5-5-5-5-5 Charleston S.C. Warehouse Fire Kills NINE Firefighters

.

A fast-moving fire in a Charleston, S.C furniture store killed nine firefighters, the largest single loss of firefighter lives since 9/11/01. Five bells rung five times is the New York City Fire Departments way of announcing line of duty deaths.

The Monday blaze broke out in a furniture warehouse. One report states that “More than a dozen firefighters who rushed into the burning furniture superstore knew — or thought they knew — two things: employees were trapped inside and the blaze was small enough to control.”

Firefighters searching for victims and trying to battle the fire picked their way through rows of sofas and mattresses stacked five and six high on racks in the cavernous warehouse, a corrugated-metal structure next to a gas station.

"It was burning everything. As fast as they would put out one side, another hot spot would pop up," said Lesley Broughton, who lives in the neighborhood and works as a clerk at a convenience store near the gutted furniture store. "Then glass started breaking and they told everybody to get back and finally it was just an inferno."

Sadly, a glitch in Charleston’s buildings codes may have played a part in this tragedy. The building had no fire sprinklers and was not required to have them. The fire chief said sprinklers would not have put out the fire but would have at least slowed it.

The cause of the fire Monday night at the Sofa Super Store, and exactly how the men were killed, were under investigation, but officials said arson was not suspected.

One erroneous report stated, “Buildings that contain a lot of furniture are especially vulnerable, because of the wood lacquer, polyurethane foam and other combustible materials that can reach flashover at a relatively low temperature — sometimes within minutes of a fire's outset.”

The highly flammable contents do NOT allow a flashovers to be reached “at relatively low temperatures,” but allows those high temperatures needed for flashover to be reached much sooner.

Store owner Herb Goldstein said in a statement: "All of us at Sofa Super Store are devastated and heartbroken by this tragedy. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the families and loved ones of the heroic firefighters who lost their lives."

A fund has been established for the fallen firefighters. Donations can be sent to: The City of Charleston Firemen's Fund, P.O. Box 304, Charleston, SC, 29402 or at ANY BankAmerica branch throughout the USA.


The dead were;

Fire Captain William "Billy" Hutchinson-Age: 48-Years with department: 30

Fire Captain Mike Benke-Age: 49 -Years with department: 29 years

Fire Captain Louis Mulkey -Age: 34 -Years with department: 11 1/2 years

Fire Engineer Mark Kelsey -Age: 40 Years with department: 12 1/2 years

Fire Engineer Bradford "Brad" Baity, Age: 37 -Years with department: 9

Fire Assistant Engineer Michael French-Age: 27-Years with department: 1 1/2 years

Firefighter James "Earl" Drayton-Age: 56-Years with department: 32 years

Firefighter Brandon Thompson-Age: 27-Years with department: Four years

Firefighter Melven Champaign-Age: 46-Years with department: Two years

.

.

.

ADD ANOTHER FIVE FIVES...For a Firefighter From Brooklyn;

.

.

A 23 y/o FDNY firefighter from Brooklyn was killed earlier this evening (Thursday, June 21, 2007) after falling from the roof of a four story building in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn (pictured above top) while operating at a fire at that Meserole Street address.

.

Dan Pujdak of Ladder Co. 146 in Brooklyn was pronounced dead on arrival at Bellevue Hospital after being taken there from the scene of the 5 pm fire. Pujdak, who lived in Queens had been on the FDNY for two years.

.

Officials say the fire was started by an unattended cigarette.

.

No one else was hurt in the late afternoon blaze.

Career Bureaucrat From a Semi, Pseudo, So-called "Conservative" administration Calls Out the Conservative Base Over Illegal Immigration

A petulant Michael Chertoff (a man whose always best served by his silence) has decided to smack-down the GOP’s Conservative base.

A nice strategy if you’re an “Open Border Democrat,” or even a Moderate “Cheap Labor” Republican, but it’s certainly not the best way for a so-called "Conservative Republican administration" to reach out to America’s Conservative majority.

“I don't believe Americans in large numbers are going to go pick lettuce,” Mr. Chertoff says.

“What you will see is a major shift of our businesses, certainly the agriculture business, out of the country, and that that is going to be a very, very bad thing,” he says.

Mr. Chertoff also faulted much of the right-wing blathersphere for its opposition to the Senate bill.

“We are fighting a very heavy headwind,” he says, pointing to talk radio as a major culprit.

Lawmakers are being swamped with letters, e-mails and phone calls from constituents with opinions about the proposed changes.

"Senators on both sides are being pounded by talk radio," said Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss., told the Houston (Texas) Chronicle.

http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=5430

As the good folks at Freedomfolks, put it, “Blathersphere? WTF? So I’m thinking they haven’t gotten the memo, the one that suggests not excreting on your supporters heads? Perhaps it hasn’t crossed the border illegally yet?"

Without question, the biggest problem with the failed Bill was that enforcement was an afterthought, at best.

And even a cursory look back at how the last “Amnesty Bill” (the 1986 Bill) worked out proves the legitimacy of the skepticism of the huge majority of Americans who support enforcement first.

Moreover, the “cheap labor” argument is ill-served by the push for mass legalization. After all, once these 12 million illegals become “Americans,” they will be guaranteed the minimum wage, withholding taxes, social security, etc., they will no longer be “cheap labor,” in fact, they’ll be part of that mass of Americans who no longer want to do all those drudgery-jobs, at least for the subsistence wages some employers want to offer for those jobs.

See where that goes?

Amnesty creates the need for ever more cheap labor and ever more amnesty.

Better to focus on going after the rogue employers, from those companies that hire massive numbers of “undocumented workers,” “off the books,” to the homeowner who hires a few workers at a local shape-up. KILL those illicit jobs by heavily fining these employers for first offenses and jailing them for second offenses and the vast majority of the illegal aliens here will self-deport.

The idea that “we need these people to voluntarily come out from the shadows,” is absurd! For one thing, NONE of the criminal aliens, nor potential terrorists here illegally are going to step forward under ANY process. Moreover, a recent Mexican Poll asserts that fewer than 40% of those Mexican nationals in America illegally would want American citizenship even if were offered free, as they remain fiercely loyal to Mexico.

So how is offering something, the majority of illegals don’t even want (U.S. citizenship) going to make those we desperately want out of the shadows (the criminals and potential terrorists, of whom over 90% probably don’t want citizenship) come out and identify themselves?

The short answer is, “It won’t.”

.

So what's wrong with "Enforcement First," again?

MySpace Crackdown Nets Several Sex Offenders in Texas

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot (pictured) has been the first Attorney General to go after convicted sex predators for having MySpace accounts.

AG Abbott has been cracking down aggressively on sexual offenders. In May, he subpoenaed MySpace.com and forced the site to release profiles of all registered sex offenders.

In June, police arrested seven sex offenders who have been convicted of indecent conduct with a child, and therefore violated their probation by having a profile on MySpace.

AG Abbot has charged that a MySpace account is no different than a school or playground or other gathering plce frequented by minors and to date, he’s been able to make that stick.

One conviction for a child sex offense should change a predator’s life forever – he/she forfeits their rights for the protection of other children.

He’s DONE

In a move that brings at least some degree of “justice” to the Duke Rape Hoax, Michael Nifong decided to resign on Thursday, just a day before the N.C. Panel handed down a decision that implicated Nifong in thirteen ethics violations, the most serious one, withholding the full DNA report from the defense, could bring criminal charges, including perjury charges for highly prejudicial and damning comments he made AFTER he had the DNA report that, in effect, cleared the three Duke LAX players!

In his testimony before the state bar's disciplinary hearing commission, Nifong admitted to making mistakes and said, "It's my intention, whether or not, whatever the decision (of the bar) is to be, to resign as district attorney.”

The Panel itself was withering on Nifong. State Bar prosecutor Douglas Brocker told the committee that as Nifong investigated Crystal Gail Mangum’s allegations that she had been raped and beaten at a March 2006 party thrown by Duke's lacrosse team, he charged "forward toward condemnation and injustice," weaving a "web of deception that has continued up through this hearing."

"Mr. Nifong did not act as a minister of justice, but as a minister of injustice," Brocker said.

The verdicts did not appear to surprise Nifong, who acknowledged during sometimes tearful testimony Friday that he would likely be punished for getting "carried away a little bit" when talking about the case.

Disciplinary committee chairman F. Lane Williamson also hinted during Saturday's closing arguments the three-member panel was likely to conclude that Nifong kept from the defense DNA test results that found genetic material from several men in the accuser's underwear and body, but none from any lacrosse player.

"How can you possibly explain that away?" said Williamson, who repeatedly interrupted Nifong's attorney, Dudley Witt, as he discussed the DNA testing during his closing statement.

"It wasn't just one little oversight," Williamson said later. "This was conduct over an extended period in a very high-profile case."

Despite being aware of those test results, Nifong still pressed ahead with the case anyway and won Grand Jury indictments against Dave Evans, Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty. State prosecutors later concluded the three players were "innocent" victims of a rogue prosecutor's "tragic rush to accuse."

Nifong’s attorney claimed Nifong had made "multiple, egregious mistakes" as he pursued the charges, but not intentionally.

In a stunning statement, Nifong's attorney tried to explain away his client's incredibly flawed judgment, "It didn't click," Witt said as he tried to explain one of his client's errors. "His mind is just his mind. That's the way it works. It just didn't click."

Brocker said Nifong had to have known he was making improper comments to reporters. Nifong said he regretted some of his statements, including a confident proclamation that he wouldn't allow Durham to become known for "a bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl."

He also focused on when Nifong learned about the full extent of the DNA test results and when he shared that information with the defense.

Nifong gave defense attorneys an initial report on the DNA testing in May 2006 that said private lab DNA Security Inc. had been unable to find a conclusive match between the accuser and any lacrosse players.

But lab director Brian Meehan testified this week that he told Nifong as early as April 10, 2006 — a week BEFORE Seligmann and Finnerty were indicted — about the more detailed test results.

Nifong disingenuously testified that when he gave the defense the initial DNA report, that he "believed at the time that I had given them everything."

The disciplinary hearing committee could suspend Nifong's law license or take it away entirely, however, the players' attorneys have pledged to seek criminal contempt charges next week in Durham.

Nifong’s new-found contrition seems calculated to salvage what he can out of these disastrous (for him) hearings.

He had the multiple and contradictory statements by the accuser (a woman with a history of mental and emotional problems) to the police and the DNA evidence that found no material consistent with any of the three Duke players, but that of multiple others on April 10th – BEFORE the grand Jury hearing that wrongly indicted the three.

Without a doubt, Mike Nifong is the primary villain in this saga and his being finally brought to justice (he’ll resign his position as Durham DA and stands to lose his law license for from five years to for-life and he could face criminal charges down the road.

Is Schumer’s Vision for the Democrats at Odds With the Soros-Kos Vision?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
In his recent book, Positively American, New York’s Senior Senator, Charles Schumer introduces the guiding light of his political vision – the Bailey’s (Eileen and Joe) of Massapequa, Long Island.

The Bailey’s are Schumer’s composite of the great American middle class – the people he grew up with in Brooklyn.

Schumer describes the Baileys, in part, like this, “They are bothered by the corporate excesses they read about in the paper. But they are bothered even more when they read about someone burning the American flag. They feel there is a place in America for large, successful corporations and realize they’re needed – even if it’s an unfortunate fact of life that some CEOs will always go too far. But they are infuriated by flag burners. That hits their emotional chord. The Bailey’s are angered by people who don’t appreciate America and who exploit America’s very freedoms to spit in its face – and theirs. They are skeptical of anyone who defends such people.”

Who goes on, “They believe everyone deserves a fair chance and are sympathetic to those who are less fortunate then they are...but they are not driven by communal goals over self-interest. To them there is nothing wrong with seeking what’s good for yourself and your family. To them, it’s part of the American credo. They believe in charity, but they also see nothing wrong with helping yourself do better.” He goes on, “They are proud of what they’ve done and what they’ve accomplished and they don’t need government to treat them like basket cases. Most of the time, it seems to them that government’s focused on someone else – the very poor, or the very rich. So most of the time, they tune government out.”

Schumer’s vision isn’t about converting the American middle class to Liberalism, in fact Schumer admits, “Democrats were embarrassingly liberal, pathetically liberal, shamefully liberal and liberal for too long,” no, his vision is about “listening to them.”

He refuses to lecture or hector them about their putting personal-interest over “communal values.” He even understands intrinsically the Democrats failure connecting with Americans over national security – when a Senate colleague asked him, “Why don’t they trust us on foreign policy?”

“Us?” I asked.

“Democrats.”

“They?”

“The press, the people.”

“I paused and considered..."I’m not sure they should,” I said.

It seems as though Schumer clearly sees the extreme Left (the "Kos kids" and the Soros-axis) as bigger impediments to a Democratic, then the Republicans are.

Makes sense, given the 2006 Schumer-Emmanuel Plan that had the Democrats recruiting hard-core Conservatives, including former Reagan official Jim Webb, and Evangelical Christian Heath Schuler, among others to run out West and down South.
2006 was a very promising year for the Democrats primarily because they embraced Schumer’s pro-middle class, anti-far Left “flag burners,” agenda.

Will it continue?

Can the Democrats move forward with an agenda that relegates the “Kos kids” to the back burner?

Without it, Schumer warns that the Democrats risking falling back what they seemed to b e after their 2004 defeat – a Party of permanent minority status.

Another Victory for “France’s Giuliani?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

France appears poised to continue its hard lurch to the Right as opinion polls and projections through the second round of voting scheduled for June 16 predict that Sarkozy's Union for a Popular Majority (UMP) and its center-right allies will win over 42% of the vote — under France's proportional representation rules, that would give the President and his allies between 410 and 430 of the parliament's 577 seats.

After promising “No mass legalizations,’ and “No backing away from the scheduled mass deportations,” as well as major revisions to France’s failed welfare state and ill-conceived labor laws (the 35 hour work-week and eight weeks paid vacation may be going by the boards), Sarkozy's popularity seems as high as it's ever been.

Food for thought; if France (FRANCE!!!) is talking mass deportations and refusing to legalize its illegal migrants, then why shouldn’t America take a cue from that?

I mean, after all, the NY Times and other Leftist organs have been begging America to emulate many of the failed French policies. Why not look to emulate one rooted in real common sense and true compassion?

SEE:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1631020,00.html

Where They Stand on Illegal Immigration

First, a Clinton appointee judge (U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay) holds up a Farmers Branch, TX law that bars property owners from renting to illegal aliens, then Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., proposes allowing more spouses and minor children of legal permanent residents to immigrate to the U.S., by exempting them from visa caps.

The Senate is also considering a bid by Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., to more than double, to 90,000 a year, the number of green cards available for parents of U.S. citizens.

For his part, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., plans an attempt to phase out the point system that gives little credit for family ties to a U.S. citizen or permanent legal resident.


On Wednesday, May 30, 2007 former Senator, John Edwards said that it's a "hard one" to decide if an illegal working here for one year has a "right" to citizenship, but says "five years, definitely," meaning five years of ILLEGAL STATUS definitely transforms this into a right.

Sen. Harry Reid referred to the 12 million illegal aliens currently in the U.S. as "12 million undocumented Americans."


As bad as the Moderate Republicans are on this issue (and they ARE bad), the Democrats are clearly the real pro-illegal immigrant Party.

Will this translate into votes?

Bill O’Reilly and others think, “Yes,” as poor immigrants will vote for the bigger government, more welfare Democrats.

Call me a cynic, but I’m thinking a sizable percentage of these new immigrants would be swayed by Conservative rhetoric on social issues, BUT why should any of that matter?

It shouldn’t!

The reality is that illegal immigration results in a flood of unskilled labor, driving down the “wage floor” in the U.S., which in turn pulls down other wages as well.

The Democrats can’t claim to be “the Party of the workingclass” when they support the devaluing of American labor.

At this point, ONLY the Conservatives of both Parties CAN.

.

.

.

UPDATE: "Immigration Deal Survives GOP Threat"

.

.

According to Julie Hirschfeld Davis of the AP, "The proposed immigration overhaul narrowly survived a potentially fatal challenge Wednesday as the Senate turned back a Republican bid to limit the illegal immigrants who could gain lawful status.
.
"The close vote on a proposal by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, to bar felons — including those court-ordered to be deported — from legalization reflected the delicate position of the contentious immigration bill, which remains under threat from the right and the left.

.

The vote was 51-46 against the amendment. Democrats succeeded in pulling support from Cornyn's proposal by winning adoption of a rival version that would bar a more limited set of criminals..."

.

.

So, the Dems rebuffed a Republican measure that would thwart criminals and terrorists from automatically becoming U.S. citizens?

.

I guess that sounds about right.

.

SEE: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070606/ap_on_go_co/immigration_congress

.

.

UPDATE II: The Senate voted 50-45 today to BLOCK a Democratic attempt to "limit debate" and speed this flawed immigration Bill through Congress. That's 15 votes short of the 60 needed to limit debate!

.

Once again, Conservative Dems Jim Webb and Jon Tester sided with other Conservatives and voted AGAINST limiting debate. As a result the Bill was set aside and the Senate moved onto other business.

.

As a result, this very flawed Bill may be DOA.