Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Today's Reading Assignment

by Spook86

"Planning Victory in Afghanistan," by Dr. Frederick Kagan, one of the principal architects of the troop surge in Iraq. In his essay, published by NRO, Kagan lists nine principles the Obama Administration should follow to win the Afghan war.

Well worth the read. .... Pashtuns don’t work that way. The Soviets invaded Afghanistan at the end of 1979 and quickly occupied all of the major urban areas. The insurgents, for the most part, did not contest that occupation. They focused instead on cutting off communications between the cities, on ambushing Soviet troops moving outside urban areas and villages, and on attacking isolated Soviet outposts. The Soviets did not know how to respond—they had no context for thinking about a rural insurgency. They had fought the Second World War city by city, and had suppressed rebellions in their Eastern European satellites by fighting through their capitals. They tried to subdue the Pashtuns with ferocious and indiscriminate bombing of Afghan villages, generating 5 million refugees and strengthening the resistance rather than breaking it. ....

....
This essay does not provide a plan or a strategy for success in Afghanistan. It provides, rather, a set of guidelines for thinking about how to develop one, and for evaluating plans articulated by the administration, its generals, and outsiders. Ultimately, a plan for winning in Afghanistan has to be developed in Afghanistan, just as the plan for winning in Iraq was developed in Iraq. It is a truism that any plan must involve not only the U.S. and allied militaries, but all relevant civilian and international agencies, and must deeply involve the Afghans themselves at every level. Our military and civilian leaders understand that truism. We have failed to date in accomplishing the objective not because we haven’t known that we must, but because it is very hard to do.....


Pelosi’s power grab

(Compiler's note: Thought you'd like to know .... must read.)

by Armand C. Hale

With all the focus on the stimulus bill in the news, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has also effectively moved to SILENCE what CONSERVATIVES are left in Congress, keep the American public in the dark and made a naked grab for power!

On the very first day of Congress, Pelosi pushed through a change to a House rule known as the “motion to recommit,“ a rule that was implemented a CENTURY AGO specifically to PROHIBIT the leadership of the majority party from railroading horrendous legislation through Congress under the cover of darkness.

So what is the “motion to recommit?“ What are the ramifications of doing away with it?

Here are 50 real life examples.

Republicans used the tactic 50 times in the last Congress, primarily to block tax increases buried in larger bills.“ On 50 occasions during the last session of Congress, Pelosi and Company tried to sneak tax increases, anti-Second Amendment measures and amnesty for illegal aliens, among other things into unrelated bills. On those 50 occasions, conservatives exercised their right to send the bills back to committee to FORCE liberal committee members to actually go on record.

Secrecy Is the Liberals’ Favorite Weapon. Seriously, Pelosi and her left-wing cohorts in Congress firmly believe that what YOU don’t know won’t hurt THEM. They believe that as long as you don’t know what they’re up to, they can get away with whatever they want to impose on the American people.

Pelosi is depending on the cover of darkness and the silence of her allies in the media to keep her shenanigans under wraps. The last thing Pelosi wants is for the American people to find out what she has done. The cat is out of the bag. Without the House rule known as the “motion to recommit” the Congress can;

Secretly raise your taxes.

Secretly impose amnesty for illegal aliens on your community and your neighborhood.

Secretly take away your ability to protect your family by regulating away your right to own and keep a firearm.

The list could go on and on.

Right now, Diabolical New Congressional Plans are being placed to Fund Emergency Bail-Outs by Meddling, Manipulating, and Even “Merging” Tax-Deferred Retirement Plans Such as 401(k) s into the Insolvent Social Security System. A Desperately Cash-Strapped Liberal Congress Will Soon Double Cross American Taxpayers and Investors With Massive Changes and Absolutely No Warning.

Congressional committees are already holding hearings on how the government can “tap” millions of 401(k) retirement funds

to stave off the Social Security system’s emerging insolvency crisis. This is What Obama Really Means By “Spreading the Wealth”, it involves your 401K. In fact the radical dominated House Education and Labor Committee are already floating plans to “merge” privately-owned 401K accounts with the Social Security system which former U.S. Comptroller David Walker has been warning is little more than a vault of government IOUs.

In such a “merger” spearheaded by House committee chairman Rep. George Miller, a Marxist hailing from California’s Berkeley area, your tax-sheltered personal investments would be liquidated, dumped into government bonds, and linked up with the cash desperate Social Security “retirement” system. As government bureaucrats “spread the wealth,“ you are reduced to standing in line, hat in hand, hoping you get some portion of your life savings back.

Is this the kind of openness and transparency that Obama promised? This rule change would create the most closed Congress in history. It would silence the voices of tens of millions of Americans by further shutting down open debate on the House floor and taking away the minority’s right to offer substantive policy alternatives on behalf of millions of Americans they represent.“

Legislators are trying to get the message out but they need your help to drive the message home.

It’s a choice between freedom and tyranny. Will you stand up for your freedoms?

That’s your choice!

Pakistan tells US it will curb nuclear scientist Khan's freedom

Pakistan has told the United States it will put some curbs around freed scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan to prevent him from becoming a renewed nuclear proliferation threat, a US official said on Monday.

However, the official said the United States wanted more as well as "solid" assurances from Pakistan that he will not be such a threat after a court released Khan, dubbed the father of Pakistan's atom bomb, from house arrest on Friday. ....

Obama Signs Presidential Determination Allowing Palestinians Loyal to Hamas to Resettle In US

(Compiler's note: Must read ... before it is too late.)

by Kim Priestap

President Barack Obama has signed an executive order presidential determination allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to resettle in the United States. Sure, what can go wrong when we allow hundreds of thousands of people who have been, as Mark Steyn memorably described, "marinated" in a "sick death cult," who voted for Hamas, and 55% of whom support suicide bombings live here and at the American taxpayers' expense:

By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in migration assistance to the Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.

The "presidential determination" which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on February 4.

President Obama's decision, according to the Register, was necessitated by "the urgent refugee and migration needs" of the "victims."

Few on Capitol Hill took note that the order provides a free ticket replete with housing and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of January 2006.

Let's review some of Barack Obama's most recent actions since he was inaugurated a little more than two weeks ago:

* His first call to any head of state as president was to Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah party in the Palestinian territory.

* His first one on one interview with any news organization was with Al Arabia television.

* He ordered Guantanamo Bay closed and all military trials of detainees halted.

* He ordered all overseas CIA interrogation centers closed.

* He withdrew all charges against the masterminds behind the USS Cole and 9/11.

* Today we learn that he is allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refuges to move to and live in the US at American taxpayer expense.

Anyone else seeing a pattern here?

This explains it all

(Compiler's note: The rest of the story .... must read.)

Source: A friend

Remember when the economic crisis hit and the giant investment banking firm of Bear Sterns filed for bankruptcy? The company asked for financial assistance from the government but Congress decided (wisely) that private businesses make their own decisions and should be held accountable for them. Consequently, Bear Sterns went out of business.


Then several months later AIG, the huge insurance company, announced it too was in financial difficulty. Congress did a 180 turn in their philosophy and provided bailout money for AIG. Why the change of heart? Was it out of concern for the tens of thousands of citizens who might loose money? Or perhaps Congress was suddenly concerned for the economy as a whole. Well, it was nothing that complicated.



AIG INSURES THE PENSION TRUST FUND FOR MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS!




Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan

(Compiler's note: Thought you'd like to know -- a must read.)

by Betsy McCaughey

Republican Senators are questioning whether President Barack Obama’s stimulus bill contains the right mix of tax breaks and cash infusions to jump-start the economy.

Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the “tough” decisions elected politicians won’t make.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions

If the Obama administration’s economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration’s health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. “If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,” he said. “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.”

More Scrutiny Needed

On Friday, President Obama called it “inexcusable and irresponsible” for senators to delay passing the stimulus bill. In truth, this bill needs more scrutiny.

The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.

It’s Not the Prison, It’s the Prisoners

By Andrew C. McCarthy

Obama can close Guantanamo Bay, but that won’t make the war go away.

Among our illustrious allies in the War on Terror, Yemen ranks right up there with Pakistan, whose government just released nuke-peddler A. Q. Kahn from house arrest. Yemen’s government says it is preparing a major combat operation to drain one of the many swamps where jihad festers. So what preparations is it making? Massing troops? Infiltrating terrorist strongholds to identify top targets? No, Yemen’s approach is a little different: They’re releasing al-Qaeda operatives from prison—more than 170 of them.

It’s a development worth remembering as the Obama administration continues its hand-wringing over the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, where 245 enemy combatants, including 21 charged with war crimes, are being held.

The Yemen/Gitmo nexus is in the news again because of Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a ringleader behind the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in the port of Aden. Last week, the “appointing authority” (sometimes called the “convening authority”), which oversees military commissions at Gitmo, dismissed all charges against Nashiri. The action came after the military judge handling Nashiri’s case denied prosecutors’ request that the case be adjourned for four months while the Obama administration studies the commissions.


The dismissal of charges against Nashiri is far from the end of the case. The charges can be reinstated; the question is, where? That is what the Obama administration is studying. At issue is whether to keep military commissions (which Obama opposed as a candidate), to end them by transferring war-crimes cases to the civilian courts, or to come up with a different system altogether.

Nashiri is a Saudi terrorist who, like many other Saudi terrorists, found friendly operating conditions throughout Yemen, the ancestral home of the bin Laden clan. That’s because Yemen has still more in common with Pakistan: a weak government and an ungovernable tribal hinterland—optimal conditions for a thriving Islamic terror network. A Yemeni court convicted Nashiri in absentia, but that fact is meaningless: The Cole plotters who were rounded up and prosecuted by Yemen all have been released. That includes Jamal al-Badawi, who supposedly was sentenced to death. (Our valued ally has refused to extradite him.) It also includes at least two who bee-lined to Iraq to rejoin the jihad.

The moral of the story is reiterated with each new report of released terrorists returning promptly to terror, as they reliably do: If we didn’t already have Gitmo, we’d have to invent it. There really is a war going on out there. President Obama admitted as much in his inaugural address, to the unspoken dismay, no doubt, of his most ardent supporters. We cannot rely very much on other countries to protect our national security.

It has never been possible, nor thought possible, to win a war in court. There are simply too many jihadists, with the vast majority operating outside the jurisdiction of our laws. When we are fortunate enough to nab one, that usually happens under fog-of-war conditions not conducive to Miranda warnings, police evidence-collection protocols, and the like. And it bears keeping in mind that the purpose of an American trial is to force the government to meet a very high burden of proof in a system developed for the benefit of American citizens enjoying the presumption of innocence. That is why we say we would prefer to see the government fail—i.e., prefer to see the guilty go free—than to see an innocent person wrongly convicted.

War is different. A war is fought—meaning that people are killed and prisoners taken—in order to achieve vital national objectives, particularly the protection of American lives. In that context, we cannot prefer to see the government fail. We need the government to prevail, or our lives and the rights we cherish are in jeopardy. That doesn’t mean the enemy doesn’t get due process, particularly if we decide to put some of them on trial for war crimes rather than simply detaining them for the duration of the conflict. There is, however, a reason it is called due process, rather than, say, trial process. We owe only the process that is due in the particular circumstances. War and peace are not the same circumstance. The process due Americans accused of crimes in civilian courts is not the same as the process due foreign combatants and terrorists captured during military operations.

While 245 prisoners remain at Gitmo, we’ve detained tens of thousands in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere at one time or another in the course of this war. Gitmo has never held more than 800 prisoners. And even the gross number of detainees in this conflict pales in comparison to the number held, for example, in World War II, during which millions of prisoners were taken. We couldn’t conceivably conduct full-blown civilian trials for everyone detained under the necessities of war. Even in the Clinton years, when trial in the civilian courts was the favored counterterrorism strategy, we tried fewer than three dozen terrorists—even as Americans were attacked year after year.

Obama preparing to lift sanctions against Syria

(Compiler's note: Must read)

from World Tribune

NICOSIA — President Barack Obama has decided on a new U.S. ambassador to Syria and is expected to lift sanctions against a nation charged with aiding Al Qaida in Iraq and secretly building a nuclear reactor with North Korean assistance.

Diplomatic sources said Obama, in consultation with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, has asked Frederic Hof to become the first U.S. ambassador to Damascus since 2005. The sources said Hof, a member of the National Advisory Committee of the Middle East Policy Council, agreed to take the post.

"There will be an announcement very soon," a diplomat said.

The sources said the Obama administration was expected to suspend U.S. sanctions on Syria's military and energy programs.

They said Hof would be authorized to facilitate an expansion of U.S. relations with Syria, which deteriorated under President George Bush.

In 2005, the United States withdrew its ambassador to Damascus in wake of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Syria was blamed for the car bombing in Beirut in which Hariri and many of his bodyguards were killed.

The sources said Obama sent emissaries to Syria in September 2008 and pledged that if elected he would reconcile with the regime of President Bashar Assad. After his election victory, they said, Obama sent another message that promised to appoint an ambassador within the first weeks of his administration.

Hof, an Arabic speaker and former U.S. Army officer, was said to be close to Obama's new Middle East envoy, George Mitchell. Hof worked with Mitchell when the latter headed a fact-finding commission on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in 2002.

Obama's intention to reconcile with Iran and Syria has been supported by the Democratic majority in Congress. In February, congressional delegations were planning visits to Damascus, including one headed by House Foreign Relations Committee chairman Rep. Howard Berman. Another delegation was scheduled to include members of the Senate Foreign Relations.

A delegation of the House Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee, headed by Rep. Adam Smith, has already visited Damascus and met Syrian leaders. The sources said Smith focused his talks on Obama's plans to end sanctions, particularly the Syrian Accountability Act, on the Assad regime.

"Congress wants some sort of commitment that Syria will end support to Hamas and Hizbullah, but this is not expected," a diplomatic source said.

On Feb. 8, the Syrian regime reported a breakthrough in trade relations with the United States. The state-owned Al Baath daily said the United States has agreed to sell spare parts for the repair of two Boeing 747 passenger jets owned by the state-owned Syrian airline.

Syrian Transport Minister Yaroub Bader said Damascus received U.S. approval on Feb. 6. Under U.S. sanctions, Damascus had been denied requests for weapons and aerospace components.