Posts
(Compiler's note: This is an explosive new development -- must read -- that is sure to raise government, media and public awareness of the danger inherent in U.S. businesses entangling themselves in Shariah-compliant finance. As we noted last week, “Shariah-compliant” finance means just that – compliance with Shariah law, which, among other things, oppresses women and calls for Jihad against infidels. Below is the press release the Thomas More Law Center issued yesterday. There will likely be much more information to pass along to you in the days and weeks to come.)
from ACT for America
ANN ARBOR, MI - A federal lawsuit was filed this morning against U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. and the Federal Reserve Board to stop all bailout funds from going to American International Group, Inc. ("AIG"). According to the lawsuit, the U.S. government, through its ownership of AIG, is not only violating the Constitution, but also promoting and financing the destruction of America using American tax dollars.
The basis of the lawsuit is that AIG intentionally promotes Shariah-compliant businesses and insurance products, which by necessity must comply with the 1200 year old body of Islamic cannon law based on the Quran, which demands the conversion, subjugation, or destruction of the infidel West, including the United States. To help achieve these objectives and with the aid of federal tax dollars, AIG employs a three-person Shariah Advisory Board, with members from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Pakistan. According to AIG, the role of its Shariah authority "is to review [its] operations, supervise its development of Islamic products, and determine Shariah compliance of these products and [its] investments."
Of particular significance is the Pakistani Board member, Dr. Muhammed Imran Ashraf Usmani. Dr. Usmani is the son and devoted disciple of Sheik Mufti Taqi Usmani, the leading authority on Shariah financing who, in 1999, authored a book dedicating an entire chapter on why a Western Muslim must engage in violent jihad against his own country - even if Muslims are given equality and freedom to practice their religion and to proselytize.
The lawsuit was filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of Kevin J. Murray, a former Marine infantryman who served two tours of duty in Iraq. Murray is represented by the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and David Yerushalmi, an associated attorney who specializes in litigation and is an expert on Shariah law and Shariah compliant financing. Mr. Yerushalmi also serves as general counsel to the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.
According to the lawsuit, use of taxpayer funds to acquire ownership of a business that intentionally promotes, endorses, supports, and funds Shariah-based Islamic religious practices violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, "This lawsuit not only raises significant constitutional issues, it also shines a light on serious national security issues that our own government has created by direct financial support and ownership of a business that supports anti-American, radical Islamic activities. Make no mistake, there is an internal cultural jihad underway against our great nation, and I fear that many of our political leaders are unwittingly complicit in it."
On September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists, guided by principles of Shariah-mandated jihad against "infidels," attacked and killed thousands of innocent American civilians. Shortly thereafter, the U.S. went on the offensive by engaging Islamic terrorists overseas in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As in the past when our Nation faced great crisis, American servicemen were called to action, and Kevin Murray answered the call. From March to October 2003, Murray - a U.S. Marine - was deployed overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Yet today, Murray's federal tax dollars are being used to advance the very cause of global jihad he and his fellow servicemen were placed in harm's way to overcome. Shariah explicitly demands the murder of infidels like Kevin Murray and the destruction of the United States, which Murray took an oath to defend. Shariah is the same law that is used to justify beheadings, stonings, and amputation for petty crimes in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Sudan, which Americans deplore.
Nevertheless, AIG acknowledges and boasts its promotion of Shariah law and Shariah-based business practices. AIG itself describes "Sharia" as "Islamic law based on the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet [Mohammed]."
In further support of the federal government's endorsement of Shariah, the U.S. Treasury department co-sponsored a seminar in November of this year entitled "Islamic Financing 101" to promote Shariah financing among American institutions. The Seminar was jointly sponsored by Harvard University, one of the many American universities and colleges receiving millions of dollars from oil-producing countries to influence their Middle East programs, which are often staffed with professors who are anti-American, anti-Israeli, and pro-Islamic.
"It is clear," said Thompson, "oil money is purchasing the sovereignty of the United States and whatever loyalty to America these greedy financial institutions, corporations, and universities have left. It's up to the American people to take back their country from those who so easily betray its interests."
The federal lawsuit challenges that portion of the "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008" that appropriated $40 billion in taxpayer money to fund and financially support the United States government's majority ownership interest in AIG, which engages in Shariah-based Islamic religious activities that are anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, and anti-American.
According to the lawsuit, through the use of taxpayer funds, the U.S. government acquired a majority (79.9%) ownership interest in AIG, and as part of the bailout, Congress appropriated and expended an additional $40 billion of taxpayer money to fund and financially support AIG and its financial activities. AIG, which is now a government owned company, engages in Shariah-compliant financing, which subjects certain financial activities, including investments, to the dictates of Islamic law and the Islamic religion. This specifically includes any profits or interest obtained through such financial activities.
An important element of Shariah-compliant financing is a form of obligatory charitable contribution called zakat, which is a religious tax for assisting those that "struggle [jihad] for Allah." The amount of this tax is between 2.5% and 20%, depending upon the source of the wealth. The zakat religious tax is used to financially support Islamic "charities," some of which have ties to terrorist organizations that are hostile to the United States and all other "infidels," which includes Christians and Jews.
The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, recently convicted for providing material support to Islamic terrorist organizations, is an example of an Islamic "charity" that qualifies for receipt of the zakat. Thus, as a direct consequence of the taxpayer funds appropriated and expended to purchase and financially support AIG, the U.S. government is now the owner of a corporation engaged in the business of collecting religious taxes to fund interests adverse to the United States, Christians, Jews, and all other "infidels" under Islamic law.
Continued Thompson, "This lawsuit is as much about protecting constitutional principles as it is about protecting our national security and preventing another 9/11 - whether it be overt through flying planes into buildings or covert through appropriating taxpayer money to fund an Islamic cultural jihad."
The lawsuit seeks a court order to stop the taxpayer funding of AIG and its Islamic-based businesses and activities.
The Thomas More Law Center has been involved in several cases dealing with the insidious threat of radical Islam. Law Center attorney Robert Muise, who is handling this case involving AIG, is also one of the Law Center's attorneys defending LtCol Jeffrey Chessani, USMC, the senior officer charged in the so-called "Haditha Massacre" case. Those charges were dismissed by a military judge, and the government has appealed that ruling. Muise is also representing former Marine Jesse Nieto, whose anti-Islamic terrorism message was recently banned by military authorities at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune because of some unknown complaints.
The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America's Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.
Click here for additional information.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Fort Dix trial's sequestered jury a rarity
from 
CAMDEN, N.J. (Map, News) - A jury considering the case of five New Jersey men accused of plotting an attack on the Army's Fort Dix has finished its first day of deliberations without reaching a verdict.
Philadelphia
CAMDEN, N.J. (Map, News) - A jury considering the case of five New Jersey men accused of plotting an attack on the Army's Fort Dix has finished its first day of deliberations without reaching a verdict.
On Wednesday afternoon, the jury asked a judge for transcripts of testimony from government informant Besnik Bakalli on days government lawyers questioned him. Bakalli said the suspects used a trip to Pennsylvania's Pocono Mountains to train for waging a holy war.
The suspects face life in prison if they're convicted of the most serious charges, which include conspiracy to kill military personnel and attempted murder.
Defense lawyers told jurors their clients - all foreign-born Muslims who lived for years in Cherry Hill, N.J. - were not seriously planning anything.
Chemical Security Services Group Formed
A group of highly experienced security and emergency management professionals recently announced they have formed Chemical Security Services to assist chemical facilities in complying with complex security regulations contained in the Department of Homeland Security's Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS). ....
Obama's unsavory ties
by Warren H. Williams
It was generous of The Bee to turn over a four-column swath of opinion page space to allow Bill Ayers of Illinois, co-founder of the Weather Underground, to lament how unfairly the press had treated him during the recent presidential campaign, seemingly because of his friendship with the winner, Barack Obama (" 'Domestic terrorist' tells his story," Dec. 9, Page A-11).
Yes, he conceded, some Weathermen had planted bombs in the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon among various empty offices during the Vietnam War, but it was all peace-loving and of good intent, and he would have been glad to rationally discuss it during the recent campaign except for the "frenzy of fear" generated by the press.
By embarrassing coincidence, on the same day, another Illinois politician, Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich, was making national headlines after allegedly demanding, in a phone conservation taped by federal crime probers, a payoff for the appointment of Obama's successor as U.S. senator. As background, the Wall Street Journal cited a list of other top Illinois politicos charged over the years with a variety of crimes including bribery, conspiracy, fraud and perjury. The headline read "Obama ties in the spotlight." ....
Screening of anti-Islam film stopped
STRASBOURG, Dec 17: The European Parliament banned a planned screening on Wednesday of an anti-Islam film made by far-right Dutch MP Geert Wilders, a British euro-deputy said.
“The banning of this film is a direct attack on free speech,” claimed British Independent MEP Gerard Batten, who had organised the event. ....
“The banning of this film is a direct attack on free speech,” claimed British Independent MEP Gerard Batten, who had organised the event. ....
Briton guilty of directing terror
A British man has become the first al-Qaeda suspect convicted in the UK of directing terrorism, following a trial at Manchester Crown Court. ....
Thursday, December 18, 2008
WAL-MART SAYS YES TO PARENTS - REMOVES "ISLAM IS THE LIGHT" DOLL
(Compiler's note: Many of you are following the news about the Mattel doll that says “Islam is the Light.” The release below from “MAMA” (Moms Ask Mattel for Accountability) has good news.
We commend and thank “MAMA” for its activism, and thank those of you who have taken action on this. This is an excellent example of how our citizens can play a role in the effort to roll back the tide of radical Islam.
We also commend Wal-Mart and its managers for their positive response to the concerns that have been conveyed to them. Thank you Wal-Mart!!
On the other hand, the release below reveals that Target has not been responsive at all. To find out more click on the link below.)
Parents Campaign Focuses on Target, Kmart and Toys R US
December 16, 2008 - Washington, DC: Wal-Mart managers are removing the Mattel doll that says "Islam is the Light" from store shelves, according to reports from parents and the media across the U.S. and Canada, as well as Wal-Mart employees. Many Wal-Mart managers have removed the controversial doll in the last two weeks, and others are removing it as soon as parents ask.
The Moms Ask Mattel for Accountability (MAMA) campaign to remove the doll began in late November on "Black" Friday, the year's biggest shopping day. The national MAMA campaign started as a response to parent concerns about the Mattel/Fisher Price "Little Mommy Real Loving Baby Cuddle and Coo Doll." The majority of "Little Mommy Cuddle and Coo" dolls on store shelves have an audio soundtrack that says "Islam is the Light," with no label or warning to parents on the doll's packaging that it advocates Islam to their young children, a practice known as "Dawa." MAMA has advised parents in the U.S. and Canada to ask retailers either to remove the doll from the shelves or to attach a label stating "NOTICE: This doll says "Islam is the light," an invitation to your child to join Islam." MAMA is concerned that an invitation to Islam is a material risk to young girls, because of the discriminatory Islamic law known as Shariah, and wants parents informed about the doll's statement before they purchase the doll.
"Parents are reporting that most Wal-Marts have already removed the doll, or immediately remove it when asked," said Denise Lee, founder of Moms Ask Mattel for Accountability. "And TV and newspaper stories are reporting the same policy changes. MAMA applauds Wal-Mart for taking the lead here in responding to parents' concerns, especially over the Christmas season."
Wal-Mart staff at the Wal-Mart customer "Urgent Assistance" complaint phones were helpful and frank about customer complaints about the "Islam is the Light" doll. Lee spoke with Wal-Mart "Urgent Assistance" employee Ben Werkheiser, who said "We have received quite a few complaints from customers." Werkheiser stated that removal of the dolls is "more or less left up to individual stores' decisions," and when asked if the dolls had been removed from most Wal-Mart stores answered "Yes, they've pulled them because people complained about it. We are mainly responding to customers' complaints. The dolls in most of our Wal-Marts have been pulled." Fellow Wal-Mart employee Maria McDonald stated "We have had many complaints with the doll...the calls we are getting are from customers. I personally have received a lot of calls from customers."
Wal-Mart employee Werkheiser offered advice to customers: "Contact store managers and let them know what's going on. Have them listen to the doll. Customers can call the home office, 1-800-WALMART." Although the Wal-Mart corporate office declined our request to provide an official policy statement, MAMA spokesperson Lee said: "The facts speak for themselves - Wal-Mart is saying YES! to parent requests for removal of the "Islam is the light" doll from the shelves."
A TALE OF TWO TOY STORES....
On the other hand, MAMA's requests to Target to remove the doll - or attach a label stating that it says "Islam is the Light" - met with a NO!
Amy Reilly of Target's Media Relations office called Lee and directed parents "To talk to Mattel if you have any issues with the doll." Reilly carefully stated, "We have not had a national recall on those dolls." When told of parents concerns about the doll Reilly stated, "The doll is a well selling doll." She said, for anything else "I would continue to try reaching Mattel."
"The difference is clear between two responses to parents' concerns," said Lee. "Wal-Mart is trying to help parents, and leaves the decision up to their managers. It appears from all the Target cases that parents have sent us (see "Cases" at www.labelthatdoll.com), that Target refuses to take action in response to consumer complaints, and local Target store managers aren't permitted to respond to their local community."
"The question is what will Target, Wal-Mart and other retailers do on December 26, when all those parents who bought that 'well selling' doll try to return it because it says 'Islam is the light'?" Lee said.
Lee noted that individual Kmarts have also been reported in the media as removing the dolls, but no nationwide policy has been released.
We commend and thank “MAMA” for its activism, and thank those of you who have taken action on this. This is an excellent example of how our citizens can play a role in the effort to roll back the tide of radical Islam.
We also commend Wal-Mart and its managers for their positive response to the concerns that have been conveyed to them. Thank you Wal-Mart!!
On the other hand, the release below reveals that Target has not been responsive at all. To find out more click on the link below.)
Parents Campaign Focuses on Target, Kmart and Toys R US
December 16, 2008 - Washington, DC: Wal-Mart managers are removing the Mattel doll that says "Islam is the Light" from store shelves, according to reports from parents and the media across the U.S. and Canada, as well as Wal-Mart employees. Many Wal-Mart managers have removed the controversial doll in the last two weeks, and others are removing it as soon as parents ask.
The Moms Ask Mattel for Accountability (MAMA) campaign to remove the doll began in late November on "Black" Friday, the year's biggest shopping day. The national MAMA campaign started as a response to parent concerns about the Mattel/Fisher Price "Little Mommy Real Loving Baby Cuddle and Coo Doll." The majority of "Little Mommy Cuddle and Coo" dolls on store shelves have an audio soundtrack that says "Islam is the Light," with no label or warning to parents on the doll's packaging that it advocates Islam to their young children, a practice known as "Dawa." MAMA has advised parents in the U.S. and Canada to ask retailers either to remove the doll from the shelves or to attach a label stating "NOTICE: This doll says "Islam is the light," an invitation to your child to join Islam." MAMA is concerned that an invitation to Islam is a material risk to young girls, because of the discriminatory Islamic law known as Shariah, and wants parents informed about the doll's statement before they purchase the doll.
"Parents are reporting that most Wal-Marts have already removed the doll, or immediately remove it when asked," said Denise Lee, founder of Moms Ask Mattel for Accountability. "And TV and newspaper stories are reporting the same policy changes. MAMA applauds Wal-Mart for taking the lead here in responding to parents' concerns, especially over the Christmas season."
Wal-Mart staff at the Wal-Mart customer "Urgent Assistance" complaint phones were helpful and frank about customer complaints about the "Islam is the Light" doll. Lee spoke with Wal-Mart "Urgent Assistance" employee Ben Werkheiser, who said "We have received quite a few complaints from customers." Werkheiser stated that removal of the dolls is "more or less left up to individual stores' decisions," and when asked if the dolls had been removed from most Wal-Mart stores answered "Yes, they've pulled them because people complained about it. We are mainly responding to customers' complaints. The dolls in most of our Wal-Marts have been pulled." Fellow Wal-Mart employee Maria McDonald stated "We have had many complaints with the doll...the calls we are getting are from customers. I personally have received a lot of calls from customers."
Wal-Mart employee Werkheiser offered advice to customers: "Contact store managers and let them know what's going on. Have them listen to the doll. Customers can call the home office, 1-800-WALMART." Although the Wal-Mart corporate office declined our request to provide an official policy statement, MAMA spokesperson Lee said: "The facts speak for themselves - Wal-Mart is saying YES! to parent requests for removal of the "Islam is the light" doll from the shelves."
A TALE OF TWO TOY STORES....
On the other hand, MAMA's requests to Target to remove the doll - or attach a label stating that it says "Islam is the Light" - met with a NO!
Amy Reilly of Target's Media Relations office called Lee and directed parents "To talk to Mattel if you have any issues with the doll." Reilly carefully stated, "We have not had a national recall on those dolls." When told of parents concerns about the doll Reilly stated, "The doll is a well selling doll." She said, for anything else "I would continue to try reaching Mattel."
"The difference is clear between two responses to parents' concerns," said Lee. "Wal-Mart is trying to help parents, and leaves the decision up to their managers. It appears from all the Target cases that parents have sent us (see "Cases" at www.labelthatdoll.com), that Target refuses to take action in response to consumer complaints, and local Target store managers aren't permitted to respond to their local community."
"The question is what will Target, Wal-Mart and other retailers do on December 26, when all those parents who bought that 'well selling' doll try to return it because it says 'Islam is the light'?" Lee said.
Lee noted that individual Kmarts have also been reported in the media as removing the dolls, but no nationwide policy has been released.
It's already started...Ammunition Accountability Legislation
Remember how Obama said that he wasn't going to take your guns? Well, it seems that his minions and allies in the anti-gun world have no problem with taking your ammo! If they can deprive you of ammo they do not need to take your guns!
The bill that is being pushed in 18 states requires all ammunition to be encoded by the manufacture, providing a data base of all Ammunition sales. So they will know how much you buy and what calibers. Nobody can sell any ammunition after June 30, 2009 unless the ammunition is coded.
Any privately held uncoded ammunition must be destroyed by July 1, 2011. (Including hand loaded ammo.) They will also charge a .05 cent tax on every round so every box of ammo you buy will go up at least $2.50 or more!
This legislation is currently pending in 18 states: Alabama , Arizona , California , Connecticut , Hawaii , Illinois , Indiana , Kentucky , Maryland , Mississippi , Missouri, New Jersey, New York , Pennsylvania , Rhode Island , South Carolina, Tennessee , and Washington .
The bill that is being pushed in 18 states requires all ammunition to be encoded by the manufacture, providing a data base of all Ammunition sales. So they will know how much you buy and what calibers. Nobody can sell any ammunition after June 30, 2009 unless the ammunition is coded.
Any privately held uncoded ammunition must be destroyed by July 1, 2011. (Including hand loaded ammo.) They will also charge a .05 cent tax on every round so every box of ammo you buy will go up at least $2.50 or more!
This legislation is currently pending in 18 states: Alabama , Arizona , California , Connecticut , Hawaii , Illinois , Indiana , Kentucky , Maryland , Mississippi , Missouri, New Jersey, New York , Pennsylvania , Rhode Island , South Carolina, Tennessee , and Washington .
2008 Legislation
Alabama
Alabama Senate Bill 541Arizona
Arizona House Bill 2833California
California Senate Bill 997 (Carried Over from 2007)
Connecticut
Connecticut Senate Bill 603
Hawaii
Hawaii House Bill 2392
Hawaii Senate Bill 2020
Hawaii Senate Bill 2076
Hawaii House Resolution 82-07 (Carried Over from 2007)
Hawaii Concurrent Resolution 104-06 (Carried Over from 2007)
Illinois
Illinois House Bill 4258
Illinois House Bill 4259
Illinois House Bill 4269
Illinois House Bill 4349
Illinois Senate Bill 1095 (Carried Over from 2007)Indiana
Indiana House Bill 1260Kentucky
Kentucky House Bill 715Maryland
Maryland House Bill 517Mississippi
Mississippi Senate Bill 2286Missouri
Missouri Senate Bill 1200New Jersey
New Jersey Assembly Bill 2490New York
New York Assembly Bill 10259
New York Assembly Bill 6920 (Carried Over from 2007)
New York Assembly Bill 7300 (Carried Over from 2007)
New York Senate Bill 1177 (Carried Over from 2007)
New York Senate Bill 3731 (Carried Over from 2007)Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania House BillRhode Island
Rhode Island Senate Bill 2742South Carolina
South Carolina Senate Bill 1259Tennessee
Tennessee House Bill 3245
Tennessee Senate Bill 3395Washington
Washington House Bill 3359
2007 Legislation
California Senate Bill 997
Hawaii House Resolution 82-07
Hawaii Concurrent Resolution 104-06
Illinois Senate Bill 1095
Maryland House Bill 1393
New York House Bill 6920
New York House Bill 7300
New York Senate Bill 1177
New York Senate Bill 3731
Protecting America in the New Missile Age – Chapter Four: The Cost of Missile Defense
Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr., Ph.D.
Editor’s note: This is the fourth in an 18-part series of excerpts from Protecting America in the new Missile Age – A Reader. Published by The Heritage Foundation with a number of prominent contributors, its purpose is to inform and educate all Americans about the security challenges we face in an ever-changing world.
Missile defense represents a relatively small part of the total U.S. defense budget: just over $8 billion out of a total 2008 defense budget of $700 billion. This is less than one-70th of national defense spending, and defense spending is only about 4%of gross domestic product. By reasonable standards, missile defense is a modest national security investment that pales in comparison to the consequences of a ballistic missile attack against even one U.S. city. Instead of the few thousand fatalities resulting from the 9/11 attack, we could lose hundreds of thousands and suffer vastly greater physical destruction from the detonation of a single warhead comparable to the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. One need only read the obituaries published by the New York Times in the weeks following 9/11. They make somber reading for anyone in doubt of the human tragedy caused by such an attack.
Nevertheless, we are entitled to ask what we are receiving for our investment in missile defense. As other contributors to this reader have pointed out, the United States has had a missile defense research program for several decades. President Ronald Reagan, in his seminal address on March 23, 1983, challenged the scientific and technological community to produce missile defense concepts to defend against the growing Soviet missile threat. ....
Exclusive: Saudi Kingdom Continues to Export Radical Wahhabism
Jim Kouri, CPP
Wahhabism is a fundamentalist movement, named after Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab (1703-1792). It remains the dominant form of Islam in Saudi Arabia.
Wahhabis hold that some Muslim groups such as Shia Islam follow novel or non-Islamic practices.Wahhabi theology advocates puritanical and legalistic stances in matters of faith and religious practice. Wahhabists see their role as a movement to restore Islam from what they perceive to be innovations, superstitions, deviances, heresies and idolatries. There are many practices that they believe are contrary to Islam.
Wahhabism was a considered a small sect within Islam until the discovery of oil in Arabia, in 1938. Enormous oil revenues provided the means to spread the beliefs of Wahhabism throughout the Middle East. Saudi laypeople, government officials and clerics have donated many tens of millions of dollars to create Wahhabi-oriented religious schools, newspapers and outreach organizations.
U.S. government and other experts have reported that Islamic extremism is on the rise and that the spread of Islamic extremism is the preeminent threat facing the United States. In addition, various sources alleged that Saudi Arabia is one source that has supported and funded the spread of Islamic extremism, or Wahabbism, globally.
The intelligence agencies, the Department of Defense, the State Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development are implementing various efforts to identify, monitor, and counter the support and funding of the global propagation of Islamic extremism. The intelligence agencies and DOD are carrying out identification and monitoring efforts, primarily in counterintelligence and force protection.
According to reports, the State Department and USAID are carrying out efforts to counter the global propagation of Islamic extremism, with State's efforts focused primarily on traditional diplomacy, counterterrorism, and public diplomacy and USAID's efforts focused on development programs to diminish underlying conditions of extremism.
According to the General Accounting Office they are preparing a classified report to be subsequently released with a more complete description of U.S. efforts to address the global spread of Islamic extremism. A number of sources have reported that Saudi private entities and individuals, as well as sources from other countries, are allegedly financing or supporting Islamic extremism.
For example, in July 2005, a Treasury official testified before Congress that Saudi Arabia-based and -funded organizations remain a key source for the promotion of ideologies used by terrorists and violent extremists around the world to justify their agenda. However, according to the 9/11 Commission Report, the Commission found no persuasive evidence that the Saudi government knowingly supported al Qaeda.
The government agencies also told GAO staff that Islamic extremism is being propagated by sources in countries other than Saudi Arabia, such as Iran, Kuwait, and Syria. The agencies are still examining Saudi Arabia's relationship, and that of other sources in other countries, to Islamic extremism.
The Saudi government has announced and, in some cases, undertaken some reform efforts to address Islamic extremism. For example, the government is undertaking educational and religious reforms, including revising textbooks and conducting a three-year enlightenment program, to purge extremism and intolerance from religious education. However, U.S. agencies do not know the extent of the Saudi government's efforts to limit the activities of Saudi sources that have allegedly propagated Islamic extremism outside of Saudi Arabia.
Wahhabism is a fundamentalist movement, named after Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab (1703-1792). It remains the dominant form of Islam in Saudi Arabia.
Wahhabis hold that some Muslim groups such as Shia Islam follow novel or non-Islamic practices.Wahhabi theology advocates puritanical and legalistic stances in matters of faith and religious practice. Wahhabists see their role as a movement to restore Islam from what they perceive to be innovations, superstitions, deviances, heresies and idolatries. There are many practices that they believe are contrary to Islam.
Wahhabism was a considered a small sect within Islam until the discovery of oil in Arabia, in 1938. Enormous oil revenues provided the means to spread the beliefs of Wahhabism throughout the Middle East. Saudi laypeople, government officials and clerics have donated many tens of millions of dollars to create Wahhabi-oriented religious schools, newspapers and outreach organizations.
U.S. government and other experts have reported that Islamic extremism is on the rise and that the spread of Islamic extremism is the preeminent threat facing the United States. In addition, various sources alleged that Saudi Arabia is one source that has supported and funded the spread of Islamic extremism, or Wahabbism, globally.
The intelligence agencies, the Department of Defense, the State Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development are implementing various efforts to identify, monitor, and counter the support and funding of the global propagation of Islamic extremism. The intelligence agencies and DOD are carrying out identification and monitoring efforts, primarily in counterintelligence and force protection.
According to reports, the State Department and USAID are carrying out efforts to counter the global propagation of Islamic extremism, with State's efforts focused primarily on traditional diplomacy, counterterrorism, and public diplomacy and USAID's efforts focused on development programs to diminish underlying conditions of extremism.
According to the General Accounting Office they are preparing a classified report to be subsequently released with a more complete description of U.S. efforts to address the global spread of Islamic extremism. A number of sources have reported that Saudi private entities and individuals, as well as sources from other countries, are allegedly financing or supporting Islamic extremism.
For example, in July 2005, a Treasury official testified before Congress that Saudi Arabia-based and -funded organizations remain a key source for the promotion of ideologies used by terrorists and violent extremists around the world to justify their agenda. However, according to the 9/11 Commission Report, the Commission found no persuasive evidence that the Saudi government knowingly supported al Qaeda.
The government agencies also told GAO staff that Islamic extremism is being propagated by sources in countries other than Saudi Arabia, such as Iran, Kuwait, and Syria. The agencies are still examining Saudi Arabia's relationship, and that of other sources in other countries, to Islamic extremism.
The Saudi government has announced and, in some cases, undertaken some reform efforts to address Islamic extremism. For example, the government is undertaking educational and religious reforms, including revising textbooks and conducting a three-year enlightenment program, to purge extremism and intolerance from religious education. However, U.S. agencies do not know the extent of the Saudi government's efforts to limit the activities of Saudi sources that have allegedly propagated Islamic extremism outside of Saudi Arabia.
Sob Stories for Terrorists
When someone admits to committing a crime, the emotional angst is shared by loved ones of the victim and accused alike. Drunk drivers have families, too, after all. So do bank robbers. But you won't see many newspaper stories devoted to their torment.
It is entirely different when it comes to those accused of terror-related crimes.....
Donors list raises fears over Hillary Clinton role as Secretary of State
Bill Clinton has raised millions of dollars from governments and politicians in the Middle East and Asia, raising fresh concerns about the impartiality of his wife’s role as Secretary of State. ....
'American Taliban' Lindh Asks Bush for Freedom
The parents of American-born Taliban fighter John Walker Lindh on Wednesday pleaded with President George W. Bush to set their son free before he leaves office next month.
IMF warns of economic riots, police ready for civil unrest
Paulson discussed worst-case scenario at bailout meeting – declare martial law.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
WTP Obama Citizenship Challenge -- National Press Club, DC , Dec 8, 2008
(Compiler's note: I add my endorsement of the comments presented below and recommend it as a must read item. I also highly recommend the viewing of the subject video.)
Comments below from a long-time friend .... click on the title of this article above to watch the video.
"I just watched the following web stream with all of the lawyers, ministers, politicians, etc., one the subject question. From the information that is presented in this broadcast, which is an indictment of Obama and the US National Press, there is little doubt that he was eligible to run for President. It is also shown that he was not eligible to run for Senator in Illinois and that his application for that position and the presidency were answered fraudulently. Obama was tagged in these speeches of committing the biggest criminal fraud ever perpetrated in the United States and the press was paid via different "Deals" by the Saudi Government and others. The press was tagged by a Russian Lawyer of being as bad if not worse than the Russian Press (Pravda) by their complicity in this entire matter. I have watched the entire 2:30 hours of this and walk away with no doubts. The courts now have to make the decision on further proceedings. The press has been challenged to investigate several facts surrounding this fraud. The major problem other than the crimes committed is the fact that the Constitution of the United States is under attack. And Obama, if installed as president, will be under blackmailable facts from people in the US and from several foreign countries. Before you label me as a raciest, which I am sure you know is not true, or a poor Republican loser, which I am not, I am a registered Independent please watch the video and think about it. Obama has the power to put all of this to rest by simply opening his birth certificate in Hawaii (not the fraudulent one on line) to the press and if it is correct all is well, and if it is not he can withdraw and ask for peace from the nation rather than riots.
For those of you who tell me, "oh, just drop it and quit being a poor loser" - I won't and I am not."
Comments below from a long-time friend .... click on the title of this article above to watch the video.
"I just watched the following web stream with all of the lawyers, ministers, politicians, etc., one the subject question. From the information that is presented in this broadcast, which is an indictment of Obama and the US National Press, there is little doubt that he was eligible to run for President. It is also shown that he was not eligible to run for Senator in Illinois and that his application for that position and the presidency were answered fraudulently. Obama was tagged in these speeches of committing the biggest criminal fraud ever perpetrated in the United States and the press was paid via different "Deals" by the Saudi Government and others. The press was tagged by a Russian Lawyer of being as bad if not worse than the Russian Press (Pravda) by their complicity in this entire matter. I have watched the entire 2:30 hours of this and walk away with no doubts. The courts now have to make the decision on further proceedings. The press has been challenged to investigate several facts surrounding this fraud. The major problem other than the crimes committed is the fact that the Constitution of the United States is under attack. And Obama, if installed as president, will be under blackmailable facts from people in the US and from several foreign countries. Before you label me as a raciest, which I am sure you know is not true, or a poor Republican loser, which I am not, I am a registered Independent please watch the video and think about it. Obama has the power to put all of this to rest by simply opening his birth certificate in Hawaii (not the fraudulent one on line) to the press and if it is correct all is well, and if it is not he can withdraw and ask for peace from the nation rather than riots.
For those of you who tell me, "oh, just drop it and quit being a poor loser" - I won't and I am not."
Cheney Praises Obama’s National Security Team, Defends Waterboarding
from AHN
Reflecting on his eight years in office in his first interview since the elections, Vice President Dick Cheney praised President-elect Barack Obama's national security team but defended the Bush administration's anti-terror policies, including its use of waterboarding and its decision to invade Iraq, which he said would've still taken place even if intelligence had been accurate.
The Vice President told ABC on Monday that Obama's security team, which includes Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano as secretary of Homeland Security and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) as secretary of State, was a "pretty good team."
"I'm not close to Barack Obama, obviously, nor do I identify with him politically. He's a liberal. I'm a conservative," Cheney said. "But I think the idea of keeping Gates at Defense is excellent. I think Jim Jones will be very, very effective as the national security adviser... While I would not have hired Sen. Clinton, I think she's tough. She's smart, she works very hard and she may turn out to be just what President Obama needs."
Cheney, known for his hard-line approach to foreign policy and criticized for his repeated refusals to disclose documents and records to the Democratic-led Congress, also adamantly defended the Bush administration's use of waterboarding, an interrogation method that simulates drowning and that is considered a form of torture by critics.
He added that Guantanamo Bay should remain open so long as there is a war on terror despite the fact that the Bush administration has been trying to look for ways close down the prison camp. .....
Bush Prepares Crisis Briefings to Aid Obama
By PETER BAKER
The White House has prepared more than a dozen contingency plans to help guide President-elect Barack Obama if an international crisis erupts in the opening days of his administration, part of an elaborate operation devised to smooth the first transition of power since Sept. 11, 2001.
The memorandums envision a variety of volatile possibilities, like a North Korean nuclear explosion, a cyberattack on American computer systems, a terrorist strike on United States facilities overseas or a fresh outbreak of instability in the Middle East, according to people briefed on them. Each then outlines options for Mr. Obama to consider.
The contingency planning goes beyond what other administrations have done, with President Bush and Mr. Obama vowing to work in tandem to ensure a more efficient transition in a time of war and terrorist threat. The commission that investigated the Sept. 11 attacks, noting problems during the handover from President Bill Clinton to Mr. Bush, called for a better process “since a catastrophic attack could occur with little or no notice,” as its report put it.
“This is very unusual,” said Roger Cressey, a former Clinton White House counterterrorism official who was held over under Mr. Bush. “We certainly did not do that. When the transition happened from Clinton to Bush, remember it was a totally different world. You had some documents given that gave them a flavor of where things were at. But now you’ve got two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and a hot war against Al Qaeda.”
In addition to the White House contingency memorandums, the Department of Homeland Security said it had given crisis training to nearly 100 career officials who may fill in while Mr. Obama’s appointees await Senate confirmation. Starting before the election, those career workers have conducted exercises alongside departing political appointees to test their responses.
The administration has invited members of the Obama agency review teams to observe some of those so-called tabletop exercises between now and the inauguration, on Jan. 20. The Bush team has also invited Obama transition officials to attend a “national level exercise” set for Jan. 12 and 13 that may play out what would happen if the top leadership of the nation were wiped out in a single stroke, officials said.
At the same time, senior counterterrorism officials plan to hold personal briefings for their counterparts on the biggest threats they see. And the White House has drafted as many as three dozen other long-term policy memorandums outlining various pressing issues that will confront the new team and how Mr. Bush’s aides see the status of each of these issues as his presidency comes to a close.....
Postponing reality
By Thomas Sowell
Some of us were raised to believe that reality is inescapable. But that just shows how far behind the times we are. Today, reality is optional. At the very least, it can be postponed.
Kids in school are not learning? Not a problem. Just promote them on to the next grade anyway. Call it "compassion," so as not to hurt their "self-esteem."
Can't meet college admissions standards after they graduate from high school? Denounce those standards as just arbitrary barriers to favor the privileged, and demand that exceptions be made.
Can't do math or science after they are in college? Denounce those courses for their rigidity and insensitivity, and create softer courses that the students can pass to get their degrees.
Once they are out in the real world, people with diplomas and degrees— but with no real education— can hit a wall. But by then the day of reckoning has been postponed for 15 or more years. Of course, the reckoning itself can last the rest of their lives.
The current bailout extravaganza is applying the postponement of reality democratically— to the rich as well as the poor, to the irresponsible as well as to the responsible, to the inefficient as well as to the efficient. It is a triumph of the non-judgmental philosophy that we have heard so much about in high-toned circles.
We are told that the collapse of the Big Three automakers in Detroit would have repercussions across the country, causing mass layoffs among firms that supply the automobile makers with parts, and shutting down automobile dealerships from coast to coast.
A renowned economist of the past, J.A. Schumpeter, used to refer to progress under capitalism as "creative destruction"— the replacement of businesses that have outlived their usefulness with businesses that carry technological and organizational creativity forward, raising standards of living in the process.
Indeed, this is very much like what happened a hundred years ago, when that new technological wonder, the automobile, wreaked havoc on all the forms of transportation built up around horses.
For thousands of years, horses had been the way to go, whether in buggies or royal coaches, whether pulling trolleys in the cities or plows on the farms. People had bet their futures on something with a track record of reliable success going back many centuries.
Were all these people to be left high and dry? What about all the other people who supplied the things used with horses— oats, saddles, horse shoes and buggies? Wouldn't they all go falling like dominoes when horses were replaced by cars?
Unfortunately for all the good people who had in good faith gone into all the various lines of work revolving around horses, there was no compassionate government to step in with a bailout or a stimulus package.
They had to face reality, right then and right there, without even a postponement.
Who would have thought that those who displaced them would find themselves in a similar situation a hundred years later?
Actually the automobile industry is not nearly in as bad a situation now as the horse-based industries were then. There is no replacement for the automobile anywhere on the horizon. Nor has the public decided to do without cars indefinitely.
While Detroit's Big Three are laying off thousands of workers, Toyota is hiring thousands of workers right here in America, where a substantial share of all our Toyotas are manufactured.
Will this save Detroit or Michigan? No.
Detroit and Michigan have followed classic liberal policies of treating businesses as prey, rather than as assets. They have helped kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. So have the unions. So have managements that have gone along to get along.
Toyota, Honda and other foreign automakers are not heading for Detroit, even though there are lots of experienced automobile workers there. They are avoiding the rust belts and the policies that have made those places rust belts.
A bailout of Detroit's Big Three would be only the latest in the postponements of reality. As for automobile dealers, they can probably sell Toyotas just as easily as they sold Chevvies. And Toyotas will require just as many tires per car, as well as other parts from automobile parts suppliers.
Some of us were raised to believe that reality is inescapable. But that just shows how far behind the times we are. Today, reality is optional. At the very least, it can be postponed.
Kids in school are not learning? Not a problem. Just promote them on to the next grade anyway. Call it "compassion," so as not to hurt their "self-esteem."
Can't meet college admissions standards after they graduate from high school? Denounce those standards as just arbitrary barriers to favor the privileged, and demand that exceptions be made.
Can't do math or science after they are in college? Denounce those courses for their rigidity and insensitivity, and create softer courses that the students can pass to get their degrees.
Once they are out in the real world, people with diplomas and degrees— but with no real education— can hit a wall. But by then the day of reckoning has been postponed for 15 or more years. Of course, the reckoning itself can last the rest of their lives.
The current bailout extravaganza is applying the postponement of reality democratically— to the rich as well as the poor, to the irresponsible as well as to the responsible, to the inefficient as well as to the efficient. It is a triumph of the non-judgmental philosophy that we have heard so much about in high-toned circles.
We are told that the collapse of the Big Three automakers in Detroit would have repercussions across the country, causing mass layoffs among firms that supply the automobile makers with parts, and shutting down automobile dealerships from coast to coast.
A renowned economist of the past, J.A. Schumpeter, used to refer to progress under capitalism as "creative destruction"— the replacement of businesses that have outlived their usefulness with businesses that carry technological and organizational creativity forward, raising standards of living in the process.
Indeed, this is very much like what happened a hundred years ago, when that new technological wonder, the automobile, wreaked havoc on all the forms of transportation built up around horses.
For thousands of years, horses had been the way to go, whether in buggies or royal coaches, whether pulling trolleys in the cities or plows on the farms. People had bet their futures on something with a track record of reliable success going back many centuries.
Were all these people to be left high and dry? What about all the other people who supplied the things used with horses— oats, saddles, horse shoes and buggies? Wouldn't they all go falling like dominoes when horses were replaced by cars?
Unfortunately for all the good people who had in good faith gone into all the various lines of work revolving around horses, there was no compassionate government to step in with a bailout or a stimulus package.
They had to face reality, right then and right there, without even a postponement.
Who would have thought that those who displaced them would find themselves in a similar situation a hundred years later?
Actually the automobile industry is not nearly in as bad a situation now as the horse-based industries were then. There is no replacement for the automobile anywhere on the horizon. Nor has the public decided to do without cars indefinitely.
While Detroit's Big Three are laying off thousands of workers, Toyota is hiring thousands of workers right here in America, where a substantial share of all our Toyotas are manufactured.
Will this save Detroit or Michigan? No.
Detroit and Michigan have followed classic liberal policies of treating businesses as prey, rather than as assets. They have helped kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. So have the unions. So have managements that have gone along to get along.
Toyota, Honda and other foreign automakers are not heading for Detroit, even though there are lots of experienced automobile workers there. They are avoiding the rust belts and the policies that have made those places rust belts.
A bailout of Detroit's Big Three would be only the latest in the postponements of reality. As for automobile dealers, they can probably sell Toyotas just as easily as they sold Chevvies. And Toyotas will require just as many tires per car, as well as other parts from automobile parts suppliers.
The Aimless War: Why Are We in Afghanistan?
By Joe Klein
"Things have gotten a bit hairy," admitted British Lieut. Colonel Graeme Armour as we sat in a dusty, bunkered NATO fortress just outside the city of Lashkar Gah in Helmand province, a deadly piece of turf along Afghanistan's southern border with Pakistan. A day earlier, two Danish soldiers had been killed and two Brits seriously wounded by roadside bombs. The casualties were coming almost daily now.
And then there were the daily frustrations of Armour's job: training Afghan police officers. Almost all the recruits were illiterate. "They've had no experience at learning," Armour said. "You sit them in a room and try to teach them about police procedures — they start gabbing and knocking about. You talk to them about the rights of women, and they just laugh." A week earlier, five Afghan police officers trained by Armour were murdered in their beds while defending a nearby checkpoint — possibly by other police officers. Their weapons and ammunition were stolen. "We're not sure of the motivation," Armour said. "They may have gone to join the Taliban or sold the guns in the market." (See pictures of Afghanistan's police force in training.)
The war in Afghanistan — the war that President-elect Barack Obama pledged to fight and win — has become an aimless absurdity. It began with a specific target. Afghanistan was where Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda lived, harbored by the Islamic extremist Taliban government. But the enemy escaped into Pakistan, and for the past seven years, Afghanistan has been a slow bleed against an array of mostly indigenous narco-jihadi-tribal guerrilla forces that we continue to call the "Taliban." These ragtag bands are funded by opium profits and led by assorted religious extremists and druglords, many of whom have safe havens in Pakistan.
In some ways, Helmand province — which I visited with the German general Egon Ramms, commander of NATO's Allied Joint Force Command — is a perfect metaphor for the broader war. The soldiers from NATO's International Security Assistance Force are doing what they can against difficult odds. The language and tactics of counter-insurgency warfare are universal here: secure the population, help them build their communities. There are occasional victories: the Taliban leader of Musa Qala, in northern Helmand, switched sides and has become an effective local governor. But the incremental successes are reversible — schools are burned by the Taliban, police officers are murdered — because of a monstrous structural problem that defines the current struggle in Afghanistan.
The British troops in Helmand are fighting with both hands tied behind their backs. They cannot go after the leadership of the Taliban — still led by the reclusive Mullah Omar — which operates openly in the Pakistani city of Quetta, just across the border. They also can't go after the drug trade that funds the insurgency, in part because some of the proceeds are also skimmed by the friends, officials and perhaps family members of the stupendously corrupt government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Helmand province is mostly desert, but it produces half the world's opium supply along a narrow strip of irrigated land that straddles the Helmand River. The drug trade — Afghanistan provides more than 90% of the world's opium — permeates everything. A former governor, Sher Mohammed Akhundzada, was caught with nine tons of opium, enough to force him out of office, but not enough to put him in jail, since he enjoys — according to U.S. military sources — a close relationship with the Karzai government. Indeed, Akhundzada and Karzai's brother Ahmed Wali — who operates in Kandahar, the next province over — are considered the shadow rulers of the region (along with Mullah Omar). "You should understand," a British commander said, "the fight here isn't really about religion. It's about money."
Another thing you should understand: thousands of U.S. troops are expected to be deployed to Helmand and Kandahar provinces next spring. They will be fighting under the same limitations as the British, Canadian, Danish and Dutch forces currently holding the fort, which means they will be spinning their wheels. And that raises a long-term question crucial to the success of the Obama Administration: What are we doing in Afghanistan? What is the mission?
We know what the mission used to be — to kill or capture Osama bin Laden and destroy his al-Qaeda command. But once bin Laden slipped away, the mission morphed into a vast, messy nation — building effort to support the allegedly democratic Karzai government. There was a certain logic to that. The Taliban and al-Qaeda can't base themselves in Afghanistan if something resembling a stable, secure nation-state exists there. But the mission was also historically implausible: Afghanistan has never had a strong central government. It has been governed for thousands of years by local and regional tribal coalitions. The tribes have often been at one another's throats — a good part of the current "Taliban" uprising is nothing more than standard tribal rivalries juiced by Western arms and opium profits — except when foreigners have invaded the area, in which case the Afghans have united and slowly humiliated conquerors from Alexander the Great to the Soviets.
The current Western presence is the most benign intrusion in Afghan history, and the rationale of building stability remains a logical one — but this war has become something of a sideshow in South Asia. The far more serious problem is Pakistan, a flimsy state with illogical borders, nuclear weapons and a mortal religious enmity toward India, its neighbor to the south. Pakistan is where bin Laden now lives, if he lives. The Bush Administration chose to coddle Pakistan's military leadership, which promised to help in the fight against al-Qaeda — but it hasn't helped much, although there are signs that the fragile new government of President Asif Ali Zardari may be more cooperative. Still, the Pakistani intelligence service helped create the Taliban and other Islamic extremist groups — including the terrorists who attacked Mumbai — as a way of keeping India at bay, and Pakistan continues to protect the Afghan Taliban in Quetta. In his initial statements, Obama has seemed more sophisticated about Afghanistan than Bush. In an interview with me in late October, Obama said Afghanistan should be seen as part of a regional problem, and he suggested that he might dispatch a special envoy, perhaps Bill Clinton, to work on the Indo-Afghan-Pakistani dilemma. Clinton seems a less likely prospect since his wife was named Secretary of State. The current speculation is that Richard Holbrooke may be selected for the job, which would be a very good idea. (See pictures of Barack Obama's campaign behind the scenes.)
Holbrooke is a great negotiator, but he's also a great intimidator, and the first step toward resolving the war in Afghanistan is to lay down the law in both Islamabad and Kabul. The message should be the same in both cases: The unsupervised splurge of American aid is over. The Pakistanis will have to stop giving tacit support and protection to terrorists, especially the Afghan Taliban. The Karzai government will have to end its corruption and close down the drug trade. There are plenty of other reforms necessary — the international humanitarian effort is a shabby, self-righteous mess; some of our NATO allies aren't carrying their share of the military burden — but the war will remain a bloody stalemate at best as long as jihadis come across the border from Pakistan and the drug trade flourishes.
I flew by helicopter from Helmand to the enormous NATO base outside Kandahar to learn that three Canadian soldiers had been killed that morning in an ambush. I stood in a small, bare concrete plaza as the Canadian flag was raised, then lowered to half-staff. Next the Danish flag and finally the NATO flag were raised and left to rest at half-staff. A small group of soldiers from assorted countries stood at attention and saluted as the flags rose and fell. There were no American flags this day, but there soon will be.
Before he sends another U.S. soldier off to die or be maimed in Afghanistan, President-elect Obama needs to deliver the blunt message to the leaders of Pakistan and Afghanistan that we will no longer tolerate their complicity in the deaths of Americans and our allies, a slaughter that began on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, and continues to this day. Obama will soon own this aimless war if he does not somehow change that dynamic.
"Things have gotten a bit hairy," admitted British Lieut. Colonel Graeme Armour as we sat in a dusty, bunkered NATO fortress just outside the city of Lashkar Gah in Helmand province, a deadly piece of turf along Afghanistan's southern border with Pakistan. A day earlier, two Danish soldiers had been killed and two Brits seriously wounded by roadside bombs. The casualties were coming almost daily now.
And then there were the daily frustrations of Armour's job: training Afghan police officers. Almost all the recruits were illiterate. "They've had no experience at learning," Armour said. "You sit them in a room and try to teach them about police procedures — they start gabbing and knocking about. You talk to them about the rights of women, and they just laugh." A week earlier, five Afghan police officers trained by Armour were murdered in their beds while defending a nearby checkpoint — possibly by other police officers. Their weapons and ammunition were stolen. "We're not sure of the motivation," Armour said. "They may have gone to join the Taliban or sold the guns in the market." (See pictures of Afghanistan's police force in training.)
The war in Afghanistan — the war that President-elect Barack Obama pledged to fight and win — has become an aimless absurdity. It began with a specific target. Afghanistan was where Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda lived, harbored by the Islamic extremist Taliban government. But the enemy escaped into Pakistan, and for the past seven years, Afghanistan has been a slow bleed against an array of mostly indigenous narco-jihadi-tribal guerrilla forces that we continue to call the "Taliban." These ragtag bands are funded by opium profits and led by assorted religious extremists and druglords, many of whom have safe havens in Pakistan.
In some ways, Helmand province — which I visited with the German general Egon Ramms, commander of NATO's Allied Joint Force Command — is a perfect metaphor for the broader war. The soldiers from NATO's International Security Assistance Force are doing what they can against difficult odds. The language and tactics of counter-insurgency warfare are universal here: secure the population, help them build their communities. There are occasional victories: the Taliban leader of Musa Qala, in northern Helmand, switched sides and has become an effective local governor. But the incremental successes are reversible — schools are burned by the Taliban, police officers are murdered — because of a monstrous structural problem that defines the current struggle in Afghanistan.
The British troops in Helmand are fighting with both hands tied behind their backs. They cannot go after the leadership of the Taliban — still led by the reclusive Mullah Omar — which operates openly in the Pakistani city of Quetta, just across the border. They also can't go after the drug trade that funds the insurgency, in part because some of the proceeds are also skimmed by the friends, officials and perhaps family members of the stupendously corrupt government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Helmand province is mostly desert, but it produces half the world's opium supply along a narrow strip of irrigated land that straddles the Helmand River. The drug trade — Afghanistan provides more than 90% of the world's opium — permeates everything. A former governor, Sher Mohammed Akhundzada, was caught with nine tons of opium, enough to force him out of office, but not enough to put him in jail, since he enjoys — according to U.S. military sources — a close relationship with the Karzai government. Indeed, Akhundzada and Karzai's brother Ahmed Wali — who operates in Kandahar, the next province over — are considered the shadow rulers of the region (along with Mullah Omar). "You should understand," a British commander said, "the fight here isn't really about religion. It's about money."
Another thing you should understand: thousands of U.S. troops are expected to be deployed to Helmand and Kandahar provinces next spring. They will be fighting under the same limitations as the British, Canadian, Danish and Dutch forces currently holding the fort, which means they will be spinning their wheels. And that raises a long-term question crucial to the success of the Obama Administration: What are we doing in Afghanistan? What is the mission?
We know what the mission used to be — to kill or capture Osama bin Laden and destroy his al-Qaeda command. But once bin Laden slipped away, the mission morphed into a vast, messy nation — building effort to support the allegedly democratic Karzai government. There was a certain logic to that. The Taliban and al-Qaeda can't base themselves in Afghanistan if something resembling a stable, secure nation-state exists there. But the mission was also historically implausible: Afghanistan has never had a strong central government. It has been governed for thousands of years by local and regional tribal coalitions. The tribes have often been at one another's throats — a good part of the current "Taliban" uprising is nothing more than standard tribal rivalries juiced by Western arms and opium profits — except when foreigners have invaded the area, in which case the Afghans have united and slowly humiliated conquerors from Alexander the Great to the Soviets.
The current Western presence is the most benign intrusion in Afghan history, and the rationale of building stability remains a logical one — but this war has become something of a sideshow in South Asia. The far more serious problem is Pakistan, a flimsy state with illogical borders, nuclear weapons and a mortal religious enmity toward India, its neighbor to the south. Pakistan is where bin Laden now lives, if he lives. The Bush Administration chose to coddle Pakistan's military leadership, which promised to help in the fight against al-Qaeda — but it hasn't helped much, although there are signs that the fragile new government of President Asif Ali Zardari may be more cooperative. Still, the Pakistani intelligence service helped create the Taliban and other Islamic extremist groups — including the terrorists who attacked Mumbai — as a way of keeping India at bay, and Pakistan continues to protect the Afghan Taliban in Quetta. In his initial statements, Obama has seemed more sophisticated about Afghanistan than Bush. In an interview with me in late October, Obama said Afghanistan should be seen as part of a regional problem, and he suggested that he might dispatch a special envoy, perhaps Bill Clinton, to work on the Indo-Afghan-Pakistani dilemma. Clinton seems a less likely prospect since his wife was named Secretary of State. The current speculation is that Richard Holbrooke may be selected for the job, which would be a very good idea. (See pictures of Barack Obama's campaign behind the scenes.)
Holbrooke is a great negotiator, but he's also a great intimidator, and the first step toward resolving the war in Afghanistan is to lay down the law in both Islamabad and Kabul. The message should be the same in both cases: The unsupervised splurge of American aid is over. The Pakistanis will have to stop giving tacit support and protection to terrorists, especially the Afghan Taliban. The Karzai government will have to end its corruption and close down the drug trade. There are plenty of other reforms necessary — the international humanitarian effort is a shabby, self-righteous mess; some of our NATO allies aren't carrying their share of the military burden — but the war will remain a bloody stalemate at best as long as jihadis come across the border from Pakistan and the drug trade flourishes.
I flew by helicopter from Helmand to the enormous NATO base outside Kandahar to learn that three Canadian soldiers had been killed that morning in an ambush. I stood in a small, bare concrete plaza as the Canadian flag was raised, then lowered to half-staff. Next the Danish flag and finally the NATO flag were raised and left to rest at half-staff. A small group of soldiers from assorted countries stood at attention and saluted as the flags rose and fell. There were no American flags this day, but there soon will be.
Before he sends another U.S. soldier off to die or be maimed in Afghanistan, President-elect Obama needs to deliver the blunt message to the leaders of Pakistan and Afghanistan that we will no longer tolerate their complicity in the deaths of Americans and our allies, a slaughter that began on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, and continues to this day. Obama will soon own this aimless war if he does not somehow change that dynamic.
Now You See Them--Now You Don't... Illinois Governor's Website Deletes Obama-Blago Photo
by Gateway Pundit
The Illinois State Governor's own newsletter the "Governor's Gazette" published on November 11, 2008 pictured Barack Obama holding a private conversation with Governor Rod Blagojevich.
The Governor's Gazette reported:
But, as luck would have it, that page is now mysteriously missing!
24Ahead.com reported, via LGF Quick Links:
Funny how that works.
The Illinois State Governor's own newsletter the "Governor's Gazette" published on November 11, 2008 pictured Barack Obama holding a private conversation with Governor Rod Blagojevich.
The Governor's Gazette reported:
Governor Blagojevich Congratulates President-Elect Obama and Starts Selection Process For ReplacementHere's a screengrab of the newsletter:
After congratulating President-elect Barack Obama on his Nov. 4 victory, Governor Rod Blagojevich now begins the difficult task of finding a replacement for Illinois Senate Seat.
But, as luck would have it, that page is now mysteriously missing!
24Ahead.com reported, via LGF Quick Links:
Now, the state of Illinois has deleted from their website the PDF that contained the Obama-Blagojevich picture. It was in the state publication "Governors Gazette" and originally at illinois.gov/govgazette/pdfs/Gazetteedition_2008Nov.pdf That page now returns a 404 not found, as does Version 2 of that Gazette (originally located at illinois.gov/govgazette/pdfs/Gazetteedition_2008Nov_2.pdf) and the /gazette directory.Well, that's odd. The newsletter showing Barack Obama and Rod Blagojevich holding a private conversation has disappeared:
Funny how that works.
Gaffney: "We cannot tolerate and must not permit Uncle Sam's morphing into Uncle Shariah"
In "Uncle Shariah" in the Washington Times, December 16, Frank Gaffney details why AIG's nationalization is so worrisome:
The insurance giant AIG has lately become the poster child for corporate risk-taking, mismanagement and greed. Its unimaginably large losses, rooted in insurance it extended to financial companies engaged in subprime mortgage-backed transactions, have destroyed both AIG's corporate reputation and balance sheet.Indeed, but for the fact that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson - who during his days running Goldman Sachs had extensive ties to AIG - deemed the insurance firm "too large to fail," the company would surely have gone under by now. Instead, Mr. Paulson gave AIG well over $40 billion of the slush-fund Congress intended to bailout the financial sector (part of a total $150 billion the U.S. has sunk in AIG to date). As a result, you and I and our fellow taxpayers have been saddled with ownership of nearly 80 percent of this once high-flying and now-floundering global insurance enterprise.
Another result of AIG's nationalization is, if anything, even more worrisome."
It turns out that AIG has a subsidiary specializing in "takaful" - insurance products that are purportedly "Shariah-compliant." I say purportedly because - while they have been cynically deemed "pure" (halal) by Shariah advisers that AIG employed for the purpose of making such certifications - the Islamic code expressly prohibits business transactions that involve risk. Consequently, insurance products designed to hedge against risk are inherently "impure" or haram.
Whatever the status of AIG's "takaful" products under Islamic law, the U.S. government now has a vested interest in their financial success. Uncle Sam has become Uncle Shariah.
In so doing, Henry Paulson has acted in a manner that not only appears to smack of a conflict of interest and egregious disregard for the public's fiduciary interests. He also seems to have violated the Constitution.
The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights has long been interpreted as prohibiting the establishment of any national religion or conferring upon one religion a preference over others. By taking a massive stake in a company that explicitly promotes Islam's Shariah law, the U.S. government is acting at odds with both of these revered principles. [...]
Most Americans remain unaware of the menace posed by Shariah, let alone the extent to which it is being insinuated stealthily into our country. Happily, the latter is the subject of an excellent new book by the acclaimed scholar of Islam, Robert Spencer, entitled, "Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam is Subverting America Without Guns or Bombs."...
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Delayed raid likely cost Chauncey Bailey his life
By Thomas Peele and Bob Butler
OAKLAND — The August 2007 raid on Your Black Muslim Bakery was postponed 48 hours to accommodate the vacation schedules of two senior SWAT commanders, a delay that likely cost journalist Chauncey Bailey his life, according to police sources and a lawyer representing an officer deeply involved in planning the raid.
During the delay between the first scheduled date, Aug. 1, and the raid Aug. 3, a masked gunman killed Bailey — a slaying in which authorities believe bakery leader Yusuf Bey IV was involved.
Officers familiar with the raid's planning and execution say Bailey's killing could have been prevented if not for the delay. While police did not know Bailey was being targeted, they strongly suspected bakery members had begun a killing spree that had resulted in two July 2007 deaths and described the need for the raid as paramount.
Police have for 15 months denied delaying the raid.
"I was never given any other date" other than Aug. 3, Assistant Chief Howard Jordon told Bay Area News Group-East Bay in October 2007.
On Monday, police Chief Wayne Tucker made varying statements about the matter in an interview with the Chauncey Bailey Project.
First, Tucker said there was no delay, then he said the decision to delay the raid from Aug. 1 to Aug. 3 was because "we were not ready. "... It was my decision and mine only to delay."
Then Tucker contracted further, saying, "It was never scheduled to go on the 1st. My staff may have wanted to go on the 1st. I didn't want to go on the 1st. And I made the decision based on what my comfort level was and my assurance that it was going to be successful." Questions about the delay were "call(ing) my reputation into question," he said. Four officers involved in the raid and two other senior members of Alameda County law enforcement confirmed the first scheduled date of Aug. 1, and said it was delayed because two senior SWAT commanders, Deputy Chief David Kozicki and Capt. Ed Tracey, were on a backpacking trip, and they wanted to be present. Kozicki and Tracey did not respond to messages Monday or attend Tucker's brief interview at police headquarters. Michael Rains, an attorney representing another officer involved in the raid planning, said his client, homicide Lt. Ersie Joyner III, knew of the delay, and objected to it. "A decision was made to delay and put off the (raid) and the service of the search warrants to Aug. 3," Rains said. That postponement came "over (Joyner's) very strong statements. He was prophetic" that Bey IV would order more killings, Rains said. Rains is representing Joyner and detective Sgt. Derwin Longmire in an internal affairs and state Department of Justice investigations into the handling of the Bailey case. A former Oakland lieutenant who was a watch commander in 2007 about the time of the raid said the delay was unfortunate but not intentional. "There was no violation of protocol, there was just an unfortunate set of circumstances. So just own up to that," said retired Lt. Patrick Garrahan. In midsummer 2007, police believed bakery members were responsible for two North Oakland gun killings: Odell Roberson on July 8, 2007, and Michael Wills four days later. On July 25, at the urging of Joyner and homicide Sgt. Lou Cruz, the police Targeted Enforcement Task Force began night surveillance of Bey IV. After several nights of watching the bakery, the raid was scheduled for Aug. 1, officers said. The idea was to hit the compound to search for evidence in the Wills and Roberson cases — which remain unsolved — and a May 2007 kidnapping for which Bey IV and three followers face life sentences if convicted. On Monday, July 30, 2007, SWAT teams drilled at the Oakland Army Base in preparation for raiding the bakery less than 48 hours later. They practiced storming buildings and ripping through doors with a chain saw to gain entry. But then, officers said, they were ordered to stand down. The raid was pushed back two days — to Friday, Aug. 3, because Kozicki and Tracey had been on a backpacking trip and wanted to participate, according to Rains and police sources. Police on July 30 rented two U-Haul trucks to carry a strike force to the bakery from a staging area several blocks away. They tried to extend the rental agreement on the vehicles, but were turned down and had to hurriedly rent other trucks from the Penske company to use Aug. 3, officers said. Credit card slips and rental agreements obtained from the city under the public records act confirm the transactions. The four officers said that the nature of SWAT operations requires a constant state of readiness and the ability to react with little notice. There were more than enough senior officers available to supervise the operation Aug. 1, they said, even though the risks were thought to be high. "Based on the (intelligence) we received we knew that it was going be rough," said one SWAT officer. "We expected to take some casualties on this." We were doing a final run-through at the Oakland Army Base on Monday to prepare for Wednesday's raid when word came down that we had to wait until Friday when Kozicki and Tracey got back." Because of the delay, the officers assigned to watching Bey IV stood down in the early morning hours of Aug. 1. The officers had been working double shifts, were exhausted, and were needed for the raid, rescheduled for Aug. 3, said police sources. On Aug. 2, shortly after midnight, Bey IV and two of his followers, Antoine Mackey and Devaughndre Broussard drove from the bakery to Bailey's apartment near Lake Merritt and parked there for 14 minutes, according to a tracking device on Bey IV's car and police statements. Police also have a recorded statement of a bakery worker saying Bey IV was highly agitated Aug. 1. The person also is said to have told police that Bey IV prayed for strength with Mackey and Broussard. A man who lived at the bakery told police he loaned Bey IV a white minivan without license plates about 6 a.m. Aug. 2. Bailey was gunned down about 90 minutes later near downtown. Witnesses told police they saw the masked killer flee in a white minivan without license plates. The bakery worker who spoke to police said Bey IV said of Bailey's killing "that will teach them to (expletive) with me." The next morning, Aug. 3, 200 officers raided the bakery compound on San Pablo Avenue without incident. Later that day, Broussard confessed to killing Bailey, a statement he has since recanted. But the operation was too late for Bailey. "The police department, they just fumbled everything," said Bailey's sister, Lorelei Waqia. "They caused the death, really. If they had moved on it, my brother would still be alive." Retired Lt. Garrahan said SWAT officers told him "all the coordination had been done; that the reason I kept getting was that this backpacking trip was the reason for the delay." Garrahan retired in April, but keeps in touch with many officers. Many of those officers, he said, are angry that police commanders have never acknowledged the raid delay. "If the guy on the street, the man or woman that's driving around in that police car out there, is held accountable to a standard where you must be honest, you must be truthful, then that should go all the way up the chain of command," he said.
Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial mess
What the ruling party does not want you to see. Now they also want to turn out the lights on what is and has happened in
This video shows that George Bush tried to warn Congress starting in 2001 that this economic crisis was coming, if something was not done. But congress refused to listen, along with Barney Franks. This video says it all.
The liberal AMERICAN media did not want this video on You Tube, so they had Time Warner threaten a law suit (proprietary rights) if it was not taken off.
This link is of the same video but is routed through
Disgraced Illinois governor never met an illegal alien he didn't like
When the news broke that Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich had been arrested by the FBI on a laundry list of corruption charges, I had mixed feelings about what awaits the man who was my governor before my wife and I legally crossed Wisconsin's southern border three years ago and took up residence in "America's Dairyland."
Naturally, I was pleased to learn that "Blago" probably is headed for a fairly long stay in a federal prison, but whatever sentence he receives won't be long enough to suit me. That is because none of the charges in the feds' 78-page complaint include what he has done to make the state in which I was born and worked my entire life an even bigger magnet for illegal aliens. Latest estimates show that nearly 600,000 illegals are living on the backs of Illinois taxpayers.
Never reluctant to boast that he is the "son of immigrants," Blagojevich wasted no time in hanging out the welcome sign for illegals. In May 2003 he signed into law a bill giving in-state tuition to illegals, and he always has supported the idea of giving them drivers licenses so they "could get to work." Fortunately, numerous attempts to "make the roads safer" in Illinois by teaching illegals the "rules of the road" have thus far failed.
In late November 2005 Blago, working closely with the left-wing Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR), created by executive order the New Americans Immigrant Policy Council (NAIPC) for the purpose of helping immigrants "assimilate" into Illinois society. Among the 15 council members is a representative of the ICIRR, which has received thousands of dollars from the Donors Forum of Chicago for the purpose of pushing legislation that would give driving privileges to illegals. NAIPC's national advisory board members include Frank Sharry, formerly of the National Immigration Forum and now head of America's Voice, and Cecilia Munoz, who had been a senior vice president with the National Council of La Raza before recently being named to President-elect Barack Obama's White House staff.
- During the March 2006 illegal alien demonstrations in Chicago that included appearances by Mayor Richard M. Daley and Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), Blago helped inspire the crowd when he told them in Spanish that he "understood" their values and concerns.
Recent revelations about Blago's very brazen and bizarre chicanery even though he knew for three years that he was being closely watch by the feds help explain another of his equally bizarre actions: Last August he signed a bill "prohibiting" employers from using, E-Verify, the federal government's highly effective voluntary workplace verification program that determines whether an individual can work here in accordance with federal law. In other words, if Illinois employers attempted to comply with federal immigration law they would find themselves in hot water with their state.
Blago's asinine attempt to circumvent our immigration laws (with the help of the General Assembly's Latino Caucus) was to have become effective at the beginning of this year, but it was put on hold after the state was sued by the Department of Homeland Security. The last I heard a new bill that substitutes the word "discourages" for "prohibits" is under consideration.
Wafa Sultan’s wake-up call to Colin Powell: “Is there something wrong with being a Muslim?”
(Compiler's note: A must read)
Wafa Sultan: “Is it not a duty for each one of us to view Islam not frivolously but in a most serious manner?”
Wafa Sultan: “Is it not a duty for each one of us to view Islam not frivolously but in a most serious manner?”
One of the heroes of our age
When Colin Powell endorsed Obama in October, he went out of his way to criticize those who were trouble by the idea of a Muslim President. Hugh Fitzgerald explained what was wrong with Powell’s analysis in his article “Colin Powell and Jihad: A dereliction of duty.” And now the heroic Wafa Sultan contributes some observations of her own: “Contemplating Islam,” by Wafa Sultan in Hudson New York, December 15 (thanks to Pamela and JW):
Clueless ‘house negro’ Powell (Al Sharpton quote)
If we consider the Islamic texts, their content and the devotion that so many Muslims - including in America - attach to them; if we consider the tragic upshot of these teachings in terms of our current world’s security, is it not a duty for each one of us to view Islam not frivolously but in a most serious manner?There was an episode during the current Presidential election that greatly disturbed me. It was former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s interview on “Meet the Press.” For me this interview was a defining moment. He expressed his displeasure at some of his colleagues’ accusations that Obama might be a Muslim, and stated: “And what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim?”
Mr. Powell’s admonition at others who dare questioning Muslims, or Islam and its implications, in particular, people like me, who suffered immensely precisely because there is “something wrong with being a Muslim,” would indeed be disheartened. If Powell doesn’t understand what may be the dire consequences for being a Muslim, then who should understand? The man, who once held the post of American Secretary of State, asserts categorically that there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim, even though the country he led has been suffering immensely from Muslim terrorism and has paid a high price because of it.
I appreciate that Powell, who has been nurtured by the American moral code, refuses to judge people on the basis of their religious affiliation. That is his right. But he does not have the right to nonchalantly disregard people’s apprehensions of Muslims, especially at those of us who have lived in Muslim countries. We have risked our lives to escape from them, and are now risking our lives again to speak up against the harm they cause, induced by Islamic theology and culture.
In order to understand my perspective one would have to be a woman, living in Syria, my birthplace, or any other Arab Muslim country.
Since immigrating to the United States more than five presidential elections ago, I always regarded American politics as a luxury that did not concern me. Living in the US was enough to satisfy me emotionally, physically and intellectually. Anything beyond that was more than I required.
I came to regard America’s might as much greater than any president that happened to be in power - Democratic or Republican. Hence, I assumed that any person, who attained the rank of presidential candidate, regardless of party affiliation, was capable of safely leading this great nation. Because of that, I never took the trouble to inquire which candidate was more worthy of victory; for me it was a mere toss-up.
However, the events of September 11th, 2001 stripped away my confidence. I began wondering how well Americans understand Political Islam - the underlying cause of this and other heinous attacks and how willing are we to probe into its ideology or comprehend its objectives. The events surrounding the most recent election have increased my doubts and my concerns for this country, which I love with all my heart.
So what is the problem? During and after the recent election, my fear for America was that Obama’s victory could breathe fresh life into the further rise of Islamism, including Islamic terrorism.
Why?
Islamists’ psychology is worlds apart from that of Westerners. They believe in absolute terms in their divine mission to submit the world to Islam. They are engaged in a constant search for divine meaning and inspiration - even in mundane matters.
First, there was Senator Obama’s Muslim background. It is well known that Mr. Obama was born to a Muslim father, spent part of his early life in Indonesia - a Muslim country - and attended a Muslim school there. Almost every day my inbox was flooded with e-mail rumors about Obama which reflected many American citizens’ fears regarding the Democratic candidate’s Muslim background.
But Mr. Obama reassured us that he is a Christian and that was enough to dispel the doubts I might have had about him being a Muslim. I let go of my fear for America should Obama win. For now, I regained my confidence in him.
However, Salafists interpret even daily events in a way that may not necessarily appear significant to Westerners. In this context some Islamists go so far as viewing the Islamic background of Obama as a heaven-sent confirmation of the first step in realizing the dream of submitting the West to Islam. The mere fact that American president bears a Muslim name like Hussein is enough to assure them that Islam is marching into America and has already infiltrated the White House.
Once, I was browsing through a website in Arabic and came across a news item announcing that the American actress Halle Berry gave birth to a daughter whom she named Nahla; an Arabic name meaning “bee”. I then read readers’ comments on this piece of news. A considerable number of them were jubilant, since they regarded this report as a God’s sign that Islam had begun to advance into America, because the word nahla is mentioned in the Koran.
As for Mr. Powell, does he understand that Islam is not just a religion but a political doctrine that seeks to impose itself on non-Muslims even by force? If he does, why should people not be doubtful?
This is not an Islamophobic prejudice I present. Muslims, like any other national group, can be either good or bad, and the best among them do not act in accordance with Islam’s political ideology, either because they are not familiar with it, or because they have deliberately progressed beyond it. But how are we to scrutinize the good from the bad when a high level political official like Mr. Powell undermines the questioning of any concerns related to this issue?
Certainly, Mr. Powell knows that Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam, is most revered among Muslims. Does Mr. Powell realize that it is incumbent upon every devout Muslim male to emulate Muhammed’s ways? If so, has Mr. Powell studied the life of Muhammad as it is recounted in the original Arabic sources, as I learned it in my schooldays?
One particular part of the prophet’s historical account I studied in third grade at primary school. We read with pride how Muhammad beheaded eight hundred Jews from the Bani Quraiza tribe in one night, then took their wives and children hostage and spent that same night with a Jewish woman Safia, whose husband, father and brother he had just killed. This wretched story is only a drop in the ocean of numerous Arabic narratives written about Muhammad’s misconduct.
Moreover, according to Islam’s most revered jurists, a true Muslim must believe in Islam as both religion and a political entity. A committed Salafi Muslim does not recognize the American constitution. His willingness to live under that constitution is, as far as he is concerned, nothing more than an unavoidable step on the way to that constitution’s replacement by Islamic Sharia law.
The Koran states: “Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their numbers. Allah does not guide the wrongdoers” (5:51). Is it legitimate for Christians and Jews to be concerned about this tenet?
American government officials must spend funds to interpret Arabic texts word for word, without distortion or falsification. Among other illuminating tenets they may find, is the concept of taqqia (literally, “caution, prudence, dissimulation”). It allows a Muslim to conceal his true cherished beliefs when he feels that non-Muslims around him have the upper hand, while at the same time working secretly to achieve his “noble” objective, so that he can attack them when the time is ripe….
China's barely-noticed economic war with the U.S.
Sol Sanders also writes the "Asia Investor" column weekly for EAST-ASIA-INTEL.com.
Beijing is waging economic warfare against Washington. But as is the Chinese wont, it is using traditional guerrilla asymmetrical tactics in what is more than a little fog of war.
With near financial hysteria and demi economic chaos in the U.S. and what looks increasingly like a meltdown of the Chinese economic model – export-led mercantilist state capitalism – the viewer has more than sand thrown in his eyes.
Shell-shocked old Hank Paulson in late November went through the motions of the semi-annual Strategic Economic Dialogue with the Chinese. Maybe it was a relief just to get out of Washington for a short visit to Beijing even without the usual Communist version of sing-song girls. So he hit the repeat button on old mantras about how helpful both parties were to each other.
An official and required report of the Treasury to Congress claims that no major trading partner, including China, fell below the standards that would label them a currency manipulator. But there weren’t many analysts around who believed it. Even in the Treasury itself, Washington couldn’t quite get their songsheets together. In May a report to Congress said “…the pace of appreciation needs to continue in order to address the continuing substantial undervaluation of the RMB and the risks China is creating for itself, the Asian region, and the world economy in which China is playing a greater role. Treasury has been reinforcing that message to Chinese authorities on a frequent basis both bilaterally and multilaterally and will continue to do so.” bailout
Six months later, another Treasury report finds that China allowed its currency to appreciate a total of 6.2 percent against the dollar in the first half of 2008, just short of the 6.4 percent gain in the entire year in 2007. But in the last couple of weeks of November before Paulson’s meeting, the yuan slipped back to its lowest level in about five months, the report went on to say. [Were the Chinese trying to tell Paulson something in numbers instead of ideographs?]
Translation from Washington bureaucratese? “The Chinese are mucking around with their currency to the U.S. dollar and the whole world trade community’s hurt and we keep asking them to stop it. But they won’t.”
The Congressionally mandated U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission – once the darling of the Taiwan lobby but now a dumping ground for Hill staffers – annual report in late November put it bluntly [if with not much documentation and therefore, apparently, little hope]: Congress should enact legislation to stop China’s currency manipulation. How?
It isn’t that Beijing is operating in a moneychangers’ vacuum. The Chinese government is doing everything it can to help its export sector. That’s because it is losing jobs at a rapid pace with the current global shutdown. That includes intervening to keep the yuan stable against the dollar instead of permitting it to continue to rise, even at the glacial pace for years it had informally promised the Bush Administration it would permit. That would make exports more expensive. With exports accounting, the mythmakers in Chinese statistics say, for a third of any growth in the Chinese economy, the reason is obvious.
Of course currency manipulation isn’t the whole story of this cat and mouse saga. Some observers have argued that the yuan is now probably so undervalued that only a massive – and therefore destabilizing – revaluation would really cut into China’s cheaper export prices for manufactured goods. That may be even harder with reports Beijing’s still cloudy $1.7 billion “stimulus” package – everybody has to have a stimulus package these days, the most fashionable policy around. A significant [and secret, of course] part is going to go into new export subsidies to back up the cheaper yuan.
Besides, the Chinese are buying American debt – and Washington is about to roll up vast news sums of that for export. The Chinese, long the largest holders of U.S. Treasury securities [along with its East Asian neighbors and the Persian Gulf sheikhdoms], continue to buy more. [With a $43.6 billion increase in holdings of U.S. treasury securities in September, China's overall holdings amounted to $585 billion with.Japan cutting its holdings to $573 billion from $586 billion in August.] What else could they do with the foreign exchange they are piling up with their mercantilist policies? Besides, for the first time in history, the Treasury has gone into minus interest rates for its securities. That means the world, generally, still thinks that the U.S. promise to pay the bearer on demand is more valid than other possibilities around the globe.
The guesswork – Chinese financial policy is such a tangle of propaganda, ineptitude, corruption and stealth that one can never be quite sure about even the estimates of the dismal scientists – is that the Beijing financial warriors have been more active recently. It looks like the Chinese have been using their massive foreign exchange reserves [now nearing $2 trillion in other people’s, mainly U.S., debt] to hammer the rate of the ren min bao [yuan] to the dollar. Cheaper Chinese currency to the American dollar, of course, theoretically fuels Chinese exports now as it has all through the boom period
The honorable experts have already been shaken and chastened by the latest [always suspicious] statistics on those exports. At a still magnificent $114.99 billion, they declined in November 2.2 percent from a year earlier, the sharpest fall since 1999, and, morosely, are predicted to continue to fall and bounce on the bottom for at least another year or so. Of course, the Chinese currency manipulation tends to keep out imports, anything but the industrial components and raw materials, especially energy. They are needed for the export machine, ironically, largely in the hands of the Western and Japanese multinational corporations who bundle and brand them to market. The worldwide collapse of commodity prices, particularly in metals and oil, also helped trim the import bill. So the trade balance recorded a new record: 40.1 billion yuan, $5.8 billion, well over the previous record of 35.2 billion yuan set in October.
China has been the third-largest export market for the U.S., and has been a major buyer of commodities – much of that from the U.S. and such other [until now] booming economies as Australia. Even India is going to be hit as a major exporter of iron ore with China’s purchases falling by 7.9 percent in November. [Crude wasdown 1.8 percent.] But that is likely to dramatically decline with the level of production in China.
All of this is leading to a galloping deflation in China – prices are falling everywhere. That’s good news for the ticket punching bureaucratic hacks at the Politburo in Beijing since the cost of living – particularly a sharp rise in food prices – was threatening back in the late spring to get out of hand. Theoretically it would also help the exporters to keep their prices down, if for no other reason, than growing unemployment has further strengthened the hand of the slave markets for industrial labor in the Pearl River Delta and Shanghai industrial complexes.
But the question is whether all this falderall will really help maintain the stability of a fragile Chinese politcal economy. Keeping export prices at an artifically low level – now with the help of worldwide deflation – may not do the trick. The question is, to use Maynard Milord Keynes metaphor, whether continuing to hold prices down for Chinese exports to the U.S. [the EU and Japan] will really push the hanging string of rapidly diminishing U.S., Euro and Japanese demand. With consumption patterns retracting in the U.S., Europe and Japan, at an alarming rate, nobody may want that new widescreen LCD/Plasma TV even at a bargain price. In fact, there may not be a market for that new Intel microprocessor measured in millionths of a millimeter even if we can use it to replace most of the tower of a PC or produce tiny little accelerator to fit inside your ear. Not for a while.
Most businesspeople in China "didn't imagine that these events in the U.S. would affect them," Li Qiang, chief statistician of the National Bureau of Statistics, told the Financial Times. "For most of the last 18 years, the economy has been continually growing, so they've gotten used to it." Curious, since everyone knew all the time they had been living on exports and had created only a relatively small internal market largely for a pampered elite partial to Guchi and Armani. In China, of course, that includes tens of millions of people. But in the coastal city of Yuyao, the Ningbo Wanglong Group, a food company, claims that years of rapid expansion have made it one of the world's largest producers of preservatives for food and feed. But the combination of continuing adulteration and poisoning scandals in Chinese foods, domestic and export have frightened away customers at a time of general decline in demand. That reflected in toys and other goods has resulted in growing unemployment including graduates of Chinese universities who had for some time been having trouble finding employment.
Ironically [or perhaps characteristically] there are no reliable estimates of Chinese unemployment, certainly no statistics. But anecdotal evidence is that the always rampant undereployment and unemployed in the economically stagnant countryside is now getting an addition, returning workers from declining industrial production. The 640 million question is, of course, how far will this go. Economists are already scaling back estimates of Chinese gross development product, from the slightly over 9 percent of the last quarters, to as low as 5 percent. It’s long been believed that anything less than double digit growth or thereabout does not absorb even a modicum of the growing labor force in China’s 1.3 billion. Large unemployment could mean trouble for Beijing’s rulers; incidents of social unrest including pitched battles with police have been growing. There may not be a lot American policy can do about helping a regime which has refused so adamantly to move politically toward more flexible policies.
President-elect Obama spoke out during the campaign against what he called unfair Chinese trade practices and currency manipulation. But Lawrence Summers, tapped to be Obama’s White House economic director, last year told the Congress they should go easy on China's currency policies. Fed banker Timothy F. Geithner who will slip into Paulson’s worn shoes as Treasury secretary in January, has lived in China, studied Chinese, and sat in the New York Fed where this problem of foreign currencies was uppermost. He may even have thoughts about how to approach it. Ken Lieberthal, a former National Security Council adviser on Asia under President Bill Clinton and who advised Hillary Rodham Clinton and then Obama during the presidential campaign, has made soothing noises about calming what he calls "mutual distrust about both sides' intentions [which] has grown." He claimed that on a recent trip to Beijing, he found many officials and ordinary Chinese who believed in one of those 9/11 conspiracy type theories: the United States purposely triggered a global financial crisis to thwart China's growth. Maybe Lieberthal, to introduce a little realism, had better remind the Chinese that their Paramount Leader Deng Xiaoping, who started the modernization, said that it didn’t matter what color a cat was in this cat and mouse economic game, as long as it caught mice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
