Quote of the day

In this morning’s Washington Times, Rep. Mac Thornberry wrote about the ramifications, if Congressional Democrats get their way, of inserting the word ‘lawful’ into the FISA bill:

So the provision allowing surveillance on al Qaeda, as long as it is “lawful,” was crafted to grant the pressure groups what they want while providing their congressional allies a much needed political fig leaf. Unless the government can prove a negative [emphasis added mine] — that a foreign target will not make or receive a call from an American — a warrant is required. If a foreign target begins to discuss the “foreign affairs” of the United States, collection would have to stop. Otherwise, surveillance on Osama bin Laden or any other terrorist would not be “lawful.”

Are Janet Reno and Jamie Gorelick working behind the scenes to write such legislation?

Why is NYC beginning a 9/11 cancer study just now?

The New York Post reports:

The city Health Department has launched a sweeping study — the first of its kind — of cancers among 9/11 responders and thousands of others who lived or worked near the World Trade Center.

“We’re starting to look at all cancers now. It’s a high priority,” said Lorna Thorpe, the department’s deputy commissioner for epidemiology.

“There’s reason for concern,” Thorpe said, because of known carcinogens in Ground Zero dust and smoke such as benzene, asbestos, silica, and chemicals emitted in fires.

The study aims to identify all cancers among 71,000 people in the city’s WTC Health Registry, including Twin Towers survivors and nearby office workers, lower Manhattan residents, kids, school staff, and 31,000 rescue, recovery and cleanup workers.

The study is already zeroing in on blood cancers — leukemia, lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and non-Hodgkins lymphoma — which can develop in two to 10 years, sooner than most tumor cancers.

We know that OSHA identified early on after 9/11 “carcinogens in Ground Zero dust and smoke” so why is New York City just now beginning this study?