Science's recent cover-up

Astronomers using a telescope atop Palomar Mountain have discovered what they say is the solar system's 10th planet, a frigid ball of rock and ice bigger than Pluto and 9 billion miles from the sun. The object, graced with the unglamorous name 2003UB313.

Computer hackers had apparently broken into the astronomers' private Web site and planned to announce the finding themselves. Astronomer Mike Brown, of the California Institute of Technology, said he and two co-discoverers had planned to unveil the news in a few months.

The discovery was actually made in January based on photos taken of the planet Oct. 31, 2003, with Palomar Observatory's 48-inch Samuel Oschin telescope. Brown had been poring over data with Chad Trujillo of the Gemini Observatory in Mauna Kea, Hawaii, and David Rabinowitz of Yale University in Connecticut. "I was just on cloud nine," Brown said of the moment Jan. 8 that he became convinced the photographed object is the solar system's 10th planet.

The team has submitted a name for the proposed planet to the International Astronomical Union, but Brown would not say what they proposed. Calling this object a planet promises to be controversial, Brown acknowledged. It orbits the sun at a 44-degree incline to the ecliptic, the geometric plane on which Earth circles the sun. The orbits of most of the solar system's other planets lie very close to this plane.

Some astronomers don't consider Pluto to be a planet, because it, too, follows an inclined orbit – in its case about 17 degrees. "I've been a strong proponent of saying Pluto is not a planet, (but) I've come to the conclusion that people love Pluto . . . and I should just let it go," Brown said. "But if (the newly discovered object) is bigger and farther, you better call it a planet. I would say get out your pens and start rewriting the textbooks today."

The object takes about 560 years to orbit the sun in an elliptical orbit. It is now at its farthest point from the sun, about 9 billion miles. It will reach its closest point to the sun – about 3 billion miles, or Neptune's distance from the sun – in 280 years. The object is nearly 1,700 miles in diameter – smaller than the moon. It must be a cold, desolate place. If a person were standing on the surface of 2003UB313 and held a pin up to the sun, the head of that pin would cover the sun, Brown said. Temperatures on that surface probably range from about minus 400 to minus 370 degrees Fahrenheit.

"It's not a very nice place to live, definitely," Brown said.

Anyone who has at least a 14-inch telescope equipped with a digital CCD camera can detect the newly discovered object, Brown said. It can be found high in eastern skies in the constellation Cetus during predawn hours. Coordinates for 2003UB313 will be posted at http://www.iau.org, Brown said.

Senate Democrats begin stalling tactic just like with Bolton

Hours after President Bush announced his nomination for the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats quickly pressed for the release of all material that would shed light on the high court nominee's views.

The White House is protecting attorney-client privilege in withholding legal writings by Roberts when he was principal deputy solicitor general under former President George H.W. Bush. The disagreement over access to decades-old government records flared as Attorney General Alberto Gonzales suggested that, if confirmed, Roberts would not be bound by an earlier statement that the landmark 1973 ruling that established a woman's right to an abortion was settled law.

"From what we know now, John Roberts had a hand in some of the most aggressive assaults on civil rights protections during the Reagan administration," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, said in a statement. "The White House should make all relevant documents available so that the Senate can make an informed decision."

Committee aides began sifting through the first of thousands of documents to be made available, dating from Roberts' tenure as a special assistant in the Justice Department, and in the White House counsel's office in 1983-86. As a historical footnote, one memo was hard to beat a one-page paper in which the young Roberts reported that beginning "my first day on the job" he had been helping O'Connor prep for her own confirmation hearings to the high court.

"The approach was to avoid giving specific responses to any direct questions on legal issues likely to come before the court, but demonstrating in the response a firm command of the subject area and awareness of the relevant precedents and arguments," Roberts wrote in the Sept. 17, 1981, memo.

Other memos from 1982 showed Roberts advising Smith to support Republican-led efforts in Congress to limit the federal judiciary's power to decide social issues such as abortion and school prayer. In a document dated Feb. 16, 1982, Roberts offered further suggestions to Smith, who was girding for an appearance before conservatives unhappy with judicial nominations early in the Reagan administration. Addressing criticism that judicial nominations weren't "ideologically committed to the president's policies," Roberts suggested something other than a "yes they are" answer.

"Rather, we should shift the debate and briefly touch on our judicial restraint themes," he wrote. "It really should not matter what the personal ideology of our appointees may be, so long as they recognize that their ideology should have no role in the decisional process." It is a point that the Bush administration is making now that regardless of Roberts' personal views, he will rule based on the Constitution and court precedent.

Wacko Wonka in a retarded movie

The uncanny resemblance of Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka to eccentric popstar Michael Jackson hasn’t gone unnoticed. Willy Wonka’s deathly pallor, chimpish cheeks and unusual attire have been contrasted with that of the infamous singer. Unfortunately, the similarities don’t end there. Wonka lures children to his magical factory with sweeties, where they suffer several nasty surprises and are eventually returned to their parents in a considerably altered condition from when they arrived. Sound familiar, anyone?

There’s hardly anything to spoil in this one since it’s a remake of the old movie, and followed the book exactly, so I’ll speak freely.

Generally speaking, I liked the original better. Johnny Depp is just a bit too weird for me. His voice is very high and disturbing in this film. I’ve been told he was modeling his character on Michael Jackson (to some extent), and that seems like a reasonable choice. Michael Jackson is – like Wonka – somewhat of a recluse, an odd dresser, and … some might say (not me) … somewhat of a genius. Michael Jackson is also supposed to have a bad relationship with his father, like Wonka does in the new version. But the overall effect is a little too disturbing for my tastes. Depp does well at being disturbing, which is also a little disturbing, since he was pretty weird in Pirates of the Caribbean as well.

Charlie is better in this version, I think. He’s more honest and more likable. And somehow I liked the story line better in the remake. But I liked the Oompa Loompas better in the old version for one simple reason – you could understand what they were singing, and their songs followed that odd ancient theory that a song should have a melody. The styles of the songs were not even consistent in the movie. All I can say is the music was horrible. The Broadway Production version of the Oompa Loompas was certainly amusing, but their purpose in the storyline is to give the moral commentary on the horrible little monsters (the children), and since nobody could understand what the heck they were saying that purpose was foiled.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blooded Prince

Unsurprisingly, the Harry Potter book is all over Bit Torrent and other file sharing services. Complete scanned and OCR’d files appeared less than a half-day after the book’s release for some individuals that do not want to line J.K Rowling’s pockets. Author J.K. Rowling has been branded a "Luddite fool" for inadvertently encouraging fans to pirate the latest Harry Potter book only hours after its official release. But within hours, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince had been scanned and put online by an underground collection of fans capitalizing on Rowling's decision not to release an official e-book version.

After fellow fantasy fans contributed the missing scans and chipped in to run optical-character-recognition software on the pages, a Russian website used by the team to host the ripped book received 80,000 hits, according to the individual. Unauthorized versions of the book are available in Word, PDF and plain-text formats suitable for handhelds and other devices, alongside an audio recording thought to be the as-yet-unreleased official narration.

The electronic book is not in as much distress as the CD is; there is no problem solved by unauthorized book files being illegally copied and shared over the internet and Google. Also, the e-book market has refused to gain significance because of piracy, and because of the same ridiculous DRM issues that plague music: proprietary file formats and incompatible handheld players. "For the next book, we're going to be prepared," said the Half-Blood Prince scanner. "The people who'll be helping me will be at their computers waiting for me to get home with it and I'll be calling in sick to work for a day or two so I can scan it without interruptions."

Pakistani men may be involved in London terror attack

On Monday travel companies reported a rash of cancellations in the wake of this weekend's attacks in the Red Sea resort, which left at least 88 people dead and more than 100 injured. Egypt's tourism minister expressed concern on Sunday that the attacks would hit the $6.6 billion tourism industry, the country's biggest private-sector employer, in the short term.

Sharm el-Sheikh Police investigators were searching yesterday for six Pakistani men as the probe widened in the weekend terrorist attacks at the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, and Egypt sacked its security chiefs of Sinai in an apparent acknowledgment of security failures. Police at checkpoints around the resort were circulating photographs of the six, who were apparently among a group of nine Pakistanis who arrived in Sharm el-Sheikh from Cairo on July 5, said two investigators, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the probe's sensitivity.

The nationalities of the men were not known. Police were not saying the Pakistanis were definitely involved, and investigators were also pursuing other threads. But any involvement of Pakistanis in Saturday's pre-dawn attacks in Sharm el-Sheikh in which a string of coordinated bombs killed 88 people and flattened part of a luxury hotel would imply an international, possibly al-Qaeda hand behind them. British authorities have been seeking several Pakistanis in connection to this month's deadly bombings in London, and Washington has raised the possibility that both the London and Sharm attacks were planned by al-Qaeda. Pakistani involvement would also represent a change in militant violence in Egypt, which in the past was seen as largely homegrown with little direct foreign hand.

But Roland Schmid, spokesman for travel group TUI Switzerland, told swissinfo that holidaymakers were unlikely to stay away from Egypt for long. "Looking at the immediate reaction, I think it might have a short-term effect for Sharm el-Sheikh but not for Egypt in the long-term," he said.

He added that while bookings would probably drop in the first instance, many tourists were likely to forget about the Sharm el-Sheikh bombings within a month or two. "But if there is another attack, say in Cairo, involving foreign tourists then that will probably cause a similar reaction to the one that followed Luxor," warned Fässler, who runs the Winterthur Centre for Crisis Intervention.

The crisis centre dispatched an international care team to Sharm el-Sheikh to help those traumatised by Saturday's events. Urs Fehr, spokesman for tour operator Kuoni Switzerland, said it was too early to draw conclusions on the long-term picture. But he echoed the view that there was unlikely to be a repeat of the sharp drop-off in bookings that followed the Luxor massacre.

Investigators were working several possible theories including possible Palestinian involvement and whether the Sharm attacks were linked to last October's bombings in two other Sinai resorts that killed 34 people, including Israelis. Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf said yesterday that al-Qaeda's command and communication system in his country has been eliminated and that the network could not have orchestrated terrorist attacks in London, Sharm el-Sheikh or elsewhere from Pakistan.

States governments paralized with fear

Facing a tough re-election campaign in 1994, Republican Gov. Pete Wilson championed a ballot measure that would, if enacted and upheld by the courts, cut off public benefits to illegal immigrants. Proposition 187 passed handily and Wilson won re-election by a landslide, but the measure was later set aside by activist judges. And a decade later, the political fires it ignited are still burning brightly because the issue encapsulates the powerful economic and demographic trends reshaping the state.

Proposition 187 was the first in a string of ballot measures that, in toto, signify a society that's beset by internal cultural upheaval. California's white population is aging and shrinking, and although it continues to wield dominant political power -- as demonstrated by the passage of Proposition 187 and later measures outlawing affirmative action and bilingual education -- many whites fear a loss of cultural power to newcomers. To many, illegal immigrants are simply human beings seeking to better themselves by filling difficult, low-paying jobs in agriculture, construction, restaurants and hotels that are vital to the economy. But to others, they are law-breaking invaders who drain the public treasury and whose ability to gain entry into California should not be rewarded.

It's entirely possible that both views are correct, at least in part, but modern politics don't allow for such nuanced positions. This is the era of us vs. them, blue vs. red, a confrontational attitude that's reflected in the trash-talking talk shows.

Illegal immigration began bleeding again a few years ago when Latino activists and liberal Democrats pressed Wilson successor Gray Davis to sign legislation granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Davis resisted, knowing that it would be a loser among still-dominant white voters, but caved in as he faced a recall election in 2003 and needed Democratic Party support.
Once Davis had been recalled -- mostly because he signed the driver's license bill -- and Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger had been elected as his successor, the driver license advocates did an abrupt political retreat, quickly repealing the bill rather than face certain defeat in a referendum being ginned up by anti-illegal immigrant activists.

The issue, however, did not disappear. And if anything, the underlying angst about illegal immigration has intensified -- driven, in part, by widespread economic fears, especially the outsourcing of jobs to other countries. That entanglement poses a delicate problem for both political parties since Republicans tend to oppose illegal immigration more vociferously than Democrats, while Democrats raise fears about job outsourcing and Republicans see it as simply global free trade.

Last weekend, the immigration fires were rekindled when a handful of self-named California Minutemen began patrolling the border with Mexico, supposedly to help the Border Patrol spot illegal immigrants, but in reality to draw media attention and stir up opposition to illegal immigration. The Minutemen likened themselves to a Neighborhood Watch but some apparently were armed and they attracted, as expected, denunciations from Latino rights groups, which branded them as vigilantes.

The Minutemen's appearance also reignited an image problem for Schwarzenegger, who had praised a similar effort in Arizona and had drawn fire from Latino leaders in return. Schwarzenegger's spokeswoman, Margita Thompson, danced on the issue Tuesday, saying that the governor "understands" their concern about illegal immigration but "does not support their being armed."

And right on cue, a conservative group calling itself the California Border Police Committee gained official clearance to gather signatures for a new ballot measure that would create a state police unit to supplement the Border Patrol.

"Californians are fed up with open border policies that invite illegal immigration and threaten national security," said Assemblyman Ray Haynes, R-Murrieta, who introduced similar legislation.

"I would hope that the days of anti-immigrant bashing are behind us," Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez responded. "We ought to be celebrating our diversity."

What will Senate Democrats do?

Senate Democrats, after months of preparing for a full-scale fight with President Bush over a Supreme Court nominee, yesterday found themselves instead weighing whether or how to battle his choice of John Roberts Jr. The dilemma Democrats face is that Roberts, a well-known Washington lawyer before becoming a federal appellate court judge in 2003, appears to be more conservative than they would like but less ideological than they feared.

Democratic leader Sen. Harry Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, set the tone the day after Bush selected Roberts, taking pains to describe the nominee as an accomplished lawyer and a "very nice man," but withholding judgment on whether he deserves to serve as one of the country's nine most powerful judges.

Several Democrats complained that Roberts had served as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit for only two years and has a sparse judicial record. As a result, they were considering requesting confidential copies of material he wrote when he served as deputy solicitor general in the Justice Department under President George H.W. Bush. If the request is made, it would be the first time in the history of our country setting a new precedent, which has not been applied to any other Supreme Court nominee.

Bush urged the Senate to proceed with the confirmation process "in a dignified, civil way." He also said, "I'm confident the senators will come to realize what I've come to realize: We're lucky to have a man of such wisdom and intellectual strength willing to serve our country."

Law Enforcement allowed tunnel to be built under border

Since February, U.S. and Canadian law enforcement secretly watched drug smugglers build a tunnel across the border. Using shovels, more than 1,000 2-by-6's and rebar, the smugglers built a 360-foot-long tunnel complete with ventilation and electricity. Wednesday afternoon, their elaborate operation came to an end when U.S. federal agents arrested three men exiting the tunnel in Whatcom County just east of the Lynden-Aldergrove crossing.

They face federal charges of conspiracy to distribute marijuana and conspiracy to import marijuana. The three are being held in a federal jail in SeaTac. More charges may follow. The tunnel started in a Quonset hut - a large metal shed - at 26717 Zero Ave. just inside Canada. The property is owned by Francis Devandra Raj, 30, one of the three men arrested. It stretched under the border and emerged in the living room of 151 E. Boundary Road north of Lynden. The homeowners are listed as Raman L. and Kusum B. Patel, according to the Whatcom County Assessor's Web site.

The tunnel was under construction for more than a year and was big enough for a person to walk through, hunched over. The entrances were 6 feet by 6 feet and the entire tunnel was reinforced on all sides by rebar and wood, according to a U.S. Attorney's Office news release. The people constructing it put together a pulley and winch system to lift the dirt out and move it north or south to one of the openings. The tunnel was completed earlier this month.

U.S. federal agents installed surveillance cameras and listening devices in the East Boundary Road home earlier this month and monitored action in the tunnel constantly.
About 200 pounds of marijuana was seized as part of the investigation and other suspects are being investigated and watched, according to U.S. and Canadian officials. Authorities said the tunnel will be sealed so it can't be used any longer.

Microsoft goes in different direction

Microsoft ditched the code name Longhorn on Friday, announcing the next version of its flagship Windows operating system will be called Windows Vista. The world's largest software maker also said it will release the first of two test versions to developers and information technology professionals by Aug. 3.

The company did not say when it expects to release a second test version to a broader audience, but said it remains on target to ship the oft-delayed update to Windows XP sometime in the second half of next year. Microsoft gave an internal gathering of its employees in Atlanta the first word about the new name Thursday.

"The core idea around Windows Vista is bringing clarity to the user so they can focus on what matters most," Brad Goldberg, general manager for Windows product management said Friday.

Vista's features will include better ways to visualize data, such as seeing through windows that are stacked atop each other, more natural file organization and faster searching. The operating system will also be designed to better protect computers against viruses and spyware.

Message from the loser John Kerry

Dear JoeyBee,

This much is clear already. Judge Roberts is no Sandra Day O'Connor.

Last night we learned that President Bush wants to replace a woman who voted to uphold Roe v. Wade with a man who argued against Roe v. Wade, and that sends a clear signal that this White House remains bent on opening old wounds and dividing America.

There are big questions that must be answered involving Judge Roberts' judicial philosophy as demonstrated over his short time on the appellate court. The Senate must learn whether he has a clear, consistent commitment to upholding Constitutional standards like civil rights, the right to privacy, and Roe v. Wade. These issues are in serious question if you take even a cursory glance at his record.

We need to ask the tough questions to determine whether John Roberts is the nominee who will give America a Court that is fair, independent, ethical and committed to Constitutional freedoms rather than an ideological agenda, and I promise you I will do everything in my power to assure that no question is sidestepped.

Throughout every step of the confirmation process, I will keep you informed about the questions that need to be asked, the answers we need to demand, and the principles we need to defend. It's impossible to overstate the importance of this moment.

As the U.S. Senate discharges one of its most important responsibilities, I will be active and vigilant. I hope you will do the same, beginning right now. Start by sharing a few words about your personal feelings on the importance of this Supreme Court nomination.

John Kerry

Finally something is being done about immigration

All of the estimated 10 million to 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States would have to leave the country under a bill introduced yesterday by two conservative Republican senators.
The bill by Senators Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas is a tougher alternative to a rival bipartisan bill introduced two months ago that would allow some illegal immigrants to get jobs legally and eventually gain citizenship without leaving the country.

The Kyl-Cornyn bill calls for the creation of a machine-readable, tamper-proof Social Security card that would be issued to every American in the workforce. It would also fund the hiring of 10,000 Department of Homeland Security personnel dedicated to weeding illegal immigrants out of the workforce and an additional 1,000 for detecting immigration fraud.
Companies that hired illegal immigrants would face tough fines.

Additionally, the bill would authorize the recruitment of 10,000 new Border Patrol agents over five years and a $2.5 billion investment in unmanned aerial vehicles, cameras, barriers, and sensors along the Mexican border. The senators did not give a total cost for the bill, but a fact sheet distributed with their proposal contained partial costs of well over $12 billion.

Cornyn said the bill contained an orderly and dignified way for illegal immigrants in the country to return home. They would have five years in which to do so. Illegal immigrants who refuse would face fines of $2,000 a year for each year they stayed beyond the deadline. Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts and an author of the rival bipartisan bill, said, ''The mass deportation of illegal immigrant persons as contemplated by the Cornyn-Kyl bill is not a realistic solution, and won't solve the security and economic problems we face."

Proimmigration groups blasted the proposal. Angela Kelley of the National Immigration Forum said it was completely unworkable and massively expensive.

Selective Enforcement

Each day, more than a thousand Mexican citizens flee their indigent nation to seek fortune in the land of the free. Their presence is illegal and not appreciated by most of America’s population. Evidently, current attempts at blocking the source of entry are failing. It seems that miles of bent up wire interrupted by a blockade every Timezone or two does not seem to be getting the message across: We don’t want you!

The labor that a slew of illegal migrant Mexican farm workers do is painstaking and dangerous. They work harder than I could ever see myself working and are paid in pocket change. Aged 15 to 40, these illegal aliens perform our slave labor twelve hours a day to give us what we need and take the jobs we don’t want.

The number of immigrant day laborers is rising fast on the heels of the construction boom. Immigrants who lack permanent employment, relying instead on jobs that may change from one day to the next, are a fixture of the U.S. economy, numbering as many as one million nationwide, according to advocacy groups. A substantial number of these workers -- no one knows how many -- are in the U.S. illegally.

Last month in Victorville, Calif., an anti-immigrant group called SaveOurState.org picketed a Home Depot Inc. store where day laborers congregate, while members of human-rights groups counterprotested across the street. "The debate about immigration is happening at this level -- in our neighborhoods," says Pablo Alvarado, national coordinator of the National Day Labor Organizing Network, an immigrant-rights group based in Los Angeles. Similar demonstrations have recently taken place in numerous other cities aound the United States.

Up to 25,000 day laborers gather every day at more than 100 points across Los Angeles County, according to the Center for the Study of Urban Poverty at the University of California, Los Angeles. In the New York metropolitan area, the second-largest market for these job seekers, up to 15,000 people gather at about 60 points. An estimated 80 day-labor centers operate in the U.S., and three-quarters of them have opened in the past five to seven years. Many of the centers are operated jointly by local governments and community groups. The centers are "a burgeoning policy response to the day-labor issue across the country," says Prof. Valenzuela.

Proponents of day-laborer centers say they offer a practical solution to community problems such as traffic jams and public urination associated with the laborer pickup points, and also help protect workers from being exploited. Critics say the centers provide services to illegal immigrants who are taking jobs away from Americans, and also help employers who cheat the government of tax revenue by paying workers off the books.

Pakastan: The next State to realize how evil some Islam is

Pakistan's Interior Minister, Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao, on July 20th, 2005 confirmed 200 Islamic activists have been rounded up in a renewed crackdown on religious extremists, but denied any links with the London bombings. He had earlier conferred with senior police and intelligence officials from throughout Pakistan for several hours. President General Pervez Musharraf had last week instructed security agencies to proceed against religious groups involved in sectarian and militant activities.

The directives followed reports from London that three of the four London bombers were Britons of Pakistani origin and at least one of them had visited a seminary by the militant group Lashkare Taiba (LeT) that had been fighting Indian troops in the Himalayan state of Kashmir. LeT was among the six outfits that Musharraf outlawed in January 2002 for their radical and militant outlook and activities in Kashmir and Afghanistan, where the Taliban had sheltered some of the fugitives wanted by Pakistani authorities on various charges.

Pakistani security agencies on Tuesday raided various mosques and Islamic schools across the country in the latest swoop against religious extremists, which continued on Wednesday. At least three propaganda editors have been arrested and police are still looking for people linked to about 15 religious political publications, believed to be fanning sectarian discontent and hatred in the country. According to interior ministry sources, prominent religious members of outlawed militant and sectarian groups are also being monitored.

Leaders of religious parties and schools have condemned the latest drive, saying it is aimed at "pleasing the West only".

Community supports illegal alien detention

Several top local law enforcement officials in New Hampshire say they are taking a wait-and-see attitude or have no plans to prosecute illegal aliens on the state's criminal trespass charge — for now. New Ipswich Police Chief W. Garrett Chamberlain, the first New Hampshire police chief to institute the policy, said since his department made the first arrest in May, his views have not changed.

The law, RSA 635:22, reads that a person is guilty of criminal trespassing if, "knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place." Traditionally used in relation to private property, supporters of using the law against illegal aliens say the law can be applied to those who are in the state or the country without permission. Chamberlain said he has received a large number of calls and letters on the issue, most supportive.

On the other side…

Salem Police Chief William Donovan has established an official department policy that Salem police officers won't arrest illegal aliens on criminal trespass charges. He said he can appreciate the reason why Chamberlain and Gendron have ordered the tactic, but does not agree.

"I can understand the frustration that these guys are dealing with," Donovan said. "They're dealing with a lot of illegal immigrants in their town, but the fact of the matter is that we (as local law enforcement) don't have the right to do it."

Donovan said it is his understanding, based on conversations with Rockingham County Attorney James Reams and other attorneys, that only federal magistrates or officers from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency can make the official determination that an individual is an illegal alien. Derry Police Chief Edward Garone said his department does not use the criminal trespass charge against illegal aliens and will not be changing the policy unless a clear court decision is made on the New Ipswich and Hudson cases.

Unfortunately, now all we can do is wait and see what the courts decide.

Shocking Medical Marijuana Findings

State Health Department Studies
In addition to the published research there have been a series of six studies conducted by state health departments under research protocols approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.The focus of these studies, conducted by six state health agencies was the use of marijuana as an anti-emetic for cancer patients. The studies, conducted in California, Georgia, New Mexico, New York, Michigan and Tennessee, compared marijuana to antiemetics available by prescription, including the synthetic THC pill, Marinol. Marijuana was found to be an effective and safe antiemetic in each of the studies and more effective than other drugs for many patients.

Highlights of the Studies
New Mexico: This study involved 250 patients.The study compared marijuana to THC capsules. The research protocol was approved by the FDA in 1978. In order to participate in the research the patient had to be referred by a physician and had to have failed on at least three other antiemetics. Patients were permitted to choose marijuana or the THC pill.
Both objective (e.g., frequency of vomiting, amount of vomiting, muscle biofeedback, blood samples and patient observation) and subjective measures were made to determine the effectiveness of the drug.

The study concluded that marijuana was not only an effective antiemetic but also far superior to the best available conventional drug, Compazine, and clearly superior to synthetic THC pill." The study found that [m]ore than [90] percent of the patients who received marijuana . . . reported significant or total relief from nausea and vomiting." The study found no major adverse side effects. Only three patients reported adverse reactions, none of these reactions involved marijuana alone. The 1984 report concluded . . . the data accumulated over all five years of the program's operation do show that marijuana smoked resulted in a higher percentage of success than does THC ingested."

California: California conducted a series of studies from 1981 through 1989. Annual reports were submitted to the FDA, state legislature and Governor. Each year approximately 90 to 100 patients received marijuana. The California research was described as a Phase III trial."
The study protocol preferred THC pills by making it much easier for patients to enter that portion of the study. Patients who received marijuana had to be over 15 years of age (the THC pill patients had to be over 5 years of age); had to be marijuana experienced, use the drug on an in-patient basis (patients could only use marijuana in the hospital and not take the medicine home) and had to be receiving rarely used and severe forms of chemotherapy. Thus, the design of the study did not favor marijuana.

Even with this built in bias against marijuana, the study consistently found marijuana to be an effective antiemetic. In 1981 the California Research Advisory Panel reported: "Over 74 percent of the cancer patients treated in the program have reported that marijuana is more effective in relieving their nausea and vomiting than any other drug they have tried." In 1982, a 78.9 percent effectiveness rate was found for smoked marijuana. By 1983 the report was conclusory in its findings stating:

The California Program also has met its research objectives. Marijuana has been shown to be effective for many cancer chemotherapy patients, safe dosage levels have been established and a dosage regimen which minimizes undesirable side effects has been devised and tested.
The California Research Advisory Panel continued to review data on marijuana until 1989 with similar results.

Michigan: The Michigan research compared marijuana to Torecan. It involved 165 patients. Upon admission to the program patients were randomized into control groups with some randomized on the conventional antiemetic Torecan and the remainder randomized to marijuana. When failure on the initial randomized drug occurred, patients could elect to crossover to the alternate therapy. This procedure allowed the Michigan Department of Health to evaluate how well patients responded to both drugs and allowed patients to register their preference.

The Michigan study reported 71.1 percent of the patients who received marijuana reported no emesis to moderate nausea. Ninety percent of the patients receiving marijuana elected to remain on marijuana. Only 8 of 83 patients randomized to marijuana chose to alter their mode of antiemetic therapy. This was almost the inverse of patients randomized to Torecan, there more than 90 percent - 22 out of 23 patients - elected to discontinue use of Torecan and switched to marijuana.
Very few serious side effects were found related to marijuana use. The most common side effect was increased appetite - reported by 32.3 percent of patients - this was a positive effect. The most common negative effects were sleepiness, reported by 21 patients and sore throat, reported by 13 patients.

Another person for the ethics committee to investigate

A pro-marijuana group is suing state campaign finance regulators in an effort to force them to investigate a deputy federal drug czar's expenses in campaigning against a 2004 marijuana legalization initiative.

The Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project says Scott Burns, deputy director for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, toured Alaska last fall giving public speeches against an initiative to legalize marijuana in the state. Burns, however, did not disclose to the Alaska Public Offices Commission how much was spent on the trip.

"The Marijuana Policy Project and the groups supporting the initiative in Alaska filed reports and told the citizens of Alaska exactly how much was spent on the campaign and we simply feel the federal government should play by the same rules," said Marijuana Policy Project government relations director Steve Fox.

Fox said the group filed the lawsuit in an Anchorage Superior Court Thursday. He said the group has filed a similar lawsuit in Montana.

Fox said in February his group formally requested that the Alaska Public Offices Commission investigate the campaign stops made by Burns. A month later APOC rejected the request, stating that the commission does not have authority to investigate "the United States and its officials."

Alaska Department of Law spokesman Mark Morones said he has not seen a copy of the lawsuit, but, he said, "I think APOC had denied the complaint because it's a federal agency involved and it didn't have jurisdiction."

Who’s lying is the question to ask after both The New York Times and The Washington Post published front-page articles that reported that Karl Rove did speak to conservative columnist Bob Novak before Novak wrote an article revealing the CIA identity of Valerie Wilson and that Rove had confirmed to Novak that Valerie Wilson worked at the CIA.

Each account is attributed to a single unnamed source. The Times identifies its sourced as "someone who has been officially briefed on the matter." The Post cited "a lawyer involved in the case." And the account provided is one that apparently would help Rove fend off a criminal charge. Both newspapers say that Novak called Rove on July 8, 2003 (six days before Novak published the piece that outed Valerie Wilson), that Novak said he had learned that Valerie Wilson worked at the CIA (he referred to her by her maiden name, Valerie Plame), and that Rove confirmed that he had heard that, too. Each story says its source claimed that Rove had learned about Valerie Wilson's CIA position from other journalists.

The point here is to show that Rove was not peddling the information, that he had not received it from a classified source, and that he did not have reason to know that Valerie Wilson was working at the CIA under cover. Under the relevant law--the Intelligence Identities Protection Act--it is only a crime for a government official to disclose identifying information about a covert US intelligence officer if the government official received that information from a classified source and is aware that the officer is a clandestine employee of the CIA in the past 6 years. Consequently, Rove defenders can cite the account planted in the Times and the Post and claim that he did not violate the law because he had heard about Valerie Wilson from a journalist (not a classified source) and because there is no indication he knew of her covert status. Rove can also claim that Valerie Plame had not been stationed over seas in the past six years. Rove also has a counter to Mr. Wilson citing Wilson statements that he was sent by the vice-president, and that his wife did not get him the assignment he was not qualified for. And now, both statements by Mr. Wilson have been proven false.

This might work. But, of course, it is up to a judge to determine if Rove or anyone else broke the law or engaged in perjury or obstruction of justice. And there is no telling if this account is indeed accurate. But this new disclosure does lead to an obvious conclusion: somebody has lied. Was is Karl Rove, Mr. & Mrs. Wilson, or has the special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald been the one lying trying to settle a grudge against Republicans?

Currently, President Bush has been able to cover-up the truth about illegal immigration for his buddy Fox and other business associates south of the border. An analysis of the Bush administration's guest worker plan claims that it has actually helped fuel illegal immigration because most believed President Bush is offering amnesty. Of course the liberal media will not report the story because of their stance with illegal aliens, and diverted attention to Karl Rove.

The survey analyzed and released 28 June by Judicial Watch, found that 63 percent of more than 800 immigrants arrested along the nation's southern border said they had heard from the Mexican government or media that Bush was offering amnesty. Forty-five percent said they attempted to cross the border based on those beliefs. Eighty percent said they wanted to apply for amnesty.

"Illegal immigration increased as a result of President Bush's proposed immigration reform," said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch.

The proposal was backed by the business community, opposed by many immigrant advocacy groups and languished in Congress. Some Republicans have criticized the plan as tantamount to amnesty, a characterization the administration has rejected.

John Bolton has stated that he would accept a recess appointment as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations if his nomination stalemate continues, The Washington Post reported in it's paper. Bolton was selected by President Bush to succeed cowardly John Danforth as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations in early March. The Senate Republicans, having twice failed to end a filibuster on the issue, and has not been able to set an up-or-down vote and the White House is not willing to withdraw the nomination.

And during this time of political limbo, the U.N. has continued it's anti-american sentiment by breaking U.S. laws, covering-up rape and corruption scandals, and fleaceing the American public of badly needed tax dollars. Recent newspaper reports and memos from the U.N. has brought to life a accounting scandal in the U.N. that will drawf ENRON in comparison. Billions of dollars have turned-up missing at the U.N., and the only remedey to solving the mystery is charging the U.S. more dues to cover the difference.

Democrats claim the White House hasn't provided needed information for them to determine Bolton's fitness for the position. Bush can make Bolton a "recess appointment" -- an option that allows the president the opportunity to fill a spot when Congress is not in session to approve or deny it. The Post reported Wednesday that an unnamed source "familiar with Bolton's thinking" said: "He'll take the recess (appointment) and head straight to the U.N. to take care of bussiness. The president has made his decision and the president is asking the Senate to confirm the selections and if the Senate refuses to do that, than most assuredly Bush will make a recess appointment."

Congress is to begin its summer recess July 30.

Once again the People don't matter

A federal court judge on Wednesday extended for the fifth time an order barring a former investigator for the U.N. oil-for-food probe from turning over documents to U.S. congressional committees.
The delay, until July 13, was granted by U.S. District Judge Ricardo Urbina in Washington. All parties have asked for repeated delays while they try to work out an agreement.
The restraining order, first issued on May 9, blocks Robert Parton, a former FBI agent, from handing over boxes of documents to two congressional committees that subpoenaed them after he resigned from the U.N.-appointed Independent Inquiry Committee.

Parton left the probe, led by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, believing the inquiry ignored evidence critical of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, whose son worked for a company that received a lucrative contract in Iraq under the $67 billion program.
Parton took thousands of files with him, which the Volcker inquiry says violated a confidentiality agreement, could put witnesses at risk and jeopardize its investigation.
The documents were given in response to a subpoena to the House of Representatives International Relations Committee, headed by Illinois Republican Rep. Henry Hyde. Another House committee and one in the Senate then filed their own subpoenas.
In its suit against Parton, the United Nations does not ask for the documents in the possession of Hyde's panel, but tries to prevent them from being distributed to other committees.
Annan appointed the Volcker probe last year to investigate fraud in the oil-for-food program, which began in 1996. Under the deal, former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's government could sell oil to buy goods to ease the impact of U.N. sanctions on ordinary Iraqis. The sanctions were imposed after Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait.
Parton said he kept the documents to back up his allegations that the investigation was flawed. The Volcker panel says the documents belong to its inquiry and it needs to have jurisdiction over their distribution and to protect witnesses.

Source: REUTERS