Printer Friendly
July
Don’t get caught flat-footed in front of the press! Below is a quick rundown of today’s “must reads.” – John T. Doolittle, House Republican Conference Secretary
The Morning Murmur – Wednesday, July
19,
20062, 2006
1. Hezbollah is Targeting U.S. - New York Post
Hezbollah yesterday warned the United States: You're next on our hit list.
Iranian Hezbollah's spokesman boasted that the group has trained 2,000
volunteers who are ready to take aim at the United States.
2. Now isn't the time for restraint - USA Today Op-ed
When compared with U.S. history lessons, the advice of the G-8 industrial
nations to Israel is wrong. We'd never accept such advice for ourselves. The
Israelis should not accept it for the same reasons: It would not end the
threat.
3. Arab world's awakening brings hope - New York Daily News
Amid the carnage in the Mideast, there is hope. Like a ray of sunshine
piercing the darkness, some Muslims are beginning to awaken to the danger of
the Islamic extremists in their ranks. This awakening is even spreading to
Iraq.
4. Balance Science, Ethics - USA Today Op-ed
In formulating his policy on federal funding for embryonic stem cell
research, President Bush considered the needs of science and ethics and
chose a balanced approach that would advance both.
5. Senate immigration bill 'far worse' than in '86 - Washington Times
The House Judiciary
Committee was told yesterday that in addition to providing legalization to
about four times as many illegal aliens as did the 1986 Immigration Reform
and Control Act (IRCA), the Senate bill also repeats mistakes made 20 years
ago that will render the border-enforcement provisions and employer
sanctions meaningless.
For previous issues of the Morning Murmur, go to www.GOPsecretary.gov
FULL ARTICLES BELOW:
1. Hezbollah is Targeting U.S. - New York
Post
By URI DAN, With Post Wire Services
July 19, 2006 -- JERUSALEM - Hezbollah yesterday warned the United States:
You're next on our hit list.
The threat against U.S. interests came as the FBI revealed it is searching
for Hezbollah terrorist agents operating on American soil.
Iranian Hezbollah's spokesman, Mojtaba Bigdeli, boasted that the group has
trained 2,000 volunteers who are ready to take aim at the United States.
"They have been trained and they can become fully armed. We are ready to
dispatch them to every corner of the world to jeopardize Israel and
America's interests," Bigdeli said.
"If America wants to ignite World War III . . . we welcome it," he added.
Amid the escalating threats and the week-old war in the Middle East, federal
law-enforcement officials have stepped up their efforts to root out sleeper
agents in the United States.
"Because of the heightened difficulties surrounding U.S.-Iranian relations,
the FBI has increased its focus on Hezbollah," said FBI spokesman Paul
Bresson in Washington. "Those investigations relate particularly to the
potential presence of Hezbollah members on U.S. soil."
There is no sign of an imminent attack, he added.
Meanwhile in Israel, military officials said they need another two weeks to
finish off Hezbollah, as the Iran-backed terrorists fired more than 100
rockets and missiles into northern Israel.
But they may have to wrap things up in only one week, according to a report
in the British paper The Guardian.
The United States has given Israel a one-week window to inflict damage on
the terror group before pushing for a cease-fire, the paper says, citing
British, European and Israeli sources.
Syria has started to rearm the thinning Hezbollah arsenal - but Israel
yesterday destroyed four trucks packed with missiles coming into Lebanon
from its eastern neighbor yesterday, officials said.
The terror thugs desperately needed the new supplies because "40 to 60
percent of Hezbollah's operational capability is destroyed," sources said.
In other developments:
* Israeli warplanes killed 31 people, including 11 soldiers, at an army
barracks east of Beirut yesterday. Another strike, early this morning,
leveled 10 houses in the village of Srifa, killing at least 10.
* Some Israeli ground troops crossed into southern Lebanon early this
morning to search for tunnels and weapons in what military officials called
"restrictive attacks."
* Hezbollah's Katyusha rockets continued to rain down on Haifa and more than
a dozen other northern Israeli towns. A 30-year-old father was killed as he
led his daughter into a bomb shelter in Nahariya, and more than 20 other
Israelis were injured elsewhere.
* President Bush said he suspects Syria is trying to re-establish its
domination of Lebanon after being kicked out last year.
"It's in our interest for Syria to stay out of Lebanon and for [Lebanon's]
government to survive," Bush said in Washington.
* Israel continued its campaign in Gaza, moving tanks into a refugee camp
early this morning under cover of machine gun fire. Five Israeli soldiers
were wounded, two seriously, and at least two Hamas gunmen were killed in
the clash.
* Hundreds of Americans and Europeans continued to flee Lebanon. About 200
Americans gathered near the heavily guarded U.S. Embassy compound early this
morning, waiting to be put on a ship. The State Department yesterday dropped
a controversial plan to ask Americans to pay for some evacuations.
* Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert charged that Hezbollah began the latest
crisis - by abducting two Israeli soldiers a week ago - in an effort to
divert attention from Iran's nuclear-arms effort.
"Unfortunately, this Iranian trick succeeded," Olmert said.
Iran has supplied Hezbollah with much of its firepower, including long-range
Zelzal missiles capable of hitting targets 120 miles away, officials said.
They said Iran transferred the Zelzals to Lebanon 18 months ago.
In the last two days, Israeli jets managed to blow up several Zelzals.
But Hezbollah still has a few Zelzals "and hundreds" of Syrian-made Sajar
missiles with a range of 50 miles, a defense source said.
Israeli aircraft dropped leaflets over southern Lebanon mocking Hezbollah's
leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, who hasn't been seen in five days.
"Where are you hiding?" the fliers asked.
Meanwhile, hundreds of anti-Israeli protesters denounced the campaigns in
Lebanon and Gaza yesterday outside Israel's Midtown consulate.
"What Israel is doing goes against every standard of human decency," said
Ben Davis, 27, of Brooklyn.
http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/hezbollah_is_targeting_u_s__worldnews_uri_dan__with_post_wire_services.htm
2. Now isn't the time for restraint -
USA Today Op-ed
Updated 7/18/2006 11:52 PM ET
By Newt Gingrich
Imagine that this morning 50 missiles were launched from Cuba and exploded
in Miami. In addition to buildings and homes being destroyed, scores of
Americans were being killed. Now imagine our allies responded by saying
publicly that we must not be too aggressive in protecting our citizens and
that America must use the utmost restraint.
Our history shows us that we, as Americans, would reject such bad advice.
After all, we have never reacted to a direct attack on our soil with any
restraint. Every time America has been attacked by an enemy, we set about
defeating it and ending the threat.
This was true of Pearl Harbor in World War II, after which we replaced the
imperial Japanese government. The regimes of Nazi Germany and fascist Italy
met the same demise. Without actually being attacked, President Kennedy
risked nuclear war to eliminate the threat of Soviet missiles in Cuba. After
the 9/11 attacks, we replaced the Taliban in Afghanistan once it became
known that they were providing refuge for the al-Qaeda terrorists
responsible for the attack. This is our history as Americans. We believe
that our government has a duty to protect us.
When compared with U.S. history lessons, the advice of the Group of Eight
industrial nations to Israel is wrong. The communiqué says the No. 1
priority is a cease-fire that would effectively leave Hezbollah in
possession of all its rockets. We'd never accept such advice for ourselves.
The Israelis should not accept it for the same reasons: It would not end the
threat.
Israel, a fellow democracy, has the same duty and right to protect its
citizens from enemy attack. It is doing so while making every effort to
avoid civilian casualties. The Israeli response is wholly justified based on
a history where Israeli concessions to the Iran-Syria-Hezbollah-Hamas
terrorist alliance have consistently resulted in their enemies preparing for
the next attack. The terrorists have been attacking with increased
capability, brutality and violence aimed at civilians. This is only the
latest cycle in an ongoing 58-year campaign to destroy Israel.
In 2000, the Israelis withdrew from southern Lebanon, creating an
opportunity for peace. Instead of peace, for six years Iran, Syria and
Hezbollah moved more than 10,000 missiles into the vacated area. More
recently, the Israelis withdrew from Gaza to provide another circumstance
for peace and an opportunity for a self-governing Palestinian people to work
toward creating a place of prosperity, but instead Hamas created a place of
terror. Now Israel is the target of more than 1,000 missiles from both Gaza
and southern Lebanon in the past week alone.
Iranian involvement is not in question. There are at least 100 Iranian
guards in southern Lebanon. Apparently, it was an Iranian missile fired with
Iranian know-how that hit an Israeli warship. Because Hezbollah and Hamas
are waging war against Israel as proxies for Syria and Iran, the United
States should announce that we support Israel's effort to remove every one
of the thousands of missiles in southern Lebanon, and that we will
decisively stop any effort by Syria and Iran to intervene.
United Nations Resolution 1559, supported by the European Union, called for
Hezbollah to be disarmed. If not now, when? If not by the Israelis, who? The
G8 advice, if taken, would only guarantee the cycle of violence. The
terrorist alliance must be destroyed or it will be rebuilt with more
dangerous capabilities. The appeals for an Israeli cease-fire, if heeded,
will enable Israel's enemies to re-lay the groundwork for yet another
violent campaign for what has been a nearly six-decade episode with the sole
objective of destroying Israel.
The key steps to ending the violence in Lebanon first requires recognizing
that Hezbollah in its military form must be eliminated, that the 100-plus
Iranian guard in southern Lebanon must be removed and that the allowing of
the Syrian and Iranian dictatorships to supply, train and equip the
terrorists must be stopped.
To do that, the United States should offer to help strengthen the Lebanese
government so that it has the ability to re-establish itself in all of
Lebanon and defeat the military wing of Hezbollah. We should encourage the
Israelis to work with the Lebanese government to eliminate the thousands of
missiles within its borders that threaten Israel. Finally, Iran and Syria
must be forced to cease their support of Hezbollah and Hamas by the United
States communicating to them such dire consequences that they could not
sustain the relationships. And then we should be prepared, if necessary, to
impose those consequences.
Former House speaker Newt Gingrich is a senior fellow at the American
Enterprise Institute and author of Winning the Future: A 21st Century
Contract with America.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-07-18-gingrich-mideast-conflict_x.htm
3. Arab world's awakening brings hope -
New York Daily News
With bombs and rockets falling and civilians getting killed in three
countries, it is hard to see any good news in the Mideast. But amid the
carnage, there is hope. Like a ray of sunshine piercing the darkness, some
Muslims are beginning to awaken to the danger of the Islamic extremists in
their ranks.
A handful of Arab countries, led by Saudi Arabia, are openly criticizing
Hezbollah for starting the war with Israel. In the annals of Arab versus
Jew, it is rare for any Arab country to publicly air the family's dirty
laundry, especially during a war. Yet that is what Saudi Arabia, Jordan,
Egypt and several smaller Persian Gulf countries are doing. The Saudi
foreign minister, speaking at an Arab League conference, called Hezbollah's
attacks "inappropriate and irresponsible" and warned they "will pull the
whole region back to years ago and we cannot simply accept that."
The awakening is even spreading to Iraq, where The New York Times reported
that Sunnis, the fiercest opponents of our troops, now say they want
Americans to stay to protect them from other Muslims. Some Sunni leaders
want us to send more troops, according to The Times, which recounted this
scene at a Baghdad mosque: "When an American convoy rolled in recently, a
remarkable message rang out from loudspeakers of the Abu Hanifa Mosque,
where Saddam Hussein made his last public appearance ...
"'The American Army is coming with the Iraqi Army - do not shoot,'" the
voice said ... "'They are here to help you.'"
Wow. Say it again: The Americans are here to help. That's music to my ears.
Of course, there is no guarantee the Arab masses will "get it," as
illustrated by the mayhem in Iraq yesterday. The suicide bombers and death
squads went about their grisly work in Iraq on the same day the UN reported
that sectarian violence there left nearly 6,000 civilians dead in the past
two months.
Nor are pure motives always behind those joining the anti-terror brigade.
Saudi, Jordanian and Egyptian officials are alarmed by the rise of Hezbollah
largely because it is a Shiite organization and closely allied with Iran and
Syria. They don't want unrest spreading to their own populations and they
don't want Iran and its madman president to be a dominant regional power.
Whatever their reasons, the converts are welcome to the good-guy movement.
Indeed, as the old saying goes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. That is
doubly true in the Mideast, where religion, tribe and sect create ancient
layers of loyalty and conflict.
Our failure to understand this lethal mix accounts for much of our trouble
in Iraq.
But if scattered self-interests can become common interests, then all may
not be lost. Especially since Israel is willing to do the hard work of
smashing Hezbollah, condemnation from the usual suspects notwithstanding.
Does France ever get tired of lecturing the rest of the world?
One result of Israel's courage is that sensible people from the Arab world
are speaking up. One is Ahmed al-Jarallah, the independent-minded editor of
the Arab Times, a Kuwaiti paper that publishes in Arabic and English and
online. In a recent commentary, Jarallah cited Hamas and Hezbollah as Arab
problems, not solutions, then made a stunning declaration: "Unfortunately we
must admit that in such a war the only way to get rid of 'these irregular
phenomena' is what Israel is doing. The operations of Israel in Gaza and
Lebanon are in the interest of people of Arab countries and the
international community."
Take that, France. And the rest of us should take heart.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/436124p-367451c.html
4. Balance Science, Ethics - USA Today
Op-ed
Posted 7/18/2006 8:06 PM ET
By Mike Leavitt
As secretary of Health and Human Services, I have been tutored on medical
research by remarkable scientists. They have not tried to make a scientist
out of me but an informed policymaker; there is a difference.
Science can answer many questions about how nature works, but science alone
cannot answer profound moral and ethical questions that policymakers and
society must consider. In formulating his policy on federal funding for
embryonic stem cell research, President Bush sought the opinions of
scientists, scholars, bioethicists, religious leaders, doctors, researchers,
members of Congress, his family and friends. He considered the needs of
science and ethics and chose a balanced approach that would advance both.
Believing in the potential of this research to treat and cure disease, he
permitted research on existing stem cell lines - becoming the first
president to fund research in this field. Yet he also believed that
destroying a human embryo smothers the spark of life, and that was a moral
line he could not cross. So he allowed research to go forward, as long as
federal funds did not encourage the further destruction of human embryos.
Some have described the president's policy as a "ban" on embryonic stem cell
research. On the contrary, under the president, federal funding on embryonic
stem cells has grown from zero dollars in 2001 to more than $40 million in
2005 and keeps growing as the research holds increasing promise. Much of the
scientific publications on embryonic stem cells in the world are based on
the U.S. federally approved cell lines.
The bill passed by Congress would overturn the president's stem cell policy
and for the first time use taxpayer dollars to offer an incentive for the
present and future destruction of human embryos. This bill crosses the moral
line the president drew, and he has made clear his intent to veto it.
In an age where science offers exciting - and at times ethically challenging
possibilities - policymakers have to decide where to draw the boundaries on
government-funded research.
The president's stem cell policy demonstrates the profound and unique
responsibilities of the policymaker, and it offers the type of balanced and
principled course such a complex issue demands.
Mike Leavitt is the secretary of Health and Human Services.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2006-07-18-science-ethics_x.htm
5. Senate immigration bill 'far worse'
than in '86 - Washington Times
By Charles Hurt
Published July 19, 2006
The latest immigration bill approved by the Senate is "far, far worse" than
the 1986 immigration bill that granted amnesty to 2.7 million illegal aliens
and created the magnet for the millions more who have come here since, a
House panel was told at a hearing yesterday.
In addition to providing legalization to about four times as many illegal
aliens as did the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), witnesses
said, the current bill also repeats mistakes made 20 years ago that will
render the border-enforcement provisions and employer sanctions meaningless.
"The Senate amnesty would condemn the United States to the same harmful
consequences that IRCA caused," James R. Edwards Jr. of the Hudson Institute
told the House Judiciary's subcommittee that handles immigration. "Only now,
its effects would be far, far worse."
Rep. John Hostettler, the Indiana Republican who is chairman of the
subcommittee on immigration, border security and claims, said the problem
with the 1986 legislation was that it allowed legalization before measures
were put in place to enforce immigration restrictions and punish those who
violated immigration laws.
"Time showed us that IRCA has utterly and completely failed," he said.
"Illegal immigration has not been controlled, but has increased
significantly in the past two decades."
Democrats on the panel, for the most part, criticized Republicans for
holding what they called a "mock hearing" and accused them of trying to
score political points off the explosive issue just months before the next
election.
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas, ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, said
the reason the 1986 bill did not work is that it was not "comprehensive"
enough, a criticism she also leveled at the enforcement-only bill approved
by the House last year.
"Although IRCA had legalization programs and new enforcement measures, it
did not address all of the essential issues," she said. "For instance, it
failed to provide enough legal visas to meet future immigration needs."
Mrs. Jackson-Lee also castigated Republicans for smearing the Senate bill
with the term "amnesty" because it will grant citizenship rights to some 10
million illegal aliens already here.
"It was derived from the Latin word 'amnesti,' which means amnesia," she
said after giving the definition. "S.2611 does not have any provisions that
would forget or overlook immigration law violations."
Replied Rep. Steve King, Iowa Republican: "I don't care what we call it.
It's a bad bill, and America knows it's a bad bill."
Though Republicans repeatedly referred to the bill as "Reid-Kennedy" for
Sens. Harry Reid and Edward M. Kennedy, Democrats noted that the legislation
has broad support among Senate Republicans including Majority Leader Bill
Frist. President Bush also has been highly supportive of the bill.
Michael Jackson, deputy secretary of the Department of Homeland Security,
said Mr. Bush is committed to a "three-pronged approach" to immigration
reform. He wants to strengthen the border, enhance interior enforcement of
immigration laws and create a temporary-worker program.
Asked whether this election year is causing problems for the White House in
making their case, Mr. Jackson replied, "There is a lot of focus on gaining
control of the border this year and we welcome that."
Rep. Silvestre Reyes, a Texas Democrat who served 26 years in the Border
Patrol, was among those who testified yesterday. He accused Mr. Bush and
Republicans in Congress of wasting time with the hearings.
"Talk is cheap," he said. "What border residents want and what Americans
want when it comes to border security and immigration reform is action."
But Mr. Hostettler warned that action without consideration for the mistakes
of 1986 will only create a bigger problem in the decades to come.
"Congress and the administration have no credibility with the American
people," he said.
"Why should Americans have any reason to believe that the supposed enhanced
enforcement provisions in Reid-Kennedy will be effectively enforced by the
administration any more than successive administrations have enforced IRCA?"
Mr. Hostettler asked. "The administration will probably implement amnesty
for millions of illegal aliens quite quickly. Enforcement will likely lag
behind if it occurs at all. We will find ourselves in exactly the same place
we found ourselves 20 years ago."
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060719-122124-9029r.htm
### |
