle Kwan was during a group interview in a back room at the skating rink in Lillehammer, where she was the U.S. alternate. She was gracious then, never complaining that she should be on the team, so not Tonya. She may not have skated her best in the Olympics, but she always represented herself, her sport and her country well. It is sad to see her go. -- Jim Caple

Italian hero and goat
While covering the Olympics in Italy, you sometimes have no choice but to watch the Italian broadcast of the Games. That was the case this time around. And while you couldn't understand exactly what was being said, you still got the message. A perfect example was the men's 1,500-meter speedskating race. All the pre-race hype was the showdown between Americans Shani Davis and Chad Hedrick (see below), but Italian Enrico Fabris stole the show. After Fabris set the lead time, the Italian announcers screamed each time another skater failed to best the time. "Italia! Italia! Italia!" -- Joy Russo

On the other side was The Glare Seen 'Round The World from Italian ice dancer Barbara Fusar Poli, who gave partner Maurizio Margaglio The Glare after he dropped her with seconds to go in their routine. Like many men, I've seen that same look too many times -- and it's never good. They both made up after completing their final skate, only after every local broadcast and newspaper published her famous look. -- JC

Jacobellis' trick gone bad
After leading for most of the snowboardcross final race, Lindsey Jacobellis hot-dogged it near the finish line, attempting a trick, and fell, losing her gold medal. I bet she winds up being more famous and making more money for losing the gold than she ever would have by actually winning it. – JC

The humanitarian
It was a change of pace to see Joey Cheek donating his $45,000 medal bonuses to "Right to Play" and then challenging corporations to match it (enough have as he's raised nearly $400,000 so far). Cheek is one of my favorite athletes, fast, funny and very wise. "What I do is great fun," he told reporters of skating compared to the charity. "It's a great job. I've traveled the world and made great friends. But it's pretty ridiculous -- I skate around the ice in tights. And I've trained my whole life for this." -- JC

Hockey history
We'll always remember the moments after the Swedish women's team defeated the American women in a shootout to advance to the gold medal game against Canada. Forget the big-picture stuff about the changing face of women's hockey; all true, but this was about the stark, perhaps even stunning, contrast between the Swedish players who accomplished something they thought might never be possible and the American women who lost something they never thought they would lose. No doubt, it was a moment none of the players on the ice will ever forget. -- Scott Burnside

Bode busts
After much pre-Olympics hype, Bode Miller went 0-for-5 in these Games. Miller's job is to ski fast, something he didn't do here at the Games. Still, in the same way I would never want to see Bode coming down a course holding himself back just to finish, I would loathe to see him being untrue to himself just to be safe with reporters. His performance was dismal, his reputation is in tatters. Nobody is happy. For Miller and for us, the only way the magic is going to kick up again is if we let it. Miller has to believe that he can be the person he wants to be, both on and off the slopes. -- Carrie Sheinberg

The Flying Tomato
It's been hard to find a face of the Olympics, but one that comes to mind is Shaun White. From the get-go, White was pumped to be in Torino. We can still remember seeing his beaming face during the Opening Ceremony.

In the five American snowboard Grand Prix events leading up to the Olympics, "The Flying Tomato" always qualified first. Then he would do the overall first run with a score so untouchable that, by the second run, he was free to add whatever icing he wanted. After predicting an American medal sweep, White let his jitters get the better of him in the halfpipe event. He dropped in the pipe looking at the stands, the mountains, everything but the pipe ... and he hit the lip. "I wasn't really that nervous, but just before I was about to drop in, my heart kind of fell," White said. "Then I remembered that this is what I do and I just did my thing." After that, things got very familiar as White went out and made a run to gold. -- Lindsay Berra

Shani-Chad-gate
It's amazing and sad how two wrongs can make a right. Davis and Hedrick embarrassed themselves, and each other, in a frigid and nasty post-1,500 news conference (one of the more bizarre we've seen) -- and made their sport more interesting than ever. They both lost to Fabris (Davis finished second, Hedrick third) and then had a wonderful opportunity to shake hands, apologize, hug, exchange pins, whatever. That did not happen. They sat at the same table, a bit more than an arm's length from each other, and ignored each other's answers for the better part of a half-hour. Davis downplayed the rivalry, as did Hedrick. Both seemed to blame the media for the melodrama. But Americans likely took sides: Half chose Hedrick, and the other half chose Davis. The soap opera actually helped speedskating. A sport that no one cared about at the start of the Games was now the source of the most fascinating Olympics topic since the Nancy and Tonya fiasco. -- Eric Adelson

The ice dancers
It was a special night at the ice dance finals. There was no judging controversy. The Americans took home a medal. And best of all, the world's favorite Italian couple kissed and made up. Russia won its third figure skating gold in as many finals here when Tatyana Navka and Roman Kostomarov won the ice dance with a stirring Carmen routine in Monday's free program. But the real news was Tanith Belbin and Ben Agosto breaking a 30-year American drought in the event. They didn't skate flawlessly -- she wobbled on one turn -- but they were plenty good enough to win the silver, the country's first ice dancing medal since 1976. – JC

Port Hysteria

The furor over Dubai Ports World is a distraction.
Rich Lowery

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, styles himself an independent voice unafraid to speak truth to power. Judging by his performance in the controversy over a company that is owned by the United Arab Emirates potentially managing terminals at six U.S. ports, Graham is also unafraid to speak falsehood to power. He doubts whether we should “outsource major port security to a foreign-based company.”

He makes it sound as though the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and local police agencies — all of which provide port security — will be retiring as the UAE company Dubai Ports World takes over. This is fantasy. Graham insists that the White House has been “tone-deaf politically” about this issue. He is right, but that doesn’t make it politically deft to misstate facts in an inflammatory way.

Graham, unfortunately, isn’t alone. He is part of a bipartisan herd hoping to win the War on Terror through ill-informed hysteria.

Did some of the 9/11 hijackers come from the UAE, and did the hijackers launder money through that country? Yes, but Britain also has produced terrorists, and the UAE has worked to tighten its financial system. It is arguably our most useful Arab ally, providing an air base and ports crucial to military operations in the Middle East.

The UAE is a kind of Arab model. It is pursuing commercial openness, attempting to orient itself more toward the West. Blackballing the Dubai firm would turn our backs on the UAE’s progress.

Some members of Congress, worried at being portrayed as anti-Arab, have attempted a perverse broad-mindedness by objecting more generally to foreign involvement in U.S. ports. But Dubai Ports World will take over management at certain terminals only because it is purchasing the British company that is already running them. Foreign companies — from Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and China, among other places — already play a huge role at U.S. ports.

It is loosely said that Dubai Ports World would “take over” six ports. That’s false. The ports are owned by local governmental entities, and the company will manage only a few terminals. For instance, it will manage two terminals out of 14 in Baltimore. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey owns five terminals devoted chiefly to cargo. Dubai Ports World would be involved in only one, which it would manage together with a Danish firm.

A management company has very little to do with port security. It unloads cargo containers and then holds them until they are hauled out by trucks. As homeland-security expert Stewart Verdery says, this is but a small part of the process. The U.S. begins screening select cargo containers at their port of departure. Then, when they are on their way here, computer-based risk analysis is done to decide which containers need further scrutiny.

Dubai Ports World would have no role in determining how containers or ships are reviewed and deciding which containers are inspected. Critics complain that the company will obtain inside information about U.S. ports. But because the UAE has signed on to the Container Security Initiative, in which foreign countries cooperate with the U.S. on safeguards, it already is privy to our security practices in general. The company will probably learn more about specific procedures at individual ports, but this knowledge is not that tightly held.

The unionized employees at the ports would stay the same, and almost all of them are U.S. citizens. It seems unlikely that Dubai Ports World, even if it wanted to, could infiltrate Arab terrorists into the International Longshoremen’s Association to plot mayhem in the United States.

We should worry about port security. But the real vulnerability is foreign ports, where something noxious could be loaded on ships headed here. The nightmare, of course, is a nuclear or radiological device. More resources should be poured into detection technology deployed overseas and in the U.S., where only 37 percent of containers go through radiation detectors. That is a real issue; the furor over Dubai Ports World is a distraction.

Window on The Week

National Review

A Note From The National Review: “Window on The Week.” acts as our weekly quick-and-punchy “between-the-issues” survey of the hot topics of the day. “Window on The Week” gives you a sense of what “The Week,” looks like — a popular feature which appears fortnightly in National Review.

The debate over the United Arab Emirates ports deal hasn't been terribly edifying. Most members of Congress haven't let their ignorance of what the deal is or how ports operate keep them from making categorical pronouncements about it. We have yet to hear a convincing explanation of why having the UAE-owned firm Dubai Ports World manage some terminals at six U.S. ports would threaten our national security. A firm like DP World basically operates the cranes. It is a small part of a big operation, with various U.S. government agencies providing the security. But it is understandable — and not a sign of some sort of bias, as President Bush has suggested — that people are nervous about having an Arab country involved in our ports in any way. If the interagency review was more extensive than is often the case with these sort of deals, it was still fairly cursory — only one meeting in 30 days — and calls for further review strike us as reasonable. We are therefore encouraged that the White House has signalled it might accept a delay, and that DP World has indicated it would go along with one. This is what chairman of the House homeland-security committee Pete King — a responsible voice of skepticism about the deal — has been urging. If the deal is sound, as we expect, there is no reason to rush, and perhaps a couple of weeks from now Congress will have grown tired of its own demagoguery on the issue.

Justice Samuel Alito took his seat on the Supreme Court this week — a week in which the Court also announced it would hear a case on partial-birth abortion in its next term. This upsets the abortion-on-demand crowd, one of whose shrillest voices belongs to Don Collins. Collins is a board member of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a group that favors population control in addition to restrictions on immigration. Writing in the Pittsburgh Tribune, Collins noted that, with the confirmation of Alito, five of the nine justices are Catholic. For most people, this is a piece of trivia. For Collins, it’s proof of papist conspiracy: A 1975 pro-life pastoral letter, he wrote, “is a superbly detailed blueprint of the bishops’ strategy for infiltrating and manipulating the American democratic process at national, state, and local levels.” Collins should get a prize for anti-religious hysteria: Not only does he peddle anti-Catholic clichés (“infiltrating and manipulating”), but he also thinks the Catholics’ “unwitting evangelical brethren” have been duped into becoming the pope’s legions. We think those who favor legal abortion are wrong, but they definitely deserve better spokesmen than Collins.

South Dakota has enacted a law to ban abortion, and the state’s Republican governor, Mike Rounds, is expected to sign it. Federal courts will almost certainly strike down the law before it takes effect, and South Dakota will have to pay the fees of the abortion clinics’ attorneys. Subsidizing the ACLU and Planned Parenthood may not be the legislators’ intent, but it is the effect of their actions. There may be some value in putting the state’s opposition to abortion on record. But the legislators could have accomplished that by passing a resolution committing themselves to the goal of protecting unborn human life from unjust killing as soon as it becomes possible — and committing themselves to participating in a practical strategy, combining legislation and litigation, to make it possible. The current bill, though idealistic, is a distraction from that task.

Kofi Annan has called for the closure of the terrorist-detention facility at Guantanamo Bay in response to a report by a group of U.N. “human-rights investigators.” The group, which answers to the U.N. Human Rights Commission — a body that includes such humanitarian luminaries as Sudan, Cuba, China, Saudi Arabia, and Zimbabwe — proclaimed that prisoners at Guantanamo are being treated inhumanely and even tortured. After completing their thorough, dispassionate, truth-seeking investigation of American atrocities, the rapporteurs called for the responsible U.S. officials to be prosecuted “up to the highest level of military and political command.” Of course, none of the investigators felt the need actually to visit Guantanamo and observe the scene firsthand. They instead interviewed some former detainees (eyewitnesses!), along with detainees’ families and defense attorneys. Never mind that al-Qaeda training manuals instruct operatives to fabricate torture stories whenever they are captured. Never mind, either, that American officials deny the torture allegations. The Archimedean axiom of any good U.N. investigator is that anybody is more trustworthy than an American official. It’s a principle with which the U.N. indeed hopes to move the whole world.

“People are counting the minutes for this regime to be over and gone,” a prominent Iranian dissident recently told National Review Online. They may be counting for a long time — but, thanks to the Bush administration, perhaps not as long as they originally thought. Condoleezza Rice has proposed $75 million in funding for Iranian dissident groups and labor unions, television and radio broadcasts into Iran, and fellowships for Iranians to study in the U.S. That number is more than seven times what the administration had already allotted for those purposes in its 2006 budget, and is clearly an effort to undermine the mullahcracy in Tehran. It would take a haruspex to say whether these funds will bring regime change, but given that Iran’s rulers are aggressively Islamist, resistant to diplomatic niceties, and hell-bent on building nuclear weapons — and given that the Iranian people, whom the mullahs have alienated, are markedly pro-democratic and friendly to the West — it seems a wise course.

“Dubious” doesn't quite cover the uniquely sinful nature of David Irving's distinction. He is the world's smartest and most knowledgeable Holocaust denier. But while we may debate what treats lie in store for him in the nether regions of the afterlife, in this life there's little to recommend Austria's decision to put him behind bars for three years, in punishment for something he said 16 years ago to Nazi nostalgists. At the time, Irving claimed there were no gas chambers at the concentration camps where Jews were slaughtered on an industrial scale. He now claims he was “mistaken,” though he failed to admit as much in his unsuccessful 1999 libel suit against Deborah Lipstadt, who accused him of Holocaust denial (and who is herself an opponent of Irving's conviction, and of such prosecutions generally). Austria's desire to have zero tolerance for Holocaust deniers is understandable in light of its history. But a commitment to free speech means, among other things, a willingness to tolerate the expression of views that are factually wrong (even as we correct them) or morally repugnant (even as we condemn them). That is not to say that no limits can legitimately be placed on expression: No society can tolerate speech that incites violence or eventuates the destruction of the political institutions on which freedom depends. But it is not in open societies like Austria that Holocaust denial could gain mainstream currency, but rather in totalitarian states whose governments stoke anti-Semitic sentiments for their political advantage. If Austria wanted to have a zero-tolerance policy that mattered beyond the symbolic, it could revisit its trade agreements with the current rulers of Iran — who are apparently Irving's biggest fans.

Alan Dershowitz is no right-winger. So when even he describes the resignation of Harvard president Larry Summers as “an academic coup d’etat by . . . the die-hard Left of the faculty,” things must be bad. It’s true that Summers got bruised in turf wars with professors and deans, but he probably could have survived those scuffles absent his politics. What are those politics? He opposed calls for Harvard to divest its holdings in companies that do business with Israel; he defended ROTC; and he nudged Cornel West to try his hand at scholarship in addition to rap music. Sounds pretty radical to us. Most controversial was his asking whether innate differences in the cognitive abilities of men and women might account for the low representation of women in math and science. That proposition should be tested with dispassionate scholarship. Instead, the faculty screamed Summers down and gave him a no-confidence vote. To his shame, he apologized rather than defend academic freedom, but on the whole he was a force for good in the ivory tower. We wish him well — and await academe’s next attempt to castrate those who question received notions of veritas.

Long Island University announced the 2005 winners of the George Polk awards for journalism, and the criterion appeared to be whether a journalist’s work had compromised national security. Winners included Dana Priest of the Washington Post — whose reporting exposed the existence of covert CIA interrogation centers in Europe — and Brian Ross of ABC News, whose reporting revealed even more details about those facilities. Given that such journalism is routinely rewarded, CBS News correspondent David Martin deserves all the more praise for declining to air a story on improvised explosive devices after the U.S. military told him it contained information that could help Iraqi insurgents make their attacks more deadly. “When I killed the story . . . it was 5:30 — an hour to air — and I left the Evening News broadcast without a lead story which they had been counting on all day,” he wrote on CBS News Public Eye. “Not a good career move.” Sadly, that observation is right.

No “licensed medical professionals” have volunteered to assist California’s San Quentin Prison in delivering a lethal injection to convicted rapist and murderer Michael Morales. The reason for their delicacy is that depressing the syringe would end, in the words of San Quentin’s spokesman, “the life of a human being.” You can see why doctors would bridle at such an act. “Physicians are healers. We’re not executioners,” Michael Sexton, president of the California Medical Association, told National Public Radio. “To participate in capital punishment, if you’re a physician, is a violation of the most fundamental ethical principles we hold.” What principles? The Hippocratic Oath says that doctors explicitly abjure “deleterious and mischievous” actions including giving “a woman a pessary to produce abortion.” The Geneva Conventions require doctors to “maintain the utmost respect for human life from the time of conception.” Would that all California doctors held to these principles in all circumstances. Alas, in 2000 alone, 236,060 unborn Californians received fatal treatment from licensed physicians.

Do Qaeda terrorists, like the rest of us, have to take time out from their assigned tasks to go and argue with the human-resources department about vacation and benefits? Apparently they do. Two recent studies by U.S. defense analysts have highlighted “the banality of al Qaeda’s day to day operations.” We learn, for example, that the worker bees of jihadist terrorism get 15 days of sick leave a year — very welcome, one imagines, if a jihadist’s bomb-making activities go awry. Eager to confirm these reports, we tried to call our own contacts in al Qaeda, but unfortunately they were all away at a sexual-harassment-awareness seminar.

Young Johnny Weir, 21-year-old winner of three U.S. men’s figure-skating championships, did not do as well as he had hoped at the Winter Olympics, placing only fifth. Our patriotic chagrin at this poor showing is considerably mitigated by the recollection of a recent NBC profile of Weir in which he was shown lounging on a sofa wearing a sweatshirt emblazoned with the letters “CCCP” — the Cyrillic-alphabet version of “USSR.” Challenged on this point of wardrobe sense, Weir replied that wearing a CCCP jacket is “the same as someone wearing a Madonna T-shirt.” Is it, though? We have searched in vain for index references to Madonna in The Black Book of Communism, and beg leave to doubt whether the pop diva can be held responsible for several tens of millions of untimely deaths, as the USSR certainly was. Excuses can be made: Weir was only five when the Evil Empire fell, and was educated in U.S. schools, where teaching about the true nature of Soviet Communism yields priority to lessons in Diversity Issues and the noble deeds of Sacagawea and Harriet Tubman. Still, this is one U.S. medal loss that conservatives will, we feel sure, bear with stoicism.

Soldiers had ties to Bragg

Daza ChaconGonsalvesMontrondNewman

A militant attack that killed four special operations soldiers — three of them from Fort Bragg — was the deadliest in Afghanistan this year.

The attack Monday on a Special Forces patrol killed Staff Sgt. Edwin DazaChacon, 38; Sgt. 1st Class Chad Gonsalves, 31; Sgt. Alberto Montrond, 27; and Staff Sgt. Clinton T. Newman, 26.

The four were patrolling with Afghan soldiers along a valley road north of Deh Rawod in the Uruzgan province when their vehicle was hit by a bomb, the Associated Press reported earlier this week. Insurgent fighters opened fire with rifles and rocket propelled grenades after the blast, said military officials in Afghanistan. Fighters planes and attack helicopters were called in.

DazaChacon and Gonsalves were assigned to the 3rd Battalion of Fort Bragg’s 7th Special Forces Group. Montrond was part of the 7th Special Forces Group Support Battalion. Newman was assigned to the 321st Civil Affairs Brigade, which is based in San Antonio.

Deh Rawod is known to Special Forces soldiers as a hotbed of insurgent activity. It has been the site of repeated clashes between fighters from the former Taliban regime and U.S. forces.

A Special Forces soldier who served in the area said the terrain is rugged and the valleys only have two entry points, which are often mined.

Fighters will often set ambushes at both ends when they know American forces are in the area.

“It is hard to sneak up on anybody,” said the soldier, who requested his name not be used for security reasons.

The area is the birthplace of the Taliban. Many of the movement’s leaders and fighters have tribal bonds to Uruzgan and are hiding out on their home ground, where they can get supplies and shelter.

“This is where it all started, so it has always been popular there,” he said.
Soldiers’ backgrounds

DazaChachon, a native of Diamondbar, Calif, was assigned to the 7th Special Forces Group in April. This was his second stint in the Army. He previously served in the 82nd Airborne Division during Desert Storm. He left the Army and re-enlisted in 2005.

DazaChachon’s family said in a statement released by the U.S. Army Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg that he was committed to his country.

“He was a soldier who unwaveringly placed our country before himself; He was honored to serve with his fellow soldiers, proud to serve in the United States Army, and grateful to be an American,” the family said.

All of the soldiers’ families declined to speak to reporters, instead releasing written statements through the Special Operations Command.

DazaChachon is survived by his mother and two sisters in California and his father, who lives in Colombia.

Gonsalves, DazaChachon’s teammate, was also a native of California. He joined the Army in July 1996 and served in Germany before volunteering for the Special Forces in 2000. Gonsalves completed training and was assigned to the 7th Special Forces Group in 2001 as a weapons sergeant.

Gonsalves is survived by his wife, Julie Gonsalves, his parents and two children. His wife and children live in Spring Lake. His parents, Larry and Marsha Gonsalves, live in Turlock, Calif.

Julie Gonsalves said in a statement that Chad Gonsalves was a proud soldier who loved his family and fellow soldiers.

“We will all miss him and think of him every day,” she said.

Montrond, a Fayetteville native, was also remembered by his family as a selfless soldier.

“He gave his life for this country — protecting our freedoms, our families and America’s way of life. Those with whom he served are willing to do the same,” the family said in a statement.

He is survived by his parents and his wife, Christl, and two children.

Montrond started his Army career in 1998 with the 82nd Airborne Division’s 307th Forward Support Battalion. A supply specialist, Montrond was assigned to the 528th Special Operations Support Battalion in 2002 and the 7th Group Support Battalion in 2004.

Newman, the youngest of the three, was deployed for the first time as a civil affairs soldier. He graduated from the Army Civil Affairs Course at Fort Bragg in 2001 and received orders in 2005 to deploy to Afghanistan with the 321st Civil Affairs Brigade.

“Clint always expressed the utmost respect and pride for his fellow brothers-in-arms,” his family said. “May God bless the troops who serve to keep us safe.”

Newman started his career in Germany in 1997 as a infantryman. He completed his active-duty service in 1999 with the 1st Armor Division in Bad Kruetznach, Germany, but elected to stay in the Army Reserve.

Newman is survived by his mother and stepfather, Deborah and Bill Agnew of Pleasanton, Texas, and his father and stepmother, Fred and Deborah Newman of Big Spring, Texas.

Funerals for the four soldiers will be held at Fort Bragg next week, followed by private services later in the week, the Associated Press reported.

More than 200 soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since U.S. forces helped topple the Taliban in 2001. Included in those are 22 Fort Bragg-based special operations soldiers, 10 of them from the 7th Special Forces Group.

Harry Whittington: 'I'm a Lucky Person'

The lawyer shot by Vice President Dick Cheney during a hunting trip was being discharged from a hospital on Friday and told reporters he was sorry for all the trouble Cheney had faced over the past week.

"We all assume certain risks in what we do, in what activities we pursue," Whittington, 78, said as he stood out the hospital in a suit, his face clearly bruised.

"Accidents do and will happen," Whittington said, "and that's what happened."

Whittington thanked the hospital staff. He also said he was sorry for all the difficulty the vice president and his family had faced. He said the past weekend encompassed "a cloud of misfortune and sadness."

"My family and I are are deeply sorry for everything that Vice President Cheney and his family had to go through this week," Whittington said, appearing emotional in front of television cameras.

Speaking in Wyoming to the state Legislature Friday, Cheney said, "Thankfully, Harry Whittington is on the mend and doing very well."

Paris Hilton May Star as Mother Teresa

Indian filmmaker T. Rajeevnath has been on a search for an actress to play the lead in his upcoming biopic on Mother Teresa. And he's apparently hoping that pillar of virtue Paris Hilton will take the part.

Rajeevnath is an award-winning director, having won India's National Award for Best Direction in 1999 for "Janani."

"Mother Teresa" will be Rajeevnath's eleventh commercial film.

"Although there are several actresses willing to play the role of Mother Teresa, the most widely respected and loved person, the history of the actress who is finally chosen for the role would have to be analyzed thoroughly before she is chosen," Rajeevnath tells the Indo-Asian News Service.

He adds that his "agents in California have contacted Paris Hilton."

Rajeevnath will be coming to the U.S. soon to pick a producer and plans to shoot the movie in West Bengal and several foreign countries.

He also expects to get the blessing of the Pope.

About Hilton, Rajeevnath says he was impressed by her refusal to pose nude in Playboy magazine.

The Left Coast Report wonders if Rajeevnath was equally impressed by Hilton's most ballyhooed piece of cinema - the one that 'accidentally' debuted on the Internet.

Gwyneth Paltrow Attacks American Intelligence

Gwyneth Paltrow can't seem to stop herself. She continues to make disparaging remarks about the nation that gave her the opportunity to attain the degree of wealth and success that she has.

This time around, Paltrow is insulting the intelligence of the American people.

In a recent interview with the U.K Star Magazine, Paltrow compared the brains of the English with those of the Yanks.

You guessed it. Her homies got the short end of the stick.

"Brits are far more intelligent and civilized than Americans," Paltrow opined.

The Left Coast Report guesses that Paltrow has yet to meet Keith Richards, Ozzy Osbourne or Boy George.

Lance Armstrong and Sheryl Crow Break Up Over George W. Bush?

As is often the case when celebrity couples part company, there has been an enormous amount of press coverage concerning the Lance Armstrong/Sheryl Crow split.

But the Star is reporting a possible political cause for the engagement halt. There's speculation that the root of the rift may have to do with President Bush.

No, Crow doesn't have a crush on the prez. Quite the contrary. The singer has been public about her opposition to Bush's policies.

Many of us have a less than fond remembrance of her highly visible, much discussed "War Is Not the Answer" T-shirt.

Well, it turns out that Armstrong is actually a Bush backer. The famed cyclist went biking with the commander in chief last summer.

According to a friend of Crow, Armstrong was a Bush backer to the max.

"Sheryl said Lance didn't just support Bush, - he'd go off and fight if the president asked him to," the friend said.

The Left Coast Report says, Poor Sheryl, how will she ever find someone who shares her hatred of Bush in a place like Hollywood?

Media AWOL When Hillary Clinton Injured a Cop

The press is devoting blanket coverage to Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident on Saturday, where he injured a friend while the two were quail shooting in Texas.

But the media didn't think it was such a big deal five years ago, when Sen. Hillary Clinton injured a police officer who was manning a security post at the Westchester County Airport while she was rushing to a fundraiser.

On Oct. 14, 2001, Clinton's Ford conversion van blew past a security checkpoint manned by Officer Ernest Dymond, who said later that he immediately feared a repeat of the Sept. 11 attacks.

"The van went by me and we ordered them to stop and it continued going and we continued to yell to stop," said Dymond. "I didn't know if we had a terrorist," he told the Washington Times.

The quick-thinking cop grabbed the door of Mrs. Clinton's vehicle and hung on for dear life - banging away on the window until her Secret Service driver stopped.

Injured in the process, Dymond was unable to return to work for weeks.

Two weeks after the accident, NewsMax caught up with Officer Dymond and asked if Mrs. Clinton or anyone from her office had bothered to apologize - or even check to see how he was doing.

"I can tell you, no," the hero cop said.

In contrast, Vice President Cheney was described as "very concerned" about the incident and spent Sunday checking on his injured friend "almost on a minute-by-minute basis," the New York Times said.

Despite the fact that Mrs. Clinton was the leading elected Democrat in the country, the episode received almost no media attention, with only a handful of local news outlets picking up the story.

Actor Gary Sinise: Positive Support for Iraq

The following is an exclusive NewsMax interview with actor Gary Sinise. James Hirsen reports from Hollywood.

"Everybody needs a good day in a war zone." – Actor Gary Sinise

The U.S. media present a "completely opposite" view of what is really happening with American troops in Iraq, highlighting the negative and ignoring the positive, Emmy Award-winning actor Gary Sinise tells NewsMax.

With so many in Hollywood knocking American efforts in the Middle East, Sinise – star of TV's "CSI: NY" – openly shows his support through actions as well as words.

Sinise has entertained troops in Iraq and is a co-founder – along with "Seabiscuit" author Laura Hillenbrand – of Operation Iraqi Children, a program that enables ordinary Americans to provide boys and girls in Iraq with school supply kits distributed by our men and women in uniform.

The actor, who played disabled Vietnam veteran Lieutenant Dan in "Forrest Gump," is also a spokesman for the U.S. Disabled Veterans Life Memorial Foundation. He is also the co-founder of the Lt. Dan Band, a musical ensemble that entertains troops via USO tours. (Sinise plays a mean bass guitar.)

Sinise recently spoke exclusively with NewsMax's James Hirsen, revealing what prompted him to get involved with American troops and veterans, how Iraqis really feel about the U.S. presence in Iraq - and more.

HIRSEN: Did the events of 9/11 change your view of the world?

SINISE: Yes, I think so. It definitely woke me up. I started doing a lot more looking into what was going on. I wanted to know why this happened. I knew that our military was going to start getting fairly active, and I wanted to do something, I wanted to help out. I felt, like a lot of people, very vulnerable in this country, having felt for so many years so secure. And all of a sudden to be attacked on our shores like that was a real slap in the face and a wake-up. I just felt like, well, we're a country at war now, and I wanted to be able to do something to help.

HIRSEN: You use the term "wake-up" to describe the change in attitude that 9/11 created. Why do you think 9/11 didn't change so many other folks in the media and in Hollywood?

SINISE: Well, I don't know anybody who wasn't affected by it; certainly at the time everyone was affected by it. I think there are some people that got more active in terms of volunteerism and feeling like life is much more precious than they had ever thought before and having a feeling of wanting to make the most out of it. That's what happened to me. I'm sure it happened to other people as well. And I'm sure there are many people who went back to sleep, or "it's business as usual," and that's unfortunate because I think the world changed that day. We've all heard that said. I just really believe it.

HIRSEN: What is your view of the way the media are portraying the military effort in Iraq and Afghanistan?

SINISE: It's interesting. I did an interview recently, and after the interview was over I got into a conversation with the journalist who was interviewing me who had been to Iraq as an embedded reporter; you know, fairly supportive of the media. I got into questioning why there seemed to be such an imbalance of reporting coming out of Iraq, and not just an imbalance but an omission or a confusion as to what is really going on and what is the whole truth of what is happening in Iraq, because I get a lot of other types of reports from Iraq that I never get from the media.

I'm in touch with dozens of military service members over there who are working quite diligently on their mission, accomplishing positive things, making progress, and who have a dedication and belief that what they are doing is helping, and therefore their morale is high. Yet in so many media reports we get a completely opposite view of what's happening with our military service members, that they are demoralized or broken or their morale is low and whatnot.

Granted, there probably are service members over there who don't have as high morale as somebody else might. There are a lot of people over there, and they're not going to all feel the same thing. But there's an overwhelming sense from a lot of the people that I deal with who are working cooperatively with the Iraqis on a day-to-day basis. They are making progress, and they're accomplishing positive things. Therefore they feel good about their mission, and some people who have gone would go back again.

I've talked to several people who were back here, who said, "Well, if they want me to go back, I'll go back." That doesn't sound like somebody who's angry about having gone to war, and what they did. ... A lot of people make general statements, big, sweeping, general statements. "The morale is down." That's a big, sweeping, general statement that lumps 150,000 people all into the same boat. "The Army is broken" or "The mission is not going well."

Well, there are day-to-day missions all over that country that are being accomplished by our service members, so it's not one single thing going on. There are people all over the country working with all kinds of things and doing all sorts of projects, combat related and civil affairs related, so there are many stories coming out of Iraq.

HIRSEN: What was it that you told the journalist?

SINISE: My point to this journalist [was] that I was disturbed at the media's willingness ... to go after the military regarding the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. It seemed like they could not put enough of those pictures on television enough times. We saw dozens and dozens and dozens of pictures daily, for two, three weeks, [showing] the lack of integrity of our military.

He [the journalist] said to me: "You know what, I don't care. I think we should put those pictures on every day and all the time, and I have no problem with that."

I said: "I can't disagree with you that it was a horrible misstep by a bunch of dufusses in our military, about 15 of them. But on the other hand I would say, where is the other side of the story? Why, if you're going to be so aggressive with depicting American troops in a negative manner, why not be just as aggressive to show the heroism of our service members?"

I brought up dozens of examples. There's a woman, a major, who is like a superwoman over there, helping kids and delivering kerosene lamps and pulling Iraqis out from under trucks and saving people and doing all these things. You never hear about that kind of stuff. Yet it seems like they can't wait to put bad news on.

I said, "You tell me. Why do we see one side of the story and not the other if there are two sides?" He paused, and then he said, "Well, bad news sells" – and that's all he could say.

HIRSEN: The media will respond somewhat flippantly that bad news is a hallmark of human nature. Do you find that response surprising considering this is a time of war?

SINISE: It seems like every day you could get a new piece of information that could throw you a curve. Personally, I believe that we are in a war, and I think there may be a fundamental difference with people that have varying degrees of conviction about who the enemy is, what the enemy's intentions are, whether we are actually in a war or not, who brought the war on, us or them. And there are always differing opinions about that.

Some people might not actually view this as a war. It's not like, the armada is coming; we can see it on the horizon; let's load the guns and defend the coastline. We can't do that anymore. There is an ideology out there that we have identified, that is threatening and requires response. Certainly we know that. But we're not fighting any particular country. We're fighting, basically, al-Qaida in Iraq now, and former Baathists of the Saddam Hussein regime.

There are a lot of people who didn't believe we should go to Iraq in the first place, so they're not going to view it as a war. And if they view it as a war, they view it as an illegal war, and they're not going to support it; therefore, they're not going to support the military members who are fighting it.

Personally, I believe that we are in a war. We are a country that's vulnerable. We saw that on Sept. 11.

There's no question in my mind that, given the opportunity to put a nuke in a suitcase, there are millions of people, not thousands but millions, who would dedicate themselves to detonating that nuke in one of our cities. I have no doubt in my mind. I saw it on Sept. 11. If they could have killed 300,000 instead of 3,000, they would have been all the happier about that. There's no question in my mind that that is a reality and that it has to be; that we will need our service members for many years to come and that we want to support them.

We're going to need these volunteers. That's why I get out there and support them. I believe there is an enemy and that the service members that we have are our defenders.

HIRSEN: You talk to servicemen and women regularly. Have they indicated that they're affected by the coverage of the war by the media?

SINISE: I have had some people mention it in terms of why don't they show any of the positive things that we're doing over here. I had one guy who delivered school supplies. That day they had a huge celebration in the village. It was a very cooperative day for everybody, and that to him was a big story. That was his story for the day. Instead he got back to the base and turned on the news and it was more of the same negative stuff.

It is big news every time bombs go off, and it's big news when our guys get hurt or killed. Those stories deserve to be told. But they [soldiers] might have been killed on a day when they had just accomplished some huge things and helped out a lot of people, and they would, I am sure, like that story to be told as well.

HIRSEN: Part of this is your story. You've co-founded Operation Iraqi Children. You're the national spokesman for the U.S. Disabled Veterans Life Memorial Foundation. You've been involved with veterans for a long time, and people associate you with the military, with your role as Lt. Dan in "Forrest Gump." What was it that prompted your involvement and passion for veterans' causes?

SINISE: Years ago I was involved with a group of Vietnam veterans. I had worked on some theater material, a play where I got very involved with the Vietnam veterans that the play was portraying, and that was kind of a wake-up as well.

HIRSEN: Operation Iraqi Children (http://www.operationiraqichildren.org/) is such a wonderful concept. We have many readers who would like to show their support for the military. Why do you think that this is a good way for people to do that?

SINISE: Well, Jim, I've tried to, I've been very concerned and tried to keep Operation Iraqi Children as neutral a program as possible. I don't really go out and talk about my political views. I don't do a lot of criticizing of things, banging, slamming people, because Operation Iraqi Children, no matter what my political views are or anything like that, that's not what this program is.

I believe that these kids are the future of Iraq, and so many in that part of the world have been raised to think bad things about Americans or bad things about Western culture.

I'm actually in touch with Iraqis over there who are totally supportive and totally behind the United States being there and the coalition being there, and completely appreciative of the possibilities that they have now because of what has happened in the last two or three years.

Will Europe become Eurabia?

Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder." — Arnold Toynbee
Mona Charen

As Danish embassies and European Union offices smolder in Beirut, Damascus, Gaza and Tehran — the result of a junior varsity jihad — the time could not be more apt for Bruce Bawer's "While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within," due out at the end of this month. Bawer is a gay American with a flair for languages who moved to Europe in 1999 to escape what he perceived to be the narrow-mindedness of the Christian right in America.

The move changed him. It also afforded a front row seat at the clash of civilizations now flaring into flames. If American Christian conservatives seemed intolerant to Bawer, they were cream puffs in comparison with the Islamofascists who are multiplying in Europe. Theo van Gogh produced a film about the mistreatment of women in the Islamic community and was assassinated by an unrepentant Islamist who defiantly told the dead man's mother, "I cannot feel for you because I believe you are an infidel." A rumor swept the Muslim world that American soldiers in Guantanamo flushed the Koran down a toilet, and violence erupted worldwide. European newspapers published cartoons insulting to Mohammad, and death threats poured in, embassies were set ablaze, and red-faced Muslims now vow jihad throughout the world.

The Muslim world clearly is not composed solely of murderous fanatics — but only the most self-deluded would deny that the umma is under the sway of its most radical, medieval and intolerant members. It is they who have the wind at their backs at this moment of history. Forty percent of Britain's Muslims hold a favorable view of Osama bin Laden. Hopeful Westerners continue to call for moderate Muslims to speak up. But, as Bawer asks, "[W]here were the moderate Muslims? British Muslims seemed sincerely to deplore the London attacks. But though hundreds of thousands of them had marched in protest against the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, 7/7 occasioned no sizable Muslim protest demonstration against Islamic terror . . . if that silent majority existed at all, it had to be one of the most silent majorities ever. It had remained silent after 9/11, Madrid, Beslan, and van Gogh's murder."

Europe is a beacon for Arab and Muslim immigrants, who flock to the freedom, comfort and convenience available in Western nations. There is no corresponding emigration from Europe to the Islamic world. Immigrants seek a better life, which is abundantly available, particularly in light of Europe's generous welfare benefits. But Europe does not assimilate its Muslim immigrants and does not wish to. Norway refers to its Muslim population as the "colorful community" and prides itself on keeping its "colorful" members separate from mainstream Norwegian society (in the name of multiculturalism, of course). But if a Muslim were to attempt to become an ordinary Norwegian (or Swede or Swiss or Frenchman), he would be met with rigid resistance. Multicultural cant thus covers a multitude of ethnocentric sins.

Many Muslim immigrants, Bawer argues, resist absorption as well, regarding Western society as fundamentally corrupt and unworthy. They want to live in Europe and reap the benefit of the civilization Christianity, rationalism and enlightenment have created — but they despise it and hope to destroy it.

Into this boiling cauldron (recall the October 2005 riots in France) insert demography. Muslim families have multiple children, and European families are failing to have babies at even replacement levels. Historian Bernard Lewis has predicted that Europe will be majority Muslim by the end of this century "at the very latest." In Stockholm, Muslim teenagers can be seen wearing a T-shirt that says "2030 — then we take over."

The heart of Bawer's book is not to replow familiar demographic ground, but to probe the political, moral and psychological aspects of Europe's response to this existential threat. The depressing answer, all too often, is that they capitulate. Bawer recounts how Amsterdam police, responding to a complaint by Muslims, dismantled a street mural erected on the site of van Gogh's murder that said "Thou Shalt Not Kill." Some leftist academics in Norway have suggested establishing sharia courts for Muslim citizens. Britain's Channel 4 canceled a documentary about abuse of girls in the Muslim community because the police cautioned that it might "increase community tension."

That self-censorship was exactly what the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten was attempting to expose with its cartoons. That impulse — to assert the value of free speech despite threats and violence — is the best evidence to surface in quite some time that there is some life spirit left in sagging old Europe.

The Budget: An Explainer

Tony Snow

For those of you bored or bemused by the federal budget, here's a word of encouragement. Everyone in Washington is bored, too — not because people here don't care about the expenditure of $2.6 trillion, but because most veterans of the political process understand that the early stages of political combat involve nothing more than cheesy political stagecraft. A president drafts a budget and sells it with blue-sky propaganda, while opponents mount their soap boxes and engage in old-fashioned hot-air chiliasm.

When members of Congress set about to spend your money (and waste considerable portions in the process), they begin by drafting a budget resolution. This has exactly as much binding authority as a New Year's resolution, and contains every bit as much sincerity. Within the next few weeks, members of Congress will draw up such a plan. It will set forth general goals for spending money, but deliberately will ignore at least $100 billion worth of outlays for combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and for pork-barrel appropriations attached to the "invisible" spending bill, which is called an "emergency supplemental budget resolution."

Despite all the talk about "deep cuts" in the president's budget, such things are few and far between. Nearly 80 percent of the federal budget right now has been spoken for already. Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security gobble up more than half the free cash. Defense claims another large chunk, leaving Congress to tinker with the remaining 17 percent. After Congress has finished "deep cutting" the budget, expenditures will grow by at least 3.6 percent, and probably more than 5 percent. Only in Washington could someone spend an additional $125 billion a year and call it "deep cuts."

Economists have an explanation for this. They call it "rent seeking." Think of a politician's soul as an apartment. Think of lobbyists as renters. Each year, the renters show up, waving wads of cash. Politicians survey the throng. The winning contestants get to occupy the apartments on a one-year lease. It's a great deal for lobbyists: They spend millions and take home billions. It's not such a good deal for you or me, because we pay the billions and, if we use the goods and services promoted by the lobbyists, we pay the millions, too.

Worst of all, all this money changes hands for the purpose of maintaining a government that became obsolete decades ago. The Social Security system is a New Deal dinosaur. So are many of our regulatory agencies. Medicare and Medicaid bring us to the Mesozoic era of liberalism, but they also have run their course.

If you want to understand how little sense our system of government makes, walk down the cereal aisle at your local grocery store. Count how many brands you can buy. Then ask yourself: If I have this many options in cereal, why don't I have any options when it comes to really important stuff that every single American needs — health care and retirement security? Why must we deal with Ponzi-scheme remedies that clean out our wallets without giving us our money's worth?

Do we really believe our interests are best served by programs designed when Americans were driving Model A automobiles, where most washing machines had wringers, where refrigerators were scarce, interstates were nonexistent and air-conditioning a gewgaw reserved for futuristic exhibits at the World's Fair?

This year's budget fight promises to be more interesting than most because the president has proposed a couple of ideas that could unmask forever the idiocy of Big Government. He wants to privatize a small portion of Social Security and do the same with an eensy bit of the Medicare and Medicaid bring us to the Mesozoic era of liberalism, but they also have run their course.

If you want to understand how little sense our system of government makes, walk down the cereal aisle at your local grocery store. Count how many brands you can buy. Then ask yourself: If I have this many options in cereal, why don't I have any options when it comes to really important stuff that every single American needs — health care and retirement security? Why must we deal with Ponzi-scheme remedies that clean out our wallets without giving us our money's worth?

Do we really believe our interests are best served by programs designed when Americans were driving Model A automobiles, where most washing machines had wringers, where refrigerators were scarce, interstates were nonexistent and air-conditioning a gewgaw reserved for futuristic exhibits at the World's Fair?

This year's budget fight promises to be more interesting than most because the president has proposed a couple of ideas that could unmask forever the idiocy of Big Government. He wants to privatize a small portion of Social Security and do the same with an eensy bit of the Medicare program. He hopes people will discover that they get more bang for their bucks when they manage their money than they get when somebody else gets to spend it. This is especially true because there is no incentive for the spender to economize. The people using your cash don't know you. They don't feel guilty if they waste your money. In fact, they actually get in trouble if they fail to use the cash. This is why most federal agencies go on shopping sprees during the final days of the fiscal year. They know that if they don't spend every penny, someone will cut them back.

The president's opponents, many of whom call Uncle Sam the world's most prolific dispenser of compassion, know that a real look under the hood of government would be enough to persuade voters to abandon New Deal liberalism forever. This explains why "Dinocrats" are so sore at George W. Bush, and fighting him tooth and nail.

But more of that some other time. The moral for this week is simple: Don't take too seriously what you are reading and hearing right now about the budget. It's mostly for show. The real battles will come soon enough. When they do, remember the analogy of the cereal aisle and ask yourself: Why is society so good at providing choco-blaster puffs and so bad at providing government services that don't make me feel like an insignificant, dust-engorged little mite?

'A Place Apart'

Scientist Bruce Beehler recounts his trip to one of the last untouched areas in the world, where he and his team discovered 39 new species.
By Fred Guterl, Newsweek

Bruce Beehler is one of only a few people lucky enough to have witnessed untouched wilderness. A vice president for Conservation International, he spent 24 years planning a trip to a remote cloud forest in the Foja Mountains in Papua, New Guinea. His team of Indonesian, American and Australian scientists made the trip in December and discovered 39 new species of animals and plants. Beehler spoke with NEWSWEEK's Fred Guterl about the trip. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: Are you surprised by all the excitement over your trip?
Beehler: I'm mystified, a little bit. Usually what I do doesn't receive much recognition. It's a bit of a treat.

I understand that Jared Diamond, the author and geographer, inspired the trip.
All the research I've done in my life has been following the lead of Jared's work. He was the first non-indigenous person to go up into this mountain range in 1979. He discovered the bowerbird, which lives only there. When Jared came back in 1981, we began planning this trip.

What took you so long?
Western New Guinea has been a place apart. Because there's been a low-level separatist movement there, the government hasn't liked having people snooping around. It's very difficult to get permission to do full blown research there. We'd been close three or four times, but we never got the permission. The stars aligned in late 2005. The science people at the Indonesian Institute of Science said, `Yeah, OK, let's do it.' We ran around and found some money and put together a team very rapidly of Indonesian and international scientists. And it just happened.

How did you manage the logistics?
It was a leap of faith. We chartered a plane [in Jayapura], flew out to a little airstrip called Kwerba, a lowland jungle right next to the mountain range. We had to twist the arm of a group called Helimission, which provides helicopter support for missionaries. They agreed very kindly to take us to the top of the mountain and pick us up 15 days later.

How did you know where to land?
I had flown over the mountain range in a little Cessna and saw what looked to me like a dried lake bed, about [1,000 feet] across—a tiny spot in that big forest—and got a GPS coordinate for it. So I gave that to the helicopter pilot. It turned out to be a sphagnum bog, like you see in Maine. Some parts were more solid than others. Every minute it got more cloudy. If with wind wasn't blowing up one side it was blowing up the other. And it was very humid, so as the air rises it becomes clouds. This place was cloud city.

Sounds like fun.
Until we landed up at that little bog, nobody believed we were going to get there. It didn't seem possible that everything was going to work out. When the helicopter got up there, the mountains were covered with clouds. Thank God for GPS. The helicopter pilot was able to sort of play around the clouds and find his way in. There was only one place we could land. When he came to pick us up—same thing. We couldn't leave. Three times we went up into the clouds and had to come back because the pilot couldn't see anything. On the third try the pilot said, “I see a crack,” and we went into it, and for five minutes we were lost. My hands were gripping, I was sweating. He was one cool character. After about five minutes he radioed back to the base and said, “I'm going to have to go back, I can't get it.” And just as he turned, he saw an opening [in the clouds] and he ran for it and got in. And then the world opened up for us and we were OK.

How long were you up there?
Fifteen days—not nearly long enough. But those were the only days for the helicopter company. At dawn it would be beautiful and clear, and by 8:15 it was clouded in. By 10 o'clock it was raining. We worked day and night. The herpetologists were out from dusk to dawn. I was getting up early in the morning [to look at birds]. The butterfly person had 10 or 15 minutes a day. Butterflies really don't like rain and fog, so in a place like this, they wait for a little bit of sun and dance around. He had a miserable time. But he got four new species. The herpetologists also had a tough time. The frogs tend to be forest dwelling. They become active when it's misty and rainy, so if it doesn't rain at dusk or dawn, they sort of get bored and go back to sleep.

What did you do?
We tried to enumerate what's there. Every day I kept a list of what [birds] were there. I 'd walk the few trails we had, or wander around in the bushes, and record the bird songs. I also had a mist net—like an oversized badminton net. I would put it up where birds might be flying in the forest, and check it every hour. If there are birds in it, you put them in a bag, take them back to camp, measure them and let them go. Some birds are very secretive and don't make much noise. There's nothing more pleasurable to a field ornithologist than being out in the field and recording songs. When this new Honey Eater popped up at the edge of the bog, I could tell from 50 feet that it was a new species.

What's the best thing about this area?
There are so many endemic species in a little area. It's big enough for evolution to take place. That's the exciting take-home point. Jared had gotten indications of that, but now we know there are 39-plus species. Here's one of those special places on the globe that is untrailed, unroaded, unpeopled. There aren't many places like that anymore. We have wilderness areas, but there are roads in them, cattle in them, sometimes mining going on. This is an area that we really haven't trashed. These places are becoming precious, as benchmarks for what the world used to be like.

Are you planning to go back?
We're talking about a follow-up expedition, hopefully this year. There's a lot to do back there. I'm probably not going my self. I'll give some other scientist a chance to go.

Maureen Dowd: Hillary Clinton 'Not Angry Enough'

Bush-bashing New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd is warning that Hillary Clinton may not turn out to be her party's next presidential nominee unless she finds a way to combat charges that she's "too angry."

But instead of calming down, the flame-haired scribe suggests bizarrely that Mrs. Clinton needs to lose her temper more often in public.

"Hillary's problem isn't that she's angry," insists Dowd in her Tuesday column. "It's that she's not angry enough."

The tart-tongued Timeswoman complains: "From Iraq to Katrina and the assault on the Constitution, from Schiavo to Alito and N.S.A. snooping to Congressional corruption, Hillary has failed to lead in voicing her outrage."

Chatting with radioman Don Imus Tuesday morning, Dowd said Mrs. Clinton's leadership meltdown may cost her the 2008 presidential nomination.

"It's just interesting what's happening in the Democratic Party in the last few weeks," she declared. "I think people are realizing that she's not the inevitable candidate."

Democrats are starting to fear "that it would be kind of a lemming situation if they just go with her," Dowd said.

And while GOP claims that Hillary is too angry are unfair, the Times scribe acknowledged they have her boxed in.

"Republicans are doing this really blatantly misogynistic thing and painting her as 'Angry Woman' because then that puts her in a box," Dowd told Imus. "Because if she criticizes [Bush] she's a shrew, you know. And if she doesn't she's timid and girlie."

Despite her defense, Dowd blasted Hillary for nodding along as she stood beside her husband as he spoke at Coretta Scott King's funeral on Tuesday.

"She shouldn't have been up there," the Timeswoman said. "That bobbleheaded thing was annoying."

Sen. Hillary Clinton: GOP 'Playing the Fear Card'

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday accused Republicans of "playing the fear card" of terrorism to win elections and said Democrats cannot keep quiet if they want to win in November.

The New York Democrat, facing re-election this year and considered a potential White House candidate in 2008, said Republicans won the past two elections on the issue of national security and "they're doing it to us again."

She said a speech by presidential adviser Karl Rove two weeks ago showed the GOP election message is: "All we've got is fear and we're going to keep playing the fear card."

In that speech, Rove suggested Republicans can prevail in 2006 by showing Democrats had undermined terrorism-fighting efforts by questioning Bush's authority to allow wiretapping without getting court approval first.

Clinton said, at a convention of United Auto Workers, that Democrats should not be afraid to question Bush's handling of the war.

"I take a backseat to nobody when it comes to fighting terrorism and standing up for national homeland security," she said.

Referring to fugitive al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, Clinton said, "You cannot explain to me why we have not captured or killed the tallest man in Afghanistan."

She added, "Since when has it been part of American patriotism to keep our mouths shut?"

White House spokesman Ken Lisaius responded: "It sounds like from reports that the political season is certainly starting early for some."

President Bush, he said, wants to address rising health costs, energy costs and the war in Iraq in a bipartisan way "and keep the political bomb-throwing to a minimum."

Clinton also said the Bush administration was allowing U.S. manufacturing to wither away and that the only way for workers to protect those jobs was by electing Democrats.

She was cheered by the auto workers, a few of whom shouted, "Hillary for president."

The bulk of her 30-minute speech focused on economic issues and the troubled U.S. auto industry, which is losing market share to foreign manufacturers and bracing for tens of thousands of layoffs.

Clinton said the administration has not done enough to keep America globally competitive. She urged a new long-term effort by the government and private oil companies to fund research and development, particularly in energy-saving technologies.

Speaking to an enthusiastic Democratic crowd that increasingly sees jobs moving overseas, Clinton said Thailand should not be granted access to the U.S. auto market.

The U.S. is in negotiations with Thailand on a trade pact that might eliminate or reduce a 25 percent tariff on trucks made there.

A Thousand Words

A picture is worth a thousand words, but you never expect it to fuel riots. Especially five months after they were printed.

Below you will find the original cartoons from Jyllands-Posten.

It took a while to find them. I got these from:
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6337/2188/1600/kavalkade.jpg

If your interested in hisorical paintings of the Prophet Mohammad check this site out: http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

The original article page in Jyllands-Posten and The 12 Drawings

Face of Mohammad

Life of a Cartoonist

Censorship

Crescent of Muhammed

Desert Muhammed

Glory of Mohammad

Line-up

Preaching Jihad

PR Stunt

Schoolboy Muhammed

Under the Thumb

Out Of Virgins

A thousand words

A picture is worth a thousand words, but you never expect it to fuel riots. Especially five months after they were printed.

Below you will find the original cartoons from Jyllands-Posten.

It took a while to find them. I got these from:
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6337/2188/1600/kavalkade.jpg

If your interested in hisorical paintings of the Prophet Mohammad check this site out: http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

A thousand words

A picture is worth a thousand words, but you never expect it to fuel riots. Especially five months after they were printed.

Below you will find the original cartoons from Jyllands-Posten.

It took a while to find them. I got these from:
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6337/2188/1600/kavalkade.jpg

If your interested in hisorical paintings of the Prophet Mohammad check this site out: http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

Musicians Union Seeks Truth in Lip-Synch Labeling

Ashlee Simpson and Milli Vanilli best beware; The U.K. musicians union is going after singers who, when they appear to be performing, are really engaging in lip-synching.

Reuters reports that the union wants promoters, producers and artists to label lip-synched performances on television or in live concerts.

"Stand up and be honest about it. We won't knock you for using recordings," said union spokesman Keith Ames.

If the union gets its way, a lip-synching logo will be used to alert the public. Apparently, the plan is to flash the logo up on a television screen or place it on concert tickets.

Not too long ago, while giving an acceptance speech for a song-writing award, eccentric veteran rocker Elton John attacked Madonna over the lip-synching practice. "Anyone who lip-synchs in public on stage when you pay 75 pounds to see them should be shot," John said.

Madonna has denied engaging in the feigned lip motion.

The Left Coast Report believes that when the mainstream media talking heads start echoing each other's phrases, we sure could use a logo to alert us to "lib" synching.

Tony Curtis Blasts 'Brokeback Mountain'

The current batch of Oscar nominations underscores the notion that now more than ever Hollywood is out of touch with America.

The simple fact that twice as many people have seen the documentary "March of the Penguins" than have seen any of the five nominations for Best Picture ("Brokeback Mountain," "Crash," "Capote," "Munich" and "Good Night, and Good Luck") drives the point home.

The combined audience total for all of the Best Picture nominations is less than the number of moviegoers who flocked to see "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe."

Another indication of the growing chasm between Hollywood and the rest of the universe is the scarcity of bona fide movie stars; those who enjoy that special combination of box office success and larger-than-life personas.

Long associated with the term "movie star" is the name of Jamie Lee Curtis's dad, Tony Curtis.

Tony recently told Fox News's Bill McCuddy that he hadn't yet seen "Brokeback Mountain" and had no intention of doing so. He claims that other Academy members feel similarly.

"This picture is not as important as we make it. It's nothing unique. The only thing unique about it is they put it on the screen. And they make 'em [gay] cowboys."

Curtis reminded folks that his contemporaries wouldn't have cared for the highly acclaimed Best Picture nominee. "Howard Hughes and John Wayne wouldn't like it," Curtis said.

Curtis's favorite flick of 2005 is one that, judging by the box office take, a lot of Americans would place on their list as well: "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire."

The Left Coast Report points out that while Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon may have donned women's clothing for their film roles, at least they shaved their legs for the part.

Hillary Clinton Launches Charm Offensive

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton launched a charm offensive on Monday in a bid to counter charges from a top Republican that she sounds too angry to get elected president.

In a half hour news conference at a Head Start classroom in Manhattan, Mrs. Clinton took great pains to avoid sounding shrill as she urged the GOP to worry instead about "these devastating budget cuts [and] the confusion and bureaucratic nightmare in the prescription drug benefit."

The New York Times noted that Mrs. Clinton "spoke in even tones" to reporters and used "temperate phrases" as she "conveyed her displeasure at Mr. Bush's budget priorities."

The performance stood in marked contrast to attacks delivered by Hillary last week, where she accused the White House in harsh tones of deliberately delaying aid to Hurricane Katrina victims and charged that administration officials covered-up the health risks posed by contaminated air at Ground Zero in the days after the 9/11 attacks.

On Sunday, Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman told ABC's "This Week," "Hillary Clinton seems to have a lot of anger."

"When you think of the level of anger, I'm not sure it's what Americans want" in a president, he added.

The Times noted that the comments "amount to a new line of attack by Republicans looking toward 2008" - and that Mrs. Clinton seemed "well aware of Mr. Mehlman's remarks" as she spoke to the press on Monday.

If true, it's an attack for which the GOP has much ammunition.

Mrs. Clinton's outburst during a 2003 Connecticut fundraiser, for instance, is already one of the most replayed soundbytes on talk radio, helping to cement her "Shrillary" image with critics.

"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic," she bellowed to the crowd.

Then, racheting up her nails-across-the-blackboard monotone by several decibels, Mrs. Clinton railed: "And we should stand up and say we are Americans, and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration!”

Reacting at the time to the Mrs. Clinton's tirade, former White House insider Dick Morris observed: "She sounds like she's talking to Bill."

Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton Blast Bush at King Service

The Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton lambasted President Bush Monday night at a memorial service in Atlanta for Coretta Scott King, faulting him for the Iraq war and for ignoring the plight of black people.

The two Democratic Party civil rights leaders "galvanized the crowd" during a three-hour service at the city's famed Ebenezer Baptist Church, as they blasted government figures like Bush for trying to make the King legacy their own, the Associated Press said.

"We can't let them take her from us and reduce her to their trophy and not our freedom fighter," Jackson railed.

"This is not a celebrity funeral," added Sharpton. "This is us coming to say thank you to a woman who took a bullet in her husband and kept on marching."

The dueling reverends excoriated Bush for the Hurricane Katrina disaster and for diverting the nation's resources to the Iraq war.

President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush attended Mrs. King's funeral on Tuesday, along with former first couple Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Steelers Win Fifth Super Bowl Title

The Pittsburgh Steelers finally gave coach Bill Cowher some Super Bowl satisfaction. Moments after the Rolling Stones rocked a Ford Field filled with Terrible Towels, Willie Parker broke a record 75-yard touchdown run, sparking Pittsburgh's 21-10 victory Sunday over the Seattle Seahawks.

Not only did the Steelers earn that elusive fifth championship ring and their first since 1980, but they completed a magic Bus ride that made Jerome Bettis' homecoming — and likely farewell — a success.

And they provided sweet validation for Cowher with a title in his 14th season as their coach, the longest tenure in the NFL.

As a sixth seed, no less.

Maybe their inspiration came when Mick Jagger sang a rousing rendition of "Satisfaction" at halftime.

They certainly got plenty of help from the Seahawks, too. Seattle was plagued by penalties, drops, poor clock management and a critical fourth-quarter interception of Matt Hasselbeck just when the NFC champions seemed ready to take the lead.

Instead, Pittsburgh (15-5) got the clinching score with the kind of trickery that has carried it through an eight-game winning streak.

Versatile wide receiver Antwaan Randle El, a quarterback in college, took a handoff from Parker, sprinted right and threw perfectly to Hines Ward for a 43-yard TD with 9:04 remaining.

Bettis' role was minimal in what might be the final game for the NFL's No. 5 career rusher.

So was quarterback Ben Roethlisberger's impact — the most noteworthy play for the youngest quarterback to win a Super Bowl was a horrid pass that Kelly Herndon of the Seahawks (15-4) returned a record 76 yards.

That set up the Seahawks' only touchdown, a 16-yard pass to Jerramy Stevens — Joey Porter, his verbal sparring partner all week, was nowhere in sight.

But with Parker's burst and Seattle's self-destructive tendencies, the Steelers completed their postseason march through the league's top four teams.