As the Washington Times recently reported, the McChrystal counterinsurgency rules now include: No night searches. Villagers must be warned prior to searches. Afghan National Army or Afghan Police must accompany U.S. units on searches. Searches must account, according to International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) headquarters, "for the unique cultural sensitivities toward local women." ("Islamic repressiveness" is more accurate, but that's another story.) U.S. soldiers may not fire on the enemy unless the enemy is preparing to fire first. U.S. forces may not engage the enemy if civilians are present. U.S. forces may fire at an enemy caught in the act of placing an IED, but not walking away from an IED area. And on it goes.
Here's another ROE that Gen. McChrystal should have been asked to justify to all Americans who hope to see their loved ones return home in one piece. The London Times recently reported that Marines, about to embark on a dangerous supply mission, were shown a PowerPoint presentation that first illustrated locations of IEDs along the way and then warned the Marines "not to fire indiscriminately even if they were fired on."
Even if they were fired on? Could they fire at all - even "discriminately"? How long does Gen. McChrystal think troops can hold their fire and maintain healthy morale? And how about a progress report on the investigation into that deadly disaster at Ganjgal? Congress wasn't interested in any of these questions.
The Times story went on to note: "The briefing ended with a projected screen of McChrystal's quote: "It's not how many you kill, it's how many you convince."
Another question: How many you convince of what, general? Of the depravity of child marriage? Of the injustice of Sharia laws that subjugate women and non-Muslims? Of the inhumanity of jihad?
#1
ION TOPIX > THE AFGHANIZATION OF CENTRAL ASIA
[US Policy Planners may unwitting be exporting Afghanistan's various Security, Governance Crises, etc. to its neighbors in CENTASIA/CENASIA i.e. TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN, TAIJIKISTAN.
IMO sub-read, CHINA + RUSSIA + INDJUH, espec the two former Cold War nukulaar protagonists.
#2
WORLD NEWS > [NYT Artic] RETHINKING THE PACIFIC.
LEW KUAN YEW - [paraph] The 21st Century will be marked by a CONTEST FOR GEOPOL-GLOBAL SUPREMACY in the Pacific. No State which desires to be a WORLD POWER, EXPAND OR STAY A WORLD POWER will be able to do unless can hold/stand their ground in the Pacific agz all other competing Nation-States.
I can agree.
* 1960's-early 1970's GUAM TAOTAMONAS > As US power wanes vee other World Powers [China], it may choose to deny strategic Pacific Islands to geopol enemies or opponents by destroying same via undergound nuclear detonations which cause the lands to implode + collapse upn itself.
* ISLAM + A FUTURE TROUBLESOME VIRGIN = Madonna???
D *** NG IT, you just know ANGELINA will have something to say!
FP: Dave Gaubatz, welcome to Frontpage Interview. Congrats on your new book Muslim Mafia.
Five missing American Muslim men have been arrested in Pakistan suspected of terrorist activity. CAIR claims that it assisted the FBI in this case. Your thoughts?
Gaubatz: Jamie, thank you.
I will get right to the point on this one. This is like Ismail Royer and Ali Al Timimi (both had strong relationships, and still do, with CAIR and are serving prison time for advocating terrorism against America) telling authorities they will help them prosecute Major Hasan from Ft. Hood.
I have been informing the public and law enforcement for years that the way to stop young Muslims in America from running away to fight Jihad against assumed oppressors and enemies (to include America and Israel) is, for one, to stop groups like CAIR from promoting jihadist activity. We need to prosecute groups like this when they do things that are illegal. And lets be honest about the materials that they distribute.
FP: And these materials are?
Gaubatz: These are materials Islamic leaders are providing to their worshippers. They come directly from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Iran. They are current and are distributed in 2009 as a reference to how young Muslims should carry out their obligatory duties in regards to physical Jihad. Young Muslims are told exactly the manner and tactics to use during attacks, what to attack, and the type of weapons to use.
For instance, I have previously written about the manuals that call for having the exact weapons the alleged enemies of Islam have, must be manufactured and/or purchased in America for their use. Such weapons as chemicals, high-powered weapons, biological, and nuclear.
FP: Ok just a second. Are you stating that CAIR and other such groups promote and advocate young men to leave America and engage in physical Jihad?
Gaubatz: Yes Jamie. And I am not the one saying it. The materials that these groups distribute to young Muslims are saying it. I am just reporting on what I see. And not only are these materials telling young Muslims in America to leave America to fight enemies overseas; CAIR and their supporters advocate doing so in America as well.
CAIR has the same violent materials in their National HQ, and various chapters that the young men are using for references in their mosques. The ADAMS Center and Dar Al Hijrah (both Northern VA) are prime examples of violent material being provided to the worshippers (to include children). They literally have hundreds of manuals/books/DVDs, audio lectures informing the young Muslims to ignore the U.S. Constittution and our laws, and only obey Sharia law. These Islamic scholars encourage the youth to change America, even using violent force when required. Rest at link
Posted by: ed ||
12/11/2009 10:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They come directly from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Iran.
#2
To equate islam with the mafia as does Dave Gaubatz underestimates the danger of radical islam in the US. The danger is religion driven; the mafia was not.
It's hard to imagine a better illustration of the panic and recklessness stringing ObamaCare along in the Senate than the putative deal that Harry Reid announced this week. The Majority Leader is claiming that a Medicare "buy-in" for people from ages 55 to 64 has overcome the liberal-moderate impasse over the "public option." But if anything, this gambit is an even faster road to government-run health care.
The public optionan insurance program open to everyone, financed by taxpayers and run like Medicareis intended as a veiled substitute for "single-payer" Canada-style insurance. Under the cover of "choice" and "competition," the entitlement would quickly squeeze out private insurance as people gravitated to "free" coverage and the government held down costs via price controls the way Medicare does now.
Mr. Reid's buy-in simply cuts out the middle man. Why go to the trouble of creating a new plan like Medicare when Medicare itself is already handy? A buy-in is an old chestnut of single-payer advocate Pete Stark, and it's the political strategy liberals have tried since the Great Society: Ratchet down the enrollment age for Medicare, boost the income limits to qualify for Medicaid, and soon health care for the entire middle class becomes a taxpayer commitment.
In the case of Medicare, this means expanding a program that is already going broke. Medicare reimburses doctors and hospitals at rates 70% to 80% below those of private insurers, which means below the actual treatment costs in many cities and regions. Providers either eat these lossesabout half of U.S. hospitals are running a deficit or close to itor they raise prices for private payers. This cost-shifting isn't dollar for dollar, but all empirical research shows that it adds tens of billions of dollars to consumer health bills, and this will accelerate if several million new patients are added to Medicare. That means higher prices for health insurance.
Adverse selection will also be a big problem, as the people who choose to join will inevitably be higher risk or in poorer health. Mr. Reid hasn't released any details on his plan, if they even exist, but would the sub-65 uninsured who join Medicare be subsidized? If so, in what sense is this one-hand-subsidizes-the-other taxpayer self-dealing a "buy-in"? It sounds simply like a huge Medicare expansion, especially if employers decide to drop coverage for anyone older than 55.
As for costs, how does adding new beneficiaries square with Democratic promises that they will cut Medicare spending on paper by two percentage points a year for the next two decadesjust as the baby boomers retire and health costs continue to climb?
This last-minute, back-room ploy shows again that Democrats are simply winging it as they rush to pass somethinganythingthat can get 60 votes by Christmas. President Obama praised the proposal as "a creative new framework," while Finance Chairman Max Baucus told the Washington Post, "If there's 60 Senators who can reach agreement, I'm for it." Now there's a model standard to use for reordering 17% of the U.S. economy.
The latest polls show public support for the Senate plan falling into the mid-30%-range. The remaining supporters must not be paying attention.
#1
If Medicare is used as an example of the politicization and graft government's likely to give us with a public option, what better candidate for the public option?
Posted by: Fred ||
12/11/2009 2:33 Comments ||
Top||
There's nothing wrong with a boring politician. But Obama isn't becoming boring in a stolid, dependable Angela Merkel kind of way. He's not boring like a mannerly George H. W. Bush or a thoughtful Bill Bradley. He's boring like yesterday's celebrity.
He's the teen heartthrob who's grown a little too old. He's the star from The Real World Denver -- three years ago. The cruel vicissitudes of the celebrity culture apply to everyone. If Paris Hilton can be overtaken by the even-more-pointlessly famous Kim Kardashian, no one is safe.
Much of what was new and different about Obama didn't survive its first contact with reality.
An American president is almost by definition overexposed. But Obama has jammed a full term's worth of exposure into a mere eleven months. Michelle Obama notoriously said during the campaign, "Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed." What she really meant, apparently, was that Barack would never again allow us to turn on the TV without seeing or hearing Barack.
The historic, high-stakes Obama speech is practically a fortnightly experience. Given the frequency, they can't all be interesting. But in their tendency toward the crashingly banal, they all run together into the same mind-numbing oration. He often speaks in a professorial manner that treats his listeners as if they are all eager to be lectured in Obama 101, managing to sound thoughtful without any true depth or wisdom. Abraham Lincoln once said, "It is very common in this country to find great facility of expression and less common to find great lucidity of thought." Obama confirms the insight.
He can't help studding his speech with self-references, as if he were still fascinating and new. Obama is not nearly as dull as, say, Herman Van Rompuy, the European Union's new president. But he is inflicted on us much more routinely and with much greater intensity. On net, that might make Barack Obama one of the most boring people in the world.
Posted by: Mike ||
12/11/2009 09:57 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11123 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
First time I heard of him, which was the day I met him, my reaction was "uninteresting, unimpressive". A rare case of an initial impression of mine that has held up rather well.
The voters and institutions bear the responsibility for diminishing the office and the country by insanely savaging his predecessor, elevating this undeserving nobody, and beclowning itself with obsequious, obssessive praise that literally recalls nothing so much as the days of Stalin.
#2
Verlain, I think you have said something profound about how the left and the MSM so savaged Bush that they set the stage for this radical, naive, rank amateur who now struts the world stage as if Caesar, and who now is utterly unaware or prepared for what is coming! Well said.
#1
And this is why the term 'Fisk' has become a pejorative, as is clearly shown in the first few seconds of the clip.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
12/11/2009 4:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Obama is weak; he's totally impotent..."
I hate to say I agree with Robert Fisk, but on that point, I agree with Robert Fisk.
Posted by: Mike ||
12/11/2009 6:48 Comments ||
Top||
#3
True, but Obama can still kick Fisk's ass.
Posted by: ed ||
12/11/2009 7:53 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Sasha and Malia can kick Fisk's ass. He likes it, apparently
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/11/2009 8:01 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Constant apologies abroad for everything from slavery to Hiroshima
Bows to Saudi royalty, the Japanese emperor, and Chinese autocrats
The on-again/off-again Guantanamo shut-down mess
The fight with the former CIA directors
The public show trial of Khalid Sheik Mohammed
The reach out to Ahmadinejad Castro, Chavez, and assorted thugs
The Honduras fiasco
Czars everywhere
The serial Bush did it/reset whine abroad
The Queen of England/I-pod fiasco
Gordon Brown gets snookered in his gift-giving
Unceremoniously shipping back the Churchill bust
The end of the special relationship with the UK
The New York on-the-town presidential splurge
Anita Dunn and her Mao worship
Timothy Geithner/Tom Daschle/Hilda Solis and their taxes
What ever happened to Gov. Richardson?
No lobbyists = gads of them
The Podestas insider influence-peddling empire
Sotomayors wise Latina chauvinism
The Special Olympics silly quip
Trashing Nancy Reagan
The Skip Gates/police acting stupidly mess( and then telling America "not to jump to conclusions about the murders at Fort Hood by a MOSLEM)
The get-Chicago-the-Olympics jaunt to Copenhagen
Cap-and-trade boondoggle
Millions of green jobs
Ignore gas, oil, coal, and nuclear power production
Cash-for-clunkers
The Joe Biden gaffe machine
Jobs saved or created rather than references to the actual unemployment rates
Van Jones, the racist and truther
Desiree Rogers wont testify
The blowback from, and silence about, the Rangel/Dodd corruption
The White House party crashers plan to take the 5th Amendment
The bipartisanship con
The pork-barrel stimulus spoils ( all that money for jack shit)
The demonization of the Town-Hallers
The Acorn Mess
The Kevin Jennings/Safe School Czar embarrassment
The SEIU direct access to the White House
The Asian Tour comedown ( it accomplished ...wait for it...jack shit)
The politicization of the take-over of GM and Chrysler
The Obama readjustment in the order of paying back car creditors
Car dealerships closed on shaky criteria
Obama as Caesar
The Emanuel never let a serious crisis go to waste boast
The Black Caucus/Rangel/Waters bid to bail out the inner-city radio stations
Yosi Sergant and the NEA
$1.7 trillion deficit( Hello, can you hear me? 1.7 TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT !!!)
The planned $9 trillion added to the national debt
New income tax rates; health care surcharge talk; and payroll tax caps to be lifted
Rahm Emanuels promised payback to those states that trash the stimulus
The supposed C-span aired health care debate
The promised website posts of pending legislation
Czechs and Poles sold out on missile defense
Sermons to and finger pointing at the Israelis
Getting stiffed and blown off by just about every govt. on Earth as a patsy/
The failed Putin helps to stop a nuclear Iran gambit
Voting present on the Iranian reformers in the street
Serial but empty deadlines to Ahmadinejad
The good war/bad war twisting and turning on Iraq/Afghanistan
Uptailing in Afghanistan and sticking it to the American military
The months-long dithering over Afghanistan
Renditions, tribunals, Patriot Act, etc. once trashed, now OK
Health-care take-over
The 2,000 page proposed new health code
The embarrassing Nobel Peace Prize nomination
The attacks on surgeons, Chamber of Commerce, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, etc.
The Islam mythologies in the Cairo Speech
The al Arabiya Bush did it interview
Obamas TV my Muslim faith gaffe
Since the Khomeini revolution took place, and it was named the Islamic Revolution (may God help Islam, as its name is being used by banks, ruling regimes, political parties, barbershops, and others), there has been a misguided passion for naming some main streets in Tehran with names that are provocative and beyond the bounds of politeness and respect.
For example there is the Abu Lulu al Majusi Street, which is named after the assassin of Caliph Omar Ibn al Khattab. Al Majusi is a figure who is generally reviled by the entire Arab world, and yet despite this a street was named after him in Iran. After this incident, the Iranian regime's behaviour in this regard continued, and it angered the largest Arab country by naming a street after Khalid al Islambouli, the assassin who brutally killed Egyptian President Anwar al Sadat, along with other innocent people. This Iranian innovation was renewed when they named one of Tehran's streets after Hussein al Huthi. Al Huthi was not a great scholar, nor was he a figure that earned respect or admiration during his lifetime, nor did he achieve anything for Yemen other than great strife, and this is something that the Yemenis are still paying for today.
Can anybody look at these street names and judge them favourably or believe them to be innocent?
I think this would be very difficult. Iran is interested in dividing the Arab "street" by inciting emotions, whilst in fact they are harming the Arabs through marginal conflicts that many people have been the victims of. All of this was taking place in order to draw attention away from the internal challenges the Iranian regime is facing, and these are well-known challenges such as unemployment, corruption, racial discrimination against ethnic minorities, and the issue of Iran infringing its neighbours' borders and threatening them.
However Iran's biggest problems, which the world came to fully recognize following the implications of the recent [Iranian] presidential elections, lies in the strong scepticism surrounding the competence of Iran's Supreme Leader and the Iranian regime...or in the figure of the Wali al Faqih himself. These doubts come from a very important figure and heavyweight Marja' [religious cleric], Grand Ayatollah Montazeri. Ayatollah Montazeri was at odds with Khomeini himself over several issues, and today as an Islamic jurist, he is considered to be more important and influential than [Supreme Ruler of Iran] Ali Khamenei who is only protected by his political position. However this protection has been strengthened by statements, such as the statement of a sheikh who said that the authority of the Supreme Leader is drawn directly from God, therefore making the issue of criticizing him an extremely complicated one.
The problems in Iran are enormous and they require immediate treatment that does not conceal these problems from the people or draw attention away from them with the naming of streets, the positions given to officials, or with wars supported for trivial reasons. There are internal wars taking place in Iran for purely internal reasons and this is due to the desire for change. As for the issue of the provocative naming of streets, this is fully consistent with the real reasons for exporting the revolution...which is the provocation of others.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/11/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11122 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
I particularly like the naming of Djalla Maternity Hospital in the inner city of Tehran.
You dont know who Djalla is? He's the 13th Imam and a barrel of fun. He's the man who is gonna kill all the Jews...the Savior of the World. Islam's Hope.
#1
One can only guess what âcorrectionsâ were applied to the GHCN and IPCC data sets, but I can easily guess their magnitude â about 1 degree. Curiously, the magnitude of the adjustments is about the same as the âglobal warmingâ signal of the past century.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
It's hard to imagine a better illustration of the panic and recklessness stringing ObamaCare along in the Senate than the putative deal that Harry Reid announced this week. The Majority Leader is claiming that a Medicare "buy-in" for people from ages 55 to 64 has overcome the liberal-moderate impasse over the "public option." But if anything, this gambit is an even faster road to government-run health care.
