Days after an al Qaeda wannabe Army major went on a murderous rampage at the nation’s largest military base, the Secretary of Homeland Security’s biggest concern appears to be preventing a wave of anti-Muslim sentiment in the United States.

Janet Napolitano, the Obama official in charge of protecting the country’s safety, is most worried about a politically incorrect backlash against Muslims after the Ft. Hood massacre and says her agency is working hard with groups across the U.S. to deflect any retaliation against Muslims for one man’s fury.

During a weekend visit to the United Arab Emirates Napolitano assured that the U.S. government objects to anti-Muslim sentiment emanating from the Ft. Hood murders and says Americans recognize that “this was an individual who does not represent the Muslim faith.” Napolitano guaranteed that a civil rights and civil liberties directorate in her department aimed to “prevent everybody being painted with a broad brush.” 

The Muslim Army psychiatrist, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, murdered 13 military colleagues and wounded 29 others as he chanted "Allahu Akbar!" ("God is great!") in Arabic. Hasan has ties to a radical mosque leader (Anwar al Awlaki) who promotes jihad against the U.S., had attempted to make contact with al Qaeda associates months earlier and defended Islamic suicide bombers in comments he posted on the internet. 

During an hour-long talk in front of dozens of other military doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington D.C., Hassan said non-Muslims should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats. He also said non-believers are infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire. The presentation was supposed to be a discussion on a medical issue but instead Hassan delivered an extremist interpretation of the Koran. 

At least one veteran U.S. Senator risked the wrath of straying from political correctness to publicly say the Ft. Hood assassinations could have been a terrorist act. Connecticut Independent Joe Lieberman, who heads the Senate’s Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, said initial evidence suggests that Hasan, was a "self-radicalized, home-grown terrorist" who had turned to Islamic extremism. 

That assessment should certainly give the Secretary of Homeland Security something bigger to worry about than the possibility of offending Muslims. 

A Democrat congressman from Ohio has introduced innovative legislation that would require foreign countries to reimburse American taxpayers for the exorbitant medical expenses of illegal immigrants.

Appropriately titled, PAYBACK Act (Preventing All Your Bucks from Aiding non-Citizens is Key), the measure would save the U.S. government billions of dollars annually and ensure that taxpayer dollars are not used to fund health care services for illegal immigrants, according to its author, U.S. Representative Zack Space.

Medical bills for illegal aliens would be passed along to their country of origin, according to the proposed law, which was introduced in the House this month. The government would mostly collect by deducting the cost of illegal immigrants’ healthcare from the foreign aid their home countries would normally get from the U.S.

If the U.S. does not offer foreign assistance the country would get billed for 110% of the medical costs. In the case where illegal immigrants are from nation’s to whom the U.S. owes money, the cost of medically treating their citizens would be reduced from the debt. The money would be applied to strengthening border security. “It is fundamentally unfair and outrageous to foot the bill for immigrants unlawfully in the United States,” said Space, who has represented Ohio’s 18th congressional district since 2007. 

U.S. taxpayers spend tens of billions of dollars annually to provide free medical care for illegal immigrants with states that border Mexico taking the biggest hit. The expense has become so unbearable in California—long an illegal alien sanctuary—that several municipalities eliminated the perk this year to save tens of millions of dollars in the midst of the state’s dire financial crisis.

Adding to the problem is the fact that Mexico, the country that provides the largest amount of illegal immigrants in the U.S., has long promoted America’s generous public health centers. It even operates a Spanish-language program (Ventanillas de Salud, Health Windows) in about a dozen U.S. cities that refers its nationals—living in the country illegally—to clinics where they can get free medical care without being turned over to immigration authorities.

President Obama has repealed a 16-year-old federal law he claims is “rooted in fear rather than fact” that bans immigration and travel to the U.S. by foreigners infected with AIDS. 

Passed by Congress in 1993 and signed into law by Bill Clinton, the measure was designed to reduce the spread of the deadly disease in the United States. Since 1987 AIDS has appeared on the Department of Health and Human Services list of communicable diseases of public health significance. The president’s repeal essentially removes AIDS from the list, even though there’s no disputing that it is in fact a communicable disease. 

With a stroke of a pen, AIDS will be erased from the government’s list of communicable diseases of public health significance in January. This will allow, for the first time in nearly two decades, foreigners infected AIDS to freely enter the U.S. Tuberculosis, Leprosy, Syphilis, Chancroid, Gonorrhea, Granuloma Inguinale, and Lymphogranuloma Venereum will stay on the concern list. That means five of the remaining seven are sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS.

Lifting the ban is part of a U.S. effort to end the stigma of HIV/AIDS, according to Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who actually said that the nixed policy wrongly permitted the U.S. to enable the myth that HIV/AIDS is a threat. She added that the ability to travel freely and have access to affordable health care should be available to everyone. 

Rescinding the AIDS travel ban actually got started during the George W. Bush administration. In 2006 Bush signed a measure allowing AIDS-infected visitors to enter the U.S. with short-term or business visas. In 2008 he signed a law allowing federal health officials to decide whether to take AIDS off the list of communicable diseases. Obama took the final step by once and for all ordering the removal thus lifting the travel ban.

Five Muslim illegal immigrants detained in New York after Middle Eastern terrorists attacked the area on September 11 have won $1.26 million from the U.S. government to settle a lawsuit accusing federal authorities of violating their rights.

The illegal aliens were among 170 Arab and Muslim men jailed for immigration law violations in New York during post 9/11 roundups. The nation had just suffered the worst terrorist attack in history at the hands of Middle Eastern extremists and security was on high alert, especially in the area surrounding the Big Apple.

The Middle Eastern immigration violators were jailed at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn and most have been deported. The five who sued the government claimed that then Attorney General John Ashcroft, prison personnel, FBI supervisors and other officials violated their rights by imprisoning them on the basis of their race and religion. The Muslims from Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey assert that they were illegally detained victims of racial profiling.

In a separate lawsuit another illegal immigrant detained during the same period, Ehab Elmaghraby, settled with the U.S. government for $300,000 a few years ago. He was deported to his native Egypt in 2003 after pleading guilty to credit card fraud. Like the five who just settled, Elmaghraby claimed in his lawsuit that he was beaten in jail and denied access to phones and lawyers. 

A New York-based social justice group represented the Muslims who just got a check from Uncle Sam. In the lawsuit attorneys alleged that the “non-citizens” were swept up by federal agents in a racial profiling dragnet following 9/11. The complaint accuses the government of violating the illegal aliens’ rights under the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments and under international human rights law. No mention that they violated federal law by living in the U.S. illegally.  

In what may seem like an amusing joke, a disgraced politician who resigned amid a headline-grabbing hooker scandal is speaking about government ethics at a prestigious Ivy League University this month.

Former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, who left public office in shame after being exposed as a regular client of a high-end prostitution ring, will lecture about ethics in government next week at Harvard University’s Foundation for Ethics. The once-popular Democrat, who served two terms as New York Attorney General, was his party’s rising star until the internationally covered scandal brought him down. 

Spitzer ultimately got caught because he essentially tried to launder the hefty cash payments to the “escort service” and suspicious bank officials contacted the Internal Revenue Service. The married father of three young girls paid thousands of dollars a pop for romps with much-younger prostitutes who also serviced other wealthy high-profile figures. Federal authorities say Spitzer blew at least $80,000 on hookers over a decade.

While this may sound like the sort of thing that can permanently end a politician’s career, Spitzer plans to make a comeback with a run for statewide office—New York Comptroller—next year. He is also considering running for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by former U.S. Representative Kirsten Gillibrand, who was appointed by Governor David Paterson to fill Hillary Clinton’s vacancy.

Earlier this year Spitzer landed a job teaching at a public college as an adjunct professor. The City College of New York, a four-year school with an enrollment of about 13,000, is paying the scandal-plagued politician $4,500 to teach a course called “Law and Public Policy.” 

The third major donor of a U.S. Senate candidate who is currently Florida’s governor has been criminally charged in a large scale corruption scheme, illustrating a pattern of shady fundraisers for the veteran Republican politician who may soon represent the Sunshine State in Congress. 

As he campaigns for national office, Florida Governor Charlie Crist is conveniently trying to distance himself from the crooked money men who have generously donated big bucks to his campaigns over the years. All three were close friends who socialized regularly with the governor and two were rewarded with prominent positions in his administration. 

The latest to be arrested and indicted, distinguished south Florida attorney Scott Rothstein, raised at least $675,000 for Crist’s 2006 gubernatorial campaign and donated close to $80,000 during the first 50 days of Crist’s U.S. Senate campaign. The governor appointed Rothstein to a state Judicial Nominating Commission and Rothstein identified himself as a “close friend and advisor to the governor” on his law firm biography. 

This week Rothstein was arrested and federally charged for masterminding an investment scam that could reach hundreds of millions of dollars. Dozens of federal agents raided his Ft. Lauderdale office this week and seized documents and computer records related to the fraudulent operation. Crist maintains that he’s not that close to Rothstein, although the men attended each other’s weddings last year and his Senate campaign will not in any way be affected by the relationship. 

A few months ago, south Florida ophthalmologist Alan Mendelsohn, a prolific fundraiser and political power broker, was charged with fraudulently using money from political action committees to pay for a mistress’s love nest, a luxury car for himself and his children’s education. Mendelsohn was so tight with Crist, a former Florida attorney general, that the governor gave him a spot on his coveted gubernatorial transition team in 2006.

In February a Jordanian businessman (Ala'a al-Ali) was indicted for making tens of thousands of dollars in illegal contributions to various political candidates, including Crist, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Arizona Senator John McCain. Ali, who lives in the Dominican Republic, circumvented federal limits on individual contributions as well as a ban on foreign donations by using bogus donors that he later reimbursed.

A fourth Crist donor embroiled in scandal but not formally charged is a prominent Delray Beach defense contractor (Harry Sargeant) who bundled hefty sums for Crist’s gubernatorial campaign, much of it from foreign donors in California who insist they never gave a dime and, frankly, don’t have the resources to. Sargeant and Crist are old college buddies and Sargeant’s political ties have landed him lucrative Pentagon contracts that have earned him a fortune.

Nearly a year after House Republicans created a much-ballyhooed committee on earmark reform, it has done nothing to repair the notoriously unethical—and often corrupt—method of publicly funding pet projects for the politically connected.

In fact, eight of the 10 Republicans who serve on the highly touted Select Committee on Earmark Reform have continued to seek earmarks and so have the vast majority of their colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives. The pork spending has continued uninterrupted even though Republican members were asked to refrain from requesting any additional earmarks until the new committee reported back with its highly anticipated reform recommendations.

Almost a year later, there has been no report and no recommendations even though both were scheduled to be delivered no later than February 16, 2009. The committee claims the report is a “work in progress” although members openly admit that they haven’t bothered meeting since they missed the original February deadline.

In the meantime, committee Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington has requested nearly $130 million in earmarks so far this year. Only two members of the new reform group, Arizona’s Jeff Flake and Texas’ Jeb Hensarling, have refrained from requesting earmarks. So much for the committee’s claims that it will bring change and transparency to the process by which Washington spends taxpayers’ money.

When they created the earmark reform committee, GOP leaders claimed that the spending habits of Congress have become a clear symbol of a “broken Washington” because federal lawmakers allocate billions of tax dollars yearly to projects that benefit their influential supporters and campaign donors.  

A great example is the recently passed 2010 defense spending bill. It was loaded with $2.6 billion in earmarks to fund highly questionable projects that will benefit the financial supporters of the lawmakers—both Democrat and Republican—who voted for the legislation. President Obama signed it even though he’s repeatedly vowed to battle the special interests that severely inflated military spending in the past.

Not surprisingly, even Obama has used the earmark process to steer hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to his family and financial supporters as an Illinois Senator and so has House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. A few years ago Madame Speaker inserted a $25 million provision into a redevelopment bill to financially benefit her husband.

Federal immigration authorities are crediting a crucial team effort with local law enforcement agencies nationwide for a substantial increase in the number of criminally convicted illegal aliens in the last year. 

The Department of Homeland Security’s largest investigative agency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), reports that agents assigned to find fugitives who have ignored deportation orders have increasingly apprehended illegal aliens with criminal records. 

Nearly half of the 35,000 immigrants arrested by ICE during the 2009 fiscal year have been convicted of crimes in U.S. courts, according to the agency’s records. The figure marks an increase of 23% from the previous fiscal year and illustrates the operation’s success in ridding communities across the country of dangerous criminals who shouldn’t even be in the U.S.

ICE officials attribute the success to a closer working relationship with local police departments that notify immigration authorities when an illegal alien is arrested and help the feds develop leads. The local-federal partnership is known as 287(g) and is ardently opposed by Latino advocates who claim it instills fear in immigrant neighborhoods and gives local police a green light to commit racial profiling and civil rights abuses.

In fact, a few months ago a coalition of influential Latino and civil rights organizations demanded that the Obama Administration terminate the 287(g) program because it exacerbates racial profiling. In a stern two-page letter to the president the army of politically-connected immigrant rights groups said local law enforcement agencies nationwide are abusing the program to target communities of color. 

Obama has caved in to the powerful La Raza movement by weakening 287(g) even though it has helped reduce violent crime in local communities and aided in the deportation of thousands of criminal illegal aliens who would otherwise fall through the cracks. To obtain details relating to the incomprehensible changes, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security because the agency has exceeded the deadline on a July public records request.