Friday, January 8, 2010

Our Way of Life, or Them: Survival of our Civilization or Death by Stupidity. American prison treatment versus their way.

If you have the inclination to visit, say ... Iran, you may wish to ensure you (as a female) cover your head before you leave the aircraft, or rather, if you wish to leave the aircraft, you must ensure you have your head covered.  There are consequences if you do not.  Mind you, there are also consequences if you wander around Tehran (any part) wearing tight fitting jeans, t-shirt, and a hijab.  The t-shirt and jeans have to go, or they must be covered with a manteau-type top (covering your rear-end).  If you do not, there will be consequences and if you are one of those enlightened Western women, the consequences will be truly primitive to your standards.

If you are gay, living in Tehran (and like people everywhere), you wish to meet and greet other gays, requiring you to go to parks or places typically inhabited by gays, you may wish to be careful.  Quite often the police will arrest you, take you back to their station where you will be repeatedly raped, before you may end up released.  This also applies to prostitutes, although a little different.  The police have a temporary marriage form filled out first, then they rape you, and send you on your way.  There are consequences. 

In Iran, many of the protestors from the June and December protests against the mullah-led regime, have reported arrests, beatings, and ongoing rape while they are held in the dreaded Evin prison.  Many protestors (both male and female) who end up being released, tell of being raped regularly throughout the day by groups of men (guards).  They tell of terrible humiliation - having photos taken (particularly of the men) being raped or forced to perform oral sex on guards, and then when released, threatened with the exposure of the photos.  Those released are the lucky ones - many have simply disappeared in Evin.  There are consequences. 

In Egypt, the stories that are told of prison experiences make the events seen in 'Midnight Cowboy' appear downright desirable.  A gay Arab, living in Israel, traveled to Egypt for a vacation that according to him was not for sex, rather just for rest.  He was arrested, taunted, humiliated, and finally after several weeks thrown into a prison cell 6x6, in his underwear.  He shared the cell with rats, roaches and all kinds of maggots.  Even when an officer of the guard reprimanded the guards for allowing the Arab-Israeli guy to sit in maggots, rats, and shit, little changed - he received a very thin mattress, a shirt and pants, and a plastic trashcan that he could use as a toilet.  Eventually after 40 or so days, the man was released.   

You do not want to violate Ramadan in Egypt either - breaking Ramadan - eating or smoking during the month could get you arrested and thrown into prison, or fined up to $2,000.  There are consequences.

In Pakistan, you surely do not want to violate Ramadan, or prison will be your future.  During the 2009 Ramadan, estimates are that more than 3,300 people were arrested for eating or smoking during Ramadan (in public).  Of these, 76 were foreigners.  Depending upon when you are arrested, your visit to the court could be considerably much later.  Spending one day in a Pakistani prison is worse than any time in a Turkish cell.

You most certainly do not want to go to Pakistan and make it known you are a Christian.  Abid Javed Francis was 31 years old when he was arrested and beaten in front of his mother for not paying a bribe.

It was not simply the beating by one police officer, more than 11 were involved in the actions against Francis.  The police demanded $125 from his family, who could not afford it, only to have the bribe increase to $625.  His family lives in one of the slum settlements in Karachi.

The police upped the ante by charging Francis with illegal arms dealing - several days after he was arrested.  Shortly after the illegal arms charge was filed, it was amended - Francis was charged with stealing a motorbike instead.

Francis was left in a cell in his underwear for a couple weeks, beaten constantly, and when his mother was told she could see him, he was stripped to his underwear, on a stretcher in an open area, exposed to chill.  He died a few days later from internal injuries sustained while in custody.  There are consequences.

One could go on all day and go through another thirty countries with these exact same, or worse stories, but it is truly a wasted effort, not to remember the lives taken by barbarians, but because it does not and will not change.  If you plan on visiting Saudi Arabia, you might wish to leave your Bible at home.  Some people do carry their Bible, perhaps because it is better reading than most novels, or perhaps because they wish to find a closeness with the past and with God that only the Bible, not Time magazine, can provide.  If you do take your Bible with you, understand that at the airport you arrive at, you will be searched.  Very much like the way you are searched leaving LAX or any American airport, you are searched as you ENTER the Saudi Kingdom.  If they find a Bible on your person or in your cases, it will be, in front of you, put into a shredder.  This is actually a better option than what could happen.  If you have two or more Bibles, you are arrested, and put into a Saudi prison - perhaps Al Hayar.  And for several days you could be chained to the door so that you cannot sit down or sleep.  Sleep deprivation will then play havoc with your mind.  In one case, one prisoner faced 5 days, then 11 days, then 14 days at different intervals, of sleep deprivation. There are consequences.  Your cell is no different than the one in Egypt, and your food appears through a hatch in the door, a concrete slab serves as a bed and fluorescent lights beat down on you 24 hours a day. I would think that is preferable to nail extractions, or whippings, electric shock, or cigarette burns, which all occur.

You could end up in a Saudi prison for any number of reasons - as a Westerner, you sit down with a female who is an acquaintance from work, to talk about your family or your work, and bing bang bong, you are arrested.  You cannot speak to a female who is not your wife, sister, mother.  There are consequences.

The torture in Saudi prisons is perhaps more refined than you find in Pakistan, but no less deadly - beatings,  punching, kicking, being thrown around the room, having your testicles stood on, being lain down on the floor in a hog-tied position, hands shackled behind your back and attached to your ankles, and then beaten over the soles of your feet, followed up perhaps by falanga - where you are strapped over a metal bar and hung upside-down off the floor so that your feet and buttocks are prominently exposed, and then you are beaten across the soles off the feet, across the buttock, and then every once in a while if you are unlucky, a quick shot into the scrotum.

Not that your Saudi captors care when they rape you (males) in an office down the hall from the cells, in the next room are dozens of officers or agents sitting and talking while you are raped.  Everyone knows what happens and what goes on - in fact a few may take turns doing you, before you are returned to your cell.   There are consequences.


Now, compare that to Guantanamo Bay.






Halal food, more than a dozen choices of food, three meals a day, time to worship, a Koran, doctors on call 24 hours a day, visits by the International Red Cross, attorney visits (all without American guards in the room during these visits).

This does not mean it is a paradise, certainly not.  A window, bed, sheets, heating and air, food, toilet (to their specifications), clothing ... of course it is not a paradise.  The majority of the 300 or so men held in Guantanamo were caught attempting to kill American soldiers and or as a result of direct links to terrorist groups or individuals.  Is there anyone innocent among the 300 or so.  It is not impossible, but it is not likely.

Use common sense, which I understand is in short supply by 30-40% of the American electorate and quite likely a larger percent of the world body, but try.  Why would CIA or the army, or whoever it is that puts people into Guantanamo, spend the energy, time, and money to put someone who has, with 100% certainty, no connection to terrorism or anyone involved in terrorism into a prison that will fill space and cost money.  Ok, so they don't care about the cost.  Flying a plane across the world with a few people on it, fuel costs to transport to Cuba, the food and upkeep for the guy while he stays in Guantanamo, and the eventual release of details about the prisoner ... all for no reason.  I apologize, but I do not believe CIA works that way as a matter of policy.  Nor does anyone in our system.  Now, in Egypt, the cost to keep the guy is maybe a gallon of gruel a month - reasonable, and doable.  Not going to break any bank.

Now to Abu Ghraib - what happened at Abu Ghraib.  Humiliation.  Simulated sex.  Prisoners forced to perform oral sex or simulated oral sex on other prisoners.  Fear tactics - prisoners were made to believe they could be electrocuted.  Most was psychological.  The dogs did not bite them, rape them, eat them, or piss on them.  The guards did not beat them nor rape them.  Abu Ghraib is a prison divided in two.  One half of the prison is for criminals, run by the Iraqis.  Common criminals get put into the Abu Ghraib prison.  In the middle is the administrative, medical section.  And on the other end is the terrorist prisoner side.  Common run of the mill criminals did not get put into the political section run by the Americans, BUT which included Iraqi doctors who would visit the prisoners or care for any prisoner taken to them for medical issues.  Several doctors who were involved in working at Abu Ghraib have written about their knowledge of events and how disproportionate the coverage by the US media of killers and terrorists. 






I do not suggest the images show tolerable behavior by American guards, rather they should have been relieved of duty and dishonorably discharged.

The electrical threat - not real.  It was imaginary, unlike the electrical shocks that did occur in Saudi Arabia.  It was intended to make them believe ... and they did.  Was it torture - it was certainly very strong psychological intimidation, right before they got to return to their cells, get dressed, eat, and sleep on their bunk.

It does not in any way, remotely come close to the actions in ANY country I mentioned above or for that matter in any of the other 30-40 I could go into detail about.

The men in this section of the prison were not common people - were any innocent, more likely yes, given how some of them ended up in Abu Ghraib (as compared to Guantanamo). Many of the men involved were within the Saddam regime, torturers, or involved in efforts to undermine US control and kill Americans.

Do I feel bad for any of them?  IF any were truly innocent of any and all charges, yes.  For the rest - no.

Americans were held hostage by the Iraqis.  When the US invaded Iraq, we moved so quickly that supply lines had to catch up, and a few times, were lost and attacked.  Lori Piestewa was the driver of one such truck part of the 507th, a mechanical repair team, used to service or repair vehicles.  In the front seat with her was Jessica Lynch.  Lori Piestewa was the first female and first mother, murdered in Iraq.  I understand that for the bleeding hearts, she isn't a part of any story - but she should be.




When their vehicle came under attack, she was wounded.  When she and Lynch realized they could not continue the fighting, along with several other males in their group, they surrendered.  Piestewa was wounded, but alive when they surrendered.  The Iraqi killers, shot her dead, in the vehicle, and took Private Lynch.  Lori Piestewa was not only the first female and first American mother murdered in Iraq, but she was also a Hopi and Mexican.  She had two children, and she bravely fought off the murderers until the very end.  Unfortunately, Lori did not look like her friend.  Jessica Lynch was also wounded, but she was blonde, blue eyed, and fair skinned.  She was of more interest to the Iraqi killers than Piestewa. 

Several other men were taken with Lynch.  Wounded, perhaps, but alive.  How do we know this?  The murderers had little time before US forces would arrive on the scene.  They had to act quickly and carrying away dead bodies is not an easy task. 

We also saw how these prisoners were treated by the Iraqi government and their killers.





They were all dead, while the above fool, marched around lifting and picking at the soldiers dead bodies all the while smiling for the camera.  This was shown on Iraqi TV in the hours before US forces ended the regime of death.

Perhaps you have seen the above image, perhaps the ones in color.  It shows an odd image of several dead Americans, with their pants undone at the button or zipper.  Odd.  Almost as if someone was inspecting them under their pants, either before they were executed or after.  Of course the Iraqis claim the men were not executed.  Hard to believe when the soldier has a hole in his head - you know, the place where his helmet was.  Our military investigated these images and the events, after we took Baghdad and had access to these people - the men were indeed executed, and then hastily buried in a shallow grave, in a pile.

When Lynch was freed, the Americans involved located the bodies, and without implements, dug up the bodies by hand, all the while acting as quickly as possible given the bombings and shooting outside the hospital, to take them home. 

Jessica Lynch has never spoken or written of the events in the room she was held, and that is her right - no one should have to relive it.  In all likelihood, the men involved were killed and are now being diddled by Satan. 

There is a difference in how Iraqis were treated in Abu Ghraib and how American war prisoners were treated by the Iragi Government, how terrorists are treated in Guantanamo, and how foreigners are treated in Arab prisons.  The media ignore some, play down others, and blow up into a mountain only what Americans did in Abu Ghraib.  As a result of the US media blowing Abu Ghraib up into an atrocity to end all atrocities, more than a dozen people died in rioting and attacks around the world, when that information became public.  It became a rallying cry for every anti-American on earth, and more recently, resulted in the deaths of a half-dozen Americans in Afghanistan - at least, according to the bombers wife.







By SELCAN HACAOGLU, Associated Press Writer
Fri Jan 8, 7:24 am ET

ISTANBUL – The Turkish wife of a Jordanian doctor who killed seven CIA employees in a suicide attack in Afghanistan says her husband was outraged over the treatment of Iraqis at Abu Ghraib prison and the U.S.-led invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Defne Bayrak, the wife of bomber Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi, said in an interview with The Associated Press that his hatred of the United States had motivated her husband to sacrifice his life on Dec. 30 in what he regarded as a holy war against the U.S.

Bayrak also said Friday, "I think the war against the United States must go on."

Turkish police questioned and released Bayrak on Thursday. But she says police confiscated a book she had written called "Osama bin Laden the Che Guevera of the East."



There are consequences for your actions.  There are only two sides (with slight degrees of variation on one side and none on the other) - you are either on one side or the other, you are not unbiased in a war that can end one of two ways.  For me, it is clear - I want my family, my children, my grand children, my civilization to survive, and I accept the necessary actions that must be taken to ensure the survival of our way of life.  Winston Churchill said it long before, and I am certain scores of historical figures before him - we need those men who will do, what the rest of us will not, to ensure we can sleep safely in our beds at night.

I understand the philosophical argument - we are better, we must show we are better, we ... and we will lose while we show how great we are, our children will be enslaved or killed, and our culture destroyed.  But, you will be able to write in a journal, that will be hidden away for several hundred years, that we did not infringe upon anyones liberty or wants, wishes, or feelings.

I am cognizant of the emotional reaction opponents will have to my comparisons - they will argue I have no idea or clue what I am saying, that nothing is similar, and I am conflating issues that are wholly unrelated.  I would argue that they are related and more so, show Americans as a great deal more compassionate and tolerant than any Arab prison / country, even at the worst of Abu-Ghraib.  Yes, bibles and sexual preference, and eating during Ramadan are different from terrorism and from war criminals.  I would expect the preferential Bible eater to be treated better (I combined them intentionally).  A country that imprisons someone for possessing a Bible, beats and tortures them for whatever their crime, beheads them, or rapes them repeatedly for being gay, and fines and imprisons people for eating during Ramadan (which is not by the way, religiously sanctioned by the Koran - the actions which are taken by police) - will be even more horrifying in the treatment of political prisoners or terrorists.  They do not humiliate, they rape.  The humiliation we were shown, was bad, but does not come close to anything we know of the treatment people face every day in Arab prisons.  We are also not selecting random people to imprison, individuals selected or collected are far less innocent than their lawyers claim.  After all, OJ's lawyers forever claimed he was innocent, still do.  The proof is in what happens when these killers, I mean innocent men, are released from their 1 Star lodging in Guantanamo.  They very nearly and immediately go off and blow themselves up, trying to kill as many innocents as possible.  I hope their lawyers can sleep.


There are consequences in the war against terror, and for those individuals who do not understand we are at war with a fascist ideology, they need to stand aside and allow those 'rough men' Churchill spoke of, to do their duty.  Even if the individuals do not want to be saved, the 'rough men' will save them anyway, because that is what they do.  They know the consequences if they don't.




















American prisons

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Washington, D.C.: No One on Duty - Everyone was on Vacation, and NO ONE Returned Immediately.

or golfing.




NCTC director Michael Leiter remained on ski slopes after Christmas Day airline bombing attempt




BY James Gordon Meek
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
Thursday, January 7th 2010, 4:00 AM


WASHINGTON - The top official in charge of analyzing terror threats did not cut short his ski vacation after the underwear bomber nearly blew up an airliner on Christmas Day, the Daily News has learned.


Michael Leiter, director of the National Counterterrorism Center since 2007, decided not to return to his agency's "bat cave" nerve center in McLean, Va., until several days after Christmas, two U.S. officials said.

"People have been grumbling that he didn't let a little terrorism interrupt his vacation," said one of the sources.

[Then again, neither did Obama.  He stayed where he was, didn't even make a statement immediately, just sort of dawdled around, unaware.]


The NCTC, the post-9/11 clearinghouse for intelligence to detect terror plots against the U.S., is under intense scrutiny for failing to "connect the dots" on Nigerian bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

Leiter's spokesman declined to say when the terror-center chief returned to Washington and fully retook the helm of his analysis agency, which is near CIA headquarters just outside the nation's capital.

"It is our policy to not make our director's schedule available to the public," center spokesman Carl Kropf said in an e-mail.

Leiter has long been well-regarded, and he was not the only official in the homeland security orbit to skip town for vacation during the holidays. President Obama himself stayed in Hawaii until Jan. 4.

But Leiter's decision to stay close to the ski slopes instead of his headquarters - ground zero for defending the nation against terror - has raised eyebrows among intelligence officials, who have been scrambling since Dec. 25 to figure out what went wrong and plug the holes.

Leiter - appointed by President George W. Bush - already ranked high in the buzz over whose heads could eventually end up on Obama's chopping block.

Without mentioning Leiter or the NCTC by name, Obama made it plain in a Tuesday speech that there was intelligence in the center's hands that should have been "fully analyzed and fully leveraged" to stop Abdulmutallab from boarding Northwest Flight 253.

Abdulmutallab, badly burned by his device after it failed to fully detonate, was indicted Wednesday on six counts of terrorism and is expected in federal court in Detroit tomorrow for his arraignment.

Obama also dropped the bombshell Tuesday that U.S. spooks knew the previously locally focused Al Qaeda branch in Yemen aspired to attack the U.S. homeland. The intelligence community "failed to connect those dots," he said.

"The information was there," Obama said. "Agencies and analysts who needed it had access to it."

Officials throughout the government recognized the terror center was the target of Obama's wrath, since it was the agency set up on the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission in 2004 to analyze terror-threat intelligence.

An affable ex-Navy pilot, Leiter - like Obama - was editor of the Harvard Law Review. He clerked for liberal Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Breyer and was a career Justice Department prosecutor before Bush appointed him NCTC director.


But Leiter has been indiscreet too. He once blabbed in a bar that Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty was "the dumbest public official I've ever met."

On Jan. 2, Leiter surprised many Obama administration officials with his first statement on the Detroit bombing attempt - eight days after it happened.

Leiter said the plot was typical of "insidious terrorist threats we face," and said Al Qaeda continues "to refine their methods to test our defenses and pursue an attack on the homeland."

That same day, National Public Radio had aired an interview - taped before Christmas - in which Leiter said it is "harder and harder for us to detect" Al Qaeda's improved capabilities.

"We're not going to stop every attack," he predicted, ominously. "Americans have to very much understand that it is impossible to stop every terrorist event. But we have to do our best."

Meanwhile, a newspaper reported that border security agents were waiting to grill Abdulmutallab when he landed in Detroit after they learned of his extremist links.

If the intelligence had been discovered sooner, border agents said it could have led to questioning and search a of Abdulmutallab before he boarded the Amsterdam-to-Detroit flight with a one-way ticket.

"The people in Detroit were prepared to look at him in secondary inspection," a senior law enforcement official who requested anonymity told the Los Angeles Times.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was bashed for saying 48 hours after the near-miss attack that "the system worked," but her predecessor said she's doing a heckuva job.

"Although that initial statement was obviously a misstep, I think she has recovered from that. I think she has actually done a good job," ex-Secretary Michael Chertoff told "Fox & Friends" Wednesday.














terror

Ed Koch: War on Terror

If you are not aware of who Koch is, you should look him up.  He is a very good example of a liberal - former Mayor of New York, and very much on the same page with Obama domestically.  He is however, on the same page as Liberman when it comes to foreign policy and terrorism.  Interesting.





The War on Terror Is A War, Not A Police Action


By Ed Koch

Recently I read what I believe to be the very best column I've seen criticizing President Obama's attitude and strategy in the war against Islamic terrorism. The column was written by Charles Krauthammer and titled "Obama's dangerous denial " I will be making references to his arguments, but I also suggest you read the entire column, which you can get by clicking here.

In 2004, I supported George W. Bush for a second term as president because I believed that the most important issue facing the United States was the threat posed by Islamic terrorism, a life or death issue. Even though I did not agree with President Bush on a single domestic issue, I nevertheless supported him because I believed the Democratic candidate, John Kerry, took positions that were not adequate for the struggle ahead. Moreover, I believed the Democratic Party was not up to the responsibility to protect America and its allies from those in al-Qaeda and the Taliban who had made clear they were committed to murdering every Christian, Jew and Hindu who refused to convert to Islam or pay tribute. I have no regrets in having taken that position.

When the choices for President were presented in 2008, the candidates being Barack Obama and John McCain, I chose to support Barack Obama, who called me on the telephone to say that if I had any questions on his positions on different issues, he was ready to answer them. I told him that he did not have to worry about me and the decision I would be announcing. He immediately asked would I go to Florida and campaign for him in the large Jewish community in that state. I said I would and I did. I also campaigned for him in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. The Jewish vote for Barack Obama was 75 percent of the votes cast by Jews in the U.S., the second highest ethnic and racial vote cast, the first being that of African-Americans.

I hasten to add the size of the Jewish support had nothing to do with me. The Jewish community is overwhelmingly liberal and could not abide the thought of domestic issues being ill-served by another Republican administration. I discovered when I went to Florida, Pennsylvania and New Jersey that those Jewish communities had already made up their mind and needed no sales pitch from me.

I told this to Senator Obama at the Alfred E. Smith dinner where he appeared with Senator John McCain shortly before the election. He was generous in his praise of my efforts on his behalf, but I knew those efforts were not needed to secure his victory.

Parenthetically, I should note the last time I spoke with the President was when he called me at the New York-Presbyterian Hospital where I stayed for five weeks in the intensive care unit recovering from the effects of a quadruple bypass and complications. I appreciated the call, as I did a similar call from former President Bill Clinton. Former President George W. Bush did not call. I told President Obama that his call would undoubtedly result in an upgrading of my room. We did not discuss affairs of state.

Now to the Krauthammer column. He opens with a knockout punch, quoting Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano saying "the system worked" when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a Nigerian Muslim terrorist, was apparently used by al-Qaeda in an attempt to bring down an American airliner with 288 people on board, over Detroit. I won't cite all of the facts as to why the system, in fact, did not work and how lucky we were that a Dutch passenger tackled and restrained the terrorist. Why haven't we honored that brave civilian? And why haven't we publicly shown appreciation to the two police officers who risked their lives to take down the Fort Hood Muslim terrorist, Major Nidal Hasan, before he could kill and maim others?

Krauthammer makes a telling point when he writes "The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration's response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to downplay and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face. Napolitano renames terrorism 'man-caused disasters.' Obama goes abroad and pledges to cleanse America of its post-9/11 counterterrorist sins. Hence, Guantanamo will close. CIA interrogators will face a special prosecutor, and Khalid Sheik Mohammed will bask in a civilian trial in New York - a trifecta of political correctness and image management."

Krauthammer goes on to point out that the President has made a point of banishing the phrase "war on terror." The President's initial statements following the act of terrorism over Detroit were tepid, referring, as Krauthammer notes, to Abdulmutallab as "an isolated extremist." On the third day, apparently recognizing the inadequacy of his earlier comments, he referred to the incident as potentially "catastrophic," and the lack of adequate security measures as "systemic." In my opinion, after the President finally recognized the gravity of the situation he should have flown home from his vacation in Hawaii.

Krauthammer ended his column with another knockout punch, writing, "Any government can through laxity let someone slip through the cracks. But a government that refuses to admit that we are at war, indeed, refuses even to name the enemy - jihadist is a word banished from the Obama lexicon - turns laxity into a governing philosophy."

Mr. President, I hope you read the Krauthammer column. It is not too late for you to recover from the setbacks you suffered in the year just ended. Your commitment to battling Islamic terrorism led by al Qaeda which has a presence in an estimated 62 countries must be believably reaffirmed, with both words and deeds. You should not hesitate to denounce and take appropriate diplomatic, economic and military action to punish those states that permit jihadists to flourish and train on their soil and ultimately attack the U.S. Also, reverse your position on Guantanamo and try enemy combatants in military courts. Moreover, it is not enough to talk about energy independence. We should be told by your Energy Secretary what progress has been made on a quarterly basis with a press conference for follow-up questions.

Democrats have been seen as inadequate in the area of national security. If that perception continues or grows, we will see not only the normal loss expected in a bi-annual congressional election, but a rout with the Republicans taking both Houses in November of this year.

Mr. President, there is a war on, not a police action. Tell the American people and the world that we are at war so we can muster all our resources to fight it and win.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
democrats

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

One of the Most Ignoranrt and Dangerous People in America

Holy Mother of God, I thought I had heard everything, and I thought the worst was stupid people with their bloody insane ignorance dealing with 9/11.  Noooooooooooooo it is even worse than that.

January 4, 2010.


The Mike Malloy Show
radioequalizer.blogspot.com
The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

Here it in his own words.  Now, clearly there are nuts on either end.  The difference, the ones on the right are so whacked out, no one ever pays any attention to them.  The ones on the left, draw the intellectual crowd who ooh and ahh at everything they hear, like the homily at mass.

The difference is not slight, nor should they be ignored - these rock hard stupid, ignorant fools are more dangerous to our Republic than the evil from bin Laden, because these fools undermine the fabric of society by their lies and ignorance, feeding others the pabulum, and perpetuating nonsensical innuendo and lies that are picked up by less ignorant fools and developed into conspiracy theories of mass proportion.


Click here for some of the most ignorant crap anyone has uttered (next to the 9/11 nutters)



In regard to the al qaida terrorist sent from Nigeria to blow up a plane as it landed in Detroit - the same plan and terrorist embraced by al qaida as one of their own, as was the plan ... this moron says the following ignorant crap, which, after having heard it, made me stupider for having heard it -

"My gut feeling is this was deliberate, this was deliberately done in order to put the Obama Administration in such a vice grip that it's impossible to get anything done. To raise so much fear -- this is what Republicans do, this is what they do."


Republicans set this entire episode up, organized and planned it, with the intention of killing a couple hundred people - which for Republicans is nothing.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ignorant people

Obama: Lies and Openness

Many people have been saying this for a LONG time, but eventually even CBS catches on.


Did he lie, as the title above states - I can only say what I see or hear - and everyone should be the judge of that information for themselves.  So click and watch yourself.





Obama Reneges on Health Care Transparency


As a Candidate, President Obama Promised to Put Health Care Reform Negotiations on C-SPAN

January 6, 2010
by Chip Reid
 
 
(CBS) President Obama wants the final negotiations on health care reform - a reconciliation of the House and Senate versions of the bill - put on a fast track, even if that means breaking an explicit campaign promise.


"The House and Senate plan to put together the final health care reform bill behind closed doors according to an agreement by top Democrats," House Speaker Nanci Pelosi said today at the White House.

The White House is on board with that, too, reports CBS News political correspondent Chip Reid. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stressed today that "the president wants to get a bill to his desk as quickly as possible."

During the campaign, though, candidate Obama regularly promised something different - to broadcast all such negotiations on C-SPAN, putting the entire process of pounding out health care reform out in the open. (That promise applied to the now-completed processing of forging House and Senate bills, too.)

Back when Republicans controlled Congress and George W. Bush was in the White House, it was Democrats who angrily complained about secret backroom deals.

Now the roles are reversed.

"The negotiations are obviously being done in secret and the American people really just want to know what they are trying to hide," said Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga.

Even with no cameras and no Republicans in the room it will be a tall order for the House and Senate to resolve their differences - especially on abortion coverage and how to pay for health reform

Even so, top Democrats in both houses say they hope to have the final bill ready for the president's signature in time for his State of the Union address - less than four weeks from now.

 
 
 
 
 
 
democrats

CIA, SPIES, Afghanistan, and Responsibility for Failures

Top intel officer slams work of U.S. spies in Afghanistan
January 5, 2010
CNN


Washington (CNN) -- U.S. spies "can do little but shrug" when commanders ask for the information they need to fight the Taliban insurgency, the top U.S. military intelligence officer in Afghanistan said in a blistering report.

U.S. military intelligence officers in Afghanistan spend too much time focusing on enemy groups and tactics and not enough on trying to understand Afghanistan's culture, people and networks, Maj. Gen. Michael Flynn wrote in a report published Monday.

The American intelligence community is "ignorant of local economics and landowners, hazy about who the powerbrokers are and how they might be influenced, incurious about the correlations between various development projects and levels of cooperation among villagers, and disengaged from people in the best position to find answers," Maj. Gen. Michael Flynn wrote in a report published Monday.

His report comes out less than a week after seven CIA officers and a Jordanian intelligence agent were killed by a double agent who set off a suicide bomb inside their base in Afghanistan.

But the report is about military intelligence gathering, not the CIA's work, one of Flynn's co-authors, Marine Capt. Matt Pottinger, told CNN.

"This is primarily about improving intelligence within the Department of Defense," he said via e-mail

"Our timing was independent of the tragic event in Khost Province," he said, referring to the attack that killed the CIA officers.

Flynn co-wrote the report with Pottinger and Paul Batchelor of the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency for a Washington think tank, the Center for a New American Security.

The Pentagon backs the report, a spokesman for U.S. forces in Afghanistan told CNN.

"We support this kind of activity. Gen. (Stanley) McChrystal is looking for ways to make things better," Adm. Greg Smith said, referring to the top U.S. general in the country.

The report said some good work is being done on the ground, and that local intelligence officers "know a great deal about their local Afghan districts." But, the report said, they "are generally too understaffed to gather, store, disseminate and digest" information.

And, critically, they do not have the resources to gather information which could give Americans a better understanding of Afghanistan, such as census data, patrol debriefs, minutes from councils with local farmers and tribal leaders, polling data, translated summaries of radio broadcasts that influence local farmers and the like.

"This vast and underappreciated body of information.... provides... a map for leveraging popular support and marginalizing the insurgency itself," Flynn and his colleagues argue.

As a result, "U.S. intelligence officers and analysts can do little but shrug in response to high level decision-makers seeking the knowledge, analysis and information they need to wage a successful counterinsurgency," they say.

The report claims they cannot answer basic questions unrelated to the military fight against the Taliban, such as: "Is that desert road we're thinking of paving really the most heavily trafficked route? Which mosques and bazaars attract the most people from week to week? Is that local contractor actually implementing the irrigation project we paid him to put into service?"



***********************************

5 Jan 2010
The Washington Post
by Joby Warrick and Peter Finn


Bomber of CIA post was trusted informant Jordanian had promised information about al-Qaeda leaders



The suicide bomber who killed seven CIA operatives in Afghanistan last week was a Jordanian informant who lured intelligence officers into a trap by promising new information about al-Qaeda’s top leadership, former U.S. government officials said Monday.

The attacker, a physician-turned-mole, had been recruited to infiltrate alQaeda’s senior circles and had gained the trust of his CIA and Jordanian handlers with a stream of useful intelligence leads, according to two former senior officials briefed on the agency’s internal investigation. His track record as an informant apparently allowed him to enter a key CIA post without a thorough search, the sources said.

The bomber, identified as Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi, was standing just outside an agency building on the base Wednesday when he exploded a bomb hidden under his clothes, killing the seven Americans along with a Jordanian officer who had been assigned to work with him. Six CIA operatives were wounded.

The agency has declined to publicly identify the victims, a mix of career officers and contractors with backgrounds ranging from law enforcement to military Special Forces.

Details about the suicide bomber’s identity provided jarring insight into how a vital intelligence post in eastern Afghanistan was penetrated in the deadliest attack on the CIA in more than 25 years. Initial reports suggested that the bomber was an Afghan soldier or perhaps a local informant who had been brought onto the base for debriefing.

Instead, the new evidence points to a carefully planned act of deception by a trusted operative from a country closely allied with the United States in the fight against al-Qaeda. U.S. and Jordanian officials had come to regard Balawi as trustworthy, former officials said, despite a history of support for Islamist extremism — a point of view he appeared to endorse in an interview with an al-Qaeda-affiliated publication as recently as this past fall.

“He was someone who had already worked with us,” said a former U.S. counterterrorism officer who discussed the ongoing investigation on the condition of anonymity. The official said Balawi had been jointly managed by U.S. and Jordanian agencies and had provided “actionable intelligence” over several weeks of undercover work along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

The CIA declined to comment on reports identifying Balawi as the bomber, first posted by alJazeera television on its Web site. A U.S. intelligence official said only that the agency is “ looking closely at every aspect” of the attack on the facility known as Forward Operating Base Chapman, in the province of Khost near Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan.

“ The agency is determined to continue pursuing aggressive counterterrorism operations,” the official said. “Last week’s attack will be avenged. Some very bad people will eventually have a very bad day.”

Al-Jazeera described Balawi as a 36-year-old physician from Zarqa, a Jordanian town that also was the home of Abu Musab alZarqawi, the slain leader of alQaeda in Iraq. It said Balawi had been recruited to help track down Ayman al-Zawahiri, the Egyptian physician and second in command of al-Qaeda, who U.S. intelligence officials believe is hiding in the lawless border region.

Balawi had a history of supporting jihadist causes and had been arrested in late 2007, according to SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors extremist Web sites. He was detained by Jordan’s intelligence agency, which sought to turn him into an informant, the former government officials said.

Before his arrest, Balawi, who used the online name Abu Dujana al-Khorasani, was a wellknown contributor to al-Hesbah, a once-prominent jihadist forum, according to SITE. He eventually became an administrator of the Web site.

In September of last year, Balawi gave an interview to Vanguards of Khorasan, a magazine associated with al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, according to SITE. His handlers presumably were aware of the interview but may have regarded it as part of his cover.

Balawi nonetheless spoke at length and in sometimes overwrought language about his devotion to jihad and martyrdom.

“I have had a predisposition for love of jihad and martyrdom since I was little,” he told the magazine, according to a translation by SITE. “If love of jihad enters a man’s heart, it will not leave him even if he wants to do so.

He also expressed his admiration for the stoicism of the mujaheddin with whom he was encamped.

“If the name of a martyr they knew is mentioned in front of them, you find that blood has frozen in their veins as though it were a dew drop on the mouth of a beautiful flower,” Balawi said. “ You find that the weeping in their straying looks is more eloquent than screams.”

The role of Jordanian intelligence at the CIA’s base was tacitly acknowledged over the weekend when the body of the Jordanian intelligence operative was flown home for a military burial in the capital city of Amman. The man, identified in Jordanian news accounts as Sharif Ali bin Zeid, was assigned to work as a handler for Balawi, the former U.S. counterterrorism official said.

Jordan is a key ally in the U.S. fight against al-Qaeda, and its intelligence operatives have been integrated into missions in the Middle East and beyond, current and former U.S. intelligence officials say. Yet, despite its critical role, officials from both countries have insisted that its participation remain virtually invisible, in part to avoid damaging Jordan’s standing among other Muslim nations in the region, former intelligence officials said.

Bin Zeid was honored with a military funeral when his body arrived in the capital. The ceremony was attended by Jordan’s King Abdullah II and his wife, Rania, but official news reports said only that the intelligence captain had died while performing humanitarian service in Afghanistan.

Bin Zeid, who had married about a year ago, was described by a former Jordanian intelligence officer who knew him as a modest but highly effective officer who never traded on his royal status as a cousin to the king. His family ties nonetheless made him ideally suited for the most sensitive missions, the former officer said. “He loved his work; it was his life.”

CIA Director Leon E. Panetta, other agency and national security officials, and friends and family members of the seven CIA employees attended a private ceremony Monday at Dover Air Force Base, Del., where the bodies were returned, agency spokesman George Little said.

“ These patriots courageously served their nation,” he said.










cia

OBAMA: TAX Private Health Plans

Nothing new.  This was revealed many many times.  Each time, Democrats shook their head as if someone had just farted and did a tisk tisk and raised their eybrows as if to suggest the person making the claim  was a bloody lunatic.  Apparently now the AP is a bloody lunatic.  Apparently CBS has turned on The One, as they now report Obama has lied about the transparency of his administration and his health plan.
Tsk tsk.

(sidenote - while all this is very gloomy, and should be for any sane and rational person - there are a couple mechanisms to correct this socialist stupidity - the Congress will change hands again and under Republicans, these stipulations will be rescinded, saving 40% of Americans a tremendous amount of money and ensuring choice.  The other mechansim, and one not discussed too often - the Constitutionality of the actions Democrats wish to force upon everyone.  MANY of these items within the bill, when signed into law, will be taken to the Supreme Court, and like Roosevelt's efforts - result in the Court knocking them down as unconstitutional.  Something Democrats have to look forward to - forcing the creation of a new bureaucray that limits choice and care, raises costs on a majority of Americans, eliminates private insurance options, and all of this just as the Court would hear the cases, causing a log jam in the health care system, leaving millions in limbo.  Hmmm.  Maybe the Democrats have done this on purpose.  Blame the Republicans if it does go to the Court - blame them for throwing everything into limbo, raising costs to fight the Court battles ... Amazing how bright Losercrats are, and how utterly retarded Retardicans can be.)






AP sources: Obama OKs taxing high-end health plans


By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer
Wed Jan 6, 2009




WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama signaled to House Democratic leaders Wednesday that they'll have to drop their opposition to taxing high-end health insurance plans to pay for health coverage for millions of uninsured Americans.

In a meeting at the White House, Obama expressed his preference for the insurance tax contained in the Senate's health overhaul bill, but largely opposed by House Democrats and organized labor, Democratic aides said. The aides spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting was private.

House Democrats want to raise income taxes on high-income individuals instead and are reluctant to abandon that approach, while recognizing that they will have to bend on that and other issues so that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., can maintain his fragile 60-vote majority support for the bill.

Pelosi and four committee chairmen met with the president Wednesday as they scrambled to resolve differences between sweeping bills passed by the House and Senate. The aim is to finalize legislation revamping the nation's health care system in time for Obama's State of the Union address early last month.

Despite the dispute over the payment approach, Pelosi, D-Calif., emerged from the meeting expressing optimism.

"We've had a very intense couple of days," Pelosi said. "After our leadership meeting this morning, our staff engaged with the Senate and the administration staff to review the legislation, suggest legislative language. I think we're very close to reconciliation."

Congressional staff members stayed at the White House into the evening to continue work and a conference call of the full House Democratic caucus was scheduled for Thursday.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
democrats

Obama and Amidinejad Sitting in a Tree

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton announced Monday: "The Obama administration wants to keep the door to dialogue open with Iran."






Which means: Iran can have nuclear weapons and the US will not try to stop them.  Obama in action.  Please be aware of how utterly feckless this policy is - The US has decided that sanctions are not the route to go - after all, talking to Iran for six years under Bush and a year under Obama accomplished a lot!  We have 7 years of discussions with Iran and .. what do we have to show for it?  Iran on the verge of possessing several nuclear weapons.  And this is regarded as acceptable by Obama?  By liberals? 

Well, what you have decided is that Israelis will die, Iranians will die, and a greater conflict will erupt in the Middle East - because that is exactly what will happen, relatively soon.  Israel will have to act and when it does, its actions will be in direct response to the failure of the US to act in any serious manner.  When the death toll mounts, look to Obama.  When the conflagration spreads, look to Obama.

THIS is what happens when you elect an inexperienced community organizer to the US Senate, and immediately thereafter, to the highest office on the planet - the US Presidency.











Iran

Tuesday, January 5, 2010

The French: Marriage and Arguments

What absolute brilliance.  They are remarkable, these Frenchmen.  I cannot think of anything more enlightening.  They are light years ahead of the US, and rightly so.






France to introduce new law banning 'psychological violence' in marriages


By Peter Allen
05th January 2010
The Daily Mail


France will become the first country in the world to ban 'psychological violence' within marriage later this year.

The new law, which would also apply to co-habiting couples, would see people getting criminal records for insulting their loved ones during domestic arguments.

Electronic tagging would be used on repeat offenders, according to the country's prime minister, Francois Fillon, who announced the law.

Partners who resort to 'psychological violence' during arguments could end up with a criminal record under a new French law. (Posed by models)

If it proves successful, it could be introduced in other European countries including Britain.

But critics dismissed the measure as a 'gimmick' which would be impossible to implement.

The law is particularly aimed at protecting women who currently suffer the worst attacks of this kind, ranging from off-hand comments about their appearance to threats of physical violence.

French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said electronic tagging would be used on repeat offenders

Mr Fillon said: 'It's an important step forward as the creation of this offence will allow us to deal with the most insidious situations - situations that leave no visible scars, but which leave victims torn up inside.'

He added that his government would also be experimenting with electronic surveillance measures to 'monitor the effectiveness of restraining orders against a violent spouse'.

Psychologist Anne Giraud said: 'Squabbling couples will allege all kinds of things about each other, but they won't necessarily be true.

'The police are likely to be called out more and more when this law comes into force this year, but often it will be a case of one person's word against the other.

'Psychological violence is a very serious matter, but punishing it through the courts is a very different matter altogether.'

Critics have also said the government should not be intervening in private domestic arguments in which no one got hurt.

Sociologist Pierre Bonnet said: 'The next step will be to make rudeness a criminal offence. The police and courts will be over-stretched trying to deal with the numerous cases.'

A TV advertising campaign was used last year to try and highlight domestic violence in France. It showed a husband who regularly insults his wife, leaving her mentally traumatised.

In 2008, 157 French women were killed by their husband or partner, with hundreds more suffering domestic physical violence.

A spokesman for Mr Fillon said the new law was supported by the government, and was likely to come into effect within six months.








laws

Monday, January 4, 2010

He's Losing the World to Them.

America is losing the free world




By Gideon Rachman
January 4 2010 20:11
Financial Times

Ever since 1945, the US has regarded itself as the leader of the “free world”. But the Obama administration is facing an unexpected and unwelcome development in global politics. Four of the biggest and most strategically important democracies in the developing world – Brazil, India, South Africa and Turkey – are increasingly at odds with American foreign policy. Rather than siding with the US on the big international issues, they are just as likely to line up with authoritarian powers such as China and Iran.

The US has been slow to pick up on this development, perhaps because it seems so surprising and unnatural. Most Americans assume that fellow democracies will share their values and opinions on international affairs. During the last presidential election campaign, John McCain, the Republican candidate, called for the formation of a global alliance of democracies to push back against authoritarian powers. Some of President Barack Obama’s senior advisers have also written enthusiastically about an international league of democracies.

But the assumption that the world’s democracies will naturally stick together is proving unfounded. The latest example came during the Copenhagen climate summit. On the last day of the talks, the Americans tried to fix up one-to-one meetings between Mr Obama and the leaders of South Africa, Brazil and India – but failed each time. The Indians even said that their prime minister, Manmohan Singh, had already left for the airport.

So Mr Obama must have felt something of a chump when he arrived for a last-minute meeting with Wen Jiabao, the Chinese prime minister, only to find him already deep in negotiations with the leaders of none other than Brazil, South Africa and India. Symbolically, the leaders had to squeeze up to make space for the American president around the table.

There was more than symbolism at work. In Copenhagen, Brazil, South Africa and India decided that their status as developing nations was more important than their status as democracies. Like the Chinese, they argued that it is fundamentally unjust to cap the greenhouse gas emissions of poor countries at a lower level than the emissions of the US or the European Union; all the more so since the industrialised west is responsible for the great bulk of the carbon dioxide already in the atmosphere.

Revealingly, both Brazilian and Chinese leaders have made the same pointed joke – likening the US to a rich man who, after gorging himself at a banquet, then invites the neighbours in for coffee and asks them to split the bill.

If climate change were an isolated example, it might be dismissed as an important but anomalous issue that is almost designed to split countries along rich-poor lines. But, in fact, if you look at Brazil, South Africa, India and Turkey – the four most important democracies in Latin America, Africa, Asia and the greater Middle East – it is clear that none of them can be counted as a reliable ally of the US, or of a broader “community of democracies”.

In the past year, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil has cut a lucrative oil deal with China, spoken warmly of Hugo Chávez, president of Venezuela, and congratulated Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad on his “victory” in the Iranian presidential election, while welcoming him on a state visit to Brazil.

During a two-year stint on the United Nations Security Council from 2006, the South Africans routinely joined China and Russia in blocking resolutions on human rights and protecting authoritarian regimes such as Zimbabwe, Uzbekistan and Iran.

Turkey, once regarded as a crucial American ally in the cold war and then trumpeted as the only example of a secular, pro-western, Muslim democracy, is also no longer a reliable partner for the west. Ever since the US-led invasion of Iraq, opinion polls there have shown very high levels of anti-Americanism. The mildly Islamist AKP government has engaged with America’s regional enemies – including Hamas, Hizbollah and Iran – and alarmed the Americans by taking an increasingly hostile attitude to Israel.

India’s leaders do seem to cherish the idea that they have a “special relationship” with the US. But even the Indians regularly line up against the Americans on a range of international issues, from climate change to the Doha round of trade negotiations and the pursuit of sanctions against Iran or Burma.

So what is going on? The answer is that Brazil, South Africa, Turkey and India are all countries whose identities as democracies are now being balanced – or even trumped – by their identities as developing nations that are not part of the white, rich, western world. All four countries have ruling parties that see themselves as champions of social justice at home and a more equitable global order overseas. Brazil’s Workers’ party, India’s Congress party, Turkey’s AKP and South Africa’s African National Congress have all adapted to globalisation – but they all retain traces of the old suspicions of global capitalism and of the US.

Mr Obama is seen as a huge improvement on George W. Bush – but he is still an American president. As emerging global powers and developing nations, Brazil, India, South Africa and Turkey may often feel they have more in common with a rising China than with the democratic US.





 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
obama

Phones and Neighbors

I was talking to my neighbor about cell phones and asking his opinion on what he belives is best.  Neighbours are such a funny lot - chatty at times and reclusive at others.  Unfortunately, I always have someone outside.  With 4-5 houses surrounding me ina horseshoe shape, someone is always around.


While we talked about cell phones, he asked me what I thought of an internet gossip person - I knew the name vaguely, from people who had raised the name in my presence - so I told him: (from the bottom up) I find people who live to gossip about other people to be some of the lowest forms of life on earth.  He seemed aghast at my subtleties and further queiried me - so tell me what you really think of gossip columnists online or in the paper or television .  So I told him very clearly so as not to be vague or ambiguous about my feelings - terrorists and child murderers/rapists/peadophiles are at the bottom of my list, above which are murderers (of anyone but children), rapists, and other serious felons.  Bad governments - Chinese or Cuban, Venezuela, or Vietnamese, North Korea, Iranian ... bad leaders rank just below the rapists and around the murderers level.  People who steal your property or income followed by gossip hounds.


People who live to talk about others, either to put them down or champion some retarded cause, are insecure not only about themselves, their childhood, their reason for living, they have very little value to us - the mass of humanity.  They procure silliness and weakness from slimeballs and shitheads, wrap it up and tell us all about it - as if 1) we need to know, 2) we should care, 3) it matters, 4) it is anyone's business ...  Bugger off is a reasonable expectation.  I wish, for each and every person who indulges in the 'industry' of gossip - crippling arthritis, speech impediments, and an inexplicable need for oxygen tanks.  My neighbor asked me how could be so cruel?  Honestly, in a world where up is down and down is up - I don't care whether or not it is cruel - because it is cruel only to him and two dozen other people who have been kicked in the head, one too many times by their mothers.  For the rest of us, it would be serving a greater good- much like the hospital evaluations teams that will be coming your way thanks to Obama - to determine whether or not the government should spend the $15,000 on your surgery or if it would be put to better use helping an illegal alien who is 20 years old.  After all, he has 60 years of hard labor ahead of him.  You ... less useful.


After we finished with the gossip topic, he asked me what I thought of Obama's ratings - they seemed to be falling faster than a rock from space (ok, not quite as fast):  I told the neighbor that occasionally the people get it right and occasionally we get it wrong.  Sometimes when we get it wrong, we learn quickly (Jimmy Carter), but we have to live out the rest of his term.  Sometimes when we get it wrong (Johnson), we feel bad for the guy and elect him because he has some connection to something larger than our individual self, offering us a change from the past yet a connection to what we believed we valued.  Then we accept it and trudge through praying for a miracle - perhaps Congress will see the light and act in accordance with the wishes of the American people.  My neighbor was unsure of what I thought of Obama, by the end of this discussion, so we changed topics - cell phones.


I told my neighbor - Barry is his name, that I want the Xperia.  I had wanted the Xperia 1 but they are now a generation away from that version.  I believe they are on Xperia 10 ... even better, and more money. In any case, it is my dream phone.  For now, a Blackberry.  I can't complain too much - Canada, Waterloo, if I am not mistaken.  Practically American except they speak funny.  I always thought it was a good phone, but since phone companies decided it was more fun to charge nearly $30 for access, hard to imagine two phones X $30 = $60 just for access plus the costs.  Too much.  Not a Blackberry issue so much as a carrier issue, but still.   Next on the maybe list is the Motorola Android.  It is the iphone, but heavier and less sleek.  It is the Xperia but not as extravagant and options laden.  The iphone will be made available, hopefully this year, and maybe ... maybe.   My neighbor has the Motorola Android - he likes it.


By this time, it was getting dark and cold and I was finished.  I said goodbye and came inside.  Bed time for Bonzo.









nothing

Liberals and Guantanamo Bay

They had their rights denied.  They were not treated well.  They were bloody killers who took every opportunity to get back to doing what they wanted to do - die killing Americans.  Every person who was instrumental in their release - demanding they receive rights, be released back into society - because they were innocent, and or no evidence existed as to their guilt ... if no evidence existed they would not have been incarcerated, but the source of the information may have been too secret to reveal for a petty killer regardless of consequences.  Yet the idea of pushing for the release otherwise does not prove the American system it simply recirculated men who wanted nothing more than to kill Americans. 


Freed Guantanamo inmates are heading for Yemen to join al-Qaeda fight




Tom Coghlan
The Times

January 5, 2010






At least a dozen former Guantánamo Bay inmates have rejoined al-Qaeda to fight in Yemen, The Times has learnt, amid growing concern over the ability of the country’s Government to accept almost 100 more former inmates from the detention centre.

The Obama Administration promised to close the Guantánamo facility by January 22, a deadline that it will be unable to meet. The 91 Yemeni prisoners in Guantánamo make up the largest national contingent among the 198 being held.

Six prisoners were returned to Yemen last month. After the Christmas Day bomb plot in Detroit, US officials are increasingly concerned that the country is becoming a hot-bed of terrorism. Eleven of the former inmates known to have rejoined al-Qaeda in Yemen were born in Saudi Arabia. The organisation merged its Saudi and Yemeni offshoots last year.

The country’s mountainous terrain, poverty and lawless tribal society make it, in the opinion of many analysts, a close match for Afghanistan as a new terrorist haven.

Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, voiced concern about the growing strength of al-Qaeda in Yemen. “Obviously, we see global implications from the war in Yemen and the ongoing efforts by al-Qaeda in Yemen to use it as a base for terrorist attacks far beyond the region,” she said.

A Yemeni, Hani Abdo Shaalan, who was released from Guantánamo in 2007, was killed in an airstrike on December 17, the Yemeni Government reported last week. The deputy head of al-Qaeda in the country is Said Ali al-Shihri, 36, who was released in 2007. Ibrahim Suleiman al-Rubaish, who was released in 2006, is a prominent ideologue featured on Yemeni al-Qaeda websites.

Geoff Morrell, the spokesman for the Pentagon, said: “This is a large question that goes beyond the issue of transferring detainees. The bulk of the remaining detainees are from Yemen and that has been the case for a long time. We are trying to work with the Yemeni Government on this.”

The US Government issued figures in May showing that 74 of the 530 detainees in Guantánamo were suspected or known to have returned to terrorist activity since their release. They included the commander of the Taleban in Helmand province, Mullah Zakir, whom the British Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Jock Stirrup, called “a key and seemingly effective tactical leader”. Among others who returned to terrorism was Abdullah Saleh al-Ajmi, a Kuwaiti who killed six Iraqis in Mosul in 2008.

The number believed to have “returned to the fight” in the May 2009 estimate was double that of a US estimate from June 2008. US officials acknowledged that more detainees were known to have reoffended since, but the number has been classified.

“There is a historic trend and it continues. I will only say that we have said there is a trend, we are aware of it, there is no denying the trend and we are doing our best to deal with this reality,” Mr Morrell said.

Officials said that a higher proportion of those still being held were likely to return to terrorism because they were considered more of a security threat than those selected in the early stages of the release programme.

Chris Boucek, an expert on the region for the Carnegie Endowment think-tank, said that up-to-date figures for Saudi Arabia showed that 26 of the 120 Saudis released from Guantánamo were either in jail, wanted by the authorities or dead.

Gregory Johnsen, a Yemen expert at Princeton University, said evidence showed that al-Qaeda was seeking to use Yemen to mount a renewed campaign into Saudi Arabia. He cited a recent incident in which two Saudi militants, one the brother-in-law of alShihri, were killed while trying to cross the border in women’s clothing. Martyrdom videos were subsequently posted on militant websites.

The Saudi Government had boasted previously of a zero reoffence rate for Guantánamo detainees who were put through its widely praised rehabilitation programme for al-Qaeda members.

Robert Lacey, who writes about Saudi Arabia, made numerous visits to the Prince Mohammad bin Naif rehabilitation facility north of Riyadh.

“I know a number of young men from Guantánamo who were successfully reintegrated,” he told The Times. “The programme involves the whole family with a mixture of religious re-education, patriotism, guilt and co-opting in terms of being given a car, job and a nice wife.”

However, other analysts suggested that the claims for the Saudi programme were exaggerated. Mr Johnsen pointed out that an attack that nearly killed Prince Mohammad bin Naif, the Saudi head of counterterrorism, in August was mounted by a Yemen-based al-Qaeda terrorist who had offered to join the reintegration programme to get near his target.

“The Saudi programme is nothing but bureaucratised bribery. The ideologically committed terrorists simply won’t listen,” Mr Johnsen said.

The Yemen reintegration programme for terrorists was abandoned on December 10, 2005.





 
 
 
 
 
 
liberals

Sunday, January 3, 2010

Global Warming: Peruvian Natives Facing Extinction (due to the cold) but due to Global Warming

(Even amidst the growing evidence that we are cooling, they have to get in that little jab - the reason these people may go extinct is because the glaciers are metlting.  The truth is - they aren't.  The summer glaciers are meting at faster paces than in the past, but the winter ice is still all there and in fact, increasing - THOSE are the facts Mr. Gore.)



Peru's mountain people face fight for survival in a bitter winter




Annie Kelly in Pichccahuasi
The Observer
Sunday 3 January 2010
 
 
 
For alpaca farmer Ignacio Beneto Huamani and his young family, life in the Peruvian Andes, at almost 4,700m above sea level, has always been a struggle against the elements. His village of Pichccahuasi, in Peru's Huancavelica region, is little more than a collection of small thatched shelters and herds of alpaca surrounded by beautiful, yet bleakly inhospitable, mountain terrain.


The few hundred people who live here are hardened to poverty and months of sub-zero temperatures during the long winter. But, for the fourth year running, the cold came early. First their animals and now their children are dying and in such escalating numbers that many fear that life in the village may be rapidly approaching an end.

In a world growing ever hotter, Huancavelica is an anomaly. These communities, living at the edge of what is possible, face extinction because of increasingly cold conditions in their own microclimate, which may have been altered by the rapid melting of the glaciers.

A consequence is that Quechua-speaking farmers and their families, who have managed to subsist for centuries at high altitude, believe they may not make it through the next southern winter.

There have been warnings from meteorologists in Peru that this month will see the Huancavelica region hit by the worst weather conditions in years with plunging temperatures, floods and high winds. The weather is already claiming lives; last month seven people died and scores were treated in hospital after torrential rain caused flash flooding in Ayacucho, the capital of the neighbouring region.

The cold is tipping Pichccahuasi into a spiralling decline brought on by pneumonia, bronchitis and hunger.

Although designed to withstand the cold, Huamani's house is crumbling and his roof, half-collapsed from the snowstorms that battered the village last June and July, offers scant protection from the freezing wind and rain.

His family, including four young children, sleep on wet ground night after night. His children have not yet recovered from illnesses from this year's winter and he is terrified that they won't be resilient enough to endure further freezing weather.

He points to his youngest son, aged two, who trails after him, soaking wet and racked with bouts of coughing, as he goes about his work

"All the children here are sick, they all have breathing problems," he says. "The problem is there is too much cold, too much rain. We have had no time to recover from last winter before it has begun again. There is nothing I can do."

Climate change campaigners and development NGOs say that the failure of Copenhagen has signed the death warrant for hundreds of thousands of the world's poorest and that a quarter of a million children will die before world leaders meet again to try to thrash out another deal at the United Nations next climate change conference in Mexico in December. Among them may be these children of the high mountains.

Enduring prolonged sub-zero temperatures is a matter of course for Peru's indigenous mountain people, many of whom live at more than 3,000m above sea level. Scores die every year from the cold, but in recent years the number of people succumbing to the freezing temperatures has triggered talk of a national crisis.

This year the neighbouring district of Puno saw a severe spike in child mortality as the winter brought months of high winds and relentless ice storms. Government figures record that more than 300 children died in Puno in May last year from the cold; NGOs say that the figure was probably much higher.

Local government officers in Huancavelica could not provide figures for how many children died here last year, but admit that child mortality is rising in the region.

"There have been many dead children. I don't know how many, but there are more and more and mainly the deaths have been from pneumonia," says Rafael Rojas Huanqui, regional director for the Defensa Civil, the national disaster protection agency. "They have no resilience of any kind to deal with the weather getting colder."

Huancavelica has always been one of Peru's most deprived regions, with 80% of families, largely indigenous farmers living at heights of up to 5,000m, subsisting below the poverty line.

The changing weather has come on top of a lack of basic health services, animal diseases, rising food prices and a declining availability of water.

Since 2007, children's acute respiratory infections have increased by 30% and staple food production has fallen by 44%. Latest figures show that one in 10 children do not live to see their first birthday.

Ignacio Huamani says that the main problem his village faces is a lack of water, as more extreme temperatures mean there is no grass or drinking water for the alpaca that people breed for wool and meat. "If the alpaca die, then we all die," he says. He works with his neighbours to build shelters for the alpaca to give some protection from the elements, but he is fighting a losing battle.

Since 2007, alpaca mortality in Huancavelica has more than doubled, with pregnant animals aborting their calves, a huge psychological as well as economic blow to people who rely on their ability to keep their herds alive.

Any money the village has is spent on trying to keep their animals from dying. NGOs and children's groups working in the area warn that in such desperate situations, the lives of alpaca become more valuable than those of children.

"The welfare of children is sidelined because the situation is so bad that everything has become about the survival of the animals, both for the families themselves and the agencies who are trying to support them," says Teresa Carpio, director of Save the Children Peru. She expects to see child mortality in the region rise this year.

"In the west we tend to think that children take priority above all else, but when there is this level of desperation, children can be the last to get the attention they so badly need – until it is too late."

Four hours' drive away in the larger community of Incahuasi, a health clinic is full of women and children waiting to see a visiting nurse. Helen dos Santos trained in nearby Ayacucho, but unlike most other locally trained health workers has stayed to work in the region. Now she spends her week travelling on foot between villages, walking for up to five hours a day.

"It's always been poor here, but now the situation is getting critical," she says. She points to the 20 or so children lined up in the waiting room. "All of these children are malnourished, some very dangerously so, and winter is still five months away.

"I don't have any strong antibiotics to give them, only aspirin. I can't even refer them to the hospital in Huancavelica because nobody has enough money to pay for transport there and the men here are reluctant to spend on anything but the animals."

Rojas Huanqui says the regional government is working hard to strengthen health systems with more doctors and nurses in "most" of the villages, but admits that the state has been unable to deliver the basic services required.

"I'm not going to deny that it's really hard to supply the great amount of villages there are, and they are used to getting everything for free, so the progress that the government makes is limited, but we do need to implement stronger medicines up in the villages that need it most," he says.

There is anger among Huancavelica's mountain people at what they see as the inaction of regional and central government. Although aid packages and clothing bundles arrive with the onset of winter, it does not compensate for what these people believe is the ambivalence of the authorities to their fate.

"We can only put ourselves in God's hands, because nobody else is helping us," says Carolina Flores, a mother of six whose six-month-old daughter is dangerously ill with pneumonia. "Our men have gone and talked to people in the government and told them what is happening to us, but they do nothing. We are not important to them, so we die up here and nobody helps us."

For how long the mountain people are prepared to wait for action remains to be seen. After hundreds of years of systematic discrimination, there are signs that indigenous people across Peru are prepared to fight what they consider to be threats to their survival.

Last July, dozens of indigenous protesters were killed and scores injured when riots broke out in Bagua Grande in the Amazonas region over claims that the government was giving away land to oil and gas drilling. The relationship between Peru's indigenous people and the government of the president, Alan García remains tense.

Those working with indigenous populations in Huancavelica are warning that governments cannot expect people in threatened villages to accept their fate lying down.

"The conduct of the authorities in relation to Peru's Quechua mountain communities is similar to the one they take to indigenous communities throughout the country, which is to ignore their problems because they don't believe that they are a priority," says Dr Enrique Moya, the former dean of Huamanga University, who now works with local NGOs which are running support programmes in the region.

"Religion is still a strong sedative in these communities, but although the first reaction to what they are facing might be fatalism – the feeling that they are in God's hands – we are starting to see a change.

"The difficulty is that the government only reacts when things turn violent, so I think what we have here is potentially an area of great conflict, because no matter how used to poverty they are, these people won't be left to die."

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
global warming

Saturday, January 2, 2010

The Peace Lovers Are Serious: Kill the Cartoonist

Police shoot man attacking Muhammad cartoonist


By JAN M. OLSEN, Associated Press Writer
January 2, 2010

COPENHAGEN – Police shot a Somali man wielding an ax and a knife as he tried to break into the home of an artist whose cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad with a bomb-shaped turban outraged the Muslim world, the head of Denmark's intelligence agency said Saturday.

Jakob Scharf said in a statement that a 28-year-old man with ties to al-Qaida attempted to enter Kurt Westergaard's home in Aarhus Friday night. But Westergaard pressed an alarm and police arrived minutes later.

The attack on the artist, whose rendering was among 12 that led to the torching of Danish diplomatic offices in predominantly Muslim countries in 2006, was "terror related," Scharf said. He said the man would be charged with attempted murder.

Westergaard, whose 5-year-old granddaughter was in the home on a sleepover, sought shelter in a specially made safe room when the suspect broke a window of the home, said Preben Nielsen of the Aarhus police.

Officers arrived two minutes later and tried to arrest the assailant, who wielded an ax at a police officer. The officer then shot the man in a knee and a hand, authorities said. Nielsen said the suspect's life was not in danger.

The suspect's name was not released in line with Danish privacy rules.

"The arrested man has, according to PET's information, close relations to the Somali terrorist group al-Shabab and al-Qaida leaders in eastern Africa," Scharf said. PET is Denmark's intelligence agency.

Scharf said without elaborating that the man is suspected of having been involved in terror-related activities in east Africa. He had been under PET's surveillance but not in connection with Westergaard, he said

The man, who had a permit to stay in Denmark, was to be charged Saturday with attempted murder for trying to kill Westergaard and the police officer, Scharf said.

It was unclear whether the suspect actually managed to get inside the home of the 75-year-old cartoonist in Denmark's second largest city, 125 miles (200 kilometers) northwest of Copenhagen.

Westergaard could not be reached for comment. However, he told his employer, the Jyllands-Posten daily, that the assailant shouted "revenge" and "blood" as he tried to enter the bathroom where Westergaard and the child had sought shelter.

"My grandchild did fine," Westergaard said, according to the newspaper's Web edition. "It was scary. It was close. Really close. But we did it."

Westergaard was "quite shocked" but was not injured, Nielsen said.

Westergaard remains a potential target for extremists nearly five years after he drew a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban. The drawing was printed along with 11 others in Jyllands-Posten in 2005.

The drawings triggered an uproar a few months later when Danish and other Western embassies in several Muslim countries were torched by angry protesters who felt the cartoons had profoundly insulted Islam.

Islamic law generally opposes any depiction of the prophet, even favorable, for fear it could lead to idolatry.

Westergaard has received death threats and is the subject of an alleged assassination plot.

The case "again confirms the terror threat that is directed at Denmark and against the cartoonist Kurt Westergaard in particular," Scharf said.

In October, terror charges were brought against two Chicago men whose initial plan called for attacks on Jyllands-Posten's offices. The plan was later changed to just killing the paper's former cultural editor and Westergaard.

In 2008, Danish police arrested two Tunisian men suspected of plotting to murder Westergaard. Neither suspect was prosecuted. One of them was deported and the other was released Monday after an immigration board rejected PET's efforts to expel him from Denmark.

Throughout the crisis, then-Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen distanced himself from the cartoons but resisted calls to apologize for them, citing freedom of speech and saying his government could not be held responsible for the actions of Denmark's press.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Islam

Friday, January 1, 2010

New Years in France:

Not a great time to own a car!  One other point that is not made ... it mentions 'poor' but it doesn't mention the ethnic/religious composition of these groups.  If you look at a map of France, the cities where the fires occured, and then chart the ethnic composition of those 'departments' you will find ..... ???  : )

So - why don't they mention this little factoid???




Hundreds of cars torched in France at New Year


January 1, 2010


PARIS (Reuters) – Youths burned 1,137 cars across France overnight as New Year's Eve celebrations once again turned violent, the French Interior Ministry said on Friday.

Car burnings are regular occurrences in poor suburbs that ring France's big cities, but the arson is especially prevalent during New Year's Eve revelry.

The number of vehicles torched was only 10 short of the record 1,147 burned this time last year, even though the Interior Ministry mobilized 45,000 police during the night -- 10,000 more than 12 months ago.

It said police detained 549 people overnight, compared with 288 in 2009 New Year celebrations. However, unlike in previous years, there were no direct clashes between police and youths. "The few disturbances that did take place were brought swiftly under control," the ministry said in a statement.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Islam

One Take on Pax-Obama

Analysis, not the agenda of the individual, should be first consideration.  Does it comport with events as they have and are unfolding, does it comport with known conditions.  I find several statements questionable, a few more are near conjecture, but there are quite a few that are reasonably accurate to consider the conjecture, and provide the benefit of the doubt to the questionable.





Life and premature death of Pax Obamicana

By Spengler
December 24, 2009
Asia Times



History speaks of a Pax Romana, a Pax Britannica, and a Pax Americana - but no other namable eras of sustained peace, for the simple reason cited by Henry Kissinger: nothing maintains peace except hegemony and the balance of power. The balancing act always fails, though, as it did in Europe in 1914, and as it will in Central and South Asia precisely a century later. The result will be suppurating instability in the region during the next two years and a slow but deadly drift toward great-power animosity. Those who wanted an end to US hegemony will get what they wished for. But they won't like it.

"No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation," US President Barack Obama told the United Nations on September 23. "No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold." Having renounced hegemony as well as the balance of power, Obama by year-end chose to prop up the power balance in the region with additional American and allied soldiers in Afghanistan. Obama chose the least popular as well as the least effective alternative. The US president's apparent fecklessness reflects the gravity of the strategic problems in the region.

There is one great parallel, but also one great difference, between the Balkans on the eve of World War I and the witch's cauldron comprising Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and contiguous territory. The failure of the region's most populous state - in that case the Ottoman Empire, in this case Pakistan - makes shambles out of the power balance, leaving the initiative in the hands of irredentist radicals who threaten to tug their sponsors among the great powers along behind them. But in 1914, both France and Germany thought it more advantageous to fight sooner rather than later. No matter how great the provocation, both India and China want to postpone any major conflict. The problem is that they may promote minor ones.

Western analysts are unanimous that Pakistan must not be allowed to become a failed state, for example, through a seizure of power on the part of Islamist elements in the military allied to the Taliban. Enlisting Pakistan in counter-insurgency against Pashtun rebels in Afghanistan, though, ensures this outcome. US policy, wrote Syed Saleem Shahzad on this site on October 23 (Where Pakistan’s militants go to ground ), "draws Pakistan, already mired in political and economic crises, into an ever-deepening quagmire. The country has become a playing field for operators of all shades. These include Iranian Balochi insurgents, over a dozen Pakistani militant groups linked with the Taliban or al-Qaeda, the US Central Intelligence Agency's network, security contractors associated with the American establishment, and last but not least, agents provocateurs. Pakistan, one of the booming economies of Asia just two years ago, seriously risks becoming a failed state."

The US-sponsored frontier war amounts to Punjabis - traditionally the core of the country's military - killing Pashtuns. The default view of area defense analysts has been that army operations against the Taliban may turn into a Punjabi-Pashtun ethnic conflict. But the cracks in the Pakistani state run in several directions. Punjabi Islamists allied to the Taliban, meanwhile, are in open revolt; Punjabi terrorists took part in the October siege of Pakistan's army headquarters in Rawalpindi.

Pakistan is being ground between two millstones: the Afghan war and the global economic crisis. Half the country is illiterate, and half of Pakistanis live on less than US$1 a day. The country's respectable economic growth rate of 5% per annum during the late 2000s was fed by foreign credit, which allowed it to run a current-account deficit of 8.3% as of 2008. The country's finances collapsed in late 2008, forcing Islamabad to adopt an austerity program under the auspices of the International Monetary Fund. "Pakistan is not yet a failed economy," wrote Santosh Kumar in The Hindu on November 24. "But it can happen. This is not a prospect the world, especially India, can view with equanimity, since the spillover will impact us badly."

The credibility of secular government - with its promise of economic improvement - is threadbare. The alternative is an Islamist regime committed to confronting India over Kashmir and suppressing the Shi'ite minority that comprises 30% of Pakistan's population. The Islamist alternative has such appeal that Punjabi terrorists, as noted, are conducting suicide attacks against the Punjabi-dominated army.

India might be compelled to respond to the victory of Islamist radicals in its nuclear-armed neighbor. Iran, for that matter, cannot maintain its credibility with its Shi'ite allies around the region if it sits on its hands while Pakistan crushes its co-confessionalists. Iran's interest in obtaining nuclear weapons has several motivations. One is to establish a screen of deterrence behind which it can grab its neighbors' oil, as it proposed to do by sending a division of the Iranian army to surround an Iraqi oilfield last week. Another is to prepare for prospective conflict with Pakistan; if Pakistan fails, Iran will have a strong interest in interfering in Pakistan on behalf of the Shi'ite minority.

The Obama administration's response to the threat of Islamist takeover has been "to pick a new fight with India on Kashmir", as Indian analyst C Raja Mohan complained in the online edition of Forbes magazine on November 8:

Obama has also sensed, rightly, that the US cannot stabilize Afghanistan unless it fixes Pakistan's profound insecurities and gets its army to level with the US and stop supporting America's enemies in Afghanistan. Few Indians disagree with Obama's reasoning that the threats to Pakistan's security are internal and do not come from India. But many are beginning to get anxious about the third step in Obama's logic: to get Pakistan to cooperate with the US in Afghanistan, Washington must actively seek to resolve Islamabad's problem with New Delhi over Kashmir. Put simply, the Indian fear is that they are being asked to pick up the political tab for America's failed policy in Afghanistan, and for the Pakistan Army's deliberate betrayal of US interests there.

The Obama administration has antagonized India in the hope of mollifying Pakistani irredentism, just as it has antagonized Israel with the dubious argument that if Israel makes concessions to the divided, ineffectual Palestine Authority, it will be able to mollify Iran. Nothing will assuage the Palestinians, who are failed before coming a state, nor the Pakistanis, whose failure is ineluctable.

As I argued in Asia Times Online on October 20 (When the cat's away, the mice kill each other), the net effect of America's fecklessness is to give the Russian Empire an opportunity to stretch a hand out of the geopolitical grave and grasp a last, great opportunity. Russia faces a slow demographic death, but it remains a great power in terms of military technology: its surface-to-air missile systems are as good as anything American can field, and its newest system, the as yet undeployed S-500, may be better, according to a senior American aviation executive.

Compared with the airframe and avionics technology now in development phase in the Unites States, Russia remains a second-best producer of warplanes. But Obama's budget cuts have hit military aviation hard, leaving its closest allies - including Israel and Australia - without a clear alternative to the aging F-16 force. Russia and India, meanwhile, are developing a "fifth generation" fighter, with some inputs from France and Israel. There is widespread speculation that Russia's decision to cancel deliveries of its S-300 anti-missile system to Iran carried a price tag for the Israelis: order the latest Russian systems for their own use, and make available the entire package of Israeli avionics.

In short, Washington appears to have driven its two closest allies in Asia - Israel and India - into a technology alliance with Russia that may have enormous long-term consequences. It is not only that the US has renounced its intention to act as a hegemon; a few years from now, it no longer may have the technological ability to act as a hegemon. This threatens to close off what may become the best chance to maintain peace in the region.

Rather than chanting in unison "Pakistan must not be allowed to fail!", Western strategists should plan for the consequences of a failed state in Pakistan. One alternative - with its own attendant difficulties - was raised by M K Bhadrakumar on this site on October 10 (Pakistan warns India to 'back off'):


India, of course, can do a lot to help the US and NATO in such a scenario by training the militia operating under the ‘warlords’ and also providing them with weapons. In sum, without military deployment in Afghanistan, Delhi has the capacity to play a decisive role in crushing the Taliban insurgency, which is what makes the Pakistani military establishment extremely anxious in the developing political scenario on the Afghan chessboard.

In this scenario, India would encircle and contain a Pakistani failed state, cutting off the Afghanistan operations of the Islamist wing of Pakistan's military. Pakistan would be aghast, but the vise-grip around its borders would be so tight as to discourage future misbehavior.


There is one problem with this scenario, and that is China. As Francesco Sisci wrote on this site on December 15 (A radical empire looms), "Afghanistan and Pakistan are not unstable domino tiles that can be moved at will in a careful balance of weights and counterweights, as in old political power games. Pakistan and Afghanistan are part of a more complex balancing act that is both domestic and international and in which we also find China and India."

China cannot sit by and allow India to encircle and eventually crush its ally Pakistan - not because China has fundamental strategic interests in Pakistan, but because it cannot tolerate such a blemish to its credibility. The problem does not lie in Pakistan, but in the mutual capacity of India and China to destabilize each other. Maoist rebels are active in about a third of Indian territory, and the Indian government claims that they receive their weapons from China - without yet accusing the Chinese government of direct involvement. India has a probe stuck prominently into China's most sensitive spot, namely Tibet. On November 10, the Chinese government denounced India for permitting the Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual leader, to visit Tawang on the Tibetan border. China still claims as part of Tibet the whole border state of Arunachal Pradesh, including Tawang.

Unlike World War I, in which the warring parties in the Balkans drew Russia and Austria into war and the rest of Europe with them, India and China will not go to war over trifling border issues. But in the absence of a solution to Pakistan's state failure, they will continue to support low-intensity operations and add to the region's instability. China in this respect most resembles Austria in 1914. It is the power that wants stability at all costs, and has the most to lose - through the provincial rebellion of ethnic minorities - from instability. But it cannot impose stability through any means within its own reach. More than any other power in the world, it regards the prospective failure of the Pakistani state with horror. Beijing does not seem to have thought through the configuration of a post-Pakistani world.

The balance of power fails along with Pakistan. The alternative to the balance of power, as Kissinger said, is hegemony, and no one but the United States can exercise it. A hegemonic US would do the following:

- Invite New Delhi to increase its role in Afghanistan - which the Russians emphatically support - and make clear to Islamabad that the consequences of a shift toward radical Islam will be to leave Pakistan at the mercy of India.

- Dictate to India a conciliatory policy toward China, including an empty dance card for the Dalai Lama and consideration for Chinese interests in Nepal and Myanmar.

- Persuade China to throw its Pakistani ally under the bus, in return for assurances of Indian good behavior, as well as other incentives (access to US technology, for example).

- Assure China that the United States will not take advantage of its troubles with the Uighurs in Xinjiang or any other Chinese ethnic minority - and that it will police such allies as Turkey with respect to such problems.

- Crush Iran's imperial ambitions in the region, both to protect US allies such as Saudi Arabia and to eliminate a potential existential threat to Pakistan and remove a claim to legitimacy for radical Sunni Islamists.

- Give Russia assurances that matters pertaining to its "near abroad" from Ukraine to Kyrgyzstan will be considered with a view toward Russian interests.

The implications of such an exercise in great-power politics are in some respects ugly. They include a perpetual civil war in Afghanistan and the continuation of at least low-level civil war in Pakistan. The object would not be to prevent Pakistan from turning into a failed state, but to prevent a failed state in Pakistan from poisoning the rest of the region. It also implies a self-interested recognition that the United States has nothing but sentimental interests in Ukraine, Georgia and Tibet - and that sentiment is cheap. It is not the best alternative, to be sure, but as General George Patton said, the best is the enemy of the good.

At the close of 2009, Washington still has the capacity to act as a hegemon. The most dangerous undertaking of the Obama administration is not the petty failures of policy, such as the hapless effort to appease the Palestinians over West Bank settlements, or Pakistan over Kashmir. If America's technological leadership in fighter aircraft, surface-to-air missiles, and related technologies continues to erode, the United States - like Britain in 1914 - no longer will have the power and credibility to enforce an agreement among prospectively hostile players.

America's self-sabotage in this regard is a unique act of abnegation in the history of world strategy. It lost Vietnam because to win would have required more boots on the ground and more body bags on homebound aircraft. But the problems of South and Central Asia do not require a substantial US troop commitment. On the contrary, the escalation of US force in Afghanistan makes matters worse. India can put sufficient boots on Afghan soil to prevent a Taliban victory. No one else wants or needs US troops. But America's capacity to sail an aircraft carrier to any coast in the world and be master of the situation is essential.

Russia and India may field a fifth-generation fighter, perhaps a very good one if it contains the full Israeli avionics package. But a sixth-generation fighter is already in the research-and-development phase in the United States. If Washington puts resources behind cutting-edge defense technology, no other country or combination of countries can mount a challenge for a generation or more. America's failure to sustain its own power will be as tragic as it is unnecessary.



Spengler is channeled by David P Goldman, senior editor at First Things (http://www.firstthings.com/).

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
obama

Global Warming: Had it Been Warmer

Cold weather kills scores


January 01 2010 at 12:15PM

New Delhi - At least 17 people died as towns and cities in India's northern states were hit by cold weather, officials said on Friday.

"Sixteen people have died in Uttar Pradesh since early Wednesday due to cold [weather] conditions in the state. Most victims were homeless or pavement dwellers," state police spokesman G N Khanna said.

Police in Jammu, the winter capital of India-administered Kashmir, found the body of a worker who also died due to the cold.

Temperatures have plummeted in Uttar Pradesh and main cities such as Kanpur and Agra recorded temperatures as low as 1 to 4 degrees Celsius.

Beggars and homeless people had to spend the cold nights with little protection beyond plastic sheets and bags, reports said. State authorities were distributing blankets and firewood to the poor, police said.


Weather officials said there would be no respite from the cold weather and expect temperatures to fall further over the weekend.

Cold weather prevailed in northern states like Punjab and Haryana. The season's lowest temperature on the plains was reported from Amritsar, which recorded minus 0,2 degrees Celsius.

In the Himalayan region, several parts of Indian Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh temperatures dropped below zero.
 
Winters in India are brief, beginning in mid-December and ending by February. - Sapa-dpa


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
global warming

Make Mine Freedom - 1948


American Form of Government

Who's on First? Certainly isn't the Euro.