Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan
The surgeon general is a government health educator sometimes called “the nation’s doctor.” It at times has been a high-profile position, such as in the 1980s, when Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop became the government’s leading spokesman on the emerging AIDS epidemic.
The post has faded into relative obscurity in recent years. Last year, both the Institute of Medicine and Trust for America’s Health called for the surgeon general to play a more prominent and powerful role.
It would appear that our new Surgeon General is stricken with the fatal disease of affirmative action because of the following speech she gave in her speech this week in Atlanta, Georgia.
Being a retired professional I know the value of education and he knowledge that one must have to practice the healing arts. The skills and minds of our health care professionals are determined by two things and one of them is not the color of ones skin!
It takes a GOD given gift to have the hands of Brain Surgeon or a highly skilled Oral Surgeon, and a mind that can learn all the intricacies of the human body and the knowledge of diagnosis and treatment to begin the practice of a healing art.
I say “practice” because when one finishes his doctors training he is just a safe beginner.
A professional is the Antonym for the word beginner, but that is what doctors of all types and colors must realize they are. A continuous student of the art and practice of the healing art! Doctors who quit learning are bound to become a threat to the public!
If all one thinks about is to balance the numbers of the ratio of one particular race to the over all population of any field, much less the healing arts, they are following a path to destruction of that profession or business that they want to balance.
The ability to learn is an innate ability that is not given to those who we seek for our health care, but a GOD given talent. There is no way we can balance the disparity of people of color by setting quotas and goals to recruit more people of color.
The sole determinate should be who has the ability to learn and the skill to run the gauntlet of higher education required to be a health care provider! Color of ones skin should not even be put on the application for admittance to a health care professional school.
The new U.S. Surgeon General on Thursday called for stepped-up efforts in increasing the number of minority physicians.
She should have called for the destruction of the strangle hold the Teachers Union has on Public Education by restoring the government grants for those children in the inner cities who are outstanding students can attend magnet schools or private schools that provide a real education not just the political correctness and diversity that I believe are the main objectives of Public education today!
In what was one of her first speeches to a large crowd since she was sworn in Nov. 3, Dr. Regina Benjamin noted that the proportion of U.S. physicians who are minorities is only 6 percent — the same proportion as a century ago.
“There’s something wrong with that,” said Benjamin, speaking at a conference on health disparities at a hotel in downtown Atlanta.
The numbers come from a 2004 estimate of the percentage of U.S. physicians that are black or Hispanic. Blacks and Hispanics account for roughly 28 percent of the U.S. population, according to 2008 figures from the U.S. Census Bureau.
In a 27-minute speech, Benjamin told health leaders in the audience to encourage young minorities to pursue careers in medicine or other ambitions.
If people like Dr. Benjamin really want more people of color to succeed in any field of life she should join those of us who believe the Public School system is just dumbing down the youth of America so they can be spoon fed by the political class. Her thrust should be to improve education of the all people by returning to the three “Rs”and basic abilities to read, write and do calculations in math. Then the “cream will rise to the top” and those who have the ability to persue professional education will get that. Not by setting quotas. We have seen what a disaster that has produced in all forms of public life!
The tragedy that occurred last month on an Army base caused by an apparent terrorist doctor who was not only educated but promoted to major despite the fact that many people knew he was a potential for trouble. Was a perfect example of political correctness and affirmative action gone wrong!
Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: Opinions, PC. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, SPEECH DOCTORS, SURGEON GENERAL
Saturday, December 05, 2009
Friday, December 04, 2009
WILL SERFDOM BE IN AMERICANS FUTURE?
Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan
The so-called Land of the Free, has decided to recreate the ancient and rejected art of serfdom. As in history, serfdom was enacted gradually with restrictive laws that slowly or in some cases quickly ate away at the right of the people to move freely, thus guaranteeing the government a stable tax base and its favorite enterprises, a stable work force to exploit, one that can not walk away.
In America that is about to be done by the new Cap and Trade Law, that will more than likely go into effect next year. Only one of the chambers of the Congress has passed it but the other will soon if a miracle does not occur, and some Democrats develop a back bone and stand up for the people that elected them, not the president!
In the name of all things green, humans in the Free World including the USA will be turned into serfs.The Greens or rather Watermelons, Green on the outside, Marxist Red on the Inside have found the perfect tool with which to leverage the futures of all peoples in advanced nations.
No longer is the cry of power to the people, as the cover for the power grab of the more equal amongst the “equals” but instead it is the cry of Power to the Plants and the Fishes and the little buggy things that fly around and annoy you!
And it will cost the future of yourselves and your children, but Gaia will love you when you are decomposing in her belly, serf. Gaia is a primordial deity in the Ancient Greek pantheon and considered a Mother Goddess or Great Goddess.Source:Wikipedia
Her equivalent in the Roman Pantheon was Terra Mater or Tellus. Romans, unlike Greeks, did not consistently distinguish an Earth goddess (Tellus) from a grain goddess (Ceres).[2] Today it appears this is the Green Ecologists new replacement for GOD!
But how will this be done?
In the giant, unread “democratic” bills that the American Democrat controlled Congress is pushing through, some with literally up to ten thousand pages of unread and undebated laws.
Cap and Trade (American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009) will force all home owners to make extremely costly efficiency upgrades to their homes, for energy efficiency, before the government will give the serf, aka the citizen, a license to sell their home. Of course, before the process begins, the serf must get and pay for a government inspection and another after the upgrades.
With the taxes associated with the proposed health reform bill, Cap and Trade, and the massive multi-trillion dollar debt that is growing daily. Our dollar has lost 92% of its value in the past 30 years, and is certainly will be worthless if the spending does not stop. The American public will have to have a wheel barrel of dollars to buy a loaf of bread!
The middle class will disappear and what will remain is the government ruling class, the entertainment class and the academic elite! They will not call us serfs, or unwashed but we will be those left out of the CHANGE Obama promised America!
Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: BILLS, CONGRESS, Opinions, SERFDOM, TAXES
Thursday, December 03, 2009
IS SHARIA LAW A USA THREAT?
COLUMBUS -- A runaway Christian convert and her Muslim family must listen to each other's views about religion if they are to reunite, a possibility that appears in jeopardy since the girl continues to refuse any contact with her parents or siblings, a caseworker says.
A case-management plan filed yesterday said Rifqa Bary and her parents should hear what each has to say about Islam and Christianity as a step toward a possible reunification. But the plan, written by a government caseworker, also said "severe differences" exist between the 17-year-old girl and her parents over what led Rifqa to run away to Florida over the summer.
The girl has said she feared her father would harm or kill her for leaving Islam. Her father has denied the claim.
"Parents concern is that Rifqa has a false perception of their religious beliefs and that her understanding creates a barrier to reunification," wrote Margaret Shirk, a Franklin County Children Services Board caseworker. "Rifqa's concern is that her parents do not understand her practice of Christianity."
Bary's parents, Mohamed and Aysha Bary, agree with their daughter being in foster care for the moment, but are concerned about her and would like a family relationship with her again, according to the plan.
Shirk's plan says Rifqa Bary has made it clear she wants no contact with her parents or her brothers. The girl talked to her brothers on the phone while she was in Florida but since then decided she wants no contact with them either, the plan said.
"Rifqa has been insistent about not having any contact with her parents and now with her siblings for what she has expressed for healing purposes," the plan said. "Rifqa continues to express fear about returning home."
The plan also calls for finding other relatives or nonrelatives that Rifqa could be placed with if reunification with her parents isn't a possibility. The goal is to bring them together by Aug. 10, when the girl turns 18, after which she would be on her own and could leave foster care.
The girl's family is originally from Sri Lanka and emigrated in 2000 to seek medical help for Rifqa, who had lost sight in her right eye when she fell and struck a toy airplane at home.
Rifqa disappeared July 19 and apparently stayed with friends of a minister she knew in Columbus for two days, according to court documents.
The minister, Brian Williams, drove Rifqa to the Columbus bus station, where she took a bus to Florida and was met by "Christian associates" she met on Facebook, according to an Oct. 15 complaint filed by her father seeking her return from Florida.
Police used phone and computer records to track the girl to the Rev. Blake Lorenz, pastor of Orlando, Fla.-based Global Revolution Church. Authorities said the teen had met him through an online Facebook prayer group.
Columbus is home to one of the largest Somali Muslim populations in the United States, 70,000 and growing. This is the group, Somali Muslims, that has been at the epicenter of myriad busts for jihad in recent weeks (and one coming soon). Is she safe in a devout Muslim community?
The office of Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland (recipient of boucoup Islamo-bucks) issued a statement back on September 14th, on why Rifqa Bary should be returned to Ohio. She was in Florida.
“Child welfare agencies and authorities in Ohio and Franklin County are fully capable of providing for the security and well-being of Ohio’s children,” the statement said. “The governor believes this is a family matter and therefore would most appropriately be handled here in Ohio with the assistance of the child welfare and foster care system.”
One can see the stark difference in how Florida and Ohio are handling Rifqa. This speaks to my fear of Rifqa’s being returned to Ohio. There is a level of corruption and Islamic influence all the way up to Governor Strickland’s office that is deeply troubling. Strickland is on their payroll. And so now Rifqa Bary’s civil rights are being violated by the state of Ohio. She is being for all intents and purposes held prisoner, deprived of access to a phone, to the Internet, and to public school. And why is all this being done? What crime has she committed? The Ohio authorities may not realize what they are doing, but they are holding Rifqa under house arrest in accord with Sharia law, which stipulates that female apostates are to be imprisoned until they recant. Ohio is effectively practicing Sharia law.
Where are all the feminists in America coming to the defense of this young Muslim girl?
Where indeed? Whenever feminist groups are asked to comment on an honor killing or gender apartheid, they always defer and suggest that the media speak to the Muslim groups. How courageous. It is despicable that feminist groups and child welfare groups are nowhere to be seen. Feminist groups are either afraid of the Islamic supremacists who are trying to deny Rifqa her religious freedom and human rights, hate Christianity for its position on abortion, or they hate America so much that they will be silent when women are being oppressed by a force that also hates America.
The barbaric oppression of women under Sharia has never mattered to American feminists. Hillary Clinton has never said a word about it. Gloria Steinem hasn’t touched the subject. Code Pink has never come out against the barbarians. But they will go to Israel and protest freely their against the Jewish people right to self defense. Morally ill.
source: FrontPage.com
COMPARING FDR’S SPEECH WITH OBAMA AT WEST POINT
What if on December 8th, 1941, President Roosevelt said to Congress instead of the following words, the speech that Obama gave at West Point?
Roosevelt said: “ Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 – a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.
The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with the government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.
It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.
Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.
As commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.
Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us.
No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.
I believe I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.
Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.
With confidence in our armed forces – with the unbounding determination of our people – we will gain the inevitable triumph – so help us God!”.
Now compare these words that President Obama said to the Nation on television and to the West Point cadets who will be graduating in the spring and sent to fight the war in Afghanistan.
“As President, I refuse to set goals that go beyond our responsibility, our means, or our interests. And I must weigh all of the challenges that our nation faces. I don’t have the luxury of committing to just one. Indeed, I’m mindful of the words of President Eisenhower, who — in discussing our national security — said, “Each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs.”
Over the past several years, we have lost that balance. We’ve failed to appreciate the connection between our national security and our economy. In the wake of an economic crisis, too many of our neighbors and friends are out of work and struggle to pay the bills. Too many Americans are worried about the future facing our children. Meanwhile, competition within the global economy has grown more fierce. So we can’t simply afford to ignore the price of these wars”.
FDR spoke in the middle of the Great Depression, but he unlike Obama was not mixing the will to defeat an enemy that attacked the USA and killed thousands of Americans with his ability to Socialize the USA economy. His message(Roosevelt) was we need to defeat this enemy at all costs!
Only a man with no military experience and a mind-set that was formed while being a Community Organizer would equate paying for the fight to defeat an enemy who attacked us with the economy that he hopes to socialize!
Not only does this send a defeatist message to the enemy , but it a demoralizing effect on the troops in the field of battle.
What Obama said can only be interpreted as we have to spend only what we can afford to support the war, but we can run the printing presses in the basement of the Treasury Department 24 hours a day to pay for pork and social/welfare programs!
If FDR had put this type of language in his message to Congress the Day after Pearl Harbor. The whole of Europe and England would be speaking german and we would probably have been subject to the rule of the Japanese Emperor!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
JUST ANOTHER CAMAIGN SPEECH, WHEN WILL IT END?
WHY DID THE WHITE HOUSE ATTACK FOX NETWORK?
THE RUSSIAN ARE ENJOYING THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR ECONOMY
Holocaust, Sovereignty, and Socialism
Posted in THREATS TO US
Roosevelt said: “ Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 – a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.
The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with the government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.
It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.
Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.
As commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.
Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us.
No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.
I believe I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.
Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.
With confidence in our armed forces – with the unbounding determination of our people – we will gain the inevitable triumph – so help us God!”.
Now compare these words that President Obama said to the Nation on television and to the West Point cadets who will be graduating in the spring and sent to fight the war in Afghanistan.
“As President, I refuse to set goals that go beyond our responsibility, our means, or our interests. And I must weigh all of the challenges that our nation faces. I don’t have the luxury of committing to just one. Indeed, I’m mindful of the words of President Eisenhower, who — in discussing our national security — said, “Each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs.”
Over the past several years, we have lost that balance. We’ve failed to appreciate the connection between our national security and our economy. In the wake of an economic crisis, too many of our neighbors and friends are out of work and struggle to pay the bills. Too many Americans are worried about the future facing our children. Meanwhile, competition within the global economy has grown more fierce. So we can’t simply afford to ignore the price of these wars”.
FDR spoke in the middle of the Great Depression, but he unlike Obama was not mixing the will to defeat an enemy that attacked the USA and killed thousands of Americans with his ability to Socialize the USA economy. His message(Roosevelt) was we need to defeat this enemy at all costs!
Only a man with no military experience and a mind-set that was formed while being a Community Organizer would equate paying for the fight to defeat an enemy who attacked us with the economy that he hopes to socialize!
Not only does this send a defeatist message to the enemy , but it a demoralizing effect on the troops in the field of battle.
What Obama said can only be interpreted as we have to spend only what we can afford to support the war, but we can run the printing presses in the basement of the Treasury Department 24 hours a day to pay for pork and social/welfare programs!
If FDR had put this type of language in his message to Congress the Day after Pearl Harbor. The whole of Europe and England would be speaking german and we would probably have been subject to the rule of the Japanese Emperor!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
JUST ANOTHER CAMAIGN SPEECH, WHEN WILL IT END?
WHY DID THE WHITE HOUSE ATTACK FOX NETWORK?
THE RUSSIAN ARE ENJOYING THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR ECONOMY
Holocaust, Sovereignty, and Socialism
Posted in THREATS TO US
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Obama Sends Message to Taliban That We Will Withdraw in 2011
For the first time,(and the first time in our countries history) the president set a timeline on America's military involvement in the country it invaded in October 2001. He told the World including the Taliban that he will support the war effort until 2011 and then withdraw. There was no reference to our winning and eliminating the Taliban.That is after all the reason we went into Afghanistan to defeat and elimate those who attacked NewYork and Washington in 2001, not to build schools and roads!
The White House hopes that the addition of 30,000 US troops, which will begin almost immediately, ( If you consider sometime in the summer of this year immediately! I calculate a 7-8 months delay until the Marines go to Afghanistan sometime next summer, when our heroic volunteer force is fighting and dying and need help now!)combined with the pressure of the new deadline, will spur the government of Hamid Karzai into action.
(What action he expects from the Karzai government, he did not elaborate on. It leaves a lot of wiggle room for him to reverse his decision on witdrawl, and bring troops home sooner if he gets too much pressure from his anti-war supporters)
He did not even tell the leaders of Countries that he spoke to before his speech at West Point what the details of his plan were.
News agencies report that Obama was spending much of Monday and Tuesday on the phone, outlining his plan — minus many specifics — for the leaders of France, Britain, Germany, Russia, China, India, Denmark, Poland and others. He also met in person at the White House with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.
During the speech, which to me sounded like a political speech more than a war declaration of support for our troops. He never once mentioned the words Islamist extremist,or Jihadist. In fact he even said that he wanted to be friends with the Taliban after we withdraw in 18months! This President in my opinion is the first Commander in Chief giving aid and comfort to the enemy!
Obama said that "these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011".
He continued: "Just as we have done in Iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan's security forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul".
"But it will be clear to the Afghan government – and, more importantly, to the Afghan people that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country."
(If this is not a clear message to the Taliban to hide low until 2011 when they can take over the country as they did when the Russians withdrew!)
"It is no use saying, 'We are doing our best.' You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary"...Winston Churchill
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
A HALF HEARTED RESPONSE TO McCHRSTAL'S REQUEST FOR 40,000 TROOPS
What would have happened had General Eisenhower delayed the invasion of Europe for THREE months after the World Press announced that the Invasion was being delayed while Roosevelt decided how many troops to send into the beaches in Normandy France?
The German’s would have slaughtered more than they did, because they would have moved all their defensive forces and firepower to the Normandy beach cliffs. It would a massacre of disastrous proportions.
The first troops to be deployed to Afghanistan are going to be Marines,( when in doubt ,send in the Marines!)” General James Conway, the Marines’ top officer, told troops in Afghanistan at the weekend. “We have been leaning forward in anticipation of a decision. And we have got some pretty stiff fighting coming.”
The Marines are expected to be followed quickly by about 1,000 US Army trainers. They will land in Afghanistan early next year to hasten the growth of the Afghan Army and police force, another critical component of Mr Obama’s new strategy. ( you remember the commander in the field, General McChrystal had asked for 40,000 troops now!)
And the additional 30,000 US troops will deploy to Afghanistan over the next 12 to 18 months.( talk about a calculated delay to satisfy his political base that is violently against sending any more troops!)
The first priority will be to dislodge the Taleban from the Helmand town of Marjeh. Despite months of often intense fighting, the 9,000 Marines already there have failed to retake the city, which is a hub of the country’s opium trade. It is also a Taleban stronghold where many of the roadside bombs, the biggest killer of foreign troops, are made. ( Why don’t the soldiers burn or defoliant the poppy fields and dry up the supply of opium. This si the source of much of the financial support given to the Taliban)
Another focus will be to build a security cordon around the southern city of Kandahar, another Taleban hotbed. The aim will be to protect the civilian population from Taleban attacks, part of the classic counter-insurgency strategy that General Stanley McChrystal, the ground commander, has already begun pursuing.
( It seems we are more concerned with what we used to call collateral damage to the population during a battle to DEFEAT an enemy than they are to support and protect our brave men and women in uniform!)
Mr Obama is also expected to lay out in a prime-time speech tonight an aggressive goal for greatly increasing the size of the Afghan Army and police force. It will call for increasing the size of the Army to 134,000 troops by next October, four years earlier than the initial goal of 2014. ( This appears to be another tip of the hat to the anti-war zealots that Obama needs to get re-elected in three years)
The accelerated training of Afghan forces is central to Mr Obama’s hopes of handing over responsibility for the country’s security to the Afghans themselves as quickly as possible. (a numbers game, never mind if they can defend themselves against the Taliban, Obama just wants to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq!)
Analysts also believe that another crucial element of the new strategy will be to use the additional troops to secure the main highway between Kandahar in the south and the capital Kabul. This central road is currently not controlled by Nato forces.(As usual we have to the heavy lifting for the NATO skimpy force!)
Mr Obama told America’s senior military leadership about his long-awaited decision on troop numbers and strategy at a 5pm Oval Office meeting on Sunday, said the White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.
Mr Obama conveyed his decision, which has been more than three months in the making, to Robert Gates, his Defence Secretary, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs chairman, and General David Petraeus, chief of US Central Command.
The meeting was immediately followed by a secure video conference with General McChrystal and Karl Eikenberry, the US Ambassador in Kabul, when they were also formally instructed about the new strategy.
(I would assume McChrystal was very disappointed that he would not get the 40K troops immediately as he requested)
Mr Obama held a series of calls yesterday with foreign leaders, including Gordon Brown, to brief them about his decision. He also called President Sarkozy of France, President Medvedev of Russia, and personally briefed Kevin Rudd, the Australian Prime Minister, who is in Washington on an official visit. (I am sure he apologized for sending the troops. Since that is all he has done since assuming the Presidency, apologize and bow to foreign leaders for America’s actions)
In tonight’s speech Mr Obama will attempt to convince a sceptical American public that the surge of troops, which will bring the number of American forces in Afghanistan to 100,000, is the right option. ( he has to convince the anti-war base that he had to send troops or risk another Viet Nam massacre )
I was already convinced that he would not grant the Commander in the fields request for 40,000 troops immediately to mount a surge. You will remember Obama said he doesn’t like the word VICTORY!!
This obvious from the leaked reports of the speech he will give at West Point tonight.
In his address,to be delivered from the US Military Academy at West Point, Mr Obama will focus heavily on the importance of an exit strategy, and will make clear that there is no open-ended commitment in Afghanistan.
He is planning to set lay out a “time frame” for scaling back the US involvement there, US officials said.
Withdrawal not VICTORY is on the Commander in Chiefs mind! What a disgrace this man is to the office he holds!!
Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: afghanistan, decision, DELAY, obama, troops
The German’s would have slaughtered more than they did, because they would have moved all their defensive forces and firepower to the Normandy beach cliffs. It would a massacre of disastrous proportions.
The first troops to be deployed to Afghanistan are going to be Marines,( when in doubt ,send in the Marines!)” General James Conway, the Marines’ top officer, told troops in Afghanistan at the weekend. “We have been leaning forward in anticipation of a decision. And we have got some pretty stiff fighting coming.”
The Marines are expected to be followed quickly by about 1,000 US Army trainers. They will land in Afghanistan early next year to hasten the growth of the Afghan Army and police force, another critical component of Mr Obama’s new strategy. ( you remember the commander in the field, General McChrystal had asked for 40,000 troops now!)
And the additional 30,000 US troops will deploy to Afghanistan over the next 12 to 18 months.( talk about a calculated delay to satisfy his political base that is violently against sending any more troops!)
The first priority will be to dislodge the Taleban from the Helmand town of Marjeh. Despite months of often intense fighting, the 9,000 Marines already there have failed to retake the city, which is a hub of the country’s opium trade. It is also a Taleban stronghold where many of the roadside bombs, the biggest killer of foreign troops, are made. ( Why don’t the soldiers burn or defoliant the poppy fields and dry up the supply of opium. This si the source of much of the financial support given to the Taliban)
Another focus will be to build a security cordon around the southern city of Kandahar, another Taleban hotbed. The aim will be to protect the civilian population from Taleban attacks, part of the classic counter-insurgency strategy that General Stanley McChrystal, the ground commander, has already begun pursuing.
( It seems we are more concerned with what we used to call collateral damage to the population during a battle to DEFEAT an enemy than they are to support and protect our brave men and women in uniform!)
Mr Obama is also expected to lay out in a prime-time speech tonight an aggressive goal for greatly increasing the size of the Afghan Army and police force. It will call for increasing the size of the Army to 134,000 troops by next October, four years earlier than the initial goal of 2014. ( This appears to be another tip of the hat to the anti-war zealots that Obama needs to get re-elected in three years)
The accelerated training of Afghan forces is central to Mr Obama’s hopes of handing over responsibility for the country’s security to the Afghans themselves as quickly as possible. (a numbers game, never mind if they can defend themselves against the Taliban, Obama just wants to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq!)
Analysts also believe that another crucial element of the new strategy will be to use the additional troops to secure the main highway between Kandahar in the south and the capital Kabul. This central road is currently not controlled by Nato forces.(As usual we have to the heavy lifting for the NATO skimpy force!)
Mr Obama told America’s senior military leadership about his long-awaited decision on troop numbers and strategy at a 5pm Oval Office meeting on Sunday, said the White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.
Mr Obama conveyed his decision, which has been more than three months in the making, to Robert Gates, his Defence Secretary, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs chairman, and General David Petraeus, chief of US Central Command.
The meeting was immediately followed by a secure video conference with General McChrystal and Karl Eikenberry, the US Ambassador in Kabul, when they were also formally instructed about the new strategy.
(I would assume McChrystal was very disappointed that he would not get the 40K troops immediately as he requested)
Mr Obama held a series of calls yesterday with foreign leaders, including Gordon Brown, to brief them about his decision. He also called President Sarkozy of France, President Medvedev of Russia, and personally briefed Kevin Rudd, the Australian Prime Minister, who is in Washington on an official visit. (I am sure he apologized for sending the troops. Since that is all he has done since assuming the Presidency, apologize and bow to foreign leaders for America’s actions)
In tonight’s speech Mr Obama will attempt to convince a sceptical American public that the surge of troops, which will bring the number of American forces in Afghanistan to 100,000, is the right option. ( he has to convince the anti-war base that he had to send troops or risk another Viet Nam massacre )
I was already convinced that he would not grant the Commander in the fields request for 40,000 troops immediately to mount a surge. You will remember Obama said he doesn’t like the word VICTORY!!
This obvious from the leaked reports of the speech he will give at West Point tonight.
In his address,to be delivered from the US Military Academy at West Point, Mr Obama will focus heavily on the importance of an exit strategy, and will make clear that there is no open-ended commitment in Afghanistan.
He is planning to set lay out a “time frame” for scaling back the US involvement there, US officials said.
Withdrawal not VICTORY is on the Commander in Chiefs mind! What a disgrace this man is to the office he holds!!
Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: afghanistan, decision, DELAY, obama, troops
Monday, November 30, 2009
PUT YOUR LIFE ON THE LINE AND THIS MAY AWAIT YOU!!
With things like this going on the now Political Correct Armed Forces it a wonder anyone vlunteers to serve and defend our Country!
Posted by Jax Hawk on Monday, November 30, 2009 10:58:56 AM
The following story is almost unbelievedable in a time of war. It is though some Nazi high Command general had been captured after he killed thousands of American soldiers in an ambush and burned their bodies in a large bonfire that was still smoldering when he was captured. The small group of Rangers that captured him was so enraged that they rough him up before he was turned over to the prisoner of war camp.
When they returned to their unit no citation or medals were forthcoming, but charges of brutality were brought against the unit and they were tried and court martialed!
If this had happened the morale of the fighting men who learned about this heinous and wrong headed charge would have a grave affect on the fighting capability of the men and women trying hard to defeat the Nazi's. We might have lost the war!
Now comes this story from Fox News about a group of Navy Seals. The most highly trained and dedicated unit in the Service that I am proud to have served a very long time ago.
These brave men put their own lives on the line every time they go on a mission. They do things that no other unit can do and it takes dedication and a heroic effort to just become a Navy Seal!
"Navy SEALs had secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges!.
The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.
Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.
Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.
Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.
Pettty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.
Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.
The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7!
The official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses [was] given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad. . . .
The detainee was turned over to Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up the chain of command, and an investigation ensued. (you will notice that he complained about abuse while he was in the custody of Iraqi's, could they have done the "fat lip" is my question?)
The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated that “Objective Amber” planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and “they had been tracking this guy for some time.”
The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its grip over Iraq.
Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.
Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.
The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment.
They are sensitive because I believe political pressure and negative press about the Iraq war has made them have "rabbit ears"!
If we were’t so “sensitive,” perhaps less American troops would die. The world is laughing at this ridiculous treatment of our own men. Why would anyone want to serve if this is what they get in return? Catch a terrorist murderer and get court martialed?
If you’re looking for a true story that showcases both American heroism and Afghani humanity, Marcus Luttrell’s Lone Survivor: The Eyewitness Account of Operation Redwing and the Lost Heroes of SEAL Team 10 (Little, Brown, $24.99), written with Patrick Robinson, may be the book for you.
Tags: facts Navy SEAL COURT MARTIAL terrorist OPINIONS
Sunday, November 29, 2009
DO AMERICANS WANT THIS TO HAPPEN IN THE USA?
An article in todays internet version of the Guardian Newspaper of London reveals just what can happen if Americans allow our politicians to turn over our health Care to a bunch of bureaucrats.( and do not expect to see this information in any newspaper or on TV in the USA!)
This article is a frightening portent of what is to come if we allow the Democrats to ram their socialized medicine Bill through Congress to satisfy one of Obama's campaign promises!
The true scandal of NHS hospitals failing to comply with basic safety standards is revealed in today's Observer. Research that ranks every general hospital in England against a range of safety measures has named 12 NHS hospital trusts judged to be "significantly underperforming".
This is despite the fact that last month the Care Quality Commission, the health service regulator, judged overall care at eight of the trusts to be good or excellent. Today's study by Dr Foster, an NHS partner organisation that collates and analyses healthcare data, also highlights 27 trusts with unusually high death rates. Almost 5,000 more patients in their care died in the past year than was expected.
Revelations of such widespread safety failings will send shockwaves through the NHS, already reeling from scandals at two trusts last week. Poor nursing care, filthy wards and hundreds of unnecessary deaths were exposed at Basildon and Thurrock University NHS Hospitals Foundation Trust, and the chair of the NHS trust in Colchester was fired.
Now the new data proves that key safety failings are occurring in 11 more hospital trusts across England. They include Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Healthcare Trust, South London Healthcare Trust, Weston Area Health Trust, Hereford Hospitals Trust, Lewisham Hospital Trust and University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire Trust. Eighteen were found to have death rates the same or higher than at Colchester. Ministers want to know why seven in particular have had persistently high death rates over five years.
The Department of Health yesterday ordered the CQC to investigate if any other trusts needed urgent attention. The CQC said it was "monitoring closely a number of other trusts", but had no evidence there was another case in England where it would take action of the kind taken at Basildon.
John Black, president of the Royal College of Surgeons, last night told the Observer that patient safety had been neglected by hospitals too busy meeting NHS-imposed financial targets: "Too many hospitals are too concerned with meeting financial targets at the expense of clinical standards, and we are seeing patients suffering as a consequence."
Today's research exposes systemic failures in large parts of the NHS during the last financial year and finds:
■ 39% of trusts failing to investigate unexpected deaths or cases of serious harm on their wards.
■ At least 209 incidents in which "foreign objects", such as swabs and drill-bits, were left inside patients after surgery.
* At least 82 cases in which medical staff operated on the wrong part of the patient's body.
It finds that 5,024 people died after being admitted for "low-risk" conditions such as asthma or appendicitis, of whom 848 were under 65. A proportion of those deaths will be linked to safety errors.
The Conservatives reacted by promising a complete overhaul of the regulation system, which rated Basildon "good" only weeks ago. Andrew Lansley, the shadow health secretary, said: "Labour's failed health inspection regime is more interested in targets than patients." He also questioned the timing of the Basildon announcement. Officials knew of the hospital's failings weeks ago but decided to publicise them last Thursday, just days before the Dr Foster research was due to be published in the Observer".
The NHS in London defines Health Trusts thusly: "Hospitals are managed by acute trusts, which make sure that hospitals provide high-quality healthcare, and that they spend their money efficiently. They also decide on a strategy for how the hospital will develop, so that services improve.
Acute trusts employ a large part of the NHS workforce, including nurses, doctors, pharmacists, midwives and health visitors, as well as people doing jobs related to medicine – physiotherapists, radiographers, podiatrists, speech and language therapists, counsellors, occupational therapists, psychologists and healthcare scientists. There are many other non-medical staff employed by acute trusts, including receptionists, porters, cleaners, specialists in information technology, managers, engineers, caterers and domestic and security staff.
Some acute trusts are regional or national centres for more specialised care. Others are attached to universities and help to train health professionals. Acute trusts can also provide services in the community, for example through health centres, clinics or in people's homes. All the above are run by bureaucrats!
Americans wake up before we trash the best health care in the World and turn the doctor patient relationship into a patient/ bureaucrat relationship!
This article is a frightening portent of what is to come if we allow the Democrats to ram their socialized medicine Bill through Congress to satisfy one of Obama's campaign promises!
The true scandal of NHS hospitals failing to comply with basic safety standards is revealed in today's Observer. Research that ranks every general hospital in England against a range of safety measures has named 12 NHS hospital trusts judged to be "significantly underperforming".
This is despite the fact that last month the Care Quality Commission, the health service regulator, judged overall care at eight of the trusts to be good or excellent. Today's study by Dr Foster, an NHS partner organisation that collates and analyses healthcare data, also highlights 27 trusts with unusually high death rates. Almost 5,000 more patients in their care died in the past year than was expected.
Revelations of such widespread safety failings will send shockwaves through the NHS, already reeling from scandals at two trusts last week. Poor nursing care, filthy wards and hundreds of unnecessary deaths were exposed at Basildon and Thurrock University NHS Hospitals Foundation Trust, and the chair of the NHS trust in Colchester was fired.
Now the new data proves that key safety failings are occurring in 11 more hospital trusts across England. They include Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Healthcare Trust, South London Healthcare Trust, Weston Area Health Trust, Hereford Hospitals Trust, Lewisham Hospital Trust and University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire Trust. Eighteen were found to have death rates the same or higher than at Colchester. Ministers want to know why seven in particular have had persistently high death rates over five years.
The Department of Health yesterday ordered the CQC to investigate if any other trusts needed urgent attention. The CQC said it was "monitoring closely a number of other trusts", but had no evidence there was another case in England where it would take action of the kind taken at Basildon.
John Black, president of the Royal College of Surgeons, last night told the Observer that patient safety had been neglected by hospitals too busy meeting NHS-imposed financial targets: "Too many hospitals are too concerned with meeting financial targets at the expense of clinical standards, and we are seeing patients suffering as a consequence."
Today's research exposes systemic failures in large parts of the NHS during the last financial year and finds:
■ 39% of trusts failing to investigate unexpected deaths or cases of serious harm on their wards.
■ At least 209 incidents in which "foreign objects", such as swabs and drill-bits, were left inside patients after surgery.
* At least 82 cases in which medical staff operated on the wrong part of the patient's body.
It finds that 5,024 people died after being admitted for "low-risk" conditions such as asthma or appendicitis, of whom 848 were under 65. A proportion of those deaths will be linked to safety errors.
The Conservatives reacted by promising a complete overhaul of the regulation system, which rated Basildon "good" only weeks ago. Andrew Lansley, the shadow health secretary, said: "Labour's failed health inspection regime is more interested in targets than patients." He also questioned the timing of the Basildon announcement. Officials knew of the hospital's failings weeks ago but decided to publicise them last Thursday, just days before the Dr Foster research was due to be published in the Observer".
The NHS in London defines Health Trusts thusly: "Hospitals are managed by acute trusts, which make sure that hospitals provide high-quality healthcare, and that they spend their money efficiently. They also decide on a strategy for how the hospital will develop, so that services improve.
Acute trusts employ a large part of the NHS workforce, including nurses, doctors, pharmacists, midwives and health visitors, as well as people doing jobs related to medicine – physiotherapists, radiographers, podiatrists, speech and language therapists, counsellors, occupational therapists, psychologists and healthcare scientists. There are many other non-medical staff employed by acute trusts, including receptionists, porters, cleaners, specialists in information technology, managers, engineers, caterers and domestic and security staff.
Some acute trusts are regional or national centres for more specialised care. Others are attached to universities and help to train health professionals. Acute trusts can also provide services in the community, for example through health centres, clinics or in people's homes. All the above are run by bureaucrats!
Americans wake up before we trash the best health care in the World and turn the doctor patient relationship into a patient/ bureaucrat relationship!
Saturday, November 28, 2009
IT IS TOO BAD THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE DID NOT THINK CHRYSLER BOND HOLDERS DESERVED THE SAME PRO
Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan
Saturday, November 28, 2009
If the American public had any doubt where the loyalties of the Obama administration were before yesterday. There is no doubt about it today.
As you will recall when we had the controversy over the government take over of General Motors less than a year ago. During the GM process the issue of bankruptcy for Chrysler was not allowed, by Obama’s Car Czar, to go through the normal bankruptcy process, but a “special” government bankruptcy was pushed through by the Car Czar that was in direct violation of the Constitution!
This travesty ignored the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution that guarantees that the bond holders are prime recipients for any payment that results from reorganization. But in the Chrysler manipulation, the CAR CZAR appointed by, and beholden to only Obama, decided that the bond holders came last and the workers of the auto union came first. A direct violation of the Constitution! In fact Obama called the Bond holders unpatriotic because they were not willing to accept 20 cents on a dollar for their bonds and had threatened to sue to get what they thought they were due !
Now the issue of contracts between the government and ACORN has been addressed by the Attorney Generals office.The issue is, should the government pay monies owed ACORN for services that were contracted(arranged) before the President signed a Bill forbidding the payment of taxpayers money to this corrupt organization.
Remember that when they were contracted to register voters they not only registered dead people, they registered Mickey Mouse!!
In a direct contrast to the Chrysler bond holders deal, the Attorney General’s office ruled that ACORN must be paid because the contracts were in force before Obama signed the Bill forbidding payments to ACORN
The following is an excerpt from an article on the internet written by Charlie Savage.
“Acorn, which stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, has received about $53 million in federal aid, much of it grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development for providing various services related to affordable housing.
But the group has become a prime target for conservative critics, and on Oct. 1, President Obama signed into law a spending bill that included a provision that said no taxpayer money — including money authorized by previous legislation — could be “provided to” the group or its affiliates.
A Housing and Urban Development Department lawyer asked the Justice Department whether the new law meant that pre-existing contracts with Acorn should be broken. And in a memorandum signed Oct. 23 and posted online this week, Mr. Barron said the government should continue to make payments to Acorn as required by such contracts.
The new law “should not be read as directing or authorizing HUD to breach a pre-existing binding contractual obligation to make payments to Acorn or its affiliates, subsidiaries or allied organizations where doing so would give rise to contractual liability,” Mr. Barron wrote”.
The deputy director of national operations for Acorn, Brian Kettenring, praised Mr. Barron’s decision.
Of course he would and so should all the recipients for the government (tax payer funded) bail outs including the Wall Street bankers, Brokerage houses(AIG,etc.) and other Obama supporters who helped elect Obama, and now are being paid back!
The decision by the acting assistant Attorney General reminds me of the testimoney of Bill Clinton when he was questioned whether he had sex with “ML”. He said it all depends on the meaning of the word is, is? Of course I am paraphrasing his words, but the result is the same. The parsing of words using Semantics to confuse the issue.
Here is what the AAG said: “Mr. Barron said he had based his conclusion on the statute’s phrase “provided to.” This phrase, he said, has no clearly defined meaning in the realm of government spending — unlike words like “obligate” and “expend.”
Citing dictionary and thesaurus entries, he said “provided to” could be interpreted as meaning only instances in which an official was making “discretionary choices” about whether to give the group money, rather than instances in which the transfer of money to Acorn was required to satisfy contractual obligations.
Since there are two possible ways to construe the term “provided to,” Mr. Barron wrote, it makes sense to pick the interpretation that allows the government to avoid breaching contracts”.
I believe the reason why Obama and Democrats are pushing so hard for Health Care reform to be rushed through Congress is to reward large Unions and AARP and other ilk who will gain from Socializing 1/6th of our GNP. Not to cut the cost of health care or provide health insurance to those who cannot afford it!
Wake up Americans !! How long will this corrupt adminstration go without Americans marching in the millions on the Capitol screaming enough already!!
Saturday, November 28, 2009
If the American public had any doubt where the loyalties of the Obama administration were before yesterday. There is no doubt about it today.
As you will recall when we had the controversy over the government take over of General Motors less than a year ago. During the GM process the issue of bankruptcy for Chrysler was not allowed, by Obama’s Car Czar, to go through the normal bankruptcy process, but a “special” government bankruptcy was pushed through by the Car Czar that was in direct violation of the Constitution!
This travesty ignored the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution that guarantees that the bond holders are prime recipients for any payment that results from reorganization. But in the Chrysler manipulation, the CAR CZAR appointed by, and beholden to only Obama, decided that the bond holders came last and the workers of the auto union came first. A direct violation of the Constitution! In fact Obama called the Bond holders unpatriotic because they were not willing to accept 20 cents on a dollar for their bonds and had threatened to sue to get what they thought they were due !
Now the issue of contracts between the government and ACORN has been addressed by the Attorney Generals office.The issue is, should the government pay monies owed ACORN for services that were contracted(arranged) before the President signed a Bill forbidding the payment of taxpayers money to this corrupt organization.
Remember that when they were contracted to register voters they not only registered dead people, they registered Mickey Mouse!!
In a direct contrast to the Chrysler bond holders deal, the Attorney General’s office ruled that ACORN must be paid because the contracts were in force before Obama signed the Bill forbidding payments to ACORN
The following is an excerpt from an article on the internet written by Charlie Savage.
“Acorn, which stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, has received about $53 million in federal aid, much of it grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development for providing various services related to affordable housing.
But the group has become a prime target for conservative critics, and on Oct. 1, President Obama signed into law a spending bill that included a provision that said no taxpayer money — including money authorized by previous legislation — could be “provided to” the group or its affiliates.
A Housing and Urban Development Department lawyer asked the Justice Department whether the new law meant that pre-existing contracts with Acorn should be broken. And in a memorandum signed Oct. 23 and posted online this week, Mr. Barron said the government should continue to make payments to Acorn as required by such contracts.
The new law “should not be read as directing or authorizing HUD to breach a pre-existing binding contractual obligation to make payments to Acorn or its affiliates, subsidiaries or allied organizations where doing so would give rise to contractual liability,” Mr. Barron wrote”.
The deputy director of national operations for Acorn, Brian Kettenring, praised Mr. Barron’s decision.
Of course he would and so should all the recipients for the government (tax payer funded) bail outs including the Wall Street bankers, Brokerage houses(AIG,etc.) and other Obama supporters who helped elect Obama, and now are being paid back!
The decision by the acting assistant Attorney General reminds me of the testimoney of Bill Clinton when he was questioned whether he had sex with “ML”. He said it all depends on the meaning of the word is, is? Of course I am paraphrasing his words, but the result is the same. The parsing of words using Semantics to confuse the issue.
Here is what the AAG said: “Mr. Barron said he had based his conclusion on the statute’s phrase “provided to.” This phrase, he said, has no clearly defined meaning in the realm of government spending — unlike words like “obligate” and “expend.”
Citing dictionary and thesaurus entries, he said “provided to” could be interpreted as meaning only instances in which an official was making “discretionary choices” about whether to give the group money, rather than instances in which the transfer of money to Acorn was required to satisfy contractual obligations.
Since there are two possible ways to construe the term “provided to,” Mr. Barron wrote, it makes sense to pick the interpretation that allows the government to avoid breaching contracts”.
I believe the reason why Obama and Democrats are pushing so hard for Health Care reform to be rushed through Congress is to reward large Unions and AARP and other ilk who will gain from Socializing 1/6th of our GNP. Not to cut the cost of health care or provide health insurance to those who cannot afford it!
Wake up Americans !! How long will this corrupt adminstration go without Americans marching in the millions on the Capitol screaming enough already!!
Friday, November 27, 2009
THERE ARE TWO BASIC PRINCIPLES THAT THIS BLOG ADDRESSES
There are two items of interest that I will address in the blog today. The Economy and Patriotism!
First I am compelled to comment on the asinine statement of Senator Conrad of North Dakota. I hate to cast aspersions on people whom I know little about, but I am compelled to ask the question: What were you people thinking when you sent the elitist stupid man to Washington.
Apparently he does not understand that the Bill of rights gives us freedom of speech, and the uniform code of military justice reigns over all persons regardless of rank that wear the uniform of the United States!
His statement yesterday that impugned all who believe if you commit a crime of the massive effect that was the plotting of flying our airplanes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, and is captured on foreign soil by military personnel he is a prisoner of war.
AS such he is entitled to trial by a military tribunal as were the Nazis in Nuremberg, not in the civilian court.
But this paragon of Liberal progressive thinking had this to say about those of us who protest the decision by the attorney general to bring KSM to New York for a civil trial.
"CNSNews.com) – Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) told CNSNews.com that civilian courts are well-suited to prosecute al Qaeda terrorists and that "if people don't believe in our system, maybe they ought to go somewhere else.”
Conrad also dismissed a question about the rights of terrorists captured on foreign battlefields and the rules of evidence in terms of a civilian court trial as not serious.
If Senator Conrad was a patriotic American he would want the confessed plotter of the worst destruction committed on U.S. soil in the history of our Nation, to receive his just punishment. If for no other reason than to avenge the lives of the almost three thousand people who lost their lives in this heinous act, but if this mockery of a trial proceeds it is an almost certainty that the five terrorists will be acquitted if not released by dismissal before the trial begins by the judge because of this Supreme Court Ruling.
According to the Supreme Court in Weeks v. United States (1914), the government cannot use evidence obtained without a search warrant.
“The tendency of those who execute the criminal laws of the country to obtain conviction by means of unlawful seizures and enforced confessions, the latter often obtained after subjecting accused persons to unwarranted practices destructive of rights secured by the Federal Constitution, should find no sanction in the judgments of the courts, which are charged at all times with the support of the Constitution, and to which people of all conditions have a right to appeal for the maintenance of such fundamental rights,” the Court found.
I believe, as most Americans believe, that when an appointed or elected official of the Government, either locla, state or federal does something that is either un-constitutional or just not in the interests of the people whom the official is supposed to represent. They should speak out ! Not quietly, but in a loud voice that gets the attention of the elected and appointed official. It is still a free Country and you can still say anything that is not presently treasonous or inciting to riot!
Senator Conrad should apologize to the American people for his statement!
The second and not necessarally less important is the U.S. Economy. It is heading south rapidly and the number one cause is the massive spending by the Congress to satisfy President Obama's quest to socialize the USA! They say they are doing it to reverse the downward spiral of the economy, but despite and because of the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars, the economy has nose dived that has resulted in an unemployment rate of 17% ,if you count the people who no longer are looking for work!
The fall of the US dollar is turning into an avalanche that I and others could be the downfall of the USA fre-enterprise system!.
The following is an interesting article printed in the English version of Pravda that illustrates my point.
"On Tuesday, the American currency lost nine kopeks in Russia and reached a new minimum mark this year - 29.5 rubles per dollar. Within six months (April through September) the dollar lost over 10 percent at the world foreign exchange trading, which marked the sharpest decline since 1991. Some experts believe that the American currency is close to collapse, which may lead to a new financial crisis.
The tendency of the US dollar devaluation has been observed for a few years, but the current rate of decline is unprecedented. Some jokesters even rushed to re-read the letters of Karl Marx to Friedrich Engels written during the US financial panic of 1857 discussing the collapse of America. It would have been funny if it wasn’t so serious.
The chief economist of HSBC Bank Stephen King believes that if the US officials fail to stop the fall of American currency, it may provoke another financial crisis. “A dollar collapse would be a disaster all round… It would leave the international monetary system short of stability and long of fear. It would unleash economic upheavals on a similar scale to those seen in the 1970,” King wrote for The Independent.
American officials don’t seem to be overly concerned since nothing is being done about it. The US hasn’t done anything to support the currency since 1955. But is a collapse inevitable? From the viewpoint of macroeconomic indicators, the US state of affairs is, indeed, scary: record budget deficit of $1.4 trillion, record state debt that now exceeds $11.9 trillion, high unemployment and weak currency. Huge inflows of capital into the economy that Obama is proud of haven’t yet shown results.
But on the other hand, weak currency may be good for the US.
“The economy is supported by industrial orders based on the current weak dollar and higher prices in the future. Key players in the market are ready to support their manufacturers by weakening the currency,” says Alexander Kuptsikevich, FxPro financial analyst.
If the state debt is growing, it means that the US continues to obtain loans.
“Market participants prefer to borrow money in dollars, and dollar loans are relatively affordable. They invest into more active instruments denominated in currencies of developing countries,’ explains Yevgeny Nadorshin, chief economist of Trust Investment Bank.
This causes growth of stock index. For example, Russian Trading System increased by 34 percent within two and a half months.
Shall we sit by while Obamphiles destroy our Republic?
First I am compelled to comment on the asinine statement of Senator Conrad of North Dakota. I hate to cast aspersions on people whom I know little about, but I am compelled to ask the question: What were you people thinking when you sent the elitist stupid man to Washington.
Apparently he does not understand that the Bill of rights gives us freedom of speech, and the uniform code of military justice reigns over all persons regardless of rank that wear the uniform of the United States!
His statement yesterday that impugned all who believe if you commit a crime of the massive effect that was the plotting of flying our airplanes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, and is captured on foreign soil by military personnel he is a prisoner of war.
AS such he is entitled to trial by a military tribunal as were the Nazis in Nuremberg, not in the civilian court.
But this paragon of Liberal progressive thinking had this to say about those of us who protest the decision by the attorney general to bring KSM to New York for a civil trial.
"CNSNews.com) – Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) told CNSNews.com that civilian courts are well-suited to prosecute al Qaeda terrorists and that "if people don't believe in our system, maybe they ought to go somewhere else.”
Conrad also dismissed a question about the rights of terrorists captured on foreign battlefields and the rules of evidence in terms of a civilian court trial as not serious.
If Senator Conrad was a patriotic American he would want the confessed plotter of the worst destruction committed on U.S. soil in the history of our Nation, to receive his just punishment. If for no other reason than to avenge the lives of the almost three thousand people who lost their lives in this heinous act, but if this mockery of a trial proceeds it is an almost certainty that the five terrorists will be acquitted if not released by dismissal before the trial begins by the judge because of this Supreme Court Ruling.
According to the Supreme Court in Weeks v. United States (1914), the government cannot use evidence obtained without a search warrant.
“The tendency of those who execute the criminal laws of the country to obtain conviction by means of unlawful seizures and enforced confessions, the latter often obtained after subjecting accused persons to unwarranted practices destructive of rights secured by the Federal Constitution, should find no sanction in the judgments of the courts, which are charged at all times with the support of the Constitution, and to which people of all conditions have a right to appeal for the maintenance of such fundamental rights,” the Court found.
I believe, as most Americans believe, that when an appointed or elected official of the Government, either locla, state or federal does something that is either un-constitutional or just not in the interests of the people whom the official is supposed to represent. They should speak out ! Not quietly, but in a loud voice that gets the attention of the elected and appointed official. It is still a free Country and you can still say anything that is not presently treasonous or inciting to riot!
Senator Conrad should apologize to the American people for his statement!
The second and not necessarally less important is the U.S. Economy. It is heading south rapidly and the number one cause is the massive spending by the Congress to satisfy President Obama's quest to socialize the USA! They say they are doing it to reverse the downward spiral of the economy, but despite and because of the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars, the economy has nose dived that has resulted in an unemployment rate of 17% ,if you count the people who no longer are looking for work!
The fall of the US dollar is turning into an avalanche that I and others could be the downfall of the USA fre-enterprise system!.
The following is an interesting article printed in the English version of Pravda that illustrates my point.
"On Tuesday, the American currency lost nine kopeks in Russia and reached a new minimum mark this year - 29.5 rubles per dollar. Within six months (April through September) the dollar lost over 10 percent at the world foreign exchange trading, which marked the sharpest decline since 1991. Some experts believe that the American currency is close to collapse, which may lead to a new financial crisis.
The tendency of the US dollar devaluation has been observed for a few years, but the current rate of decline is unprecedented. Some jokesters even rushed to re-read the letters of Karl Marx to Friedrich Engels written during the US financial panic of 1857 discussing the collapse of America. It would have been funny if it wasn’t so serious.
The chief economist of HSBC Bank Stephen King believes that if the US officials fail to stop the fall of American currency, it may provoke another financial crisis. “A dollar collapse would be a disaster all round… It would leave the international monetary system short of stability and long of fear. It would unleash economic upheavals on a similar scale to those seen in the 1970,” King wrote for The Independent.
American officials don’t seem to be overly concerned since nothing is being done about it. The US hasn’t done anything to support the currency since 1955. But is a collapse inevitable? From the viewpoint of macroeconomic indicators, the US state of affairs is, indeed, scary: record budget deficit of $1.4 trillion, record state debt that now exceeds $11.9 trillion, high unemployment and weak currency. Huge inflows of capital into the economy that Obama is proud of haven’t yet shown results.
But on the other hand, weak currency may be good for the US.
“The economy is supported by industrial orders based on the current weak dollar and higher prices in the future. Key players in the market are ready to support their manufacturers by weakening the currency,” says Alexander Kuptsikevich, FxPro financial analyst.
If the state debt is growing, it means that the US continues to obtain loans.
“Market participants prefer to borrow money in dollars, and dollar loans are relatively affordable. They invest into more active instruments denominated in currencies of developing countries,’ explains Yevgeny Nadorshin, chief economist of Trust Investment Bank.
This causes growth of stock index. For example, Russian Trading System increased by 34 percent within two and a half months.
Shall we sit by while Obamphiles destroy our Republic?
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
ANOTHER REASON TO WORRY IF YOU LIVE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
EM crews that respond to emergency 911 calls will only take you to he nearest hospital. Even if you travel to the city to see an internist or cardiologist who is affiliated with a major metropolitan hospital for a chronic medical condition that suddenly becomes acute. The EMT crews who man the ambulances are required to take you to the nearest hospital.
This is a good idea if you are suffering a heart attack, but if you end up in the emergency room of a rural or small city hospital, you better have them transfer you to the Big city hospital as soon as you are stabilized. If you do not the “TAB” for your treatment will cost you very much more because of provisions in the Pelosi House Health Care Bill.
A rural town’s only hospital very likely has the only outpatient surgery unit, the only radiology unit and the only clinical laboratory. Its outpatient clinic may be the only primary care practice in town, and it may have the only ambulance service and the only home health agency.
If the House health care bill becomes law, the Democrats’ plan stipulates below-market payment rates and a new government-run insurance company that would compete with cash-strapped rural hospitals.
Rural hospitals, which are normally small and operate on a tight budget, could be put in further financial jeopardy because the House-passed version of health care reform does not fix the disparity in Medicare reimbursements between rural and urban hospitals. Rural hospitals usually are paid far less than their urban counterparts, despite facing comparable rates of chronic illnesses such as heart disease or diabetes.
Currently, Medicare reimburses hospitals based on how their average labor costs – adjusted to account for the hospital’s geographic location – relate to the national average. This geographic location adjustment is supposed to represent an area that has relatively uniform costs.
However, if a hospital’s geographic area does not have uniform costs, hospitals can be short-changed and may end up having to pass the excess cost on to patients who carry private insurance.
The disparities are caused by Medicare’s “metropolitan/non-metropolitan” classification system. Under this system, hospitals located in metropolitan areas are paid at one rate and hospitals in non-metropolitan areas – usually the entire area of a state that is not within a particular city’s limits – are paid at a lower rate.
Rural hospitals are often placed in financial straits because costs in the non-metropolitan areas, and financial difficulty translates into shoddy care and the transfer of the lost reimbursement from the Federal government to the patient. This is a double “whammy” courtesy of the Democrats and Rhinos who eventually will pass this travesty if Americans do not wake up and stop it!!
Maggie Elehwany the VP for NRHA told CNSNews.com; “Because these are small facilities, they often operate at a very narrow margin. Many of them are the only access to care for patients within miles and miles and miles,” she said. “They generally have a low [patient] volume but they still have to have a basic level of equipment and update their HIT [Health Information Technology] and things like that.”
“Medicare’s way of saving money is sort of bit like a Costco purchase – the more you do, you’ll make out okay because you’re doing such a high volume of business – that just doesn’t work in rural areas,” she said.
These disparities mean that rural hospitals are forced to pass the costs of Medicare patients not covered by government on to patients with private insurance, a system put at risk by a government-run public option, one that could siphon off those privately insured customers.
If this does not convince you people, who like I do, live in a small city not close to a BIG crime ridden city that the politicians consider US as only “fly over” communities. This provision in the Pelosi Bill should awaken you to the fact that they do not care about us except at election time when they beg for our votes!
Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: commentary, cuts, PELOSI BILL, RURAL HOSPITALS
EM crews that respond to emergency 911 calls will only take you to he nearest hospital. Even if you travel to the city to see an internist or cardiologist who is affiliated with a major metropolitan hospital for a chronic medical condition that suddenly becomes acute. The EMT crews who man the ambulances are required to take you to the nearest hospital.
This is a good idea if you are suffering a heart attack, but if you end up in the emergency room of a rural or small city hospital, you better have them transfer you to the Big city hospital as soon as you are stabilized. If you do not the “TAB” for your treatment will cost you very much more because of provisions in the Pelosi House Health Care Bill.
A rural town’s only hospital very likely has the only outpatient surgery unit, the only radiology unit and the only clinical laboratory. Its outpatient clinic may be the only primary care practice in town, and it may have the only ambulance service and the only home health agency.
If the House health care bill becomes law, the Democrats’ plan stipulates below-market payment rates and a new government-run insurance company that would compete with cash-strapped rural hospitals.
Rural hospitals, which are normally small and operate on a tight budget, could be put in further financial jeopardy because the House-passed version of health care reform does not fix the disparity in Medicare reimbursements between rural and urban hospitals. Rural hospitals usually are paid far less than their urban counterparts, despite facing comparable rates of chronic illnesses such as heart disease or diabetes.
Currently, Medicare reimburses hospitals based on how their average labor costs – adjusted to account for the hospital’s geographic location – relate to the national average. This geographic location adjustment is supposed to represent an area that has relatively uniform costs.
However, if a hospital’s geographic area does not have uniform costs, hospitals can be short-changed and may end up having to pass the excess cost on to patients who carry private insurance.
The disparities are caused by Medicare’s “metropolitan/non-metropolitan” classification system. Under this system, hospitals located in metropolitan areas are paid at one rate and hospitals in non-metropolitan areas – usually the entire area of a state that is not within a particular city’s limits – are paid at a lower rate.
Rural hospitals are often placed in financial straits because costs in the non-metropolitan areas, and financial difficulty translates into shoddy care and the transfer of the lost reimbursement from the Federal government to the patient. This is a double “whammy” courtesy of the Democrats and Rhinos who eventually will pass this travesty if Americans do not wake up and stop it!!
Maggie Elehwany the VP for NRHA told CNSNews.com; “Because these are small facilities, they often operate at a very narrow margin. Many of them are the only access to care for patients within miles and miles and miles,” she said. “They generally have a low [patient] volume but they still have to have a basic level of equipment and update their HIT [Health Information Technology] and things like that.”
“Medicare’s way of saving money is sort of bit like a Costco purchase – the more you do, you’ll make out okay because you’re doing such a high volume of business – that just doesn’t work in rural areas,” she said.
These disparities mean that rural hospitals are forced to pass the costs of Medicare patients not covered by government on to patients with private insurance, a system put at risk by a government-run public option, one that could siphon off those privately insured customers.
If this does not convince you people, who like I do, live in a small city not close to a BIG crime ridden city that the politicians consider US as only “fly over” communities. This provision in the Pelosi Bill should awaken you to the fact that they do not care about us except at election time when they beg for our votes!
Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: commentary, cuts, PELOSI BILL, RURAL HOSPITALS
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
WILL MORAL LEGITIMACY BE QUESTIONED IN NEW YORK TRIAL?
WILL HUMAN RIGHTS FOR TERRORISTS BE THE ISSUE IN NEWYORK?
Ali Dayan Hassan, senior South Asia researcher for the US-based rights watchdog Human Rights Watch is at work in the United Kingdom. He is also the British HRW South East Asia consultant to the the Lord Chilcot inquiry that will try to decide what was the overriding factor that took Britain into the Iraq war. This is a “crucial secret” the Chilcot inquiry could unlock. Key could be what assurances Tony Blair gave George Bush in a series of bilateral meetings, notably at the president’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, in April 2002.
The five man investigation committee that is holding a hearing that the leader says will last most of a year to investigate what actually was the reason for the Iraq war, and was Britain complicit in the torture of captured terrorist suspects.
The session will be televised on the BBC so it appears London will have a “circus” to watch on the “Tellee”about the same time that we have the travesty called a trial in New York for KSM and his four co-conspirators!
It appears the British have the same Human Rights “shill” as we have here in the USA.
What troubles me is the fact he may be called as a witness for the defense of the Terrorist Five” scheduled by Obama and his Attorney General in New York.
The following is an article that Hasan wrote for Dawn, Pakistan’s only English newspaper.
“ISLAMABAD will be sealed off so that President Musharraf can welcome US President George Bush to his capital. Bush is making the journey to compliment and compensate Musharraf on services rendered in the ‘war on terror’.
Musharraf is hosting Bush to bask in the glory of a renewed alliance with the United States and to strengthen his faltering grip on power. Nowhere is human rights on the agenda.
In the run up to the trip, Bush has praised general Musharraf’s “vision for a democratic Pakistan” and his commitment to “free and open elections” Unless Bush knows something that Pakistanis do not, it appears that the continued disregard and undermining of the Pakistani Constitution, the marginalization of mainstream political parties, and the failure to hold a credible election is an odd formula for a democratic Pakistan and the Bush administration’s broader commitment to “fostering democracy in the Muslim world.”
The skewed view of President Musharraf held by Bush is certainly based on shared values. But rather than the shared value of democracy that Bush likes to speak about, what Musharraf and Bush have in common is a shared commitment to the priority, above all else, of the ‘war on terror.’ Bush has been gushing about Musharraf’s role therein, appreciating his “commitment to joining the world in dealing with Islamic radicals who will murder innocent people to achieve an objective.”
Bloggers note: this is the same Musharraf that identified the man scheduled to be tried with four other terrorists in New York as ” the man who had been recruited by the 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Shaikh Muhammad, who had trained a 12-man suicide squad intended to hit US interests around the world, and conducted reconnaissance of Heathrow airport in preparation for a possible attack” Source: BBC News.
“Given the conduct of the Bush administration in this context, the US president’s appreciation of the Musharraf government is hardly surprising. International human rights law contains no more basic prohibition than the absolute, unconditional ban on torture and “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.” To date, the Bush Administration’s understanding of the term “torture” remains uncleared. My comment is that torture and beheading by the terrorists is no problem for this Leftist humanist!
And to make your blood boil even more I offer an excerpt from an article written by Ali Dayan Hasan for the Dawn Internet. The only Pakistan Newspaper that is printed in English”.
DOES THIS SOUND LIKE IT MAY BE USED AS A DEFENSE ARGUMENT IN THE TRIAL SCHEDULED FOR NEW YORK?
”British officials knew that Pakistani intelligence agencies routinely used torture, were aware of specific cases and did not intervene,” HRW’s senior South Asia researcher, Ali Dayan Hasan, said.
Such complicity had been confirmed by unnamed UK and Pakistani officials, the report said.
bloggers note: unnamed sources is a way to say this cannot be verified!
”A key lesson from the past eight years of global efforts to combat terrorism is that the use of torture and ill-treatment is deeply counter-productive,” Mr Hasan went on.
”It undermines the moral legitimacy of governments that rely on it and serves as a recruiting tool for terrorist organisations. ”The evil of terrorism does not justify participating in or using the results of torture. Until an independent inquiry is held and those responsible held accountable, Britain’s reputation as a rights-respecting nation will stand tarnished.”
Some one ought to inform Mr Hasan that all WAR is immoral, but unfortunately there is only one option–to surrender to our attackers! Remeber 9/11/01!!
I would remind the reader that those who blow themselves up to kill innocent people, chop heads off Journalists, and plant IEDs to kill anyone who drives the road are religious zealots dedicated to kill anyone they feel is not Islamic! And need I remind you of the Zaccarias Moussaoui trial as an example of the bad result that can happen in the New York trial?.
But a better case for an accurate preview of what can go wrong is that of USA v. Karim Koubriti and his other co-defendants in the Detroit terror trial. As I’ve noted in excruciating detail, after Koubriti was found guilty by a federal jury in Detroit, his lawyers and PC prosecutors conspired to get the verdict overturned. The Justice Department (yes, it was President BUSH’s Justice Department) indicted the prosecutor (who beat the absurd charges). Terrorist Koubriti is now living in my hometown making his way to becoming a U.S. Citizen (with the DOJ’s help). And he’s suing the prosecutor, Richard Convertino. That’s what can happen here with KSM and his buddies.
Winston Churchill said something that is worth quoting at this point. He said; “A prisoner of war is a man who tries to kill you and fails, and then asks you not to kill him!
Ali Dayan Hassan, senior South Asia researcher for the US-based rights watchdog Human Rights Watch is at work in the United Kingdom. He is also the British HRW South East Asia consultant to the the Lord Chilcot inquiry that will try to decide what was the overriding factor that took Britain into the Iraq war. This is a “crucial secret” the Chilcot inquiry could unlock. Key could be what assurances Tony Blair gave George Bush in a series of bilateral meetings, notably at the president’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, in April 2002.
The five man investigation committee that is holding a hearing that the leader says will last most of a year to investigate what actually was the reason for the Iraq war, and was Britain complicit in the torture of captured terrorist suspects.
The session will be televised on the BBC so it appears London will have a “circus” to watch on the “Tellee”about the same time that we have the travesty called a trial in New York for KSM and his four co-conspirators!
It appears the British have the same Human Rights “shill” as we have here in the USA.
What troubles me is the fact he may be called as a witness for the defense of the Terrorist Five” scheduled by Obama and his Attorney General in New York.
The following is an article that Hasan wrote for Dawn, Pakistan’s only English newspaper.
“ISLAMABAD will be sealed off so that President Musharraf can welcome US President George Bush to his capital. Bush is making the journey to compliment and compensate Musharraf on services rendered in the ‘war on terror’.
Musharraf is hosting Bush to bask in the glory of a renewed alliance with the United States and to strengthen his faltering grip on power. Nowhere is human rights on the agenda.
In the run up to the trip, Bush has praised general Musharraf’s “vision for a democratic Pakistan” and his commitment to “free and open elections” Unless Bush knows something that Pakistanis do not, it appears that the continued disregard and undermining of the Pakistani Constitution, the marginalization of mainstream political parties, and the failure to hold a credible election is an odd formula for a democratic Pakistan and the Bush administration’s broader commitment to “fostering democracy in the Muslim world.”
The skewed view of President Musharraf held by Bush is certainly based on shared values. But rather than the shared value of democracy that Bush likes to speak about, what Musharraf and Bush have in common is a shared commitment to the priority, above all else, of the ‘war on terror.’ Bush has been gushing about Musharraf’s role therein, appreciating his “commitment to joining the world in dealing with Islamic radicals who will murder innocent people to achieve an objective.”
Bloggers note: this is the same Musharraf that identified the man scheduled to be tried with four other terrorists in New York as ” the man who had been recruited by the 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Shaikh Muhammad, who had trained a 12-man suicide squad intended to hit US interests around the world, and conducted reconnaissance of Heathrow airport in preparation for a possible attack” Source: BBC News.
“Given the conduct of the Bush administration in this context, the US president’s appreciation of the Musharraf government is hardly surprising. International human rights law contains no more basic prohibition than the absolute, unconditional ban on torture and “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.” To date, the Bush Administration’s understanding of the term “torture” remains uncleared. My comment is that torture and beheading by the terrorists is no problem for this Leftist humanist!
And to make your blood boil even more I offer an excerpt from an article written by Ali Dayan Hasan for the Dawn Internet. The only Pakistan Newspaper that is printed in English”.
DOES THIS SOUND LIKE IT MAY BE USED AS A DEFENSE ARGUMENT IN THE TRIAL SCHEDULED FOR NEW YORK?
”British officials knew that Pakistani intelligence agencies routinely used torture, were aware of specific cases and did not intervene,” HRW’s senior South Asia researcher, Ali Dayan Hasan, said.
Such complicity had been confirmed by unnamed UK and Pakistani officials, the report said.
bloggers note: unnamed sources is a way to say this cannot be verified!
”A key lesson from the past eight years of global efforts to combat terrorism is that the use of torture and ill-treatment is deeply counter-productive,” Mr Hasan went on.
”It undermines the moral legitimacy of governments that rely on it and serves as a recruiting tool for terrorist organisations. ”The evil of terrorism does not justify participating in or using the results of torture. Until an independent inquiry is held and those responsible held accountable, Britain’s reputation as a rights-respecting nation will stand tarnished.”
Some one ought to inform Mr Hasan that all WAR is immoral, but unfortunately there is only one option–to surrender to our attackers! Remeber 9/11/01!!
I would remind the reader that those who blow themselves up to kill innocent people, chop heads off Journalists, and plant IEDs to kill anyone who drives the road are religious zealots dedicated to kill anyone they feel is not Islamic! And need I remind you of the Zaccarias Moussaoui trial as an example of the bad result that can happen in the New York trial?.
But a better case for an accurate preview of what can go wrong is that of USA v. Karim Koubriti and his other co-defendants in the Detroit terror trial. As I’ve noted in excruciating detail, after Koubriti was found guilty by a federal jury in Detroit, his lawyers and PC prosecutors conspired to get the verdict overturned. The Justice Department (yes, it was President BUSH’s Justice Department) indicted the prosecutor (who beat the absurd charges). Terrorist Koubriti is now living in my hometown making his way to becoming a U.S. Citizen (with the DOJ’s help). And he’s suing the prosecutor, Richard Convertino. That’s what can happen here with KSM and his buddies.
Winston Churchill said something that is worth quoting at this point. He said; “A prisoner of war is a man who tries to kill you and fails, and then asks you not to kill him!
Monday, November 23, 2009
WHILE POTUS BOWS AND SCRAPES IN THE FAR EAST THE SENATE PREPARES TO RIP UP THE CONSTITUTION
While in Tokyo, Japan Obama was photographed kowtowing to Emperor Akihito of Japan last weekend, by the middle of the week he was accused of being almost supine when dealing with the new capitalist emperors of China, whom he allowed to stifle his star qualities at every turn.
From the “town hall” meeting in Shanghai stuffed with carefully schooled patsies of the Communist Youth League to the joint press conference with President Hu Jintao at which no questions were allowed, Mr Obama cut an uncharacteristically wooden, stilted figure. As one American columnist acidly observed, at times it was “hard to tell who was Hu.”
Reading from pre-prepared 1,200-word statements, the two men spoke as if from their parallel policy universes, unable even to feign agreement on most key issues. On trade, currency, Iran, climate change and human rights Mr Obama failed to win so much as an inch of ground from his hosts.
And yet two hours later the two governments released a “Joint Statement” which is now being hailed as the most significant step forward in US-China relations since Richard Nixon reopened relations 30 years ago.
The statement – mentioned by neither leader at the press conference – left even the most seasoned China watchers perplexed.
”It was paradoxical,” said Richard Baum, professor of Chinese politics at the University of California, Los Angeles. “The press conference confirmed every low expectation we had for the meeting, but when I saw the statement, I said, ‘Wait a minute, are we talking about the same event?’ It is the most extensive document in 20 years, maybe ever.”
Running to more than 4,000 words, it promised a breadth and depth of co-operation that was unthinkable even two or three years ago. On more than 40 key areas, including military and security ties, global financial governance, climate change and the economy China and America agreed to put their much publicised differences to one side and work together.
From the general (including China’s significant first ever “welcome” to the US as an Asia-Pacific nation contributing stability to the region) to the particular (a pledge to put “millions” of electric cars on the roads of both countries) the document was described as “incredible”.
The substance of the Joint Statement has already caused some to reassess the merits of Mr Obama’s strategy in Beijing. Perhaps, by giving China so much “face”, Mr Obama may in time be judged to have saved his own.
”It was surprising that the White House should roll over to Chinese demands to control the agenda as they did,” said Professor David Shambaugh, director of the China Policy Programme at George Washington University and visiting scholar at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
”He(Obama) met no Chinese people, no CEOs, not even the US Chamber of Commerce. He didn’t give a speech at a university or even visit a wind farm.
“However the Joint Statement is a most extraordinary document, a blueprint for global partnership that opens a new chapter in the China-US relationship.” It was, he said, “a major accomplishment”.
On this view, Mr Obama’s softly softly approach paid a significant dividend, as he traded media opprobrium at home for the chance to take what a White House official called “an important first step” in a new relationship with China. It is a step that the White House hopes will be viewed positively in “the scope of history”, if not in the New York Times – which memorably said Mr Obama had been “squelched” by his Chinese hosts.
Doubters of Mr Obama’s low-key strategy point to China’s failure to give ground on a single major issue this week – not even faintly tougher language on Iran, for example – and wonder if China will ever make the compromises required to turn the grand aspirations of the Joint Statement into reality. Where Mr Obama sees statesmanship, his opponents see weakness which the Chinese are ready and waiting to exploit.
But both governments have asked for patience, saying they are determined to focus on positives not negatives.
“I did not expect, and I can speak authoritatively for the President on this, that we thought the waters would part and everything would change over the course of our almost two and a half day trip to China,” said Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary.
In essence, said veteran Chinese commentator, Shi Yinhong, professor of International Relations at Renmin University in Beijing, both sides have “agreed to disagree” over their core positions, which is itself an important step forward in the context of US-China relations.
“The joint statement clearly places co-operation as the primary aspect of the US-China relationship, relegating their rivalry and competition to a secondary position. This is a position that would have been impossible perhaps even two years ago,” he said. Source: London Telegraph
I say the co-operation will be done by the Obama administration and his MINIONS in Congress, and the ChiCOMS will do the dictating to the USA because they hold all the T-bonds!
While this charade was occurring in China the Senate was violating the Bill of Rights once again, by passing the vote to consider and debate their Health Care travesty called reform 60-39!
The Constitution that was ratified on 12/15.1791 contains section nine(9) that defines the LIMITS of Congress.
This section contains the language that I believe makes the so-called fines on individuals and families that choose not to buy health insurance subject to a fine and possible Jail term.
I am no Constitutional lawyer, but I think the word fine could easily be interpreted as a tax as it applies to the proposed bill.
The language in the Constitution in Section nine (9) is this: No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Attainder: The loss of all civil rights by a person sentenced for a serious crime. [< OFr. attaindre, to convict] Source: AHD
In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has a negative effect on a single person or group (for example, a fine or term of imprisonment). Originally, a Bill of Attainder sentenced an individual to death, though this detail is no longer required to have an enactment be ruled a Bill of Attainder!
I also believe the Senate Bill violates the 5th amendment of the Bill of Rights that says:
Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
If your hard-earned money is not your property,what is?
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Today the Senate of the United States will have less than eight hours to debate a proposed Bill that will effectively turn over one-sixth of our economy to the Federal Government from the Free enterprise system.
Tonight the Democrats who have a majority of 60 senators will start the process of steam rolling this Socialist tax filled Bill over the objections of a majority of the American public who have expressed their disdain for the so-called “Government Option”.
Some of the Senators actually believe that they are doing something good, but unfortunately the majority of the “princely” elected representatives are doing the will of the “messiah” Obama!
And any thinking person who has read either of the books written by Obama and studied his legislative record and history in Illinois before he clawed his way into the U.S. Senate, will realize that we have as president a man who believes the Constitution is flawed because it limits what the Federal Government can do “and does not address the re-distribution of wealth”!
Where has this philosophy of government come from? I and many scholars who have studied the progress of the Leftists in the USA note that many of the ideas that Obama
has employed since he took over the Oval Office came from the same place where Obama took his pre-law education, Columbia University.
The following is an article about the two Phd.’s from Columbia who developed the “scheme” that I believe is the road map for Obama and his sycophants.
Social theorist, welfare rights activist, and political science professor Frances Fox Piven was born in 1932 in Calgary, Alberta. Raised in New York, she was naturalized in 1953, the same year she received a BA in city planning from the University of Chicago. After receiving an MA (1956) and a Ph.D. (1962) from that institution, she moved to New York where she worked as a city planner and then as a research associate for one of the country’s first antipoverty agencies, Mobilization for Youth (MFY) on New York’s Lower East Side.
In 1965 Piven and her MFY colleague Richard Cloward began a career of formulating the theoretical underpinnings of anti-poverty and welfare rights movements with the publication of a paper entitled “Mobilizing the Poor: How It Can Be Done”.
Cloward and Piven ”apply social analysis to organizing strategy” to find ways to take advantage of changing social, economic, and political conditions to benefit the poor. Their work was instrumental in the founding of such organizations as the National Welfare Rights Organization and HumanSERVE, a voter-registration project that culminated in the “Motor-Voter” Act of 1994. Piven has taught at Columbia University (1966-72), Boston University (1972-82), and the City University of New York (1982-). With Cloward, she has co-authored numerous articles and nine books including Regulating the Poor: The Functions of Public Welfare (1971), Poor People’s Movements (1977), and Why Americans Don’t Vote (1988).
There is a liberal record of unmitigated legislative disasters, the latest of which is now being played out in the financial markets before our eyes. Before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress – with substantial majorities most of the time. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?
Why? One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.Just a few examples are the Social Security , Medicaid and Medicare plans that are either bankrupt or on the verge of bankruptcy!
Then there is the Post Office, Amtrak and the failure of the Stimulus Bill to stem unemployment that is now at 10.2%!
I submit to you they understand the consequences. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent – the failure is deliberate. Don’t laugh. This method not only has its proponents, it has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.
The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:
The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.
Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer Saul Alinsky:
“Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)
Their strategy( and apparently Obama and the Congressional Democrats)is to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation’s wealth.
In their Nation article, Cloward and Piven were specific about the kind of “crisis” they were trying to create:
By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.
No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:
1. The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
2. The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.
Capitalizing on the racial unrest of the 1960s, Cloward and Piven saw the welfare system as their first target. They enlisted radical black activist George Wiley, who created the National Welfare Reform Organization (NWRO) to implement the strategy. Wiley hired militant foot soldiers to storm welfare offices around the country, violently demanding their “rights.” According to a City Journal article by Sol Stern, welfare rolls increased from 4.3 million to 10.8 million by the mid-1970s as a result, and in New York City, where the strategy had been particularly successful, “one person was on the welfare rolls… for every two working in the city’s private economy.”
Transferring the Health Care industry from the Free Enterprise system will create thousands if not millions of Federal and State administrators,aka beauracrats, replacing decision makers in the Insurance Industry and the Medical system that are now working in the private fee for service sector!
Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: CLOWARD-PIVENS, CONGRESS, health care bill, obama, socialism
Tonight the Democrats who have a majority of 60 senators will start the process of steam rolling this Socialist tax filled Bill over the objections of a majority of the American public who have expressed their disdain for the so-called “Government Option”.
Some of the Senators actually believe that they are doing something good, but unfortunately the majority of the “princely” elected representatives are doing the will of the “messiah” Obama!
And any thinking person who has read either of the books written by Obama and studied his legislative record and history in Illinois before he clawed his way into the U.S. Senate, will realize that we have as president a man who believes the Constitution is flawed because it limits what the Federal Government can do “and does not address the re-distribution of wealth”!
Where has this philosophy of government come from? I and many scholars who have studied the progress of the Leftists in the USA note that many of the ideas that Obama
has employed since he took over the Oval Office came from the same place where Obama took his pre-law education, Columbia University.
The following is an article about the two Phd.’s from Columbia who developed the “scheme” that I believe is the road map for Obama and his sycophants.
Social theorist, welfare rights activist, and political science professor Frances Fox Piven was born in 1932 in Calgary, Alberta. Raised in New York, she was naturalized in 1953, the same year she received a BA in city planning from the University of Chicago. After receiving an MA (1956) and a Ph.D. (1962) from that institution, she moved to New York where she worked as a city planner and then as a research associate for one of the country’s first antipoverty agencies, Mobilization for Youth (MFY) on New York’s Lower East Side.
In 1965 Piven and her MFY colleague Richard Cloward began a career of formulating the theoretical underpinnings of anti-poverty and welfare rights movements with the publication of a paper entitled “Mobilizing the Poor: How It Can Be Done”.
Cloward and Piven ”apply social analysis to organizing strategy” to find ways to take advantage of changing social, economic, and political conditions to benefit the poor. Their work was instrumental in the founding of such organizations as the National Welfare Rights Organization and HumanSERVE, a voter-registration project that culminated in the “Motor-Voter” Act of 1994. Piven has taught at Columbia University (1966-72), Boston University (1972-82), and the City University of New York (1982-). With Cloward, she has co-authored numerous articles and nine books including Regulating the Poor: The Functions of Public Welfare (1971), Poor People’s Movements (1977), and Why Americans Don’t Vote (1988).
There is a liberal record of unmitigated legislative disasters, the latest of which is now being played out in the financial markets before our eyes. Before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress – with substantial majorities most of the time. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?
Why? One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.Just a few examples are the Social Security , Medicaid and Medicare plans that are either bankrupt or on the verge of bankruptcy!
Then there is the Post Office, Amtrak and the failure of the Stimulus Bill to stem unemployment that is now at 10.2%!
I submit to you they understand the consequences. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent – the failure is deliberate. Don’t laugh. This method not only has its proponents, it has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.
The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:
The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.
Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer Saul Alinsky:
“Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)
Their strategy( and apparently Obama and the Congressional Democrats)is to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation’s wealth.
In their Nation article, Cloward and Piven were specific about the kind of “crisis” they were trying to create:
By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.
No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:
1. The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
2. The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.
Capitalizing on the racial unrest of the 1960s, Cloward and Piven saw the welfare system as their first target. They enlisted radical black activist George Wiley, who created the National Welfare Reform Organization (NWRO) to implement the strategy. Wiley hired militant foot soldiers to storm welfare offices around the country, violently demanding their “rights.” According to a City Journal article by Sol Stern, welfare rolls increased from 4.3 million to 10.8 million by the mid-1970s as a result, and in New York City, where the strategy had been particularly successful, “one person was on the welfare rolls… for every two working in the city’s private economy.”
Transferring the Health Care industry from the Free Enterprise system will create thousands if not millions of Federal and State administrators,aka beauracrats, replacing decision makers in the Insurance Industry and the Medical system that are now working in the private fee for service sector!
Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: CLOWARD-PIVENS, CONGRESS, health care bill, obama, socialism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)










































