FRC Criticizes New York Cross-Dressing Ruling Case

FRC criticizes New York cross-dressing ruling case While some advocates claim that a ban on cross-dressing amounts to the violation of transgender people’s rights, a family organization has presented the opposite argument while commenting on a recent American Eagle Outfitters case.

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo successfully challenged the clothing retail chain to change its policies to be more transgender-friendly. According to The New York Daily News, the company will abandon the rule about employee "personal appearance" that banned men from wearing women’s clothing and vice versa.

"If more places would follow behind American Eagle’s experience, a lot of us would be able to work more," said Joi-elle White, a transgender member of Make the Road New York, adding that "there would be less of us on the street or on the internet risking our [lives] just to survive."

However, Family Research Council (FRC) president Tony Perkins has expressed his disappointment with the outcome, and linked the case to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), currently under consideration in Congress.

"Every American who believes in the right of employers to set dress and grooming standards for their employees should be alarmed by how this attorney general has used bullying tactics and litigation to impose cross-dressing policies on American Eagle Outfitters," Perkins warned. ADNFCR-1961-ID-19793362-ADNFCR

In A Letter To Pentagon, Civil Rights Groups Defend Press Freedom

In a letter to Pentagon, civil rights groups defend press freedom Several human and civil rights organizations sent a letter to top officials at the Pentagon demanding the reversal of the ban on several reporters covering military commission hearings of foreign terrorist suspects in Guantanamo Bay.

The letter was prompted by the ban imposed on four journalists from the United States and Canada for publishing the name of an interrogator in one of the cases.

The four, who include reporters from The Miami Herald, The Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail and Canwest News Service, allege the ban is "illegal and unconstitutional," because the name of the interrogator was already in the public domain, and publishing it did not constitute a violation of the Pentagon’s rules, according to media reports.

In their intervention, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Human Rights First, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the National Institute of Military Justice said that "this [decision] not only runs counter to the U.S. administration’s stated commitment to transparency in government, but will also bring the military commissions into further disrepute, internationally and within the U.S."

The Pentagon has said the newspapers in question can continue to cover the story, which involves detainee Omar Khadr, but they must send other journalist to do so. ADNFCR-1961-ID-19793301-ADNFCR

Adding Spices To Ground Beef Can Help Eliminate Cancer-Causing Compounds

Adding spices to ground beef can help eliminate cancer-causing compoundsResults of a new Kansas State University study suggest that adding certain spices to ground beef may help lower the accumulation of dangerous compounds that are known to cause cancer.

For the study, lead author Scott Smith and his colleagues sought to identify natural ways to reduce the carcinogenic compounds that are commonly produced when ground beef is grilled, fried or boiled. Known as heterocyclic amines (HCAs), these compounds have been proven to increase the risk of developing colorectal, stomach, pancreatic and prostate cancers.

"Cooked beef tends to develop more HCAs than other kinds of cooked meats such as pork and chicken," Smith said. "Cooked beef patties appear to be the cooked meat with the highest mutagenic activity and may be the most important source of HCAs in the human diet."

Working off of the theory that antioxidants can help combat dangerous carcinogens, the researchers tested the effectiveness of several spices in inhibiting the formation of HCAs. They found that fingerroot, rosemary and turmeric were the most successful.

In fact, rosemary extract was able to reduce HCA formation by 61 to 79 percent.

Financial Reform Legislation Puts Natural Supplements At Risk

Keep your eyes focused on the rogue corporatist Congress over the next couple of weeks as the reconciliation process takes place to merge the House and Senate versions of the financial reform legislation in a conference committee.

While the provisions in the two bills which further centralize control over the financial system in the hands of power-grabbing chief executive are bad enough, a provision in the House version that has nothing at all to do with finance has really caught our attention and must be defeated.

It’s an amendment that would give the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the authority to require supplement companies perform at least two human studies before making any claims for their products, according to the Alliance for Natural Health (ANH). Currently, supplements are regulated under the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA).

The amendment to HR 4173 was introduced by Representative Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and has nothing to do with the financial services industry. But it will limit your ability to acquire and use natural health supplements.

The trials the amendment requires are time-consuming and beyond the financial means of most supplement companies, according to the ANH. And even if the companies could find the money, the FTC could require more and more costly versions of these studies, or more of those studies. At each stage, fewer supplements would be available, and those available would cost more and more, until they became as costly as drugs.

The decisions about supplements would then be placed in the hands of five unelected FTC commissioners who could issue binding regulations in a wide range of areas. And companies that didn’t comply with the new rules could be put out of business.

It’s not an unusual tactic as the FTC has done this before with other companies who didn’t toe their line.

“According to renowned constitutional attorney Jonathan Emord, ‘The provision removing the ban on FTC rulemaking without Congressional preapproval contained in H.R. 4173 invites the very same irresponsible over-regulation of the commercial marketplace that led Congress to enact the ban in the 1980s. FTC has no shortage of power to regulate deceptive advertising; this bill gives it far more discretionary power than it needs, inviting greater abuse and mischief from an agency that suffers virtually no check on its discretion.’” (

Waxman is an enemy to freedom, choice in medical decisions and to the supplement industry. On his website, Waxman writes: “I am troubled that the FDA lacks the basic information necessary to protect consumers from unsafe dietary supplements. The FDA clearly needs to have more resources to give consumers real protection. I intend to work with my colleagues in Congress to ensure that FDA has the tools it needs to address this and other important public health missions.”

What he means is that big pharma doesn’t profit from natural supplements so Big Brother needs to quash them. By the way, the top four industries contributing to Waxman’s campaign in the 2009-2010 cycle are: hospitals/nursing homes; health services/health maintenance organizations (HMOs); lawyers/law firms and health professionals.

While it’s bad enough that Congress’ elected elitists are more interested in protecting their sugar daddies (large financial firms that slip large amounts of cash into their pockets) than Average Joe; what’s worse is their desire to limit your freedom to make choices about which natural health supplements you can take.

We urge you to call your Senators and member of Congress this week and tell him or her to make sure no provisions restricting the use of supplements get included in the final version of the financial reform bill. You can find your member of Congress here.

And finally, I’m often struck (or saddened) by the comments from some who post on this site who fail to see how their government moves past socialism toward fascism on a daily basis. They often ask—sometimes by logging in under several different names and carrying on a conversation with themselves in an effort to disrupt a discussion—exactly what freedoms are being taken away by an overreaching corporatist government.

Well, here’s one: the ability to make your own decisions about your health and how you choose to remain healthy.

There are many others: like freedom of speech, freedom of association, gun ownership, the ability to own property (if you are required to pay a tax in order to keep it, is it truly yours?), freedom to operate a business as you see fit, freedom to pass along your earnings to your children and the freedom to decide whether your children are given potentially harmful vaccinations (enforced through rules requiring vaccinations to enroll in public schools).

If you are too blind to see that these things are happening daily, then may God help you, because you are incapable of helping yourself.

Wall Street Reform Bill Fails To Advance In The Senate

Wall Street reform bill fails to advance in the Senate Following nearly a year of contentious debate, the Democrats’ Wall Street reform bill stalled in the Senate last week, as all but two Republicans voted against the measure designed to overhaul the financial regulatory system.

Joining the GOP in preventing the advancement of the bill were two Democrats—Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wis.)—who oppose the legislation because they do not feel that it goes far enough.

Soon after the vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) criticized Republicans for blocking a piece of legislation that would prevent bailouts and strengthen consumer protections, according to

"Wall Street and, obviously, 39 out of 41 Republicans… think that things going on, on Wall Street, are just fine," Reid said. "I think that’s a real stretch to think the American people think that they want this to go on as in years past."

Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said that the bill is just another example of the increasingly intrusive nature of big government.

"Not only does the bill still contain a massive new government agency with broad new powers over consumer spending and Main Street businesses, it does nothing to rein in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the main protagonists in the financial meltdown," said McConnell.

Reid indicated that the Democrats plan to hold another vote on the bill in the coming days.

Obama The Hitman: First A Cleric, Who’s Next?

The administration of President Barack Obama has itself tied up in quite a knot.

The administration that opposes enhanced interrogations, that wants to treat terrorists caught both on the battlefield and in country as common criminals, that wants to try suspected 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a New York City courtroom, that read Miranda rights to the foreign-born underwear bomber right away but delayed it for hours for the naturalized citizen Times Square bomber, has targeted an American citizen living in Yemen for assassination.

Of course, since the United States government has a policy against assassination that’s not what it’s being called. But what else do you call the order designating American-born radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki as a target for a strike by a drone missile?

Awlaki is suspected by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of actively plotting violence. He is described in The New York Times as “a charismatic preacher who has said it is a religious duty to attack the United States.” The CIA says it believes Awlaki’s rhetoric inspired Times Square attempted-bomber Faisal Shahzad.

Of course Shahzad’s visit to Pakistan where he met with a member of an intelligence group with ties to the CIA surely had nothing to do with the bomb attack, but that is a topic for another day.

Whether Awlaki gets blown to bits by a Hellfire missile or shot in the head by a sniper, he’s dead and the U.S. government has become judge, jury and executioner.

To eavesdrop on Awlaki’s telephone calls the CIA—because of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—would first be required to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. But to target him for death the CIA only needed approval from the National Security Council (NSC).

As former CIA lawyer Vicki Divoll told The Times, “Congress has protected Awlaki’s cell phone calls. But it has not provided any protections for his life. That makes no sense.”

I wonder if Awlaki will be read his Miranda rights before the missile explodes, or will Attorney General Eric Holder wait until afterwards and read them over Awlaki’s bits and pieces.

But wait. That might not be a problem because some in Congress want to take away Americans’ guaranteed citizenship rights if they target fellow citizens with terrorist violence.

Senator Joe Leiberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, said recently, “If you’re attacking your fellow Americans in an act of war you lose the rights that come with citizenship.”

And this is where it gets really sticky. The Obama administration has yet to call the Times Square bomb plot an act of terrorism. On the White House website it is referred to as the “Times Square incident.” Or, to paraphrase Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, it was a potential man-caused disaster.

We are no longer sliding down a slippery slope. Now we are cascading down a steep mountainside.

It began soon after 9/11 with the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act in the weeks following the attack. That act is already being used to strip U.S. citizens of their rights. Just ask Jose Padilla and Ashton Lundeby how that act is working out for them.

Now we have an administration that has shown a proclivity to use missile attacks from Predator drones to kill what it is calling insurgents or terrorists in Pakistan and Afghanistan—and killing innocents in the process—saying that it’s time to use them in a country we’re not currently at war with to kill an American citizen who hasn’t harmed anyone himself.

That same bunch doesn’t call planting a bomb in Times Square terrorism. But it warns that those who oppose its policies—and show their opposition by demonstrating and holding up signs outside the Capitol building and in cities and towns across the country—are potentially inciting attacks similar to Timothy McVeigh’s bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building.

If they think the rhetoric of Tea partiers—or Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck or whoever—is somehow inciting violence, how long is it before the administration starts authorizing drone missile attacks on them?

Apparently, all it takes to get on the CIA’s short list for a missile strike is for someone in the administration to decide you are inciting violence. That doesn’t bode well for a group that has drawn the ire of Obama, his administration, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid, who are on record as considering Tea partiers, former military members and anti-healthcare reform protestors as Nazis and terrorists.

American citizens… beware… this administration thinks you’re more dangerous and deserve fewer rights than foreigners planting bombs on U.S. soil. And if you hear the far-off hum of an airplane or the whoosh of a missile being fired, run like Satan himself is on your heels.

But if you’re al-Qaida don’t worry. Holder will read you your rights and have a court appointed attorney standing by.

How Can I Prepare For The Future When I Struggle To Get By?

Dear Bob

What about people who don’t have large sums of money to “invest” in your precious metals. What about the poor or the ones who struggle every day to get by. What do they do?


Dear ALC,

I understand that many are struggling to get by, especially those who are out of work or are on fixed incomes. However, you can still take steps to prepare for an uncertain future. Without knowing your specific situation I can’t give more than general advice. However, you should work to extricate yourself from debt. You should set aside a little non-perishable food (as much as you can afford) every time you go shopping. To invest in precious metals, I would recommend silver. Its price is around $17-$18 per ounce and you can buy it one ounce at a time, if that better fits your budget.

Best Wishes,

Mayor Bloomberg Moves To Relax Gun Rules, But Advocates Still Unhappy

Mayor Bloomberg moves to relax gun rules, but advocates still unhappyNew York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said his administration will simplify the process whereby New Yorkers can obtain gun permits, reversing what gun rights advocates have long criticized as arcane and restrictive rules. However, his move appears to have failed to satisfy gun proponents.

The decision—which the administration explains is meant to increase efficiency by allowing for better investigation of applicants who might not qualify for a gun, while processing those fit to have them more swiftly—has been described as a reversal for Bloomberg who has been known for his anti-gun policies, according to The New York Times.

However, representatives of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) have said that on reviewing the new regulations they see the announcement as "a lot of flash and very little substance."

The program, which Bloomberg said will streamline licensing requirements, reduce renewal fees and speed up the application process, "sounds good on the surface," said SAF executive vice president Alan Gottlieb.

He noted, however, that there is only one handgun licensing office in Manhattan and only one office for registering and licensing rifles and shotguns in Queens.

"The handgun application fee is $340, and there is a $94.25 fingerprinting fee on top of that. This fee structure screams ‘for elites only’ because those fees are outrageously expensive for average citizens," Gottlieb concluded.

Gingrich Nazi Comparison Stirs Firestorm Of Criticism

Gingrich Nazi comparison stirs firestorm of criticism Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has found himself in a hot seat for the controversial comments he made in his latest book, where he compared President Barack Obama’s administration to the Nazi and Soviet regimes.

In To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular-Socialist Machine, Gingrich wrote that Obama and his closest Democratic collaborators, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), are implementing a socialist agenda, especially in areas such as the healthcare reform and economic stimulus, according to media reports.

In Gingrich’s view, these types of policies pose "a great threat" to America, and are comparable to those that characterized Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

His comments have provoked a strong reaction from many groups, including the American Jewish Council (AJC). David Harris, executive director of the AJC, said the analogy was "foolish and dangerous."

"It is vital that the Republican leadership say clearly that such analogies are unacceptable," Harris said. "Unfortunately, as the recent controversy over the new immigration law in Arizona also demonstrates, demonizing political opponents as Nazis is becoming all too common in American political debate."

Criticism has also come from Gingrich’s own political allies. Former GOP Congresswoman Susan Molinari told talk show host Joy Behar that she wanted to "distance myself from that remark. To compare anything that is going on in this country to the atrocities of Nazi Germany in any way, shape or form is just crazy," quoted by CNN.

FAIR: Obama’s Aunt’s Case Illustrates ‘Abuse Of U.S. Political Asylum Policy’

FAIR: Obama's aunt's case illustrates 'abuse of U.S. political asylum policy'President Barack Obama’s paternal aunt Zeituni Onyango, who is a citizen of Kenya and was living in the United States illegally, has been granted political asylum by a court in Boston.

The court accepted Onyango’s argument that she feared violence—she and Obama’s father, who was her half-brother, were members of the Luo tribe, a minority in Kenya—if she returned to that country. The ruling opens the way for her to apply for legal permanent residency in a year, according to The Boston Globe.

However, the court’s decision has angered immigration reform proponents, including the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). The organization called it "a case study in how those seeking to evade U.S. immigration laws can manipulate the system," and demanded that the entire record of the case be made public.

FAIR representatives were particularly angered at the fact that Onyango was granted the asylum despite having her 2004 petition denied by a Federal immigration court, a ruling she ignored.

"[The] case is an all-too-typical example of how our asylum laws are used to thwart the enforcement [of] U.S. immigration laws," said Dan Stein, president of FAIR, adding that "the system allows people who defy our laws repeated opportunities to [come up with] new reasons to be granted legal permission to remain."ADNFCR-1961-ID-19785087-ADNFCR