The Scott Report
Senate vote that rejects ban on flag burning
Filed July 1, 2006

By Garrison Scott

A proposed constitutional amendment that would have allowed Congress to ban flag burning was rejected Tuesday, June 23rd 2006, in the Senate by the narrowest margin since Congress began considering the issue 17 years ago.

The 66-34 vote fell one vote shy of the two-thirds majority needed to send the proposal to the states for ratification. This was a close one.

For more than 200 years, the American flag has been the symbol of our nation's strength and unity. It's been a source of pride and inspiration for millions of citizens. And the AmericanFlag has been a prominent icon in our national history. Here are some of the highlights of its unique past.

On January 1, 1776, the Continental Army was reorganized in accordance with a Congressional resolution, which placed American forces under George Washington's control. On that New Year's Day the Continental Army was laying siege to Boston, which had been taken over by the British Army. Washington ordered the Grand Union flag hoisted above his base at Prospect Hill. It had 13 alternate red and white stripes and the British Union Jack in the upper left-hand corner (the canton).
I

n May of 1776, Betsy Ross reported that she sewed the first American flag.

On June 14, 1777, in order to establish an official flag for the new nation, the Continental Congress passed the first Flag Act: "Resolved, That the flag of the United States be made of thirteen stripes, alternate red and white; that the union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field, representing a new Constellation."

Between 1777 and 1960, Congress passed several acts that changed the shape, design and arrangement of the flag and allowed for additional stars and stripes to be added to reflect the admission of each new state.

Act of January 13, 1794 - provided for 15 stripes and 15 stars after May 1795.

Act of April 4, 1818 - provided for 13 stripes and one star for each state, to be added to the flag on the 4th of July following the admission of each new state, signed by President Monroe.

Executive Order of President Taft dated June 24, 1912 - established proportions of the flag and provided for arrangement of the stars in six horizontal rows of eight each, a single point of each star to be upward.

Executive Order of President Eisenhower dated January 3, 1959 - provided for the arrangement of the stars in seven rows of seven stars each, staggered horizontally and vertically.

Executive Order of President Eisenhower dated August 21, 1959 - provided for the arrangement of the stars in nine rows of stars staggered horizontally and eleven rows of stars staggered vertically.

Today the flag consists of thirteen horizontal stripes, seven red alternating with 6 white. The stripes represent the original 13 colonies, and the stars represent the 50 states of the Union. The colors of the flag are symbolic as well: Red symbolizes the blood of the brave men and women spilled for this country, White symbolizes Purity and Innocence and Blue represents Vigilance, Perseverance and Justice.

Raising the Flag on Mt. Suribachi

The 48 star flag is also known as the "Iwo Jima Flag" since this flag was the one raised over mount Suribachi. The flag was raised on February 23, 1945 on Mt. Suribachi, Iwo Jima. Two pictures were taken by Joseph Rosenthal, A.P, of the flag raising and the second one became the most famous photograph in American history.

The flag was carried up Mount Suribachi by Marines, who had been in battle for four days, and suffered 40% casualties. The Iwo Jima flag raisers were Ira Hayes, Franklin Sousley, John Bradley, Harlan Block, Rene Gagnon, and Michael Strank. Three did not long survive. Sergeant Michael Strank, born 1919, Jarabenia, Czechoslovakia got the order to climb Mt. Suribachi. The Sergeant picked his men and led them to the top. A flag had been raised once, but Mike explained to his men that a larger flag had to be raised so that "every Marine on the cruddy island could see it." Mike died March 1, 1945. He jumped on an explosive to shield one of his men. There was not much left of Mike except dog tags and a Catholic Medal of St. Patrick.

My Point of View

The American Flag is a symbol of the United States of America and belongs to each and every one of us who are blessed to live here.

You will hear ‘symbolic expression” often used to mean the same thing as free speech.
"Symbolic expression" is a phrase used to describe expression that is mixed with elements of conduct. The Supreme Court has made clear in a series of cases that symbolic expression (or expressive conduct) may be protected by the First Amendment. Several of these cases have been highly controversial--perhaps none more so than Texas v.s. Johnson (1990) reversing the conviction of a man who expressed his strong displeasure with U. S. policy by burning an American flag.

I do not agree with the Supreme Court. Burning our flag under some perverted notion that we are acting out free speech by violating a symbol of the United States of America, is physically violating the property of all who are citizens of this great country.

The act is not free speech. Burning the flag is a physical act. Free speech should be just that, speech, oral or verbal, or speech by the written word. I’m exercising my right to free speech by writing this report.

It is my opinion, that desecrating our nations flag is the same as burning down the White House or violating the Washington Monument or Lincoln Memorial. Burning the flag, should have the same punishment that would befall those who would desecrate any of our most precious national monuments.

The Scott Report On Immigration Part II

Filed 06/01/06

By Garrison Scott

Illegal immigration is such a BIG issue that I couldn't help but write another Scott Report on the issue.

President Bush tried to ease the worries of his Mexican counterpart when he prepared for a nationally televised address unveiling a plan to send thousands of National Guard troops to help seal the nation's southern border against illegal immigrants.

Mexican President Vicente Fox called to express concern over the prospect of militarization of the border, and Bush reassured him that it would be only a temporary measure to bolster overwhelmed Border Patrol agents, the White House said.

Yet the idea has further stirred an already volatile debate about immigration on both sides of the border even before the president made his prime-time speech from the Oval Office. A number of Democrats and even a few key Republicans voiced skepticism or outright opposition to the reported plan, calling it a politically motivated move that will only further strain units already stretched by duty in Iraq without solving the underlying problem of illegal immigration.

The president's plan could increase the strain with Fox, who has grown disenchanted with Bush's failure to ease immigration rules as promised. Fox for years has pressured Bush to help the 11 million illegal immigrants now in the United States, many of them from Mexico, with little to show for it. In their 15-minute call, "the president reiterated to President Fox his commitment to comprehensive immigration reform," Tamburri said.

Minutemen To Build Arizona-Mexico Border Fence

At present, six private land owners have partnered with the Minutemen for the commencement of construction of border fencing on their land. Surveillance cameras on the fencing will be monitored via computer by registered Minutemen across the country. We have chosen a fence design that is based on the Israeli fences in Gaza and on the West Bank that have cut terrorist attacks there by 95% or more.

In order to be effective, a fence should not be easy to compromise by climbing over it with a ladder, cutting through it with wire cutters, ramming it with a vehicle, or tunneling under it undetected. No fence can be a 100% impenetrable barrier—but a good design will be time-consuming enough that Border Patrol agents can be alerted to get to a point of attempted intrusion before the intrusion can be completed.

Two construction companies to date have offered to inaugurate ground-breaking, coordinate volunteer construction crews and donate the use of the necessary heavy construction equipment.

The ground-breaking will begin in Arizona on Memorial Day weekend, unless in the interim President Bush deploys National Guard and reserve troops to immediately secure the out-of-control southern border.

The fencing will be built with privately donated funds, engineering and labor and will be used as an example to educate the public about the feasibility and efficacy of fencing to secure America’s borders from illegal incursion by aliens and international criminal cartels. A non-profit organization dedicated specifically to this purpose will facilitate and administer donations for construction of the fence. Monetary and in-kind contributions for this effort will go directly into building materials for this private, volunteer fencing project.

Simcox issued the following statement on the MCDC border fence project:

“President Bush once said he would not wait on events to act to protect our country. He has been president for over five years, and still he has not acted to secure our territorial frontier, even as his administration admits the United States government does not have operational control of our borders.

Lately, congress has been in a stalemate with the senate regarding border control.

Congressman John Sullivan released the following statement regarding the immigration legislation the Senate passed:

“It is imperative for our nation to have secure borders and enforcement of our interior immigration laws. In December 2005, the House passed responsible immigration reform legislation that focused on securing our borders, giving local law enforcement the tools to enforce our interior immigration laws and does not provide amnesty to the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens currently in our country. Unfortunately, the Senate immigration reform legislation provides amnesty to those who are here illegally and develops a never-ending guestworker program that also leads to amnesty.

“The Senate legislation could allow for over 100 million people to immigrate to our country legally over the next 20 years. This influx of people, largely unskilled immigrants, could cost the government at least $30 billion, which would be the largest expansion of the welfare state in 35 years.

“We owe it to the American people to secure our borders first and enforce the laws of our country.”

I think Congressman Sullivan was right on target with this statement, but like Fox News always says "We report and you decide"

Garrison Scott

SOURCES:

MINUTEMEN

FOX NEWS

THE WASHINGTON POST

CONGRESSMAN SULLIVAN

By Garrison Scott

For those of you who think that illegal immigration doesn’t affect you. The following is information that might change your mind.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS ACRIME

Each year the Border Patrol is making more than a million apprehensions of people who flagrantly violate our nation's laws by unlawfully crossing U.S. borders to work and to receive publicly-funded services, often with the aid of fraudulent documents. Such entry is a misdemeanor and, if repeated, becomes punishable as a felony. Over twelve million illegal immigrants live in the United States -- some estimate even more, upword to twenty million.
In addition to sneaking into our country in violation of the immigration law that requires that aliens be documented for legal entry (referred to as "entry without inspection -- EWI"), others enter with legal documentation and then violate the terms on which they have been admitted by taking jobs that are not authorized or overstaying the authorized period of stay in the country. The INS estimated in 1996 that about 60 percent of the then estimated five million illegal immigrants were EWI and 40 percent were overstayers. Both types of illegal immigrants are deportable under Immigration and Nationality Act Section 237 (a)(1)(B) which says:
"Any alien who is present in the United States in violation of this Act or any other law of the United States is deportable."

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS NOT A VICTIMLESS CRIME

Apologists for illegal immigration like to paint it as a victimless crime. But in fact, illegal immigration causessubstantial harm to American citizens and legal immigrants, particularly those in the most vulnerable sectors of our population--the poor, minorities, and children.
Illegal immigration causes an enormous drain on public funds. The seminal study of the costs of immigration by the National Academy of Sciences found that the taxes paid by immigrants do not cover the cost of services received by them. We cannot provide high quality education, health care, and retirement security for our own people if we continue to bring in endless numbers of poor, unskilled immigrants.
Additionally, job competition by waves of illegal immigrants willing to work at substandard wages and working conditions depresses the wages of American workers, hitting hardest at minority workers and those without high school degrees.
Illegal immigration also contributes to the dramatic population growth overwhelming communities across America--crowding school classrooms, consuming already limited affordable housing, and straining precious natural resources like water, energy, and forestland.

BORDER PATROL: NECESSARY BUT NOT SUFFICIENT

The Border Patrol plays a crucial role in combatting illegal immigration, but illegal immigration cannot be controlled solely at the border. About half of the illegal alien population is comprised of visa overstayers--people who entered the country legally, but became illegal aliens by their failure to leave the U.S. upon expiration of their visa. Once entry occurs, there is little chance of detection and virtually no chance of deportation, except for convicted criminals.

THINK OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION THIS WAY

Imagine your basement is flooding. What do you do? Option 1: Go into the basement and try to scoop the leaking water out. Option 2: Find the leak and seal it. Then scoop the water out. Right now we are trying to use option 1. That isn't even near what we should be trying to accomplish.

WHAT CAN WE DO?

We need a comprehensive program to end illegal immigration; that means ensuring that people who enter illegally or overstay their lawful status will not be able to obtain employment, public assistance benefits, public education, public housing, or any other taxpayer-funded benefit without detection.
The three major components of immigration control--deterrence, apprehension and removal--need to be strengthened by Congress and the Executive Branch if effective control is ever to be reestablished. Controlling illegal immigration requires a balanced approach with a full range of enforcement improvements that go far beyond the border. These include many procedural reforms, beefed up investigation capacity, asylum reform, documents improvements, major improvements in INS detention and deportation procedures, limitations on judicial review, improved intelligence capacity, greatly improved state/federal cooperation, and added resources. See How to Combat Illegal Immigration.

WHAT ABOUT THE COSTS?

Effective control and management of the laws against illegal immigration require adequate resources. But those costs will be more than offset by savings to states, counties, communities, and school districts across the nation.

HOMELAND SECURITY

September 11, 2001, changed our nation forever. It changed the way we think, the way we view the world, and forever changed the way we approach terrorism on our soil. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security is the most significant reorganization of the federal government in over half-a-century. This agency is charged with protecting the American people and its borders, highways, ports, and critical infrastructure from terrorist attack.
Our first responders play critical roles in defending our homeland and it is vitally important that they have the equipment and tools necessary for preparedness. To answer the call, our police officers, firefighters and other law enforcement agencies are now, along with our military serving overseas, on the front lines of this war.
Now that you have read this report, I ask you. Do you still think that illegal immigration does not affect you? Yeah, I thought so.

Garrison Scott

SOURCES:
US Border Patrol
Minute Men
Congressman Sullivan

Another argument that this side presents is the inconsistency of the other side's claims. One negative prediction of those that are concerned about global warming is the increase in severe storms and hurricanes. Those that minimize the threat of global warming suggest that severe storms and hurricanes have actually decreased in the past 50 years.
Patrick J. Michaels, a professor of environmental science, says that, "carbon dioxide is increasing in the atmosphere at a rate below that of most climate-change scenarios because it is being increasingly captured by growing vegetation." This is inconsistent with the global warming theory, which suggests that there should be a strong relationship between carbon dioxide, released by humans, and rising temperature.
The fact that there is inconclusive evidence to prove the global warming theory is another argument critics of the theory put forth. Another expert on environmental science, Richard Lindzen says, "We don't have any evidence that
this “global warming” is a serious problem …"

The Increase in Temperature is not necessarily a Bad Thing:

Some of the critics of the global warming theory also suggest that even if the earth is warming it is not a cause for alarm. Historical evidence supports the idea that warmer climate intervals are beneficial for human activities, food production, and health. Cold periods have had the opposite effect.

The Misleading Picture:
The result is that the picture many now have is of the Earth heating up and hotter now than it has ever been. But... 1999 was cooler than the year before and since 1998 the world has been cooling. The hottest day in all recorded history was at Al Azizah in Libya back in 1922. There was warming from the 1880s to the 1940s, then a cooling for the next 40 years. Some of the hottest years were in the 1930s, when builders in Britain began putting pipes on the outside of buildings because frosts were only a memory. Then the thermometers turned around and from 1940 right up to 1980, global mean temperatures fell by about 0.3degC. All those houses in Britain started getting burst pipes.

Some over-reacted and called it the start of a new Ice Age, due to global warming. Pardon? Yes, a heating up or cooling down now was, apparently, because of global warming. The 40 year downturn in temperature was in spite of supposed rising CO2 levels due to the new industrialisation after the war, showing then that rising CO2 does NOT fit into the scenario of Greenhouse gases.
Look outside. Do you see any global catastrophe? Point to an ocean that is rising. Point to a methane cloud. Demonstate in any lab how CO2 could rise or significantly increase in the atmosphere and therefore be harmful.

The Pattern is Lunar:

As far as Earth’s climate is concerned, the lunar movement is a major influence. To understand it better, imagine a settling pot-lid as it is spun on its flat side on a table top. It wobbles around and around. Imagine a point on the rim. As the lid settles, the point will wobble around in an ever-flattening sine curve. That’s what the Moon does around the Earth’s ecliptic (plane of orbit around the Sun). As it moves it drags more or less of the atmosphere with it, spreading the atmosphere further over the Earth’s surface at the high end of the cycle and confining the atmosphere to a narrow band within the tropics at the lower end. The warming effect is that of milder summers and warmer winters, and at the moment we are well past the midpoint. Global-warmingists will point to the higher temperatures and claim that they were right all along. But up till now they haven't wanted to look to the Moon. After the last high end in 1987, temperatures did start descending especially around 1991/2, but most failed to notice.

Inaccurate Predictions:

Some scientists are sometimes outrageously wrong. In March 1998 they declared that a 2km wide asteroid called 1997 XF11 was on a near collision course with Earth. It was later discovered that the asteroid would miss the earth by at least a million kilometres.

Halley’s Comet was another fizzer. After all the hype, you needed high powered binoculars to even see it. There has been a recent call to look at the possibility of future meteor strikes and what to do if they presented a threat to mankind. Then there's volcanoes, earthquakes, comets, gamma rays - someone only has to suggest something no one else has thought of to worry over for a while for it to hit the big headlines.

During the Gulf War there was the fear of a permanent oil shortage, and everyone installed LPG in their vehicles. Before that, the threat of nuclear war, and lots of people had bunkers built in their gardens. Then in Auckland, the water scare, and everyone put in their own water tanks. Then there was Y2K, which had those with a PC panicking for a while. But these pass and things return to normal.

Perhaps another threat is surely coming to a neighborhood near you. Someone will be asking for research grants, paid for by you, the taxpayer. Recently the then NZ Associate Minister for the Environment said global warming is "inextricably related to climate instability and poses one of the biggest threats to our economy". NZ's current Energy Minister has said the science of global warming is undeniable. But perhaps there is a bigger and more direct economic threat to every country's economy; the creaming off of massive funds to study non-existent dangers.
What about the year 1492 where Christopher Columbus searched for the new world. What did everyone know then? The earth isn’t flat now is it.
In closing, by now you should know that I believe global warming clearly does not exist, and if so, will most likely take positive affect.

This picture was taken in the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History in Washington D.C. when I visited the Museum in December of last year. The exhibit stated that we were still in an Ice Age......... Garrison Scott

Sources:
NOAA PALEOCLIMATOLAGY PROGRAM
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
THE CATO INSTITUTE
DOUGLAS HOYT: SCIENTIST
RICHARD LINDZEN: SCIENTIST