Colorado Republican Tom Tancredo, revered by some U.S. conservatives for his efforts to staunch the flow of illegal immigrants from Mexico, said this week that Bush is a dangerous internationalist.

"He is going to do what he can to create a place where the idea of America is just that, it's an idea. It's not an actual place defined by borders. I mean this is where the guy is really going," he told WorldNetDaily, a controversial conservative website.

"I know this is dramatic, or maybe somebody would say overly dramatic. But I'm telling you that everything I see leads me to believe that this whole idea of the North American union, it's not something that's just written about by right-wing fringe kooks," said Tancredo, who is considering a run at the presidency.

"It is something in the head of the president of the United States, the president of Mexico, I think the prime minister of Canada buys into it..."
Tancredo followed up with an interview on the conservative Fox News network, where he said the borders will lose all their significance, serving merely as "speed bumps" in the flow of goods, services and people.

In October, Tancredo demanded the United States suspend work on the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) signed last year by Canada, Mexico and The United States until Congress examines its goals and agreements, which include standardizing regulations and dismantling other barriers to trade.

The deal to collaborate on a wide range of trade and security issues is part of a larger plot to merge the countries in a European Union-like arrangement using a common currency, he said, with no oversight from legislators.

The congressman, who wrote a book on the border security issue called "In Mortal Danger," is one of four members of Congress who've signed a resolution opposed to a union or a free trade "superhighway system."
They're not the only ones worried about closer ties between the three countries.

A coalition of American conservatives is organizing a grassroots effort to make it an issue in the 2008 presidential race and vow to campaign against any candidate, Republican or Democrat, who won't side with them.

The movement was spearheaded in October by Howard Phillips, chairman of the public policy group Conservative Caucus, anti-feminist activist Phyllis Schlafly and author Jerome Corsi.

The group is calling for a congressional investigation into the SPP and full disclosure of all documents when the new Congress run by Democrats begins in January. They're getting support from the Minuteman Project that monitors the borders to deter illegal crossings, a group Bush has called vigilantes.

Supporters of the anti-union stand point out that a prominent three-country task force backed by Canada's business elite has promoted an elaborate vision of a common economy and security perimeter.

The plan, released last year, drew fire from some Canadians who saw it as a dangerous surrender of sovereignty designed to benefit big business.
Tancredo, who has often talked about the "porous" Canada-U.S. border, stirred up controversy last year when he mused on a Florida radio show that America could destroy Islamic holy sites like Mecca if there's another terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

While beloved by many right-wingers and immigration hawks, Tancredo was recently labelled one of the 10 worst congressmen by Rolling Stone magazine.

The publication noted he wants to deport every undocumented worker in the United States, a proposal that would cost at least US$200 billion, and has called for halting all immigration, legal or otherwise.

The Minister had volunteered to give evidence to a special parliamentary committee set up to examine allegations that the U.S. has been using many European Union member countries as staging posts for international flights under the CIA's auspices carrying suspected terrorists to interrogation camps.
But Mr Ahern rounded on the committee members yesterday, protesting that a draft report on renditions had been leaked before he could address the MEPs.

The report alleges that CIA flights have passed through Ireland on 147 occasions, one of them the nicknamed 'Guantanamo Express' which is said to have refuelled in Shannon on its way home after carrying terrorist Abu Omar from Rome to Egypt where he remains in captivity.

'I have to say that I would have the most serious questions about the methodology used in establishing such a figure of allegedly suspicious flights. I would seriously question the draft report's language', the irritatedMinister told the legislators. 'I parinstanceticularly deplore the text,' he added.

In the 'Express' case, allegations about involvement with Omar's abduction only surfaced eighteen months afterwards, by which point it was difficult to prove what the aircraft had been up to. But Mr Ahern said he made his statement on the basis of the strongest political assurances from the Bush administration that no planes had passed through Irish airspace, still less landed in the country with any prisoners on board.

The Minister said it was striking that neither in this or any other had any evidence been produced to prove clandestine American activities on Irish soil.
The Garda SIochna has investigated six complaints from members of the public related to extraordinary rendition. On two occasions reports were passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions but in both investigations no further action was taken because of the lack of evidence.

'The Government have always made it clear that were evidence of criminal activity on Irish territory ever to emerge, we would act immediately.

Boarding planes, applying court orders, criminal prosecution and extradition were all measures which could be applied if the police believed them necessary but the Government can't tell the police what to do,' Mr Ahern pointed out.

The Minister did agree there should be more information-sharing about flights.

However, he said he was under no illusions about the scale of air traffic management. There are between 750 and 1,750 movements of private aircraft through Irish airports each month. In addition there have been 224,614 overflights during the last nine months, he said.

"I wouldn't say it's going to be a breakthrough meeting but I do think it is an important meeting along the way. It's high time that we passed a [United Nations] Security Council resolution on Iran," U.S. undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told reporters in France.

Burns will join officials from Britain, France, China, Russia, and Germany later in Paris for a meeting of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

The group will discuss possible sanctions against Iran, which rejected a UN Security Council deadline to end uranium enrichment by Aug. 31.

Burns urged Russia and China to join the other permanent members of the Security Council in reaching an agreement on sanctions.

"We've waited long enough. We've had hours and hours of discussions and we really do need the Russian and Chinese governments to shift into third or fourth gear ... and to work more quickly to agree with us on the basis of a resolution."

"We know it's going to impinge upon Iran's nuclear and missile programmes. We know that we all want to cut off the ability of Iran to seek financial support, or technological support to continue its enrichment or missile programmes, or heavy water reactor programmes," he said.

France's foreign minister on Monday said agreement on a Security Council resolution was near.

Iran warns Europeans

Earlier Tuesday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned European countries that co-operating with the U.S. on sanctions would be "an act of hostility."

"I'm telling you in plain language that as of now on, if you try, whether in your propaganda or at international organizations, to take steps against the rights of the Iranian nation, the Iranian nation will consider it an act of hostility," Ahmadinejad said in a speech before thousands of people in northern Iran.

"And if you insist on pursuing this path," he continued, Iran "will reconsider its relations with you."

It was the first time that Ahmadinejad had threatened to downgrade relations with European nations, which are responsible for a large portion of Iran's international trade.

Ahmadinejad doesn't have the final say in the country's policy, however.

That falls to supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Washington and other Western countries believe Tehran is secretly trying to build a nuclear weapon. Iran maintains its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, such as finding new forms of energy.

I recently learned that a national campaign has begun to oppose the use of the Koran in the swearing-in ceremonies for representatives, senators, and even the President and Vice president. The American fascists are sending emails and letters to legislators asking for a law to prevent the use of any other book than the Bible for taking the oath of office.

Why? Because to use any other book would "undermine American civilization" according to columnist Dennis Prager. The so-called "good Christians" of the American Family Association have endorsed and embraced Prager's fascist views and assert that because Prager is a Jew that it is not just a Christian issue. Of course they don't acknowledge that the first half of the Christian Bible is the Jewish Bible, and therefore for a Jew to advocate the exclusive use of the Christian Bible is actually advocating the exclusive use of the Jewish-Christian Bible. Of course for Prager to place his hand on the Bible to take an oath, if he were an observing Jew, he would have to accomplish the mental gymnastics of having his hand only reach down to the first part of the book and stop before including the New Testament.

Prager's un-American ranting is really something to wonder at. First he says, Ellison "should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization." This silliness is really fascinating from someone who is supposed to be engaging in rational discourse. If one believes that placing one's hand on the Koran is a threat to American civilization, then clearly the holder of that belief is extremely hostile to the Koran. To argue otherwise is just absurd sophism.

Then Prager says, by way of example, "What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book." Dennis Prager's education is woefully lacking as he evidently never learned in school that America doesn't have a "holiest" book, because the USA believes in the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. This doctrine by the way is enshrined in our US Constitution's First Amendment, as well as evidenced by the fact that God is not mentioned anywhere in the US Constitution. What a great document it is!.

But the real irony is that the fascists like Prager overlook the very core of the symbology of the oath taking ceremony as it relates to American civilization, that is the very purpose of putting a hand on a book. The person is not swearing allegiance to the book, nor to a religion or a culture, he or she is swearing allegiance to the US Constitution. The ceremony is one in which the person is stating an oath of allegiance, based exactly on their own personal religious and spiritual faith, that they will uphold and protect the US Constitution. We accept this oath precisely because it is based on the person's sincerity and personal integrity as evidenced by their hand on the book that they themselves uphold to be the highest expression of their spiritual and moral life. That's not to hard to understand is it?

Contrary to how Prager and similar totalitarian thinkers see damage "to the fabric of American civilization" if Ellison is allowed to choose his own book, it is squarely this choice that is the fabric of American civilization. The book chosen is intensely personal and individual by design! Other wise the oath of office would be meaningless. If would be as meaningless to a Muslim to make the oath with his hand on the Bible as it would for a Jew to make the oath with her hand on the Koran. Or for either to make the oath with their hands on the phonebook.

There are only two rational positions to have on this question. Either the person being sworn in must get to choose the book that represents to them their most personal and important evidence of their own integrity and sincerity, or the book should be the document to which they are pledging allegiance, that is the US Constitution.

If the fascists want to avoid having the Koran being used in the oath of office, then the only American alternative is to remove all religious books from the ceremony and have the hand placed on the US Constitution itself. This of course would change the central meaning of the act itself. Instead of being the indicator of the source of one's spiritual and moral values, as the book now represents, the hand on the book would simply indicate the object to which the oath is being given. That is workable, but the consequence means that there would be no observable ritual and ceremony showing the personally meaningful traditional source of the moral integrity of the oath taker.

If a person puts his or her hand on a Bible, Koran, Buddhist Sutra, or whatever book that gives them their roots of moral strength, then I feel that is a welcome indication of the character of the person who is taking the oath. Prager's Chicken Little "the sky is falling in on American civilization" warning, of course, only presents his own hubris even as he projects his hubris onto Ellison. For Prager to worry that some elected Nazi might use Mein Kampf, or that an elected Scientologist might use the book Dianetics,is really a baseless worry. If those are the books a newly elected Congressperson would choose, then those books are the evidence of their sincerity. I would much rather have a congressman openly show us that he considers Mein Kampf to be his greatest moral inspiration than to have him secretly embrace it while publically putting his hand on the bible.

Mr. Prager, this is America - with its separation of church and state- if you don't like to have Muslims in office, then don't vote for them, but you don't get to dictate your religions views onto others and prevent them from using the book that means most to their moral character.

Mr. Ellison, thank you for putting your hand on the Koran. You make America a better place to live by showing that a Muslim can get elected and make an oath to support the US Constitution.

Now, when do we get to have a Buddhist or an atheist elected to Congress?

The conflict of interest charge was filed in U.S. District Court in Baltimore and carries a maximum of one year in prison and a 100,000 dollar fine. Prosecutors filed the charge as a criminal information, instead of indictment, indicating there may be a possible plea deal.

Sunderland "did participate personally and substantially as a government employee and officer ... in a particular matter in which, to the defendant's knowledge, he had a financial interest," the court papers said.

The court filing also says Sunderland failed to get proper approval from NIH for his consulting work and did not properly report 285,000 dollars in consulting fees and travel money from Pfizer for work that "directly related" to his federal research responsibilities.

Sunderland's case was spotlighted as part of a congressional investigation examining the large number of NIH scientists who have earned money moonlighting as outside consultants for private biotechnology and drug companies.

That investigation prompted the NIH, the government's premier health research organization, to institute tough new ethics rules that bar such deals. Scientists recently told NIH the new rules are so strict that many are considering leaving the agency.

NIH officials declined to comment Monday.

Wednesday, a study using Louisiana data and a survey of hundreds of school principals was released by the RAND Corp., a nonprofit research group that has partnered with regional universities to inform posthurricane policies.

"The school system did a tremendous job of absorbing the displaced students," says John Pane, lead author of the study. But he raises concerns about the effects on students and school staff. "Many students missed a tremendous amount of school; under the best of circumstances, missing five weeks or more is a setback, but these children are not in the best circumstances."

Among the other findings:

- Class sizes increased in more than one-third of surveyed schools.

- Minority students were disproportionately displaced. They were 65 percent of those who had to change schools, compared with a 59 percent minority enrollment overall in the most affected parishes.

- Many schools with a high number of displaced students reported increased staffing needs that went unmet the whole year for lack of funds or qualified applicants.

- Most school principals surveyed said that student behavior hadn't changed significantly, despite the changed student body. But a substantial minority said displaced students were more likely to bully, fight, or isolate themselves in school.

Tracking the effects on academic success will take time. RAND researchers are analyzing recent test data, and they hope to expand their study into Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama.

Principals did note some academic problems. In schools with a high rate of displaced students, 47 percent said those students were more likely to struggle academically. And 57 percent said they were more likely to need counseling.

Combined with the pressures of state testing, this led some principals to feel discouraged. One wrote: "We had a couple of cases where the students were so academically below, and of course this [caused] our overall, already low scores to dip even lower.... [We] are always blamed for these problems, and quite frankly, we should be applauded for our tremendous efforts."

Those efforts ranged from calling the homes of absent students to increasing counseling, tutoring, and after-school care. But with teachers and staff facing more stress and tougher job demands, many schools didn't have the resources to offer sufficient professional development.

Outside the state-run Recovery School District (RSD) in New Orleans, most schools affected by the hurricanes have stabilized, says Meg Casper, spokeswoman for Louisiana's Department of Education.

The RSD, which oversees 34 schools in New Orleans, is still seeking to fill 45 openings for teachers. In New Orleans, "we are experiencing a lot of the issues that were outlined in [the summary of] this report," says Ms. Casper, who did not have access to the full report when she spoke with the Monitor. "We're trying to assess students to see exactly where they are in their academic career, not just based on the last grade they passed but how long they've been out of school.... [And we are] trying to get more social workers in."

On a national level, the RAND report suggests the need for a national system to track students' schooling across state borders. Without such a system, RAND researchers were not able to determine how many of the more than 53,000 students no longer in state public schools had enrolled in other schools.