Kars-4-WHO

We have probably all heard the jingle on the radio for the charity Kars-4-Kids, which claims to use car donations towards rehabilitation for children in need. Recently, however, attorneys-general offices in Pennsylvania and Oregon have found that the charity isn’t all it claims. According to tax returns, all funds raised by the organization have been funneled to a group which promotes the education of children in Jewish heritage. The ad also claims to give free vacations for those who do donate their cars. These vacations have turned out to be a ploy for timeshare opportunities.

Given that regulations on charities are different state-by-state, is this simply an issue of caveat emptor? Or, on the other hand, should the state get involved to protect those who might want to donate to charities?

Intelligence treasure-trove

Former Justice Department official John Yoo argued in this week’s Wall Street Journal that holding the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the U.S. will amount to an “…intelligence bonanza for al Qaeda”. The crux of his argument stems from the need for full disclosure of evidence during a trial, including U.S. intelligence methods and sources. KSM and his co-defendants will be afforded the same Constitutional rights as resident aliens, including the full disclosure clause. Yoo also cites the trial of Z. Moussaoui, and the way lawyers were able to string along the trial for four years. This created a forum for him to air his anti-American grievances, and gave al Qaeda critical information on who the Government saw as threats to national security.

Barring one’s personal opinions on whether or not the trial should be held in the U.S., is Yoo’s argument sound? Does the trial represent an intelligence flub when taking judicial procedure into account?

Being perfect

A recent BBC documentary, “My Supermodel Baby”, reveals that airbrushing is a pervasive practice among magazine companies, particularly those dealing with babies and infants. Is the ideal of perfection becoming obscene, or are magazine companies simply looking after their product?

STD rates among U.S. teens

The CDC released a report saying that the U.S. has among the highest rates of sexually transmitted diseases in the developed world, especially among those aged 15-24. Cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis, the three big curable diseases, have all risen significantly in the past year. In addition, the CDC claims that over 19 million new infections take place each year, half among the teenage sector.

John Douglas of the CDC states that "…we haven't been promoting the full battery of messages…we have been sending people out with one seatbelt in the whole car." This allusion to the policies of the previous decade begs the question: how well is abstinence-only education working? What policies should be in place to prevent the resurgence of STDs, especially among the younger generation?

National UN Peacekeepers

Ciudad Juarez, one of the most dangerous places in the world, has a murder rate of 7 people per day. It is embroiled in a cataclysmic drug war which, although violent, is an issue of national security for the Mexican Government. While the Government has sent troops to the area to quell violence, local businesses are not content with the progress made. They are requesting that the United Nations send in peacekeepers to facilitate an end to the conflict.

Chapter VII of the UN Charter clearly states that all matters involving peacekeeping forces must be international in nature. In fact, the UN was created upon the basis of State sovereignty being held in highest regard. Although the nature and definition of peacekeeping has changed over the past decades, the preeminence of sovereignty has not. Has the UN gone too far in allowing peacekeeping forces to deal with national matters, thereby stretching its already thin budget? Should it focus its attention to matters of an international concern? Is the UN trying to do too much, with too little?

"V"Obama

Many on the right, especially Tea Partiers, are arguing that ABC’s remake of the hit 1980s series “V” is a critique of current administration policies. Sean Hannity cites that the series “focuses on a telegenic leader who arrives from outer space offering a message of hope and compromise and promising, you guessed it, universal health care. Sound familiar? Oh, and the media? They love this new leader.”
I grew up on the original miniseries and TV show, and took it as a simple ride on a sci-fi spaceship, expecting the same from this. Without putting in my opinions, I’m curious as to what others think of the series. Is it a critique, or have the interpretations become skewed?

Banned from Wal-Mart

A Chicago area gay couple who were recently shopping at the retailer have been banned from all stores permanently. While going through the self-checkout, video apparently caught the men and their two adopted boys not ringing through a lighter. The men, both lawyers, were then interrogated by store security for nearly an hour, only to be acquitted of charges and released. Wal-Mart management then informed the men they had been banned from all stores, and would be prosecuted for trespassing if they did not leave immediately. In addition, the store sent the men a bill for $158.40, or the full cost of the lighters. Both men, and the two sons, claim in statements that they were harassed and degraded during the event. Of particular note were the disparaging remarks towards lifestyle apparently made to the two young boys.

The question then begs itself: is Wal-Mart either (a) too elitist and strict in their policies; and/or (b) homophobic in their actions?