PrairiePundit

Washington Times Editorial:

There were emotional scenes outside the high court today after computer hacker Gary McKinnon lost a further attempt to avoid his extradition to America on charges of breaching US military and Nasa computers.
McKinnon, who has been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, would suffer from a "severe mental breakdown" if forced to serve up to 60 years in an American jail, his mother, Janis Sharp, said, pleading with politicians to intervene.
"Why aren't they stopping the extradition of a man who is clearly vulnerable and who on the accepted evidence suffers from Asperger's?" Sharp said. "Gary is clearly someone who is not equipped to deal with the American penal system and there is clear evidence that he will suffer a severe mental breakdown if extradited."
In a judgment Sharp described as "heartbreaking", the court refused McKinnon's request that the home secretary, Alan Johnson, should be forced to reconsider the case, describing the extradition as "a lawful and proportionate response".
Lawyers for the 43-year-old, who have already announced they will appeal against the decision, said they were encouraged by a display of sympathy for McKinnon in the judgment, which acknowledged expert evidence of a "high risk of serious deterioration in his mental health and a risk of suicide".
"I have no doubt that he will find extradition to, and trial and sentence and detention in, the US very difficult indeed," said Lord Justice Stanley Burnton. "His mental health will suffer. There are risks of worse, including suicide."
...

Well, he does have to be tried in the US before he can be sentenced and detained even if he is clearly guilty which has apparently been established during the course of years of extradition hearings. I guess I can understand his mom being emotional about the order, but many in the UK including the media seem to think he is being sentenced to a Russian gulag. It is time for these people to get a grip.

Democrats lost the seniors on health care

Gallup:

Seniors are the least likely of all age groups in the U.S. to say that healthcare reform will benefit their personal healthcare situation. By a margin of three to one, 36% to 12%, adults 65 and older are more likely to believe healthcare reform will reduce rather than expand their access to healthcare. And by 39% to 20%, they are more likely to say their own medical care will worsen rather than improve.

...

I think this is a result of Obama's obsession with cost containment and the seniors see their current care as the target. I think the have reason for concern as do veterans.

Investor's Business Daily discusses some of the concerns.

Veterans object to health care bill

The Hill:

...

In a letter to Pelosi that was obtained by The Hill, the groups state “the legislation could limit the health care choices for veterans, increase the cost of health care for veterans, deny coverage to dependent family members of veterans, and threaten the quality of health care offered to veterans through the VA health care system.”

...

The groups also want the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to continue running the healthcare system offered through the Department of Veterans Affairs and not be “infringed” upon by any other healthcare organizations or administration departments.

“By virtue of their service and sacrifices, veterans have earned special benefits that are separate and in addition to benefits the government provides to other citizens,” the six groups wrote to Pelosi.

...

There will be a political price to pay if this situation is not corrected and it will extend far beyond veterans. It is certainly something elese to remind members of Congress of in their Town Hall meetings.

Democrats new health care message

If you are happy with your current coverage by "villains" you are in trouble.

...

“Our message is simple. It is now being echoed by the White House,” said the memo sent to all Democratic members. “And it counters the Republican ‘government takeover’ message.”

The message in the memo, though, won't fit on a bumper sticker:

“Remove the insurance companies from between you and your doctor— capping what they can force you to pay in out of pocket expenses, co-pays and deductibles, and giving you the peace of mind you will be covered for the care you need, if get sick, or if you change or lose your job.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) brought out the new message in an exchange with reporters in the Capitol, when she said, “They are the villains in this.”

...

This is what the health insurance industry gets for not attacking the Democrats plan. Imagine how ugly the Democrats would be if these guys were actually fighting back.

Missile defense proves successful again

CNN:

The United States successfully tested a sea-based component of its missile defense shield Thursday evening, intercepting a ballistic missile with a dummy warhead over the Pacific Ocean, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said.

The exercise was the 19th successful test in 23 attempts of the system -- known as the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Program -- since 2002.
A target missile was fired from Hawaii about 5:40 p.m. (11:40 p.m. ET) and was tracked by Navy ships hundreds of miles away.
The USS Hopper, one of three Navy ships tracking the launch, fired an interceptor missile, which struck the target about 100 miles above the Earth. The process -- from launch to shoot-down -- took less than five minutes, according to the U.S. military.
The United States plans to use the sea-based system on Navy Aegis-class ships to protect against incoming short- to medium-range missiles fired from hostile countries. Eighty-six of the ships eventually will have the capability.
...

Danger Room reports:

...

In a statement, Riki Ellison, the plugged-in chief of the Missile Defense Advocacy Association, said the ARAV “represented a ballistic missile similar in speed, acceleration and burn of the same short range missiles fired by North Korea on July 2nd and 4th of this year.”

Equally important, this was an “ascent phase” shoot-down: According to a Missile Defense Agency news release, the interceptor struck the target 1oo miles above the Pacific Ocean. By Ellison’s count, this is only the second ascent-phase intercept in 23 at-sea firings by the Aegis missile defense system.
...

What the "ascent phase" means means is that it is prior to apogee, (See this graphic.) which assumes the boost phase systems did not work. Other systems target the missile if it makes it though these first two phases. There is more on the system here. Hat tip to Graham for this information and clarification.

Enemy recruits traitors with victim strategy

CNN:

An American who says he went to fight U.S. forces in Afghanistan told interrogators that about the time he became an al Qaeda member he came across several Belgian and French militants.

Belgian counter-terrorism sources said the group traveled to Pakistan's tribal areas at the beginning of 2008, also intent on fighting in Afghanistan.
The Europeans -- four Belgians and two French citizens, all of North African descent -- were recruited, Belgian police say, by Malika el Aroud and Moez Garsallaoui, a married couple who had long enjoyed a notorious reputation among European counter-terrorism services.
El Aroud's previous husband, Abdessattar Dahmane, had assassinated Ahmed Shah Massoud, the head of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, in a suicide bombing attack ordered by Osama bin Laden two days before 9/11.
When CNN interviewed the couple in 2006, El Aroud showed how she administered a pro-al Qaeda Web forum called Minbar SOS, which included pro-al Qaeda postings and propaganda videos. Read how al Qaeda is now operating
Belgian investigators say the Web site played an important role in the radicalization of members of the French-Belgian group.
One of them was a 25-year-old Frenchman, Walid Othmani. He was arrested on his return to Europe from Pakistan and is now in French custody. Belgian prosecutors told CNN Othmani has been charged in France with participation in a criminal conspiracy with the aim of preparing a terrorist act.
"I don't think I would have left to fight jihad without viewing these videos [on Minbar] ... it made me aware that the European media were hiding things about the situation in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan," Othmani told French interrogators, according to Belgian legal documents obtained by CNN.
According to Belgian counter-terrorism officials, Garsallaoui, a Tunisian citizen, recruited some of those who traveled to Pakistan in person in Brussels, but relied on the Internet to recruit others.
...

One of the elements of the enemy recruiting has always been to portray themselves and Muslims as victims. You could see the same portrayals in early bin Laden al Qaeda videos. They are not above using faked atrocities and they make no attempt to put facts in context.

They certainly don't show the mass murder of fellow Muslims in their "involuntary" martyrdom operations. Those who are sucked in by the deceit and become traitors to their own countries deserve little sympathy. They must have been looking for such an excuse to begin with.

Congress not so hot at Town Hall meetings

Politico:

Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.

On the eve of the August recess, members are reporting meetings that have gone terribly awry, marked by angry, sign-carrying mobs and disruptive behavior. In at least one case, a congressman has stopped holding town hall events because the situation has spiraled so far out of control.

“I had felt they would be pointless,” Rep. Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.) told POLITICO, referring to his recent decision to temporarily suspend the events in his Long Island district. “There is no point in meeting with my constituents and [to] listen to them and have them listen to you if what is basically an unruly mob prevents you from having an intelligent conversation.”

In Bishop’s case, his decision came on the heels of a June 22 event he held in Setauket, N.Y., in which protesters dominated the meeting by shouting criticisms at the congressman for his positions on energy policy, health care and the bailout of the auto industry.

Within an hour of the disruption, police were called in to escort the 59-year-old Democrat — who has held more than 100 town hall meetings since he was elected in 2002 — to his car safely.
...
Bishop isn’t the only one confronted by boiling anger and rising incivility. At a health care town hall event in Syracuse, N.Y., earlier this month, police were called in to restore order, and at least one heckler was taken away by local police. Close to 100 sign-carrying protesters greeted Rep. Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) at a late June community college small-business development forum in Panama City, Fla. Last week, Danville, Va., anti-tax tea party activists claimed they were “refused an opportunity” to ask Rep. Thomas Perriello (D-Va.) a question at a town hall event and instructed by a plainclothes police officer to leave the property after they attempted to hold up protest signs.

The targets in most cases are House Democrats, who over the past few months have tackled controversial legislation including a $787 billion economic stimulus package, a landmark energy proposal and an overhaul of the nation’s health care system.

Democrats, acknowledging the increasing unruliness of the town-hall-style events, say the hot-button issues they are taking on have a lot to do with it.
...
On Tuesday, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who handles incumbent retention duties for House Democrats in addition to chairing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, met with freshman members to discuss their plans for the monthlong August recess. While the specific issue of town hall protesters never came up, according to sources familiar with the meeting, he urged them not to back away from opponents.

“He said, ‘Go on offense. Stay on the offense. It’s really important that your constituents hear directly from you. You shouldn’t let a day go by [that] your constituents don’t hear from you,’” said one House Democratic leadership aide familiar with the meeting.
...

Some time Democrats can be pretty dense and this appears to be one of those times. The passionate voters they are seeing are that way because they do not like the policies that Democrats are trying to push on us. If they think these people are passionate now, they should see them coming out of the voting booths in 2010. If Democrats go on offense against these people they will find their constituents getting even more motivated to get them out of office.

If Democrats can't read the polls and the passions of the crowd they will deserve to get the defeat they have coming.

Government health care clunkers

Maichael Ramirez looks at another program running on empty.

The human rights wackos double standard

Noah Pollak:

Over the past two weeks, Human Rights Watch has been embroiled in a controversy over a fund raiser it held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. At that gathering, Middle East director Sarah Leah Whitson pledged the group would use donations to “battle . . . pro-Israel pressure groups.”

As criticism of her remark poured in, Ms. Whitson responded by saying that the complaint against her was “fundamentally a racist one.” And Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, declared that “We report on Israel. Its supporters fight back with lies and deception.”

The facts tell a different story. From 2006 to the present, Human Rights Watch’s reports on the Israeli-Arab conflict have been almost entirely devoted to condemning Israel, accusing it of human rights and international law violations, and demanding international investigations into its conduct. It has published some 87 criticisms of Israeli conduct against the Palestinians and Hezbollah, versus eight criticisms of Palestinian groups and four of Hezbollah for attacks on Israel. (It also published a small number of critiques of both Israel and Arab groups, and of intra-Palestinian fighting.)

It was during this period that more than 8,000 rockets and mortars were fired at Israeli civilians by Palestinian terrorist groups in Gaza. Human Rights Watch’s response? In November 2006 it said that the Palestinian Authority “should stop giving a wink and a nod to rocket attacks.” Two years later it urged the Hamas leadership “to speak out forcefully against such [rocket] attacks . . . and bring to justice those who are found to have participated in them.”

In response to the rocket war and Hamas’s violent takeover of Gaza in June 2007, Israel imposed a partial blockade of Gaza. Human Rights Watch then published some 28 statements and reports on the blockade, accusing Israel in highly charged language of an array of war crimes and human rights violations. One report headline declared that Israel was “choking Gaza.” Human Rights Watch has never recognized the difference between Hamas’s campaign of murder against Israeli civilians and Israel’s attempt to defend those civilians. The unwillingness to distinguish between aggression and self-defense blots out a fundamental moral fact—that Hamas’s refusal to stop its attacks makes it culpable for both Israeli and Palestinian casualties.

Meanwhile, Egypt has also maintained a blockade on Gaza, although it is not even under attack from Hamas. Human Rights Watch has never singled out Egypt for criticism over its participation in the blockade.
...
In the Middle East, Human Rights Watch does not actually function as a human-rights organization. If it did, it would draw attention to the plight of Palestinians in Arab countries. In Lebanon, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are warehoused in impoverished refugee camps and denied citizenship, civil rights, and even the right to work. This has received zero coverage from the organization.
...

Human Rights Watch is really a terrorist rights organization that seeks to condemn resistance to the terrorist. They take the same approach to the US and others in the west who resist the Islamic terrorist organizations. They have lost what ever moral authority they claim in the process.

The coming Democrat retreat on health care

Charles Krauthammer:

...

Conventional wisdom always makes straight-line projections. They are always wrong. Yes, Obama's aura has diminished, in part because of overweening overexposure. But by year's end he will emerge with something he can call health care reform. The Democrats in Congress will pass it because they must. Otherwise, they'll have slain their own savior in his first year in office.

But that bill will look nothing like the massive reform Obama originally intended. The beginning of the retreat was signaled by Obama's curious reference -- made five times -- to "health-insurance reform" in his July 22 news conference.

Reforming the health care system is dead. Cause of death? Blunt trauma administered not by Republicans, not even by Blue Dog Democrats, but by the green eyeshades at the Congressional Budget Office.

Three blows:

(1) On June 16, the CBO determined that the Senate Finance Committee bill would cost $1.6 trillion over 10 years, delivering a sticker shock that was near fatal.

(2) Five weeks later, the CBO gave its verdict on the Independent Medicare Advisory Council, Dr. Obama's latest miracle cure, conjured up at the last minute to save Obamacare from fiscal ruin, and consisting of a committee of medical experts highly empowered to make Medicare cuts.

The CBO said that IMAC would do nothing, trimming costs by perhaps 0.2 percent. A 0.2 percent cut is not a solution; it's a punch line.

(3) The final blow came last Sunday when the CBO euthanized the Obama "out years" myth. The administration's argument had been: Sure, Obamacare will initially increase costs and deficits. But it pays for itself in the long run because it bends the curve downward in coming decades.

The CBO put in writing the obvious: In its second decade, Obamacare significantly bends the curve upward -- increasing deficits even more than in the first decade.

This is obvious because Obama's own first-decade numbers were built on arithmetic trickery. New taxes to support the health care plan begin in 2011, but the benefits part of the program doesn't fully kick in until 2015. That excess revenue is, of course, one time only. It makes the first decade numbers look artificially low, but once you pass 2015, the yearly deficits become larger and eternal.
... In the end, Obama will have to settle for something very modest. And indeed it will be health-insurance reform.
To win back the vast constituency that has insurance, is happy with it, and is mightily resisting the fatal lures of Obamacare, the president will in the end simply impose heavy regulations on the insurance companies that will make what you already have secure, portable and imperishable: no policy cancellations, no pre-existing condition requirements, perhaps even a cap on out-of-pocket expenses.
...

They will pay for this by requiring young people who are not buying insurance to do so. It is easy to make car insurance mandatory, because you can deny licenses for the car and the driver. It will be much harder to effect that kind of control on health care.

Black Panther Justice--Empathy for thugs

The Justice Department's decision to drop an already-won voter-intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party merits multiple, independent investigations.
On Tuesday, Rep. Frank R. Wolf, Virginia Republican, officially asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to refile the case. Mr. Holder should comply.
So far, the Justice Department has stonewalled legitimate inquiry. It has yet to provide records sought by this newspaper back in May. It has yet to answer a July 22 letter from Mr. Wolf that asks 35 questions on 17 different subjects relating to the Black Panther case. Justice has claimed, falsely, that the decision to drop the case was made by career attorneys only, not by political appointees. And it has declined to let congressmen interview the career attorneys who originally filed, and won, the case against the Black Panthers.
As first reported by The Washington Times, career attorneys at Justice already had won a default judgment against three Black Panthers and the party as a whole for intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place while wearing paramilitary-style garb, as one of them brandished a nightstick and made racial threats.
One of the Black Panthers, Jerry Jackson, was an official poll watcher for the Democratic Party and the Obama campaign. Justice Department spokesman Tracy Schmaler refused several times to say whether department lawyers consulted with any outsiders. Yet Kristen Clarke of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund confirmed that she talked about the case with Justice Department lawyers.
Ms. Schmaler said she would not talk about "internal deliberations." But if they consulted with outside groups, those deliberations by definition are not just internal.
Robert N. Driscoll, former chief of staff of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, told us it would be ethically dubious if political appointees consulted with outside interest groups without telling the career attorneys who filed the case. "I would be hammered if I were to have had such a meeting," he said.
Mr. Wolf's July 22 letter raised numerous discrepancies between Justice Department explanations and readily available facts. In a July 13 letter to the congressman, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Welch wrote that the department dropped the cases against the New Black Panther Party as a whole and its leader, Malik Zulu Shabazz, because "the factual contentions in the complaint did not have sufficient evidentiary support" to prove that they "managed" and "directed" the intimidating behavior of the two Panthers deployed at that polling place.
Mr. Wolf responded that, "the confession on national television by Malik Zulu Shabazz on Nov. 7, 2008, flatly contradicts your assertion. Mr. Shabazz unequivocally claims that his activities in Philadelphia were part of a nationwide effort involving hundreds of party members, and that the use of weapons was a necessary part of the Black Panther deployment."
...

This is a scandal that should not be ignored. A political decision to drop the case against people who were obviously guilty is no way to prevent this type of voter intimidation in the future. It also suggest that Democrats are willing to let their sympathizers do anything to assure their victory.

What would Israel get for halting settlements?

NY Times Editorial:

...

Under pressure from Washington, Mr. Netanyahu’s government has dangled a possible compromise: a temporary freeze in new construction, as long as 2,500 units now in process can be completed and Arab East Jerusalem is exempt. It is a weak offer.
While they press the Israelis, Mr. Obama and Mr. Mitchell are also asking the Palestinians and Arab states to do more. They are insisting that the Palestinians work harder to prevent incitement against Israel in schools and the media. They have asked Arab states — notably Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Syria — to signal the beginning of an acceptance by allowing Israel to fly commercial planes through Arab airspace or open government commercial offices in their capitals. They are also pressing Arab states to provide more aid for the fragile government of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas.
President Obama and Mr. Mitchell claim they are making progress, but so far there is little sign of it. Saudi Arabia, which has pushed Washington hard to revive negotiations, has been especially resistant. Mr. Mitchell would do well to remind them that a prolonged stalemate will only feed extremism across the region.
Israeli leaders do not often risk being at odds with an American president, but polls show broad support for Mr. Netanyahu’s resistance. President Obama, a skilled communicator, has started a constructive dialogue with the Islamic world. Now he needs to explain to Israelis why freezing settlements and reviving peace talks is clearly in their interest.

What the administration is demanding of the Arabs still seems of little value to Israel and the resistance of the Saudis suggest they are not even willing to give that little. But ultimately the real problem in a peace agreement is the Palestinians unwillingness to restrain the terrorist among them.

It is possible they do not have the capacity to restrain them, but whatever the reason without that restraint they have nothing of value to offer Israel. That has been the reason for the failure of these efforts in the past and will be the reason for their failure in the future.

What the administration has done with its emphasis on the settlements is allowed them to become an excuse forthe failure of the Arabs to do nothing. That is not helping the cause of peace they claim to pursue. It allows the Arabs to insist on going back to the 1967 borders which never never recognized before 1967 as if they have some relevance to the current negotiations.

I still do not see much evidence that the Arabs are serious about wanting a peace agreement with Israel. Maybe if they helped rebuild the 2nd Temple that would be a start.

A new strategy in Afghanistan?

The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan is preparing a new strategy that calls for major changes in the way U.S. and other NATO troops there operate, a vast increase in the size of Afghan security forces and an intensified military effort to root out corruption among local government officials, according to several people familiar with the contents of an assessment report that outlines his approach to the war.

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who took charge of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan last month, appears inclined to request an increase in American troops to implement the new strategy, which aims to use more unconventional methods to combat the growing Taliban insurgency, according to members of an advisory group he convened to work on the assessment. Such a request could receive a chilly reception at the White House, where some members of President Obama's national security team have expressed reluctance about authorizing any more deployments.

Senior military officials said McChrystal is waiting for a recommendation from a team of military planners in Kabul before reaching a final decision on a troop request. Several members of the advisory group, who spoke about the issue of force levels on the condition of anonymity, said that they think more U.S. troops are needed but that it was not clear how large an increase McChrystal would seek.

"There was a very broad consensus on the part of the assessment team that the effort is under-resourced and will require additional resources to get the job done," a senior military official in Kabul said.

A request for more U.S. troops in Afghanistan could pose a political challenge for Obama. Some leading congressional Democrats have voiced skepticism about sustaining current force levels, set to reach 68,000 by the fall. After approving an extra 21,000 troops in the spring, Obama himself questioned whether "piling on more and more troops" would lead to success, and his national security adviser, James L. Jones, told U.S. military commanders in Afghanistan last month that the administration wants to hold troop levels flat for now.

One senior administration official said some members of Obama's national security team want to see how McChrystal uses the 21,000 additional troops before any more deployments are authorized. "It'll be a tough sell," the official said.
...
One of the key changes outlined in the latest drafts of the assessment report, which will be provided to Gates by mid-August, is a shift in the "operational culture" of U.S. and NATO forces. Commanders will be encouraged to increase contact with Afghans, even if it means living in less-secure outposts inside towns and spending more time on foot patrols instead of in vehicles.
...
The report calls for intelligence resources to be realigned to focus more on tribal and social dynamics so commanders can identify local power brokers and work with them. Until recently, the vast majority of U.S. and NATO intelligence assets had been oriented toward tracking insurgents.

The changes are aimed at fulfilling McChrystal's view that the primary mission of the international forces is not to conduct raids against Taliban strongholds but to protect civilians and help the Afghan government assume responsibility for maintaining security. "The focus has to be on the people," he said in a recent interview.

To accomplish that, McChrystal has indicated that he is considering moving troops out of remote mountain valleys where Taliban fighters have traditionally sought sanctuary and concentrating more forces around key population centers.

The assessment report also urges the United States and NATO to almost double the size of the Afghan security forces. It calls for expanding the Afghan army from 134,000 soldiers to about 240,000, and the police force from 92,000 personnel to about 160,000. Such an increase would require additional U.S. forces to conduct training and mentoring.
...

There is more.

If getting more troops is a tough sell, it is because Democrats seem to have a profound ignorance of counterinsurgency warfare. By this point it has to be a willful ignorance. It has been obvious for some time that more troops are needed to get the kind of force to space ratio needed to cut off the movement of the Taliban and protect the civilians. We have already seen how effective this kind of strategy can be in Iraq, yet it si still a tough sell?

It is also pretty obvious that we need to add more Afghan forces to the fight. They can help in gathering intelligence and spotting the enemy. They are an important aspect of the force to space ratio and protecting the locals.

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Roman city captured by Attila the Hun found

Times:

The bustling harbour of Altinum near Venice was one of the richest cities of the Roman empire. But terrified by the impending invasion of the fearsome Germanic Emperor Attila the Hun, its inhabitants cut their losses and fled in AD452, leaving behind a ghost town of theatres, temples and basilicas.

Altinum was never reoccupied and gradually sunk into the ground. The city lived on in Venetian folk tales and historical artefacts but its exact position, size and wealth gradually faded into obscurity.

Now, using aerial photography of the region, Italian archaeologists have not only located the city, but have produced a detailed map revealing its remarkably intact infrastructure and showing it to be slightly larger than Pompeii.

The abandonment of the city and its subsequent preservation makes it an archaeological time capsule, a unique find in Roman heritage. “It’s extremely unusual for a town to go out of use like this and that is what makes it absolutely invaluable for achaeologists. It gives a full profile of what the town looked like without the imposition of modern infrastructure,” said Dr Neil Christie, a specialist in the Roman empire at the University of Leicester.
...

The Hun were not Germanic although they occupied parts of Germany. According to Wikipedia:

...

The Huns were a group of nomadic pastoral people who, appearing from beyond the Volga, migrated into Europe c.AD 370 and built up an enormous empire in Europe. Their main military technique was mounted archery. They were possibly the descendants of the Xiongnu who had been northern neighbours of China three hundred years before^[1] and may be the first expansion of Turkic people across Eurasia^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6]. The origin and language of the Huns has been the subject of debate for centuries. The leading current theory is that their leaders at least may have spoken a Turkic language.

...

This comports with my recollection of their origin. It is not clear to me why people continue to call them German other than the fact that they used it as a base of operations when they were messing with the rest of Europe.

What is the rich's fair share of taxes?

Tax Policy Blog:

Newly released data from the IRS clearly debunks the conventional Beltway rhetoric that the "rich" are not paying their fair share of taxes.

Indeed, the IRS data shows that in 2007—the most recent data available—the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.4 percent of the total income taxes collected by the federal government. This is the highest percentage in modern history. By contrast, the top 1 percent paid 24.8 percent of the income tax burden in 1987, the year following the 1986 tax reform act.

Remarkably, the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent now exceeds the share paid by the bottom 95 percent of taxpayers combined. In 2007, the bottom 95 percent paid 39.4 percent of the income tax burden. This is down from the 58 percent of the total income tax burden they paid twenty years ago.
...

This is just more evidence of the Democrats' politics of fraud on taxes. The question they should be asked when they talk about the rich being under taxed is what percentage of taxes should the rich pay. I think most people would think they are paying more than their fair share.

But he does a pretty good imitation of one

From WCVB-TV:

‘I Am Not A Racist,’ Says Cop Who Wrote Gates Slur

This is not about Sgt. Crowley.

Not that there is anything wrong with that

From the Austin American-Statesman:

UPDATED: Hutchison site is loaded with hidden phrases—including two “Perry gay” references, which the campaign says it’s removing

Apparently it was a glitch in some software and has been taken down.

Israelis support rebuilding 2nd Temple

Arab News:

A news survey conducted by the Israeli Ynet news service and the Gesher organization found that about two thirds of the Israeli public want the Second Temple rebuilt. Gesher claims a 4.6 margin of error on a survey of 516 Israelis.
The Temple Mount, which is the foundation of the First and Second temples is today home to Islam’s third-holiest mosque, Al-Aqsa. The Second Temple, built by Herod the Great, was destroyed in 70 A.D. when the Romans sacked Jerusalem.
Sixty-four percent responded favorably to the question of rebuilding the temple commissioned by Herod the Great, while 36 percent responded negatively.
Among the practicing and orthodox Jewish Israelis, virtually all respondents wanted to see the Second Temple rebuilt.
Just under half of secular Israelis — 47 percent — also said they would like to see Herod’s Temple rebuilt.
Eighty percent of respondents said it was “justified” to mark what many Jews consider the saddest day of their history (the destruction of the temple) by rebuilding the temple.
The deputy chief of the Islamic Movement inside Israel Sheikh Kamal Al-Khatib asserted that the temple would never be rebuilt.
“If the Jews think that their mourning will end and they will rejoice by destroying Al-Aqsa Mosque and building their temple, we say to them that their dream will not be fulfilled and they will continue to mourn,” he told Arab News yesterday. “Al-Aqsa is for Muslims only.”
Control over Jerusalem, which Israel captured during the June 1967 War, has been seen as the most sensitive and thorniest issue of Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
...

This seems to be a pretty fair presentation of the facts from what is usually a pretty hostile source for news about Israel. I have felt that the construction of the mosque in that location was an attempt to destroy Jewish claims to what was a holy site. The Muslims did similar construction on Hindu sites in India.

Since the location has come under Jewish control, people of all faiths have had access to it. That would be unlikely if the Palestinians took control.

Illegal population declines

The Hill:

A new report estimates that the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. has dropped nearly 14 percent in two years, a trend that mirrors the deflation of the once-fiery immigration debate.

The Center for Immigration Studies, a nonpartisan think tank that favors reduced illegal immigration but does not advocate mass deportations, estimates that since summer 2007 the illegal-immigrant population has dropped from 12.5 million -- its peak -- to 10.8 million in the first quarter of 2009.

The CIS report also said there is evidence that the number of new illegal immigrants arriving has fallen by about one-third in the past two years compared to earlier this decade.

The drops have corresponded with a decrease in the number of illegal immigrants apprehended trying to cross into the U.S. and with a decline in the remittances sent back by immigrants to their home countries.

The figures also correspond with the deflation of the hot-button immigration issue, which reached a frenzy with the Sensenbrenner bill in 2005 and the mass immigration protests of 2006, faded into the background during the 2008 presidential campaign, and has taken a decided legislative back seat to issues such as healthcare and climate change in this Congress.

...

So will this hurt their chances for becoming a citizen under "comprehensive" immigration reform. Ironically, no. Most of those plans had a requirement that they go back to their country of origin and apply for citizenship. I do think that increased enforcement of immigration laws, and border protection had as much or more to do with the decrease as the drop in the economy.

An interesting question to ask is how many of those who left had been given a sub prime mortgage and did the drop in the price of their home also lead to their departure?

Nigeria Taliban leader found in goat pen

BBC:

The leader of an Islamic sect blamed for days of deadly violence in Nigeria has been killed in police custody, police officials say.
The news came just hours after security forces said they had captured Mohammed Yusuf in the city of Maiduguri.
Mr Yusuf led Boko Haram, which wants to overthrow the government and impose a strict version of Islamic law.
Hundreds of people have died in five days of clashes between his followers and security forces.
"He has been killed. You can come and see his body at the state police command headquarters," Isa Azare, spokesman for the Maiduguri police command, told Reuters news agency.
His bullet-riddled body was shown on state television, AFP news agency said.
Troops had stormed Boko Haram's stronghold on Wednesday night, killing many of the militants and forcing others to flee.
Mr Yusuf was arrested earlier on Thursday, after reportedly being found hiding in a goat pen at his parents-in-law's house.
BBC News website Africa editor Joseph Winter says Nigeria's security forces have a terrible reputation for brutality and human rights groups accuse them of frequent extra-judicial killings.
...

It appears they gave him the same due process he gave his innocent victims. It is curious that the leader's own brutality and extra-judicial killings were not a concern to human rights groups. The world is better off with out Yusuf and his followers. The only real question is whether putting him through a a lawfare process would develop information that would be beneficial to society. I suspect the chances of that are remote. That being said, I would have taken him into custody to see if he had some intelligence information.

One of the main motivations for the groups attack was education. They were fighting for ignorance and at least the dead achieved that objective.

Democrats have no mechanism for excluding illegals from health care

Fox News:

Health care reform could end up bailing out employers who hire illegal immigrants and skimp on their health benefits.
Under the legislation being considered on Capitol Hill, undocumented workers would technically not be covered. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said as much in an interview Sunday.
"No, illegal immigrants are not covered by this plan," she said.
But the reality, immigration analysts say, is that the legislation is missing any mechanism to keep illegals out of the system. And if they exploit that loophole, taxpayers could be on the hook for billions to cover health care costs their employers do not.
Already, illegal immigrants account for $10.7 billion in state and federal health care spending, according to preliminary numbers from The Federation for American Immigration Reform.
Special projects director Jack Martin said that amount, which derives in large part from emergency room visits and births, would only rise unless the health care proposals on the Hill are changed.
"The bill in its current form is in effect going to be tempting to illegal immigrants who are not yet receiving medical benefits," Martin said. "We would expect that the cost would increase."
In a recent study, FAIR said that nothing in the health care package would prevent illegal immigrants from enrolling in a taxpayer-funded public plan, and that no verification mechanisms exist to prevent them from receiving credits to help with private plans.
...

In fact, the Democrats specifically rejected legislation that would have excluded illegals from eligibility. They also do not want anyone asking what their immigration status is when they apply. This is another example of the Pelosi politics of fraud when it comes to health care and immigration.

Drone war focus moves from al Qaeda to Taliban

LA Times:

U.S. military leaders have concluded that their war effort in Afghanistan has been too focused on hunting Al Qaeda, and have begun to shift Predator drone aircraft to the fight against the Taliban and other militants in order to prevent the country from slipping deeper into anarchy.

The move, described by government and Defense Department officials, represents a major change in the military's use of one of its most precious intelligence assets. It also illustrates the hard choices that must be made because the drones are in short supply.

Senior government officials say that defeating Al Qaeda remains the overriding U.S. objective. However, they have determined that the best way to do that is by strengthening and stabilizing Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan, rather than endlessly looking for important Al Qaeda figures.

But a shortage of drone aircraft could limit the effectiveness of the thousands of additional troops being sent as part of the Obama administration's new focus on Afghanistan, officials say. A preliminary review has concluded that the command in Afghanistan requires up to four times as many Predators as it currently has.

To try to meet the demand, the military has shifted about eight Predator drones assigned to special operations forces in Afghanistan to conventional forces. It is refocusing them on major insurgent strongholds rather than on scouring remote mountain ranges for suspected terrorists.

In addition, the U.S. military's Central Command is planning to send about a dozen more drones to Afghanistan, representing about a 25% increase. Among them are aircraft being reassigned from Iraq, despite resistance from the U.S. command there.

The sweeping redeployment means that insurgent groups that have carried out ambushes and roadside bombings will for the first time be tracked by dozens of drones capable of remaining over a target for hours undetected, identifying key individuals, and firing missiles within a matter of seconds.

...

Despite the shift, the special operations forces retain a substantial amount of Predators. But officials say they are working to ensure that unconventional missions are more closely aligned with the new counterinsurgency strategy of the overall force.

...

There is more. This story seems to reflect recent announcements of UAV strikes and their targets. I suspect that it also reflects that most of the obvious al Qaeda targets have been hit are gone to ground and the Taliban targets are still relatively east to spot and engage. In terms of allegation of resources the hits on the Taliban are probably giving more bang for the buck right now.

Ohio losing hope for change

Reuters:

Hope and jobs are in short supply in Ohio eight months after President Barack Obama won the recession-battered state in the 2008 election with promises of a better future.
"People were looking for a savior to get us out of this mess and that's why they voted for Obama," said Jeff Fravor, 55, a retired train conductor on his way to breakfast on the outskirts of Toledo.

"I've nothing against Obama personally, but he's new to the job and 'hope' won't fix this mess."

Candidate Obama delivered his message over and over again in Ohio, a politically diverse battleground state that often decides presidential elections. Obama went back to the state last week with an approval rating below 50 percent.

A Quinnipiac University opinion poll released on July 7 showed the Democratic president's popularity in America's seventh most populous state had fallen to 49 percent from 62 per cent in May. Even worse for Obama, 48 percent said they disapproved of his handling of the U.S. economy, with 46 percent approving.

The reason for the poll drop? Rising unemployment.

The downturn has pummeled Ohio's manufacturing base.

"As jobs have gone away, that has created a true focus here on job creation," said Andrew Doehrel, head of the Ohio Chamber of Commerce. "People look at what's been done on a federal level in terms of bailouts and stimulus and they see that this has not equated to anything more than lost jobs in Ohio."
...
Ohio's unemployment has nearly doubled from 5.7 percent in January 2008. That is not a good start for Obama in a state with 20 electoral votes that could be vital for his re-election effort in 2012.
...
"Obama set expectations too high here and six months later, things haven't got better, so some people are losing hope," said John Johnson, branch manager of the Southeastern Container Inc plant in nearby Bowling Green, which makes plastic bottles for Coca-Cola Co..
...

They are not as bad off as Michigan but they are getting closer. The Democrat governor has not helped either. I think the state has raised taxes during the recession which is no way to stimulate employment.

Protesters overwhelm security forces at burial site in Iran

LA Times:

Thousands and possibly tens of thousands of mourners, many of them black-clad young women carrying roses, overwhelmed security forces today at Tehran's largest cemetery to gather around the grave of Neda Agha-Soltan, the young woman whose videotaped shooting at a June 20 demonstration stunned the world.

Mourners in a long procession converged on the burial site, kicking up clouds of dust as they walked. "Death to the dictator," they chanted. "Neda is not dead. This government is dead."

Uniformed security forces initially clashed violently today with some of the mourners, supporters and leaders of the opposition, who were there to protest and grieve for those killed in recent unrest. Unsuccessful presidential candidates Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi attempted to attend the graveside ceremony marking the religiously significant 40th day since the death of Agha-Soltan and others killed in the fighting.

"Oh, Hossein! Mir-Hossein," the mourners chanted in support of him.

According to one witness, who asked not to be identified for fear of reprisal, Mousavi stepped out of his car only to be surrounded by police, who forced him back into his vehicle and out of the cemetery.

At first, mourners were confronted by security forces, who struck some with batons and made arrests in an attempt to bar them from gathering at Tehran's Behesht Zahra cemetery, the country's largest. The tree-lined streets leading to the graves of Agha-Soltan and others were blocked by riot police, the witness said.

The witness said protesters identified and violently confronted several plainclothes Basiji militiamen.

"Police, police, support us," the crowd chanted. "God is great!"

But as people poured out of the nearby subway station and taxis along the highway, security forces retreated. One witness said police released detainees and began cooperating with the mourners, directing them to Section 257 of the cemetery, where Agha-Soltan and others were buried.

...

This sounds like another general uprising by the women of Tehran. That has to be scary for the Ayatollahs. They just do not deal well with women out of control.

Polling leads Obama to change his health care pitch

Wall Street Journal:

...

Trying to regain momentum, Mr. Obama is shifting his pitch to new consumer-protection rules for insurance companies, part of a bid to win over Americans who already have coverage.

David Axelrod, one of the president's top advisers, acknowledged that the White House's months-long focus on controlling medical costs hasn't worked. "Consumer protections are a lot more tangible," he said.

On Wednesday, Democratic leaders in the House reached accord with conservative party members to move their bill through the last of three committees, although the full House won't vote on the measure until at least September. "Failure is not an option," said California Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman.

The White House is eager to show progress and build public support before Congress breaks for summer, when opponents plan to continue their campaign. "If this bill hangs out there over the August recess my guess is it will get shredded," House Minority Leader John Boehner (R., Ohio), said.
In the Journal poll, only two in 10 people said the quality of their own care would improve under the Obama plan; just 15% of those with private insurance thought it would. Twice as many overall, and three times as many with private coverage, predicted their own care would get worse. (Emphasis added.)
...

There is more. This is not a poll that the Obama administration can be happy about. Given the highlighted finding above it is surprising that there is as much support for the plan as there is. I think it is the major reason for the decline since 85 percent of Americans have coverage,

'Harmless as an enemy, treacherous as a friend'

Cliff May:

Historian Bernard Lewis has observed that a nation can make few mistakes worse than this: to be “harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend.” Is that a fair characterization of American foreign policy under the Obama administration?

Start with Honduras, which has been a stable and valuable American ally for two decades. Recently, Pres. Manuel Zelaya attempted to subvert his country’s laws and democratic institutions in pursuit of the kind power enjoyed by such left-wing and anti-American strongmen as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez, Cuba’s Raul Castro, and Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega.

Honduras’s Supreme Court stood up to Zelaya — eventually ordering the military to remove him from office. Honduras’s Congress voted to install a new president, Roberto Micheletti, the next in line under Honduras’s constitution, and a member of the same Liberal party to which Zelayla belongs.

New elections, Micheletti said, should be held in November, as scheduled — or sooner, if that would ease tensions. As for the decision to expel Zelaya from the country, that must be understood, he explained, “in the context of genuine fear of Mr. Zelaya’s proven willingness to violate the law and engage in mob-led violence.”

Nevertheless, President Obama was quick to denounce Zelaya’s ouster and — echoing Chávez, Castro, and Ortega — demand that he be reinstated. Senior White House officials threatened sanctions if Honduras’s legislature, courts, and military refuse to do as told. More than $18 million in military and development assistance already has been suspended.

Contrast that with the White House response to the massive election fraud that recently took place in Iran: President Obama said he did not want to be seen as “meddling.”

...

Obama has never really explained his decision in Honduras in any way that was consistent with the facts. Perhaps he cannot. His revoking the diplomatic visas of four Honduran officials also makes no sense other than being consistent with his initial bad judgment.

Selling fear

Karl Rove:

On the campaign trail last year, Barack Obama promised to end the “politics of fear and cynicism.” Yet he is now trying to sell his health-care proposals on fear.

At his news conference last week, he said “Reform is about every American who has ever feared that they may lose their coverage, or lose their job. . . . If we do not reform health care, your premiums and out-of-pocket costs will continue to skyrocket. If we do not act, 14,000 Americans will continue to lose their health insurance every single day. These are the consequences of inaction.”

A Fox News Poll from last week shows that 84% of Americans who have health insurance are happy with their coverage. And because 91% of all Americans have insurance, that means that 76% of all Americans will be concerned about anything that threatens their current coverage. By a 2-1 margin, according to the Fox Poll, Americans want coverage from a private provider rather than the government.

Facing numbers like these, Mr. Obama is dropping his high-minded rhetoric and instead trying to scare voters. During last week’s news conference, for example, he said that doctors routinely perform unnecessary tonsillectomies on children simply to fatten their wallets. All that was missing was the suggestion that the operations were conducted without anesthesia.
This is not a healthy way to wage a policy debate. It also risks making the president look desperate at a time when his proposals are looking increasingly too expensive for Americans to accept.

Last weekend, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) demolished Mr. Obama’s claims that his plan cuts the growth of future health spending and won’t add to the deficit. Responding to a White House proposal to create an independent panel to recommend Medicare cuts, the CBO said on Saturday that “The probability is high that no savings would be realized” in the next decade, while entitlement spending would rise $1.042 trillion. The CBO did say there might be $2 billion in savings in the second decade of the program—a pittance.

White House Budget Director Peter Orszag shot back at the CBO with a blog posting on the White House’s Web site arguing, “the point of the proposal . . . was never to generate savings over the next decade.” Really? The White House rolled out the proposal hoping to give cover to Blue Dog Democrats in Congress barking about the cost of overhauling health care.
...

When you are selling change you have to attack the status quo. Obama's problem is that his change does not look better than the status quo, it looks worse to many voters. Scaring them out of that belief is looking like a very tough job.

Valley hospital influences health care debate

One of the largest sources of campaign contributions to Senate Democrats during this year’s health care debate is a physician-owned hospital in one of the country’s poorest regions that has sought to soften measures that could choke its rapid growth.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee collected nearly $500,000 at a reception here on March 30, mostly from physicians and others affiliated with Doctors Hospital at Renaissance, financial disclosure records show.
The event was held at the home of a prominent McAllen developer, Alonzo Cantu, a hospital founder, investor and board member who has raised prodigious sums from the Rio Grande Valley for an array of Democrats.
Another event at Mr. Cantu’s home, in September 2007, brought in at least $800,000 for the committee’s House counterpart, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, according to disclosure reports. The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, was in attendance and cut a ribbon at the hospital’s new women’s center while in town.
The hospital, which is in Edinburg, adjacent to McAllen, is working both sides of the aisle. Its political action committee, Border Health PAC, split $120,000 last year among House and Senate candidates, including Republicans.
Although Congressional negotiations over health care legislation are continuing, Doctors Hospital seems to be getting much of what it wants. Thus far, physician-owned hospitals have been insulated from some of the most onerous potential restrictions in the health care legislation moving through Congress.

...

The gleaming, well-equipped Doctors Hospital at Renaissance, which has expanded to 503 beds from 30 in six years, has become a footnote in the health care debate. It was featured unflatteringly in a June article in The New Yorker about geographic disparities in health care spending, a story that President Obama has cited repeatedly in speeches and meetings.
The article, which is sharply disputed by hospital officials, posited that physician ownership provided “an unholy temptation to overorder” tests and procedures because doctors earn not only their fees but also a share of the hospital’s profits. At Doctors Hospital, where 353 of its 452 owners are physicians, net revenue amounted to $64 million in 2008.

...

The disparities between the cost of operation at this hospital seems stark enough to suggest an audit is in order. I suspect that is unlikely given their political activities. If my math is correct the working of both sides has netted Republicans roughly $60,000 in contributions while Democrats have received $1,360,000. Yeah, I think they are supporting Democrats and expect to have their back covered on any "reform" legislation.

Obama's 2 major unemployment stimulus plans

Nina Easton:

...

Obama officials insist we "can't afford not to" fix the health-care system and wean the nation off fossil fuels. "I don't see how anyone can look at the excessive growth rates [in health-care costs] and believe that can be sustained with a healthy economy," says Larry Summers, Obama's top economic adviser. Or as Zandi puts it, "Nothing is more important to the country's long-term fiscal outlook than health-care reform, and he only gets one bite at it. Investors know this, so they'll bid up interest rates" if reform isn't done right.
"Done right," of course, is in the eye of the beholder. Zandi argues that reform needs to be "credibly paid for" -- ideally by limiting the tax deduction for employee-paid plans -- and it needs to contain costs. While the first question remains under debate in Congress, on the second, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office warns that evolving legislation could bust the budget.
While the right kind of health-care reform has the potential to boost the economy and lessen the entitlement burden on the budget, the same cannot be said of going green, which economic models are showing will reduce growth and create job losses. The cap-and-trade bill that barely passed the House will reduce the purchasing power of households by an average of $730, rising to $830 by 2030, according to an analysis by the Boston-based consulting firm CRA International. "It's a complete myth that the economy and jobs will grow as a result of making energy 10% to 20% more expensive," says CRA economist Anne E. Smith. "You have to look at this through the lens of an economist, not through the lens of wishful thinking."
...

Both of these programs look like they re in trouble as voters show increasing angst about deficits that they will produce. They are also in trouble because the mask has slipped revealing the liberalism behind the Obama rhetoric. Both of these programs would be bad for the economy and jobs.

The unemployment stimulus

Gov. Rick Perry:

...

he Texas economy is the strongest in the nation. Our unemployment rate is 2 percent lower than the national average, and employers continue to relocate and expand in Texas.
However, I am fully aware that because of the national recession, too many Texans are out of work or uncertain about their economic future. That's why I, state lawmakers and leaders at the Texas Workforce Commission have worked hard to keep our unemployment trust fund sound, adequately funded and safe from the meddling of Congress, the Obama administration and federal bureaucrats.

Recent weeks have seen a flurry of news stories regarding unemployment benefits in Texas. Taken as a whole, they have painted a confusing and incomplete picture of unemployment insurance in our state. Here are the facts:

Texas unemployment benefits are safe. Unemployed Texans are and will continue to be covered thanks to a combination of additional contributions from Texas businesses in the form of unemployment taxes, bond financing and borrowing of federal funds. As in previous recession years, these tools will be used to keep the trust fund financed.

Texas employers know that state officials work to keep UI taxes low to encourage job creation. But when the need arises, businesses are required to pay more into the unemployment compensation system. Borrowing from the federal unemployment fund — which employers pay taxes to maintain — is also routine. Texas borrowed such funds during the 2003 national recession and in prior economic downturns. At least 15 other states are doing or preparing to implement similar federal borrowing.

We are also utilizing some “no-strings” funding available in the federal stimulus package. This allows Texas to provide an additional $25 per week in benefits to qualified unemployed Texans, resulting in an additional $161 million for the program and weeks of extended benefits for Texas workers.

I did reject $555 million in federal stimulus dollars that would have mandated the state of Texas to pay costlier benefits and put higher taxes on Texas employers indefinitely. Even if we had accepted these stimulus funds, Texas would have still seen higher unemployment taxes, bond financing and federal borrowing to keep benefits from the UI Trust Fund flowing.

But in return for less than seven weeks of unemployment benefits, this $555 million stimulus payment would have required Texas to permanently expand its unemployment program and burden Texas job creators with higher taxes for the long haul. Those stimulus dollars would have done more harm than good for Texas workers, employers and taxpayers, which is precisely why the Texas Association of Business and National Federation of Independent Business urged and supported my decision to reject the federal unemployment stimulus funds.

If Washington really wanted to help Texans, they would have sent us this money without strings attached like the Bush administration did in 2002.
...

I think as long as the system is working, rejecting the strings attached funds will not be an issue for most voters. I do think that most Texans are concerned about control freaks in Washington dictating how the state operates is business. Since Texas is doing so much better than the rest of the country, they should be looking this way for examples. The best way to deal with unemployment is to foster a climate that creates jobs. That is something Texas has excelled at in recent years.

The recent increase in the minimum wage is another job killer program from Washington that will fall heavily on minorities and teenagers. It is something else we have to overcome while in a recession.

Piling on a new payroll tax for small business that does not provide health care insurance will only add to the unemployment stimulus from Washington.

Obama to short Navy on jets

Adm. Paul Rohrer:

Hot on the heels of President Obama canceling the Air Force's most advanced strike fighter, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) announced this week that we now face a much greater shortfall in Navy and Marine Corps strike fighters than was previously estimated. Last year, CRS predicted a shortfall of 125 navy fighter jets by 2017. They now predict that the shortfall will more be more than 300 jets.

The American people deserve to understand what those shortages really mean.

On the surface, President Obama's defense budget calls for cutting the Navy's aircraft carrier strike groups from 11 to 10. But a closer inspection reveals that Obama's program delays and budget cuts will do terrible harm to the readiness and capability of our carrier groups.

Although America does have 10 carrier groups, we cannot deploy all 10 at any given time. Both personnel and equipment require shore time for maintenance, rest, and training. Along with the carrier groups that are temporarily rotated out of service, the worsening shortage of fighter aircraft is reducing the number of ready carrier groups even further.
...
A carrier group typically sails with 50 strike fighters on board. If the F-18 inventory shortfall climbs from 125 to 300, as the CRS now predicts, then you have a shortage of six carrier groups worth of jets.
...

But he is fully funding ACORN. If an enemy could wipe out 300 Navy jets that would be seen as a dire situation. When an administration is cutting defense in war time while running up huge deficits on domestic programs, they have skewed priorities that need to come to the attention of voters.

Ouch! Not a good start to campaign

R.G. Ratcliff:

U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's message Wednesday was as simple as it was confusing: If Gov. Rick Perry does not quit his re-election race to give her a free run at the Republican gubernatorial nomination, she will quit the Senate to run against him.
In a bizarre series of interviews, Hutchison — who has been in the Senate for 16 years — said Perry is wearing out his welcome by wanting to win re-election so he can have 15 years as governor. And if he does not get out of her way, she will quit her job to take him out.
...
Several hours later, however, she told reporters in Washington that her statements had been misunderstood and what she really wanted was for Perry to get out of the race.

“Nobody expected (Perry) to run for 15 years, and I think there's a chance that he wouldn't run because he would see how divisive it is and that he's trying to stay too long and that he can really help in many ways if he doesn't run, in which case I could then be able to stay in the Senate all the way to the end,” Hutchison said, according to Congressional Quarterly.
...

I suppose Gov. Perry's preference is to not have Sen. Hutchison in the primary race either, but he seems realistic enough to accept the challenge and deal with it. Let's hope this race becomes about the issues of how best to keep Texas strong and prosperous.

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

The Tea Party Poll

Most Americans continue to want the federal government to focus on reducing the budget deficit rather than spending money to stimulate the national economy, a new New York Times/CBS News poll finds. Yet at the same time, most oppose some proposed solution for decreasing it.
Fifty-six percent of respondents said that they were not willing to pay more in taxes in order to reduce the deficit, and nearly as many said they were not willing for the government to provide fewer services in areas such as health care, education and defense spending.

...

Isn't that the message the Tea Party movement has been sending for months? The same message that many in the media, particularly the liberal MSNBC, have been criticizing and making fun of with homoerotic insults. It turns out that most voters are more concerned about the deficits than Obama and the Democrats. That is one reason why the health care bill is in such trouble. With the failure of the stimulus to stimulate the big spenders are having a difficult time explaining things.

White roof savings

Returning to their ranch-style house in Sacramento after a long summer workday, Jon and Kim Waldrep were routinely met by a wall of heat.

“We’d come home in the summer, and the house would be 115 degrees, stifling,” said Mr. Waldrep, a regional manager for a national company.
He or his wife would race to the thermostat and turn on the air-conditioning as their four small children, just picked up from day care, awaited relief.
All that changed last month. “Now we come home on days when it’s over 100 degrees outside, and the house is at 80 degrees,” Mr. Waldrep said.
Their solution was a new roof: a shiny plasticized white covering that experts say is not only an energy saver but also a way to help cool the planet.
Relying on the centuries-old principle that white objects absorb less heat than dark ones, homeowners like the Waldreps are in the vanguard of a movement embracing “cool roofs” as one of the most affordable weapons against climate change.
Studies show that white roofs reduce air-conditioning costs by 20 percent or more in hot, sunny weather. Lower energy consumption also means fewer of the carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming.
What is more, a white roof can cost as little as 15 percent more than its dark counterpart, depending on the materials used, while slashing electricity bills.

...

Actually there was no difference in price when I installed a white metal roof. I probably could save some money by going with the silver Galvalum finish which actually reflects even more heat. I also installed a reflective barrier inside the roof as well as super insulating the ceiling and walls. The results was remarkably efficient. We just had one of the hottest Junes since I have been living here and my electric bill was a little over $200 for a 2,500 square foot house.

Pakistan making use of US precision weapons against Taliban

Pakistan’s Air Force is improving its ability to pinpoint and attack militant targets with precision weapons, adding a new dimension to the country’s fight against violent extremism, according to Pakistani military officials and independent analysts.

The Pakistani military has moved away from the scorched-earth artillery and air tactics used last year against insurgents in the Bajaur tribal agency. In recent months, the air force has shifted from using Google Earth to more sophisticated images from spy planes and other surveillance aircraft, and has increased its use of laser-guided bombs.
The changes reflect an effort by the Pakistani military to conduct its operations in a way that will not further alienate the population by increasing civilian casualties and destroying property. But they are also dictated by necessity as the military takes its campaign into areas where it is reluctant to commit ground troops, particularly in the rugged terrain of Waziristan, where it had suffered heavy losses.
Military analysts say the airstrikes alone, no matter how precise, cannot ultimately substitute for ground forces or for better counterinsurgency training, something Pakistan has been reluctant to accept from the United States. But they say the airstrikes have become a valuable tool for Pakistan in fighting the Taliban and Al Qaeda in sometimes inaccessible terrain.
Since May, F-16 multirole fighter jets, the Pakistani military’s aerial workhorse, have flown more than 300 combat missions against militants in the Swat Valley and more than 100 missions in South Waziristan, attacking mountain hide-outs, training centers and ammunition depots, Pakistani military officials said.
In conjunction with infantry fire, artillery barrages and helicopter gunship attacks, military officials say, the air combat missions have reinvigorated the military campaign in Swat and put increasing pressure on the leader of the Pakistani Taliban, Baitullah Mehsud, in South Waziristan.

...

“The biggest handicap we had in Bajaur was that we didn’t have good imagery,” Air Chief Marshal Qamar said. “We didn’t have good target descriptions. We did not know the area. We were forced to use Google Earth.
“I didn’t want to face a similar situation in Swat,” he said.
In advance of the Swat campaign, the air force equipped about 10 F-16s with high-resolution, infrared sensors, provided by the United States, to conduct detailed reconnaissance of the entire valley.
The United States has also resumed secret drone flights performing military surveillance in the tribal areas, to provide Pakistani commanders with a wide array of videos and other information on militants, according to American officials.

...

The human rights wackos seem more tolerant of Pakistan collateral damage, but they still don't put the responsibility where it belongs on the Taliban for setting up positions in civilian areas in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

I believe the Bush administration made a deal to upgrade the Pakistan F-16s last fall. At the time I said that if they were used to go after the Taliban along the Afghan border they would be worth every penny. It looks like Pakistan is living up to my expectations so far.

They appear to be using a raiding strategy trying to wear down the Taliban with the precision raids before making an assault on the area. Pakistan is still deficient in learning the techniques of counterinsurgency operations. The army's irrational resistance to accepting US help in learning the techniques continues.

The video that accompanies the article is worth watching. Just go to the link above.

Sudan wants women out of their pants

Daily Mail:

A Christian woman who faces 40 lashes for wearing trousers in Sudan made a dramatic appearance in court yesterday to fight her case.
Lubna Ahmed al-Hussein walked into the packed hearing in the same green slacks that got her arrested.
Under Islamic laws used in parts of the country, it is illegal for a woman to wear trousers rather than long skirts in public.
But the law is not supposed to apply to non-Muslims like Miss Hussein, a former journalist who works for the United Nations.
And it is only imposed sporadically in the capital, Khartoum, where she was arrested.
Indecency cases are not uncommon in Sudan, but Miss Hussein has used hers to campaign against dress codes.
Yesterday journalists scuffled with police armed with batons outside the court and some reporters, who were briefly detained, had equipment confiscated.
Scores of women, some wearing slacks, attended to support Miss Hussein.
The case was adjourned as lawyers discussed whether her status as a UN employee gave her legal immunity.
...

It is unfortunate they are not discussing what a bad law it is. Requiring women to wear funny clothes is a crime against human decency. It is a product of letting perverts set the fashion agenda, because they fear they cannot control their own hormones.

Latin America swings right?

From the Guardian:

Latin America's swing to the right

The writer makes the case that in Chile, Uruguay and Brazil the voters are moving away from the left. Perhaps they have seen the mess Chavez and his cronies have made.

Gaza goes Taliban

Stephanie Gutmann:

Freed from scrutiny by the EU and US focus on whether Israelis add extensions to their homes in Jerusalem, Hamas continues the quiet work of turning the Gaza strip into a Taliban-style Islamic state. A few days ago came the news that the Gaza Strip’s most senior judge “has ordered all female lawyers to wear headscarves and a long, dark colored cloak under their black robes when they appear in court beginning September.”

This is part of a general crackdown on female professionals — or maybe it’s just females. It follows the news several weeks ago, reported by Khaled Abu Toameh of the Jerusalem Post, that Hamas policemen attempted to arrest a female Palestinian journalist “under the pretext that she came to a Gaza beach dressed immodestly and was seen laughing in public.”
...

These are very scared men who fear their hormones cannot be controlled unless they control what women wear. Also see the post below where a 27 year old woman was murdered by her father for having a cell phone. It is hard to imagine civilized people treating women so horribly in the name of a religion. The sickness of the culture is becoming more obvious is people would stop turning their heads.

Michael Williams makes his case for senate race

Cleburne Times-Review:

...

From health care proposals to spending to the cap and trade bill, Williams decried the actions of President Barack Obama.

“A child born today gets a birth certificate in one hand and a federal deficit bill for $30,000,” Williams said. “I remember hearing some, during the inauguration, say, ‘Well, how much damage can [Obama] do in four years?’ We didn’t realize how much he could do in six months.”

By remaining true to the values of the party, Republicans have an opportunity to turn things around, Williams said. But they must reach out to do so.

“To regain control, we have to make this party look a whole lot more like Texas than this room,” Williams said. “That means sitting down with black folk, Latinos and others to see what their thoughts and concerns are.”

...

If you give Michael a chance you will like him and his policies. The contest still has a long way to go, and you will have more chances to get to know him.

Voters not buying Obamacare sales pitch

NBC:

Despite his public-relations blitz over the past two weeks to promote his plans to reform the nation's health-care system — including holding two town halls on Wednesday — President Barack Obama has lost ground on this issue with the American public, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
Pluralities now say that the president’s health care plan is a bad idea, and that it will result in the quality of their care getting worse. What’s more, just four in 10 approve of his handling on the issue.
The poll also finds that Obama's overall job-approval rating has dropped to 53 percent. And it shows a public that has grown increasingly concerned about the federal government's spending as the administration defends its $787 billion economic stimulus and supports a $1 trillion-plus health-care bill.
...

A NY Times poll eroding support for Obama and his health care plan.

...

Americans are concerned that overhauling the health care system would reduce the quality of their care, increase their out-of-pocket health costs and tax bills and limit their options in choosing doctors, treatment and tests, the poll found. The percentage who describe health care costs as a serious threat to the American economy — a central argument being made by Mr. Obama — has dropped over the past month.

...

The Times story also suggest that GOP ads against the Democrat plan have been very effective. I suspect they are effective because they hit on concerns that voters have expressed about the plan. I think the concerns will grow over the recess as people become more familiar with the bill that Obama was trying to rush through.

In fact, his rush may have added to the concerns of voters. Those Democrats who thought Hillary Care failed because it was not rushed may have to rethink. Their basic problem is a belief that the current health care system is unsatisfactory, I know it is not for me and most people I know. Perhaps those for whom it is a major concern, have made the issue appear more important than it is for rest of the voters.

Russia to drill for oil off Florida coast in Cuban waters

BBC:

Russia is to begin oil exploration in the Gulf of Mexico, after signing a deal with Cuba, says Cuban state media.
Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin signed four contracts securing exploration rights in Cuba's economic zone in the Gulf.
Havana says there may be some 20bn barrels of oil of its coast but the US puts that estimate at five billion.
...

Democrat are still against drilling in US waters off the Florida coast. In fact they are generally opposed to offshore drilling in the fantastic belief that "green energy" will make it unnecessary and also replace all foreign oil. This is one time when I think the Cubans and the Russians are more in the real world.

The knife went off in my hand?

From the AP:

Mom of decapitated baby: 'I didn't mean to do it'

I think she probably means she wishes she had not chopped her baby's head off.

Why Democrats, Obama have so much trouble selling health care reform

Gallup:

...

Whether the focus is access to healthcare or the quality of care, less than a majority of Americans are convinced that healthcare reform will be beneficial to either the country or to their own personal situations.
Americans are less likely to believe healthcare reform will result in improvements to themselves personally than to the national healthcare situation.

Americans believe that healthcare reform will increase costs rather than lower them, both nationally and for themselves.

...

Health care reform has always ranked pretty low on the concerns of voters, mainly because most voters are not unhappy with their own experience. It is not surprising that they might come to the conclusion that the changes to benefit the few who are unhappy with their health care ex0perience will be at their expense.

The Democrats went into this fight thinking the public wanted what they were trying to offer and they seem surprised to find that is not the case.

Only 10?

From the Chicago Tribune:

10 things you don't know about Ed Swiderski of 'The Bachelorette'

For a guy I have never heard of surely there must be more than 10 things I don't know about him.

Hutchison says she'll resign from Senate this fall

R.G. Ratcliff:

U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison told a Dallas radio station talk show host today that she will resign her Senate seat in either October or November.
Hutchison told host WBAP host Mark Davis that she would like to stay in office while running for governor, but she can't so long as Gov. Rick Perry remains in the contest.

When Davis asked Hutchison if she would stay in office while running, she replied, “I just can't — as long as Governor Perry stays in the race…”

Hutchison said her formal announcement for governor will occur next month.

“Well I'm going to announce in August. Formal announcement: I am in. Then the actual leaving of the Senate will be sometime — October, November — that, in that time frame,” she said.

That statement is likely to open a floodgate politically.

There already is a crowd of politicians looking at running for Hutchison's Senate seat, including Houston Mayor Bill White and former Comptroller John Sharp as Democrats, and among the Republicans there are Railroad Commissioners Elizabeth Ames Jones, Michael Williams, state Sen. Florence Shaprio and former Secretary of State Roger Williams.

But if Perry names Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst as Hutchison's interim replacement, that also likely opens up the attorney general's office as incumbent Greg Abbott is expected to run for lieutenant governor if the office is vacant.

If Hutchison resigns in October or November, a special election will be held no later than May 2010, but Perry could set the election sooner by declaring an emergency.
...

She seems genuinely disappointed that Perry is running for reelection. I am sorry to see her go, but it will certainly make Texas politics interesting for the next year or so. There are a number of good candidates in the race to replace her and so far none have pulled away from the field. I have a high regard for both Railroad Commissioners Elizabeth Ames Jones and Michael Williams. If Dewhurst is in the race, he has resources that may make him a formidable candidate also.

I think Kay has a formidable task in defeating Perry in the Republican primary at this point, although she has plenty of time to change the current dynamic and she has a history of running strong campaigns. I plan to support the winner of the primary. I hope they both run a respectful campaign that focuses on the issues.

Palestinian man gives daughter the death penalty for having cell phone

Jerusalem Post:

A Gaza man is being held on suspicion he bludgeoned his daughter with an iron chain, cracking her skull in a particularly brutal family "honor killing," two human rights groups said Wednesday, citing police and forensics reports.

The groups' reports said that the assault was triggered by Jawdat Najjar's discovery that his daughter Fadia - a 27-year-old divorced mother of five - owned a cell phone. He suspected she used it to speak to a man outside the family, according to the groups' reports.

...

Three of the woman's brothers were also detained on suspicion that they acted as accomplices, said the rights groups Mezan and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR), citing police and forensics reports. The groups did not say how they obtained the reports.
Fadia Najjar was the 10th victim of a so-called "honor killing" this year in the Palestinian territories and among Arab communities in Israel, according to rights groups.
...
"It's shocking," said Samir Zakout of Mezan. "But it's not surprising because killers know they won't be punished harshly."
In the West Bank and Gaza, "honor killing" assailants serve between six months and three years in prison, said Mona Shawa of PCHR.
...

What a strange religion that finds murder "honorable." Controlling the lives of women is obviously very important to them, but their feat is clearly irrational as are the killings.

No health benefits from organic food

The BBC has the story.

...

But the Soil Association criticised the study and called for better research.

...

An association of dirt is critical of others?

Democrat overreach spells election angst

Politico:

Democrats giddy with possibilities only six months ago now confront a perilous 2010 landscape signaled by troublesome signs of President Barack Obama’s political mortality, the plunging popularity of many governors and rising disquiet among many vulnerable House Democrats.

The issue advantage has shifted as well, with Democrats facing the brunt of criticism about the pace of stimulus package spending, anxiety over rising unemployment rates and widespread uneasiness over the twin pillars of Obama’s legislative agenda: his cap-and-trade approach to climate change and the emerging health care bill.

Bolstered by historical trends that work in the GOP’s favor — midterm elections are typically hostile to the party in power — and the prospect of the first election in a decade without former President George W. Bush either on the ballot or in office, Republicans find themselves on the offensive for the first time since 2004.
...
“There’s a sense building among Republicans that 2010 is going to be a far better political environment than 2008 or 2006,” said GOP pollster Whit Ayres. “Part of that is because we have a Democratic president and a Democratic-controlled Senate and House that are promoting fiscally dangerous policies for the future of the country. Part of it is we don’t have the burden of Iraq as we did in 2006 and don’t have the economy on the Republicans’ watch as we had in 2008.”

In one sign of the reconfigured landscape, Republican candidates lead in the polls in this fall’s closely watched gubernatorial elections — in New Jersey and Virginia. In New Jersey, where first-term Democrat Gov. Jon Corzine trails his challenger by double digits, a far-reaching corruption investigation has led to the resignation of one member of Corzine’s Cabinet and insider speculation about whether Corzine should be replaced on the ticket in November by a more viable Democratic nominee.

Corzine, who has shown no indication he’s willing or interested in stepping down, isn’t the only Democratic governor buffeted by the political winds. A handful of Democrats whose seats are up for election in 2010, including Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, have recently seen their approval ratings plummet below 40 percent — dangerous territory for an incumbent.

In New York, Gov. David Paterson faces similarly daunting numbers, and other first-term Democratic governors from Ohio to Iowa to Colorado have also seen their approval ratings move in the wrong direction. In Pennsylvania, a recent Quinnipiac University poll reported Gov. Ed Rendell with the lowest approval rating of his two terms in office.

“What’s hurting the Democrats badly is that people are afraid of the deficit and spending. They don’t see signs of economic growth, and people are worried,” said GOP pollster John McLaughlin. “If you look at the economy right now, voters gave the Democrats benefit of the doubt, they thought the stimulus would work, employment would recede — and they’re finding out now it’s not the case.”
...

There is more. This is one of the reasons the Blue Dogs deal with the liberals is dangerous for them and other Democrats. With the health care bill the Democrats have put themselves in the position of being the loser whether they get it passed or not.

The Blue Dogs heal?

CNN:

A group of fiscally conservative House Democrats announced Wednesday they reached a deal with the chamber's Democratic leaders on a health care reform bill.

Rep. Mike Ross of Arkansas, speaking for the Blue Dog Democrats, said the agreement calls for the House Energy and Commerce Committee to begin debating the bill later Wednesday, but for no vote by the full House until after the upcoming August recess.
Ross and the Blue Dogs had threatened to derail the bill in the Energy and Commerce Committee because of concerns that it costs too much and failed to address systemic problems in the nation's ailing health care industry.
The Blue Dogs had presented committee chairman Rep. Henry Waxman a list of 10 items that they wanted changed in health care reform proposals. Neither side revealed what the 10 items were.
...
Earlier Wednesday, CNN obtained an e-mail from a top aide of Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus that aimed to debunk a Washington Post headline that negotiators in that chamber were close to a deal.
"While progress has been made in recent days, neither an accord nor an announcement is imminent," wrote Russ Sullivan, Democratic staff director for the committee. "In fact, significant policy issues remain to be discussed among the Members, and any one of these issues could preclude bipartisan agreement."
...

The Democrats liberals have put the Blue Dogs in a lose-lose position and they appear to have decided to lose the next election in their conservative districts by helping the liberals get their control freak health care plan through the House. If they were really as conservative as they claimed while running for office would they do this? I doubt it. This remains an unpopular program that will run up the deficit while helping only a small portion of people without helath care at the expense of those who do have it.

It should give the Republicans a good shot of being in the majority after 2010.

As for the Blue Dogs, when Nancy Pelosi says "heal" she is not talking about health care.

The Hill reports that liberals are rejecting the Blue Dog deal. It is looking like irreconcilable differences for the Democrats.

The ad hoc approach to foreign policy

Michael Gerson:

The Obama administration lacks a foreign policy ideology as a matter of ideology. Speaking recently at the Council on Foreign Relations, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asserted, "Rigid ideologies and old formulas don't apply." The torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans -- tempered by pragmatism, proud of its ad hockery and willing to consider everything on a case-by-case basis.

But even lacking an ideology, the administration does have a doctrine. The defining principle of President Obama's foreign policy is engagement with America's adversaries. Much of the president's public diplomacy has been designed to clear a path for such talks -- expressing respect for legitimate grievances, apologizing for past wrongs and offering dialogue without preconditions.

Six months on, how fares the Obama doctrine? Concerning North Korea and Iran, the doctrine is on its deathbed.

North Korea responded to administration outreach by testing a nuclear weapon, firing missiles toward U.S. allies, resuming plutonium reprocessing and threatening the United States with a "fire shower of nuclear retaliation." During congressional testimony, Clinton admitted, "At this point [it] seems implausible, if not impossible, the North Koreans will return to the six-party talks and begin to disable their nuclear capacity again."
The Iranian regime's reaction to engagement was to cut the ribbon on a nuclear enrichment facility, add centrifuges, conduct a fraudulent election, and kill and imprison a variety of political opponents. Regarding administration overtures, Clinton recently told the BBC, "We haven't had any response. We've certainly reached out and made it clear that's what we'd be willing to do . . . but I don't think they have any capacity to make that kind of decision right now."

The problem is not engagement itself -- which was, after all, attempted in various forms by the previous administration. The difficulty is that the Obama foreign policy team has often argued that the reason for tension and conflict with nations such as North Korea and Iran is a lack of adequate American engagement -- which is absurd, and which has raised absurdly high expectations.
During the 2008 campaign, for example, Obama adviser P.J. Crowley (now State Department spokesman) argued, "Hard-liners on both sides have dominated that relationship and made it very difficult for the United States and Iran to come together and have a serious conversation." But can the lack of a serious conversation with Iran -- or with North Korea -- now credibly be blamed on the previous administration? Obama's diplomatic hand has been extended for a while now. Fists remain clenched. This is not because some magical diplomatic words remain unspoken. It is because of the nature of oppressive regimes themselves.
...
This is the paradox of the Obama doctrine. By attempting to engage North Korea and Iran so visibly, Obama is dramatically exposing the limits of engagement -- and building the case for confrontation.

What Obama and Clinton are discovering is that it is not us but them that is the problem. And once those talks produce no results, what then? The answer for this administration is more meaningless sanctions that will not be enforced consistently by Russia or China. Meanwhile the regimes continue their pursuit of weapons that will permit them to blackmail and destroy the "other."

Iraq will have no air defense after US leaves

The Iraqis will be unable to handle their own air defenses after all American troops withdraw from the country by the end of 2011, the top commander of American forces in Iraq said Tuesday.

The commander, Gen. Ray Odierno, in comments to reporters traveling here with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, did not directly say that American planes and pilots might effectively have to serve as an Iraqi air force until the Iraqis were ready to defend their country’s airspace on their own. But he said that a United States Air Force team was expected soon in Iraq to assess what the United States could, and should, do.
Iraqis have already asked the United States for new F-16 fighter jets, but General Odierno said it would be impossible to build and deliver them by the end of 2011, even if the Iraqis were able to afford them.
Asked if the Iraqis would be in a position to fly their own defensive air patrols at the end of 2011, when a United States agreement with Iraq calls for all American troops to be out of the country, General Odierno replied, “Right now, no.”

...

They could probably solve that problem by allowing the US basing agreements for an Air Force base. The current government seems to oppose allowing any US forces after the 2011 date and the current US government seems bent on the same idea. They will both have to show flexibility to give Iraq adequate air defenses.

A former Air Force officer notes:

Even with experienced aviators and maintenance personnel it can take up to two years to convert an air wing from a major weapons system--like F-4s to f-16s. All the pilots have to go through retraining, takes longer if trained pilots not available. All the maintainers need to be retrained either by the trainers on a training base or by a cadre of instructors. The Iraqis have no bench to speak of so they are in more of a bottom up rather than a retraining status so their development is harder and longer. Without proper supply and logistics the aircraft will end up as 'hangar queens,' or down for maintenance.

I think they are going to need us after 2011.

The Iran diplomacy fantasy

John Bolten:

...

Israel rejects another feature of Mr. Obama’s diplomatic stance. The Israelis do not believe that progress with the Palestinians will facilitate a deal on Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Though Mr. Gates and others have pressed this fanciful analysis, Israel will not be moved.

Worse, Mr. Obama has no new strategic thinking on Iran. He vaguely promises to offer the country the carrot of diplomacy—followed by an empty threat of sanctions down the road if Iran does not comply with the U.S.’s requests. This is precisely the European Union’s approach, which has failed for over six years.

There’s no reason Iran would suddenly now bow to Mr. Obama’s diplomatic efforts, especially after its embarrassing election in June. So with diplomacy out the door, how will Iran be tamed?

Mr. Gates’ mission had extraordinary significance. Israel sees the political and military landscape in a very inauspicious light. It also worries that, once ensnared in negotiations, the Obama administration will find it very hard to extricate itself. The Israelis are probably right. To prove the success of his “open hand,” Mr. Obama will declare victory for “diplomacy” even if it means little to no gains on Iran’s nuclear program.

Under the worst-case scenario, Iran will continue improving its nuclear facilities and Mr. Obama will become the first U.S. president to tie the issue of Israel’s nuclear capabilities into negotiations about Iran’s.

Israel understands that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent commitment to extend the U.S. “defense umbrella” to Israel is not a guarantee of nuclear retaliation, and that it is wholly insufficient to deter Iran from obliterating Israel if it so decides. In fact, Mrs. Clinton’s comment tacitly concedes that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons, exactly the wrong message. Since Israel, like the U.S., is well aware its missile defense system is imperfect, whatever Mr. Gates said about the “defense umbrella” will be politely ignored.

Relations between the U.S. and Israel are more strained now than at any time since the 1956 Suez Canal crisis. Mr. Gates’s message for Israel not to act on Iran, and the U.S. pressure he brought to bear, highlight the weight of Israel’s lonely burden.
...

The US can put much more pressure on Israel than it can put on Iran. I do not think that pressure on either will resolve this matter. You have a bunch of religious bigots in Iran bent on Israel's destruction and you have Israelis bent on keeping that from happening. Obama really has not lever that will keep it from happening and therefore it is unlikely that he can stop Israel from defensive measures. All he can really hope for is a heads up to give the US military time to respond to Iran's response to Israel's attack.

Those sensitive Islam Fascists

Janet Albrechsten:

Language police should stop tiptoeing and call these terrorists what they are: Islamo-fascists.

THE bodies of slain Australians in Jakarta were not yet back in the country when a new report warned us last week against referring to Islamo-fascists as -- dare one say it -- Islamo-fascists. If we want to reduce alienation and radicalism among young Muslims we must watch our language, says A Lexicon on Terror, a book compiled by the Victoria Police and the Australian Multicultural Foundation.
Multicultural Foundation head Hass Dellal told The Age that the wholesale branding of Islam with violence and extremism was of great concern.

Speaking at a conference last week Stephen Fontana, the assistant commissioner for counter-terrorism co-ordination, said that "a comment we think is harmless, some communities read as an attack".

Would someone kindly lock up these language police for crimes against the English language? An attack is what happened in Jakarta when innocent hotel guests were murdered at the J.W. Marriott and Ritz-Carlton hotels. And it is, quite literally, the bleeding obvious to point out that the perpetrators of the carnage are a group of Islamist militants who twist the tenets of Islam to suit their ideological purposes. They seek to bring down democracy in Indonesia and punish Western nations for fighting the Taliban and al-Qa'ida, with the ultimate aim of creating an Islamic caliphate. Yet while these terrorists go to great lengths to promote their Muslim identity and their militant Islamist ideology, it seems we are not allowed to mention that now.

There is nothing wrong with crafting careful language when dealing with terrorism. For years political leaders have used terms such as Islamist terrorist or Islamo-fascist to carefully distinguish militants from the vast majority of peace-loving Muslims. But there is a difference between being careful and being cowardly. The kind of zealous language policing endorsed by the Victoria Police and the Multicultural Foundation encourages us to hide from the truth.

Their new whitewash language is not just daft, it's dangerous. Clarity of language is a critical tool if we are serious about uncovering and understanding militant Islam. After so many attacks and the murder of so many innocent people, why would we cower from identifying the drivers of their Islamist extremism?
...
The suggestion from McClelland and senior police that using terms such as Islamo-fascists may drive young Muslims into the arms of jihadists is dubious. I'm willing to wager that those drawn to violence have other matters on their minds and other forces pulling them towards violence than the language employed by Westerners.

If we submit a questionnaire to young would-be jihadists asking them to list, on a scale of one to 100, the reasons they might choose jihad over, say, becoming a pastry chef or a train driver, I'm guessing none are going to suggest they are fed-up with the way Westerners used the term Islamo-fascist. Instead, they may list matters such as hating democracy, achieving glory for Islam and Muslims, destroying the infidel enemies around them, wanting to bring to account those countries that sent infidel troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, and so on. That's what the present generation of Islamist terrorists tells us and it may be useful to take them at their word.
...

The Islamic Fascist are religious bigots and they are bigots because of what they are taught by other bigots and not because they feel insulted by a description of their activities by authorities or the media.

Part of the problem of the language comes from an artifice of Muslims to say that those with whom they disagree with within their faith are not true Muslims. What they really mean is that they think those Muslims are not true to the same beliefs they have. But is it reasonable to expect these people who disagree with the radicals to become one of them because they don't like the description? Would it be reasonable for them to do so?

Winning in Afghanistan

Bing West:

More coalition soldiers have died in July than in any previous month in the nine-year war in Afghanistan. Last week, the soldier who slept on the cot next to me was killed. A rocket-propelled grenade fired from a snow-capped mountain in remote Nuristan Province killed Staff Sgt. Eric Lindstrom, a father of twin baby girls and the best squad leader in the platoon.

Strangely, our military leaders rarely talk about the battles here. They urge shooting less and drinking more cups of tea with village elders. This is the new face of war—counterinsurgency defined as nation-building, an idealistic blend of development aid and John Locke philosophy. Our generals say that the war is “80% non-kinetic.”

Although they welcome the largess provided by coalition forces, the village elders with whom our soldiers drink tea are intimidated by an enemy that prowls at night when our forces return to their bases. The Taliban is a highly mobile, amorphous force, with little popular support. But it is very willing to fight. Firefights are infrequent during the harvest seasons for poppy, corn and wheat, indicating that most local guerrillas are poor kids raised in a culture of tribal feuds, brigandage and AK rifles. The enemy leaders, more sinister and gangster-like, slip back and forth across the 1,500-mile border with Pakistan.

While our Special Operations Forces launch raids that disrupt the Taliban, our conventional soldiers carry out the less-adventurous “framework” operations—mainly presence patrols. With 80 pounds on their back, day after day they slog through the heat, dust and mud, waiting for the enemy to initiate contact.

Overall, too few of the enemy are being killed or captured to sap their morale. It’s like fighting Apaches in the 19th century. The hidden guerillas shoot from tree lines or mountainsides, making accurate return fire impossible. And we rarely bomb a compound, despite press headlines to the contrary. A week ago, a Marine, a British adviser and I watched a man scurrying back and forth at one end of a long building while we were under fire from the other end. The man was carrying something, but the Marine couldn’t decide whether the rules permitted shooting him. No army has ever fought with the restraint of the U.S. and its NATO allies.
...
On both fronts—development and fighting—the U.S. military has surged forward this summer, just as promised. Given the vast, harsh terrain and the immense open border, instead of 60,000 American soldiers we actually need 100,000—and many more helicopters. Infantrymen wear down after hundreds of grueling patrols. Instead of a 12-month tour, the U.S. Army should rotate its units on a seven-month basis and keep their brigades intact, as do the Marines.
...
War is not complicated. You have to separate the guerrilla forces from the population and kill them until they no longer want to continue. Al Qaeda, dominated by Arabs, is finished inside Afghanistan. The Taliban are Afghans, to be dealt with by Afghans. As he did in Iraq, Gen. Petraeus wants to recruit local forces to protect their own villages. That will expand the Afghan forces to 300,000 and stabilize the situation. On patrols, Afghan soldiers spot the enemy 10 times more frequently than do coalition solders. Afghan soldiers are brave, hardy, ill-disciplined, individualistic, temperamental and trustworthy.
...

West's book, The Strongest Tribe, is the best book about the Iraq war, period. He is now bringing his insight to the Afghan struggle and the military and government would be wise to listen to what he has to say. Just as in Iraq, our intelligence gathering goes up rapidly when we get local forces involved and the support of the local people. To do that we will need more of our troops and the Afghan troops.

Savage discovers emails about his UK exclusion order

John O'Sullivan:

THE latest twist in the saga of how the British government banned talk-radio host Michael Savage from entering Britain is straight out of the sitcom "Yes, Prime Minister," in which a Machiavellian civil servant, Sir Humphrey, repeatedly manipulates PM Jim Hacker into foolish decisions with subtle arguments that Jim never quite grasps.

...

So it would've been if a shrewd old mandarin like Sir Humphrey were still running the Home Office in Whitehall. He'd never have made the elementary error of putting the real reasons for banning Savage in a confidential e-mail. He'd know that the final destination of confidential Labor government mail is the front page of the conservative Daily Mail.

Which is where the internal Home Office e-mails relating to Savage's exclusion from Britain ended up this week.

Savage himself is owed most of the credit for exposing this latest farce: He decided to fight his exclusion by launching a slander suit against the home secretary (the hapless Jacqui Smith, who has since resigned amid an avalanche of gaffes), and then obtained his own list of incriminating e-mails as part of the legal process.

These e-mails are fully as silly -- and damaging -- as anything in "Yes, Prime Minister." One makes it explicit that Savage is being named as an excluded person "to ensure that the names disclosed . . . are not all Islamic extremists." Another reveals that the Prime Minister Gordon Brown and the Foreign Secretary David Miliband are "firmly behind" this "naming and shaming."

A third e-mail (from a civil servant who seems a potential Sir Humphrey) prudently warns his bosses that all this sounds too much like "duplicity."

Indeed, it does. The list of "named and shamed" included not only Islamic "extremists" but also two Russian skinheads imprisoned for 20 racial murders. What had Savage done to justify including him in such company?
...
It had another low political motive as well as that of appeasing radical Islamism -- namely, attempting to discredit conservatives by associating them with extremists and political criminals. Exactly the same tactics -- "guilt by association" and "guilt by exclusion" -- were later used against Geert Wilders, the anti-immigration Dutch politician. Whatever flaws of taste or opinion they may have committed, neither man posed any threat to security, the British way of life or even community tension.
...

There have been many attempts at false moral equivalency since 9-11 and this is just one of the sillier attempts. There have been other attempts to lump critics of Islam in with the Islamic religious bigots, even though those critics have never suggested genocide against Muslims much less participated in it.

What Savage has exposed is a sickness within the liberal mindset in the UK. The liberal culture there is at war with self defense and with anyone who criticizes the liberal thought police. While I am not a fan of Savage, he has performed a great service by exposing this duplicity.

The assumptions of the birthers

David Hirsayni:

The science fiction writer Damon Knight once claimed that the popularity of conspiracy theories could be explained by our "desire to believe that there is some group of folks who know what they're doing."
Wishful thinking. And few groups of folks have displayed less aptitude in the art of keeping secrets than government.
Yet, no matter who is in power, no matter how incompetent they may be, there always exists this irate minority that believes politicians possess supernatural powers of deception.
The mystery the nation faces isn't President Barack Obama's birth certificate. The mystery is how any American can believe that all the president's former political opponents, both the Republican and Democratic parties, Hawaiian officials and two Honolulu newspapers (nay, the entire press corps) could work in concert to conceal the biggest con of the eon.
Well, OK, not the biggest con.
There was George Bush, who, though often accused of possessing the brainpower of a ripe banana, was, nevertheless, also able to work on the North American Union agreement and mastermind an oily conspiracy for the ages.
According to a 2006 Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll, more than a third of the public suspects that Bush officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East.
Like we need an excuse.
President Bill Clinton's long-verifiable history of slimy behavior also was never enough to quench the anger of some. So we concocted the Don of Little Rock, who, though he wasn't shrewd enough to cover up a run-of-the-mill affair with an young intern, had the ability to surreptitiously run a cocaine trafficking outfit and knock off Vince Foster and Ron Brown.
Those who peddle the Obama birth certificate conspiracy are squandering their chance at making any substantive case against an administration that is waging a completely non-secretive battle against capitalism.
...

Hirsayni gets to the essence of what is wrong with the Birther conspiracies. They are wasting energy and credibility on an issue they will never prevail on and are giving the left an excuse to ignore substantive arguments against this administration.

Whether or not Obama produces some long form birth certificate, I doubt they will ever be satisfied. The whole idea of a teenage mother in Hawaii going off to a third world country to give birth is just to ridicules to begin with. But if they are so hung up on the documentation of the birth, how about they document the passport to Kenya? Did his mother even have a passport at that time?

The fundamental problem with the Birther movement is that its a Kings X argument. It is an attempt to remove from office someone who was elected because of some perceived glitch in the documentation of his birth. Even if they were successful, the reaction to their success would insure Democrat victories intot he future. That is why it is more important to defeat your political enemies on substance.

The venom that is being poured out against the unbelievers by the Birther movement is not going to persuade anyone and it makes them look all the more desperate. If it makes them feel better that those who disagree with them are part of some vast conspiracy or just fools, that is about all they are getting from the exercise.

Democrats get the Cliff Notes treatment on their health care bill

They held the tutorial in the Capitol basement. The leadership had set aside five hours, from 4 to 9 p.m. Monday, with one break for procedural votes upstairs. For the first 2 1/2 hours, about 180 members of Congress had to do something for which they have limited affinity: Remain speechless. Sit still in a folding chair. Listen to staffers. They couldn't even ask questions but only jot them down for discussion later in the evening.

They were all House Democrats, boning up on the historic and controversial health-care reform legislation that's being crafted in their chamber. The rough draft of HR 3200 ("America's Affordable Health Choices Act") was unveiled two weeks ago and runs more than 1,000 pages, not counting amendments. Last week the Democrats decided that, if they're going to try to sell this plan to their constituents, they need to have a better sense of what it says, line by line.

They needed a teach-in.

So their staffers led them through the bill, section by section -- from Division A, Title I, Subtitle A, Section 101 all the way through Division C, Title V, Subtitle E, Section 2541.

After a couple of hours the Democrats had adopted a refrain:

"No one's going to say we haven't read the bill," said Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland, as he took a break from the closed-door gathering.

"Nobody can say we haven't read it," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California, just minutes later.
...

I never thought those who used Cliff Notes had really read the material. I think I will still have to give the Democrats a failing grade on reading the bill. Because, lurking within a bill are some traps that can be overlooked with a scan and summary. What this process was really doing was giving them a cram course in talking points about their bill. It was about politics and having something to say to constituents, and not about legislation.

Other reasons to oppose national health care

Megan McArdle:

I know, most of you have already figured out why I oppose national health care. In a nutshell, I hate the poor and want them to die so that all my rich friends can use their bodies as mulch for their diamond ranches. But y'all keep asking, so here goes the longer explanation.

Basically, for me, it all boils down to public choice theory. Once we've got a comprehensive national health care plan, what are the government's incentives? I think they're bad, for the same reason the TSA is bad. I'm afraid that instead of Security Theater, we'll get Health Care Theater, where the government goes to elaborate lengths to convince us that we're getting the best possible health care, without actually providing it.

That's not just verbal theatrics. Agencies like Britain's NICE are a case in point. As long as people don't know that there are cancer treatments they're not getting, they're happy. Once they find out, satisfaction plunges. But the reason that people in Britain know about things like herceptin for early stage breast cancer is a robust private market in the US that experiments with this sort of thing.

So in the absence of a robust private US market, my assumption is that the government will focus on the apparent at the expense of the hard-to-measure. Innovation benefits future constituents who aren't voting now. Producing it is very expensive. On the other hand, cutting costs pleases voters this instant. This is, fundamentally, what cries to "use the government's negotiating power" with drug companies is about. Advocates of such a policy spend a lot of time arguing about whether pharmaceutical companies do, or do not, spend too much on marketing. This is besides the point. The government is not going to price to some unknowable socially optimal amount of pharma market power. It is going to price to what the voters want, which is to spend as little as possible right now.

It's not that I think that private companies wouldn't like to cut innovation. But in the presence of even rudimentary competition, they can't. Monopolies are not innovative, whether they are public or private.

...

There is much more, but she has put the left back on their heels with her opening. There is nothing like stripping your opponents of their favorite weapon from the git go. Her arguments about innovation and competition are ones that the Demcorats have not really addressed either. With Canada and the UK free riding on our innovation, it is hard to see where it will come from if we go their route.

Making the case for limited government from Austin

Rick Perry:

Austin, Texas, and Washington are a little more than 1,500 miles apart, but the differences in governing philosophy could be measured in light years.
Both towns feature well-intentioned public servants and impressive capitol domes, but they seem to represent the polar opposites in the ongoing debate over the benefits of limited government.
In Texas, we have long based our approach on individual liberty and initiative, believing that families, entrepreneurs and individual citizens deserve the opportunity to strive and succeed -- with minimal government interference. After regular, 140-day legislative sessions every two years, Texas lawmakers go home to live under the laws they pass.
Limited time at the Capitol not only requires state leaders to focus on the essentials, it also reduces the mischief unrestrained government can do. Limiting state government in Texas has led to balanced budgets, low taxes, a predictable regulatory climate and a fair legal system.
For example, our just-concluded legislative session yielded a balanced state budget, tax relief for 40,000 small businesses, and it left $9 billion unspent for future state needs.
States that have overspent, overtaxed and overregulated have seen greater deficits, job losses and even population loss. Texas proves that fiscal discipline, lawsuit reforms and prioritizing accountable public education can create huge dividends for citizens, taxpayers, employers and government.
Washington clearly marches to a different drummer, with Congress meeting in seemingly endless session. It seems the majority view inside the Beltway is that a benevolent, all-knowing government can expand, decide and encroach without limit because individual Americans simply cannot be trusted to make right choices. I believe this mind-set is driving the explosive growth of the federal government's size, spending and intrusiveness.
...
Washington's current fiscal excesses and unprecedented expansion have placed the protections and powers embodied in the 10th Amendment at risk. As the federal government expands before our very eyes, those of us who value freedom are simply sounding the alarm with every means available. We cannot remain silent while the powers-that-be in Washington methodically dismantle the system that has allowed Americans to determine their own destiny, compete on their own merits and enjoy the fruits of their labors.
I sincerely hope that our nation's durable principles prevail and keep our states and local communities from becoming mere functionaries of a bloated federal government. Together, citizens across the nation - regardless of political party - can remind this administration and Congress that the Framers of the Constitution deliberately limited the powers of the federal government.
When Washington's power to tax, regulate, mandate and meddle is restrained, American families are free to enjoy the liberty upon which our nation was founded. Limited government works.

Gov. Perry has been one of the leading spokesmen for the 10th Amendment of late. It fits with his statements before the Tea Party groups, and evidently has significant appeal. I think conservatives still have to make the case on the merits against the control freak government being pushed by the Democrats and liberals.

I do think that Texas makes that case with it success, using a formula that the liberals have rejected. In fact, it is by rejecting the evils of liberalism that Texas has prospered while California and New York have gone into decline.

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

The German pocket guide to fighting in Afghanistan

Times:

Taleban insurgents fighting German forces in northern Afghanistan have often lived to fight another day thanks to trilingual warnings that have to be shouted out before the men from the Bundeswehr can squeeze their triggers.

The seven-page pocket guide to combat tucked into the breast pocket of every German soldier offers such instructions as: “Before opening fire you are expected to declare loudly, in English, ‘United Nations — stop, or I will fire,” followed by a version in Pashtu — Melgaero Mellatuna- Dreesch, ka ne se dasee kawum!”

The alert must also be issued in Dari, and the booklet, devised by a committee in some faraway ministerial office, adds: “If the situation allows, the warning should be repeated.” The joke going round Nato mess tents poses the question: “How can you identify a German soldier? He is the corpse clutching a pocket guide.”

So nothing better reflects that the Germans are now in a real war for the first time since 1945 than the release of new rules of engagement this week, giving their forces more freedom to shoot back and shout warnings later.
...
German politicians, aware of an approaching general election that could give voice to pacificist sentiment, are still avoiding the K-word — Krieg (war) — and no modern German government can expect to be re-elected on a war platform. The reality looks a lot like war, and the new rules of engagement adapt to it. The seven-page booklet has been trimmed down to four pages and soldiers are not as hamstrung by regulations.

Up until last week it was, for example, forbidden to shoot a fleeing assailant, even though every civilian policeman in Germany has the right to shoot an armed fugitive in the arm or leg after barking a short warning.

The new guidelines say that soldiers can shoot to prevent an attack, allowing them to kill a rebel escaping from the battlefield. Much of the phrasing is nuanced but gives more room for soldiers to defend themselves. One section authorised defensive measures only if soldiers were under imminent threat; now they can open fire if “an assault is in preparation”. Changing a few words gives the Germans a few hundred more meters to react.
...

Before the change of manual they were probably killing the Taliban with laughter. I think we over did it in changing the German mind set after World War II.

The futility of emissions restrictions

China's three biggest power firms produced more greenhouse gas emissions last year than the whole of Britain, according to a Greenpeace report published today.

...

More evidence that George Bush was right about the Kyoto Treaty.

Twitter directions from the bureaucrats

From the Daily Mail:

You twit! Civil servant's instructions to ministers on how to send 140-character message are 20 pages long

You can't make some of this stuff up.

Way too many clothes

From the Daily Mail:

Shopaholic pensioner's body discovered under mountain of clothes during FIFTH search of her home

This would not happen to a nudist.

Outsourcing government jobs in the UK

Times:

More than 100 jobs at the British Council are to be outsourced to India as part of a massive cost-cutting drive to save the taxpayer money, The Times has learnt.

The decision to recruit local Indian workers to fill finance and IT posts has infuriated unions, who fear that this could be the blueprint for Whitehall.

It is believed to be the first time that the Civil Service or a quango has directly exported jobs to save costs. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office, which funds the British Council, is exploring similar options. A spokesman said that administrative jobs could be carried out by local staff in regional hubs overseas.
...

For a bunch of socialist this sounds kind of capitalistic. I suspect the politics will not be too approving.

Cutting off the Taliban cash flow

Barack Obama's special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan today announced a new US campaign to try to stem the flow of foreign funds to the Taliban, money believed to be running into hundreds of millions of dollars a year, mainly from the Gulf Arab states.
Richard Holbrooke, the former Balkan peace enforcer appointed by the White House to lead a new US policy on Afghanistan and place greater emphasis on Pakistan, said most of the money fuelling the insurgency came from supporters abroad, including in western Europe, and exceeded the Taliban's earnings from the opium and heroin trade.
The Taliban were the beneficiaries of "massive amounts of money from outside Afghanistan", Holbrooke said.
He declined to put a figure on the external funds, but the opium poppy trade and heroin refining operations are estimated to net the Taliban at least $400m (£244m) every year.
Led by officials at the US treasury and including Pentagon, FBI and CIA personnel, a new "task force on drugs and money" will try to weaken the Islamist insurgents, Holbrooke said.
"The money is coming in from sympathisers from all over the world with the bulk of it appearing to come from the Gulf, not any money we know of coming from governments," Holbrooke said. "Money is probably coming from sympathisers in western Europe as well. This is a huge problem."
In Brussels to discuss the Afghan campaign and the refugee crisis in Pakistan's Swat valley with senior EU and Nato officials, Holbrooke added that the Taliban used drug money locally to fund their operations in the "Pashtun belt", but that the more significant financial support came from abroad.
...

Maybe the New York Times will promote use of the Swift program in Europe for tracing the funds. OK, that is the program they "blew the whistle" on when the Bush administration was using it to trace terrorist funds. Their rationale for doing so never made much sense to me so I will not try to repeat it. The best way to cut off the funds is normally through cutting of banking operations. The Taliban probably have alternative ways of flowing the funds, but the people giving them the money probably do have to take it out of their banks and that may be a good starting place.

A policy of defeat in Afghansitan

Nial Gardiner:

...

In effect Miliband is saying that Britain and the United States must be willing to place cooperative, supposedly more reasonable wings of the Taliban back in local power in Afghanistan. This would be like putting the Nazis back in office after the fall of Berlin or the Khmer Rouge in charge of Cambodia again. No matter how much spin is placed on this negotiating strategy, it smacks of defeatism and appeasement, and a failure to place the conflict in Afghanistan within the broader context of a global war against a brutal Islamist ideology that seeks the destruction of the West and the free world.

British, American, Canadian and other NATO troops are not dying on the battlefields of south Asia to facilitate the return of a medieval-style government steeped in barbarism where women are treated as fourth-class citizens and individual liberty is non-existent. It would be only a matter of time before an Afghanistan dominated by “moderate” Taliban returned to its old position as a safe haven for al-Qaeda to launch attacks against New York, Washington or London.

...

Great Britain should have no truck with any strategy that allows a return to political power for the Taliban of whatever stripe. If this foolhardy policy is executed -and there are already signs it is backed by the Obama administration - it may ultimately lead to negotiations with al-Qaeda-linked groups in the region as well.

...

I am with Nial on this one. In fact the arguments of the other side overlook the fact that there are no moderate Taliban. There maybe some misguided people fighting with them, but they have no trouble going against them when the tide turns. But first you have to turn the tide and discredit the Taliban and their religious bigot ideology.

The idea that one can negotiate with nihilist is absurd.

The trials of the Havard faculty

Iowahawk takes an irreverent look at the Harvard faculty. If you are offended by the word A**hole, be advised. It is one of the funnier pieces I have seen recently. Here are a couple of sample paragraphs:

...

One after one came the cascade of stark stories: the rolled eyes of our department secretaries. The Spanish language mockery of our office janitors. The foul gestures of drunken strap-hanging Red Sox lumpenproles aboard the Red Line. The frequent police stops on the highway to Cape Ann and Martha's Vineyard for "Volvoing While Asshole." And then there are the insulting media stereotypes, where we are routinely caricatured as pompous, effete, self-important, irrelevant elitists. All, I might add, by a motley collection of lowbrow inferiors, few of whom have ever published in a peer-reviewed journal. Let alone edit one.
Sometimes it even comes at the hand of self-styled "peers" from D-list state ampersand institutions. One colleague recounted the tale of his restroom confrontation with a Texas A&M professor at a national academic conference last year. After relieving themselves at adjacent urinals, my colleague noticed the oaf leaving hastily for the plenary session and decided to gently point out his hygienic forgetfulness. "A Harvard man washes his hands after urinating," he said. "And an Aggie don't piss all over his hands, asshole," came the reply.
...

Those Aggies can be smooth talkers.

Nigerian Taliban base overrun

AFP:

Fresh fighting broke out here Tuesday after Nigerian forces shelled a mosque and the home of the leader of an Islamic fundamentalist sect on the third day of fierce clashes that have killed more than 250 people, witnesses said.
Sporadic mortar fire and gunshots rang out as soldiers shelled the mosque and home of Mohammed Yusuf in Maiduguri, sending plumes of smoke rising over the capital of northern Borno State.
An AFP correspondent, meanwhile, witnessed soldiers shooting three young men dead at point blank range close to the city's police headquarters.
The men who had just been arrested were seen kneeling and pleading for their lives before being shot.
"The deafening sounds are from mortar shelling of the house of the leader of the Taliban by the military," a source at the police headquarters told AFP.
"The military is also shelling the mosque run by the group, which hundreds of its followers have been guarding," he said.
The shelling came as Nigerian security forces sought to end an uprising by the self-styled Nigerian "Taliban" which has said it wants to lead an armed insurrection and rid society of "immorality" and "infidelity."
...
During the assault security forces overran the home of the elusive sect leader Yusuf and a nearby mosque used by his followers.
"We are not sure whether he has been killed in the shelling or has managed to escape," a police officer said of Yusuf.
The fighting began Sunday in nearby Bauchi State before spilling over into Yobe, and authorities said 55 were killed in both states.
However, most of the casualties appear to have been in Maiduguri, the northeastern city known as the birthplace and stronghold of the Islamic fundamentalist group.
Clashes between security forces and radical Islamists there on Monday alone killed at least 206 people, a police source told AFP.
...

There is more.

You have to wonder if as they face death, they think about whether God decided it was not a good idea to start this mass murder thing. Or is their something about radical Islam that makes some people completely lose their judgment?

It does look like a relatively short lived jihad.

China seizes vanadium at North Korea border

Reuters:

Chinese border police have seized 70 kg (154 lb) of the strategic metal vanadium bound for North Korea, a local newspaper said on Tuesday, foiling an attempt to smuggle a material used to make missile parts.
The U.N. Security Council has tightened restrictions on North Korea in response to its May 25 nuclear test. The sanctions are meant to cut off the North's arms trade.

Although the seizure is in line with China's own export controls, Chinese analysts had predicted Beijing would step up inspections on road and rail traffic into North Korea to help enforce the tightened sanctions.

Altogether 68 bottles totaling 70 kg of vanadium worth 200,000 yuan ($29,280) were seized at the Dandong border with North Korea, the Dandong News said.

"Customs agents at the Dandong border crossing inspect six boxes of the rare metal vanadium found hidden under boxes of fruit in a truck stopped during border checks," the newspaper said in a front-page caption of a photo dated July 24.

Vanadium is a metal that strengthens steel and protects against rust. It is alloyed with steel to make missile casings, as well as high speed tools, superconducting magnets and jet engines.
...

It seems like a pretty modest find, but it is a start. Perhaps China will get serious about enforcing the UN sanctions. If they do, the hermit kingdom will be greatly inconvenienced.

Chicago cooler since Obama left

From CBS 2 Chicago:

Chicago Sees Coldest July In 67 Years
Average Temperature Only 68.9 Degrees

Will he take credit for reducing global warming along with "saving" jobs?

Crowley gets support from fellow officers

Hat tip to Tigerhawk. The thing that still strikes me about this event is the first words that are quoted of Dr. Gates suggest he is someone with a chip on his shoulder and was willing to knock it off himself.

Hutchison shakes up campaign team

Dallas Morning News:

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison switched campaign managers on Monday, just weeks before she is expected to formally announce that she is challenging Rick Perry in the Republican primary for governor.
Campaign officials said former leader Rick Wiley is leaving because a recent health problem requires that he reduce the high stress and avoid the hectic pace of managing a large campaign.
Hutchison's campaign also introduced a host of new communications experts onto the team.
...

The polls suggest they have some catching up to do. Their biggest challenge is going to be separating the Senator from the Washington scene where things are happening that Texans are not happy with. Her meeting with the folks at the Texas Medical Center was a good start. She also needs to be more proactive in fighting against the Democrats' anti energy bill, i.e. cap and trade. That bill offers her several opportunities she needs to seize.

Hutchison makes argument for accepting stimulus funds

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison:

...

... I would have sought a way to cut the excessive federal strings. If that didn't work, I would have urged the Legislature to accept the funding and reduce the blow to Texas employers now. Then I would have had the political courage to make certain that unnecessary benefits were reversed once the current economic crisis has passed.
In fact, by engaging legislative leaders, a strong governor likely could have obtained commitments to make those future changes before accepting Texas' allotment.

Instead, Perry made a political statement carrying a $550 million price tag for Texas taxpayers. The governor's refusal to accept federal dollars to aid Texas employers was neither conservative nor responsible. It was instead the triumph of political gamesmanship over effective leadership.

It is an interesting argument, but may be too complicated to be effective. It also carries with it another question about why she was not able to cut the excessive federal strings from her office in Washington.

Perry clearly intends to make control freak federal policies an issue in the race. Hutchison is arguing that she is better equipped to deal with the them rather than rejecting aid with strings. I suspect Perry will argue that her solution would fall into the Democrats trap.

She is right about the political gamesmanship, but she needs to at least point out that the gamesmanship started with the Democrats in Washington. Otherwise she risks being tied to them.

Pakistan finds substantial evidence of LET Mumbai plot

Wall Street Journal:

Pakistani investigators told India they have found substantial, incriminating evidence that directly connects Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba to November's terrorist attacks in Mumbai.
The latest report on Pakistan's investigation, handed to Indian authorities this month, said material recovered from Lashkar camps in Karachi and the southern coastal town of Thatta indicated the terrorists were given training, weapons and direction by the militant outfit. The evidence included handwritten diaries, training manuals, Indian maps and operational instructions, said the report, a copy of which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
"The investigation has established beyond any reasonable doubt that the defunct LeT activists conspired, abetted, planned, financed and established [the] communication network to carry out terror attacks in Mumbai," the report said.

Lashkar-e-Taiba was outlawed by Pakistan in 2002, but it continued to operate under the banner of Jamaat ud Dawa, its purported charity arm.
...

This is encouraging news that suggest a better effort on the part of the Pakistan government than previous reports. In this post based on a NY Times report it appeared the government was looking for excuses not to prosecute the perps. There should be no sympathy for the LET mass murders.

Arms sold to Venezuela found in FARC camp

LA Times:

Colombia's tenuous relations with Venezuela have worsened again with the revelation that Swedish-made rockets and launchers sold to the Venezuelan armed forces have been recovered in a Colombian rebel group's camp.

Last week, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez canceled a summit with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and said he would "reassess" binational relations in light of Colombia's consent to host U.S. anti-drug aircraft at as many as four air bases.

Then, on Sunday, Uribe confirmed reports that his military had recovered powerful antitank rockets during a raid on a Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, weapons cache in the Macarena National Park last year.

Without naming the suspected supplier, Uribe said the FARC had acquired them on the "international arms market" and that protests had been made with unnamed countries "through diplomatic channels."

Colombian Defense Ministry officials said Monday that the rockets were AT4 shoulder-fired antitank weapons made by Saab Bofors Dynamics with serial numbers indicating they were sold to Venezuela. Saab official Thomas Samuelsson confirmed to reporters that his company made the rockets and had sold them to Venezuela, which he said had "signed a final-destination agreement" forbidding re-export without notification.

...

The disclosure does not prove that the Chavez government sold or willingly gave them to rebels, said Jane's Americas analyst Anna Gilmour. Venezuelan arsenals, she said, are notorious for "seepage" by corrupt officers, who resell arms and munitions as contraband.

In a news conference Monday, Venezuelan Interior Minister Tarek El Aissami denied giving the weapons to the FARC or "any collaboration with criminal or terrorist organizations. . . . If anything, we have combated terrorism."

Still, the recovered weapons seem to resemble rockets described in e-mails allegedly retrieved from the laptop computers of Raul Reyes, the FARC commander killed by Colombian forces in a March 2008 raid in Ecuador.

As represented by the Colombian government, the e-mails show exchanges between Reyes and rebel emissaries in Venezuela allegedly trying to acquire arms, including rockets, from high-level Venezuelan officials.

...

An article this month in the Bogota daily newspaper El Tiempo said the FARC was negotiating with "Venezuelan contacts" to buy as many as 20 Russian Igla S-24 surface-to-air missile launchers.

...

A little surface to air "slippage" appears in the pipeline. While it is possible that Chavez did not authorize the sale of these weapons the likelihood is remote that the control freak would not be aware. When you add Chavez's opposition to US flights to stop drug transit it is easy to get the idea that Chavez is on the side of the narco terrorist.

Update: Chavez has responded with buffoonery:

...

"In view of this new aggression by the government of Colombia I have ordered the withdrawal of our ambassador to Bogota," Chavez said on state television.

"We will freeze relations with Colombia," the leftist leader added.

So when evidence is found that weapons he purchased are in the hands of narco terrorist, Chavez claims that is Colombian aggression? The man has no shame.

Divorce drives up health care problems

CNN:

Divorce causes more than bitterness and broken hearts. The trauma of a split can leave long-lasting effects on mental and physical health that remarriage might not repair, according to research released this week.

"People who lose a marriage take such damage to their health," said Linda Waite, a sociologist at the University of Chicago in Illinois.
Waite and co-author Mary Elizabeth Hughes, of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, found that divorced or widowed people have 20 percent more chronic health conditions such as heart disease, diabetes or cancer than married people. They also have 23 percent more mobility limitations, such as trouble climbing stairs or walking a block.
...

Divorce has been equated to the grieving process similar to that of death. The emotional stress can be significant. Perhaps Obama could reduce the cost of health care in America if he could figure out a way to reduce the divorce rate. I suspect the cost saving would be significant.

Catching up with politics of fraud on health care

Rich Lowry:

BARACK Obama raised near-millennial expectations last year. If elected, he'd transform the dreary realities of Washington with his blazing freshness. He'd win over Republicans with his engaging post-partisanship. He'd solve long-standing national problems with his nonideological pragmatism.

None of this overpromising was ever very likely to come to fruition. But Obama has now fallen down on a much more elemental test of leadership: He can't tell the truth about his signature initiative.

Obama's health-care push has been the most dishonest White House advocacy in recent memory. What he says about reform bears no relation to the legislation he wants Congress to pass as soon as recalcitrant Democrats can be bludgeoned into line.

Obama says no one will lose his private coverage; costs will be controlled; and the legislation will be paid for. Obama must know that these are all politically necessary things to say, and also that none of them describes Nancy Pelosi's handiwork.

Obama can't bring himself to grapple with "reality-based" health-care reform, because it belies too many of his most essential sound bites. In the campaign, Obama said, "We need to tell people what they need to hear, not what they want to hear." On health care, Obama knows that if he doesn't keep telling people what they want to hear -- regardless of the facts -- all is lost.

The left branded George W. Bush a "liar" for making assertions about Iraq's weapons that were supported by the evidence, but turned out not to be true. Obama is saying things that aren't even supported by the evidence. They are routinely debunked by the independent Congressional Budget Office, which doesn't stop Obama from continuing to say them. It's as if the CIA issued reports every other week in 2002 explaining that no, Iraq didn't have a nuclear program nor any stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons, and Bush kept warning of the nonexistent WMD anyway.
...

I get the impression that Obama is of the belief that his saying it makes it so. It is an irrational faith in his own words and opinions. The politics of fraud has worked well for him up to this point so why stop?

The deal Iran thinks they can get from Obama

Amir Taheri:

AS the Obama administration intensifies its diplomatic moves in the Mid dle East, Tehran's possible misreading of its signals may doom its hopes of "positive engagement" with the Islamic Republic.

As Tehran sees it, the administration has already accepted a nuclear-armed Iran as a fait accompli and is only trying to secure some concessions from the Khomeinist regime.

According to the newspaper Kayhan, which reflects the views of the leadership in Tehran, the United States is "in a state of strategic desperation" in the Middle East and has no stomach for a serious confrontation with Iran.

"America's strategic needs in the region are so intense that the Obama administration is prepared to accept the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran," the paper said in an editorial Sunday. It claimed that the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has already informed allies in the region of that "acceptance."

The paper said: "In her speech last week, Clinton accepted the assumption of a nuclear-armed Iran. She only tried to show that the threat posed by a nuclear-armed Iran has been exaggerated and that the classical doctrine of deterrence through Mutually Assured Destruction could work with Iran as it did with other nuclear powers."

In this theory, President Obama is trying to establish a linkage, whereby Israel would accept a nuclear-armed Iran while Iran would withdraw its opposition to a two-state solution for the Palestinian problem.

The paper also notes that Clinton has offered to help America's Arab allies build up their defenses in response to a nuclear-armed Iran. In other words, America will no longer focus its energies on stopping Iran from becoming nuclear, but instead deploy its power and prestige to prevent its Arab allies from building up a nuclear capability.

The Kayhan editorial claims that Washington isn't even thinking of threatening Iran with further sanctions. "They have no long-term plan for dealing with Iran," it argues. "Their strategy consists of begging us to talk with them."
...

I can understand why they may have that impression since that seems to be the signal Obama has been sending since the 2008 campaign. They may have a different impression come September which appears to be the deadline for talks. At that point they will probably find that the deal Obama is willing to offer is not that different from the one that Bush was offering.

I think their reaction will be to lash out and accelerate their accelerators. The belief that Iran can be talked out of their nuclear program appears to be based on the false premise that the government can be reasoned with. But when you consider that it is made up of religious bigots who think they are on a mission from God which includes wiping out Israel and the US, what has logic got to do with it?

GOP opposition more informed on health care bill

Byron York:

Pick your average member of the House of Representatives, one who has a lot of work to do but hasn't been deeply involved in crafting the massive health care makeover bill. Who knows more about what's in that bill -- Mr. Average Democrat, or Mr. Average Republican?

Bet on the Republican. For weeks now, GOP lawmakers have been studying the Democratic health care bill, and for months before that, they studied preliminary Democratic plans. Many rank-and-file Democrats, on the other hand, have been so ill-informed about what their leadership has been doing that it was only last week, when the party offered a five-hour class on the bill's contents, that some members began to grasp the details.

That means the Republicans hold an advantage going into the health care ground war that will unfold during the August recess, when lawmakers go home to visit with voters. "We learned from the stimulus, and the other side didn't," says one savvy GOP aide. "They pushed through a bill as fast as possible so that no one knew what was in it. Very early on, there was a clear goal that Republican members of Congress would know what was in this [health care] bill and what its impact would be."

House Republicans had six private health care seminars in May, two in June and three so far in July, with the ones this month dealing specifically with the Democratic proposal on the table. GOP officials estimate about three-quarters of the Republican members have gone through the sessions.

"This is not a bill you can skim," says Rep. Dave Camp, the ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee. "You have to read it again and again and find new nuances. It's a big, complex piece of legislation."

Camp calls the August break "absolutely critical in terms of communication." Speaking by phone from the small town of Stanwood, Mich., where he was meeting with constituents, Camp told me voters are hungry for the details of the health care proposal; people come up to him in the grocery store and ask him how this or that measure would work.

Republicans want voters to know as much as possible. "If I went to most people and said there was an unelected health choices commissioner, with the power to override state law on what should or should not be included in an acceptable insurance plan -- most people would not know that," says Camp. They wouldn't like it, either.

To help make their case, GOP lawmakers have created something they call the "Prescription Pad" on their Ways and Means Committee Web site, offering regular updates on the bill's contents. But they know August is their real chance to get the message out. There's a debate going on among Republicans."...
...

Most Democrats including the President appear to be ill informed about this legislation. Some are blase about their ignorance. The Republicans need to make them pay for that ignorance and the recess will give them that opportunity.

Bad news for those with health care insurance

Martin Feldstein:

For the 85 percent of Americans who already have health insurance, the Obama health plan is bad news. It means higher taxes, less health care and no protection if they lose their current insurance because of unemployment or early retirement.

President Obama's primary goal is to extend formal health insurance to those low-income individuals who are currently uninsured despite the nearly $300-billion-a-year Medicaid program. Doing so the Obama way would cost more than $1 trillion over the next 10 years. There surely must be better and less costly ways to improve the health and health care of that low-income group.

Although the president claims he can finance the enormous increase in costs by raising taxes only on high-income individuals, tax experts know that this won't work. Experience shows that raising the top income-tax rate from 35 percent today to more than 45 percent -- the effect of adding the proposed health surcharge to the increase resulting from letting the Bush tax cuts expire for high-income taxpayers -- would change the behavior of high-income individuals in ways that would shrink their taxable incomes and therefore produce less revenue. The result would be larger deficits and higher taxes on the middle class. Because of the unprecedented deficits forecast for the next decade, this is definitely not a time to start a major new spending program.

A second key goal of the Obama health plan is to slow the growth of health-care spending. The president's budget calls explicitly for cutting Medicare to help pay for the expanded benefits for low-income individuals. But the administration's goal is bigger than that. It is to cut dramatically the amount of health care that we all consume.
...

There is much more. The Democrats' plan would mean less service for those with insurance at greater cost to give more to the uninsured. If voters recognize those facts they should be able to defeat these bills.

Obama's Israel policy

Ralph Peters:

YOU'VE sacrificed all your family had to build your modest dream home by a lake. Now a wildfire races toward you.

A former friend phones from his mansion across the water, ordering you not to call the fire brigade -- he's sending a servant to discuss things with the flames. Meanwhile, your rich buddy insists you tear down the tree-house you built for your kids: It annoys the local thugs he wants to befriend.

That's Israel's position today. Iran blazes with nuclear ambitions. Key leaders in Tehran have called, without cease, for the "Zionist entity's destruction." And Israel's former ally, the United States, implies that the situation isn't that serious.

No, what's most important to the Obama team is a total freeze on Jewish settlements on anything the State Department's Bureau of Politically Correct Geography decides is Arab land. Preventing a long-established settler from building a new room for a growing family is more important than halting Iran's weapons program.

It's true: Iran might not use the nukes it intends to acquire. But if you were raising your children in Tel Aviv, how would you like your chances?

Pick an arbitrary number. Say the odds are only one in five that Iran would actually launch nukes at Israel. In Washington, that might seem like a reasonable calculation. In Jerusalem, the "only" part would sound like pure irony.

President Obama's position may evolve as he comes to grips with reality (his views on Russia are already maturing, if Joe Biden can be believed). But he appears to have come to the Oval Office with an anti-Israel chip on his shoulder -- put there by left-wing associates over the decades.

What our president presents as even-handedness toward the Palestinians not only ignores countless facts and the lessons of history but also encourages Arab intransigence. Why compromise, when Washington's backing away from Israel?

The road to peace -- if there is one -- doesn't lead through tolerance of those who want every Jew dead.
...
Clinton test-marketed the administration's willingness to accept a nuclear-armed Iran. Instead of trying to prevent Tehran's acquisition of such weapons, she told our regional allies (real or imagined) that we'd respond by extending a "defense umbrella" to negate the effects of Iranian nukes.

Except that it wouldn't. What good would such a defense umbrella be to Israel after its destruction?

And one suspects that, with Tel Aviv a wasteland, "cooler heads would prevail" and there would be no response in kind, that we'd all just "deplore" what happened and hold conferences to insure it "never happens again."

Apart from its bewildering reluctance to try to understand Iran's leaders on their own terms, this administration clearly doesn't grasp the dynamics of nuclear proliferation among rogue regimes.
...
This administration must stop living in a fantasy world in which monstrous fanatics will do what we want because we're suddenly nice to them. You don't deter butchers who believe they're on a mission from their god by complimenting them on their rich history.
...

Even if no settlement had ever been built, we would be not one with closer to peace in the Middle East and in fact we would probably be further from peace because the settlements have given the Palestinians an incentive to do a deal or lose even more potential real estate.

What we really need to workout with Israel is coordination of any attacks on Iran. When Iran lashes out after it is attacked we need to be ready to deal with that. That to me was the importance of the Secretary of Defense's visit to Israel. He was also probably buying time for the September event at the UN, which is to be Iran's last chance to stop its nuclear program.

Texas Medical Center tells Obama to slow down

Houston Chronicle:

In their first unified voice on the subject, Texas Medical Center leaders Monday sent a message to Congress as it tries to reform America's troubled health care system: slow down.

Appearing at a news conference sponsored by U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, many of the medical center's biggest names said the issue is too important to rush through legislation that could have unforeseen harmful consequences.

“This is a monumental piece of legislation that is going to impact people for many years, both the 300 million people who have insurance and the 47 million who don't,” said Dan Wolterman, CEO of the Memorial Hermann Health Care System. “The priority should be, let's get it right, not let's get it done fast.”

Afterward, some of the leaders acknowledged the time needed might extend past 2009 but said it's more important to pass a good bill than to meet an arbitrary timetable. Two said the process ought to take years, perhaps involving a series of bills.
...
At the news conference at Ben Taub Hospital on Monday, Hutchison said “everything about the bill is counter intuitive,” then turned over the podium to a who's who of medical center leaders that included Harris County Hospital District Chairman David Lopez, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston President Dr. Larry Kaiser, Texas Heart Institute President Dr. James Willerson and Ben Taub Chief of Staff Ken Mattox. Every major medical center institution was represented.

Though each brought its own concerns, they were united that reform is necessary but that Congress needs to tread carefully to preserve the best of American health care while it tries to fix what's broken. They complained that Congress has done little to solicit input from the medical community.
...
Medical center leaders' criticism of reform efforts include: no mechanism to pay for the expanded coverage by cutting waste, fraud and errors; no attention paid to the role of illegal immigrants on health care costs; and no emphasis on prevention and graduate medical education.

The unity extended to those not at the press conference, such as Texas Medical Center President Richard Wainerdi, who said the House bill “may have unintended consequences that could be catastrophic to providers and patients” and UT M.D. Anderson Cancer Center President Dr. John Mendelsohn, who said “Congress needs to focus on the whole package, not just access.”

These guys don't sound like people trying to run up the bill with unnecessary tonsillectomies.

Concern over the role of illegal immigrants has already been addressed. The Democrats have voted to give them free medical care, even if it means the hospitals will have to eat the cost. It is surprising to me that Republicans have not made more of an issue of this. Are they concerned about losing the vote of illegals?

Sen. Hutchison made an astute political move in putting this conference together. It gives her some ammo to use against the Democrat bill as well as some political cover.

Sensing danger in a war zone

The sight was not that unusual, at least not for Mosul, Iraq, on a summer morning: a car parked on the sidewalk, facing opposite traffic, its windows rolled up tight. Two young boys stared out the back window, kindergarten age maybe, their faces leaning together as if to share a whisper.

The soldier patrolling closest to the car stopped. It had to be hot in there; it was 120 degrees outside. “Permission to approach, sir, to give them some water,” the soldier said to Sgt. First Class Edward Tierney, who led the nine-man patrol that morning.
“I said no — no,” Sergeant Tierney said in a telephone interview from Afghanistan. He said he had an urge to move back before he knew why: “My body suddenly got cooler; you know, that danger feeling.”
The United States military has spent billions on hardware, like signal jamming technology, to detect and destroy what the military calls improvised explosive devices, or I.E.D.’s, the roadside bombs that have proved to be the greatest threat in Iraq and now in Afghanistan, where Sergeant Tierney is training soldiers to foil bomb attacks.
Still, high-tech gear, while helping to reduce casualties, remains a mere supplement to the most sensitive detection system of all — the human brain. Troops on the ground, using only their senses and experience, are responsible for foiling many I.E.D. attacks, and, like Sergeant Tierney, they often cite a gut feeling or a hunch as their first clue.
Everyone has hunches — about friends’ motives, about the stock market, about when to fold a hand of poker and when to hold it. But United States troops are now at the center of a large effort to understand how it is that in a life-or-death situation, some people’s brains can sense danger and act on it well before others’ do.
Experience matters, of course: if you have seen something before, you are more likely to anticipate it the next time. And yet, recent research suggests that something else is at work, too.
Small differences in how the brain processes images, how well it reads emotions and how it manages surges in stress hormones help explain why some people sense imminent danger before most others do.

...

In recent years, the bombs have become more powerful, the hiding places ever more devious. Bombs in fake rocks. Bombs in poured concrete, built into curbs. Bombs triggered by decoy bombs.
“On one route sweep mission, there was a noticeable I.E.D. in the middle of the road, but it was a decoy,” said Lt. Donovan Campbell, who in 2004 led a Marine platoon for seven months of heavy fighting in Ramadi and wrote a vivid book, “Joker One,” about the experience. “The real bomb was encased in concrete, a hundred meters away, in the midst of rubble. One of my Marines spotted it. He said, ‘That block looks too symmetrical, too perfect.’ ”
Lieutenant Campbell had the area cleared and the bomb destroyed.

...

The men and women who performed best in the Army’s I.E.D. detection study had the sort of knowledge gained through experience, according to a preliminary analysis of the results; but many also had superb depth perception and a keen ability to sustain intense focus for long periods. The ability to pick odd shapes masked in complex backgrounds — a “Where’s Waldo” type of skill that some call anomaly detection — also predicted performance on some of the roadside bomb simulations.

...

There is much more. This is an interesting and important story. For the troops it is talking about life or death decisions.

Good warriors have always had excellent tracker skills. In Vietnam they could sniff out ambush locations or potential spots for preregistered mortar fire. This hypersensitivity to their environment in a chaotic situation cannot not always be taught, but my guess is that gamers who learn to quickly recognize danger would probably develop the skills over time. I suspect the military could develop the recognition skills with a war game.

If you read the story to the end you find some of the clues that tipped the sergeant to the booby trapped car with the boys inside. While the story is about the senses used to detect danger in the war zone, there is something to be said for the depravity of an enemy who would use small boys in a car bomb to lure troops to their possible death. When the multi cultis talk about all cultures being equal they demonstrate their own lack of morals if they can't find this kind of conduct evil.

Monday, July 27, 2009

DeMint fights the health care control freaks

On the second floor of the Lexington Medical Center here, Burrell Best, 37, an electrical engineer, and his wife celebrated the birth of their second daughter and voiced fear about the government-run health-care plan being pushed by leading congressional Democrats: "I've just never been a government-takeover kind of guy."

Five floors above him, J.B. Barker, 85, a retired truck driver, sat in a bed recovering from heart and lung congestion problems. Lunching on pepperoni pizza and Pepsi with his wife, Ellen, sitting at his side, Barker said that he does not want Washington meddling with his medical care and that he doubts Congress can craft a better system: "What we have is about as good as we can do."

As anxiety about health-care reform was being expressed Monday on the medical center's campus in this conservative suburb of South Carolina's capital, Sen. Jim DeMint (S.C.) was sharpening his opposition to President Obama's attempt to overhaul the health-care industry.

The Republican has used fiery rhetoric to create a sense of urgency on the matter, making himself a champion of conservatives in the process.

"I'm swinging on this issue," DeMint said in an interview. "If I can stop a government takeover, I will. . . . It's not personal. It's not political. It's about stopping a bad policy."

At the Heritage Foundation in Washington on Monday night, the senator signed copies of his new book, "Saving Freedom: We Can Stop America's Slide into Socialism," and received a hero's welcome. Edwin J. Feulner, president of the conservative think tank, introduced him by saying: "DeMint may be the junior senator from South Carolina, but here we call him the senior senator from the Heritage Foundation."

Last week, DeMint became a target for Obama allies after he likened the president's health-care fight to Napoleon Bonaparte's final defeat. "If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo," he said in a conference call with GOP activists. "It will break him."
...
"What will it cost South Carolina families to do nothing?" Rep. James E. Clyburn said in an interview Monday. "This plan would help make things better. Doing nothing, things will get worse."

...

Democrats have tried to use DeMint's statement against him but what they are really doing is trying to demonize DeMint to rally their rebelling base. Clyburn's statement is one for which there is no proof and there is considerable evidence that the Democrats' plan will make things worse cutting off care for some elderly and reducing available procedures, It could cut innovation and drive us further into debt with its costs. But, then Clyburn is probably one of those Demcorats who have never read the bill. When people like Sen. DeMint read it and point out its deficiencies it has to be troubling.

As for the attacks I did a tweet last week where I quoted Obama as saying that "the health care bill was not about him. It is about Jim DeMint." Their reaction to his comments certainly suggest as much. It is interesting that at the same time they were attacking DeMint they were telling the Blue Dogs they were in the process of destroying his presidency. That sounds like they agree with DeMint about at least one thing.

The legal aid high life

Amanda Carpenter:

During the worst economic downturn in decades, the federal program that provides free legal help to impoverished Americans has spent tax dollars on a decorative natural-stone wall, no-bid contracts for consultants, alcohol for a congressional party and more than 100 casino hotel rooms that were never occupied, government documents show.
The Legal Services Corp. - which stirred national controversy a few years back by paying for limousines, first-class airfare and $14 Death by Chocolate pastries for its executives - has created new symbols of excessive spending in recent months, according to federal audit reports and congressional correspondence obtained by The Washington Times.
And the timing couldn't be worse.
Even as President Obama was calling on government to reduce wasteful spending, his administration was trying to persuade Congress to increase LSC's funding by $45 million to help more Americans who are being evicted from homes or are facing other economic hardships and are in need of subsidized legal help.
But lawmakers are wary, especially after receiving a barrage of recent, critical reports from the program's independent watchdog and the congressional auditing office.
Those reports found that the agency had violated the government's open-meeting law, had opened the door for its own employees to "double-dip" by collecting pay from the program's headquarters and separate programs, had failed to follow its own contracting procedures and had unnecessarily handed out consulting contracts without competitive bidding.
The problems are so widespread that auditors in March questioned more than $80,000 in expenses for a California program that provides legal help to Indians, including payment for 136 hotel rooms at the Pechanga Resort & Casino, in Temecula, Calif., that were never used for a conference on tribal court.
...

I will be surprised if the Democrats in Congress and the Obama White House do much about this. If they are still throwing billions of dollars at a corrupt organization like ACORN, this looks like chump change.

The story may be embarrassing, but the real story should be who if anyone gets fired because of this. At a time when top law firms are laying off experienced associates the pool of talent has rarely been greater. The administration should seize the opportunity and put some honest people in these positions. Treat them like they received TARP funds.

Driven to text

The first study of drivers texting inside their vehicles shows that the risk sharply exceeds previous estimates based on laboratory research — and far surpasses the dangers of other driving distractions.

The new study, which entailed outfitting the cabs of long-haul trucks with video cameras over 18 months, found that when the drivers texted, their collision risk was 23 times greater than when not texting.
The Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, which compiled the research and plans to release its findings on Tuesday, also measured the time drivers took their eyes from the road to send or receive texts.
In the moments before a crash or near crash, drivers typically spent nearly five seconds looking at their devices — enough time at typical highway speeds to cover more than the length of a football field.

...

This is something that I will never have to worry about doing. While I am pretty tech savvy, I have never enjoyed text messaging. In fact I think I would rather eat dirt than screw around with texting even though my cell phone has a slide out qwerty key board.

I really like email, on my computers, but I have never liked the tiny keyboards with the special strokes required to send an ordinary message. I send all my Tweets from my computer too. For a while, I was retrieving my Gmail on the phone, but that got to be a hassle not worth pursuing too.

But if you think texting while driving is hazardous, there are some politicians who have found that texting while having an affair is career threatening too. There is nothing quite as embarrassing as having your cutesy love notes exposed.

The German chauffeur scandal

Talk about car trouble.

Ulla Schmidt, the German health minister, had her chauffeur drive her armored Mercedes S-class official vehicle some 1,500 miles from Germany to Spain, where she is vacationing on the coast near Alicante. Voters back home probably never would have been the wiser had thieves not stolen the car, leaving Ms. Schmidt without a vehicle but with some explaining to do.
A leading taxpayers’ group pounced on Ms. Schmidt, a Social Democrat, over the wasted money in driving the car halfway across Europe. The opposition Green Party immediately took issue with the pollution created by the drive.
“There is no scandal,” Ms. Schmidt told the newspaper Aachener Zeitung, adding that it was “more economical” to use her regular driver and car than to hire both in Spain.
Ms. Schmidt insisted that everything was handled correctly, or at least within the letter of the law, because she made several official visits during her vacation and paid out of her own pocket for private jaunts. But for the left-wing Social Democrats, whose dwindling hopes of winning the Sept. 27 election rest on convincing voters that, during these hard economic times, they are the party more in touch with the plight of the average person, a chauffeur scandal is anything but helpful.

...

The perks of office in Europe and the UK have become an embarrassment for left of center parties. Spain with its socialist government is dealing with record unemployment and could have used her hire of local talent. The US maybe the only country in the West to have elected a left of center government in recent years and we are already regretting it.

We have a President who has destroyed much of the travel and entertainment business with his dictum's about corporate travel, while he takes extravagant trips for a date in New York and is planning a vacation at a ritzy resort in Massachusetts this summer. At some point the trips may become a scandal as he sends the deficit to new depths.

Women still fighting for liberation in Afghansitan

Independent:

I am not sure how many more days I will be alive," Malalai Joya says quietly.

The warlords who make up the new "democratic" government in Afghanistan have been sending bullets and bombs to kill this tiny 30-year-old from the refugee camps for years – and they seem to be getting closer with every attempt. Her enemies call her a "dead woman walking". "But I don't fear death, I fear remaining silent in the face of injustice," she says plainly. "I am young and I want to live. But I say to those who would eliminate my voice: 'I am ready, wherever and whenever you might strike. You can cut down the flower, but nothing can stop the coming of the spring.'"

The story of Malalai Joya turns everything we have been told about Afghanistan inside out. In the official rhetoric, she is what we have been fighting for. Here is a young Afghan woman who set up a secret underground school for girls under the Taliban and – when they were toppled – cast off the burka, ran for parliament, and took on the religious fundamentalists.
But she says: "Dust has been thrown into the eyes of the world by your governments. You have not been told the truth. The situation now is as catastrophic as it was under the Taliban for women. Your governments have replaced the fundamentalist rule of the Taliban with another fundamentalist regime of warlords. [That is] what your soldiers are dying for." Instead of being liberated, she is on the brink of being killed.

The story of Joya is the story of another Afghanistan – the one behind the burka, and behind the propaganda.
...

There is much more.

The backwardness of the Afghan men is hard to comprehend. Bringing them into modern civilization is going to be a continuing battle, but at least we are giving these women a chance they would never have had under the Taliban. It is another reason why compromise with the Taliban is unacceptable. They must be destroyed.

The Gurkha goddess goes to Nepal

Daily Mail:

Leaning heavily on his carved walking stick, occasionally pausing for breath on the mountain track, the old Gurkha struggled on towards his goal - to hug his 'goddess', Joanna Lumley.
And when the 84-year-old veteran of the Burma jungles finally came face to face with the actress yesterday, he brought tears to her eyes when she learned of his journey to give her his thanks.
Harka Bahadur Pun's pilgrimage from his village in western Nepal to Kathmandu involved an agonising six-hour trek along stony tracks to a village where he could catch a bus for the 12-hour journey to the mountain republic's capital.
'You ask why an old man like me would want to do this,' he said. 'But before I die I made a promise to myself that I would come here one way or another to meet this wonderful woman called Joanna Lumley.'
Miss Lumley, 63, is in Nepal to meet retired Gurkhas, many of whom now have the right to take up residence in the UK following her victory in May.
...

The Gurkhas are some of the bravest most determined fighters in the world and I am glad to see the British are finally allowing them to immigrate to the country they have fought so hard for. There are some interesting photos of the visit. It is hard to overlook the mutual affection. Her father fought with Gurkha troops in World War II against the Japanese.

Talking with the Taliban?

A concerted effort to start unprecedented talks between Taliban and British and American envoys was outlined today in a significant change in tactics designed to bring about a breakthrough in the attritional, eight-year conflict in Afghanistan.
Senior ministers and commanders on the ground believe they have created the right conditions to open up a dialogue with "second-tier" local leaders now the Taliban have been forced back in a swath of Helmand province.
They are hoping that Britain's continuing military presence in Helmand, strengthened by the arrival of thousands of US troops, will encourage Taliban commanders to end the insurgency. There is even talk in London and Washington of a military "exit strategy".
Speaking at the end of the five-week Operation Panther's Claw in which hundreds of British troops were reported to have cleared insurgents from a vital region of Helmand province, Lieutenant-General Simon Mayall, deputy chief of defence staff, said: "It gives the Taliban 'second tier' room to reconnect with the government and this is absolutely at the heart of this operation."
The second tier of the insurgency are regarded as crucial because they control large numbers of Taliban fighters in Pashtun-dominated southern Afghanistan. The first tier of Taliban commanders – hardliners around Mullah Omar – could not be expected to start talks in the foreseeable future. The third tier – footsoldiers with no strong commitments – are not regarded as influential or significant players.
...

I think this is a left wing fantasy in the UK. The Taliban are not honorable people. There word is no good and they have a religious belief that it is their duty to lie to people of other faiths in order to achieve their objectives. They also have expressed no interest in any such talks, which makes the exercise look desperate and ridiculous. If the British left is so eager to get a fig leaf to cover their desire for retreat, I see no reason for the US to give it to them.

7 charged with terrorism in Raleigh NC

Raleigh News & Observer:

Seven men have been indicted today in the Eastern District of North Carolina's federal court on terrorism charges.
Indicted were: Daniel Patrick Boyd, 39; Hysen Sherifi, 24; Anes Subasic, 33; Zakariya Boyd, 20; Dylan Boyd, 22; Mohammad Omar Aly Hassan, 22; and Ziyad Yaghi, 21.
All are charged with conspiring to provide support to terrorists and conspiring to murder, kidnap, maim and injure persons abroad.
The charges are related to allegations that they helped raise money and provide training for terrorism operations in Tel Aviv, Israel.
Federal officials will not say where the men are being held.
Daniel Boyd is alleged in the indictment to have practiced "military tactics and the use of weapons" on private property in Caswell County, N.C., in over the past two months.
Public records show that the Boyds are residents of Willow Spring in Johnston County.
According to the indictment, Daniel Boyd, Zakariya Boyd, Dylan Boyd, Hassan, and Yaghi are U.S. citizens and residents of North Carolina. Subasic is a naturalized U.S. citizen and North Carolina resident, and Sherifi is a Kosovo native and U.S. legal permanent resident living in North Carolina.
... The indictment alleges that Daniel Boyd "is a veteran of terrorist training camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan who, over the past three years, has conspired with others in this country to recruit and help young men travel overseas in order to kill," said David Kris, an assistant attorney general in the Justice Department's National Security Division.
...

Their alleged terrorist objectives appear to be aimed at Israel where some of them traveled in 2007 in a failed terrorist attempt. Daniel Boyd spent a few years in Pakistan and Afghanistan in the early 90s where he went through terrorist training. He apparently also traveled to Kosovo.

Their motivation appears to be their religious bigotry toward Israel.

Taliban kidnapping their 'martyrs'

Times:

Murad Ali, one of five schoolboy suicide bombers rescued from a Taleban training camp, looks haggard beyond his 13 years.

He was thrilled at first when he was given a gun, but Murad told The Times last week of his ordeal at the hands of the Islamists, who have kidnapped 1,500 children like him to prepare for their fatal missions.

Murad was studying in class five in Mingora, the main city in northwest Pakistan’s Swat Valley, when the Islamists abducted him and took him to their remote mountain base in Chuprial.

Looking drained in his smudged clothes and dirty sandals, he gave a glimpse into the short life that awaits boys who are taken by the Taleban.
The next stage of his training included 16 hours a day of physical exercise and psychological indoctrination. “My instructor told me that martyrdom is the biggest reward of Allah,” Murad said quietly.

Another boy, Abdul Wahab, 15, said that the Taleban lured him to the camp from his studies at a madrassa — Islamic school — in Mingora. “I was told that it was a religious duty of every Muslim to get training to fight the enemies of Islam,” he said.

He said that he did not appreciate what he would be asked to do. “I panicked when a few days later I was told that I would be getting training for suicide bombing,” he said.

The Army believes that between 1,200 to 1,500 boys as young as 11 who were trained in Swat to become suicide bombers were recruited after the Pakistani Government signed a peace deal with the Taleban in February, handing over control of the valley to the militants.
...

This is a story that demonstrates both the desperation and the depravity of the Taliban religious bigots. Armies that rely on child soldiers are near defeat and relying on kidnapped soldiers is also a good sign of the desperation of the Taliban. This is a story that deserves wide circulation. Combining child abuse with religious flim flammery is inexcusable. Unfortunately, most of the media is too fearful of showing intolerance to religious bigots.

Islamist education revolt kills 150 in Nigeria

BBC:

Dozens of people have been killed after Islamist militants staged three attacks in northern Nigeria, taking the total killed in two days of violence to 150.
A BBC reporter has counted 100 bodies, mostly of militants, near the police headquarters in Maiduguri, Borno State, where hundreds are fleeing their homes.
Witnesses told the BBC a gun battle raged for hours in Potiskum, Yobe State and a police station was set on fire.
Some of the militants follow a preacher who campaigns against Western schools.
The preacher, Mohammed Yusuf, says Western education is against Islamic teaching.
There has also been an attack in Wudil, some 20km (12 miles) from Kano, the largest city in northern Nigeria.
A curfew is in force in Bauchi, the scene of Sunday's violence.
...

This is another example of how the emotional immaturity of some in the Islamist movement can get people killed. That preacher should be prosecuted for incitement to murder.

Brits say Panther Claw op in Afghanistan a success

CNN:

A British-led military operation meant to clear the Taliban from parts of Afghanistan has succeeded, UK officials said Monday.

NATO and its Afghan allies launched Operation Panther's Claw to flush the Taliban from parts of southern Helmand Province before Afghan presidential elections next month.
Major fighting is mostly over, and the military will now focus on "holding" the areas that have been cleared of Taliban so they do not return, Lt. Gen. Simon Mayall said in a briefing. The operation's success will enable up to 80,000 people in Helmand to vote.
"Panther's Claw has been extremely successful," said Brigadier Tim Radford, the top British military commander for the operation. "There will be many Taliban who will not be fighting any more."
He said the Taliban suffered "significant casualties," but refused to say how many. Nine British troops were killed in action in the operation, he said, and there were three Afghan civilian casualties.
Radford estimated that there were 450 to 500 Taliban fighters in the area at the time of the operation, which he called "one of the biggest that has taken place."
...

The operation did expose some of the UK's weaknesses particularly with respect to equipment such as helicopters and mine resistance vehicles. However, they were able to overcome those weaknesses and exploit the weaknesses of the Taliban who have their own force to space problems.

The elections should be the easy part now. Insurgents need ambiguity as to time and place of attack for success. They have neither when elections are scheduled at specific locations and specific times.

Pakistan pauses in pursuit of Taliban

Soon after Pakistan launched its offensive against the Taliban this spring, President Asif Ali Zardari declared that the mission would go beyond pushing the Islamist militia out of the Swat Valley. "We're going to go into Waziristan," he said.

More than two months later, that still has not come to pass. Instead, the planned invasion of South Waziristan, a Taliban and al-Qaeda sanctuary along the Afghanistan border, has been delayed by the refugee crisis spawned by fighting in Swat, an overstretched military unwilling to let its guard down with India and the difficulty in isolating the Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud, according to Pakistani and American officials.

Pakistan's military has blockaded the tribal district and bombed it from the air, and it insists that the ground assault will proceed. But as the clock ticks, military analysts worry that fighting in the mountains will be more difficult as the weather turns cold in the fall. The delay has raised questions about Pakistan's commitment to waging war against Taliban fighters the state has nurtured in the past.

"It's an insane dream to expect anything different from the Pakistani government," said Ali Wazir, a South Waziristan native and a politician with the secular Awami National Party. "The Taliban are the brainchildren of the Pakistan army for the last 30 years. They are their own people. Could you kill your own brother?"
Mehsud is believed to be responsible for the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, as well as many of the recent suicide bombings in Pakistan. American officials, however, said they have not urged Pakistan to launch the operation because of the scope of problems in the Swat Valley, where 2 million refugees were displaced by the ongoing military operation there.

"Baitullah Mehsud is a dreadful man, and his elimination is an imperative. However, the first imperative is to secure the areas the refugees are going back into," Richard C. Holbrooke, the U.S. envoy to the region, said in an interview.

Although Holbrooke said it could be beneficial to have simultaneous offensives -- the U.S. Marines on the Afghanistan side of the border and the Pakistani army in the tribal regions to the east -- the greater concern is unfinished business elsewhere. "Why would I push them to start an offensive when they have 2 million people they have to protect first?" Holbrooke said.

The Pakistani military operation against the Taliban was planned to unfold in three phases, starting in April with the Frontier Corps paramilitary force moving into areas around the Swat Valley, the former tourist destination where the Taliban seized control. The following month, two Pakistani divisions, or about 40,000 soldiers, led a ground operation into the valley. They have since regained control, although fighting continues and the Taliban leadership there remains largely intact. The third and most difficult phase was to be a ground operation into South Waziristan.
...

These pauses give pause to the question of whether Pakistan is serious about taking out the Taliban. If they could push a coordinated attack at the same time the US is pushing an offensive in Helmand it would put great pressure on the enemy and make it harder for the Taliban to resist both.

There is some concern for the refugees now going back into Swat, but eh Pakistan army could do both if it would pull more troops from its border with India. Since taking out the Taliban religious bigots is also in India's interest they should be able to give Pakistan the reassurances it needs for such a move.

Pakistan's minimalist approach to dealing with LET

James C. Capretta & Yuval Levin:

In a high-security jail here, five men — all members of the Islamic militant group described by the United States and India as the organizers of the terrorist rampage in Mumbai last year — were brought before a makeshift court in Pakistan’s first steps to bring them to justice.

The brief appearances, described by a defense lawyer, were held in secret for security reasons on Saturday in a case that Pakistan says shows its willingness to prosecute the group, Lashkar-e-Taiba. Pakistan also says that the case will demonstrate that its military, which once backed the group as a surrogate force against India, has severed all ties.
But behind the first glimmerings of the case, sympathies for Lashkar-e-Taiba and its jihadist and anti-Indian culture run deep in this country, raising a serious challenge to any long-lasting moves to dismantle the network.
The membership of Lashkar-e-Taiba extends to about 150,000 people, according to a midlevel officer in Pakistan’s premier spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence. Together with another jihadi group, Jaish-e-Muhammad, the Lashkar loyalists could put Pakistan “up in flames,” the officer admitted.
Despite that risk, the jihadis “were good people” and could be controlled, the officer said, speaking on the condition of anonymity in keeping with the agency’s custom.

...

There is more.

This story provides evidence of the Pakistani governments minimalist approach to dealing with the terrorist they have bred. They are masters of doing the minimum necessary to avoid doing what needs to be done to stop terrorist in their midst. These are not good people. They are terrorist engaged in mass murder to project their bigoted religious beliefs. It is time the world told the Pakistan government to stop protecting these people.

Another Iranian released in Iraq

Bill Roggio:

A senior Qods Force officer who led one of the three commands in Iraq assigned to attack US and Iraqi forces was one of five Iranians released by the US military on July 9.

Mahmud Farhadi, the leader of the Zafr Command, one of three units subordinate to the Qods Force's Ramazan Corps, was among five Iranians turned over to the Iraqi government and then subsequently turned over to the Iranians.

A spokesman from the Iranian foreign ministry identified Farhadi as one of the five men released on July 9, according to a report on Iranian state-run television.

Reports initially indicated that five Iranians who were captured by the US in Irbil in northern Iraq in January 2007 were released from custody. But US military intelligence officials told The Long War Journal that Farhadi was disguised as one of the Irbil Five to soften the blow of the release.

The US had previously released two members of the Irbil Five in November 2007, according to The Associated Press, but the report received little attention. This "left room for Farhadi to be pawned off as one of the Irbil Five and snuck out the back door," one official told The Long War Journal.

The US captured Farhadi during a raid in the northern Kurdish province of Sulimaniyah on Sept. 20, 2007 [see LWJ report, Captured Iranian Qods Force officer a regional commander in Iraq].

Farhadi's detention caused a row between Iran and Iraq. Iran closed the border after claiming Farhadi was an Iranian trade delegation representative named Agha Farhadi who was visiting Iraq on a sanctioned business trip.

Farhadi is considered one of the three most dangerous Iranian operatives to have been captured in Iraqi since the US began targeting the Iranian-backed Shia terror networks. His role as one of the three theater commanders in the Ramazan Corps means he is directly responsible for planning, coordinating, and executing attacks against US forces.

The Ramazan Corps is responsible for the death of hundreds of US soldiers in Iraq and backed the various uprising by Shia extremist groups. Ten percent of US deaths in Iraq are estimated to have been caused by the Iranian-supplied, armor-piercing explosively-formed projectiles, or EFPs.
...

There is much more at the above link.

I suspect that these releases are being done to facilitate talks that the Obama administration wants to have with the Iranians. The Iraqis may also want to curry favor with their neighbor. The release of the American journalist may also have been part of the bargain.

It is a fools errand. The Iranian government will continue to be at war with the US regardless of the releases and these guys will return to that battle. Ignoring the fact of Iran's war against us will not make any talks with them about their nukes any more successful. It is in fact all the more reason to be concerned about their intentions.

Obamacare is worse than what we have now

President Obama's strategy to pass sweeping health care legislation rested on stealth and speed. The idea was to fill the conversation for months on end with vague talk about expanding coverage, "bending the cost-curve," improving quality, and rooting out waste, without showing the public how the plan would actually work or what it would cost. Legislation, meanwhile, would be composed behind closed doors, and the bills would be introduced as close as possible to when they might come up for a vote to minimize the time in which they could actually be read and thought about by those who would vote on them and those who would live under them. By the time the details emerged, maybe momentum and being "closer than ever before" would be enough to overcome the torrent of objections that were sure to be raised when people got a real look at the nuts and bolts.

That moment has now come. House Democrats finally unveiled their plan on July 14, with the aim of passing it by July 31, the last day before the August congressional recess. The Senate's Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee has released its part of the plan, but the Finance Committee (which must figure out how to pay for it all) has yet to do so. There, too, the leadership hoped for a vote before the recess.

But things have not gone as the Democrats intended. As details have emerged, an extraordinary wave of public concern has washed over the debate and left the plan's champions reeling. It is all but certain that both the House and Senate will recess for August without voting on health care, despite the president's insistence on its urgency. And the emerging tone of the public debate casts serious doubt on the fate of Obamacare more broadly.
The reasons for the public revolt are easy to see. The Democrats want to spend $1.5 trillion over a decade, impose an $800 billion tax increase in the midst of the worst recession in a generation, increase federal borrowing by $239 billion (on top of the $11 trillion the Obama budget already requires us to borrow through 2019), impose costly mandates on employers that will discourage hiring as unemployment nears 10 percent, force individuals to buy one-size-fits-all government defined insurance, and insert the government in countless new ways between doctors and patients. All of that would occur whether or not the plan includes a "public option," which at this point it does include and which will exacerbate all of these problems.

As these facts have become clear, Obama's standing has fallen and public opinion has grown decidedly less enthusiastic for the administration's approach. The trend is likely to continue, because the details of the plan reveal that its two most serious drawbacks--its cost and the prospect of government rationing--are worse than even most of their critics have grasped.

First, there are massive hidden costs inherent in a little-understood provision of the plan. The centerpiece of Obamacare is a new premium subsidy program. In the House bill, families with incomes up to four times the poverty level would get a fixed cap on their insurance premiums, tied to their incomes. For instance, a family whose income is twice the poverty level would pay no more than 5 percent of its total income for insurance. But providing that guarantee to all such households in America would cost far more than even the Democrats are willing to propose. The plan therefore would make subsidies available only to households getting insurance through the new "exchanges," insurance pools set up in each state as a parallel system to job-based coverage. And full-time workers in all but the smallest firms would be barred from entering the exchanges, at least for a time, so they wouldn't have access to the new entitlement.
...
Meanwhile, it is becoming increasingly clear that Obamacare would involve not just rationed care but centrally managed and controlled care....
...

There is an interesting excerpt from a book about how logistic decisions on the weather in Russia doomed the German offensive as ill equipped to deal with the freezing conditions. The author also talks about the failure to learn the lessons of Napoleon on a similar expedition.

The Democrats second attempt at health care reform gives the impression of the German army outside Moscow inadequately clothed and floundering for a quick kill that will never come. They seem to think the problems of Hillarycare were tactical, but it was the substance of control freak government that defeated the Democrats in 1994 and that is what is grinding them down now. Even in august there is a definite chill about this plan.

Don't know much about history--Historian edition

Douglas MacKinnon:

Recently, I read a piece in the left-of-center New York Times where a select group of “historians” were giving advice to former Vice President Dick Cheney regarding his forthcoming memoir. After reading the highly suspect advice, I naturally wondered what exactly is a historian?

Unfortunately for those who actually value the truth, it seems a great many “historians” -- like the majority of the mainstream media, those who “educate” our children, and those who “entertain” us -- fancy themselves as surrogates for the liberal wing of the democrat party, and of late, propagandists for the history making Barack Obama.

For a glaring and recent example of this unethical bias, one need look no further than this exchange between “historian” Michael Beschloss and radio host Don Imus:

Michael Beschloss: “…this is a guy (Barack Obama) whose IQ is off the charts…”
Imus: “Well. What is his IQ?”
Historian Michael Beschloss: “Pardon?”
Imus: “What is his IQ?”
Historian Michael Beschloss: “Uh. I would say it’s probably - he’s probably the smartest guy ever to become President.”

Really? The “unbiased” but clearly in-the-tank for Obama “historian” Beschloss thinks Obama is the “smartest guy ever to become president.” Okay. Based on what? The SAT scores Obama won’t release. The college transcripts from Occidental College that Obama won’t release. The transcripts from Columbia that Obama won’t release. Any existing IQ scores that Obama won’t release.

Based on that non-information alone, “historian” Beschloss believes that Barack Obama is smarter than Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and John F. Kennedy. Great. I didn’t know a historian could operate without facts.

In 2003, “historian” Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. wrote that the Bush administration¹s foreign policy "is alarmingly similar to the policy that imperial Japan employed at Pearl Harbor…today it is we Americans who live in infamy."

Not only was Schlesinger’s vile comparrison a slap in the face to the hundreds of thousands of Americans and Chinese who lost their lives at the hands of Japanese war criminals, but it’s possible that his words helped to motivate candidate and now President Obama to commence his “America is bad and I apologize” tour.

Beyond the examples of Beschloss and Schlesinger Jr., we have the likes of Bush-hating Ken Burns, Joseph (I lied about my service in Vietnam, my anti-war protests and my civil rights efforts) Ellis, Doris Kerns (whoops, did I plagerize?) Goodwin, Robert (“Do you read The New York Times?”) Dallek, and a host of “historians” so deep in the tank for the liberal cause that they haven’t seen daylight in decades.
...

I think Dick Cheney has a good sense of history and is more grounded in the facts than most of the left wing historians. They have this bias that Democrats, especially liberal ones, are smart and that if Republicans and conservatives were really smart they would be liberal Democrats. But comparing the facts of the Carter administration with the facts of the Reagan administration demonstrates whose policies were smarter.

But, liberals have a way of avoiding these facts by suggesting that Carter was unlucky and Reagan was lucky. It remind me of my days racing sailboats. It was astounding how often the winners were able to position their boats so they were inside a lifting wind shift. They were always there to get the "lucky" wind shift that put them ahead. Sometimes it was luck, but it was luck guided by experience.

As the Obama administration keeps adopting the policies they reviled, Cheney is looking smarter and smarter.

Obamacare's self-serving exaggerations, political fantasy

Robert Samuelson:

The most misused word in the health care debate is "reform." Everyone wants "reform," but what constitutes "reform" is another matter. If you listen to President Obama, his "reform" will satisfy almost everyone. It will insure the uninsured, control runaway health spending, subdue future budget deficits, preserve choice for patients and improve quality of care. These claims are self-serving exaggerations and political fantasies. They have destroyed what should be a serious national discussion of health care.
The health care conundrum involves a contradiction that the administration steadfastly obscures: In the short run -- meaning four to eight years -- government cannot both insure the uninsured and rein in health spending. Here's why. The notion that the uninsured get little or no care is a myth: They now receive about 50 percent to 70 percent of the health care of the insured. If they become insured, their health care would rise toward 100 percent; that would increase both government and private health spending, depending on how the insurance is provided.
Until health costs are better controlled, expanding insurance coverage will be expensive. The president talks endlessly about the need to limit spending and eliminate waste. These are worthy goals. But changing the way medical care is delivered and paid for would take years and involve disruptive and unpopular measures. Patient co-payments might increase; networks of doctors and hospitals might displace individual practices; the tax exclusion for employer-paid health insurance might be curbed. Obama downplays the obstacles. Any "reform" isn't likely to compel needed changes, partly because it's not clear what will work.

Evaluations of proposals reflect this reality. The Congressional Budget Office judges that the legislation in the House would, through expanded Medicaid and subsidies for private insurance, cut the uninsured to 17 million in 2019 from 46 million in 2007. But the cost would be $1 trillion over a decade; of that, $239 billion would add to the budget deficit. Worse, the costs would rise faster than the sources of financing, including a tax on the wealthy. In 2019, the projection's last year, the deficit would be $65 billion. Assuming that deficit rises 4 percent a year, the cumulative shortfall in the second decade would total about $800 billion.

But Obama sees all blue sky. "Here's what reform will mean for you," he said at a recent rally. "It will mean lower costs and more choices and coverage you can count on. Health insurance reform will save you and your family money," he said. (Note: Except for subsidies, it's doubtful families will experience savings anytime soon.) And later: "We'll also change incentives so that our doctors and our nurses can finally start providing patients with the best care and not just the most expensive care. And if we do that, then reform ... will lower our deficits in the long run."

Contrast Obama's reassuring rhetoric with this exchange at a congressional hearing between Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, and Douglas Elmendorf, head of CBO.

Conrad: "From what you have seen from the product of the committees that have reported, do you see a successful effort being mounted to bend the long-term cost curve?"

Elmendorf: "No, Mr. Chairman. In the legislation that has been reported, we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs. ... The (cost) curve is being raised."
...

One of the reasons that prices keep going up is the lack of market discipline because of the distortions to the free market caused by the availability of health care insurance. The proposals of the Obama administration only exacerbate that problem by adding more demand. Health saving accounts would return some market discipline to the decision process when teamed with catastrophic health insurance for the big stuff.

The Democrats problem is they do not trust the market forces to reach results they favor so they take a control freak approach to a problem they can never really control rather than by rationing care and taking the decision away from the patient and the doctor.

Democrat governors in trouble

Micheal Barone looks at the governors who are negative territory and most of them are big government Democrats. Not mentioned is Texas Governor Rick Perry who seems to be running ahead in his bid for 2010.

Fighting over study of infectious diseases

...

"Drawing conclusions about relocating research with highly infectious exotic animal pathogens from questionable methodology could result in regrettable consequences," the GAO warned in its draft report. DHS's review was too "limited" and "inadequate" to decide that any mainland labs were safe, the report found. GAO officials declined to comment on the findings.

The new developments started another round of accusations that politics steered DHS's decision in January to build the proposed lab in Manhattan, Kan. Critics of the choice argue that a Kansas contingent of Republican Sens. Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts and then-Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat, aggressively lobbied DHS to pick their state. Records show that a DHS undersecretary and his site selection committee met frequently with the senators, one of whom is a member of an appropriations subcommittee that helps set DHS funding.

A Texas consortium that hoped to lure the DHS facility to San Antonio argues that the agency has wasted millions of dollars trying to justify its choice, and said the GAO's findings show that the selection method was "preposterous."

"They call it 'Tornado Alley' for a reason," said Michael Guiffre, an attorney for the consortium. "This really boils down to politics at its very worst and public officials who are more concerned about erecting some gleaming new research building than thinking about what's best for the general public."

DHS officials and Kansas leaders say the selection system, which began in late 2006, was always fair and open. Brownback has noted that George W. Bush was president in mid-January when his home state of Texas lost the competition.
...

The questions about the Kansas site are reasonable, but shouldn't there also be questions about locating such a facility in a major metropolitan area like San Antonio? Not that I would be particular fond of having it my area, it would seem that Bryan-College Station where Texas A&M is located would be a better site in Texas if the Kansas site is found to be a problem.

Talking about talks with Norks

...

Over the weekend, Sin Son-ho, the top North Korean diplomat at the United Nations, said his government is “not against a dialogue” with Washington. And the ministry’s statement on Monday alluded to bilateral talks as “a specific and reserved form of dialogue that can address the current situation.”
North Korea’s suggestion brightens the prospects for dialogue between Pyongyang and Washington after months of increasing tensions triggered by the launching of a long-range rocket by North Korea in April; its second nuclear test, in May; and a series of test-firings of short-range missiles.
But a fundamental rift remains: The Obama administration has indicated it would be willing to engage the North in direct talks only if the North agrees to return to the six-nation talks that involve the United States, China, Japan, Russia and the two Koreas.

...

This sounds like the kind of talks that Democrats out of power criticized the Bush administration for not engaging in. Remember how they thought Bush was wrong to insist on six party talks? My recollection is that Clinton was one of those doing the criticism and here she is right back with the Bush policy. Maybe there is something to this "smart diplomacy."

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Control freak government and corruption

Cash in an envelope. In return, a promise that a development project will speed along, unhindered by bureaucratic delays. A handshake to seal the deal.

It is the most clichéd, unimaginative form of corruption — and its persistent hold on New Jersey’s elected leaders seems unrivaled in American government. Over the last decade alone, nearly 150 of the state’s senators, mayors, county executives and council members have been arrested and charged with leaping at the chance to engage in this lowest-common-denominator crime, at times for laughably small sums of money. But the history goes back much further than that.

...

As 44 people walked before cameras last week, their hands in cuffs, after they were arrested in the state’s biggest corruption scandal in years — but not, to be sure, that many years — even their most scandal-fatigued constituents, from the gritty precincts of Journal Square in Jersey City to the glittering new condominiums on the Hudson in Hoboken, began to wonder: Why is New Jersey so unshakably corrupt?
That answer, it turns out, has as many nuances as corruption itself. Interviews with law enforcement officials, prosecutors and, perhaps the best authority on the subject — those arrested in previous sweeps, like Mr. Botti — reveal a culture of corruption so ingrained that it has become impossible to resist when the envelope appears.
A decade-long building boom has flooded towns with millions of development dollars, as well as wealthy businessmen eager to secure sewer permits and zoning waivers. The Democratic Party firmly dominates local politics, turning most elections into sleepy coronations. The state’s news organizations, once vigorous watchdogs, have been decimated by a deep industry downturn.
Add to all that the fact that New Jersey is divided into hundreds of tiny fiefdoms, where part-time elected officials without much education and with small salaries wield considerable power, and the heady mix of arrogance, control and promised payoffs dissolves the will of even the most determined reformer.
It also seems to dissolve their intelligence and caution, because often enough, the man with the envelope is wearing a wire.

...

It wasn’t always like this, proud New Jersey residents say. But, in reality, it always was.
As far back as the 1870s, a grand jury in Hudson County indicted two police commissioners accused of awarding contracts to fictitious groups. And by the 1970s, fraud, extortion and kickbacks had become as common as traffic jams on the New Jersey Turnpike.

...

Government regulation in New Jersey is more than a speed bump on the way to completion of a project. Add to that the high construction cost because of unions and the high price of land and the slightest delay while the meter is running on construction financing gives the corrupt official the leverage to ask for an envelope with cash in it. It is part of the cost of doing business in the area and it is organized theft from the public as well as the developers.

It was this kind of corruption in Louisiana and New Orleans that made Houston a great city. In Houston there are few zoning codes to trap the developers and corruption is not tolerated. The free market system insures that the guy with the best product or service gets the deal, which is a benefit to everyone but the crooks.

Control freak government gives the corrupt too many opportunities, and in New Jersey there are few who can resist.

Stimulus money at work in Austin

Stimulus Watch:

Austin, TX

Raul Alvarez Disc Golf Course: This project will develop a 36-hole disc golf course that will be environmentally and financially sustainable.

$886,000.00 - 4 jobs - Water Program

Is this project critical? or

4% voted critical - 96% voted not critical - 2756 votes cast
...

It is not clear why this is considered a water project since it is likely it will consume a lot of water. My speculation is that this is for Frisbee throwing. Austin needs to make a more convincing case as to why this is critical infrastructure.

Biden gaffe watch

From the NY Times:

Georgia’s Leader Escapes Damage in Biden Visit

I am sure it was a close thing. But if you read the story you might get the impression that Georgia's President was the one worried about gaffes. The Biden criticism of Russia would only be a gaffe if a Republican said it.

Democrats disagree on whether they have an agreement

White House officials and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continued to say on Sunday that progress was being made on legislation to overhaul the health-care system, but fiscally conservative Democrats remained less optimistic while Republicans remained steadfast in their opposition to it.

Ms. Pelosi, speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union,” declared: “When I take this bill to the floor, it will win. We will move forward, it will happen.”
But Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, the chairman of the budget committee, said it was not possible or desirable to have a bill that carried only Democratic votes.
“Look, there are not the votes for Democrats to do this just on our side of the aisle,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.”
“The only thing bipartisan about the measures so far is the opposition to them,” Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

...

Pelosi must mean she will either modify the bill or provide funding for Democrat opponents so they can vote for it. That is how she got the catastrophic energy bill through and how she and Waxman plan to do the health care bill. It probably depends on the integrity and steadfastness of the Blue Dogs. If they crater this time they will be in serious political difficulty with voters who were told they were fiscal conservatives.

Meanwhile The Hill reports:

Following a blow from the Congressional Budget Office, Democratic leaders in Congress likely will make the case this week that the healthcare reform plan has multiple benefits and cost savings that cannot be scored by independent congressional accountants.

Democrats are going to seek to convince skeptics that the healthcare overhaul has other provisions, such as prevention and wellness measures, that will provide benefits and save money, a House leadership aide told The Hill on Sunday.

...

This is what politicians call spin. When the facts become inconvenient you try to construct a different rationale for doing what you wanted to do anyway. It will probably only work for the true believers. The rest of us will see it for the politics of fraud it represents. They have lost a central tenant of their rationale for this bill. Do they really think we will forget their previous arguments for its passage?

Kurds have 80% turnout for elections