9/11 Morning Report

Today is mostly a day of remembrance. When i first started this blog, I wrote something on 9-11. Those thoughts apply today, just as much as they did in 2006. So, before going on to current events, I ask you once again: Where Were you?

There was a pretty good article by Robert Tracinski yesterday about what President Obama is saying, and has said, regarding healthcare legislation. I would behoove us all to pay attention to what has been said, what is being said, and how it has changed during the so far short length of his administration. For example:

he assures us that "My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition." So how is it that he was recorded only six years ago describing himself as an advocate of a Canadian style "single payer" system — the very opposite of "choice and competition"?

This goes nicely with a great ironic little cartoon yesterday:




You can hear a lot of dissenting voices on what Obama did and did not say at the NYTimes article ”What was missing from Obama’s speech”. But, it merely echoes what I said the other day. The plan throws more money at the symptoms, but does nothing to actually control costs. Put another way, it makes great political hoopla, but actually doesn’t accomplish the goal. And,that basically means the conservative claims of merely being about government control and taxation could be the real truth of what is going on.


Meanwhile, there is the war effort going on in Afghanistan. And, thanks to so many months and years of anti-Iraq involvement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi can truly say there is little support for increased involvement. That is sad. The U.S. has once again entered into Afghan life, and once again—this time because of Democrats—is deciding to run away before the full requirement is complete. The U.S. did it under Regan after the Russians gave up, and that let the Taliban take over. I wonder what will happen if the U.S. walks out this time? And how the Democrats will save their face. You should consider the sobering conclusions and thoughts of Michael Yon. He started recognizing the problems and potentials in Afghanistan before the pundits and politicians—just as he did in Iraq.

History Repeats Itself In Afghanistan and Pakistan

Reports on Friday and Saturday indicated that the Taliban is using civilians as human shields. This article seems to imply that this is a surprise. I fail to understand why it should be. This has been a tactic of intimidation used by every terrorist guerilla warfare group, at least in recent history--Hamas, the Taliban, all the way to Vietnam, Moa, Che Guevara, and even farther back in time. Unfortunately, the frightening part of the article is the last paragraph:

On Friday Karzai said "we cannot justify in any manner, for whatever number of Taliban, for whatever number of significantly important terrorists, the accidental or otherwise loss of civilians."

Like it or not, civilian suffering is a part of standing against evil. The Taliban, or whatever extremist group you care to name, will always use that suffering to get their opponents to stop fighting for fear of hurting innocent someone. They will try to plaster the media with how ugly the destruction is that gets “imposed by the good guys.” We must remember one very important thing. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE SUFFERINGS OF OTHERS. And, extremeists will never be stopped if we put suffering or some other difficulty ahead of defeating those extremist groups. Taking President Karzai’s statement at face value would indicate he has already given up the will to fight. For the sake of our soldiers, and those of supporting nations, I hope not. If that occurs, Afghanistan will become another Vietnam for someone.


But, then again, given Thursday’s announcement that US troops won’t go to Pakistan just brought flashbacks of Vietnam to me. Any student of history knows that a big reason North Vietnam overcame the South was the ability to hide and build forces in Laos and Cambodia. The communist forces successfully controlled those other countries, and then used them as bases. With the take over of the Swat area and areas closer to Islamabad by militant forces, coupled with the inability of the Pakistani Army to turn back the tide (some reports indicate they are being complicit in the takeover), this is looking more and more like Vietnam. Contrary to popular media reports, Bush did indeed set us on the road to get out of Iraq. His timetable has become the same timetable that President Obama is using. The question now becomes: will Obama be able to get us out of Afghanistan without the disgrace we suffered in Vietnam?

Afghanistan, and Liberal Europe

Did you know that many Taliban fighters are afraid to defect from cause? Much as Iraq has changed since former fighters began to fight for the country, it could also be true in Afghanistan. But, a stronger, more secure government is needed to pul it off.

"Ninety-five percent of the Taliban want to reconcile with the government if they can be assured security," Mullah Abdul Salam, a former high-ranking Taliban commander and now district chief in Musa Qala in the southern Helmand Province, told Reuters. "But the government of Afghanistan cannot ensure their safety. If they defect to the government, the other Taliban will kill them. They are fighting for their lives."

This possibility has a lot of promise. Petraeous has said what worked in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan. And, he has cited several good and valid reason why. Yet, while the tactics and applications that brought so much success in Iraq may not work in Afghanistan, the goal needs to be the same.

Meanwhile, the Spanish are out to arrest Bush administration officials.

The case, against former Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and [five] others, was sent to the prosecutor’s office for review by Baltasar Garzón, the crusading investigative judge who ordered the arrest of the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet.

A previous attempt was made by human rights groups in Germany. This attempt has been filed by a different human rights group, the Association for the Dignity of Prisoners, using Spanish jurisdiction since Spanish prisoners are believed to have been tortured. Mr. John yoo, whose legal opinions were the basis for Bush policies, commented that such cases could prompt military and intelligence agencies to reduce efforts to protect due to the threat of legal actions. Needless to say, there is a fine line between gathering intelligence and abuse of prisoners. The problem is that many “prisoner rights” are based, not on good policy, but on self esteem and other such concepts. This whole line of thinking ignores the wrong that is done, and the need for restitution to the victims, in the name of making nice to those who did wrong. Terrorists are no different. They hide behind legal obscurities to maim and destroy, but are treated exactly the same by liberaldom. Without some sort of punishment, aside from locking people up in country club environments—even though surrounded with barbed wire and walls—there will never be any real change in a criminals’ or terrorists’ hearts. These types of lega; actions, while perhaps motivated to keep excesses in check, will most likely only curb truly necessary and proper action, giving criminals and terrorists even greater reign.

Abandoned Partners

Sunday’s announcement that former insurgents were under Iraqi control was fantastic news. It defied all the gloomy predictions since the plan was announced. Of course, independent journalists, like Michael Yon have been telling the real story of these former al-Qaeda members for a long time. While only about 10-15% of those fighters will actually have positions in the Iraqi security forces or military, the remainder have been promised jobs or training to help them get them. And, all of it was accomplished under the Bush administration’s watch. It leaves me wondering what may happen under Obama’s watch. Will it end up being a string of broken promises and abandonment like the Democrats handed South Vietnam after Nixon? Let us sincerely hope not. Unfortunately, in his latest dispatch, Michael notes that this just might be the case:

The hints coming out of Washington tend to cause me to believe we will abandon Afghanistan. I’m making no personal comment one way or the other yet, other than Iraq was worth the effort and costs all the way around – so long as we cement that success.

You should read the rest for yourself.

Meanwhile, here at home, Democrats continue to circle the wagons around each other. Well, at least the President is doing that for his cabinet folks—still. Despite tax evasion issues, and faulty bailout implementations 9both of which ruined Bush’s popularity levels due to the media), Obama still stands behind Geithner. And then, true to form, the media lets Obama off the hook by merely changing the point of the story to Republican failures. Isn’t it amazing that the media does not care one whit if their party abandons foreign governments, or that Democrats are getting away with all the stuff Republicans can’t do without MAJOR scrutiny?

The Iran Contra debacle caused the Democratic legislature to abandoned Afghanistan to warlords, and eventually the Taliban, during the 80s. The diligent prosecuting of war against communist forces in Vietnam under Nixon caused the Democratic legislature to pass laws which doomed any democratic rule in South Vietnam. I fear what the Democratic President and legislature will bring about in the Middle East in the years ahead.

Obama and The Military...and debt

Obama has already begun to cut defense spending. The article, ostensibly about the proposed missile shield in Poland, went on to give some specific numbers. The most specific point is there will be no additional funding. Obama’s proposed budget only funds ongoing operations, with a supplement for Afghanistan and Iraq. The expanding military requirements, coupled with lower financing, does not bode well for the future—much as it did during the Clinton administration.

Meanwhile, a proposed insurance change for Veterans was scrapped by the White House. Despite the number of military families that have been receiving welfare support, the Obama administration had plans to make military personnel pay for their treatments through their own private health insurance. While in this time, I applaud the idea of creating savings, this was appalling. The White House has announced that is no longer under consideration. However, it seems the issue may not be completely off the table:

Having dropped the idea of billing private insurers for the treatment of service-connected conditions, administration officials have told veterans groups that they want to find another way to save a similar amount of money.

(…and people scoffed when Obama was accused of being anti-military…)


In other Obama news, it seems that on top of borrowing huge sums from China, the US will also be giving China money for going green.

Discussions are in the early stages but the EU has been talking to the Obama administration about offering cash for clean technology to countries like China if it agrees in turn to cap emissions in key industrial sectors and adopt cutting-edge technology.

After severely criticizing one US bank for using stimulus funds in China, it will be interesting to see if this is ever explained. This is especially true in light of China’s quiet diversification--a fancy way of saying they are scared about mounting US debt.

(…gee…I wonder why that might be…)

More of the Same...

Washington needs to be very cautious making deals with Afghan insurgents? Really? Do you think the Obama administration will listen?

The International Crisis Group said previous deals had broken down within months and strengthened the militants.

Instead, it said Afghans needed a stronger state and the rule of law.



In its report, the Brussels-based ICG warned that previous truce deals with militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan "enhanced the power and activities of violent insurgents, while doing nothing to build sustainable institutions".

A timely warning given that US military officials say the administration is close to announcing the strategy. The question is will the media hold Obama to the standard? Or will they continue to soft pedal the warnings and push the liberal agenda of appeasement with the enemies of peace?

(…gee…do we really need to ask?...)


Meanwhile, the NYT reports another Democrat is caught in a scandal. With her husband as a major stockholder, Maxine Walters influenced the doling out of bailout funds for OneUnited, one of the nation’s largest black-owned banks. Ms. Walters did not even disclose her relationship to Treasury officials until later. Treasury officials claim the disbursement was made on the merits. Does that change the facts of impropriety? Does it really matter if it is a minority owned bank? Apparently it does to the liberal media. Just read the article.

(…just one more case of Democrats manipulating the finicial system…but not being held accountable…what a surprise…)

Banks, Obama, Islam, and...What the...?

Think Sharia Law will not come to the states? Think again.

University Bank now has an entire subsidiary devoted to financial products that comply with Muslim religious law, or Shariah. It has done nearly $80 million in Islamically approvable “mortgage-alternative” financing for residential and commercial real estate in 15 states.

For the past decade, Dow Jones has computed a stock index for Shariah-compliant companies. The law schools at Harvard, Fordham and the University of California, Berkeley, have held academic conferences on Islamic finance.

In fact, the Harvard Business Review had an article that detailed how numerous business mergers and actions had been forced to become Sharia compliant due to involvement by Muslim companies or nations. It has even been reported that Muslim financial institutions have remained much more stable during this financial crisis. I will readily admit the need for more stringent controls to be in place for lending. A sizable portion of the financial crisis is the extension of too much credit to too many people. But, is Sharia Law the way to go? As it did in Lebanon, this could lead to a very slippery slope giving the religion of Islam control of America.

Speaking of strange successes, Obama is being credited for success in Iraq. The sad thing is the success is due to policies and procedures during the Bush administration. The frightening part is…he is welcoming giving power to Taliban leaders, albeit moderate ones.

"Yesterday, Mr. Obama accepted and approved the path of peace and talks with those Afghan Taliban who he called moderates," Karzai said during a function in Kabul to mark International Women's Day.

The part of the article I found most amazing…

The Taliban, who often operate out of bases across the border in Pakistan, could not be reached Sunday but have turned down similar overtures from Karzai in the past.

(…like the Taliban is going to respond to interview requests to verify news…)

Finally, in an odd piece of news Friday, Spanish police arrested a man with a caast made of cocaine.

A Chilean man with a broken leg was arrested at Barcelona airport after his "cast" was found to be made of cocaine not plaster, Spanish police say.

The 66-year-old carried six cans of beer and two hollowed-out stools that also contained cocaine, they add.

I have a couple questions on this one. First, he was arriving in Spain. How did he get past airport security in Chile? And, second…I want to know what tipped of the cops to check the cast in the first place.

Indecisive Leadership

Should we be surprised at the "Stimulus Package" announcement? Not really. Geitner's announcement was so full of vague there was no substance to it at all. It was almost as if the administration was trying to see what would public opinion might be, rather than making a statement of policy. Of course, this is nothing new for Obama. The signs of this style of decision making were all there during the Presidential Election Debates. When asked a question that required a direct answer, Obama never gave one unless someone else did first. Not so McCain. Even if the answer was not popular, McCain spoke directly to almost every question. Obama ALWAYS spoke in generalities first, specifics later. Yet he demands swift passage of his plan...which still lacks details. That smacks of everything the Democrats were complaining about during the Bush years. I guess somethings don't change.

The lesson of the Bush administration should be to act with consideration and restraint. That is, by the way, the function of government. It is, by design, slow to accomplish anything. Swift change is dangerous for government to enact. Consider the billions released during the closing years of the Bush presidency that are unaccounted for. As much as we would like to blame Bush for everything, Congress is equally at fault for not providing oversight of the money. It was a knee jerk reaction to a crisis, which is understandable. Mistakes in things done that quickly should be unstandable as well. But, now we are angry at the consequences--while looking for someone to blame. And, of course, Bush is an easy target. But so are the Democrats that continue to chair the financial committes in Congress but haven't done their jobs.

Meanwhile, we have Congress wrangling over passage of the Stimulus package. Why? Maybe it's because they are trying to create something the American people can actually live with. Maybe the creation of some a new super agency, with more funding than the military, to monitor and control healthcare access. If nothing else, maybe there are enough Senators and Congressmen who aren't sure where the money for that will come from to pay for that. But, since it was put on the Stimulus Package without disagreement by either party, that's probably not true.

It's been said that it takes anywhere from 5-8 years for Presidential policies to take full effect. If true, that would actually mean that most of the economic success attributed to Clinton was actually the result of the Reagan-Bush policies. It would also mean that, taking the Iraq and Afghanistan expenses out, the economic failures of the W years were actually Clinton's fault. Not too far fetched since the economy was already strating to slide during Clinton's last two years in office.

So, now we have Congress dragging it's feet in tackling the economy, just as it did during the Bush years. And, we have a President who demands things change immediately, while threatening to use Presidential Orders to accomplish his goals--just like Bush did, and Clinton. Some things just don't change--even though party affiliations do.

12/11 Morning Report

Hugo Chavez is making a lot of moves these days, despite having lost his referendum push at home. The Banco del Sur is slated to take the place of the IMF, which Chavez describes as a “tool of Washington.”

Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela have all joined the initiative.

Chile and Peru decided to remain on the sidelines, while Colombia, which had expressed interest, has put its decision on hold following recent disagreements between Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and Mr Chavez.

Believing the IMF plays favorites with developed nations over emerging and developing ones, Chavez has been pushing this since December 2006. Some of the difficulty getting funds is due to a wave of industry nationalization in the region. Of course, withdrawing from the World Bank and IMF would mean Venezuela would default on its bonds.

(…can’t imagine why a dictator would want to get out of his debts…can you?...)


In other South American news, Christina Frenandez has been sworm in as President of Argentina. She ran a very unorthodox campaign.

Refusing to debate any of her rivals and granting few interviews, Fernandez preferred to be photographed overseas meeting world leaders - projecting a flair for diplomacy while masking a lack of executive branch experience.

She faces a lot of tough challenges. High on the list are strengthening the courts, continuing economic improvement. She expected to govern from the center-left political position. She also expected to continue the relationship with Chavez.

(…unfortunately she is being compared to Hillary Clinton, too…)


Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, NATO and Afghan troops took back a Taliban stronghold. Breaking a deal with the British back in February, the Taliban took over the town and began terrorizing the area, bringing a death toll of some 6000. French media reports the Taliban simply walked out of town, supposedly to protect civilians from bombings. But, according to the BBC report, reminiscent of al-Qaeda tactics in Iraq, people seem to be turning against the Taliban once again.

President Hamid Karzai said the decision to enter Musa Qala came after local Taliban commanders agreed to side with the Afghan government because of brutality committed against townspeople by the Taliban, al-Qaeda and foreign fighters.

(snip)

He told of a 15-year-old boy accused of spying by the Taliban who was hung from a ceiling and roasted to death by a gas-fed fire started beneath him. The next morning the militants told the boy's mother she could pick up her son, the president said.

(…fear will keep people cowed for a while…but hope of something better will bring a change…amazing how with all it’s problems, people keep turning to coalition forces for that help…)

12/07 Morning Report

The good news? Employers added 94,000 jobs in November, and unemployment held steady at 4.7%. The bad news?

The jobs report showed a loss of 33,000 jobs in goods-producing industries during November while 127,000 jobs were created in service-providing businesses. Manufacturing industries continued to shed employees, cutting 11,000 jobs last month on top of the 15,000 that were dropped in October.

. Unfortunately, service sector jobs do not have the salary range of manufacturing jobs. Still, this increase is believed to raise the probability of a rate cut when the Fed meets next week.

More bad news? According to this NY Times article, The subprime bailout announced by the White House may not do as much as people expect.

“The approach announced today is not a silver bullet,” said Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., who hammered out the agreement. “We face a difficult problem for which there is no perfect solution.”

On top of that non-revelation, one industry analyst believes only about 20% of those facing rate increases in the next 18 months will be helped by it. BUT, analysts agree that a “sweet spot” must be found, and that this is what Bush is trying to find.

(…does the Times, and everyone else, seem to think this can be quick fixed?...it took years to get into this mess…Americans…well people…are so short term focused…)


Meanwhile, Democrats their own tax conundrum.

Trying to find a way out of a sticky tax problem, the Senate on Thursday voted overwhelmingly to prevent the alternative minimum tax from hitting millions of middle-class Americans without replacing the $50 billion that would be lost.

So, the AMT would reduce taxes by $50 million to the middle class and the Dems gave it the ax? The very people who voted them into office yanked the rug out? I understand the need to find a source for the money before cutting the taxes. But, you would think the Democrats would have had solutions for that before now.

(…maybe they were just too busy bashing Republicans and posturing for election…think the media will bash them the way they do Republicans over similar issues?...oh yeah…no media bias…how silly of me…)


Meanwhile, in Iraq, the decline in violence seems to make each new attack that much more spectacular. Now using female suicide bombers, al-Qaeda struck once again at the offices of those who have turned against them. Actions such as this, and wiping out villages for sake of power and control, demonstrate al-Qaeda’s total disregard of people—much like the Taliban was doing in Afghanistan. Frankly, the whole thing reminds me of the history lessons on how organized crime families (i.e. “the Mob”) had to be taken down by the feds after shooting lots of people and blowing up lots of stuff. They haaven’t been eliminated, but their power has been reduced and in some cases broken. Unfortunately, I think the same will be true for al-Qaeda. And, I think the Democrat ”phased withdrawal” has more risks than people want to see.

(…I wonder when that will actually come back to bite them in the @#$#...)


And finally, but not least important, did you remember—without media help—today was the anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor?



Of the 16 million who served in WWII, only 2.9 million are still alive. There are even fewer who were actually on the island of Oahu that morning. In Ft. Worth, one of the few still alive who were there tells his story.

7/31 Morning Report

I loved this report today over at Conservative Thoughts. And, I agree. I wouldn’t have expected it to even make print—given the leftist/anti-Republican/pro-Islamic stance of the media. Somehow, the fact that people think there might actually be something worthwhile going on in Iraq, and headway may be in progress, just never seems to make print anymore. According to the New York times/CNN poll:

--42 percent of Americans said that looking back, taking military action in Iraq was the right thing to do
--In May, when only 35 percent of Americans said the invasion of Iraq was the right thing.
--The number of people who say the war is going “very badly” has fallen from 45 percent earlier in July to a current reading of 35 percent.

(…this next was the real kicker for me…)

When asked specifically about their opinions of how the Democrats and Republicans in Congress are handling the war, disapproval ratings are similar — 65 percent disapprove of the Republicans’ handling of Iraq and 59 percent disapprove of the Democrats’.

So the public hates the Dhimmicrats as much as the Republicans?

(…that is somewhat reassuring, since they may take control of government in the US with the next elections…)

On the subject of little known facts, it seems in Britain you can receive an indeterminate sentence for crimes committed. Admittedly, this involves sex-offenders and there special criteria should be involved. But, there are a couple of stipulations that bear important scrutiny:

Under the sentence offenders have a minimum tariff, but must prove they are no longer a danger before they can be released.

I’m curious to see where this type of sentencing expands to include.

(...can’t you see this measure of guilt/innocence being applied to politics, or even Sharia law…).

On the subject of things Middle Eastern, Another South Korean hostage has been found slain. Unfortunately, there is a growing furor for the world to stop refusing to give in to terrorist demands.

South Korea today urged the United States and Afghan governments to show ”flexibility” over Taliban demands to exchange the remaining 21 Christian aid workers from South Korea for imprisoned militants.

The really sad part is the results of this terror campaign.

Afghan officials have also advised against any movement or travel, especially by humanitarian-aid workers, outside Kabul.

The terrorists have only succeeded in denying help to the people of Afghanistan. But, the media seems to have missed that part of the whole thing.

(…interesting that they are all Christian aid workers…don’t you think…)

Finally, Any Soldier reports this from Afghanistan:

PFC Juan S. Restrepo, age 20, of Pembroke Pines, FL, died July 22 in Korengal Valley, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered when insurgents attacked his unit with small arms fire. He was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment (Airborne), 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team, Vicenza, Italy.

At our house we remember your cry—the cry of all warriors:

"Tell them of us and say,
For their tomorrow, we gave our today."
--The Kohima Epitaph--

We remember what you have given, Private Restrepo. And we say thank you for the tomorrows you have given others. May God give back to your family more than they have sacrificed and lost.

And, now, we dance In Memoriam.