The following is a summary of a piece posted on the Center for Individual Freedom's site.

When North Korea test-fired up to seven missiles including ones designed to reach the U.S.,an emergency U.N. Secrurity Council session was called.

The result?  Japan put forward a draft resolution proposing sanctions. In particular, Japan wanted a stop to any nations transferring funds or technology that furthers North Korea's nuclear and/or missile programs, which could be used to threaten Japan.  The Security Council rejected it.  The proposal wasn't punitive, but rather specifically targeted a certain military capability.

The Security Council ended up doing nothing, unless you consider issuing a statement effective at deterring a Stalinist/Asiatic Dynasty modeled ruler who considers himself a God of sorts.  Democracy's stand-by allies, China and Russia, who each have financial interests in supplying Kim Jong Il with all the missile technology he can buy were behind the lack of action.

On the same day North Korea fired its missiles (built with money that could have helped prevent at least some of the starvation that has gone on in that country) the "reformed" U.N. Human Rights Council met in Geneva. The progress in that body was another resolution condemning Israel.

"And the band played on..."

A good friend called this morning.  In the course of our catching-up he told me about his "Starbucks experience".

He went through the drive-through on his way to an appointment.  The girl handed him his order and told him it had been paid for by the car ahead of him.  She asked, "Would you like to pay for the person behind you"?.

Since he doesn't have rocks in his head, he said, "I guess it depends on what they've ordered"!  He went ahead and paid.  Then, being the curious consultant that he is, he went in and talked to the staff.

As it happened, he was the 50th vehicle in the chain, and it continued for some time after that.

The lesson is:  The girl at the window was the catalyst to tapping the reservoir of latent goodwill.  Had she not ASKED each person if they'd like to pass it on, the chain would have been much shorter - or not a chain at all.  My friend and the others were happy to keep it going, but it didn't occcur to him until prompted with the idea.

CNN reports that Felipe Calderon is Mexico's new president after winning "a razor-thin victory Thursday...after four days of uncertainty".

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, Calderon's "leftist rival" claimed that there were irregularities in the vote count and vowed to fight the results in court.

Lopez Obrador said, "We are going to the Federal Electoral Tribunal with the same demand -- that the votes be counted -- because we cannot accept these results."  Deja-vu isn't it?

CNN's story on the election went on to say that, "Calderon had strong support among business leaders and wealthier Mexicans. Lopez Obrador's base was among the country's poor."  So, in typical class-warfare thinking, we are painted a picture of the rich conservative fat-cat "stealing" yet another election from the smarter, better-hearted socialist.  Could it be Calderon had better ideas?  CNN's story doesn't give that impression.

Given Mexico's current state of affairs, Calderon's Harvard education in economics and preference for free market economics and free trade may be just what the doctor ordered.

Lopez Obrador favors more spending on social programs for the poor.  An admirable sentiment, and one he can achieve in partnership with the Catholic Church and/or an inter-denominational coalition.  Helping the poor is not an act that government has a monopoly on.  In point of fact, keeping government bureucrats out of the mix, and having it handled by clergy and lay people is an approach that has worked historically.

Nearly 85 percent of illegal immigrants coming to the U.S. are from Mexico.  Looking at France, then at the U.S., it seems a reasonable choice of the Mexican people to elect President Calderon.  We wish him the best in improving the lives of his countrymen.

 The New York Times leaking of classified information provides aid to our enemies, harms the public interest, and increases the likelihood of terrorists’ success in planning attacks against civilians, not just in the U.S., but around the world in that we have now lost a unique and crucial tool in fighting terrorism.

Some have linked to the "Fact Sheet on Terrorist Financing Executive Order" dated September 24, 2001 as evidence that the Times revealed nothing new.  That Executive Order describes that, IN GENERAL, we will be targeting financial networks which fund terrorist organizations & leaders.

The New York Times piece divulges specific tools used to that general end, including classified information.

The difference is (to paraphrase Hugh Hewitt) between a 16-year old lead-foot knowing that the police are enforcing speed limits and a Capital-Journal article revealing the specific locations of speed traps.

Was the Times publication treason?  Treason, as defined here http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002381----000-.html is “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, …adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason”.

The NYT’s divulging of a classified program, and the specifics used to combat enemies of the citizens of the U.S., provided aid for sure, we can argue comfort.

As evidence that the Swift program was not general public knowledge, I quote directly form the NYT article http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/23/washington/23intel.html?_r=2&oref=login&oref=slogin (emphases mine)…

“Nearly 20 current and former government officials and industry executives discussed aspects of the Swift operation with The New York Times on condition of anonymity BECAUSE THE PROGRAM REMAINS CLASSIFIED”

“While THE BANKING PROGRAM IS A CLOSELY HELD SECRET, administration officials have held CLASSIFIED BRIEFINGS FOR SOME MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND THE SEPT. 11 COMMISSION”

“Under a SECRET…program initiated weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks”

“In terrorism prosecutions, intelligence officials have been careful to "sanitize," or hide the origins of evidence collected through the program TO KEEP IT SECRET “

“The idea for the Swift program…grew out of a suggestion by a Wall Street executive, who told a senior Bush administration official about Swift's database. FEW government officials KNEW much ABOUT THE CONSORTIUM, … but they quickly discovered it offered UNPARALLELED ACCESS to international transactions.”

“Viewed … AS A VITAL TOOL, the program has played a HIDDEN role in domestic and foreign terrorism investigations since 2001 and helped in the capture of the most wanted Qaeda figure in Southeast Asia, the officials said.”

“Officials described the Swift program as the biggest and most far-reaching of several SECRET efforts to trace terrorist financing”

“Administration officials… asked The New York Times not to publish this article, saying that disclosure of the Swift program could jeopardize its effectiveness”

TIMES’ DEFENSE OF PUBISHING DUE TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST…
“Bill Keller of the NYT justifies the publication saying, “We remain convinced that the administration's extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use of it may be, is a matter of public interest."

So, Mr. Keller knew that publicly elected officials & the 9/11 commission were aware of the program via CLASSIFIED BRIEFINGS. They are elected to represent us, and if they deemed the program legal, and worthy of remaining classified, what special knowledge to the contrary does Mr. Keller & the NYT have that it should be published in a large (but shrinking) newspaper?

Further to the point that the public interest has been considered by democratically elected officials (as opposed to Mr. Keller)...
“Officials realized the potential for abuse, and narrowed the program's targets and put in more safeguards. Among them were the auditing firm, an electronic record of every search and a requirement that analysts involved in the operation document the intelligence that justified each data search. Mr. Levey said the program was used only to examine records of individuals or entities, not for broader data searches."

Levey described the program as legal and appropriate in discussing it with the Times AFTER they notified him they were running the story.

ARGUMENT FOR IT’S SIGNIFICANCE IN COMBATING TERRORISM…
“Dana Perino, deputy White House press secretary, said: “One of the most important tools in the fight against terror is our ability to choke off funds for the terrorists….We know the terrorists pay attention to our strategy to fight them, and now have another piece of the puzzle of how we are fighting them. We also know they adapt their methods, which increases the challenge to our intelligence and law enforcement officials."

“Swift is a CRUCIAL gatekeeper, providing electronic instructions on how to transfer money among 7,800 financial institutions worldwide.

“The program…"has provided us with a UNIQUE and powerful window into the operations of terrorist networks and is, without doubt, a legal and proper use of our authorities," Stuart Levey, an under secretary at the Treasury Department, said in an interview on Thursday. “

“Swift data has provided clues to money trails and ties between possible terrorists and groups financing them”

“Among the successes was the capture of al Qaeda operative, Riduan Isamuddin… believed to be the mastermind of the 2002 bombing of a Bali resort”

“In the United States, the program has provided financial data in investigations into possible domestic terrorist cells”

“The data also helped identify a Brooklyn man who was convicted on terrorism-related charges last year”.

All these quotes from directly from the original NYT article on the Swift program.  For a group that lives in the very city where the worst terrorist strike in history took place, these guys are completely clueless and thoroughly dangerous.  This leak is orders of magnitude worse than the alleged leak of Valerie Plame's position.

North Korea has 3-5 more short and/or medium-range missiles it may be preparing to test fire.  This after showing the world with their first 7 missile tests on Wednesday, July 4th that they suffer from ballistic ED, for which no Viagra analog exists.

Maybe these additional threatened launches are a sad attempt to save face.

On a more serious note, this strenghthens the U.S.-Japan missile shield partnership.  If North Korea continues on this course, and China & Russia keep looking the other way, we may end up with Japan and South Korea considering missiles of their own and strengthening their militaries.

The silver lining could be counterbalance to China's growing ambitions in the Pacific.