Blog @ MoreWhat.com

From unrest displayed by various factions in Pakistan to the strange relationship between the US and former top dog Musharraf to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto the some-time ally nation is a wild card in foreign affairs.

The story below is typical of those demonstrating that which may frustrate public officials and the public in countries around the world. However, terrorists who view this latest development as positive may change their minds later. US intelligence operatives may lament this decision publicly but keeping a top Taliban commander in Pakistan’s custody may actually expand options available for acquiring necessary information.

How much money will the US have to provide Pakistan for ‘extracting’ intelligence from this individual without all those messy rules some find comforting? Sure, Pakistan is denying extradition to any other country based on perceived rights of the detained. Not likely.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Pakistani Court Blocks Extradition of Top Afghan Taliban Commander

VOA News

A Pakistani court has blocked the extradition of at least five captured Afghan Taliban leaders, including top Taliban commander Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar.

Judge Khawaja Mohammad Sharif issued the order Friday after Islamist rights activist Khalid Khawaja filed a petition with the high court in Lahore. The judge said the militants should not be handed over to any other country.

One day earlier, the Afghan government said Pakistan had agreed to send Mullah Baradar and other militants to Afghanistan.

The Afghan president’s office said Thursday that Pakistan had agreed to give up the militants in exchange for the return of Pakistani prisoners.

Pakistani security forces captured Mullah Baradar in a joint operation with U.S. agents. Pakistan also detained several other top Taliban members in recent weeks.

The United States has urged Pakistan to crack down on Afghan Taliban militants who use northwestern Pakistan as a base for attacks on U.S.-led forces in neighboring Afghanistan.

Only pointing to the bad is as unhelpful as always pointing to the good. Certainly life as well as history is a mixture of both. But the report from Sonja Pace at VOA presented below may not even correctly point to the good when describing Muslim heritage and inventions.

There is evidence to suggest much of what Muslims may claim as their own was provided to them from others and certainly much of it before the beginnings of Islam. For example, Muhammad was born in 570 AD. Algebra likely has roots at least 1000 years earlier in Babylonia. The same culture may be responsible for a number of innovations but the religion known as Islam may have nothing to do with it.

Even in the report below one person interviewed mentions ‘Indian numerals’ which would be more accurate than some other representations. Let’s not try to cover over the terrorism aspect and hate for ‘infidels’ expressed by many Muslims.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

1001 Inventions and Muslim Heritage
Sonja Pace - London

Coffee, computers and piston engines - could we imagine a world without them? These are intricate parts of every day life for most of us and the knowledge that led to them was either invented by or passed down through the ancient Muslim world. That’s the theme of an exhibit in London’s Science Museum and it’s a far cry from the view held by some that the Muslim and Western World represent a “clash of civilizations”.

It has become an intricate part of so many cultures - that cup of coffee - latte, cappuccino, espresso. It’s “Kawha” - where it was first developed as a drink - in the Arabian Peninsula, in today’s Yemen.

Professor Salim al Hassani of the University of Manchester explains the coffee beans were actually brought to Yemen, from Ethiopia. “Well of course, coffee was invented in the very early years of Islam - a guy called Khaled in Ethiopia, a young man looking after his sheep,” he said.

The sheep seemed to like the beans. So the young man took the beans to Yemen - the story goes — and the drink was developed.

And there were many other inventions or innovations passed on by the early Muslim world from the 7th Century onward. “One of them is the invention of the university. This was done in the year 850 by a young lady called Fatima al-Firhi in the city of Fez in Morocco. The first university as we know it in the world, giving degrees and so on,” he said.

And that’s the theme of this exhibit at the London Science Museum. It’s called 1001 inventions: the Muslim Heritage - a bit like “1001 Arabian Nights” the well known fairy tale.

But, the exhibit here focuses on scientific or technological inventions and advances that changed our world — from some of the earliest universities, to innovations in medicine, hygiene, pumps, and water wheels.

“Forgotten history? Not really. Ask just about anyone on the streets of Cairo or Damascus today and they’ll readily tell you about Islam’s glory days - not just its conquests but its cultural, scientific and technological innovations.”

These advances came at the height of the Islamic empire’s glory when it spread from the Middle East, across North Africa to southern Spain and beyond. “During that time, which is about 1,000 years, there were enormous contributions in science and technology, that came to us from other civilizations over another very important civilization and that is the Muslim civilization,” he said.

Muslims absorbed knowledge - from India, China, the Greeks, the ancient Egyptians - and passed it on, a bit like this replica of the elephant clock designed by the Muslim inventor, mathematician and engineer al Jazari in the early 13th Century.

Anne Marie Brennan teaches forensic biology at London’s South Bank University and is fascinated by these innovations. The clock with its giant Indian elephant and Chinese dragons is her favorite. “The elephant clock is wonderful because it is like a United Nations clock. It has all the elements of different civilizations and I like it as a scientist because it shows that science doesn’t have to be boring and sterile and plain, but it can be decorative and it can also pay homage to the cultures that bring it forward,” she said.

And then there is mathematics and algebra. In general, our numbers are known as Arabic numerals today, but it wasn’t always so. “The numbers that we have today - 1,2,3,4 - they’re called Arabic numerals, but actually the Arabs at the time called them Indian numerals,” he said.

And, the number “0″ for example - “zephir” in Arabic - was used first by early Arab scholars as an integral part of mathematical equations. And that’s part of the all-important formula of zeros and ones that was crucial to the development of computers and other new technology.

And, much like coffee, what would we do today without it?

Are we serious this time? Among the other items within the liberal agenda spearheaded by President Barack Obama as well as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and others, amnesty for illegal immigrants, no deportation for those here illegally and lax national security and border control feature prominently. But a few members of Congress, 22 to be exact, have put forth a resolution reminding everyone the rule of law must prevail to secure America’s borders and protect the nation.

111th CONGRESS 2d SessionH. RES. 1026Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the continued peace, prosperity, liberty, and national security of the United States and its people depend upon the rule of law and credible and effective immigration enforcement policies which both welcome lawful immigrants and non-immigrants and also prevent the unlawful entry or unlawful continuing presence of foreign persons.IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 21, 2010

Mr. CHAFFETZ (for himself, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. KRATOVIL, Mr. NYE, Mr. FLEMING, Mrs. LUMMIS, Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. POSEY, Mr. ROE of Tennessee, Mr. HARPER, Ms. JENKINS, Mr. BARROW, Mr. BRIGHT, Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mr. OLSON, Mr. TAYLOR, Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. KAGEN, Mr. SHULER, and Mr. CHILDERS) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Education and Labor and Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

---

RESOLUTIONExpressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the continued peace, prosperity, liberty, and national security of the United States and its people depend upon the rule of law and credible and effective immigration enforcement policies which both welcome lawful immigrants and non-immigrants and also prevent the unlawful entry or unlawful continuing presence of foreign persons.Whereas the United States, as a nation of immigrants, recognizes and celebrates the economic and cultural contributions of generations of lawful immigrants;

Whereas the United States must remain a place where lawful immigrants can come to enjoy the promises of religious, political, and economic freedom; and

Whereas the continued peace, prosperity, liberty, and national security of the United States and its people depend upon the rule of law and credible and effective immigration enforcement policies which both welcome lawful immigrants and non-immigrants and also prevent the unlawful entry or unlawful continuing presence of foreign persons: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that–

(1) the use of a basic pilot program described in section 403(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note; commonly known as the E-verify program) by employers of workers within the United States should be mandatory, and that enforcement policies should hold both employers and employees responsible whenever an individual’s employment violates United States immigration law;

(2) installing and sustaining the necessary border infrastructure and manpower to effectively secure and control United States borders to prevent the unauthorized passage of persons or contraband is a critical responsibility of the Federal Government; and

(3) any immigration reform proposal adopted by Congress should not legalize, grant amnesty for, or confer any other legal status condoning the otherwise unlawful entry or presence in the United States of any individual.

It is not everything we need but it IS a good start. Problems remain with those supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants like Mayor Bloomberg.

NY Mayor Bloomberg to promote immigration reform

On the hot-button issue of immigration, he favors more liberal laws on allowing immigrants into the country and legalizing those who lack documentation. That will draw opposition from advocates of tightening the border and deportation of illegal aliens.

“We’re committing what I call national suicide,” Bloomberg said on the NBC’s “Meet the Press” last Sunday. “Somehow or other, after 9/11 we went from reaching out and trying to get the best and the brightest to come here, to trying to keep them out.”

“In fact, we do the stupidest thing, we give them educations and then don’t give them green cards.”

What planet is Bloomberg living on? Sure, foreign nationals are educated in the US. But that is but one aspect of the problem. We’re talking about illegal immigration. Is Bloomberg suggesting students from foreign countries are here illegally? Probably not.

And his suggestion that educating the best and the brightest is a direct insult to American citizens who are pursuing their education here or already received it. Yet in addition he wants to loosen the almost non-existent immigration law and enforcement further.

This is the mindset that must be resisted. What Bloomberg suggests IS NOT reform. He merely wants to eliminate immigration law and completely open the borders. You don’t fix what is wrong with your country by importing replacements for your own citizens or exporting their jobs to another country. That has been Mexico’s answer to their country’s problems. Export it to the US. Then they benefit by the money sent by illegals back to Mexico.

The point is the US needs to improve education and the performance of students and teachers without abusing immigration law. And Mexico and other countries need to fix their own country’s problems without burdening the US. Stop sending American jobs overseas and importing cheaper labor here. And let other countries fix their own problems without affecting the US.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Dixie Chicks drop controversial lead singer in new album

By: CAITLIN R. KING
Associated Press
01/12/10 11:45 AM EST

NASHVILLE, TENN. — Two members of the Dixie Chicks — minus lead singer Natalie Maines — are preparing to release a new album this year.

Was it political controversy that caused the Dixie Chicks to fade in the music business or simply whatever talent they may have already ran its course?

During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, the Dixie Chicks performed in concert in London on March 10, 2003, at the Shepherd’s Bush Empire theatre in England. During the introduction to their song “Travelin’ Soldier”, Natalie Maines, a Texas native, said:

‘Just so you know, we’re on the good side with y’all. We do not want this war, this iolence, and we’re ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.’

Celebs in the music and film industry especially seem to hold some notion that they have some special calling that requires weighing in on public affairs. Granted, music and film have been used many times to make political statements but perhaps those fortunate enough to make a living in these businesses should remember one fact about their personal views. Not everyone agrees with their opinions. Add to that actions have consequences.

Martie Maguire and Emily Robison will be releasing new music in 2010 without lead vocalist Natalie Maines. Lloyd Maines, Natalie’s father, has stated that the trio are “definitely still an entity”. On January 15, it was announced that duo will be known as Court Yard Hounds and will release an album in May with Robison on lead vocals.

After the commentary in 2003 nothing followed until 2006 and now in 2010 two of the three women are starting again without Natalie Maines. Wonder if there are any regrets?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

related:
Dixie Chicks or Tricks?

Dixie Chicks: A Bit Naive

The critical issue these days when discussing political parties should be national security as without effective defense every other debate is moot. The GOP fall from grace preceding two election cycles of defeat merely allowed the continuation of flawed governance. The only difference is party blue rather than party red.

Michael Leiter is a Bush appointee. Obama did not replace him. Leiter is in the news due to the Flight 253 terror plot. There are conflicting reports between at least three sources, the NY Post, the NY Daily News and US News & World Report. The conflict is whether Leiter was on vacation before the event and declined to return or that he left the day after the botched national security that allowed the botched terror plot.

from the NY Post….

The White House acknowledged Thursday that Michael Leiter, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, had taken six days annual leave after the Dec. 25 attempted plane bombing but said he remained intimately involved in the U.S.’s response to the thwarted terror attack.

It was reported Thursday that government sources were upset that Leiter had gone on a ski trip following Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s attempt to destroy a Detroit-bound plane.

“People have been grumbling that he didn’t let a little terrorism interrupt his vacation,” one of the sources is reported to have told the newspaper.

from USN&WR…

Terror Chief Michael Leiter Wasn’t Vacationing Through Attack

Only later did he head out of town. “Only after explicit consultations with both the White House and the Director of National Intelligence and considering the current threat environment did Director Leiter take six days of annual leave after the event, which again did not affect in any way his ability to remain engaged with all elements of the United States Government,” he said.

The piece above critcizes the NY Daily News for reporting Leiter was on vacation and declined to return to work after the Flight 253 incident on Dec 25th. But Alex Kingbury at USN&WR misses the point.

The stumbling US national security ‘team’ seriously botched this one. Liberals in Congress criticize conservatives for holding up a critical confirmation of Obama’s nominee to head TSA. Napolitano’s no help. So having the head of another national security ‘resource’ take to the slopes AFTER a security breach is equally disturbing. Not like they fixed what’s wrong before he left.

At the very least this supports Senator Jim DeMint’s ‘holding up’ the confirmation of Erroll Southers as the head of the Transportation Security Administration. These national security vacancies require very special people to lead the effort. One could say there are vacancies in leadership roles that are filled not to mention other positions throughout government.

Nearly a decade after 9/11 everyone should be able to expect better than this from US national security. Among other things Bush bashers love to draw comparisons. Any criticism expressed toward the current administration is met with rebuttals concerning the Bush years. The point those arguments fail to recognize is 9/11 publicly exposed national security vulnerabilities and placed the topic front and center. Much was corrected by the Bush adminisstration and not without excessive opposition from the left. Now that the left is once again in the majority in Washington they are not allowed a pass to make earlier mistakes over again.

US national security failures started with Clinton and ended with Bush. Let’s not have a do over.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

One of the political debates in the news concerns President Obama’s nominee for leading the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). The simple pro and con on the issue has conservatives criticizing the Obama Administration for dragging its feet on filling the vacancy and liberals countering with the complaint that Republican Senator Jim DeMint is holding up the confirmation of Erroll Southers, Obama’s current candidate for the job.

Senator DeMint’s January 1, 2009 press release answers critics of his position. It is short, sweet and to the point. Maybe critics of Senator DeMint should consider the fact that holding up the confirmation of a flawed nominee is better than confirming same. Given recent security failures the importance of this nomination is emphasized. Rubber stamping President Obama’s first choice in the name of expediency is irresponsible at best. President Obama can easily replace this nominee with someone worthy of filling the vacancy. Here’s DeMint’s press release.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

DeMint Statement on TSA Nominee

January 1, 2010 - WASHINGTON, D.C - Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) made the following statement about President Obama’s nominee to lead the Transportation Security Administration (TSA):

“Erroll Southers has not been forthcoming about whether he’ll give union bosses control of our airport security, which is one of the most important decisions he’ll make as head of the TSA. Mr. Southers’ unwillingness to form a position on collective bargaining seriously calls into question his judgment, because it weakens security and has already been rejected by the CIA, the FBI, the Secret Service, the Coast Guard, and by every previous TSA administrator.”

“And now we learn that he misled Congress in sworn testimony about accessing confidential records. The TSA is one of the most critical security agencies in the War on Terror, and the Senate must carefully vet this nominee. If Mr. Southers is unwilling to put security ahead of politics and if he can’t tell the truth, then he’s not qualified and should not be confirmed.”

###

First homeland security princess Janet Napolitano said the systems worked in the Flight 253 incidents. Second, President Obama was uncharacteristically silent as an opportunity to pontificate presented itself. Third, Napolitano initiated damage control for her earlier pathetic appraisal of national security. Fourth, President Obama, for reasons we can imagine, broke his silence on the matter and part of a report from the Obama hijacked VOA News is below.

The president’s demeanor was serious as he faced reporters in Hawaii, where he is vacationing with his family. He talked about the steps that have been taken to improve airline safety since the attempted attack. And he sought to reassure the American people, saying that the government is doing all it can to keep the public safe and secure.

He said extra law enforcement officers will be put on many flights, and that the passenger screening process is being reviewed - including revising the computerized lists used to detect high risk individuals.

The president added that he is conferring with his national security team. He spoke of their determination to deal with the terrorist threat. “We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat the violent extremists who threaten us - whether they are from Afghanistan or Pakistan, Yemen or Somalia or anywhere where they are plotting attacks against the U.S. homeland,” he said.

President Obama urged Americans to be vigilant but confident as they travel during the current holiday season and throughout the coming year

Sorry Mr President but it appears the only ones concerned about national security are those you and your cronies have labeled violent fringe right wingers who attend tea parties. As far as extra law enforcement goes Barry, there is no extra. There’s what you have and what you use. There’s no extra. Review this if there is something you want to review. See below.

Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogations of high-value detainees came under attack Sunday from key figures in both parties.

The intelligence community has every reason to doubt your sincerity.

The White House will not weigh in on the case of the three Navy SEALs facing court martial for allegedly mistreating an Iraqi terror suspect believed to have been behind the slaying of four Americans in 2004

And it is fortunate those who serve in the military have their own leadership who inspire them as their Commander-in-Chief has abandoned that role.

Why do 2010 and 2012 keep coming to mind? Sorry, it’s just another rhetorical question. But feel free to answer if the notion strikes.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Barry from DC’s homeland security princess, Janet Napolitano, first stated the US national security system worked in referring to an attempt to detonate explosives on board a US airliner landing in Detroit on Christmas. Today she is stumbling over herself to produce damage control for her previous appraisal. No doubt this is taking place at the ‘urging’ of others in the Obamanation.

But let’s not focus only on the Obama Administration’s reaction to a failed terrorist attack. Failed only because the terrorist fortunately botched the assignment. Members of the US Congress are equally disappointing in their response to the event.

from the House Committee on Homeland Security…..

The reported act of terrorism – whether directly related to al Qaeda or not – and the response to it will be the focus of an oversight hearing next month. The Committee will get to the bottom of what did and did not happen with Mr. Abdulmutallab and what security precautions need to take place in the future.”

from the Senate Committee on Homeland Security….

WASHINGTON - Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman, ID-Conn., and Ranking Member Susan Collins, R-Me., announced Monday that they would convene a hearing in January to examine the layers of security meant to protect airline passengers from terrorist attacks but which accused terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab successfully evaded.

Hearings scheduled for January!!! So this is how are fine leaders respond to dropping the ball on national security. Not to worry folks, your elected and appointed leaders are on the job. They’re not concerned enough to interrupt their Christmas and New Year’s plans to deal with security breaches so you should not worry either. Just continue as before….. clueless.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Open thread: Obama’s statement on the Christmas Day jihadi attack; Perfunctory, hasty, and bloodless (Michelle Malkin)

Another event to once again raise the discussion on national security. Not like the status of US national security is ever erased from the American consciousness but one has to wonder if that includes the Obama Administration? The President has been criticized for not being more visible on this and other issues since heading to Hawaii on vacation. His security princess, Napolitano, stated after the Flight 253 incident, the first of two, that ‘the system’ was working properly. That someone was able to board a commercial aircraft and attempt to detonate explosives on final approach contradicts Napolitano’s conclusion. Unless only doing something after the fact is her idea of national security. And even then, simply notifying other commercial aircraft of the conditions on Flight 253 is of little value.

For those who missed it a Delta or Northwest (owned by Delta) flight, number 253, had a Nigerian passenger who attempted to detonate explosives on board as summarized above. A strange coincidence, or not, involved the same flight number on a subsequent flight in which another passenger was either detained and/or arrested for causing a disturbance. One troubling set of circumstances finds reports about the first incident suggesting the description of the ‘perp’ as a terrorist was premature and early reports about the second incident being characterized as a second terrorist attack. How’s that for a spot on press response?

Here’s a more recent account of the second incident.

A U.S. law enforcement official says an unruly passenger was detained Sunday when a Northwest Airlines flight landed in Detroit, Michigan, but he was later declared as not a security threat.

The plane was on the same route and carried the same flight number as one on Friday, when a Nigerian man allegedly tried to blow up Northwest Flight 253 just before landing.

In the latest incident, security personnel arrested a passenger upon landing Sunday because he was verbally abusive to the flight crew and had locked himself in the airplane bathroom for a long time.

The pilot radioed for emergency help. Passengers were evacuated and dogs sniffed the luggage which was spread out on the tarmac.

A law enforcement official tells news agencies that the passenger turned out to be a businessman who got sick during the flight .

And another recent update provides an excerpt on the initial incident.

Passengers have told investigators the man went into the bathroom for 20 minutes before landing, and then when he went to sit down, said he had stomach problems, and pulled a blanket on himself.

Just as the plane was getting ready to land, they heard a pop, smelled smoke and then saw the man on fire.

A Dutch passenger jumped on the Nigerian to subdue him, and blankets were used to put out the fire.

Does this brief review adequately establish Napolitano’s press statements are absurd? Certainly everyone is entitle to their opinion but you can guess that most Americans expect a different outcome in order to state the ’system worked’ when discussing US national security.

On the topic of President Obama’s silence on the matter in recent reports this blog’s reaction. It is reminiscent of an old expression about incompetence that begins with ‘better to be viewed as an idiot than….’. You probably know the rest.

Some related items are provided below on the explosive (PETN) reportedly used in the first incident.

a highly explosive organic compound belonging to the same chemical family as nitroglycerin—i.e., the nitric acid esters of polyalcohols.

PETN was introduced as an explosive after World War I. It is used by itself in detonators and detonating fuses (Primacord) and in a mixture, called pentolite, with an equal amount of trinitrotoluene (TNT) in grenades and projectiles.

PETN is a colourless, crystalline material that is generally stored and shipped as a mixture with water. It is less sensitive than nitroglycerin but is easily detonated. Valued for its shattering force and efficiency, PETN is the least stable of the common military explosives but retains its properties in storage for longer periods than nitroglycerin or cellulose nitrate (nitrocellulose) does. PETN is also used in medicine as a heart stimulant.

Yup, good old-fashioned human technology about a century old.

OSHA does not have a PEL for pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN), which is used both as a drug for preventing angina pectoris and as an explosive.

If you really need to know what a PEL is the following link explains along with many other items typcially covered on a MSDS or Material Safety Data Sheet. And one last related OSHA link.

OSHA has data on PETN. Now if only DHS had detection methods for this well-known explosive and implemented them to avoid a Flight 253 problem.

As a final note for this post a political point is in order. Bush bashers frequently express 9/11 happened on the Bush 43 watch so it was his fault. This blog has stated in the past that there is plenty of blame to go around regarding US national security. A couple of things to keep in mind. 9/11 was not conceived, planned or otherwise arranged by terrorists in less than eight months which is the time George W Bush was in office prior to the attack. Before that President Clinton completed two terms in office and posts here as well as information freely available elsewhere indicate some dropping of the ball as regards terrorism and Osama bin Laden, etc.

When Bush 43 took office and after 9/11 occurred it became his war on terror and he owned the problem. An unfortunate downside to pursuing public office. Post 9/11 the Bush Administration was successful on matters of national security for two terms. The same ownership transfer now applies to President Obama. Given the Flight 253 episode(s), Napolitano’s statement, Obama’s silence, the previous and now infamous warning by VPOTUS Joe Biden the national security situation is once more front and center.

Nothing about current US national security policy inspires confidence.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

It is not uncommon for President Obama to be characterized as an appeaser. From this World Apology Tour to a fruitless response on Iranian nukes to his recent Afghanistan exit strategy and everywhere in between, Obama the commuity orgranizer and campaigner appeases. Some even suggest his speech given after picking up his Nobel was lauded by libs and conservatives alike. But there’s another take on that one. And it is right.

As Bill Clinton taught the Dems, if you have to “confront” a liberal audience about some obvious truth, be sure to choose a hapless or unappealing one. Clinton bravely took on rappers; Obama took on Scandinavian pacifists.

The piece goes on to explain the real story of Obama’s Nobel speech. Which, by the way, leads nicely into a discussion of an older Obama speech.

from….

Remarks of Senator Obama: The War We Need to Win
Washington, DC | August 01, 2007

Thanks to the 9/11 Commission, we know that six years ago this week President Bush received a briefing with the headline: “Bin Ladin determined to strike in U.S.”

It came during what the Commission called the “summer of threat,” when the “system was blinking red” about an impending attack. But despite the briefing, many felt the danger was overseas, a threat to embassies and military installations. The extremism, the resentment, the terrorist training camps, and the killers were in the dark corners of the world, far away from the American homeland.

Then, one bright and beautiful Tuesday morning, they were here.

That a boy, Mr President, take another opportunity to bash President George W Bush. What was stated in the reference at the top of this post applies. ‘The speech was the usual collection of truths, half-truths, and deceptions.’ That of course referred to the Nobel speech and this one and all Obama speeches.

But then everything changed.

We did not finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan. We did not develop new capabilities to defeat a new enemy, or launch a comprehensive strategy to dry up the terrorists’ base of support. We did not reaffirm our basic values, or secure our homeland.

Instead, we got a color-coded politics of fear. Patriotism as the possession of one political party. The diplomacy of refusing to talk to other countries. A rigid 20th century ideology that insisted that the 21st century’s stateless terrorism could be defeated through the invasion and occupation of a state. A deliberate strategy to misrepresent 9/11 to sell a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Barack Hussein Obama speaks of these things as if it all started with George W Bush. Well, not exactly. There is plenty of blame to go around. But what is troublesome here is President Obama cherry picks the 9/11 Commission report to bash Bush. How about the other players?

from the 9/11 Commission….

Early Efforts against Bin Ladin

Until 1996, hardly anyone in the U.S. government understood that Usama Bin Ladin was an inspirer and organizer of the new terrorism. In 1993, the CIA noted that he had paid for the training of some Egyptian terrorists in Sudan. The State Department detected his money in aid to the Yemeni terrorists who set a bomb in an attempt to kill U.S. troops in Aden in 1992. State Department sources even saw suspicious links with Omar Abdel Rahman, the “Blind Sheikh” in the New York area, commenting that Bin Ladin seemed “committed to financing ‘Jihads’ against ‘anti Islamic’ regimes worldwide.” After the department designated Sudan a state sponsor of terrorism in 1993, it put Bin Ladin on its TIPOFF watchlist, a move that might have prevented his getting a visa had he tried to enter the United States. As late as 1997, however, even the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center continued to describe him as an “extremist financier.”1

1992, 1993, 1996, 1997 are specifically mentioned above. And who was President then. Wow, bin Laden was just a financier. Excuse me, ‘extremist financier’.

In 1996, the CIA set up a special unit of a dozen officers to analyze intelligence on and plan operations against Bin Ladin. David Cohen, the head of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, wanted to test the idea of having a “virtual station”-a station based at headquarters but collecting and operating against a subject much as stations in the field focus on a country. Taking his cue from National Security Advisor Anthony Lake, who expressed special interest in terrorist finance, Cohen formed his virtual station as a terrorist financial links unit. He had trouble getting any Directorate of Operations officer to run it; he finally recruited a former analyst who was then running the Islamic Extremist Branch of the Counterterrorist Center. This officer, who was especially knowledgeable about Afghanistan, had noticed a recent stream of reports about Bin Ladin and something called al Qaeda, and suggested to Cohen that the station focus on this one individual. Cohen agreed. Thus was born the Bin Ladin unit.2

In May 1996, Bin Ladin left Sudan for Afghanistan. A few months later, as the Bin Ladin unit was gearing up, Jamal Ahmed al Fadl walked into a U.S. embassy in Africa, established his bona fides as a former senior employee of Bin Ladin, and provided a major breakthrough of intelligence on the creation, character, direction, and intentions of al Qaeda. Corroborating evidence came from another walk-in source at a different U.S. embassy. More confirmation was supplied later that year by intelligence and other sources, including material gathered by FBI agents and Kenyan police from an al Qaeda cell in Nairobi.3

The CIA during the Clinton years puts some money into studying bin Laden the ‘financier’. It seems the big breakthrough was entirely a chance event.

By 1997, officers in the Bin Ladin unit recognized that Bin Ladin was more than just a financier. They learned that al Qaeda had a military committee that was planning operations against U.S. interests worldwide and was actively trying to obtain nuclear material. Analysts assigned to the station looked at the information it had gathered and “found connections everywhere,” including links to the attacks on U.S. troops in Aden and Somalia in 1992 and 1993 and to the Manila air plot in the Philippines in 1994-1995.4

It took them years to go from bin Laden the financier to bin Laden is much more than that. Yet Obama suggests George Bush is responsible for 9/11. Obama cited this report but not this part or any other than the one that suited his agenda.

By the fall of 1997, the Bin Ladin unit had roughed out a plan for these Afghan tribals to capture Bin Ladin and hand him over for trial either in the United States or in an Arab country. In early 1998, the cabinet-level Principals Committee apparently gave the concept its blessing.9

On their own separate track, getting information but not direction from the CIA, the FBI’s New York Field Office and the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York were preparing to ask a grand jury to indict Bin Ladin. The Counterterrorist Center knew that this was happening.10 The eventual charge, conspiring to attack U.S. defense installations, was finally issued from the grand jury in June 1998-as a sealed indictment. The indictment was publicly disclosed in November of that year.

Gee, then they were thinking it might be good to get this guy.

Regarding a plan to capture bin Laden…..

Director Tenet discussed the high risk of the operation with Berger and his deputies, warning that people might be killed, including Bin Ladin. Success was to be defined as the exfiltration of Bin Ladin out of Afghanistan.28 A meeting of principals was scheduled for May 29 to decide whether the operation should go ahead.

The principals did not meet. On May 29, “Jeff” informed “Mike” that he had just met with Tenet, Pavitt, and the chief of the Directorate’s Near Eastern Division. The decision was made not to go ahead with the operation.

Most of us are aware of the fumbling during the Clinton years on the topic of terrorism and bin Laden. You can go back further than that for example when the US financed bin Laden when the Soviet Union was in Afghanistan. The point here should be obvious. Pay attention to President Obama’s agenda and tactics. And stop blaming Bush for everything.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

You could be a little troubled these days with all the talk about politicians and how they respond to matters and issues of the day. President Obama is certainly not immune to analysis or the opinions it generates. Since the mainstream media or those organizations generally considered to be the establishment media rarely open a critical eye toward the President the rest of us must fill the void. After all, the President has pledged his administration would be transparent and accountable. So let’s all help him fulfill that promise.

On the topic of shootings at Fort Hood by Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan the President said the following among other things. “But it is all the more heartbreaking and all the more despicable because of the place where it occurred and the patriots who were its victims.” It should come as no surprise that the community organizer-in-chief is often credited for being a great orator. And he has taken a lot of heat for his habitual use of teleprompters. But make no mistake, little if anything he says in public has escaped the scrutiny of the PR machine and focus groups or the rest in his inner circle. In evidence in the quote above is selecting the word ‘its’ when referring to the ‘victims’ of Hasan. There’s that strategy to appease the terrorists by calling these events ‘man-made’ disasters.

Sorry Mr President but all this is a little troubling. In his weekly Internet and radio address, Mr. Obama says those who responded to the rampage represent the best of America. “We saw soldiers and civilians alike rushing to aid fallen comrades; tearing off bullet-riddled clothes to treat the injured; using blouses as tourniquets; taking down the shooter even as they bore wounds themselves,” he said. Mr President, did you once acknowledge Kimberly Munley by name?

The president, hoping to calm potential ethnic tension, reminds the public about the diversity of those who defend the U.S. “They are Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus and nonbelievers. They are descendants of immigrants and immigrants themselves. They reflect the diversity that makes this America. But what they share is a patriotism like no other,” he said.

Just by virtue of the fact the statement above was made in response to the Fort Hood shootings by Hasan demonstrates the flaw in that argument. This one must have gotten by the PR machine or the arrogance of the White House assumed you wouldn’t notice. Hasan wasn’t sharing that patriotism part, Mr President. At least at the end of the item below you refer to Hasan’s actions as a ‘crime’. Pat yourself on the back, Mr President.

My prayers go with those who were killed or injured as well as for their families. A special acknowledgment should be expressed for those who responded to the call that day. Although it has been reported Kimberly Munley does not want to be called a hero her actions were incredibly proficient and courageous. Hope she recovers from her injuries as if they never happened. Same sentiment for the others injured.

Let’s not dishonor those who died with more appeasement, Mr President.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The Beltway snipers and the Fort Hood killer: Peas in a jihad-inspired pod (Michelle Malkin) 

Absolutely unbelievable! Apparently the audacity of the O is contagious. Or maybe this is a product of his recent World Apology Tour. The UN has raised a question on whether the US is killing people indiscriminately with the use of UAVs. Perhaps they should have first asked this question to al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah or any other terrorist group. For that is what terrorists do. Absolutely unbelievable! If anyone requires further explanation of this issue there is no point continuing a discussion. The world is truly losing its collective mind. This is beyond audacity. That the UN is the source is the only thing that is not a surprise.

What the hell do they think 9/11 was if not indiscriminate killing? In more than eight years has the UN accused al-Qaeda of violating international law for that? Nearly 3000 civilians killed in the attack on the WTC and the UN wants to know about drones? Wow! And this same organization is involved with determining whether or not Iran is developing nuclear weapons. How vulnerable do you feel right now?

It will take some time to nominate another story that even comes close to comparing to this one on the absurd meter.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

UN Special Rapporteur Questions Legality of US Use of Drones
By Margaret Besheer United Nations 27 October 2009

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial killings says the use of armed unmanned aircraft by the United States to hunt down terrorists could be a violation of international law. Philip Alston said Tuesday that Washington must explain how it is sure the United States is not killing people indiscriminately with these aircraft.

U.S. officials have never confirmed the use of Predator drones, but it is widely reported that the Central Intelligence Agency has used them to kill suspected terrorist leaders operating in Pakistan’s largely ungoverned tribal areas along its border with Afghanistan.

U.N. Special Rapporteur Philip Alston questioned the legality of their use under international law. “My concern is that these drones, these Predators, are being operated in a framework which may well violate international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The onus is really on the government of the United States to reveal more about the ways in which it makes sure that arbitrary executions, extrajudicial executions are not, in fact, being carried out through the use of these weapons,” he said.

U.S. officials never acknowledge these strikes, saying they do not discuss operational or intelligence matters.

The Special Rapporteur, who is an independent expert appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council, said the U.S. response has been “untenable” and that Washington needs to be more willing to discuss aspects of its drone program. “Otherwise you have the really problematic bottom line, which is that the Central Intelligence Agency is running a program that is killing significant numbers of people and there is absolutely no accountability in terms of the relevant international laws,” he said.

Alston said the United States should explain who is running the program and what precautions are being taken to ensure that these weapons are used within the framework of international law. He added that there must also be accountability and review mechanisms in place regarding their use.

Could someone explain how this solves anything?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

related:
Pressure Mounts on Iran Uranium Enrichment Program (Right Truth) 

IAEA Drafts Nuclear Deal for Iran
By Lisa Bryant Paris 21 October 2009

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has drafted an agreement to supply enriched uranium to Iran following three days of negotiations at its headquarters in Vienna. If all parties agree to it, the deal could mark a breakthrough after a years-long international standoff over Iran’s nuclear program.

The draft agreement was announced to reporters by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s chief Mohamed ElBaradei, who has given all parties involved until Friday to approve it.

“I have circulated a draft agreement that reflects, in my judgment, a balanced approach on how to move forward,” he said. “The deadline for the parties to give, I hope, affirmative action is Friday, two days from now. And if we do get affirmative action, then I hope that we will have an agreement that we can send to the (IAEA) board of governors.”

ElBaradei said France was included in the draft agreement. Talks this week gathering Russia, the United States, France, Iran and the IAEA, stalled on Tuesday over Iran’s reluctance to have France participate in any deal on enriching its uranium. ElBaradei however described the discussions as constructive and forward-looking.

The IAEA chief did not elaborate on the draft deal, but news agencies report that it is essentially similar to an agreement reached in Geneva earlier this month. That deal would commit Iran to shipping about 75 percent of its lightly enriched stockpile of uranium to Russia for further enrichment.

The material would then be shipped to France to be converted into metal rods before being delivered back to Tehran. The rods would be used to power a research reactor in the Iranian capital making medical isotopes.

More broadly, if all parties agree to the deal, it would defuse international concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. Iran says the program is for peaceful purposes , but western nations fear Tehran is trying to build a nuclear bomb.

Nobel Peace Prize winning President Obama is said to be struggling over what to do in Afghanistan. Does the rookie believe ignoring intel, military and state warnings is the answer? What does this say about his campaign rhetoric to get elected and his desire to maintain favor from the far left antiwar liberal standard?

Officials: Obama advisers are downplaying Afghan dangers

By JONATHAN S. LANDAY, JOHN WALCOTT AND NANCY A. YOUSSEF
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — As the Obama administration reconsiders its Afghanistan policy, White House officials are minimizing warnings from the intelligence community, the military and the State Department about the risks of adopting a limited strategy focused on al-Qaida, U.S. intelligence, diplomatic and military officials told McClatchy Newspapers.

His worry about public opinion ,aka far left support, and resistance to his own advisors is of such concern the report cited here mentions the problem twice in the first seven paragraphs.

However, the officials said, in their effort to muster domestic support for a more limited counterterrorism strategy that would concentrate on disrupting and dismantling al-Qaida, White House officials are neglecting warnings from their own experts about the dangers of a more modest approach.

Given the antiwar sentiment on the left that both candidate Obama and Clinton pandered to in 2008 their ability to do the right thing and at the same time protect their political futures are at odds with each other. With their own ‘experts’ and others suggesting the simmering conflicts are providing renewed strength for al-Qaeda now is not the time for indecision. Biden’s warning of a test for Obama may be just around the corner contrary to the original forecast.

Instead of national security and defense the liberal new direction is focused on an ill-conceived domestic policy Those issues can and should wait based on the pathetic proposals offered to date. The other matters are of immediate concern and need to be handled effectively. And yes, elections have consequences.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

from September 11, 2008

At the dedication of a memorial at the Pentagon, President Bush remembered those who lost their lives there on September 11th, 2001. (Sept. 11)

Never Forget