DETROITAs community leaders and members of the press looked on, Detroit mayor David Bing proudly hurled the first brick this week in a window-shattering ceremony for the city's newest dilapidated slum.
The result of three years of construction work and more than $24,000 in public funds, the rat-infested and crime-ridden development was unveiled to the public on Tuesday.
"It is my great honor to introduce to you the brand new Baneberry Heights," announced Bing, gesturing to the ramshackle subdivision behind him. "Filthy, dangerous, filled with violence and blight: It's all here, and it's all completely falling apart."
When US President Barack Obama addresses the Muslim world from Cairo next month, Egyptian officials hope he will choose 1 000-year-old Al-Azhar mosque, the heart of a revered institution for Islamic study, as his backdrop to convey US respect for Islam.
The American Embassy in Cairo said no decision has been made yet on a venue for Obama's June 4 speech on US relations with the Muslim world. But two Egyptian security officials said on Thursday that an American advance team scouted five potential sites this week and narrowed it down to a short list of three -the Al-Azhar mosque and two other locations connected to it.
Al-Azhar is one of the oldest, most prestigious and most influential institutions of higher learning for Sunni Islam. Translation - the highest of the high, the mostest of the most.
Delivering his message from the 10th-century mosque would convey the American president's regard for Islamic religion, culture and history, Al-Azhar officials said.
"Al-Azhar is a beacon of knowledge and moderation for the whole Islamic world," said Sheikh Fawzi Zefzaf, a prominent Al-Azhar scholar.
Sheik of Al-Azhar Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi welcomed Obama to use his podium. He said a speech from the mosque could "open the door for a dialogue of reason between the world's cultures and civilisations to spread values of justice and good against hatred and violence." Hatred and violence you say? Obviouslly Sheik of Al-Azhar Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi the Magnificent has not read much about the Fatimids and the caliphate of Al-Muess.
The historic mosque was built in 972 by the Fatimids, Shi'a Muslim rulers who had just conquered Egypt and built Cairo as their capital. Later Egypt came under Sunni rule, and the mosque became a prestigious centre for the teaching of Islamic thought and philosophy.
Over the centuries, numerous rulers added to the sprawling building, which boasts five minarets and numerous domes, along with columned prayer halls and madrasas - or religious schools - around a central open courtyard. It lies in the heart of Islamic Cairo with its maze of small alleyways and bazaars.
The mosque holds a special place in Egypt's more recent political history as well, a symbol of resistance against Western imperialism. This fact alone should seal the deal for Barry and his cadre.
Nationalists launched marches and protests from the mosque during a 1919 revolt against British rule. In 1956, then-President Gamal Abdel Nasser gave a famed speech from Al-Azhar's pulpit rallying Egyptians against an invasion by Britain, France and Israel. Rahm, make a note for my writers and teleprompter man, a Nasser quote or two please.
Today, Al-Azhar University has expanded into several modern campuses. It hosts thousands of students of Islamic theology every year, exports clergy throughout the Muslim world and the U.S. and its clerics issue edicts that carry a moral weight that influences well beyond the borders of Egypt. Within the country, Al-Azhar is empowered to censor books, movies and other media related to religion. Do they censor evil conservative blogs and books, movies, Fox Network, Rush, too?
Since he took office in January, Obama has reached out repeatedly to the Islamic world. He is well liked in the Middle East, where people often mention enthusiastically that his father was a Muslim from Kenya. More bowing soon to come.
Choosing Al-Azhar, a Sunni institution, could also help ease Sunni fears over US efforts to open a dialogue with Shi'a Iran. Predominantly Sunni US allies Egypt and Saudi Arabia accuse Iran of destabilising the Middle East.
The Egyptian officials said in addition to the mosque, the advance team looked at a conference centre and a meeting hall that are part of Al-Azhar but in other parts of Cairo. They said the team ruled out Cairo University because it would have disrupted year-end exams, and Cairo Convention Hall which was deemed too shabby. Shabby won't get it! Remember folks, this is The One!
American Embassy spokeswoman Margaret White said there has been no decision yet on the venue.
Among the myriad security considerations if Obama speaks from the mosque are the problems posed by the thousands of shoes that would have to be checked at the door in accordance with Muslim tradition, the Egyptian security officials said.
First, there is the problem of where to put them all. But the bigger concern is they could provide cover for bombs, said the two officials from the president's office and the Ministry of Interior who are responsible for the security for visiting foreign dignitaries. They spoke on condition of anonymity because of security concerns. Shoe boxes?
Worshippers and other visitors traditionally remove their shoes before going into mosques and place them on a rack outside. Or on the gun racks just inside.
Al-Azhar mosque holds about 1 000 people. But normally, worshippers can wrap them in plastic bags and take them inside or leave them on trucks outside. However during an Obama speech, the audience would be barred from carrying bags inside for security reasons. - Sapa-AP This means tea bags as well!
Decision not yet made according to Ms. White at the US EMBASSY, but the shoe and plastique bag rules have already been disseminated to the congregants by security. More news at Eleven!
California Treasurer Bill Lockyer asked U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Wednesday to authorize assistance for his state from the federal Troubled Asset Relief Program, warning that depressed tax revenues may cut into basic services and halt the building of infrastructure.
In a letter, Lockyer asked Geithner for TARP assistance for California and "other financially strapped states and local governments which face a severe cash flow crunch."
"If we cannot obtain our usual short-term cash-flow borrowings, there could be devastating impacts on the ability of the State or other governments to provide essential services to their citizens," Lockyer wrote.
I guess Laficornia does qualify as a toxic asset these days ...
In particular, Lockyer cited fire and police protection, education and social services. Ah, yes, the usual suspects...
In addition, Lockyer warned in the letter that California's cash flow problems may lead to trouble accessing the long-term bond market, which could "eventually even halt our infrastructure construction programs."
Lockyer estimated that California's cash flow shortfall in fiscal 2009-2010 will be more than $13 billion. Is that before or after the SEIU got Obama to help them out with their "contract negotiations"?
But weakness in the credit markets will cause difficulties in short-term borrowing to make up that difference, Lockyer wrote, necessitating the use of TARP money to help make funds more easily available through banks.
Under a plan outlined by Lockyer in his letter, if a government is unable to repay loans made using TARP funds, the Treasury would use TARP money to "purchase the non-performing assets." Like Vallejo?
Under that scenario, the state or local government would then directly repay the Treasury under the terms it had with the bank, according to Lockyer's plan. If the entity in question couldn't pay the bank under the original terms, how the hell are they gonna pay the Treasury under the original terms?
Lockyer has stated previously that he believes the Obama administration has the authority to use TARP to guarantee state-government borrowing. Well, yeah, he must since he can fire the CEO of GM and determine what Chrysler's ad budget should be....
#1
...warning that depressed tax revenues may cut into basic services and halt the building of infrastructure.
Cause every service is essential and every dollar spent by the Gov is critical to the very existence of the world. [How the heck did they manage in the 60s when they didn't have a gazillion programs and entitlements?]
Take TARP and become a territory again. Your Senators and Representatives lose their votes in Congress until [some Southern states have had this experience] you get your house back in order.
#2
Lockyer estimated that California's cash flow shortfall in fiscal 2009-2010 will be more than $13 billion.
And the Fed's 2009-1010 shortfall will be about $3 trillion. Lockyear does realize that the Obama admin will spend $2 for every $1 it takes in taxes this year? This year's Fed deficit of $1.8-2.0 trillion is more than the entire capital spending of the entire United States, even in a good year. In terms daytime TV viewers can understand, it's as if the fat Oprah was loosed upon America's seed corn reserves and there won't be any left for planting next year.
Posted by: ed ||
05/15/2009 10:17 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I could cut 10% from the California budget with a day's work. Let me have Old Spook, TW, tu3031 and Badanov and I'll cut 25% by the end of a week. tu3031 and I would be rendering the books, Old Spook would glare menacingly at the now-terrified legislators, Bad would rewire their computers, and TW would be swinging the periwinkle Cluebat of Destiny right and left.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/15/2009 10:17 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Move Gitmo crowd to Alcatraz. Begin self-help inmate rehab of facility immediately upon their arrival. Pocket SECDEF Gate's $ 50m from operational day one! Charge another $ 50m per year in detainee tuition, Red Cross swimming classes, room & board, etc.
#6
Steve White,
I doubt you could cut 10% from their budget. The problem is that the overwhelming majority of their budget (like the Feds and the other states) is either contracturally obligated (and thus only modified by bankruptcy or Obama intervention) or required by court order.
#8
As California goes, so goes the nation. When California goes up, we get the trickle down from their sucess. In Oregon we calls this trickle down "golden rain". When things are bad in California they may not get quite as bad elsewhere, but it lasts longer.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
05/15/2009 11:44 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I doubt you could cut 10% from their budget. The problem is that the overwhelming majority of their budget (like the Feds and the other states) is either contracturally obligated (and thus only modified by bankruptcy or Obama intervention) or required by court order.
Not true. When the Richmond school district went bankrupt several years ago it was noted that administrators outnumbered the teachers. Same is true in agencies across the state. The bureaucracy is bloated and overpaid. An across the board headcount reduction of 10% wouldn't even be noticed by recipients of state services.
#11
Move Gitmo crowd to Alcatraz. Begin self-help inmate rehab of facility immediately upon their arrival. Pocket SECDEF Gate's $ 50m from operational day one! Charge another $ 50m per year in detainee tuition, Red Cross swimming classes, room & board, etc.
The money's tempting but I think we'd save even more if we moved all the state legislators to Alcatraz. But, hey, Alcatraz prolly has room for Gitmo detainees and the legislators too. Maybe the Gitmo guys would convert the legislators to Islam.
#12
come on over, Army of Steves -- CA Rantburgers (and Lizards -- quite a lot of them in the Greater Bay Area as well as So Cal) are standing by to launch Operation "Those Pork-Busters Came In -- Cleanin' Up The Town". With unlicensed nuclear particle accelerators in all our backpacks (they only LOOK like leaf-blowers).
#14
The state and local governments are REALLY desperate for revenue these days. Just yesterday I saw 2 motorcycle cops writing tickets to high school students on their bikes. They've already overharvested speeders on the freeways.
OTOH, since the Ninth declared the USA an illegal and unconsitutional nation anyhoos, it should be fine and legal for DA ARNUUUULD to seek independent = sovereign CA State bailout from CHINA, widout that pesky USGovt = Congressional permission, oversight, etc thingys???
WASHINGTON -- The head of the CIA defended the agency Friday against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's charge that she was misled in 2002 about the use of waterboarding, but he said it ultimately is up to Congress to decide where the truth lies.
"Let me be clear. It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress," CIA Director Leon Panetta wrote in a message to agency employees that was released to the public. "That is against our laws and our values." Referring to Pelosi's remarks, he said, "The political debate over interrogation reached a new decibel level yesterday."
Panetta's rebuttal was far more muted that a counterattack the Republicans unleashed against Pelosi. "I think her accusations against our terror-fighters are irresponsible and, according to the CIA's record, Speaker Pelosi was briefed on what had been done," said Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri, the senior Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee. "It's outrageous that a member of Congress would call our terror-fighters liars."
Pelosi drew the criticism a day after opening her weekly news conference with a prepared statement accusing agency briefers of misleading her in 2002 in connection with the use of waterboarding, an interrogation technique that simulates drowning. In the statement, she repeated that she was not told that waterboarding had been used, even though it had been, and said an aide informed her of its use after other lawmakers had been briefed in 2003. And now...the AP spin. Pelosi has been the target of a campaign orchestrated in recent days by the House Republican leadership, which is eager to undercut her statements as well as stick Democrats with partial responsibility for the use of waterboarding in the Bush administration.
Some Democrats have expressed surprise that she chose to inject herself more deeply into the controversy, especially at a time when President Barack Obama enjoys widespread public support and Republicans are suffering extremely low approval ratings. Associates of the California Democrat say she decided it was an error to allow Republican attacks to go unanswered any longer.
At the White House, spokesman Robert Gibbs decided to stay out of the controversy. "I appreciate the invitation to get involved but I'll decline to R.S.V.P.." He said the president wanted to look forward, not back.
Because threatening those who authorized enhanced interrogation techniques with Justice Department investigations is how one looks forward, nowadays.
Panetta, a former Democratic lawmaker from Pelosi's home state of California, said records from the period "indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of (terrorist suspect) Abu Zubaydah, describing `the enhanced techniques that had been employed.'" He cited a "long tradition in Washington of making hay out of our business. ... But the political debates about interrogation reached a new decibel level yesterday when the CIA was accused of misleading Congress." He added, "We are an agency of high integrity, professionalism and dedication. Our task is to tell it like it is -- even if that's not what people always want to hear."
An unclassified chart released last month by the CIA describes a total of 40 briefings for lawmakers over a period of several years on enhanced interrogation techniques. Pelosi's name appears once, as having attended a session on Sept. 4, 2002, when she was the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. Former Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla., who at the time was the chairman of the committee and later became CIA director, also was present.
While Goss has scoffed at Pelosi's description of the briefing, other lawmakers have challenged the accuracy of the CIA's overall reconstruction of events. So Panetta says she's fulla crap, Barry punts, and the Republicans salivate. Looks like the only one's trying to cover her ass is the AP...
But since they keep reporting on it, they aren't covering it very well. Perhaps a larger piece of fabric is needed.
#1
Bob "I pre-Twitter tweeted to myself" Graham is trying to defend her, but his reputation as a flake is already in from his boffo Presidential campaign run (you might have missed it if you blinked)
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/15/2009 18:43 Comments ||
Top||
We had this yesterday, but I have no problem rippping her all over again... It's from "Scrappleface", but it's hard to tell the difference from her "real" press conference It fooled me. But it was early...
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, under scrutiny for her changing accounts of when she knew about the CIAs enhanced interrogation techniques, said today that she was not informed until late 2003 that Muslim terrorists had used passenger jets to kill thousands of people in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.
"One of my aides mentioned in passing that she had been to a CIA briefing months earlier about these techniques," said Rep. Pelosi. "At the time, I thought the discussion was theoretical...that this was something that could happen. It wasnt until October 2003 that I learned that these methods had actually been use on American soil."
Crashing hijacked planes into buildings full of non-combatant civilians is one of several "enhanced immolation techniques" forbidden under U.S. and international law.
Rep. Pelosi, clearly rattled by reporters questions on the subject, first said she knew nothing about the 9/11 attacks, but later acknowledged that she was "too busy helping Democrats win a majority in Congress to get involved in the details of a matter that was being handled through appropriate channels."
#1
If it wasn't Scrapple Face, I'd not blame anyone for thinking that it was a straight news story from the Associated Press.
Posted by: Mike ||
05/15/2009 10:19 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Actually, read through that, then Mike's comment, then hovering above the title to get the link to be sure, but, yeah, at first read, I thought this was a pretty boldfaced but actual example of political speak. This is so outré that it might actually be true, reading something so outré actually wouldn't surprize me from a carrer politician.
Should be noted "Scrappleface" in the title, though.
A contentious "Rightwing Extremism" report that warned of military veterans as possible recruits for terrorist attacks against the U.S. was not authorized, has been withdrawn and is being rewritten, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Capitol Hill lawmakers.
"The wheels came off the wagon because the vetting process was not followed," Ms. Napolitano told the House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday.
"The report is no longer out there," she said. "An employee sent it out without authorization."
The report was shared with state and local law enforcement officials nationwide via the department's internal Web site on April 7, angering Republican lawmakers and military veterans who said it unfairly stereotyped veterans.
Ms. Napolitano did not say when the report was taken off the "intel Web site" and all Homeland Security Department Web sites, but she said it is in the process of being "replaced or redone in a much more useful and much more precise fashion."
Rep. Christopher Carney, Pennsylvania Democrat, said that as a veteran he "took offense personally," and his constituents were offended by the report as well. "It really hit home hard to me and in our district," Mr. Carney said. "It's not a good start when I go to town hall meetings and I hear people calling for your resignation."
Ms. Napolitano said the report titled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," is not the only report she has seen that says veterans are targets for recruitment by racist and other hate groups.
"It was an assessment, not an accusation," Ms. Napolitano said.
"It didn't say that," Mr. Carney interrupted
That's right," Ms. Napolitano responded. "That is why it should not have gone out."
Asked whether the person who wrote the report is still employed, Ms. Napolitano said, "Appropriate personnel action is being taken."
Rep. Peter T. King, the ranking Republican on the committee, said the report "made an impression" in his New York district as well. "I don't think it reflects well on the department, and I know you want to address it," Mr. King said.
David K. Rehbein, commander of the American Legion, said the withdrawal of the report "validates our objections."
"It did not contain any evidence," Mr. Rehbein said. "It was an unfair and unsubstantiated stereotype based on Timothy McVeigh."
The report also said "rightwing extremism" may include groups opposed to abortion and immigration, among several other threat assessments.
In March, the department issued and recalled within hours, a lexicon of key terms and phrases used by Homeland Security analysts "that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States."
Whites and blacks, Christians and Jews, Cubans and Mexicans, along with tax objectors, were among several political leanings listed in the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon." Both reports were prepared by the department's Office of Intelligence and Analysis.
"Some things in my initial days have gone very well at the department, some things have not. And that was probably the worst thing," Ms. Napolitano told the House Appropriations subcommittee on homeland security on Tuesday.
"It was not authorized to be distributed. It had not even completed its vetting process within the department. It has been taken off of the intel Web sites and the lexicon that went along with it was similarly withdrawn," she said.
"Neither were authorized products, and we have now put in place processes. And it turned out there were really no procedures to govern what went out and what didn't before, and now there are. I do not want to see a replication of that," Ms. Napolitano said
Farm management announces new barn security initiative; doors to be locked at all times
Posted by: Mike ||
05/15/2009 10:32 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I am going to swim against RB mainstream opinion here, and state that:
I believe that a State (ie, the Government) has the right (technically, even the Duty) to discover who is plotting against it, what their ultimate aims are, and how they plan to achieve those goals. The President is sworn to defend the country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. His Administration would be derelict in its duty if they did not attempt to assess and catalog the potential threats.
I do not like the ham-handed thuggish way this Administration is exercising its duties, but I recognize their authority to do so.
And I think that too much caterwauling from the Right is not helping us advocate effectively for the veterans.
#3
Thing is, they listed not named, formal groups such as ELF or PETA.
Just broad categories--veterans, pro-life, and so forth.
You'll note an article in the NYT yesterday about some BSA Explorers learning to take down a hostage situation. Interesting concept for the old "Be Prepared" crew. Anyway, the bad guy was supposed to be a disgruntled Iraq war vet.
The meme is out there.
Plus, it's insulting to Viet Nam war vets. They are apparently considered too old to cause mindless carnage any longer.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey ||
05/15/2009 11:04 Comments ||
Top||
#4
veterans are targets for recruitment by racist and other hate groups.
And disgruntled veterans DO go wacko and kill people.
Of course those statements apply to Post Office workers too. And just about ANY group of Americans. Singling out veterans, and pretty much ONLY veterans, is not right though, and perpetuates an unfair, dangerous and incorrect stereotype.
#6
Whites and blacks, Christians and Jews, Cubans and Mexicans, along with tax objectors, were among several political leanings listed in the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon."
It strikes me that the brush strokes were so broad that the report would be useless as intelligence, but would provide cover for monitoring just about anyone. Instead of focusing on veterans congress should have grilled her on what law enforcement and homeland would be using the reports for.
I seem to fall into several catagories, which concerns me.
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.
