~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From LA Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Judge refuses to reduce death sentence for man who murdered two in South L.A.

A judge denied a request today to reduce the death sentence for a man convicted of murdering two people and attempting to murder two others in a South Los Angeles housing project.

Defendant Kai Harris, 32, along with another man, was convicted of the 2004 killing of a rival member of his gang in a drug dispute, before turning his gun on three women who witnessed the attack in the apartment.

Two of the women survived gunshot wounds to the face, but the third, Annette Anderson, 52, considered a pillar of the community, was killed. Her death spurred an outpouring of grief in the Watts neighborhood where she lived all her life.

After the judge announced his decision today, Harris, slender and muscular, his hair in long tight braids, turned to a half-dozen relatives sitting in the back of the courtroom and stared without emotion. He eventually forced a smile. Two small children, Harris' cousins, choked back tears. Harris' family had ties to two of the victims.

Anderson and the man involved in the drug dispute who was killed, George Brooks, were family friends.

“You don't know how to feel now. You love both families,” said Harris' aunt, Lavett Outlaw, who was dressed in black. “We have a great loss on both sides.”

Harris and the other defendant, Donte McDaniel, entered an apartment in the Nickerson Gardens public housing project in April 2004 looking to settle a drug dispute. One of the two surviving women, who has since died of unrelated causes, suffered bullets in her chest and face, shattering her upper jaw and palate.

The woman, Debra Johnson, a frail drug addict, later drew attention for her fearless testimony against her attackers.

“The crime scene was so bloody the coroner investigator said that she could taste a metallic taste in her mouth just from all the blood that had been spilled,” said L.A. County Deputy Dist. Atty. Halim Dhanidina. “She had to throw away her work clothes.”

Judge Michael Johnson called the crime “cruel and inhuman” and said the the loss to family and friends was enormous, particularly for Anderson, who was known to help those in need.

“She was the kind of person who would take in anyone who needed a place to stay or something to eat,” Dhanidina said about Anderson.

Neighbors said at the time of the murders that Anderson, a cancer survivor, would often watch over neighborhood kids.

The judge rejected the defense's argument that Harris was intimidated by McDaniel into committing the murders. Harris is set to be executed at San Quentin State Prison.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/11/death-sentence-stayed-for-man-who-murdered-two-in-south-la.html#more

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mexican teen pleads guilty to killing U.S. Border Patrol agent

A Mexican teenager pleaded guilty to fatally shooting a U.S. Border Patrol agent last summer while attempting to rob him of government property in a remote area east of San Diego, according to a plea agreement announced today.

The suspect, 17-year-old Christian Daniel Castro-Alvarez, and an unspecified number of co-conspirators, lured Agent Robert W. Rosas Jr. out of his vehicle while he was on routine patrol near the border community of Campo, according to the agreement.

Rosas was shot multiple times by Castro-Alvarez and one or more co-conspirators. Federal authorities provided few details of the investigation, and it is unclear how Castro-Alvarez was captured and whether the co-conspirators have also been arrested.

The shooting prompted a large-scale manhunt on both sides of the border involving U.S. and Mexican federal agencies. The incident occurred about 60 miles east of San Diego in a rugged area favored by drug- and human-smuggling operations.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Police seeking suspects in three murders in Long Beach and Pico Rivera

Police are asking for the public's help today in solving three separate murders in south Los Angeles County.

One person was killed and two wounded about 11:30 p.m. Thursday in a shooting outside a liquor store in the 3600 block of Santa Fe Avenue in Long Beach, according to city police spokeswoman Jackie Bezart. The  murder is believed to be gang-related, and the victim's identity is being withheld pending notification of his family.

The victim was identified as 19-year-old Frank Castro Jr. of Long Beach. A man approached him and the two other victims on foot and shot all three of them. Castro was hit multiple times in the upper body and torso and pronounced dead at the scene. The two other victims, ages 18 and 40, were treated at a local hospital and released.

At about the same time, a driver in the 6400 block of Rosemead Boulevard in Pico Rivera saw a body in the street and called police, who found a Latino with gunshot wounds in the upper torso, said Dep. Aura Sierra of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. The victim, whose identity is being withheld until his family is notified, was pronounced dead at the scene.

The body of Comontray Lenoir was also found Tuesday in an apartment complex courtyard in the 2700 block of East 57th Street in Long Beach, Bezart said. The 24-year-old man had been shot multiple times, and the murder is believed to be gang-related.

Anyone with information on any of these cases is asked to call Long Beach police at (562) 570-7244 or the Sheriff's Department at (323) 890-5500.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/11/police-seeking-suspects-in-three-murders-in-long-beach-and-pico-rivera.html#more

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

California adopts stricter rules for drug abusers in the health industry

Nurses, dentists and other professionals with addictions will be subject to more drug tests, and any restrictions to their licenses will be listed on public websites.

by Charles Ornstein and Tracy Weber

November 20, 2009

In a major shift, California will impose tough new standards on drug-abusing health professionals, strictly scrutinizing those in treatment and immediately removing from practice anyone who relapses.

"The bottom line is we're in the business of protecting consumers," said Brian Stiger, director of the state Department of Consumer Affairs, which announced the rules Thursday. "We're not in the business of rehabilitation."

The rules will require nurses, dentists and other health workers in state-run recovery programs to take at least 104 drug tests in their first year -- more than double any current requirement.

Health professionals will be automatically pulled from practice, at least temporarily, after a single positive result. And any restrictions to their licenses will be listed on public websites, easing the long-standing confidentiality protections that have shielded participants and kept their patients in the dark.

The changes appear to address problems raised in a July investigation by The Times and the nonprofit newsroom ProPublica, which detailed how registered nurses were able to treat patients without permission and steal drugs while participating in the confidential recovery program known as diversion.

Even when the state Board of Registered Nursing kicked them out, labeling them "public safety risks," it took a median 15 months to file public accusations, the investigation found.

The standards were drafted by a committee created by the Legislature last year after repeated audits revealed that the recovery program for doctors poorly monitored participants and failed to terminate those who relapsed. The Medical Board of California shut down that program June 30, 2008.

Until now, each of the state's 21 health licensing agencies determined its own policies for dealing with professionals who had substance abuse problems.

The new rules would apply directly to the seven boards that operate diversion programs, in which licensees avoid discipline by agreeing to drug tests, support group meetings and heightened monitoring.

More than 300 people entered those programs in fiscal 2008; many more have been enrolled on a long-term basis.

But the rules also would apply more broadly, even to the medical board and other agencies without diversion programs, if a licensee has been placed on probation for a substance abuse problem.

Julianne D'Angelo Fellmeth, who audited the medical board's program, said the changes address gaping holes in the oversight of potentially dangerous caregivers.

"The state is finally taking responsibility for protecting the public," said D'Angelo Fellmeth, administrative director of the Center for Public Interest Law at the University of San Diego. "The state not only is taking control, but instituting pretty strict and strong standards."

But Ellen Brickman, president of the National Organization of Alternative Programs and director of Statewide Peer Assistance for Nurses in New York, said she was concerned that the new rules would keep addicted health professionals from seeking help, driving the problem underground.

"I'm listening to this and I'm cringing," she said. "I'm not optimistic that this is going to work the way they want it to. It won't keep people from abusing substances. It will keep them out of the system, where they'll be sicker before anybody can do anything about it."

Diversion programs, used in many states, were designed to encourage health workers to fight their addiction in a safe environment without ruining their careers.

D'Angelo Fellmeth said those who want to pursue confidential treatment still can enter private programs. Many turn to state-run programs, she said, only to avoid discipline -- because they are on the verge of being turned in by their employers or have been arrested in or convicted of drug- or alcohol-related offenses.

Among the new standards:

* Licensees suspected of drug abuse must undergo a clinical evaluation at their own expense to determine whether they can still practice safely. During this process, their licenses will be placed on inactive status, meaning they cannot work, and they must submit to drug tests twice a week. They can't return to work until they have at least one month of negative test results.

During their first year of participation, professionals will be randomly tested at least 104 times. After that, it drops to at least 50 times annually. Current programs require testing only 12 to 52 times, Stiger said.

* For the first time, the public will be able to review any restrictions placed on a health professional. Boards won't be allowed to directly say that someone is in substance abuse treatment, but they must publicly disclose that a person has an inactive license or is subject to increased supervision or limited work hours.

If someone is kicked out of the program, disciplinary proceedings will begin immediately, Stiger said. "If you have a major violation," such as use of a banned substance, "thou shalt not practice," he said.

Some states have gone even further than California. North Carolina, for instance, immediately suspends the licenses of nurses for a minimum of one year after a single relapse.

In California, all boards will be required to provide detailed information on their performance to the Legislature and the Department of Consumer Affairs.

The committee that drafted the new rules is calling for each program to successfully graduate every participant, but Stiger said officials haven't determined the consequences if they don't.

Last year, the nursing board's program had a 59% graduation rate.

The new standards are part of a broader effort to revamp the disciplinary process for health professionals in the state, speeding it up and prioritizing the most serious cases. To that end, Stiger appointed Paul Riches to a new post of deputy director for enforcement and compliance. Riches was previously executive officer of the Board of Behavioral Sciences.

The timetable for the new standards has not been finalized. The standards are due to the Legislature by Jan. 1, and boards will be asked to implement them afterward. Lawyers are still reviewing whether certain rules will require formal approval by the Legislature, Stiger said.

If these diversion programs cannot prove their worth soon, they could be eliminated, according to proposals under consideration.

"Quite frankly, we don't run them very well," Stiger said. "What we do well is enforce the law and that's where we need to be."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-california-nurses20-2009nov20,0,470516,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

L.A. cold-case detectives arrest man in 1982 murder

More than 27 years after Hazel Hughes' body was found by her nephew inside her Koreatown apartment, Los Angeles cold-case detectives have arrested a suspect for capital murder.

Victor Alvarez was arrested and charged earlier this month for the Aug. 16, 1982, murder of Hughes at her apartment on 4th Street near Vermont Avenue. Alvarez sexually assaulted Hughes during a burglary at her apartment before killing her, prosecutors allege.

Because of those special allegations, prosecutors could pursue the death penalty against Alvarez.

Hughes, 65, was one of two women whose bodies were found inside the 60-unit apartment building within 12 hours. Alvarez is also being investigated in the killing of Cordella Ferguson, 67, whose body was found the same day as Hughes'.

Ferguson's body was found by a maid. Hughes was discovered by her nephew when relatives became concerned that the sickly woman, who used a wheelchair or walker, did not answer her telephone.

Hughes' apartment at the six-story building was ransacked during the break-in. Investigators plan to reveal at a news conference this afternoon how they identified Alvarez with the help of scientific evidence.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fork-in-the-road sculpture will be site of food drive

The folks behind Pasadena's 18-foot-high, fork-in-the-road street sculpture are at it again.

This time, they plan to use the giant utensil for a food drive.

From 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday and Sunday, volunteers will collect nonperishable food items at the site of the whimsical sculpture at the intersection of South St. John and Pasadena avenues.

The food drive will benefit Union Station Homeless Services, which holds a Thanksgiving dinner each year in Central Park at South Fair Oaks Avenue and East Del Mar Boulevard.

The fork sculpture started off as a prank to celebrate the 75th birthday of Bob Stane, who owns the Coffee Gallery Backstage in Altadena.

Philip Coombes, a friend of artist Ken Marshall, came up with the idea for the food drive. People can remain in their cars because volunteers will be standing by with bags for the food, Coombes said.

The Pasadena real estate broker said he wanted to put another positive spin on the fork, which went from birthday present to guerrilla art.

“It makes you feel good to help other people,” Coombes said. “At least, it makes me feel good.”

The fork was erected on Halloween and since has become a piece of impromptu public art in Pasadena.  Stane and his friends have now proclaimed the site as Fork Plaza.

“We're trying to make it one of the biggest food volunteering projects ever in Pasadena,” Stane said.

Coobes is still looking for volunteers for the event. Anyone interested can contact him at phil@agentphil.com .

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

First of 3 L.A.-area care facilities for veterans to open

The first of three new long-term care facilities for veterans in California will open today in Lancaster, filling what officials say is a pressing need for basic care and assistance for military veterans.

The other facilities will open next month in Ventura and West next year in Los Angeles.

The William J. “Pete” Knight Veterans Home of California in Lancaster, which was built by the state Department of Veterans Affairs, will offer long-term care, assistance with daily activities and provide a place for veterans to socialize.

“It's incredibly important because veterans need this help,” said Thomas Craft, a retired Navy captain and chairman of the nonprofit Lancaster Veterans Home Citizens' Committee, which pushed for the facility to be established in the Antelope Valley.

“They realize they need help, but they don't want to go away from their families,”  he said.

The Lancaster home had been a vision of veterans since the mid-1990s, when the late-state Sen. William J. "Pete" Knight, a retired Air Force colonel — for whom the Lancaster facility is named — helped shape legislation to fund California's veterans homes.

In 1999, Lancaster donated 22 acres to the state Department of Veterans Affairs in hopes that a 400-bed facility would be built. The project was subsequently downsized to 60 beds and an adult day health center.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/11/first-of-three-laarea-care-facilities-for-veterans-open-today-.html#more

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

New law bans genetic discrimination

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, the most sweeping anti-discrimination law in nearly 20 years, prohibits employers from hiring or firing based on a person's genetic makeup.

by Joe Markman

November 21, 2009

Reporting from Washington

The most sweeping federal anti-discrimination law in nearly 20 years takes effect today, prohibiting employers from hiring, firing or determining promotions based on genetic makeup.

Additionally, health insurers will not be allowed to consider a person's genetics -- such as predisposition for Parkinson's disease -- to set insurance rates or deny coverage.

Not since the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 has the federal government implemented such far-reaching workplace protections. Stuart J. Ishimaru, acting chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, said in a statement that the law reaffirms the idea that people have a right to be judged solely on merit.

"No one should be denied a job or the right to be treated fairly in the workplace based on fears that he or she may develop some condition in the future," he said.

The National Federation of Independent Business, a nonprofit lobbying group for small businesses, filed a number of concerns in April with the EEOC, which oversees the law. The concerns included whether employers who "innocently discover" genetic information about their workers may be held liable for having that information in their files, the "confusing" interplay of other federal statutes, and the lack of an exception for publicly available genetic information on the Internet.

The business group is seeking to teach its members that under the law, any piece of medical history -- whether an employee's own or that of a family member -- constitutes genetic information, said Elizabeth Milito, senior counsel at the federation.

Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for the industry group America's Health Insurance Plans, said that his association originally supported the bill, but that the resulting regulations ultimately would disrupt efforts to stay healthy through wellness and disease-management programs.

"If a patient is at risk for a particular condition, they are a good candidate to do more preventive screenings, and this would prohibit some of that information even being gathered," Zirkelbach said.

There is not a lot of evidence that this kind of discrimination has been taking place. As of May, no genetic-employment discrimination cases had been brought before U.S. federal or state courts, according to the National Human Genome Research Institute. The government filed suit in 2001 against the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co. under the ADA for secretly testing some workers for a genetic defect that some believe can predispose a person to carpal tunnel syndrome. The railway settled the EEOC suit for $2.2 million.

Peter Bennett, an attorney in Maine who specializes in employment law, said he knew of no pending genetic discrimination cases, but expects them to pile up soon, in what he called a "kabuki dance" of litigation to sort out who is liable for what.

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, signed by President Bush in May 2008, is a huge victory for proponents of personalized medicine, which includes using genetic tests to aid in the diagnosis of disease and the selection of medicine.

"The psychological security regarding employment and insurance was a stumbling block to the advancement of personalized medicine," said Edward Abrahams, executive director of the Personalized Medicine Coalition.

"Moving that boulder from the train tracks was a major accomplishment."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-genetic-testing21-2009nov21,0,3567836,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Opinion

Senate inquiry into Ft. Hood misplaced

Sen. Joe Lieberman's insistence on this matter smells of opportunism.

by Tim Rutten

November 21, 2009

Sen. Joe Lieberman insists on pushing ahead with a Senate inquiry into the mass murder at Ft. Hood, despite White House and Pentagon anxieties that the probe could compromise the prosecution of alleged killer Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan.

It's always interesting to see how many friends due process has in times of extreme stress. Given what looks like the security authorities' wretched mishandling of the Hasan case -- the guy appears to have done everything but paste an "Osama bin Laden Rocks" bumper sticker on his car -- there's every reason for the administration and the FBI to want to put off a legislative reckoning for as long as possible. "We want to guarantee everyone a fair trial" is always good cover. But in this case, it has the additional virtue of being true.

For Lieberman's part, the Connecticut independent -- funny how that latter noun seems synonymous with "opportunist" in his case -- has an unerring instinct for plucking the political moment's low-hanging fruit. The chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs told Fox News that he wants to know whether Hasan's signs of "Islamic extremism" were "missed or ignored."

Those of us who have followed this terrible story can answer "yes" -- a conclusion we've reached even without the benefit of subpoena power. But these aren't questions that should be addressed in the politically charged, highly partisan atmosphere of Capitol Hill.

Meanwhile, Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates this week ordered an emergency investigation into all aspects of the massacre. Two outsiders -- former Army and Veterans Affairs Secretary Togo West and retired Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Vernon Clark -- will conduct the probe. Gates charged them with looking into not only the obvious security lapses but also the military's handling of Hasan's career in the years leading up to the shootings that left 13 dead and dozens more wounded. West is particularly suited to the task: When media reports several years ago revealed systemic mistreatment of severely wounded veterans of the Iraq War at Walter Reed and other military rehabilitation facilities, it was West, a one-time Clinton administration official, who was recruited to straighten things out.

West and Clark should give particular scrutiny to Hasan's career as a military psychiatrist. Such an inquiry may not be as rhetorically sexy as those involving terrorism or Islamic extremism, but it is critical to the issue of whether veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are receiving anything close to the sort of treatment they deserve from military health services.

The best reporting being done on this aspect of the Hasan debacle is that of National Public Radio correspondent Daniel Zwerdling. This week, for example, he obtained a 2007 report on Hasan's fitness by Maj. Scott Moran, then the Army doctor supervising psychiatrists at Walter Reed, where the alleged killer was then working. As NPR summarized the evaluation, Hasan's superiors believed he was "an incompetent psychiatrist and an unprofessional officer who often neglected his duties and his patients."

Zwerdling quoted from the evaluation: "The faculty has serious concerns about Capt. Hasan's professionalism and work ethic. He demonstrates a pattern of poor judgment and a lack of professionalism." According to Zwerdling, "the memo shows that Hasan proselytized to patients. He mishandled a homicidal patient. He allowed her to escape from the emergency room. The memo shows that when Hasan was supposed to be on call for emergencies, he didn't even answer the phone."

According to NPR, Hassan's colleagues described him as "disconnected from other people," and more than one speculated that he might be psychotic. Several reported his obsessive fixation on Islamic religiosity; one reportedly officially raised the issue of whether that religious fanaticism might trigger an act of betrayal, and another colleague raised the possibility that he might be capable of the sort of fratricide of which he is now accused.

Now call me old-fashioned, but before we get to questions of intelligence-gathering or monitoring potential terrorists, I'd like to know how the Army allowed a possibly psychotic psychiatrist in the grip of a hostile religious mania to treat servicemen and women suffering with the most intimate wounds combat can inflict. Was the process of removing him deemed too legally burdensome? Was he given a pass because his superiors feared accusations of bias against a religious Muslim?

We need answers to those questions; we need them now -- and answering them won't compromise Hasan's right to a fair trial.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rutten21-2009nov21,0,4971789,print.column

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Washington Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Al Qaeda's prospects

by Austin Bay

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's treachery and terror jolted Americans. As Maj. Hasan's attack demonstrates, al Qaeda and al Qaeda-influenced fanatics can strike and kill on American soil.

While Maj. Hasan serves warning that the threat still exists, does Maj. Hasan's act forward al Qaeda's political goals? Indeed, what are al Qaeda's prospects for victory eight years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on America?

Analysts and political leaders rarely address this question, at least not publicly. That's unfortunate. Napoleon understood the importance of assessing his opposition's position. He wrote in 1809, "In war one sees his own troubles, not those of the enemy." Focusing on one's own troubles and those of allies thwarts the clear-headed analysis of a diplomatic or military conflict Napoleon insisted was the mark of an effective senior commander.

American media have made a business of touting America's troubles in the war on terror. Tales of doom, fright and angry despair are audience-grabbers. Would that doom, fear and despair were the sole traits. An "it must be our fault and we made them angry" argument threads the cable TV carnival of doom. In the case of Maj. Hasan, this shtick became a discussion of his "alienation" and "isolation."

Historians such as Bernard Lewis have written volumes on the Islamic world's cultural, historical, economic and political problems. Mr. Lewis' 2001 book "What Went Wrong?" provided an extensive treatment of the great decline afflicting Middle Eastern Muslims. The assumption of theological superiority led to intellectual fossilization and stifled economic and cultural innovation.

Al Qaeda's brand of violent Islamists and their allies claim they have answers for "what went wrong" in their world. Lack of religious authenticity is part of his answer - authentic Muslims will believe as al Qaeda believes. Hence, al Qaeda places itself at odds with the majority of the world's Muslims. In al Qaeda's view, dividing secular and religious authority is a huge mistake - hence its goal of re-establishing a Muslim "caliphate."

There are various "green maps" of this caliphate, usually stretching from Spain to New Guinea, though Maj. Hasan would arguably include North America, since it appears he thinks sharia law should supersede the U.S. Constitution.

Al Qaeda in Iraq's emir, Abu Musab al Zarqawi, provided us with the most telling insight into al Qaeda's assessment of our strength and al Qaeda's huge problems - problems existing on Arab Muslim turf. Intercepted in Iraq in January 2004, Zarqawi's letter to al Qaeda's senior leaders bewailed the attraction of democracy in Iraq.

A secular, democratic state run by Iraqis was his nightmare and would seal al Qaeda's defeat in Iraq. This "new Iraq" would also create a modernizing political option in the Middle East. Zarqawi concluded he had to foment a sectarian war in Iraq between Shia and Sunni Arabs, and the resulting bloodshed and chaos would inflict a psychological and military defeat on the U.S. and its Iraqi allies.

Measured by the grand map of the would-be caliphate, al Qaeda has arguably lost significant ground since 2001. Several Sunni and Shia conflicts continue, but the strife Zarqawi sought to fatally ignite failed to shatter Iraq. He did incite defeatists in the U.S., but it was Zarqawi who was defeated in Iraq.

Pakistan teeters. It remains a radical Islamist opportunity, but its success depends on Pashtun tribal fortunes. If Pashtun Taliban factions choose to make new political settlements in Pakistan or Afghanistan, the al Qaeda commanders they currently harbor are a trading card for concessions in both Kabul and Islamabad.

Al Qaeda's ideology remains psychologically influential, and Maj. Hasan is likely an example of a sympathizer turned terrorist operative on his own initiative. Hasans are a definite danger. In the aftermath of his assault, Americans are more closely evaluating violent, anti-American threats as indicative steps toward violent, terrorist action.

Diminishing the space for domestic terrorist sympathizers may well be the fruit of his murders. And that would be another defeat for al Qaeda's tyrants.

Austin Bay is a nationally syndicated columnist.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/21/al-qaedas-prospects//print/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lessons learned

by Clifford D. May

When a military officer participates in a war against his own country, that is high treason, and that is the charge that ought to be brought against Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. But it's not going to happen.

Maj. Hasan should have been weeded out of the military long ago. There was abundant evidence that his allegiance was not to the United States - the country that had given his immigrant family safe haven and provided him the opportunity to become, at taxpayer expense, a physician, an officer and a gentleman. It was apparent that he viewed himself not as an American soldier but as a "Soldier of Allah" - the phrase he had printed on his business cards - and that sooner or later he would wage war against the "unbelievers."

Why did none of those who saw something say something? In a culture where the value of diversity trumps the requirements of security, to do so would have been career suicide. There was no way that was going to happen.

Let's be clear: The lesson of Fort Hood is not that Muslims in the U.S. military constitute a fifth column. But neither can we continue to assume blithely that someone like Maj. Hasan - American-born, well educated, apparently sophisticated - could never succumb to the temptations of what the politically correct call "violent extremism."

Paradoxically, the Fort Hood massacre highlights the fact that Muslims soldiers who are doing their duty as proud, patriotic Americans are extraordinarily independent-minded and brave. While there is no evidence that Maj. Hasan was ever harassed for being a Muslim - as some of his relatives have charged - there is a long record of Muslims who criticize Islamists being denounced as apostates, a sin that can bring a fatwa and the death penalty. "Patriotism is paganism," the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini famously said. Khomeini was a Shia Islamist, but on this theological point Sunni Islamists emphatically agree.

Western commentators sometimes assert that Muslims who preach intolerance and belligerence are "heretics" who have "hijacked" a great and peaceful religion. But no Muslim authority would say that - not even those who denounce terrorism. How, after all, can a fundamentalist be a heretic? How can someone who insists on a literal reading of the Koran be accused of misrepresenting what it says?

Some Western commentators also assert that there is a "civil war" taking place within "the Muslim world." But no battles or even protests were ever staged outside the Dar al-Hijra mosque in Northern Virginia where Anwar al-Aulaqi preached a hateful and violent theology. Maj. Hasan was among those who worshipped with - and was inspired by - al-Aulaqi, an American-born cleric who five years ago decamped to Yemen. In recent days, Al-Aulaqi has described Maj. Hasan as a "hero," adding: "The only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the U.S. army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal."

Al-Aulaqi's kind of Islam aims to humble, defeat and conquer despised "infidels." Islamists of his ilk are determined, ruthless and well-financed thanks to the West's addiction to oil, most of which is found in lands ruled by those who read Islam more or less as al-Aulaqi does.

They also have this advantage - the reluctance of so many Americans to comprehend that a war is being waged against them, even after an American military base in Texas has been turned into a killing field by what appears to have been a turncoat furious over Islamist grievances, driven by Islamist dreams.

In his remarks at the memorial in Fort Hood last week, President Obama said: "No faith justifies these murderous and craven acts." But the faith embraced by al-Aulaqi, Maj. Hasan and millions like them has been invoked to justify the slaughter of Christians, Jews and Muslim dissidents for decades. It would be enormously helpful if our political leaders would accept this reality and consider its policy implications. But that's not going to happen, at least not any time soon.

Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/21/lessons-learned//print/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Wall Street Journal

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OPINION

NOVEMBER 20, 2009, 10:24 P.M. ET

• Eric Holder's Baffling KSM Decision

  The attorney general's Senate testimony this week did nothing to reassure the families of 9/11's victims.

  by DAVID BEAMER

  On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee met to question Attorney General Eric Holder about his decision to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four others in criminal courts rather than military tribunals. As the father of Todd Beamer, who died on United Airlines Flight 93, I was able to attend that hearing. What transpired caused me great concern and shook my confidence in our current administration.

  The committee, chaired by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.), displayed the division in our country not only visually—the Democrats were seated on the left and the Republicans on the right—but in every aspect of the proceedings. I expected that some members would agree with Mr. Holder and that others would have challenging questions about his decision. What I did not anticipate was the level of partisanship showed by the majority party. It seemed clear to me and other family members of victims that party loyalty is trumping concern for America's security interests.

  In his opening remarks, Attorney General Holder acknowledged that these defendants could have been brought to trial in civilian court or before military tribunals. But he made the argument that trying them in our criminal courts would restore the integrity of our judicial system. He assured us that the trials would be quick, that the safety of New Yorkers would be paramount, that classified information would not be revealed, that the evidence was overwhelming, and that justice would be served.

  Then he said that the USS Cole attackers would be tried in military courts since they attacked our military. So how does Mr. Holder categorize the Pentagon? Inexplicably, he offered up the body count of 9/11, the fact that civilian deaths outnumbered military ones, as a rationale for his decision.

  Then the Republican members proceeded to ask Mr. Holder thoughtful questions. Some examples:

  How can we be assured that these enemies will be found guilty? Given that criminal courts are now the presumed venue for those captured on the battlefield, will soldiers need to read them their rights at the time of capture? Since you wish to make exceptions on a case-by-case basis to the presumed civil venue, don't all those captured need to be read their rights and have the opportunity to remain silent? Won't this venue expose intelligence to our enemies? Can our classified information really be secured? Can we in fact predict how the judge will rule? If these people are brought into the country will they get additional rights under immigration law? What if they claim asylum?

  The attorney general seemed bewildered in the face of these inquiries. Recurring themes in his responses included "I think," and "I can't imagine," and "I am not an expert in immigration."

  Has our attorney general not considered these issues, or imagined the possible unintended consequences that will arise from his historic decision? It certainly seemed that way. If he had, he would have had better answers.

  A second shocker: Mr. Holder said that he and his boss had not spoken in person about this decision. This matter only involves upholding the constitutional rights of Americans, establishing a precedent with battlefield impact, and the safety and security of our citizens in a time of war. What are the criteria to make something a priority with President Barack Obama? How can it be that this matter didn't make the cut?

  The Democrats used much of their questioning time to heap praise upon Mr. Holder. They all repeated the same trope: We'll show the world that America can conduct these trials openly in criminal courts. And we'll be successful, even as we convey rights to the defendants that are not warranted.

  Since when has "show the world" been a primary objective?

  No thoughtful questions from the majority party regarding this decision were forthcoming. Their questions mostly addressed other matters. They discussed overcrowding in our prisons (too many drug criminals being sentenced), asked why none of the $500 million in appropriations have helped the rape-kit processing backlog, and inquired about when recommendations for additional staff would be presented for confirmation. Their lack of attention to the pressing matter at hand suggested apathy.

  Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) did ask a question about how much the trials will cost. Clearly there will be expense incurred if this does go to trial in New York City. The early, and by no means complete, estimate is that it will cost $75 million for the first year. Mr. Schumer did not express any concern about the costs involved but only asked the attorney general for assurance that all would be covered by federal funds. This question was promptly and explicitly answered in the affirmative by Mr. Holder. After all, this is a rather modest amount by Washington standards.

  Our enemies must be thrilled. We are willingly handing them an opportunity to inflict economic harm on New York City, keep their cause in the headlines, gather new intelligence, create new terror strategies, stimulate recruiting, celebrate new-found rights, and foist a fresh round of pain and suffering upon their victims.

  This decision is September 11, the sequel. It is my hope that Mr. Holder will reconsider.

  A final observation: During the proceedings a young lady, dutifully attentive, sat with a stack of paper about 15 inches high on her lap. The papers contained names, single spaced, of some 100,000 people who signed a letter in opposition to this decision. This young woman, Jill Regan, lost her dad, Donald J. Regan, FDNY of the Bronx, who died trying to save others on 9/11. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R., Al.) asked that those names be entered into the record at the end of the session. It was agreed, but by that time the chairmen and most of the Democrats were already gone. I grieved for her—and for all of us—anew.

  Mr. Beamer is the father of Todd Beamer, who died on United Airlines Flight 93 on 9/11.

  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704888404574547681569546414.html#printMode

  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  
  From UNICEF
  
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  ‘State of the World's Children' special edition marks 20 years of child rights

  NEW YORK, USA, 19 November 2009 – On the eve of the 20th anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), UNICEF today launches a special edition of its flagship report, ‘The State of the World's Children', focusing on the ground-breaking human rights covenant for children.

  VIDEO: Watch now

  UNICEF Executive Director Ann M. Veneman, Goodwill Ambassador and actor Lucy Liu, and Grace Akallo, a former child soldier, are discussing the special edition at a UNICEF headquarters event where the agency's annual publication is being released.

  ‘The State of the World's Children' this year explores the difference that the CRC has made in the lives of children over the past two decades – and the role it can play in an increasingly populous, urbanized, disparate and environmentally challenged world.

  Rights of children everywhere

  On 20 November 1989, the United Nations adopted the CRC, the first legally binding international instrument that incorporated the full range of human rights for children.

  The Convention sets out these rights in 54 articles and two Optional Protocols. It spells out the basic human rights that apply to children everywhere: the rights to survival, health, protection, education and full participation in family, cultural and social life.

  The CRC has achieved near-universal acceptance, having now been ratified by 193 State Parties – more than belong to the United Nations or have acceded to the Geneva Conventions.

  Tomorrow, on the anniversary date itself, a commemoration of the CRC's first 20 years will take place in the Trusteeship Council chamber at United Nations headquarters.

  UNICEF and the Convention

  The provisions and principles of the CRC guide UNICEF in advocating for the protection of child rights, helping to meet children's basic needs and expanding their opportunities to reach their full potential.

  Over the past 20 years, the world has witnessed the power of the CRC to transform lives. Because of a global commitment to the Convention, more children today are surviving, more are attending school, more have access to safe water and more are being protected against deadly diseases.

  However, UNICEF recognizes that many challenges remain before all rights for all children are achieved.

  “The idea that we live in a world where people still use children as soldiers, that we live in a world where people make children do jobs that are so dangerous that they can kill or disable them – the existence of those things shows how much farther we have to go in creating those structures around children that deliver them their rights,” said the Chief of UNICEF's Gender and Rights Unit, Dan Seymour.

  Working together

  It will take a commitment from all sectors of society – from leaders and policy-makers to families and educators – to transform the CRC from words on paper into real change for all the world's children.

  “When we fail in that duty and responsibility, we are a lesser society or human family,” said Mr. Seymour. “It's one of the most powerful reflections on how far we've come as people.”

  With the Convention as a guiding document, UNICEF and its partners can hold governments accountable to their obligations, empower parents and educators with knowledge and skills, and listen to children when making decisions on their behalf. Working together, we can make the dream of the CRC a reality for every child.

  http://www.unicef.org/sowc/index_51808.html
  
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  UNICEF and partners commemorate 20 years of Convention on the Rights of the Child

  by Val Wang

  NEW YORK, USA, 20 November 2009 – Today at the United Nations, UNICEF and its partners commemorated the 20th anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the ground-breaking human rights covenant that codifies rights for all children, everywhere.

  VIDEO: Watch now

  The global commemoration and a panel discussion, held in the Trusteeship Council chamber, looked back at the progress made on child rights under the CRC and looked forward to the future.

  ‘Fundamental human rights'
  
  On 20 November 1989, the United Nations adopted the CRC, the first legally binding international instrument that incorporated the full range of human rights for children – including the rights to survival, health, protection, education and full participation in family, cultural and social life. Since then, 193 countries have ratified the treaty.

  “Over the past 20 years, the Convention has been our beacon, our template, our guide in protecting and nurturing the youngest and most vulnerable members of society,” said UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

  Added UNICEF's Executive Board President, Ambassador Oumar Daou: “The Convention contributed to changing attitudes towards children and the promotion of the fundamental human rights that children should enjoy.”

  Achievements and challenges
  
  UNICEF Advocate for Children Affected by War Ishmael Beah moderated the commemoration. At 13, Mr. Beah was recruited to fight in the civil war in his home country, Sierra Leone.

  “Before, during and after my experiences of the war, I didn't know that I had rights as a child,” he said. “But I later learned that it was because of the Convention and the organizations committed to implementing it that I was removed from the war and placed in a rehabilitation centre. And that made my presence here today possible.”

  UNICEF Executive Director Ann M. Veneman outlined the achievements of the past two decades – including reductions in child mortality, child trafficking and recruitment of child soldiers, and increases in school enrolment, access to safe water and the legal age of marriage for girls in many nations.

  However, Ms. Veneman also spoke about meeting children who had been forced into prostitution, armed conflict and early marriage, and young people victimized by sexual violence. There is still a long way to go, she said, before these unspeakable violations of child rights are a thing of the past.

  Young people seek positive change
  
  Youth activists at today's event offered their perspectives on the CRC, as well. They spoke about the discrimination, violence and lack of opportunity they have witnessed in their countries – and about their own efforts to bring about positive change in their communities.

  The 2008 International Children's Peace Prize winner, Mayra Avellar Neves, 18, recalled leading a march in protest of the violence in the ‘favela' where she lives in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The protest prompted the re-opening of schools in her neighbourhood.

  “Can you imagine how it is to live your daily life with a war going on in front of your door? Is it fair that we have to wake up under the sound of bullets? Children have the right to protection,” she said.

  Mayra and the other young people on hand challenged adults to take further action on child rights.

  “Children don't just want resolutions. Children want solutions,” said Millicent Atieno Orondo, 17, of Kenya. “We don't want to hear any good intentions. We want to see actions. Remember, you owe us our rights, so keep your promises.”

  Civil society panellists
  
  Ms. Veneman also moderated an interactive panel featuring civil society leaders from around the world, including:

  • Ioana Maria Barbu, founder and President of a Romanian NGO that promotes youth leadership
    
    
  • Emilio Jeroo Billimoria, Executive Director of the non-governmental organization Aflatoun International
    
    
  • Nyaradzayi Gumbonzvanda, human rights lawyer from Zimbabwe
    
    
  • Archbishop Felix Machado, a member of the planning committee for the World Day of Prayer and Action for Children
    
    
  • Garcia Mendez, child-rights expert and member of the National Parliament of Argentina
    
    
  • Timothy Shriver, Chairman of the Special Olympics.
    

  The leaders emphasized the need for a commitment from all sectors of society – from policy-makers to families and educators – to transform the CRC from words on paper into real change for all the world's children.
  
  “The UN Convention has a compelling message, but it is not just for governments,” said Mr. Shriver. “It is for young people. It is for civil society. The new power of enforcement is bottom up, not top-down.”

  http://www.unicef.org/policyanalysis/index_51872.html?q=printme
  
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  From the Department of Justice
  
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  Predictive Policing: A National Discussion

  November 20th, 2009
  
  Posted by Tracy Russo

  This week in Los Angeles, California, the Justice Department's National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) hosted the Nation's first symposium on Predictive Policing.  Predictive policing is a relatively new law enforcement concept that integrates approaches such as cutting-edge crime analysis, crime fighting technology, intelligence-lead policing and more to inform forward thinking crime prevention strategies and tactics.  

  The Justice Department is supporting activities in a number of police departments nationwide, some of who are participating in demonstration projects of specific predictive policing models.  A list of those projects is located, here  (PDF).

  The newly confirmed Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs, Laurie Robinson, provided luncheon remarks on Thursday and introduced keynote speaker Former Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton. In addition, Acting NIJ Director Kristina Rose, and Acting BJA Director James Burch, spoke with Southern California Public Radio along with Chief Bratton about the importance of using information to drive innovative crime fighting strategies. The interview can be heard, here.

  Although we have made impressive gains in reducing crime over the last 10 years in this country, we still face unacceptable pockets of violent crime in some neighborhoods. This symposium was an important forum for bringing together researchers, practitioners, and leaders to develop and discuss the concept of predictive policing and its impact on crime and justice. Leading criminal justice policymakers and practitioners had the opportunity to explore current issues and the future of prediction in criminal justice. In addition, attendees discussed what Predictive Policing is, where it is being practiced, and what we can learn from those experiences to develop a concrete strategy that can be replicated across the country.

  The 2½ -day workshop is a springboard for action and also marks the formation of the National Predictive Policing Advisory Group. Following the symposium, the group, comprised of police chiefs, federal law enforcement experts, criminal justice researchers, and national police organizations, will begin a national dialogue about Predictive Policing and its future in the criminal justice field.

  Innovative strategies, such as Predictive Policing, can help us understand our communities better and make us better partners in carrying out the mission of the Department of Justice. This symposium will help us define for the field how we should be moving forward to meet the challenges of law enforcement in a new era.

  http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/385

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.