Let's assume that all the chips fell the jihadis' way, that they recruited enough volunteers to be able to kidnap and decapitate every single Jew in Palestine. Then what? Muslims would still be, as General Musharraf told a conference the other day, "the poorest, the most illiterate, the most backward, the most unhealthy, the most unenlightened, the most deprived, and the weakest of all the human race." Who would "the victim of the world" blame next? The evidence of the Sudan, Nigeria, and other parts of Africa suggests that, when there are no Jews to hand, the Islamofascists happily make do with killing Christians. In Kashmir, it's the Hindus' fault. There's always someone.

Great Moments in Airport Security
Reader Dal Jeanis writes:

Regarding the three-year-old who was wanded: I had a similar experience flying with my two-year-old son to meet my wife in San Antonio. As well as wanding him, they made him take his shoes off! Well, in all honesty, he did fit the profile: a young single male with poor English skills traveling one-way.

Eleventh-graders at the elite Islamic Saudi Academy in Northern Virginia study energy and matter in physics, write out differential equations in precalculus and read stories about slavery and the Puritans in English.

Then they file into their Islamic studies class, where the textbooks tell them the Day of Judgment can't come until Jesus Christ returns to Earth, breaks the cross and converts everyone to Islam, and until Muslims start attacking Jews.

The Islamic Saudi Academy does not require that U.S. history or government be taught, offering Arabic social studies as an alternative. Officials there said that only Saudis who intend to return home do not take U.S. history, though a handful of U.S.-born students who plan to stay in this country said they opted against it, too.

School officials would not allow reporters to attend classes. But a number of students described the classroom instruction and provided copies of textbooks.

Ali Al-Ahmed, whose Virginia-based Saudi Institute promotes religious tolerance in Saudi Arabia, has reviewed numerous textbooks used at the academy and said many passages promote hatred of non-Muslims and Shiite Muslims.

The 11th-grade textbook, for example, says one sign of the Day of Judgment will be that Muslims will fight and kill Jews, who will hide behind trees that say: "Oh Muslim, Oh servant of God, here is a Jew hiding behind me. Come here and kill him."

Several students of different ages, all of whom asked not to be identified, said that in Islamic studies, they are taught that it is better to shun and even to dislike Christians, Jews and Shiite Muslims.

Some teachers "focus more on hatred," said one teenager, who recited by memory the signs of the coming of the Day of Judgment. "They teach students that whatever is kuffar [non-Muslim], it is okay for you" to hurt or steal from that person.

Finally, there's line 47. You haven't heard about that, but you will.

Here's the story. The Bush administration didn't want to give those famous $300 rebate checks; its original plan would have pumped hardly any money into the economy last year. Under prodding from Democrats the plan was changed to incorporate immediate cash outlays. But those outlays were included only grudgingly, and with a catch: they really weren't rebates. Instead, they were merely advances on future tax cuts.

What that means is that most taxpayers, when they reach line 47 of their 1040's, will discover that they owe $300 more in taxes than they expected. In other words, the one piece of the Bush tax cut that probably did help the economy last year is about to be snatched away. The direct monetary impact will be significant; the psychological impact, as taxpayers realize that they've been misled, may be even greater.

Last summer Congress passed, and the President signed into law, a bill that provided immediate tax relief for taxpayers. The bill created a new 10% bracket that did not go into effect until January 1, 2002. In order to give taxpayers the benefit of the new 10% bracket immediately, Advance Payment checks were sent in the maximum amounts of $300 for singles, $500 for head of households, and $600 for married filing jointly.

Line 47 of Form 1040 (line 30 of Form 1040A and line 7 of Form 1040EZ) provides a Rate Reduction Credit for those taxpayers who did not get the maximum benefit from last summer's Advance Payments, and whose 2001 income or tax amounts qualify them for an additional amount.

Contrary to the column's assertion, last summer's checks did not reduce refunds or increase tax bills. In fact, the most recent figures show that the average amount for nearly 23 million refunds processed has actually increased by $232, to $2,210.

Taxpayers who received the maximum Advance Payment for their filing status should leave line 47 blank. The Advance Payment check they received last year is theirs to keep. Period.

My Feb. 22 column mentioned "line 47" in this year's 1040. What I said was correct, but has been subject to misinterpretation, most of it innocent, some of it deliberate. Let me say it another way: Most people think that they received both a rebate and a tax cut. But the rebate was only an advance on the tax cut; it must be counted against the refund you would otherwise receive. Hundreds of thousands of early filers have already gotten this wrong. The effect is to give many people a rude shock, which is not what this economy needs.

The country is moving in the right direction on cleaning up campaign financing. We should go further and start serious debate on public financing of campaigns.

"Clean money" reform is working in several states where a set amount of money is apportioned to candidates.

The McCain-Feingold and Shays- Meehan bills are merely steppingstones to true reform: public financing.
EDWARD RAPP
Inverness, Fla., Feb. 25, 2002

BEIJING -- The Chinese government responded to President Bush's call for religious tolerance Friday by promptly editing out his remarks on freedom and faith in its transcript of a speech that Bush delivered on live national television.

Before the U.S. leader had even boarded Air Force One to return to Washington on Friday afternoon, China's state-controlled media put out their version of the morning address, in which Bush spoke to an audience of university students.

Almost half the speech--large chunks extolling American liberty and urging China to relax its political and religious restrictions--was simply hacked out in the transcript released by the official New China News Agency. The heavy censorship prompted indignant complaints on the Internet from people who demanded that the full text be restored. "Why must the New China News Agency kid itself?" someone using the name Crawler asked in one chat room. "Does striking out someone's words mean the person never said them?"

Others took to posting the censored portions for others to read. "The Chinese media always distort the facts," another cyber-citizen wrote. "Everyone ought to compare the live remarks with the subsequent transcript."

SEN. BROWNBACK: And I would hope we wouldn’t have litmus tests on judges. It used to be that, OK, Ronald Reagan was accused of a litmus test on judge. We shouldn’t have a litmus test from the left or the right on judges. And I think it’d be fair to say that that should be a standard for both sides.

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to another...

SEN. FEINSTEIN: Let me just say one thing ‘cause I can’t let that one go. This isn’t a federal district court. This is an appellate court. For most people, the appellate courts are very much like the Supreme Court. They decide the cases. There are big cases to be decided. There are points that many of us feel passionately about, one of them being Roe vs. Wade. Sam and I would disagree on Roe vs. Wade. I don’t want to see Roe overturned. I’m in a position where I’m going to be very careful that a judge that I vote for to go to a circuit court will not do that. And I think I have every right to do so. It’s not a question of a litmus test. It’s a question of following established law and keeping that law intact.

SEN. BROWNBACK: I think that was defined as a litmus test under Ronald Reagan what Senator Feinstein just articulated.

"Well, I don't know what the public does and I don't know what you guys do, you probably won't even report it again if I'm not around. But I intend to make sure there is a closure and resolvement of the case, and I think the fact that I would be in Washington, D.C., I would be able to at least have some contact with law enforcement to see that they don't let the thing sort of die out."

Testimony of Zhang Hongjuan

Dec. 10, 2001

My name is Zhang Hongjuan (Xu Tong kge), and I am 20 years old. On Aug. 14, 2001 I was arrested by officers of the Shi Pai Police Station. The police officers interrogated me with severe torture before sending me to the Detention Center of Zhong Xiang Police Department.

At this Detention Center they tortured me further. They put shackles on my hands and feet, and used electric clubs to touch my whole body, especially my chest. I had no strength to resist such assaults, so I called them “rogues.” It enraged them to more violent acts. They forcefully unbuttoned my shirt, tearing off one button, and touched every spot of my chest with the electric club. I yelled at the top of my voice, but they moved the club into my mouth to stop me from crying. “It’s useless to call for help. No one will come. You’re in the hands of the Communist Party. The Party has given us these electric clubs, shackles fetters for the very purpose of dealing with you!” One of the men pulled at his pants and threatened: “When I’m angry, I will take off your clothes and give you a good beating. You said we shouldn’t unbutton your shirt? I won’t be held accountable even if I strip you naked and strike you hard.” I was one of many people tortured in this way, and my torture was lighter than theirs. I don’t know why they tortured me so cruelly.

The following is my testimony of the greater humiliation and torture suffered by my fellow inmates. I will describe what I saw and heard in person. Fengjiu, who is only 15 years old, also had her chest, hands and feet touched and injured by their electric club. When Li Li (Tongjin) saw the blisters on Fengjiu’s body, she exclaimed that the policemen had violated her human rights. The policemen overhead her and took note of it. When it was Li Li’s turn to be interrogated, they sneered: “So you mentioned human rights. I will treat you as subhuman and give you no human rights. Are you still a human?” With these words they came up to her and tore at her blouse. She held it tight, so they abused her with these words: “You talked of holiness and purity. But you’re a sham! Tell us the truth: How many times have you slept with your teacher [referring to Gong Shengliang]?” Li Li flew into a rage: “You slanderers!” she shouted and demanded: “Let’s go to a hospital to check it out!” Hearing this challenging statement, they dared not push this any further, yet they still would not let her go. They continued to torment her by inserting the electric club underneath her shirt to burn her chest and her lower parts, pulling off her hair by handfuls from her head, and splashing water unto her face. For a whole day, a whole night and yet another whole morning she was continuously tortured. The police spared no means of torture to get information from us.

Wang Lan, nearly beaten to death, had passed out several times. Seeing that she couldn’t eat anything, the police insisted that she was pregnant by having sexual intercourse with the teacher [Gong Shengliang], whom they wanted to put to death. Believing they had got hold of some material evidence against Gong, they brought Wang Lan to a hospital for a pregnancy test, but they were disappointed by the result. Tong Cuijuan underwent the same torture. They beat her up, hoping for a confession that she had slept with her teacher [Gong Shengliang]. When they used electric clubs to touch her breasts, anger gave her courage to call them “base.” They unbuttoned all but two buttons on her shirt and pulled it down. Her chest was exposed for their humiliation. Later they announced: “A 3-year sentence will be unfair for Tonghao (Cuijuan) because she cooperated with us very satisfactorily.” They said this as if they had got what they had wanted from Tonghao.

Chi Faling, too, had her chest and lower parts touched by electric clubs. The police tortured us in this ruthless manner for no other purpose but to get “verbal and material evidence” to accuse and incriminate our teacher [Gong Shengliang].

Princess Buniah al-Saud's attorney told the judge she wanted to go home to celebrate Eid al-Adha, a holiday associated with the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. When asked by her attorney if she would return, al-Saud said softly: "Of course I will."

Al-Saud, 41, a niece of King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, added that her family's name would be tarnished if she didn't.

Circuit Judge Richard Conrad allowed her to have her passport back. A trial date has not been set and it was not known when the princess would leave the United States.

Chief Assistant State Attorney Bill Vose said he was reluctant to let al-Saud leave the country because the United States has no extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia and would have no legal recourse if she failed to return.

"This isn't the crime of the century," Vose said. "But I'm concerned that she won't come back because she has no legal reason to come back."

ATLANTA –– Former President Jimmy Carter on Thursday criticized President Bush's labeling three countries an "axis of evil," saying the statement was "overly simplistic and counterproductive."

Carter said Bush's statement seriously jeopardized progress made with North Korea, Iran and Iraq in recent years.

"I think it will take years before we can repair the damage done by that statement," said Carter, speaking at an Emory University conference on the impact of terrorism.

Pastor Gong was sentenced to death on December 5 on charges of operating an "evil cult" and on the seemingly trumped-up charges of rape and assault. The month-long period for deciding his appeal was extended January 5 by a Hubei court following sharp international protest.

The letter, written by two underground Christian women, Li Ailian and Wang Yue, reports that in efforts to find and apprehend Pastor Gong and suppress the South China Church, police arrested and severely beat at least 25 Christians, and tortured others with electric prods. Two victims, described below, reportedly died.

Yu Zhongju, a young mother from Zhongxiang was arrested May 27, 2001 in a private house connected with Pastor Gong's congregation. She died in police custody in late July, allegedly as a result of torture. According to her family, police informed them of Yu's death July 20, after her body had begun to decompose. The police paid the family, warning them not to raise the matter further. There has been no official investigation of the case.

Gu Xuegui, a Christian man also connected with Pastor Gong's church, disappeared while in police custody, probably sometime in October. A congregant from Puyang City, Henan province last saw Gu in a prison vehicle with his face showing signs of beatings. His family later received information that he had died under severe torture.

During the 37-minute news conference, the Chinese president twice initially ignored questions from U.S. reporters about why his government restricts practicing religious faith and has imprisoned Catholic bishops. When he later answered, Bush looked away.

"I don't have religious faith," Jiang said. "Yet this does not prevent me from having an interest in religion. I've read the Bible, I've also read the Koran, as well as the Scriptures of Buddhism. . . . Whatever religion people believe in, they have to abide by the law. So some of the law-breakers have been detained because of their violation of law, not because of their religious belief."

Typical is the experience of Santee, Calif., a city of 58,000 on the outskirts of San Diego County. A little over a year ago, Mayor Randy Voepel received a letter from the newly arrived Chinese consul general in Los Angeles, Lan Lijun. Mr. Lan's letter began with a cheery greeting and rolled right along to describe the Falun Gong movement as a "doomsday" cult that creates "a panic atmosphere" and if left unchecked in America could end up "jeopardizing your social stability." Noting that China would "like to establish and develop friendly relations with your city"--and implying this would require complying with China's wishes--Mr. Lan's letter went on to urge that "no recognition and support in any form should be given to the Falun Gong" and urged banning them from registration as any kind of official organization.

Not so typical was Mr. Voepel's reaction. A Vietnam War veteran, he wrote back: "Your letter personally chilled me to my bones. I was shocked that a Communist Nation would go to this amount of trouble to suppress what is routinely accepted in this country. . . . I have the greatest respect for the Chinese people in your country and everywhere else in the world, but must be honest in my concern for the suppression of human rights by your government as evidenced by your request." Mr. Voepel then issued a mayoral proclamation commending the Falun Gong.

O'Reilly: "Then why does she call 911 after she kills her kids? Explain."

Doherty: "That's a fact. That's not any evidence that this woman is in her right mind. Just because she knows that 911 is a place to call for help."

O'Reilly: "Why does anyone call 911?"

Doherty: "Well somebody had to come take care of the mess."

As comprehensive campaign finance reform nears its expected enactment, House Democratic lawmakers have already adopted strategies for redirecting the flow of large contributions to outside groups aligned with their party, a move they hope will help them regain control of the Chamber.


House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.) has assured African-American members of his caucus that he will raise money for groups such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the Southwest Voter Project to pay for their voter registration and get-out-the-vote operations.


Reform legislation sponsored by Reps. Chris Shays (R-Conn.) and Marty Meehan (D-Mass.) that passed the House last week bans soft money but allows federal lawmakers to raise funds in $20,000 increments for outside organizations as long as those groups are “nonpartisan.” The loose restrictions would allow party leaders to direct hundreds of thousands of dollars for such groups.

The slogan "NYC, Terror Free" worries me. To throw anyone out of New York would be unjust. The cycle of hostilities since September 11th have (sic) spun out of control. My answer to PLO out of NYC is that the moment we start kicking terrorists out of New York City - I leave also. A terror-free city is no place for me.
Salaam,
Edward

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) –– A Saudi court has sentenced a man to six years in prison and 4,750 lashes for having sex with his wife's sister, a newspaper reported Sunday.

The woman involved in the case was sentenced to six months in jail and 65 lashes, the paper Al-Eqtisadiah reported, though the court found she had not consented to the relationship. She had also reported the affair to the police.

I am writing to thank you for attending the hearing on the nomination of Judge Charles Pickering to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and to urge you to support his nomination because of his hostility to child murder, men-bashing, and civil rights. Because of his record on these issues and his recent testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, I urge you to vote for his confirmation and make sure the full Senate considers him.

Judge Pickering is a staunch opponent of infanticide. He served as a State Senator from 1972-1980; during that time he voted in favor of a convention to propose a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, and he voted against state funding for abortion-advocacy groups. In 1976, Judge Pickering chaired the subcommittee of the National Republican Party that approved a plank calling for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to make abortion illegal. Pickering also sensibly opposed the Equal Rights Amendment.

Senator Feinstein (D-CA) questioned Pickering about his support for a constitutional ban on abortion, and Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) also pressed Pickering as to his views on Roe v. Wade. Pickering refused to reveal his position on Roe v. Wade, as is common for both liberal and conservative judicial nominees, or discuss his views on other Supreme Court cases decided after Roe that have allowed states to limit abortion access. Pickering’s reluctance to answer these questions clearly is the proper decision, demonstrating that he has good judicial temperment.

Judge Pickering’s history on civil rights issues is also encouraging. In 1959, he wrote a law review article analyzing a Mississippi statute that criminalized interracial marriage. His legal objective legal analysis resulted in the state legislature amending the law that was later found unconstitutional.

By supporting Pickering’s nomination, we will send a message to the President that he should continue to nominate candidates who are wise, reasonable and conservative.

With that in mind, Pickering deserves praise for courageously testifying in 1967 against Sam Bowers, a Ku Klux Klan leader who was being tried for the firebombing death of Vernon Dahmer Sr., a civil rights leader who was helping blacks register to vote.

Pickering's testimony against Bowers cost Pickering his re-election as the local prosecutor, Medgar Evers' brother Charles Evers wrote in a Wall Street Journal piece in support of Pickering.

On the other hand, William Taylor, a Washington lawyer who served on the Washington, D-C.-based Citizens' Commission on Civil Rights at that time, pointed out that, by that time, even the white establishment of Mississippi had begun to decide that Klan violence was bad for business.

In his tenure on the district bench, he has shown an amateurish tendency to use legal opinions as vehicles for extended discussions of issues of public controversy. The fact that one of these opinions openly questions basic principles of modern civil rights law makes supporting him difficult.

Pickering's entire record is not that of a committed -- if now closeted -- segregationist; nor did the Senate find him to be such when it unanimously voted to confirm him as a district judge in 1990. The need on the part of liberal groups and Democratic senators to portray him as a Neanderthal -- all the while denying they are doing so -- in order to justify voting him down is the latest example of the degradation of the confirmation process.

In China, the government had a unique problem: how to keep a billion people from accessing politically sensitive websites, now and forever.

The way to do it would be this: If a Chinese user tried to view a website outside China with political content, such as CNN.com, the address would be recognized by a filter program that screens out forbidden sites. The request would then be thrown away, with the user receiving a banal message: "Operation timed out." Great, but China's leaders had a problem: The financial excitement of a wired China quickly led to a proliferation of eight major Internet service providers (ISPs) and four pipelines to the outside world. To force compliance with government objectives--to ensure that all pipes lead back to Rome--they needed the networking superpower, Cisco, to standardize the Chinese Internet and equip it with firewalls on a national scale. According to the Chinese engineer, Cisco came through, developing a router device, integrator, and firewall box specially designed for the government's telecom monopoly. At approximately $20,000 a box, China Telecom "bought many thousands" and IBM arranged for the "high-end" financing. (American computer engineer Michael) Robinson confirms: "Cisco made a killing. They are everywhere."

IS CHINA'S Internet beyond redemption? Is it destined to be a tool of surveillance and repression, managed by the Chinese government and serviced by cynical Western partners? Maybe not. The Great Firewall might be vulnerable to a few physicists at the University of Oregon. I spent a day watching Stephen Hsu diagram the Chinese web and its weaknesses. Hsu and his company, SafeWeb, have developed a proxy server system called Triangle Boy. The triangle refers to the Chinese user, to a fleet of servers outside of the firewall, and to a mothership which the servers report to, but the Chinese government cannot find. Already tens of thousands of Chinese users have connected with it; five of the top twenty Triangle Boy search sites are in the Chinese language. Every day, the Chinese user receives an e-mail listing new addresses of Triangle Boy servers, which allow the user to visit websites that they would otherwise be unable to reach. Because the addresses of the servers change constantly, the system is practically unbeatable. Any attack, especially on the mothership, requires enormous resources.

But as surely as Triangle Boy works to liberate the surfing Chinese masses, you can bet State Security is looking for a way to pounce on this latest proxy rebellion. The simplest one will be to enlist American companies, still eager to curry favor in Beijing, and get them to develop software allowing the Public Security Bureau to sniff out and block proxies as quickly as they are created.

The only practical solution to this puzzle is for the Bush administration to make Internet freedom in China a high priority. At the moment it is a laughably small priority. The Voice of America, whose website has been a high-profile target of Chinese blocking, last summer began funding Triangle Boy to the tune of $10,000 per month. VOA officials undertook that small effort in frustration; they attempt to send daily news via e-mail to some 800,000 addresses in China, with no guarantee that they are getting through. Hsu estimates that supplying one million Chinese users with Triangle Boy (approximately 600 million page views a month) would require just $1 million annually. Budgeted at $300 million a year, VOA has the means and is wisely looking at several other solutions as well. But for VOA to justify an anti-blocking effort on a scale that will make a difference, it will need to be seen as carrying out an important plank of American foreign policy, not just acting on the margins as it is now.

Article 18
Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.
No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.
Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

Article 19
Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.
The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:
For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

For example, there's the little-understood but dangerous provision limiting "coordination" between candidates and, yes, citizens. You have to be a lawyer to understand the nuances here. But in essence the bill redefines what is illegal "coordination" to include "any general or particular understanding" with a candidate by a group that later campaigns on his behalf.

So let's say you're the AFL-CIO, and you meet to lobby a Member of Congress on a looming trade bill. If the union later ran issue ads for or against that Member at election time, or ran phone banks or sent out voter guides, that Member might well be in violation of the law's new "coordination" ban.

At a minimum, that candidate would almost certainly be subject to legal harassment from his opponent, in the form of petitions for probes from the Federal Election Commission. This threat to free speech and the right to assembly is egregious enough that it is opposed by, among others, the ACLU, the AFL-CIO and the National Right to Life Committee.

Dale Earnhardt's death changed many lives this past year. It even changed his own.

Even if Enron deserved help (it didn't), few politicians would have risked public wrath by rushing to its aid. What this episode actually shows is that the breadth of contributions insulates politicians against "undue" influence by large donors.

"It will stop us playing any loud music whatsoever, affecting almost of all of the pieces played by orchestras."

She said that if the directive was followed to the letter it could have a "devastating impact" on the music industry.

"We recognise that at certain times there is a risk of hearing damage to musicians. That is irrefutable.

"But we are working to try and remedy this in ways that are practical for the musicians."

Alison Wright Reid, an occupational health and safety specialist, said: "This will make classics unplayable.

"Musicians simply would not be allowed to play them all, including the EU's anthem, the finale of Beethoven's Ninth."

Although he was carrying grenades and rifles when captured, it matters not whether Walker ever shot an American or even discharged a weapon. Nor does it matter whether Congress declared war. It is constitutionally sufficient that there is a military conflict where the United States is involved. "[I]f a body of men be actually assembled, for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable purpose" then any act by the accused, however "minute" or "remote" is treason, according to Chief Justice John Marshall almost 200 years ago.

"The reason that the World Trade Center got hit is because there are a lot of people living in abject poverty out there who don't have any hope for a better life," he said.

He said the attacks were an act of desperation, and that Americans lack an understanding of a willingness to die for one's country.

"We sometimes read that terrorism is bred in poverty, that poverty is its root cause and conveyor belt, and that the best palliative would be substantial transfers of money from the developed to the developing world," he said in a speech before the conservative Heritage Foundation. "I would think we should be wary of this argument."

While Negroponte said that though there are a multitude of compelling reasons to assist the developing world in "maximizing its economic potential," he also noted that the al Qaida terrorist group was far from poverty-stricken.

He pointed out that it was well funded and maximized some of the benefits of the developed world, including modern airlines, hotels and communications networks. The group did not spring forth from, but rather worked to the detriment of, its economically underdeveloped host nation, Afghanistan.

"People do not suddenly loose their moral compass because they are poor, and terrorism does not represent or benefit the poor," he said. "One look at what terrorism did to Afghanistan's people and economy demonstrates exactly what might be called the terrorist's ethic of social and economic justice."

"The book talks about how Islam gave women rights, but nowhere does it teach that the Koran says a man is allowed to have seven wives. Kids should know that, because it's relevant to the religion and the culture," (Attorney Brad) Dacus says. "They want to make Islam palatable to Americans."

And, (Daniel) Pipes and Dacus claim wording in the Islam chapters presents theological beliefs as historical facts.

This isn't entirely true. There are numerous passages that contain language like "Muhammad is believed by his followers to have...." But others are more ambiguous ("Muhammad was awakened one night by a thunderous voice [of God] that seemed to come from everywhere..."), and still others do in fact present theological belief as fact ("[T]he very first word the angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammad was 'Recite.'").

The transmission of the Christian faith throughout the Roman Empire, decrees the state, is to be taught in the "Fall of Rome" unit. But Across the Centuries makes no mention of Christianity here, not even when it discusses the Emperor Constantine, whose battlefield conversion to the Christian faith was one of the pivotal events of Western civilization.

State guidelines call for Christianity to be addressed again in a unit on medieval Europe: "Special attention should be paid to Christianity in the Middle Ages because the Church, more powerful than any feudal state, influenced every aspect of life in medieval Europe. The story of St. Francis of Assisi should be told, both for his embodiment of the Christian ideal and for the accessibility to students of his gentle beliefs."

But in the seven pages devoted to the European Middle Ages, Christianity is presented not in terms of moral and theological belief, but almost entirely as a matter of power relations and social organization. How much space does Across the Centuries give to St. Francis of Assisi, a historical figure so important he merited special mention in the state guidelines? Ten sentences, plus three lines from one of his poems.

This bias against the religious content of Christianity extends into the unit on the Reformation, which gives short shrift to the theological ideas that inspired Protestantism, and focuses almost exclusively on the social and political fallout.

The situation is particularly painful for American troops. They are offered a range of religious services, with the help of military chaplains.

But they must worship in private, even though many of them are protecting the kingdom from outside threats. And soldiers who wear a cross or a Star of David must keep the symbols hidden.

"We have all these fine young American men and women over here," one chaplain said. "They're great Americans. They're great soldiers. Yet they're expected to surrender their religious practices when they arrive."

President Bush has called Islam a great religion and described the American people as both religious and tolerant. When he addressed a joint session of Congress shortly after Sept. 11, he said that the "barbarians" who attacked the United States "hate our freedoms, our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other."

But neither Mr. Bush nor any of his national security advisers have criticized the refusal of Saudi Arabia to allow Americans and other foreigners to worship freely. The United States, like other governments, has agreed to a compact dictated by the Saudis: if you have to practice your religion, do it in secret.

BT tried to persuade the judge to interpret the language broadly for the jury -- to include a computer mouse, for example, as the "keypad" mentioned in the patent.

"It has keys," BT lawyer Robert Perry said hopefully.

"Islam is a religion in which God requires you to send your son to die for Him. Christianity is a faith in which God sends His son to die for you."

A little more than a year ago, the judge in the French case, Licra v. Yahoo (news/quote), shook the mahogany desks of lawyers around the world when he reaffirmed an earlier ruling that Yahoo, based in Santa Clara, Calif., had violated French law by allowing French citizens to view auction sites displaying Nazi memorabilia.

The case has jumped the Atlantic and is making its way through the courts in the United States, where a federal judge has ruled that French sanctions against Yahoo — including $13,000 a day in fines — cannot be enforced in the United States. The two groups that sued the company in France, the International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism (known as Licra) and the Union of French Jewish Students, are appealing the federal judge's decision in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco.

Regardless of the appeal's outcome, nations seeking to control potentially harmful speech that arrives from offshore are seen as almost certain to use the French precedent to bolster their efforts.

On orders from his superiors, Sergeant (Rodney "Rocky") Sickmann did not so much as lob a tear gas grenade at the mob coming to occupy the embassy. Now he thinks he and his fellow guards should have started shooting.

"Had we opened fire on them, maybe we would only have lasted an hour," he said. But if he and 51 others had died there, rather than becoming hostages for the next 444 days, "we could have changed history," he said, by sending the message that Americans could not be attacked without cost. Instead, he said, the surrender sent the message that there was no penalty for attacking the United States.

"If you look back, it started in 1979; it's just escalated," he said in an interview at his home here.

'Ostensibly,' says one European diplomat, 'this is about security. But quite how a massive increase in defence spending is supposed to prevent another terrorist attack remains unclear. Instead this seems to be about repairing the bruised American psyche after 11 September. America's powerlessness in the face of this attack requires big gestures and reassurances, even if they are counter-productive and meaningless.'

Indeed, some analysts say, if it is security that America seeks it is better sought in dialogue with potentially threatening states, rather than in reinforcing the idea already held by many anti-US groups that it is an evil empire bent on world domination.

The reality - even before the latest proposed increases in military spending - is that America could beat the rest of the world at war with one hand tied behind its back. The requirement that US armed forces be able to fight two fully fledged wars with two separate adversaries simultaneously may recently have been dropped, but only because it would be hard pushed to find two such equal foes to fight.

A single US nuclear-powered carrier group - which forms around the USS Enterprise, for example, with a flight deck almost a mile in length and a superstructure 20 storeys high - concentrates more military power in one naval group than most states can manage with all their armed forces. America has seven of these battle groups.

'Will the Americans ever fight a war through Nato again?' asks Carl Bildt, former Swedish Prime Minister. 'It's doubtful. The United States reserves the right to itself to wage war, and dumps on others the messy, expensive business of nation-building and peace keeping'.

It is worthwhile to note recent advances in military technology on the part of France.

All French tanks now are equipped with a transmission that has only one speed forward (low-low,slow-slow) and fifteen speeds in reverse. You may laugh at the American Phalanx anti-missile system until you see the new French Frigates, which are equipped with 22 different means to signal surrender. New French military radios transmit surrender on all channels simultaneously.

The New French Aircraft Carrier, the "DeGaulle", had it's propeller fall off. The radiation levels are above standards for human habitation, but French have nothing to worry about because the mass of the testicular area is so much smaller. The Carrier cannot make the speed of it's oil-fired predecessor, and cannot make wind over deck sufficient to launch aircraft at gross weight. The French have rectified that problem by assigning French UN Diplomats who continually expel hot air while an air event is taking place.

There was much discussion about the yellow stripe down the back of the uniforms of the French Army, but you have to admit, it reduces the possibility of injury from friendly fire. "We believe in visibility," said the French Minister of Defense.

Yes, France stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the United States in combating the forces of evil. Americans remember proudly how the French refused to allow F-111 bombers to overfly France when we (the United States) creamed Libyan dictator Moamar Khadafi, and accidentally (how careless) put a missile into the French compound. And when we talk of military might remember the nation of Cameroon, that was placed under French authority by the United Nations, and the massacres of women and children by French machine guns in the 1950's. Yes the French stand ready, and their military might is not to be underestimated.

Cal Thomas, a syndicated columnist and TV talking head, started the dinner more than a decade ago. The first one was held in the Hilton bar, which easily held the 25 people who showed up. The speaker was evangelist Billy Graham.

Mr. Thomas's idea, then and now, was to bring Christians in the media together with their non-Christian colleagues for an evening of fellowship. The aim is to reproduce the conditions under which Mr. Thomas himself became a Christian in 1973--by being exposed to "educated, talented professional journalists who have a relationship with God." Speakers usually talk about their Christian faith in a personal way. There is no altar call.

So what's the significance of the turnout? It obviously doesn't amount to a full-blown revival in the Washington press corps, with masses of hard-bitten reporters converting to evangelical Christianity. Rather, it suggests something more modest, yet still impressive: a turn to faith among dozens of journalists in the nation's capital.

Mr. Snow's speech was a self-effacing account of what he has learned as a Christian. "I'm kind of a dull guy living an exciting life," he said. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the media are "in a quest for news," not truth. "You want the truth?" Mr. Snow said. "Read this thing." He held up a Bible, which he jokingly summarized this way: "We had this big fight. God wins."

His final point was that we must pray for our enemies because even in them we "see the face of God." At this point, he looked at Sam Donaldson of ABC-TV in the audience. "Sam, you're the face of God." Mr. Donaldson snapped back: "That's a terrible thing to say about God."

Mr. Snow got the last word. "Sam," he said, "I said God has a sense of humor."

So Bob Rubin did what Bob Rubin does. On his own, without consulting Weill or anyone else, he picked up the phone and made what he thought would be the most discreet of calls to Treasury Undersecretary Peter Fisher. Rubin and Fisher weren't strangers -- Rubin knew him from his Treasury days, when Fisher worked at the New York Fed.

"Hey, Peter," Rubin proposed, "this is probably not such a good idea, but what do you think about putting a call in to the ratings agencies? Maybe they could work with Enron's bankers to see if there might be an alternative to an immediate downgrade."

It was a cheeky proposal: Rubin was asking the federal government to meddle in the private business of the independent ratings agencies, Moody's and Standard and Poor's, on behalf of a company with manifold financial and spiritual links to the current administration. Not to mention the fact that he was a major shareholder and executive of one of the two banks that stood to lose the most if Enron went under. "Gee, Bob," Fisher smartly demurred, "I'm not sure if that's advisable at this point."

But for once, Bob Rubin was pushing against a string. By inserting himself into the Enron mess so late in the game, he made his presence physical, not spectral. Which is not how Bob Rubin's power works. For such a famously self-denying man, the call was a rare act of hubris.

They listen as well as talk. They have been known to produce something nice, such as flowers, when it is not required. They even know how to dress, speak and perform other ordinary human functions.

In theory, they are much beloved for all these qualities. It is only when they try to have an actual romance that they run into trouble. So do the objects of their affections, but in that case, the trouble comes when the ladies in question try to explain to their hopeful parents why they are not interested.

Like those poor parents, Miss Manners has never understood what was so unappealing about gentlemen's reliability, and so appealing about the shenanigans and sloppiness of their rude rivals. Or rather, she understands, but does not share, these tastes. Therefore, she feels obliged to warn those nice gentlemen not to get their hopes up.

The deterioration of the image of Islam during the crisis has played its part in this rise of conversions to Christianity and the adoption of its principles. What is happening and what has happened in Algeria, such as the massacres and killings in the name of Islam, has [sic] led many, when asked what the difference, in their view, was between Islam and Christianity, to declare: "Christianity is life, Islam is death."

Also last week, Rep. Cliff Stearns, Florida Republican, announced plans to introduce legislation to help pregnancy resource centers acquire ultrasound machines so that pregnant women might see what is growing inside them. Many abortion clinics have such machines but, according to women with whom I have spoken, doctors turn the screen away so they cannot see the image. Several studies of pregnancy resource centers with ultrasound machines have found that nearly 90 percent of abortion-minded women choose to have their babies after seeing the shape and movement of the child in their wombs.

Abortion-rights groups oppose Stearns' bill. Planned Parenthood president Gloria Feldt says, "They're using medical technology as political propaganda." How is it propaganda to allow a woman to see inside her womb? What Planned Parenthood has been saying about the unborn being unhuman is the real propaganda. The truth is in the picture, which is what the "pro-choice" Feldt doesn't want women to see.

Besides, doesn't the very word "choice" presuppose that there is more than one?

The movie promotes kindness, abstinence and honesty. It treats young women with respect and encourages the audience to cherish life. It is unapologetically wholesome.

(Deborah) Rabideau said she is trying to understand how she can minimize the long-term impact that abuse has on her daughter’s life. "There’s no excuse for what he did and I will not excuse what he did," she said.

But after extensive counseling, Rabideau believed the next step in healing was forgiveness. She thought the best way to help her daughter cope with the trauma was to help her put her anger behind her.

"For her not to forgive him will devastate and ruin her life much more than it will ruin his," she said.

Her daughter "wanted to see her father desperately," Rabideau said, and counselors the family was seeing recommended the visits. "If my daughter didn’t want anything to do with her Dad, I wouldn’t have pushed her," she said.

Weeks later, Rabideau said state troopers stormed her house without warning, grabbed her daughter and threw the child into a van.

"She was clutching, she was screaming," Rabideau said. "She almost vomited from the violent force with which they threw her into the van," she said. That same day, Rabideau received a notice from the prison informing her officially that she could no longer visit the facility with her daughter.

Rabideau says she would have stopped the visits immediately had she known she was jeopardizing her custody, but that she never received so much as a warning from the state.

The neglect that warranted Aaron Ross being placed in foster care were charges that Ross was not holding him or his bottle properly during feeding.

The hospital staff did not voluntarily file a neglect report on Aaron; they were ordered to by DSS who was aware that Ross was about to deliver. The nurse who filed the report noted in Ross’ medical records that the form was "sent to DSS per their request. DSS aware we are unable to establish neglect in such a short period of time. Form sent regardless."