Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 05, 2015, 02:55:09 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
86836 Posts in 2278 Topics by 1069 Members
Latest Member: ctelerant
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 499 500 [501] 502 503 ... 671
25001  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Daily Expression of Gratitude on: December 14, 2008, 12:02:36 AM
For my extra time with my children while my wife is out of town.
25002  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: April 2009 US Gathering on: December 13, 2008, 11:57:40 PM
The corral is no longer owned by the same person.  I'm playing phone tage with my brother to clarify the situation, and have asked if we can use the dirt area between his house and the orange grove as a Plan B.

25003  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Indians capture 23 pirates on: December 13, 2008, 01:20:13 PM
Indian navy captures 23 pirates
Pirates threatened a merchant vessel in the Gulf of Aden, navy says
The Associated Press
updated 9:45 a.m. PT, Sat., Dec. 13, 2008

NEW DELHI - The Indian navy captured 23 pirates who threatened a merchant vessel Saturday in the lawless waters of the Gulf of Aden, where dozens of ships have come under attack by gunmen in recent months.

An Indian navy ship, the INS Mysore, was escorting merchant ships in the region near Somalia when it received a distress call from seamen on board the MV Gibe, who said they were being attacked by two boats.

The distress call said the pirates were firing as their boats closed in on the Gibe, according to a statement from the Indian government. The pirate boats attempted to escape when they saw the Mysore and its helicopter, but were boarded by Indian marine commandos, the statement said.

The pirates had "a substantial cache of arms and equipment," including seven AK-47 assault rifles, three machine guns, a rocket-propelled grenade launcher and other weapons, the statement said. They also found a GPS receiver and other equipment.

The pirates were from Somalia and Yemen, two countries on the coast of the Gulf of Aden.

The Gibe was flying an Ethiopian flag, the statement said, but there was no further information about the ship.

Last month, India's navy drew criticism after sinking a Thai fishing trawler that had been commandeered hours earlier by pirates. At least one Thai crew member was killed in the attack, which the Indian navy had originally announced by saying it had sunk a pirate "mother ship." The Indian navy defended its actions, saying it had fired in self-defense.

Somali pirates have become increasingly brazen, and recently seized a Saudi supertanker loaded with $100 million of crude oil. Many of the vessels are taken to pirate-controlled regions in Somalia, where they are held for ransom.

It was not immediately clear what would happen to the pirates captured by the Indians, or where they would be taken. The statement said only that the prisoners and their weapons would be "handed over to appropriate authorities ashore."

'All necessary measures'
Most foreign navies patrolling the Somali coast have been reluctant to detain suspects because of uncertainties over where they would face trial, since Somalia has no effective central government or legal system.

An estimated 1,500 pirates are based in Somalia's semiautonomous Puntland region, raking in millions of dollars.


Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will present a draft Security Council resolution next week asking the United Nations to authorize "all necessary measures" against piracy from Somalia.

But on Friday, the commander of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet expressed doubt about the wisdom of launching attacks against Somali pirates on land, as the draft proposes.

U.S. Vice Adm. Bill Gortney told reporters that it is difficult to identify pirates, and the potential for killing innocent civilians "cannot be overestimated."
25004  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: We the unorganized militia on: December 13, 2008, 01:09:14 AM
And a second related piece:

1). On what to do - Some folks think we are advocating running into the fight screaming with a knife in one hand and a snubby in the other. I'm not sure where that comes from, as it has never been suggested and is quite silly when you think about it.

Still, an aggressive counter attack at the outset of the incident seems to be a better option than hiding and hoping to go undetected once the bad guys have consolidated their forces. I do think that if you are unarmed (why would anyone do that today?), your options are very limited.

Additionally, if you are not at the point of contact, going to the fight may not be smart as you don't have any more info other than shots have been fired.
Going out in a blaze of glory is not on anyone's "to do" list here - at least I don't think so. But hiding helplessly and calling for help is not on it either.

If you can't do anything about the event, I am all for getting the “foxtrot” out of dodge. As far as evidence gathering - or getting intel out - or helping the police identify the bad guys, etc. Why is that your problem?

2). If you are armed (as well you should be), and know what is happening beyond a shadow of a doubt (its not the DEA in a firefight with a drug dealer that you are now intervening in), and in a position to shoot the bad guys - well - what do you think you should do?

911? Nope - not for me. Someone else can do that.
Call someone else ? Not at that point - not for me.

I am either engaging, or getting out. Once I am out, I may call, but when in the fire, you either fight, fly, or fry.

3). Before considering engaging the bad guys, consider who is with you. For example, endangering your family to save someone else may be seen by some as the epitome of selflessness, but I see it as the epitome of stupidity. I got a chance to speak with a Deputy whose daughter was killed by an armed robber because he chose to put another’s property and safety above that of his own family. Bad choice - very bad choice.

If I am in a Mumbai-esque situation with them, my job is to use my skills to get them out. Those who did not prepare are on their own until I get them to, what I consider, safety. If fifty unarmed peacenik liberals get slaughtered because I chose the safety of my tribe and family first, oh well - they made their bed, now they can bleed in it.

Now, having said that, if any tangos are in your way as you egress, you bet you should shoot your exit right through them. If I am alone, I may do something different, but family and tribe comes before anyone and anything else…so should yours.

4). If I am at ground zero, when the bad guys begin shooting, and I am alone, I will attack. Not because it is the best thing to do, but because it is the only thing to do. What other option do you have? I suggest you do likewise. And understand the tactical implications of "ATTACK". It doesn't mean running into their midst with a knife in one hand and a Glock in the other screaming “Wolverines”. If that is what you think attacking means- dude! - you need to come to class and get updated. How many times have I made an issue of shooting from long range in the Terrorist Interdiction Course?? Attack means you get your sights on the terrorist (his head if possible) and you smoke him in cold blood. This is vastly different from a typical civilian CCW self-defense shooting. There is no need for warning - no requirement to do anything, nor any chance given for surrender.

Perhaps AMBUSH is a better word.

5). I do not see the advantage in hunkering down and allowing the event to consolidate itself while you, the good witness, gather and pass information. That may be what the authorities want you to do as it benefits their mission. But YOUR mission is different.

I see what goes on in the Al Qaeda Training Video, and what has taken place in nearly every event where there have been organized terrorist active shooters. They have a plan and once they are able to consolidate their forces your options get very very limited.

An example - they know you are hiding in a covered area - and they will notice once they either stumble upon you in their security sweeps, or when you fire at one of them. They order you to come out. You tell them to go suck bacon. They grab a little girl and blow her brains out right there in front of you and her mother. As she falls, they grab another one. The mother is no longer screaming as she has been butt stroked into unconsciousness. Then they tell you again to come out as they grab up her sister and put the muzzle of an AK in her mouth. This is right out of their play books.


6). Some guys are assuming the bad guys will be using AKs. I think in Mumbai they used AKs because that was what they could get in Pakistan. One of my contacts - a man who should know, advises the rifles they used were Pakistani military AKs. If G3s would have been available, they may have used those.

Some think the AK will always mark you with the image of “the bad guy”. I think having ANY rifle in your hands may do that in these cases. Some interesting things in this area. I have asked several police guys about this and the truth is they can't readily distinguish between a FAL and an SKS. A rifle is a rifle and a pistol is a pistol. That is usually as far as it gets.

Another case in point – The Beltway terrorists Malvo and Mohammed, they used an AR-15.

Interestingly enough, there has been a fair bit of off the schedule training of cops with AKs. Agencies that allow their people to buy their own stuff are seeing more and more AKs in service. Specially the Arsenal SLRs in 223.

7). If the event is a typical psycho-lone gunman type thing like Trolley Square, Tacoma Mall, et al, you can expect a reasonably quick police response (still in the realm of several minutes at best). So the idea of picking up one of the bad guy’s rifles may not be either needed, nor wise. If you find yourself in this, you will be fighting with your pistol, not with the bad guy’s rifle, nor your personal rifle. Time to go get it, you will not have.


In a Mumbai/Beslan type event you can bet the tangos will have set up something to delay the police. Whether it is explosives, or outside shooters (which you may need to deal with as you egress anyway), or something. In such an event, picking up the bad guy’s weapons is an option. An option, but not one without risks. It gives you a better capability to engage and drop tangos than your CCW pistol, but in these events, anyone with a rifle may still be mistaken as a bad guy.

Cool. I have heard a great deal of discussion about whether Mumbai was a practice run or not. This attitude is usually seen in very US-centric thinkers. Not everything that happens around the world has anything to do with us. This was as much a practice run as Pearl Harbor was a practice run for the invasion of the Philippines.

Terror is seen as a tool by the terrorists, and not usually as an end in itself. There was a reason for Beslan, The Twin Towers, Madrid, etc. Terror creates fear and the realization that the authority in power cannot protect anyone. This will either bring a solidarity against the evil, as has been seen in Israel, or the desire to appease the evil, as has been seen in Europe. Terror hopes to appeal to that appeasement mentality who wants to give in to the terrorist so the terror will stop.

It also appeals to man's natural hatred. In this case, it appeals to the Indians who will say - "See what happens when we make friends with Americans and Jews".
It will also appeal to those who will say, "See you cannot trust Pakistan. Pakistan is and always has been, our enemy".

The fomenting of those sentiments and their cultivation and development, which may be strategically seen as an advantage by the terrorist masterminds, is what Mumbai was about.

Still, one cannot ignore that many victims there did not give a flying fornication about US Foreign Policy, India's Alliances, or Islam's Expansion, but they were still tortured and killed, specially if they were Jews or Americans.

Gabe Suarez
25005  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / To serve & defend our Constitution; we the unorganized militia; citizenship on: December 13, 2008, 01:05:05 AM
Woof All:

Inmy humble opinion there is an American Creed-- that of our Founding Fathers as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, and our Constitution.

One are of particular interest to us (use the search funcion for the "Poltics & Religion" forum) is that which has to do with the   Second Amendment and Section 311 Title 10 (see the John Lott article "The Unorganized Militia" on the Flight 93 Memorial page).  Its why we have a thread titled "The Unorganized Militia" on the P&R forum!

Q:  So why have a thread of the same name here?  

A:  This one is to discuss where the rubber meets the road.

We kick things off with a piece by Gabe Suarez:
===================================
There has been a great deal of discussion about what to carry for an event like Mumbai. Gents, let's think about this. If you happen to be caught up in this at its conclusion, facing a dozen riflemen working together as a unit, and you with your Kel-Tec, what do you think your realistic chances of success are? Being real is not being defeatist, but come on.

Now, at the outset of the event, where there may be only one or two adversaries, it gets a little better in terms of odds. But only a little. You have one advantage and that is the advantage of surprise and one target. They, on the other hand have many avenues of danger to cover, only one which is yours. This will be a rapidly moving fluid situation.

One man was saying that using a cell phone to photograph the bad guys would be good. Pictures of the bad guys on your cell phone? Come on....seriously? If you have the ability to take their picture, you also have the ability to take their life, or GTFOT (get the f*** out of there) so get out of the evidence collecting mindset.

Number two, some guys were discussing carrying a special bag with them with all manner of weapons and gear to facilitate such a fight. Keeping a Bug Out Bag in the office or in the car is a wise move, but I doubt many of us are going to walk around fully kitted out all the time, so I think this will be limited to what you have on your person. Know what....you'll carry your tango bag everywhere until you get sick of it and leave it in the car one day and then, that will be the day and you will fight with what you have on your person anyway.

Those of you with little bitty guns (snubbies and Glock 27s and such), I suggest you rethink your weapon choices. I can run a mini-Glock pretty good, but not as good as a full sized gun. What do I carry? A Glock 22 when at home and a Glock 17 when away. 15 rounds or 17 rounds respectively.

Yes, the bigger gun is harder to hide. Yes, I have to choose my clothing more carefully. Yes, its heavier. All of those things they tell you are true. But when you NEED THE MOTHER F'ING GUN NOW, those uber-comfortable pocket chain guns so popular with the CCW crowd will never allow you to fight as well as a full-sized gun.

Calibers - Please! I will take a 40 or a 9mm over a 45 any day of the week for the simple fact of the matter that I can fight much longer with one than I can with a seven or eight shot weapon. It may have been a caliber edge in 1976 when the only thing going was marginal hollow point ammo, but not today bwana. Ask any of those metro-sexual gun instructors if they want to get shot in the face with my "45 set on stun".
Magazine capacity is not an asset, it is a blessing.

Engagement Dynamics - Short range, run and gun, point shooting is an essential skill and must be prioritized for the urban ambush gunfight. However, for anti-terrorist activity, if you find yourself just outside or arm's length with a doped up, combat-trained AK-armed tango, you have already stepped into it. You can still fight, but wouldn't it be far better to be able to ice these monkeys from 25, 50 or even 100 yards?

Read the reports boys. There are folks who had an eye on the action from a distance. "If only I had a gun" was one of the Brit reporters said. The ability to hit out at these distances is not hard at all. But it must be learned and trained. And, your gear must support your ability to do it.

Those uber-court-proof heavy triggers promoted as essential by the lawyer-instructors are trash. Get rid of them. You don't need a hair trigger on your pistol, but you do need a manageable trigger. My Glocks for example all use the standard 5# connector set up and give me a crisp release that is conducive to accuracy. You don't need the 3# target connector, but good heavens don't add one of the abominable New York triggers.

Those big fat close range sights? If you can hit at 100 yards with them, drive on. I cannot, so I use sharply defined black iron sights like the Heines, and the Trijicons. Those of you with eye issues that can't use the irons well enough, invest in one of the Docter red dot sights. Yep....a red dot sight on your pistol. It is small enough to carry around and bright enough that even Mr. Magoo can hit at 100 meters with it.

Another thing - Usually after one of those events I will hear "By golly if I had been there I would have pulled out my custom model 29 and..." That is usually spoken by a guy who hasn't done any physical training since high school, would have a heart attack if he had to run ten feet to cover, and is so out of condition he could not fight his way out of a Sierra Club Tea Party In San Francisco. I'm not trying to offend anyone here but its not just about marksmanship and your ammo choices. If you are already a good shot, you need to get away from the range and into the gym or the street and train your out of shape shooter's body so you will be able to fight not just shoot.

And finally, without which all else is wasted, develop the will to kill. It is hard for some to sneak up on a man and shoot him in the back of the head unannounced, regardless of what the man has done, or is about to do. You need to get over that if you want to be a player at this level. it is not about capturing, or about bringing to justice, or about "stopping the action". it is about getting the drop on a terrorist from a distance, unseen and undetected, putting your sights on his ear, controlling your heartbeat, and then pressing that trigger without a moment's hesitation.

Gabe Suarez

One Source Tactical
Suarez International USA


25006  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Stratfor: The significance of pirates on: December 13, 2008, 12:37:47 AM
   
Geopolitical Diary: The Significance of Pirates
December 12, 2008

High-level discussions began Thursday over a U.S.-sponsored resolution at the U.N. Security Council (UNSC) that seeks to strengthen the international response to piracy in waters off the coast of Somalia. The new resolution -— which comes just a week after the UNSC passed another U.S.-penned resolution, extending the current U.N. approach to Somali piracy by another year —- would authorize foreign countries to send military assets ashore into Somalia and into Somali airspace in pursuit of pirates.

This would significantly intensify the international fight against Somalia-based pirates, who are now in possession of some 17 major ships. Thus far, international law has authorized foreign warships to invade Somali territorial waters in counter-piracy operations, but their activity has been confined to maritime interdictions. The U.S. push for broader authority is meant to strike at the pirates in Puntland, the lawless part of Somalia where they find safe haven.

The slow expansion of piracy off the Horn of Africa increasingly has dominated headlines in recent years, but on a strategic level it has been little more than a nuisance for global commerce. After the capture of one supertanker from Saudi Arabia, major oil shipments from the Middle East to the West began steering an extremely wide berth around Somalia.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy, which is the de facto guarantor of worldwide maritime shipping security, has plenty of bandwidth to address any real challenges to freedom the of seas. Washington has been taking its time with the piracy issue politically, and slowly working to build an international consensus through the UNSC, because Somali piracy has not yet reached the point that it poses a strategic threat to U.S. interests. The request for further U.N. authorization means not that Washington is punting the issue, but rather that it is starting to consider taking on piracy more forcefully.

The deeper meaning of the piracy issue is that it runs up against the underlying U.S. interest in control of the seas: the foundation of U.S. global military dominance, and in turn the foundation of U.S. global economic dominance. Combating maritime piracy has been a perennial concern of the United States, and is in essence the cornerstone of U.S. naval policy.

Throughout its existence, the United States has depended on maritime commerce for its survival. Even the early European colonies in North America were at first heavily dependent on seaborne lines of communication to Europe, and over time the colonies came to rely heavily on commercial maritime trade, which was protected from piracy by the European navies. In 1783, however, when the American Revolutionary War officially ended with the Treaty of Paris, the U.S. government suddenly became responsible for the safety and protection of its own merchant traffic overseas.

The United States, with its Continental Navy in the process of being disbanded and the new government deep in war-related debt, could not protect its interests abroad and was forced to pay annual tribute and occasional ransoms to the “Barbary” states of Algiers, Tripoli and Tunis -— North African regencies of the Ottoman Empire that had long extorted payments from ocean-going powers through the threat of piracy. It was not until the turn of the 19th century that the reconstituted U.S. Navy was equipped with its first frigates. When tribute was demanded of President Thomas Jefferson’s new administration in 1801, he dispatched the Navy to protect U.S. commercial interests on the other side of the Atlantic. What followed was a series of naval engagements and the first U.S. expeditionary assault on foreign soil: the Battle of Derne in Tripoli, which the United States won and which was the decisive action in the First Barbary War.

U.S. interest in freedom of the seas —- and the U.S. Navy’s ability to protect that interest -— would only continue to grow. The core American imperative of ensuring the free flow of traffic on the high seas was a key factor in the War of 1812, as a Britain engaged in the Napoleonic wars forcefully impressed sailors aboard U.S.-flagged ships into Royal Navy service. And arguably one of the most important outcomes of World War II was that the United States achieved an effectively unchallenged hegemony over the world’s oceans — a hegemony only further solidified in subsequent decades.

The Somali pirates do not, at this point, pose a strategic threat to the U.S. interest in freedom of the seas — but the push to intensify operations against them shows that Washington wants to act against them before they have a chance to rise to that level.

 
25007  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Food Chain and Food Politics on: December 12, 2008, 11:04:29 PM
PJ O'Rourke had a very powerful chapter in his "Parliament of Whores" about the Dept. of Ag.    It would make sense to me to abolish the whole thing.
25008  DBMA Espanol / Espanol Discussion / Los Asesinos de Habilidad Creciente on: December 12, 2008, 10:51:57 PM
En México, los Asesinos de Habilidad Creciente
Los Hits bien-coordinados del Cártel Muestran Sofisticación más grande
 
Un equipo forense examina la escena del asesinato de Huerta. Los asesinos despidieron 85 series en SUV de Huerta, lo golpeando 40 veces. No cerca vehículos fueron golpeados por balas perdidas.

Por Puesto de William
El Poste de Washington Servicio Extranjero
El viernes, el 12 de diciembre de 2008; Llame A16
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/11/AR2008121103540.html

CIUDAD JUAREZ, México -- El hit fue rápido, bravo, mortal. Jesús Huerta Yedra, un acusador federal primero aquí, fue gunned hacia abajo la semana pasada en un cruce ocupado 100 yardas de la frontera de EEUU en un asesinato de la coreografía precisa.

En la guerra caótica de droga de México, los ataques son ya no el trabajo de aficionados desesperados con objetivo malo. Cada vez más, las matanzas son llevadas a cabo por profesionales, a menudo encapuchado y enguantado, que atrapa sus objetivos en emboscadas coordinada, la huelga con potencia de fuego arrolladuro, y entonces se desaparece en la hora punta de tarde -- así como ellos hicieron en la matanza de Huerta.

Los asesinos pagados, conocido como sicarios, son prendidos raramente. Los funcionarios mexicanos dicen que las escuadras del comando probablemente viajan del estado para indicar, a través de un país donde el gobierno y sus fuerzas de seguridad dibujan alarmando conclusiones acerca del alcance y la habilidad de un enemigo apoyado por miles de millones de dólares en ganancias de droga.

"Ellos consiguen muy bueno en sus trabajos," dijo Hector Hawley Morelos, el coordinador del estado forense y el laboratorio de crimen aquí, donde criminólogos y pesquisidores han sido agobiados por más de 1.600 homicidios en Juarez este año. "Los asesinos muestran un nivel alto de sofisticación. Ellos han tenido la instrucción -- en algún lugar. Ellos parecen tener el conocimiento de policía procedimientos investigativos. Por ejemplo ellos no dejan huellas dactilares. Eso perturba muy".

Alejandro Pariente, el portavoz para el fiscal general en el estado de chihuahua, dijo, "Ellos son llamados crimen organizado para una razón muy buena. Porque ellos son organizados muy".

En Ciudad Juarez, una ciudad industrial dura a través del río del Paso de El, donde 42 personas han sido matadas en el la semana pasada, el depósito de cadáveres sirve como un aula cruel para el estudio de violencia de droga por la frontera.

En una entrevista la semana pasada, un pesquisidor ocupado en el laboratorio forense habló al realizar una autopsia. Una docena de muertos aguardaron exámenes finales, extendieron en mesas metálicas, su pebbled de cuerpos con hoyos gordos de bala, abre ojos que miran fijamente en bombillas fluorescentes. Los hombres todo fue clasificado finalmente como "organizó crimen" homicidios, que justifican la mayoría de muertes en Ciudad Juarez, la ciudad más violenta en México.


El lunes, Fiscal general federal Eduardo Medina Mora dijo que ha habido 5.376 matanzas relacionadas con la droga este año en México, el doble dura el número de año. Luego esa noche, Victor Hugo Moneda, que dirigió agencia investigativa de policía de México D.F., fue matado en una emboscada como él salía su coche en su casa en la capital. Los agresores, utilizando un coche y la motocicleta, despidieron 22 disparos, según custodiar.

En el depósito de cadáveres de Juarez, los tres congeladores con acceso directo son llenados a la capacidad de más de 90 cadáveres, amontonó piso al techo, a salir bolsas blancas con cremalleras. Después de que unos pocos meses, los que no sean identificados son enterrados en un campo en el cementerio de la ciudad en la orilla del desierto.

"Las pautas que nosotros a menudo vemos con homicidios organizados de crimen son armas de alto nivel, heridas de múltiplo, trauma extremo," dijo el Alma Rosa Padilla, un médico encargado de las análisis principal, que completa tantas como cinco autopsias llenas cada día. "Ellos no van al hospital".

Un EEUU policía anti droga, que habló en la condición del anonimato porque él trabaja en México, dijo, "El ejército mexicano ha tenido un problema con desertores. Así que tiene a la policía, inclusive unidades anti crimen especiales. Ellos ahora trabajan para el otro lado".

Más que una docena funcionarios mexicanos primeros de aplicación de la ley han sido retenidos recientemente para trabajar supuestamente para los cárteles de droga, inclusive Noé Ramírez Mandujano, el acusador anti droga, primero y anterior de la nación. El fue detenido el mes pasado en la sospecha de aceptar $450.000 a cambio de compartir la inteligencia con negociantes.
===============

En México, los Asesinos de Habilidad Creciente
 


Según información soltó el jueves por el Congreso mexicano, más de 18.000 soldados han desertado al ejército mexicano este año. En los últimos tres años, 177 miembros de unidades de especial-fuerzas han abandonado sus postes, y muchos fueron a trabajar para el crimen organizado.

Recientemente, chihuahua Gov. José Reyes Baeza dijo que pistoleros empleados que han sido detenidos confesaron que ellos llevaron a cabo ejecuciones para 1.000 pesos por la matanza, acerca de $75.

Las armas vierten sobre la frontera aquí de Tejas, comprado ilegalmente de pandillas de calle o legalmente en tiendas deportivas de bienes en Estados Unidos. Dure mes, el ejército mexicano hizo la toma más grande de armas ilegales de fusiles y militar-tipo en más de dos décadas, destapando una reserva de 540 rifles, 165 granadas y 500.000 cartuchos en una casa en Reynosa, justo a través de la frontera de McAllen, Tex.

Según funcionarios mexicanos, los rifles robados de la Beatitud de Fuerte, un poste de Ejército de EEUU en el Paso de El, acaba por en las calles de Juarez. En el laboratorio forense, el equipo de la balística sacó una docena de armas, inclusive AK-47s, AR-15s, M 16s y otros armamentos de militar-grado.

"Pienso que el gobierno es agobiado simplemente. Los casos entran cincos y decenas ahora, y son probablemente muy duro mantenerse al ritmo de," dijo Tony Payan, un experto en el comercio de droga y profesor en la Universidad de Tejas en el Paso de El. "El gobierno está en el defensivo. Los maleantes tienen la ventaja aquí. Ellos probablemente perfeccionan sus técnicas más rápido que el gobierno puede encontrar que los expertos o los recursos para combatirlos".

El asesinato de Huerta fue una huelga brava. El fue el acusador federal segundo-más alto en el estado. Recientemente, el abogado de 40 años de edad fue entregado el caso de mató a periodista Armando Rodríguez, un periodista de policía de veterano en periódico de El Diario que fue matado por un pistolero delante de su casa dura mes en Ciudad Juarez. Las razones detrás de la matanza de Huerta se quedan desconocido.

Cuándo investigador forense David García y su socio llegaron en su camioneta blanca 15 minutos después del disparar en la tarde de diciembre. 3, la policía municipal marcaba el perímetro de la escena de crimen con cinta amarilla y los primeros soldados llegaban a montar guardia.


La Sunny, cruce ancho de la Calle de Arizona y el Bulevar que Papa John Paul II linda con el Grande de Rio y es un camino de cinco-minuto de un principal puente en el Paso de El. Fácilmente visible a través del río fue una línea de piquete de vehículos de Patrulla de fronteras de EEUU.

Huerta cabalgaba en el asiento de pasajero de un nuevo Viaje de Regate de plata-coloró SUV con platos de Tejas, que había parado en una luz roja. El coche fue pasado a un secretario en la oficina del acusador, Marisela Esparza Granados. Cuándo García llegó, el astilló limpiaparabrisas en el vehículo todavía luchaban por operar.

El cruce alrededor del Regate fue ensuciado con esqueletos gastados. García y su socio, que llevan tablillas con sujetapapeles pero ningunas armas, fotografiaron metódicamente la escena y reunieron 85 cubiertas, todo en el calibre coherente con la cuenta algunos testigos policía dicha -- que dos hombres encapuchados de dos camionetas recogieron frente del Regate y fuego abierto con AK-47s.

Los criminólogos en el laboratorio forense fueron golpeados por varios detalles. Primero, ellos sospecharon que Huerta fue seguido por por lo menos uno, y quizás varios, persiguen vehículos, que habrían ayudado a los pistoleros se ponen en posición de tender una emboscada Huerta. Ellos supieron que el coche Huerta utilizaría y su ruta, los investigadores dijeron.

Segundo, los criminólogos fueron impresionados con la precisión, la velocidad y la audacia del ataque.

Cuándo se paró en el semáforo, el vehículo de Huerta fue rodeado por otros coches en un cruce llenado. Pero ningunos otros vehículos fueron golpeados por balas perdidas. Más tarde, Hawley, el coordinador de laboratorio, indicó la pauta apretada de pocking de disparo de fusil la parabrisas del SUV.

"Usted ve ellos golpean donde ellos apuntan. El fue el objetivo. No ella," Hawley dijo. Los asesinos concentraron su fuego directamente en Huerta, que no llevaba una chaleca antibalas. "Si ellos saben que ellos llevan una chaleca antibalas, ellos ignoran el pecho y disparan la cabeza," él agregó.

La autopsia reveló que Huerta había sido golpeado por lo menos 40 veces, la mayoría del en el pecho. El asiento del pasajero del SUV fue empapado con sangre. El secretario, Esparza, fue golpeado sólo tres veces, aunque una herida de cuello fue fatal.

En el laboratorio de crimen, las cubiertas de esqueleto fueron examinadas por el equipo de la balística y registrados. Las balas son casi siempre de Estados Unidos. Los asesinos no se fían de balas hechas en México, Hawley dijo, agregar, "Las balas norteamericanas son mejores".
25009  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Obama Phenomena on: December 12, 2008, 10:48:23 PM
GM:

Would you please also post your article about Capt Rozelle on the "Our troops in action" thread?

TIA,
Marc
25010  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Mexico-US matters on: December 12, 2008, 10:43:01 PM
In Mexico, Assassins of Increasing Skill
Well-Coordinated Cartel Hits Show Greater Sophistication
 
A forensics team examines the scene of Huerta's murder. Assassins fired 85 rounds at Huerta's SUV, hitting him 40 times. No nearby vehicles were hit by stray bullets.

By William Booth
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, December 12, 2008; Page A16
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/11/AR2008121103540.html

CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico -- The hit was fast, bold, lethal. Jesús Huerta Yedra, a top federal prosecutor here, was gunned down last week in a busy intersection 100 yards from the U.S. border in a murder of precise choreography.

In Mexico's chaotic drug war, attacks are no longer the work of desperate amateurs with bad aim. Increasingly, the killings are being carried out by professionals, often hooded and gloved, who trap their targets in coordinated ambushes, strike with overwhelming firepower, and then vanish into the afternoon rush hour -- just as they did in the Huerta killing.

The paid assassins, known as sicarios, are rarely apprehended. Mexican officials say the commando squads probably travel from state to state, across a country where the government and its security forces are drawing alarming conclusions about the scope and skill of an enemy supported by billions of dollars in drug profits.

"They are getting very good at their jobs," said Hector Hawley Morelos, coordinator of the state forensics and crime laboratory here, where criminologists and coroners have been overwhelmed by more than 1,600 homicides in Juarez this year. "The assassins show a high level of sophistication. They have had training -- somewhere. They appear to have knowledge of police investigative procedures. For instance, they don't leave fingerprints. That is very disturbing."

Alejandro Pariente, the spokesman for the attorney general in Chihuahua state, said, "They are called organized crime for a very good reason. Because they are very organized."

In Ciudad Juarez, a tough industrial city across the river from El Paso, where 42 people have been killed in the last week, the morgue serves as a grim classroom for the study of drug violence along the border.

In an interview last week, a busy coroner in the forensics lab spoke while performing an autopsy. A dozen dead men awaited final exams, sprawled on metal tables, their bodies pebbled with fat bullet holes, open eyes staring at fluorescent bulbs. The men were all eventually classified as "organized crime" homicides, which account for the majority of deaths in Ciudad Juarez, the most violent city in Mexico.


On Monday, federal Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora said there have been 5,376 drug-related killings this year in Mexico, double last year's number. Later that evening, Victor Hugo Moneda, who led Mexico City's investigative police agency, was killed in an ambush as he was exiting his car at his home in the capital. The assailants, using a car and motorcycle, fired 22 shots, according to police.

In the Juarez morgue, the three walk-in freezers are filled to capacity with more than 90 corpses, stacked floor to ceiling, in leaking white bags with zippers. After a few months, those who are not identified are buried in a field at the city cemetery at the edge of the desert.

"The patterns that we often see with organized crime homicides are high-caliber weapons, multiple wounds, extreme trauma," said Alma Rosa Padilla, a chief medical examiner, who completes as many as five full autopsies each day. "They don't go to the hospital."

One U.S. anti-drug law enforcement officer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he works in Mexico, said, "The Mexican army has had a problem with deserters. So have the police, including special anti-crime units. They are now working for the other side."

More than a dozen top Mexican law enforcement officials have been detained recently for allegedly working for the drug cartels, including Noé Ramírez Mandujano, the nation's former top anti-drug prosecutor. He was arrested last month on suspicion of accepting $450,000 in exchange for sharing intelligence with traffickers.
===============

In Mexico, Assassins of Increasing Skill
 


According to information released Thursday by the Mexican congress, more than 18,000 soldiers have deserted the Mexican army this year. In the last three years, 177 members of special-forces units have abandoned their posts, and many went to work for organized crime.

Recently, Chihuahua Gov. José Reyes Baeza said that hired gunmen who have been arrested confessed that they carried out executions for 1,000 pesos per killing, about $75.

Weapons pour over the border here from Texas, bought illegally from street gangs or legally at sporting goods stores in the United States. Last month, the Mexican army made the largest seizure of illegal firearms and military-type weapons in more than two decades, uncovering a cache of 540 rifles, 165 grenades and 500,000 rounds of ammunition in a house in Reynosa, just across the border from McAllen, Tex.

According to Mexican officials, rifles stolen from Fort Bliss, a U.S. Army post in El Paso, end up on the streets of Juarez. At the forensic laboratory, the ballistics team pulled out a dozen weapons, including AK-47s, AR-15s, M-16s and other military-grade arms.

"I think that the government is simply overwhelmed. The cases are coming in fives and tens now, and it is probably very hard to keep up," said Tony Payan, an expert on the drug trade and professor at the University of Texas in El Paso. "The government is on the defensive. The thugs have the upper hand here. They probably perfect their techniques faster than the government can find the experts or the resources to combat them."

Huerta's murder was a bold strike. He was the second-ranking federal prosecutor in the state. Recently, the 40-year-old lawyer was handed the case of slain journalist Armando Rodríguez, a veteran police reporter at El Diario newspaper who was killed by a gunman in front of his house last month in Ciudad Juarez. The reasons behind Huerta's killing remain unknown.

When forensic investigator David García and his partner arrived in their white van 15 minutes after the shooting on the afternoon of Dec. 3, the municipal police were marking the perimeter of the crime scene with yellow tape and the first soldiers were arriving to stand guard.


The sunny, broad intersection of Arizona Street and Boulevard Pope John Paul II abuts the Rio Grande and is a five-minute drive from a main bridge into El Paso. Easily visible across the river was a picket line of U.S. Border Patrol vehicles.

Huerta was riding in the passenger seat of a new silver-colored Dodge Journey SUV with Texas plates, which had stopped at a red light. The car was driven by a secretary at the prosecutor's office, Marisela Esparza Granados. When García arrived, the splintered windshield wipers on the vehicle were still struggling to operate.

The intersection around the Dodge was littered with spent shells. García and his partner, who carry clipboards but no weapons, methodically photographed the scene and collected 85 casings, all in the caliber consistent with the account some witnesses told police -- that two hooded men from two vans pulled in front of the Dodge and opened fire with AK-47s.

The criminologists at the forensic lab were struck by several details. First, they suspected that Huerta was followed by at least one, and perhaps several, chase vehicles, which would have helped the gunmen get into position to ambush Huerta. They knew the car Huerta would use and his route, the investigators said.

Second, the criminologists were impressed with the precision, speed and audacity of the attack.

When it rolled to a stop at the traffic light, Huerta's vehicle was surrounded by other cars at a crowded intersection. But no other vehicles were hit by stray bullets. Later, Hawley, the lab coordinator, pointed out the tight pattern of gunfire pocking the SUV's windshield.

"You see they hit where they aim. He was the target. Not her," Hawley said. The assassins concentrated their fire directly at Huerta, who was not wearing a bulletproof vest. "If they know they're wearing a bulletproof vest, they ignore the chest and shoot the head," he added.

The autopsy revealed that Huerta had been struck at least 40 times, most in the chest. The passenger seat of the SUV was soaked with blood. The secretary, Esparza, was struck only three times, though a neck wound was fatal.

In the crime laboratory, the shell casings were examined by the ballistics team and recorded. The bullets are almost always from the United States. The assassins do not trust bullets made in Mexico, Hawley said, adding, "The American bullets are better."



25011  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Obama Phenomena on: December 12, 2008, 02:33:51 PM
The more of our lives the government controls and manipulates, the more reason there will be to buy politicians and their price will go up.
25012  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Any comments on the Levin Report on: December 12, 2008, 02:31:25 PM
The bipartisan vote in support of the report would seem to give it considerable weight.  Any comments?  GM?

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2008/Detainees.121108.pdf
25013  DBMA Espanol / Espanol Discussion / Segunda Parte on: December 12, 2008, 02:10:53 PM
El Ejército mexicano

Antes Calderon envió al ejército después de los narcos en 2006, contrabando de droga estuvo desenfrenado en México, pero los cárteles controlaron sus respectivos territorios, donde corrupción reinó y la paz prevaleció (más o menos). Había escaramuzas ocasionales de cártel en cártel pero ellos tendieron a ser efímeros. La falta histórica de presión de gobierno creó finalmente más riqueza y el poder para los cárteles para luchar sobre y la violencia comenzó a subir. Cuándo Calderon mandó a tropas federales, ellos revolvieron efectivamente el nido del avispón. Los asesinatos de droga-relacionó a través de skyrocketed de México como cárteles compitieron para el territorio flojamente tenido de sus rivales que vacilan.

Calderon no es el primer presidente mexicano de utilizar el ejército para combatir los cárteles, pero él ha cambiado dramáticamente la manera que el ejército contribuye a la misión del counternarcotics del gobierno. Los antecesores de Calderon confiaron principalmente en el Grupo Especial de Fuerzas Airmobile (GAFE), que fue entrenado especialmente y fue equipado para realizar desafiando extraordinariamente operaciones con poco tiempo de antelación. Estas misiones incluyeron el 2003 arresto de Osiel Cardenas Guillen, líder anterior del cártel de Golfo, y de la 2002 captura de Benjamin Arellano Felix, la cabeza del cártel de Tijuana.

Pero las operaciones que implican GAFE o el alto mando GAFE (las la mayoría de los élite de fuerzas especiales de México) fueron solo-objetivo, misiones aisladas. Desde que 2006, Calderon ha desplegado a tropas — inclusive ambas unidades especiales de fuerzas y batallones regulares de infantería — Por primera vez en misiones a largo plazo diseñadas para imponer la estabilidad y desenredar el sistema entero de cártel. La misión ha llegado a ser, en un sentido, tanto counterinsurgency como counternarcotics, con fuerzas federales que operan distante distante con el conocimiento limitado del paisaje o personas locales. En algunas maneras, esto es muy semejante a las fuerzas de desafíos EEUU encara en Iraq y Afganistán.

La política nacional doméstica de la seguridad de México bajo Calderon ha sido formulada en el nivel de Gabinete, con el Secretariado Interior (SEGOB) tomando la delantera. A pesar de la muerte de Interior Secretario Juan Camilo Mourino en un noviembre. 4 choque del avión en México D.F. (pensó ser causado por error piloto), política de seguridad hace probable continúa proceder de the secretariat. SEGOB trabaja con el Secretariado de Defensa, la Seguridad Pública Secretariado y el PGR a coordinar el despliegue de fuerzas federales (ambos militar y la aplicación de la ley).

Casi todos despliegues a gran escala son operaciones conjuntos con policía y tropas federales que patrullan junto, que combina la fuerza bruta de fuerza militar con las capacidades investigativas de la policía federal. La cooperación no es perfecta, y hay muchos ejemplos de coordinación pobre. Muchas de las correrías y arrestos mayores han sido llevados a cabo por GAFE con exclusión de aplicación de la ley federal. GAFE entonces transfiere a detenidos en la custodia de la oficina del fiscal general para la prosecución. A menudo, aplicación de la ley federal es recortada de operaciones sensibles — Presumiblemente porque el ejército tiene la inteligencia que podría ser cedida si expuso de corromper policía federal.

Primer despliegue militar de Calderon contra los cárteles implicó a 6.500 tropas expedidas a Michoacan (estado de la casa de Calderon) en diciembre 2006. Michoacan fue el centro de una oleada de violencia que había dejado a 500 muertos en incidentes relacionados con la droga ese año (muchas de las muertes fueron aturdirmente horribles, inclusive decapita y los desmembramientos). El mes siguiente, Calderon desplegó a 3.300 tropas al estado de Baja California y 1.000 tropas al estado de Guerrero. Desde entonces, las tropas han sido mandadas a calmar violencia en 14 otros estados, con tener total de despliegues estabiliza para el por delante de seis meses en aproximadamente 35.000. Aunque los números de despliegue son un secreto de cerca tenido, nosotros también estimamos que aproximadamente 10.000 policía federal también ha sido enviada a éstos molesta lugares.

La infantería mexicana del ejército y fuerzas especiales luchan la guerra del suelo del mayoría del ejército contra los cárteles. Las fuerzas especiales participan en correrías de precisión en ubicaciones estratégicas mientras la infantería realiza patrullas (a menudo con policías federales), establece puntos de revisión de camino y entra en la búsqueda y destruye misiones en la marihuana y operaciones de cultivo de amapola de opio. A llegar en un área de operaciones, las tropas empiezan por vetting la policía local. Esto requiere, como mínimo, un desarme temporario de policías, y a veces la corrupción local es tan profunda que los oficiales permanentemente son aliviados de sus armas. La marina mexicana ha sido utilizada asimismo para operaciones offshore como el 2006 cerrar del litoral de Michoacan en conjunción con operaciones simultáneas de suelo. Cuándo unidades necesarias y militares coordinan con policía federal autorizada a realizar investigaciones que el ejército no es permitido ni es preparado para realizar.

La estrategia de Calderon para los primeros 12 meses de operaciones del contrario-cártel del ejército implicó, casi exclusivamente, concentrando en el Gulf cartel En fortalezas en y alrededor de Tamaulipas y Michoacan indica. El objetivo durante este período parece haber sido de desmantelar Golfo centrándose antes en otros cárteles. En el proceso, sin embargo, el cártel de Sinaloa comenzó a hacer movimientos para llenar los vacíos dejaron por Golfo. Aunque violencia girara fuera de control en territorio de Sinaloa, casi ningunas tropas fueron enviadas allí durante el primer año (el territorio de Sinaloa tiene comercio o industria importantes pequeños y fue una prioridad más baja, mientras Golfo opera cerca del pasillo de envío de Monterrey-Nuevo Laredo, por que más que el 60 por ciento de exportaciones mexicanas al paso de Estados Unidos). Durante estos primero 12 a 15 meses, la estrategia de contrario-cártel fue dictada por el territorio controlado por el cártel de Golfo.

Ahora parece que la estrategia es de perseguir múltiples cárteles y para manejar la violencia en centros de población. Después de que 12 a 15 meses de operaciones contra Golfo, el cártel fuera apreciablemente más débil y la violencia comenzaba a estallar en otras áreas, inclusive centros grandes de población como Juarez y Tijuana. En ese punto, el gobierno empezó despliegues extendido más anchamente, expidiendo rápidamente a tropas necesitaron como “apagar fuegos.” Uno de los factores primarios en el cambio en la estrategia fue opinión pública. Los residentes y los alcaldes de ciudades grandes quieren que Tijuana y Juarez llegaba a ser cada vez más harta de la violencia creciente. Ansioso de demostrar a los gobiernos del pueblo y el estado que lo todavía tuvo un asidero en la situación, el gobierno federal comenzó a reaccionar más directamente a éstos concierne, enviando a tropas no contra un cártel particular pero al último lugar de peligro violento. Hasta ahora, mientras el gobierno federal ha conseguido mantener las calificaciones positivas de aprobación, han estirado el ejército muy delgado en el proceso.

En esencia, el ejército movió de utilizar una almádena en un solo objetivo a utilizar una serie de pequeños martillos en muchos objetivos. Los resultados han sido menos que satisfactorio. Más temprano en la campaña, despliegues de ejército tendrían como resultado inicialmente una disminución inmediata y notabla en la violencia. Esto es ya no el caso. Desde marzo, cuando el ejército movió en estabilizar Juarez — donde violencia giraba rápidamente fuera de control — El ejército ha tenido a menos tropas disponibles y ha tenido que depender de la policía local para la ayuda. La violencia continuó aún después de las tropas llegadas.

La operación de Juarez fue un momento decisivo en la estrategia del gobierno federal, y no es un ejemplo bueno de cómo opinión pública condujo el gobierno hacia una respuesta prominente que hace, al fin, mejora apreciablemente la situación de la seguridad. La operación representó el primer despliegue a gran escala en el que un número insuficiente de soldados y policía federal fue forzado a compensar la escasez de mano de obra reclutando la ayuda de aplicación de la ley local. Naturalmente, la situación fue complicada por el hecho ése razón las tropas fueron en primer lugar había de investigar a la policía local para lazos al crimen organizado. Como resultado, muchas policía protestó o fue a la huelga, y a este día situación de la seguridad de la ciudad se queda tenue. Juarez fue el primer signo claro que el gobierno no desplegaba suficientes fuerzas para encontrar la misión expandida del ejército.

Uno de los problemas más grandes que el ejército ha tenido que confrontar es tamaño completo de México. El ejército del país 200,000-strong (todas ramas, con el ejército en acerca de 144.000) — consistir en su mayor parte de reclutas —Simplemente no es suficiente grande para dominar 761.606 millas cuadradas de México del territorio ni seguir un estimó a 500.000 personas implicadas en el comercio ilícito de droga. Unas 35.000 tropas federales son desplegadas en cada ocasión. En el el norte de área contigua, donde 16.000 tropas son desplegadas, los traficantes de drogas tienen una cantidad tremenda de tierra abierta en su disposición, donde ellos han establecido una red vasta de rutas y pisos francos (el el norte de área contigua atraviesa casi 250.000 millas cuadradas y está acerca del tamaño de Tejas). Los esfuerzos de la aplicación de la ley en este ambiente son muy difíciles, desde que los cárteles tienen la capacidad de cambiar rápidamente tránsito rutas y cambiar sus pautas de conducta para evitar descubrimiento (aunque ellos pasarán generalmente por pueblos en los que ellos son capaces de establecer control). Las 16.000 tropas en el el norte de la frontera encaran una situación semejante que Marina de EEUU confrontaron en la provincia de Anbar de Iraq, donde un juego que frustra de “golpea un lunar” llegó a ser la táctica predominante de la coalición. Aún con cooperación de EEUU, hay tropas mexicanas simplemente demasiadas pocas por EEUU-la frontera de México para combatir completamente actividades de cártel México interior.




Un segundo desafío que el ejército mexicano debe tratar con es aún más básico: No fue diseñado para esta clase de misión. Como la mayoría de los ejércitos parados, el ejército de México no es entrenado ni es equipado para imponer las leyes domésticas de país. Falta no sólo la autoridad civil pero también la pericia necesaria para realizar investigaciones e imponer orden. Aunque el ejército despliegue con aplicación de la ley federal, que tiene alguna pericia civil, el grado a que el ejército debe operar sin la ayuda de policía local (es decir, los que saben el territorio) es un estorbo que paraliza.

El ejército así es forzado a adaptar rápidamente a una clase de guerra que puede ser llamada fácilmente asimétrico. Los agresores criminales organizados en México, quieren a rebeldes en Iraq y Afganistán, son difícil de distinguirse de civiles inocentes y puede montar ataques entonces mezclan rápidamente en la población. Y con ninguna manera de depender de pericia local, la inteligencia exacta y oportuna es limitada muy. Visto como una fuerza que ocupa, tropas federales tienen un tiempo difícil que gana la confianza de habitantes y redes locales efectivas reveladoras de humano-inteligencia, que es clave a un counterinsurgency exitoso.

A pesar de estos desafíos, las estrategias y las políticas aplicadas han llevado hasta ahora a éxitos inauditos contra traficantes de drogas. El ejército es responsable de la mayor parte de estos éxitos. Sobre los últimos dos años, la marina mexicana ha reducido el trafico de drogas marítimo de drogas ilícitas por el 65 por ciento. La vigilancia aumentada del ejército de espacio aéreo (junto con nuevos radares y restricciones de donde vuelos son permitidos aterrizar) ha llevado a una reducción del 90 por ciento en el trafico de drogas de antena de cocaína de Colombia. En esencia, el ejército tiene probado así ser lejos la única institución en México que tiene la capacidad de intervenir apreciablemente con crimen organizado en el país.

A pesar de estos éxitos significativos sobre los últimos dos años, el ejército, con su número limitado de tropas, no ha podido prevenir el número de víctimas relacionado con la droga de subir (el peaje se paró en 1.543 en 2005 y superará 5.000 en 2008). Verdaderamente, si cualquier cosa, la situación de la seguridad ha empeorado a través de México, en parte porque el gobierno tan es centrado en los cárteles a costa de criminales ordinarios. Como resultado, crímenes violentos como asesina, armó robo y el asalto está en la subida por todas partes el país.

El Golpetazo Duro Largo

No hay solución sencilla al problema de cárteles de la droga de México. Aún desmantelar el aparato de cártel sería un remedio a corto plazo a un permanente problema. Siempre que hay una demanda para drogas en Estados Unidos, habrá individuos emprendedores que tratarán de negociarlos por el EEUU el sur de vecino.

La artimaña, entonces, es de construir sólido que suficientes instituciones en México para reemplazar — o contrarresta por lo menos — La influencia de los traficantes de drogas. El militar puede desmantelar corrompe las policías, pero el sistema para establecer un efectivo judicial u otra autoridad cívica en su lugar no parecen ser suficiente completo para lograr ninguna última reforma. El militar puede purgar corrompe individuos de los grados de aplicación de la ley local, pero del problema básico de plomo de plata O persiste. Y allí parece ser una capacidad disminuyente de aplicar un programa económico del desarrollo que proporcionaría oportunidades alternativas de empleo para miembros de cártel y haría el comercio de droga menos atractivo. En esencia, no hay estrategia completa de reedificación, y sin un surgir de equilibrio de ser-sosteniendo de operaciones militares, una victoria clara y decisiva es difícil de lograr aún en el mejor de circunstancias.

Mientras ciudadanos mexicanos todavía por y por apoyo grande la misión del gobierno, battle fatigue is beginning to set in, Y su tolerancia para la violencia podría ondear. Calderon todavía mantiene las calificaciones de aprobación de alrededor del 60 por ciento, pero sobre la mitad de mexicanos sondeó cree durante el verano que el gobierno pierde la guerra en cárteles. Si apoyo público se marcha de Calderon, la guerra del gobierno en el crimen organizado ganará a otro enemigo más.
Tell Stratfor What You Think
25014  DBMA Espanol / Espanol Discussion / Stratfor: Una Guerra de atricion es estrategia limitada on: December 12, 2008, 02:08:48 PM
Part 2: A War of Attrition is a Limited Strategy
El 10 de diciembre de 2008 | 1211 GMT

 Resumen

 Durante los últimos dos años, el gobierno mexicano ha participado en una campaña concertada contra los cárteles de droga, que había operado con la impunidad cercano por décadas en áreas contiguas de México. Mientras ha habido algunos éxitos, factores geográficos, institucionales y técnicos han hecho el gobierno hace campaña una lucha ascendente. Con corrupción desenfrenada que plaga los grados de la aplicación de la ley de México, el Presidente Felipe Calderon utiliza el ejército para imponer la regla de la ley en la periferia del país, donde los cárteles todavía colocan el peligro más grande. Pero la situación recuerda el esfuerzo temprano de EEUU en Iraq, donde una pequeña fuerza extranjera entrenada para la guerra convencional puede no rápidamente transición a un papel del counterinsurgency y donde no había estrategia completa para la reedificación.

Análisis
 La Nota de la redacción: Esto es la segunda parte de una serie en México.

El desafío primario de México en su combate contra los cárteles de droga es su geography. El país el norte de la región contigua es hecho de desierto, separando las redes de transporte y centros de población occidentales y orientales costeras. Gran distancias y terreno inhóspito — mucho de ello árido o montañoso — Haga control de gobierno del país desafiando muy.
El gobierno no controla las cuestas de la Sierra Madre Oriental ni el Occidental de Sierra Madre, que corre al norte-sur arriba cada costa y es las rutas primarias de droga-trafico de drogas. Ni lo hace controla el el norte de desierto que bordea Estados Unidos, que, como el oeste americano fabuloso en Estados Unidos, es en esencia una frontera donde leyes escritas en México D.F. son difíciles de imponer.



El el norte de la región contigua es definido fundamentalmente por su proximidad a Estados Unidos, que es la fuente primaria de renta de comercio, el turismo, las remesas, los trabajos (para los que afrontan la frontera que cruza) e inversión directa extranjera. Por supuesto, Estados Unidos es también el mercado más grande de mundo para drogas ilícitas. México del sudeste es igualmente frontera-como, con selvas densas en la orilla oriental de la frontera de México-Guatemala y en las montañas de las tierras altas de Chiapas. Aunque México D.F. más cerca, el el sur de la región es muy pobre, de diversidad étnica y todavía acoge el Zapatista Ejército Nacional de Liberación, un resto de la Revolución mexicana a principios del siglo XX.

No casualmente, la revolución, que empezó en 1910, implicó un desafío cercano-idéntico para el gobierno central en función de control territorial, con rebeldes de Ejército de la Liberación de Emiliano Zapata del Sur en el sur de México y el ejército de la Casa de campo de Pancho en el norte. Las similitudes geográficas entre las fortalezas de la revolucionario era y ésos de cárteles actuales de droga subrayan cuán históricamente difícil es para el gobierno para controlar su territorio. La ausencia de conexiones como interconectar geográficas naturales los ríos, que proporcionarían fácil y la línea ferroviaria urbana para fuerzas federales de seguridad, significa que el gobierno central mexicano debe vencer montañas, los desiertos y las selvas para afirmar su autoridad en los interiores.
Hoy, los cárteles toman ventaja llena de la falta del gobierno de control en el el norte de y del sur de partes del país. Los traficantes de drogas mueven cocaína en el sur de México después de atravesar América Central, en el norte de manera de los países andinos cacao-crecientes de Sudamérica. Al norte, y por los pasillos de transporte de las dos costas, cárteles mexicanos de droga disfrutaron de limitó el gobierno interferencia durante las décadas del Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) regla y estableció de los reinos factos donde su palabra fue la ley y las drogas movieron eficientemente hacia el norte — En Estados Unidos.




En 2006, sin embargo, la marea giró para los traficantes de drogas cuando Presidente mexicano nuevamente elegido Felipe Calderon cabalgó para enchufar en promesas de campaña de aplastar los cárteles. La tarea no sería fácil para Calderon. La corrupción penetra cada nivel de instituciones de la aplicación de la ley de México — cuyos miembros son continuamente bajo la amenaza de la muerte por los cárteles — Y local (e incluso federal) policía puede non mantener la regla de la ley. Esto ha dejado mucha de la región contigua de México totalmente sin ley.

Con aplicación de la ley local y federal cedió — y encarado con un enemigo bien-entrenado rico mucho armado y pernicioso — Calderon concluyó que la única manera de derrotar a mexicano organized crime Fue de desplegar el ejército. Pero a pesar de la potencia de fuego superior del ejército y combate las capacidades (comparó a fuerzas domésticas de seguridad), es ni suficiente grande para cubrir el territorio necesario ni es diseñó para la aplicación de la ley doméstica. Largo, alargó operaciones militares también enfatizan un presupuesto ya molestado del gobierno. Y el ambiente en el que el militar debe operar es un hostil uno. Cuando sigue los cárteles, el ejército mexicano es más como un poder que ocupa que persigue a rebeldes locales que una agencia del gobierno central que impone la regla de la ley. Además, su reputación relativamente sin mancha en un país plagado con corrupción no es garantizada aguantar. El más largo permanece comprometido con los cárteles las más grande sus oportunidades de ser corrompido. La realidad, por supuesto, es que México tiene pocas otras opciones.

Problemas institucionales

Durante los 71 años de regla por el PRI y la presidencia subsiguiente de seis-año de Zorro de Vicente del Nacional Partido de Acción, el gobierno mexicano hizo limitó movimientos contra los cárteles. Para la regla de la mayor parte de PRI, los cárteles estuvieron muy lejos de tan fuerte como ellos ha llegado a ser en la década pasada, así que políticos podrían proporcionar para permitirles ser, en la mayor parte. La presión carente durante esta vez, los cárteles crecieron cada vez más poderoso, estableciendo las redes complejas del negocio a través de sus regiones y en los mercados internacionales de droga. Cuando el negocio comenzó a recoger, así que hizo la influencia de los cárteles. El flujo de caja creciente dio los cárteles operando más alto presupuestos, que hicieron más fácil de comprar cooperación de administración local y también levantó las estacas en la industria de droga-trafico de drogas.

Cuando los cárteles llegaron a ser más poderosos el nivel de violencia también comenzó a subir, y por el gobierno de 2006 Calderon decidido para hacer su movimiento. Por esta vez, sin embargo, los cárteles de droga tan fueron atrincherados que ellos habían llegado a ser la ley vigente en sus respectivos territorios. Las autoridades locales y federales de la aplicación de la ley habían llegado a ser corrompen, y la entrada de tropas militares tuvo el efecto de desestabilizar estas relaciones — cuando los planificadores pensaron — Y estropear el negocio de los cárteles. Con la disolución de sus redes, los cárteles empezaron defender, proveer sus lazos establecidos en el gobierno y defendiendo agresivamente su césped.

El problema de corrupción se reduce al lure of money Y la amenaza de la muerte. Conocido por el plomo de plata O de frase (que traduce literalmente a “la plata o dirige,” con el significado implicado, “toma un soborno o toma una bala”), el selecto dado a la aplicación de la ley y funcionarios del estado los pone bajo la amenaza de la muerte si ellos no permiten (o, como es a menudo el caso, facilita) operaciones de cártel. Con el gobierno históricamente incapaz de proteger todo su personal de estas clases de amenazas — y ciertamente incapaz de emparejar los largos bolsillos de los cárteles — Los funcionarios de la aplicación de la ley de México han llegado a ser casi universalmente informales. Las amenazas de la muerte han aumentado como el gobierno ha intensificado sus operaciones anti cártel, teniendo como resultado movimiento y dificultades altos que alistan nuevo personal — Personal especialmente calificado. (La ciudad de Juarez ha estado sin un jefe de policía desde que pleno verano, después de que jefes anteriores fueran matados o fueron huidos a Estados Unidos. Los destinos semejantes han acontecido agencias locales de aplicación de la ley en casi cada estado mexicano).

En función de dinero a mano, mexicano organizó crimen puede golpear cualquier oferta que el gobierno puede hacer. Los cárteles mexicanos introducen en algún lugar entre $40 mil millones y $100 mil millones por año. El octubre. 27 anuncio eso 35 employees of the anti-organized crime unit (SIEDO) in the Office of the Mexican Attorney General (PGR) Había sido detenido y había sido cargado con corrupción ilustra el hecho que ni los alcances superiores del gobierno están a salvo de infiltración por los cárteles. En este ejemplo, funcionarios primeros fueron pagados hasta $450.000 por mes para pasar información adelante a un cártel implicado en el trafico de drogas de cocaína. Esta clase de dinero es una tentación inmensa en un país donde salarios anuales para funcionarios huyen $10.000 para policías locales a $48.000 para senadores y $220.000 para el presidente. El crimen organizado puede concentrar en individuos clave en el gobierno mexicano y convencerlos a proporcionar información con una combinación de ofertas lucrativas y amenazas físicas si ellos no obedecen.

Cuándo viene a terminar en amenazas de la muerte, los cárteles tienen probado sí mismos ser bastante eficientes. Los asesinatos de Edgar Millan Gomez, Igor Labastida Calderon Y otros funcionarios federales de policía en México D.F. antes este año es ejemplos que hace al caso. Golpear a funcionarios de alto nivel en la capital del país les envían un mensaje bravo a funcionarios del estado. En un nivel local y más pernicioso, los cárteles han montado una ofensiva concertada contra estado y policía municipal. En el año pasado ellos han asesinado un suma de 500 policías, y en algunos pueblos, el jefe de policía y el cuerpo de policía entero ha sido detenido en cargas de corrupción.

Las amenazas de la muerte son un problema grave para autoridades mexicanas porque México simplemente no tiene la capacidad de proteger todo su personal de aplicación de la ley y a funcionarios del estado. Los detalles protectores efectivos requieren niveles altos de habilidad, y deficiencias de la mano de obra de México lo hacen difícil de encontrar que personas para llenar estas posiciones — Especialmente desde que los candidatos serían en gran parte el personal mexicanos de aplicación de la ley que son a sí mismo los objetivos.

Y sin la protección completa, hay muy poco estímulo para el personal de aplicación de la ley de tener fuera contra influencia de cártel. Después de todo, una vez que los cárteles han establecido a sí mismo como la ley vigente, son mucho más fácil para la policía local permitir perros que durmientes están que son de escoger combates con el perro más grande en el bloque — Con ninguna esperanza de respaldo suficiente del gobierno central.

La pérdida coherente del personal por charges of corruption Y la muerte es una debilidad inherente para México. Hace la conservación del conocimiento institucional difícil, erosionándose aún más la eficacia de esfuerzos de la seguridad del gobierno. Adicionalmente, la pérdida de jefes locales de policía, los alcaldes e indica y funcionarios federales de policía a la muerte, la prosecución o la resignación interrumpen continuidad de la autoridad y hacen la estabilidad en el operacional plano imposible. Además, el proceso es que se autoperpetúa. Los que reemplazan muerto o corrompen a funcionarios a menudo son experimentados menos y menos vetted y son más probable de ser perdido a la corrupción o el asesinato.

El movimiento y la corrupción altos también duelen la reunión de la inteligencia y reducen el conocimiento situacional. Mantener fuentes en el campo son una táctica importante en cualquier guerra, pero esas fuentes requieren el manejo coherente por el personal de aplicación de la ley que ellos se fían de — Y cambios rápidos en el personal destruyen esa confianza. Verdaderamente, la corrupción y el movimiento conducen más a menudo las capacidades de la inteligencia hacia atrás, saltando filtraciones y encauzando información del gobierno a los cárteles en vez de al revés.

Aún la constitución es una fuente de la inseguridad institucional, limitando el tiempo en la oficina del presidente y legisladores a un término. Irónicamente, mientras estas provisiones fueron puestas en el lugar para prevenir la trinchera de líderes en posiciones del poder (verdaderamente, esto fue uno de los asuntos que conducen de la Revolución mexicana), ellos contribuyen realmente a la corrupción, desde que líderes no encaran el desafío de buscar reelección y averiguación duradera de votante. Aunque refuerza el aparato del partido poniendo el énfasis en el plan del partido antes que las ambiciones del individuo, el estado de México- y políticos federal-planos son casos perdidos sobre la oficina entrante. Esto los liberta para asentarse favores políticos y asuntos personales sin necesitar para explicárselo a votantes en el día de las elecciones.

Integración federal de Aplicación de la ley

Los desafíos de la guerra de cártel han incitado la administración de Calderon a reorganizar y combinar las dos agencias federales de aplicación de la ley de país, la Policía Impeditiva Federal (PFP) y la Agencia Federal de Investigaciones (AFI), en lo que será simplemente conocido como la Policía Federal. Las dos agencias independientes han tenido tradicionalmente responsabilidades diferentes e informados a dos secretarios diferentes en el Gabinete del presidente.

El PFP ha sido la fuerza más física, en esencia una agencia doméstica grande de policía cargó con proporcionar el gran público seguridad como mantener ordena en protestas y parar disturbios. El AFI, por otro lado, fue modelado después de EEUU Oficina Federal de Investigación — Una agencia que enfoca más a investigar actividad criminal que lo combatiendo en las calles. En muchos despliegues de counternarcotics durante el por delante de dos años, tanto PFP como AFI han sido desplegados, con PFP manejando generalmente puntos de revisión de carretera y búsquedas de vehículo mientras AFI investiga escenas de crimen y sigue plomos. Desde que son agencias federales de aplicación de la ley, sus áreas de la superposición de responsabilidades, pero cada han mantenido su propia estructura separada de la cultura y la orden.

Con la guerra de droga que intensifica sobre los últimos dos años, se hizo patente que amenaza primaria de seguridad de México fue organizada crimen y la violencia que acompañaron lo. Los cárteles de México son muy brutales (y tan requieren la mano pesada del PFP), pero ellos también son organizados muy bien y de complicidad (requiriendo la pericia investigativa del AFI). En el pasado, las dos agencias a menudo trabajarían el mismo caso sin coordinar sus actividades, que tuvieron como resultado una falta de información-compartir e investigaciones prolongadas. La administración de Calderon concluyó que luchando los cárteles requieren un cuerpo de policía federal capaz de proporcionar la seguridad física y realizar el trabajo investigativo continuamente.

Así que el gobierno aplicó un plan para integrar el PFP y AFI — Un plan eso, mientras considerado completo en el papel, es distante de completo en la práctica. Tales transiciones burocráticas toman inevitablemente mucho tiempo y el esfuerzo y tienen como resultado ineficacias a corto plazo (que puede ser un problema con una guerra de cártel que rabía). Para fechar, rivalidades burocráticas parecen haber prevenido unidad verdadera en todo. A pesar del acuerdo de papel, el PFP y AFI se quedan separación en la práctica, haciendo sus propios arrestos y seguir sus propios casos con interacción limitada uno con el otro. En septiembre 2008, AFI agents protested El hecho que ellos fueron hechos para informar a comandantes de PFP en la Seguridad Pública Secretariado. PFP quitó finalmente a los agentes de AFI del caso, demostrando claramente las rivalidades entre organismos.

Además, no es claro cómo la decisión impresionará corrupción en las agencias. Por una parte, habiendo centralizado control sobre una sola institución carena el proceso de corrupción-vigilancia. Por otro lado, con sólo una institución federal de seguridad, no hay segundo partido de proporcionar un cheque independiente de exterior en la corrupción. Además, si hay sólo una agencia y es corrompe o sufrimiento de ataques, entonces toda policía federal de México es debilitada. Adicionalmente, manteniendo que dos agencias también tiene en cuenta cada en ser aislado de la corrupción y debilidades del otro.

Es claro que una unión formal de dos agencias independientes de policía no puede ser institucionalizada de noche. Pero la presión es gran acelerar el proceso. Calderon ha puesto una fecha tope tentativa de integración completa por 2012 (que es también el año de la elección luego presidencial). La idea es para la Policía Federal de últimamente tomar la delantera en la campaña contra los cárteles en vez del ejército.

Más allá de los problemas de reorganización burocrática, agencias federales de aplicación de la ley de México encaran varios desafíos logísticos y técnicos. Las deficiencias técnicas serán dirigidas hasta cierto punto por EEUU Merida Initiative, Que otorgará aproximadamente $900 millones a México en los próximos dos años para el equipo y la instrucción. Esto dará México la oportunidad de recoger las tecnologías como equipo de espectrometría de ion (la tecnología de narcótico-presintiendo) eso tiene probado ser útil en tomas de marihuana. Hay también mucho cuarto de mejorar colección de información, el almacenamiento y el análisis. No hay base de datos centralizada con antecedentes penales para local, el estado ni agencias federales de policía. Las agencias de la aplicación de la ley también faltan las capacidades suficientes de seguro-comunicaciones y droga-descubrimiento, que significa que custodia actividades pueden ser vigiladas por los cárteles y embarques domésticos de droga son más difíciles de discernir.

Pero incluso si México pueda crear la estructura más efectiva y eficiente burocrática y obtener las tecnologías muy últimas para sus fuerzas de la seguridad, no hay manera verdadera de compensar la corrupción que paraliza que penetra aplicación de la ley federal. Y con la ferocidad creciente de los cárteles de droga, no hay fin a la vista a la presión que ellos pueden y colocarán en el personal de la aplicación de la ley de México. Las causas fundamentales de corrupción institucional en México — coerción y soborno — Son entrelazados profundamente en la cultura política de país y tomarán décadas, quizás generaciones, para arrancar. Esto significa que el gobierno no alcanzará su objetivo de transición la guerra de droga en las manos de tiempo de aplicación de la ley pronto, que tendrá en cambio consecuencias para el ejército como luchan contra los cárteles. Fundamentalmente, la seguridad fuerza reforma de necesidad (y rápidamente) antes el ejército sucumbe a las mismas presiones que han paralizado a la policía federal.
25015  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / CCW in National Parks on: December 12, 2008, 01:20:45 PM
CULTURE & POLICY
Around the nation: Concealed carry in national parks
Last week, the Department of Interior adopted a new regulation that allows concealed weapons permit holders to carry their weapons into national parks if the state in which the park is located allows concealed carry. This is a significant change from the previous regulations, which prohibited the possession of loaded firearms in national parks. Indeed, the new recognition that there is a Second Amendment even in national parks is a step in the right direction. There is also a Tenth Amendment issue here -- that the laws of states prevail, even on federal land.

Although the NRA and sensible gun owners across the country welcomed this change, gun-control advocates reacted with their usual hysteria. Using the same apocalyptic exaggerations they trotted out (unsuccessfully) to oppose state concealed carry laws, the gun grabbers issued warnings of bedlam. Of course, their predictions of carnage never came true in states that have enacted concealed carry laws. To the contrary, crime dropped in these states. For the same reasons, national parks will not become the free-fire zones that the gun grabbers predict. Instead, law-abiding citizens now can defend themselves and their families against hostile predators -- human and animal -- that might threaten their lives.

Although the regulation takes effect before Obama takes office, his record shows his support of radical gun-control laws, and we expect an executive order undoing the regulation. During his tenure in the Illinois Senate and again in the U.S. Senate, Obama rarely saw a gun-control measure that he didn't support. He supported a ban on handguns; he voted in favor of a ban on virtually all semiautomatic rifles, pistols and shotguns; he favors registration and licensing; he opposes concealed carry. Yet he promises, "I believe in common-sense gun safety laws, and I believe in the Second Amendment. Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I said that throughout the campaign. I haven't indicated anything different during the transition. I think people can take me at my word." But a simple check of his "Change" Web site (under Crime and Law Enforcement) puts the lie to this promise.

25016  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 3rd SF group gets Silver Star on: December 12, 2008, 01:12:48 PM
Profiles of Valor: 3rd Special Forces Group
On 6 April 2008, in the mountains of Afghanistan's Nuristan province, a battle erupted between a team of 12 Special Forces troops from Operational Detachment Alpha 3336, a few dozen Afghan allies and hundreds of jihadis. The soldiers had jumped from helicopters at daybreak onto a mountain covered in ice, attempting to gain the high ground on a terrorist stronghold in the Shok Valley. Their mission: To capture or kill members of the militant group Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin (HIG). But insurgents quickly took positions against the U.S. troops -- and the insurgents had the high ground. Staff Sgt. Luis Morales saw an insurgent and opened fire, killing him, but enemy fighters then began firing on U.S. and Afghan troops from practically every direction. Because there was only one way up the valley, the jihadis "were able to wait until we were in the most vulnerable position to initiate the ambush," said Staff Sgt. Seth Howard. Several soldiers were hit in the opening barrage, but they all fought back. "We were pretty much in the open, there were no trees to hide behind," said Morales, who helped pull Staff Sgt. Dillon Behr, shot in the hip, back to a safer position. Morales himself had been shot in the thigh and ankle.

For the next seven hours, the small contingent of U.S. and Afghan troops fought hard while pinned to the side of the mountain, and managed to get down the mountain without being overwhelmed only when Air Force jets bombarded the insurgent positions with 2,000-pound bombs. The soldiers who could walk carried those who couldn't, including Staff Sgt. John Wayne Walding, who was hit by a bullet that according to Master Sgt. Scott Ford, the team sergeant, "basically amputated his right leg right there on the battlefield."

A helicopter attempted to land and evacuate the soldiers, but took several rounds in the rotor and hovered just long enough for the medic to jump off. A second helicopter then landed in an icy stream nearby and collected the troops. Among the Americans and Afghans, there were 15 wounded and two killed, both Afghans, while 150 to 200 jihadis were killed. The Green Berets were nearly out of ammunition, too -- each one had two magazines left. Today, 10 of those soldiers from Operational Detachment Alpha 3336 of the 3rd Special Forces Group will receive the Silver Star for their heroism. It will be the highest such number given to elite troops for a single battle since the Vietnam War. (For more details of the battle, see The Washington Post's account.)
25017  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / PD WSJ on: December 12, 2008, 12:49:07 PM
The New Blacklist

Hollywood has spent more than half a century railing against the anti-Communist blacklists of the 1950s that prevented some people from working in the movie industry. Woody Allen, George Clooney and countless other celebrities have produced liberal-minded films purporting to show how evil the blacklist was and upbraiding those who were silent while it was imposed.

Well, a real live blacklist is going on in California now and only a few liberals are daring to question it. Last month, after California voters approved Proposition 8 prohibiting gay marriage, many activists were bound and determined to hound anyone who supported the measure. Scott Eckern, artistic director of the California Musical Theater in Sacramento, the state's largest nonprofit performing arts company, donated $1,000 to the "Yes on 8" campaign. Protests from the producer of the Broadway musical "Hairspray" and many other show business people soon forced him to resign.

Similarly, Los Angeles Film Festival Director Richard Raddon was forced to step down after it was revealed he had donated $1,500 to "Yes on 8." The festival's organizer put out a statement blandly saying, "Our organization does not police the personal, religious or political choices of any employee, member or filmmaker." Behind the scenes, however, many of the festival's board members pressured Mr. Raddon to resign. "From now on, no one in entertainment is going to feel safe making a donation as measly as $100 to a conservative defense-of-marriage campaign," says Brent Bozell, head of the conservative Media Research Center.

Nor is the modern-day blacklist confined to entertainment. This week, Marjorie Christoffersen, manager of the famous Los Angeles restaurant El Coyote, resigned after her restaurant was subjected to a month of boycotts and demonstrations because she had contributed $100 to the campaign against gay marriage. Ms. Christoffersen, who had been with El Coyote for 26 years, insisted her stance had nothing to do with prejudice against gays, but rather with her Mormon faith. That didn't impress the blacklisters. Fellow employees at El Coyote vouched for her kindness to gay employees, including personally paying for the mother of an employee who died of AIDS to attend his funeral. That didn't matter either. And neither did the fact that the managers of El Coyote sent $10,000 to gay groups to "make up" for Ms. Christofferson's contribution. The boycott continued.

The slowdown in business forced Ms. Christoffersen to leave, prompting Charles Karal Bouley, a former columnist for the gay publication The Advocate, to ask in the Huffington Post if the reaction against some Prop 8 supporters hasn't been "overkill." "Marjorie Christoffersen had the right to donate $100 to yes on 8," he wrote. "Americans have the right to be wrong. . . . Even Barack Obama said marriage was between a man and a woman at a time when we needed his voice on our side on equality. He let us down, too, remember, and many of you still gave him a job."

At least the Hollywood blacklist targeted those who either professed Communist sympathies or refused to sign loyalty oaths. As columnist Maggie Gallagher points out, "Targeting an entire business because one person associated with it made (in their personal capacity) a donation to a cause is brand new." Some gay activists are one step away from claiming that if someone disagrees with them, they shouldn't be allowed to work anywhere. The original Hollywood blacklist never went that far, but you won't see any movies made about the current intolerance mounted against supporters of traditional marriage.

-- John Fund

The Spector of Specter

Last night’s auto bailout collapse was not the last word on taxpayer dollars for Detroit, but the showdown was certainly a down payment on an even bigger Senate fight next year over labor unions.


In a conference call with bloggers yesterday, Republican Senator Jim DeMint said the biggest battle in next year’s Congress would be over card check legislation -- and pointed to Republican Senator Arlen Specter as the weak point in Republican defenses.


You might think Detroit’s troubles would be a warning against enlarging union power to dictate wages and terms to American business. Card check would allow union organizers to take over workplaces without a secret ballot vote. But Mr. Specter faced a tough primary fight in 2004 from conservative GOP Rep. Pat Toomey, and won largely because the state AFL-CIO strongly urged its Republican members to support him. Mr. Specter paid the union back by voting for card check in 2007, albeit at a time when Republicans had enough votes to stop it from becoming law.


Next year, Democrats will likely be only two votes short of the 60 votes needed in the Senate. And if Al Franken prevails in the Minnesota recount, Mr. Specter could end up being the deciding vote. Already, Pennsylvania AFL-CIO Chief Bill George is telling reporters that the card check vote would be “critical” in determining whether the union throws its weight behind Mr. Specter again. Meanwhile, conservative activist Grover Norquist and Mr. Toomey, who now runs the Club for Growth, are laying down markers for Mr. Specter on the right. Mr. Toomey tells The Hill newspaper he might consider running against Mr. Specter again in the 2010 primary if Mr. Specter supports labor's agenda.


This morning, the UAW’s Ron Gettelfinger blamed failure of the auto bailout talks on GOP desire to get a “win” in advance of the card check fight. The talks collapsed over Democratic refusal to force the UAW to accept a reduction in wages and benefits to match the transplant factories of the foreign manufacturers.


Mr. Gettelfinger didn’t quite say so, but card check is also part of Big Labor’s increasingly hopeless strategy to preserve its Big Three pay levels. The idea is to drive up wage and benefit costs at Toyota, Nissan and other transplants. Card check is key. The UAW has racked up a goose egg in 20 years of trying to organize the foreign-owned plants, and Detroit's recent troubles are not exactly a big advertisement to workers in Tennessee or Alabama to welcome the UAW. Whether even card check would help is doubtful in any case. But certainly a process that continues to rely on a secret ballot free from intimidation is unlikely to advance the UAW’s cause.

-- Holman W. Jenkins Jr.

Quote of the Day

"Like his memoir, Fugitive Days , 'The Real Bill Ayers' is a sentimentalized, self-justifying whitewash of his role in the weirdo violent fringe of the 1960s-70s antiwar left. 'I never killed or injured anyone,' Ayers writes. 'In 1970, I co-founded the Weather Underground, an organization that was created after an accidental explosion that claimed the lives of three of our comrades in Greenwich Village.' Right. Those people belonged to Weatherman, as did Ayers himself and Bernardine Dohrn, now his wife. Weatherman, Weather Underground, completely different! And never mind either that that 'accidental explosion' was caused by the making of a nail bomb intended for a dance at Fort Dix. . . . I wish Ayers would make a real apology for the harm he did to the antiwar movement and the left. . . . I'd like him to say he's sorry for his part in the destruction of Students for a Democratic Society. He's sorry he helped Nixon make the antiwar movement look like the enemy of ordinary people. He's sorry for his more-radical-than-thou posturing, and the climate of apocalyptic nuttiness he helped fuel . . ." -- columnist Katha Pollitt, writing in The Nation magazine, in response to a New York Times op-ed by Obama friend and former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers.

In Search of . . . Margaret Thatcher

Britain's Conservative Party was depressed to learn this week that it's not making up a great deal of ground against Prime Minister Gordon Brown despite a U.K. economy even harder hit by the credit crisis than the U.S.

On the third anniversary of David Cameron's rise to become leader of the Tories, a new Times of London poll shows his party garnering the support of just 39% of Britons. These are lousy numbers for a party long out of power and with the opportunity to blame a serious recession on Mr. Brown's Labour Party. The only good news for Conservatives is that Labour's approval rating is even lower at 35%, not much higher than George W. Bush's numbers.

Maybe that's why down is beginning to look a little like up to Conservatives, who've been on the wrong side of British pollsters for more than a decade. Mr. Cameron, who figures to square off against Mr. Brown in an election in 2009 or 2010, finally has begun differentiating himself from Mr. Brown's tax-and-spend policies. He has been warning voters of Labour's "unsustainably high" spending and of the inevitable tax hikes ahead. Some see this as evidence Tories are finally recapturing their Thatcherite mojo. In the last three years, Mr. Cameron has made many mistakes, from messily fussing over the Conservative "brand" to lacking an early and articulate rebuttal to Mr. Brown's statist maneuvers. Many voters on the right still wonder just how conservative this Conservative Party leader really is. He remains a vocal supporter of public services such as the National Health Service, one of the biggest reasons for uncontrolled spending growth.

Mr. Cameron's challenge is not dissimilar to the challenge faced by Republicans in Washington. After an orgy of "Big Government" conservatism, the latter are now trying to regain their status as a voice for fiscal restraint amid a crisis-spawned explosion of interventionism. Of course, it doesn't help that a president of their own party has been a big contributor to the spree. Mr. Cameron at least has the advantage of being able to sound a more credible trumpet -- if he's willing to use it. It took a decade of economic crisis on both sides of the Atlantic before voters gave the Thatcher-Reagan solution a chance. Let's hope it doesn't take so long this time.

25018  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / WSJ: China's Democratic Charter on: December 12, 2008, 11:58:57 AM
China's democracy movement has moved in fits and starts since the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. But a manifesto issued this week marks a brave new chapter in the fight for political freedom.

More than 400 Chinese citizens living inside China published "Charter 08" on the Internet. The document calls for a new constitution to establish multiparty democracy and includes a scathing account of Communist rule. It describes its ambition for a political system in which the military, courts, schools and churches are accountable to the constitution rather than to a political party.

In a year that has seen a crackdown on political dissent, especially during the Olympics and March Tibet protests, this is a bold step, and the authors don't mince words: "Our political system continues to produce human rights disasters and social crises." It continues: "[A]s the ruling elite continues with impunity to crush and to strip away the rights of citizens to freedom, to property, and to the pursuit of happiness, we see the powerless in our society . . . becoming more militant and raising the possibility of a violent conflict of disastrous proportions. The decline of the current system has reached the point where change is no longer optional."

An introduction to the charter by American Sinologist Perry Link -- who translated it into English -- likens it to Charter 77, the document signed by Vaclav Havel and other Czechoslovakian dissidents in 1977. Like those dissidents, two signers of Charter 08 were detained by police this week and about a dozen have been questioned, according to Amnesty International.

The Czech dissidents waited 13 years to realize their democratic dream. In China, the reality of self-government also seems far off and Charter 08 won't produce immediate change. But the boldness and bravery of its statement suggest that the democrats' day will come.
25019  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Jefferson: Lies on: December 12, 2008, 11:53:37 AM
"It is of great importance to set a resolution, not to be shaken, never to tell an untruth. There is no vice so mean, so pitiful, so contemptible; and he who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and a third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world's believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good disposition."

--Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, 19 August 1785
25020  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / WSJ: Other than that, the story was accurate on: December 12, 2008, 11:50:33 AM
Other Than That, the Story Was Accurate

Yesterday's item on Gov. Rod Blagojevich's alleged attempt to sell Barack Obama's erstwhile Senate seat cited a pair of reports from KHQA-TV in Quincy, Ill., contradicting Obama aide David Axelrod's claim that Obama never discussed the Senate appointment with Blagojevich, a claim that contradicted Axelrod's own earlier claim that he knew the governor and the president-elect had discussed the matter.

The first KHQA report, on Nov. 5, said that Obama was "meeting with Governor Rod Blagojevich this afternoon in Chicago to discuss" the nomination. The second, three days later, said that the meeting had taken place. Never mind, KHQA now says:

KHQA TV wishes to offer clarification regarding a story that appeared last month on our website ConnectTristates.com. The story, which discussed the appointment of a replacement for President Elect Obama in the U.S. Senate, became the subject of much discussion on talk radio and on blog sites Wednesday.
The story housed in our website archive was on the morning of November 5, 2008. It suggested that a meeting was scheduled later that day between President Elect Obama and Illinois Governor Blagojevich. KHQA has no knowledge that any meeting ever took place. Governor Blagojevich did appear at a news conference in Chicago on that date.
To call this a "clarification" is rather an understatement, like saying that KHQA's performance in this matter is not the proudest moment in the history of American journalism. In any case, the "clarified" KHQA report was, as far as we know, the only evidence, aside from Axelrod's now-recanted statement, that Obama and Blagojevich had discussed the matter. Even assuming no conversation took place between the two principals, we still are left with the question of when the Obama team became aware of Blagojevich's alleged scheme and what if anything they did about it.

Jim Lindgren has a detailed and suggestive timeline. He points to a CNN report from Nov. 9, the Sunday after Election Day, in which "a prominent Democratic source close to" Obama confirms an earlier report by Chicago's WSL-TV "that Valerie Jarrett is Obama's choice to replace him in the Senate."

"On Monday, Nov. 10," Lindgren recounts, quoting the criminal complaint, "Blagojevich holds an incredible 2-hour conference call with multiple consultants: 'ROD BLAGOJEVICH, his wife, JOHN HARRIS, Governor General Counsel, and various Washington-D.C. based advisors, including Advisor B,' discussing his corrupt schemes. He follows this with two calls with Advisor A."

The same day, the CNN story linked above was updated:

Two Democratic sources told CNN Monday that Obama wants Jarrett to serve in the White House, not the Senate.
Here is Lindgren's analysis:

So what happened? The likeliest scenario is that one of the many participants in Blagojevich's Monday phone calls either floated his plans to the Obama transition team to assess their response or tipped off the Obama camp about the reckless ideas that Blagojevich had planned.
In any event, within hours of Blagojevich substantially expanding his circle of confidants, the Obama camp withdrew Jarrett's name from consideration and attributed that withdrawal to the President's wanting Jarrett in the White House. And the Obama staffers went out of their way to depict this as Obama's choice, rather than Jarrett's, which would have been more common. The report claims Obama's involvement in the decision and suggests a direct effort to undercut the idea that Obama was pressuring Blagojevich to appoint Jarrett.
Lindgren speculates that Rep. Rahm Emanuel, Blagojevich's successor in the House and Obama's designated chief of staff, was the Obama camp's point of contact with the Blagojevich camp. As National Review's Byron York points out, the L.A. Times asked Obama specifically about this, and he ducked the question (ellipses in transcript):

Q: Have you ever spoken to Gov. Blagojevich about the Senate seat?
Obama: I have not discussed the Senate seat with the governor at any time. My strong belief is that it needed to be filled by somebody who is going to represent the people of Illinois and fight for them. And beyond that, I was focused on the transition.
Q: And that was before and after the election?
Obama: Yes.
Q: Are you aware of any conversations between Blagojevich or [chief of staff] John Harris and any of your top aides, including Rahm [Emanuel]?
Obama: Let me stop you there because . . . it's an ongoing . . . investigation. I think it would be inappropriate for me to, you know, remark on the situation beyond the facts that I know. And that's the fact that I didn't discuss this issue with the governor at all.
What would be the significance if Emanuel turned out to have known about the alleged bribery attempt? Legally, not much, according to Lindgren:

It is not a crime to fail to report a bribery attempt. The federal misprision of felony statute would seem to make it a federal crime to fail to report a federal felony. . . .
But case law has conclusively determined that mere non-reporting is not enough. Active concealment or the acceptance of a benefit for concealing is required.
Since all indications are that the Obama camp rejected any corrupt deal, they would seem to be legally in the clear. In their refusal to make a deal, it would appear their instinct for self-preservation served them well. It would be more impressive, though, if it turns out they did the public-spirited thing and reported Blagojevich's conduct to the authorities.

Obama's "ongoing investigation" dodge has drawn criticism from both right and left (the latter has likened it to President Bush's refusal to comment during the investigation of the Valerie Plame kerfuffle). Yet prosecutors generally do not like prospective witnesses to talk about a case publicly, and surely we want Obama and his aides to cooperate with prosecutors. It does put Obama in a politically awkward position, though, especially if the facts he is constrained from discussing publicly reflect well on him and his advisers.

Who Was Dick Simpson?
He is a political scientist at the University of Illinois at Chicago whom Reuters quoted yesterday (as we noted) as saying, "Obama is not related to the corruption pattern in Chicago," and, "He has not been pressing for any person to replace him in his Senate seat."

Simpson is also a former Chicago alderman--a fact that seems relevant, but that Reuters omitted.

25021  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Organized & Disorganized Religion and anti-religion on: December 12, 2008, 11:16:09 AM
Woof All:

I have always thought there was a correlation between celibacy/the lack of marriage (heterosexual sex) for priests and the Church's massive problems with pedophilia.  The following article in today's WSJ challenges that assumption:

Marc
==================

By ERICA SCHACTER SCHWARTZ
It began on the radio this summer. New York Assemblyman Dov Hikind ran a segment on his Saturday night talk show titled "We Are Only as Sick as Our Secrets: Sexual Abuse, Healing the Shame," featuring graphic accounts of sexual abuse of children in the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community in Brooklyn.

There had been a few high-profile cases before, but this "was when the floodgates opened," explained Mr. Hikind, an Orthodox Jew himself. Following the show, additional victims and their family members came forward to share with Mr. Hikind their own stories. "Cases of sexual abuse are not worse among the Orthodox," clarifies Mr. Hikind. "But when there's a problem and you don't deal with it, it gets worse." Over the past few months he has collected hundreds of testimonies spanning several decades, naming at least 50 alleged pedophiles across the tri-state Orthodox Jewish community, including well-respected rabbis and teachers.

But now these testimonies have become a source of contention. They have been subpoenaed for a civil suit by a lawyer representing six former students of Rabbi Yehuda Kolko, a longtime teacher at one of Borough Park's leading all-male yeshivas, who has been charged repeatedly since the 1980s with sexually molesting his students. (Last year Rabbi Kolko pleaded guilty to child endangerment.) The problem is that Mr. Hikind had sworn to keep the testimonies confidential.

Mr. Hikind claims he will "do the right thing" about the subpoena without betraying the names of any of the victims. While he will not hand over his complete list of alleged perpetrators, he says that "we are starting to share names" with Brooklyn District Attorney Charles J. Hynes.

Many people give Mr. Hikind credit for bringing much needed attention to an issue in the Orthodox community that has frequently been swept under the rug. (One exception to the silent treatment was the Orthodox Union's creation of a special commission in 2000 to investigate the sexual abuse charges against Rabbi Baruch Lanner, leader of the National Conference of Synagogue Youth, who was later convicted.) He also deserves credit for getting victims to talk at all. Mr. Hikind says that he encourages each victim who comes to him to go directly to the police, but no one is willing to. They are too afraid of the repercussions for themselves and their families in terms of reputation and marriageability.

The trouble is that subpoena or no subpoena, he has valuable information that is not being effectively utilized to investigate the alleged offenders and get them off the streets. "Dov Hikind has decided that secrecy is a more worthwhile value than child protection," explains Marci A. Hamilton, a professor at the Cardozo School of Law and an expert in clergy law. By witholding the names of the perpetrators, "he is sharing in the responsibility of every child who is harmed by them."

What Mr. Hikind wants to do instead is tackle the issue from within the community. He has assembled a task force of rabbis, therapists, principals and pediatricians to help the community respond to cases of sexually abused children -- raising awareness, forming a registry of teachers (so that a teacher who is removed from one school does not simply go to another) and devising a system of investigating allegations. Investigation is extremely important, he adds, because "you have to make sure an innocent person is not being thrown to the wolves."

While Mr. Hikind's effort is well-intentioned, Prof. Hamilton calls it "a doomed project." Resolving cases of sexual abuse without the legal establishment in this country "has never worked in any other religious community," she points out, citing the Catholic Church as an example. And the truth is, many rabbis agree with her. According to Rabbi Mark Dratch, the chief executive officer of JSAFE (The Jewish Institute Supporting an Abuse-Free Environment), "Rabbinic authorities do not have the expertise or ability to handle these things. Making reports [to the legal authorities] is the only way to go."

Mr. Hikind insists that his plan does not look to circumvent law enforcement, but to collaborate with it. The question, though, is if the ultra-Orthodox constituency that Mr. Hikind is working with will be a real partner in this endeavor. In the past, they have unfortunately been resistant, worrying more about the consequences of disparaging renowned Torah scholars than about protecting a child's life. Some rabbis in the community have even impeded the efforts of other rabbis who are willing to speak out and take action. Orthodox rabbi and psychologist Benzion Twerski resigned from Mr. Hikind's task force for fear of tarnishing his reputation and his family's reputation within the community. In Williamsburg, Rabbi Nuchum Rosenberg received threats for speaking out against abuse in his community.

So is Mr. Hikind's plan "doomed"? It depends. If the community is willing to take more cases to the police rather than watching alleged perpetrators float from one community to another, where they will no doubt prey again, then great. But if they are not, if they succumb to the same social pressures that have paralyzed them for decades, then every day that goes by another community of children is at risk.

No matter what happens, though, Mr. Hikind promises not to reveal any victims' names. "I will not, God forbid, destroy a person's life all over again," he says. That's good. But let's hope another child's life is not destroyed either.

Ms. Schwartz writes a monthly column for the Jewish Week.
25022  DBMA Espanol / Espanol Discussion / Re: Agradecimiento de cada dia on: December 12, 2008, 11:09:54 AM
Ayer mi esposa se fue a visitar a su madre.  Cuando su avion estaba aterrizando (landing) habia otro avion en el camino (runway) y fue necessario abortar el "landing" en condicion de emergencia (emergency abort of the the landing).  Habian unos segundos de alta emocion.

Agradezco tener mi esposa, madre de mis hijos, en mi vida.
25023  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Humor/WTF on: December 12, 2008, 10:55:09 AM
For those wondering what he is talking about, he is making a reference to a joke I tell at the beginning of "Combining Stick & Footwork".
25024  DBMA Espanol / Espanol Discussion / Democratas en LA necesitan apoyan EUA on: December 12, 2008, 10:50:08 AM
Publicado en ingles en el WSJ, traducido por software al espanol.
========================
Por JOSÉ MARIA AZNAR, VICENTE FOX, ANDRÉS PASTRANA, JULIO MARIA SANGUINETTI y FRANCISO FLORES
Somos amigos de Estados Unidos. Admiramos el compromiso largo y firme de las personas norteamericanas a los valores de libertad, la democracia y dignidad individual. Cuándo nosotros servimos nuestros países, nosotros hicimos cuanto pudimos para reforzar lazos hemisféricos y transatlánticos con EEUU

Hace unos pocos semanas, las personas norteamericanas tuvieron su elección presidencial 56. La libertad de las personas norteamericanas expresar su hace por el proceso democrático ha mostrado el mundo una vez más que los logros de una gran nación dependen del respeto fuerte para los principios del pluralismo, liberten opinión pública, y la regla de la ley.
Nosotros siempre hemos creído que cerramos relaciones entre naciones democráticas son no sólo bueno bilateralmente pero globalmente también. La amistad, el respeto, la cooperación y el comercio entre democracias promueven prosperidad, favorecen la estabilidad, y refuerzan libertad.

El presidente electo Barack Obama y su nueva administración y Congreso encararán desafíos y amenazas difíciles. Sus decisiones y las acciones jugarán un papel decisivo en la promoción de la democracia y la prosperidad a través del mundo.
En este momento, nosotros experimentamos una crisis financiera de dimensiones inauditas. En este mundo globalizado, la cooperación, el liderazgo, honradez intelectual y valor político son requeridos más que nunca. Juzgando de nuestra experiencia que gobierna, podemos ver que algunas nuevas respuestas serán requeridas a dirigir esta crisis. Necesitamos soluciones creadoras, y ellos deben ser basados en los principios sano de responsabilidad y transparencia. Sin embargo, nosotros no debemos descuidar los otros problemas que encaramos.

La elección del Sr. Obama para el ministro -- Hillary Clinton -- ayudará a construir puentes de la comprensión y la cooperación con Iberoamérica. Iberoamérica es una parte esencial de la comunidad de las naciones que comparten los valores de la democracia y la economía de mercado liberales. Su PIB combinado es más grande que PIB de China.
La historia muestra que siempre que Iberoamérica haya sido descuidada que la causa de libertad y prosperidad ha sido socavada. Por lo tanto, es esencial que las naciones que abracen los principios de libertad y democracia se juntan para encarar amenazas actuales de seguridad.

Vivimos en un mundo peligroso. El fallecimiento del comunismo fue un paso hacia adelante en la causa de la libertad. Pero la historia ha vuelto. Los enemigos viejos de sociedades libres y abiertas colocan nuevos desafíos al mundo. El terrorismo, cualquier su naturaleza, continúa colocar una amenaza a la civilización y la paz. Islamismo es un modelo y una yunta para millones. Utopianism regresivo esparce en muchos países latinoamericanos por una onda del populismo. El nacionalismo y el fanatismo religioso continúan alimentar conflicto e inestabilidad.

Los enemigos de libertad que comparte vistas anti-occidentales ahora forman nuevas alianzas. Las libertades y libertades son disminuidas progresivamente dentro de algunos países latinoamericanos mientras políticas exteriores de duro-poder son aplicadas como un medios para aumentar influencia y debilitar al enemigo común: el Oeste. Latinoamericanos debe continuar trabajar con sus socios y amigos norteamericanos para asegurar la protección de la democracia y otras instituciones civiles. Debemos promover una transición a la democracia en Cuba y dirigir nuestros esfuerzos de evitar el resurgimiento de regímenes autoritarios.

La pobreza es una realidad dolorosa en muchos países. Millones de personas no tienen acceso a la asistencia médica ni la educación. Esto es inaceptable. Creemos totalmente que los beneficios de globalización deben estar disponibles a todos. Hemos encontrado en nuestros propios países que instituciones democráticas fortificantes, proporcionando gobierno bueno, y abriendo nuestras fronteras para comerciar es la mejor manera de mejorar condiciones sociales y bienestar económico.

Iberoamérica tiene mucho en ganar del libre cambio. Los acuerdos de libre cambio exitosamente negociando ayudarán a traer el progreso y la prosperidad a países latinoamericanos, así como alrededor del globo.

Hoy, hay sobre 40 millones de personas con lazos fuertes a Iberoamérica que vive en EEUU y, por su dinamismo, contribuye a su grandeza. La tradición de libertad abrazada por EEUU está en el acuerdo con tradiciones hispanas y cultiva. La coexistencia pacífica del norteamericano y tradiciones hispanas refuerza la idea de Iberoamérica que forma parte del mundo Occidental.

Iberoamérica necesita apoyo contra las amenazas que encara actualmente. Es esencial que Iberoamérica pueda contar con el apoyo de EEUU si es de tener éxito en promover y consolidando valores y principios comunes.

Demócratas latinoamericanos comparten el sueño de libertad y progreso con las personas norteamericanas. El presidente electo Obama personifica una esperanza que debe ser cumplida.

El Sr. Aznar es un presidente anterior de España. El Sr. Zorro es un presidente anterior de México. El Sr. Pastrana es un presidente anterior de Colombia. El Sr. Sanguinetti es un presidente anterior de Uruguay. El Sr. Flores es un presidente anterior de El Salvador.
25025  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Question from a friend in Iraq on: December 11, 2008, 11:02:02 PM
Here's what my friend is thinking off:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=315bca1c04
25026  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Predictions confirmed on: December 11, 2008, 03:07:43 PM
Evolutionary theory predictions confirmed

http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/evo_science.html
25027  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: New to forum on: December 11, 2008, 02:50:09 PM
Woof Rick:

Welcome aboard.  I just surfed through some of your clips-- excellent movement and creativity!

Crafty Dog
25028  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Our Founding Fathers: on: December 11, 2008, 02:06:27 PM
 
My Fellow Patriots,

Of the American fight for liberty, George Washington wrote, "Our cause is noble; it is the cause of mankind!" Indeed, it was, and it remains our noble cause. And we know, by virtue of your patronage, that you are standing with us on many frontlines in honor and defense of our nation's proud heritage and legacy of liberty.

Of those unwilling to enlist in this righteous cause, Samuel Adams said, "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

However, of those who did enlist, and have in generations since, Adams wrote, "It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."

Though a minority we may be, we have never wavered in our endeavor to set brushfires of liberty.

From our humble beginnings in 1996, The Patriot Post is now the most widely read conservative political journal on the Internet. We reach millions of readers, and by extension, their families, friends and associates, and we do so at a cost of less than 25 cents per reader per year. Thousands of our readers repost our content on blogs, social networking sites and personal Web sites. High school teachers, and college and university professors use our content to teach their students, and many political and cultural organizations reprint our content in their publications.

On the other hand, the major print media outlets, which have commanded a stranglehold on public opinion for generations, are now suffering unprecedented reader attrition. Liberal standard-bearers like The New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Baltimore Sun and other print dailies are losing ground to the "new media" -- that's us.

The Patriot's Annual Fund is donor supported so we can offer our publication free of charge to thousands of American military personnel, students and those in ministry or other professions with limited financial means.

We hear from these Patriot readers every day, and I would like to share a few of their recent comments:


"I forward The Patriot to all of my military colleagues here at CENTCOM and SOCOM. Many have become subscribers and have thanked me for alerting them to your website. The Patriot is an outstanding resource for right-thinking Patriots." --Macdill AFB

"I am a tenured professor at [a major university] and am teaching an Honors course on our national heritage. The Patriot is a very constructive source for alternative perspective to the liberal tripe that passes as 'intellectual discourse' in academia. Thank you!" --Los Angeles, California

"Patriots, I am a 'house church' coordinator in Beijing. I greatly appreciate The Patriot. Its message of liberty shines like a beacon for all of us here." --Beijing, China

Patriots, this is a call to arms. As we close out our books this year, we still must raise $153,787 in order to meet our budget. Please, support The Patriot's 2008 Annual Fund today, in accordance with your ability. (If you prefer to support us by mail, please use our printable donor form or print the donor information listed below.)




Publishing, like freedom, is not free. We employ editorial and technical managers, numerous part-time feature and content editors, and an indispensable research and analysis team. In addition, our Internet publishing efforts require a sizable investment beyond the human one; this includes robust and powerful hardware, custom software, office space, installations, maintenance and more. We also incur substantial legal, accounting and insurance costs.

Yet, our mission and operations budget is a small fraction of the expenses of other influential conservative organizations, primarily because our dedicated staff members are motivated by mission and not deterred by modest wages. (View our expense graphic here.)

If you have not already done so, please take a moment to support The Patriot today.

I thank you for the honor and privilege of serving you as editor and publisher of The Patriot. On behalf of your Patriot Staff and National Advisory Committee, thank you, and God bless you and your family this Christmas season.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander,
Publisher, for the editors and staff

Note: Once your donation has been recorded, your e-mail address is removed from our appeal and update lists. However, when the year-end campaign is complete, we will send you a report.

Donor Guide:
Recommended Operation Support Levels:
Family Defender: $26 (50¢/week)
Frontline Patriot: $39 (75¢/week)
Company Command: $52 ($1/week)

Recommended Mission Support Levels:
Battalion Command: $100
Regiment Command: $250
Division Command: $500
Corps Command: $1,000

Send your contribution to:
The Patriot Annual Fund
PO Box 507
Chattanooga, TN 37401-0507

Please make your check payable to "The Patriot Annual Fund," and please note your e-mail address on the memo line so we can credit your subscriber account, and so our publisher can thank you.

(Please pray on this and every day for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world in defense of our liberty, and for the families awaiting their safe return.)
 
25029  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 10 Worst Predictions for 2008 on: December 11, 2008, 01:52:08 PM
The 10 Worst Predictions for 2008

 

Posted December 2008
 
Prognostication is by far the riskiest form of punditry. The 10 commentators and leaders on this list learned that the hard way when their confident predictions about politics, war, the economy, and even the end of humanity itself completely missed the mark.





1
Scott Gries/Getty Images"If [Hillary Clinton] gets a race against John Edwards and Barack Obama, she's going to be the nominee. Gore is the only threat to her, then. … Barack Obama is not going to beat Hillary Clinton in a single Democratic primary. I'll predict that right now." —William Kristol, Fox News Sunday, Dec. 17, 2006

Weekly Standard editor and New York Times columnist William Kristol was hardly alone in thinking that the Democratic primary was Clinton's to lose, but it takes a special kind of self-confidence to make a declaration this sweeping more than a year before the first Iowa caucus was held. After Iowa, Kristol lurched to the other extreme, declaring that Clinton would lose New Hampshire and that "There will be no Clinton Restoration." It's also worth pointing out that this second wildly premature prediction was made in a Times column titled, "President Mike Huckabee?" The Times is currently rumored to be looking for his replacement.
2
CNBC"Peter writes: 'Should I be worried about Bear Stearns in terms of liquidity and get my money out of there?' No! No! No! Bear Stearns is fine! Do not take your money out. … Bear Stearns is not in trouble. I mean, if anything they're more likely to be taken over. Don't move your money from Bear! That's just being silly! Don't be silly!" —Jim Cramer, responding to a viewer's e-mail on CNBC's Mad Money, March 11, 2008

Hopefully, Peter got a second opinion. Six days after the volatile CNBC host made his emphatic pronouncement, Bear Stearns faced the modern equivalent of an old-fashioned bank run. Amid widespread speculation on Wall Street about the bank's massive exposure to subprime mortgages, Bear's shares lost 90 percent of their value and the investment bank was sold for a pittance to JPMorgan Chase, with a last-minute assist from the U.S. Federal Reserve.
3
ERIC CABANIS/Getty Images"[In] reality the risks to maritime flows of oil are far smaller than is commonly assumed. First, tankers are much less vulnerable than conventional wisdom holds. Second, limited regional conflicts would be unlikely to seriously upset traffic, and terrorist attacks against shipping would have even less of an economic effect. Third, only a naval power of the United States' strength could seriously disrupt oil shipments." —Dennis Blair and Kenneth Lieberthal, Foreign Affairs, May/June 2007

On Nov. 15, 2008 a group of Somali pirates in inflatable rafts hijacked a Saudi oil tanker carrying 2 million barrels of crude in the Indian Ocean. The daring raid was part of a rash of attacks by Somali pirates, which have primarily occurred in the Gulf of Aden. Pirates operating in the waterway have hijacked more than 50 ships this year, up from only 13 in all of last year, according to the Piracy Reporting Center. The Gulf of Aden, where nearly 4 percent of the world's oil demand passes every day, was not on the list of strategic "chokepoints" where oil shipments could potentially be disrupted that Blair and Lieberthal included in their essay, "Smooth Sailing: The World's Shipping Lanes Are Safe." Hopefully, Blair will show a bit more foresight if, as some expect, he is selected as Barack Obama's director of national intelligence.
4
Spencer Platt/Getty Images"[A]nyone who says we're in a recession, or heading into one—especially the worst one since the Great Depression—is making up his own private definition of 'recession.'" —Donald Luskin, The Washington Post, Sept. 14, 2008

The day after Luskin's op-ed, "Quit Doling Out That Bad-Economy Line," appeared in the Post, Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy, and the rest is history. Liberal bloggers had long ago dubbed the Trend Macrolytics chief investment officer and informal McCain advisor "the Stupidest Man Alive." This time, they had some particularly damning evidence.
5
YASUYOSHI CHIBA/AFP/Getty Images"For all its flaws, an example to others." —The Economist on Kenya's presidential election, Dec. 19, 2007

The week before Kenya's presidential election, the erudite British newsweekly ran an ill-conceived editorial praising the quality of the country's democracy and predicting it might "set an example" for the rest of the continent. If only. The ensuing election was rife with examples of voter fraud and ballot-stuffing. What followed was a month of rioting and ethnic bloodshed that left more than 800 dead and 200,000 displaced. The carnage ended in a messy power-sharing agreement between President Mwai Kibaki and his challenger Raila Odinga, leaving the country deeply divided and its government delegitimized.
6
Brad Barket/Getty Images"New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg will enter the Presidential race in February, after it becomes clear which nominees will get the nod from the major parties. His multiple billions and organization will impress voters—and stun rivals. He'll look like the most viable third-party candidate since Teddy Roosevelt. But Bloomberg will come up short, as he comes in for withering attacks from both Democrats and Republicans. He and Clinton will split more than 50% of the votes, but Arizona's maverick senator, John McCain, will end up the country's next President." –BusinessWeek, Jan. 2, 2008

No part of this prediction from BusinessWeek's "Ten Likely Events in 2008" turned out to be even remotely true. After weeks of hints and press leaks, Bloomberg declared he would stay out of the race, saying that Barack Obama and John McCain showed signs of displaying the "independent leadership" needed to govern effectively. After overturning New York's term-limits law, Bloomberg seems likely to run for a third term as mayor instead.
7
Sean Gallup/Getty Images"There is a real possibility of creating destructive theoretical anomalies such as miniature black holes, strangelets and deSitter space transitions. These events have the potential to fundamentally alter matter and destroy our planet." —Walter Wagner, LHCDefense.org

Scientist Walter Wagner, the driving force behind Citizens Against the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), is making his bid to be the 21st century's version of Chicken Little for his opposition to the world's largest particle accelerator. Warning that the experiment might end humanity as we know it, he filed a lawsuit in Hawaii's U.S. District Court against the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), which built the LHC, demanding that researchers not turn the machine on until it was proved safe. The LHC was turned on in September, and it appears that we are still here.
8
JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images"The possibility of $150-$200 per barrel seems increasingly likely over the next six-24 months." —Arjun Murti, Goldman Sachs oil analyst, in a May 5, 2008, report

The vaunted predictive powers of Murti, dubbed the "oracle of oil" in a glowing New York Times profile, failed him this time. Oil prices peaked in July at about $147 a barrel before beginning a long decline. Thanks to a decrease in demand because of the global recession, prices are now nearing the $40 mark, and some experts even see $25 as a possibility next year.
9
VIKTOR DRACHEV/AFP/Getty Images"It starts with the taking over of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which has already happened. It goes on to the destruction of the Georgian armed forces, which is now happening. The third [development] will probably be the replacement of the elected government, which is pro-Western, with a puppet government, which will probably follow in a week or two." —Charles Krauthammer, Fox News, Aug. 11, 2008

Krauthammer immediately followed this inaccurate forecast (Russia eventually agreed to a cease-fire and pulled out its troops several weeks later, leaving Mikheil Saakashvili's government in place) by predicting that Ukraine would be next on Russia's hit list and suggesting that the United States station troops there. As for Saakashvili, his approval rating was at 76 percent in September.
10
Mario Tama/Getty Images"I believe the banking system has been stabilized. No one is asking themselves anymore, is there some major institution that might fail and that we would not be able to do anything about it." —Henry Paulson on National Public Radio, Nov. 13, 2008

The U.S. Treasury secretary entered November with guns blazing. After much hemming and hawing before Congress a month earlier, he came out with what he called his "bazooka" —a $700 billion mandate to scoop up bad assets from troubled banks. By mid-November, he had already discharged $300 billion in munitions, albeit mostly via the kind of direct equity stakes he had rejected earlier. Unfortunately for Paulson, shortly after his vote of confidence, Citigroup's stock price plunged 75 percent in one week, closing below $5 for the first time in 14 years.

25030  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / WSJ: Waxman buries FM truth on: December 11, 2008, 12:47:03 PM


Henry Waxman's House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform met Tuesday to examine "The Role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the Financial Crisis." Alas, Mr. Waxman didn't come to bury Fan and Fred, but to bury the truth.


The two government-sponsored mortgage giants have long maintained they were merely unwitting victims of a financial act of God. That is, while the rest of the market went crazy over subprime and "liar" loans, Fan and Fred claimed to be the grownups of the mortgage market. There they were, the fable goes, quietly underwriting their 80% fixed-rate 30-year mortgages when -- Ka-Pow! -- they were blindsided by the greedy excesses of the subprime lenders who lacked their scruples.

But previously undisclosed internal documents that are now in Mr. Waxman's possession and that we've seen tell a different story. Memos and emails at the highest levels of Fannie and Freddie management in 2004 and 2005 paint a picture of two companies that saw their market share eroded by such products as option-ARMs and interest-only mortgages. The two companies were prepared to walk ever further out on the risk curve to maintain their market position.

The companies understood the risks they were running. But squeezed between the need to meet affordable-housing goals set by HUD and the desire to sustain their growth and profits, they took the leap anyway. As a result, by the middle of this year, the two companies were responsible for some $1.6 trillion worth of subprime credit of one form or another. The answer to Mr. Waxman's question about their role in the crisis, in other words, is that they were central players, if not the central players, in the creation of the housing boom and the credit bust. Mr. Waxman released some of these documents Tuesday but kept others under wraps.

In early 2004, Freddie's executive team was engaged in a heated debate over whether to start acquiring "stated income, stated assets" mortgages. And in April of that year, David Andrukonis, the head of risk management, wrote to his colleagues, "This is not an affordable product, as I understand it, but a product necessary to recapture [market] share. . . . In 1990 we called this product 'dangerous' and eliminated it from the marketplace." Freddie went ahead anyway.

At Tuesday's hearing, both Mr. Waxman and former Fannie CEO Franklin Raines argued that Fan and Fred were following the market, not leading it, as if this was exculpatory. The documents plainly show that people at both Fan and Fred clearly understood that these mortgages were risky, thought many homeowners didn't understand them and that they were putting their business at risk by buying up Alt-A and subprime mortgage-backed securities.

One Fannie Mae document from March 2005 notes dryly, "Although we invest almost exclusively in AAA-rated securities, there is a concern that the rating agencies may not be properly assessing the risk in these securities." But they bought them anyway, both to maintain their market share and to show people like Democrat Barney Frank that they were promoting affordable housing.

By April 2008, according to a document prepared for then-Fannie Mae CEO Daniel Mudd and marked "Confidential -- Highly Restricted," Fannie's $312 billion in Alt-A mortgages represented "12% of single-family credit exposure." This book of business, the document notes, "was originated to maintain relevance in market with customers -- main originators were Countrywide, Lehman, Indymac, Washington Mutual, Amtrust." The first four need no introduction; regulators ordered Ohio-based Amtrust to stop lending two weeks ago.

Remember that one of Fannie's roles was supposed to be to buy up mortgage-backed securities in the secondary market and keep that market "liquid." This was, they always argued, the rationale for their $1 trillion-plus MBS portfolios. By becoming buyers of private-label subprime and Alt-A-backed MBS, they did just that -- they liquified and helped legitimize products that they now claim others irresponsibly sold.

In today's Opinion Journal
 

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Whitewashing Fannie MaePolitical Favors at the FCC

TODAY'S COLUMNIST

Wonder Land: U.S. Says It Will Bail Out Christmas
– Daniel Henninger

COMMENTARY

We Need a Bailout Exit Strategy
– Christopher CoxObama Was Mute on Illinois Corruption
– John FundHow the GOP Should Prepare for a Comeback
– Karl RoveBankruptcy Doesn't Equal Death
– Don boudreauxMr. Raines even suggested that Fan and Fred's regulator was to blame for allowing them to get into trouble. "It is remarkable," he told the committee, "that during the period that Fannie Mae substantially increased its exposure to credit risk its regulator made no visible effort to enforce any limits."

What Mr. Raines failed to mention was that, all along, Fannie and Freddie were spending millions on lobbying to ensure that regulators did not get in their way. As the AP reported Sunday night, Freddie spent $11.7 million in lobbying in 2006 alone, with Newt Gingrich, for example, getting $300,000 that year for talking up the benefits of Freddie's business model. (Apologies welcome, Newt.)

Other Republicans on Freddie's payroll included former Senator Al D'Amato and Congressman Vin Weber, and then House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's former chief of staff, Susan Hirschmann. As we know by now, Fan and Fred tried to buy everybody in town from both political parties, and the companies did it well enough to make themselves immune from regulatory scrutiny.

Mr. Waxman calls it a "myth" that Fannie and Freddie were the originators of the crisis. That's a red herring. Mr. Waxman's documents prove beyond doubt that Fan and Fred turbocharged the housing mania with a taxpayer-backed, Congressionally protected business model that has cost America dearly.

 
25031  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / WSJ on: December 11, 2008, 12:40:08 PM
John Fund is a serious political reporter for the WSJ:
======================================

By JOHN FUND
This week Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was arrested on charges that he conspired to sell Barack Obama's U.S. Senate seat, among other misdeeds. At first the president-elect tried to distance himself from the issue: "It is a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don't think it's appropriate for me to comment." But it quickly became clear that Mr. Obama would have to say more, and yesterday he called for Mr. Blagojevich to resign and for a special election to fill the vacant Senate seat.

 
APWhat remains to be seen is whether this episode will put an end to what Chicago Tribune political columnist John Kass calls the national media's "almost willful" fantasy that Mr. Obama and Chicago's political culture have little to do with each other. Mr. Kass notes that the media devoted a lot more time and energy to investigating the inner workings of Sarah Palin's Wasilla, Alaska, than it has looking at Mr. Obama's Chicago connections.

To date, Mr. Obama's approach to Illinois corruption has been to congratulate himself for dodging association with it. "I think I have done a good job in rising politically in this environment without being entangled in some of the traditional problems of Chicago politics," he told the Chicago Tribune last spring. At the time, Mr. Obama was being grilled over news that he bought his house through a land deal involving Tony Rezko, a political fixer who was later convicted on 16 corruption counts. Rezko is mentioned dozens of times in the 76-page criminal complaint against Mr. Blagojevich.

Mr. Obama has an ambiguous reputation among those trying to clean up Illinois politics. "We have a sick political culture, and that's the environment Barack Obama came from," Jay Stewart, executive director of the Chicago Better Government Association, told ABC News months ago. Though Mr. Obama did support ethics reforms as a state senator, Mr. Stewart noted that he's "been noticeably silent on the issue of corruption here in his home state including, at this point, mostly Democratic politicians."

One reason for Mr. Obama's reticence may be his close relationship with the powerful Illinois senate president Emil Jones. Mr. Jones was a force in Mr. Obama's rise. In 2003, the two men talked about the state's soon-to-be vacant U.S. Senate seat. As Mr. Jones has recounted the conversation, Mr. Obama told him "You can make the next U.S. senator." Mr. Jones replied, "Got anybody in mind?" "Yes," Mr. Obama said. "Me."

Starting in 2003, Mr. Jones worked to burnish Mr. Obama's credentials by making him lead sponsor of bills including a watered-down ban on gifts to lawmakers. Most of Mr. Obama's legislative accomplishments came as result of his association with Mr. Jones.

In 2002, Mr. Obama turned up to help Mr. Blagojevich, a staunch ally of Mr. Jones, win the governor's mansion. Rahm Emanuel, Mr. Obama's incoming White House chief of staff, told The New Yorker earlier this year that six years ago he and Mr. Obama "participated in a small group that met weekly when Rod was running for governor. We basically laid out the general election, Barack and I and these two [other participants]."

Mr. Blagojevich won, but before long, problems surfaced. In 2004, Zalwaynaka Scott, the governor's inspector general, said his administration's efforts to evade merit-selection laws exposed "not merely an ignorance of the law, but complete and utter contempt for the law." Nonetheless, Mr. Obama endorsed Mr. Blagojevich's re-election in 2006.

This spring, many Democrats were so disgusted with Mr. Blagojevich that state House Speaker Michael Madigan drafted a memo on why Democrats should impeach Mr. Blagojevich. Mr. Madigan's "talking points" compared the corruption going on in the state to a tumor that must be removed.

But Mr. Madigan's move drew a rebuke from Mr. Jones. The Chicago Sun-Times story at the time quoted Mr. Jones saying he thought it was wrong for the speaker to "promote the impeachment of a Democratic Governor. . . Impeachment is unwarranted in my opinion, and should not be used as a political tool."

Many people were curious who Mr. Obama would side with in the dispute. Would it be with those Democrats who wanted to move aggressively against an apparently corrupt governor or with his old Chicago ally, Mr. Jones, who preferred to wait? Mr. Obama did neither. He kept silent. (I emailed the Obama campaign about Mr. Blagojevich's problems in June, but my question was ignored.)

In today's Opinion Journal
 

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Whitewashing Fannie MaePolitical Favors at the FCC

TODAY'S COLUMNIST

Wonder Land: U.S. Says It Will Bail Out Christmas
– Daniel Henninger

COMMENTARY

We Need a Bailout Exit Strategy
– Christopher CoxObama Was Mute on Illinois Corruption
– John FundHow the GOP Should Prepare for a Comeback
– Karl RoveBankruptcy Doesn't Equal Death
– Don boudreauxTo his credit, Mr. Obama did call Mr. Jones in September to urge passage of an ethics bill banning some office holders from accepting money from a business that has a $50,000 or larger contract with the state. The bill passed and takes effect on Jan. 1.

Mr. Obama has spoken out forcefully against corruption outside Illinois. Kathy Tate-Bradish, a Chicago teacher active in education in Africa, gushed on Mr. Obama's campaign blog during his visit to Kenya last year about his "amazing" speech against corruption during his visit there.

"Corruption is the single biggest thing keeping not only Kenyans, but all Africans, down," she wrote. "Corruption is just killing them but nobody has been able to speak out against it because they fear for their own security. Barack spoke out against it, publicly, in Kenya. I honestly think the speech he gave will be one of the major factors that turns the tide against corruption."

Mr. Obama says he plans to return often to Chicago as president. "Our friends are here. Our family is here. And so we are going to try to come back here as often as possible," he told the Los Angeles Times this month. Perhaps during one of those trips he could find time to forthrightly address the corruption issues that the state will be sorting through in the weeks and months ahead. A president has a powerful bully pulpit. A few words from Mr. Obama could force real and lasting change in Illinois.
25032  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / PD WSJ on: December 11, 2008, 12:10:32 PM
The Son Almost Rises

One key political casualty in the fallout from the Blagojevich scandal is likely to be Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., who yesterday stepped forward to acknowledge he was "Senate Candidate 5" in the federal criminal complaint against Illinois' governor.

According to federal prosecutors, Mr. Blagojevich told allies that a representative of Candidate 5 had approached him on a "pay to play" basis and offered over $1 million in contributions in exchange for appointing Rep. Jackson as the U.S. Senator replacing Barack Obama.

Mr. Jackson said he had nothing to do with any such offer, although his attorney indicated that it was possible someone in Mr. Jackson's orbit had approached the governor without his consent.

Regardless of what ultimately happens legally, Mr. Jackson has now been captured on tape reading carefully from a prepared statement denying his guilt and then refusing to take questions from reporters on the advice of his attorneys -- hardly a launching platform to political greatness.

Mr. Jackson has been angling for a bigger political stage to play on for years, having frequently clashed with Chicago Mayor Richard Daley to the point that he almost challenged him for the office in 2007. Lately, though, the fiery congressman from Chicago's South Side had made peace with the Daley machine and was on track to secure its blessing for a bid for statewide office. At a breakfast held at last fall's Democratic National Convention in Denver, Mr. Jackson effusively hugged Mayor Daley and had to use a tissue to wipe away some tears as he explained the meaning of the reconciliation. "I've been trying to get to know Mayor Daley for 14 years," he told the assembled crowd.

Political reporters interpreted the performance as an obvious attempt to secure Mr. Daley's blessing as the next U.S. Senator from Illinois. It was a good strategy, but it crashed and burned this week as Mr. Jackson was caught up in L'Affaire Blagojevich.

Now, instead of moving to the U.S. Senate, Mr. Jackson faces months of uncertainty as federal prosecutors probe his relationship to the disgraced Illinois governor and the possible indictment of his associates or even himself.

-- John Fund

Kissing the Olympic Rings Goodbye?

Chicago's Olympic committee is holding its breath, hoping that the high-profile drama surrounding Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich's arrest on federal corruption charges won't adversely impact the city's bid to win the 2016 Games. Earlier this year, Chicago was announced as one of the four finalists by the IOC along with Tokyo, Madrid, and Rio de Janeiro.

Though generally considered an underdog, most observers believe the election of Barack Obama as president significantly boosted Chicago's chances of becoming only the fourth American city to host the Games (St. Louis hosted in 1904, Los Angeles in 1984, and Atlanta in 1996). Indeed, Mr. Obama wasted no time in putting his new global clout to work on behalf of the Windy City: One of his first acts as President-elect was to tape a video message to IOC members that was submitted along with city's final bid on November 21.

"The United States would be honored to have the opportunity to host the games and serve the Olympic movement," Mr. Obama said in the video. "As president-elect, I see the Olympics and Paralympic Games as an opportunity for our nation to reach out, welcome the world to our shores and strengthen our friendships across the globe."

Olympic officials say Governor Blagojevich hasn't played much of a role in the bidding process thus far, but the Governor did pledge to contribute $150 million in guaranteed state funds as part of Chicago's overall $1.5 billion bid package to the IOC. These financial guarantees are critical to Chicago's chances, since Chicago is the only city among the final four whose financial commitments are not being fully backed by the host country's national government.

Initial reactions suggest that while the Blagojevich scandal is unseemly and not necessarily helpful in the short term, it won't have much impact, if any, on the final outcome. Then again, the IOC won't make the final decision until next October, and in the world of Chicago politics, who knows what could happen by then.

-- Tom Bevan, executive editor of RealClearPolitics.com

Those Tragic Al Franken Voters

Al Franken, the Democratic Senate candidate locked in an acrimonious recount battle with GOP Senator Norm Coleman of Minnesota, has turned to YouTube.com to make the case that Minnesota officials aren't counting ballots that should be counted.

The Franken campaign released its latest video just before the State Canvassing Board's scheduled meeting on Friday, in an effort to convince the board to count several hundred absentee ballots that Team Franken claims were rejected for specious reasons. The video, which features seven voters who claim their votes should have been counted, is an effective piece of propaganda. As the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports: "In one scene, quadriplegic Mike Brickley of Bloomington is shown lying in bed -- with his head resting on a Minnesota Vikings pillow -- as he pleads with officials to count his vote."

Mr. Brickley tells the camera: "I may be a quadriplegic, but we are still someone, and we deserve to have our votes counted."

The Coleman campaign claims Mr. Brickley had his ballot rejected because officials found he was not registered to vote and that his signature on the absentee ballot didn't match the one used on the application for an absentee ballot. Mr. Brickley maintains he was registered and that his wife had to sign his ballot on his behalf because of his disability.

If Mr. Brickley is indeed registered to vote, I have no doubt a way will be found to have his ballot counted. But his hard-luck case doesn't address the many thousands of absentee ballots rejected for legitimate reasons. With Mr. Coleman holding a lead of between 190 and 300 votes as the recount ends, Mr. Franken has little chance of winning unless he can convince state officials to count a large number of absentee ballots that were originally rejected for not meeting legal requirements. There is precious little evidence that enough such ballots exist to turn the tide.

-- John Fund

Quote of the Day I

"When it comes to Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D-Dead Meat), many national TV talking heads can't resist playing amateur psychiatrist. 'He's crazy,' said one talking head of our governor. 'A sociopath!' said another. 'He should have been put in a straitjacket, not handcuffs,' said a third, all of them diagnosing Blagojevich as cuckoo. . . .
  • ne thing is clear: The pundits who make such diagnoses have never talked to a Chicago machine politician in their lives. How do they think Chicago politicians talk in private when they're muscling some other guy for cash? Like Helen Mirren playing the queen?" -- Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass.

Quote of the Day II

"Idiocy and greed aren't just for Republicans. For every Larry Craig, there's an Eliot Spitzer; for every Ted Stevens, there's a Rod Blagojevich. In our heads, we Democrats know that. It's just that in our hearts, we don't want to believe it. Because we're the good guys, right? But it's precisely when a party achieves power that its members need to start worrying the most about idiocy and greed. . . Gaining political power also corrupts in far more subtle ways. Members of political majorities succumb easily to smugness and complacency, to the conviction that explaining and justifying ideas is no longer necessary, to the temptation to dismiss critics as so many irrelevant cranks. 'Groupthink' is mainly a disease of the powerful and complacent, not the fractious opposition" -- Los Angeles Times columnist Rosa Brooks.

The Next Senator from New Yawk?

When Hillary Clinton vacates her Senate seat, there won't be any need for another carpetbagger to fill the spot. Among those applying for the job is Fran Drescher, star of "The Nanny" and a childhood resident of the outer boroughs of New York City. The actress best known for her role as a nasally New Yorker feels she could play that role just as convincingly in the U.S. Senate.

Ms. Drescher's publicist notes that she has been an advocate for women's health, notably the "Cancer Schmancer" movement, encouraging early testing. For that matter, she's also been a public diplomacy envoy for the State Department, a frequent visitor to Capitol Hill to lobby for cancer funding, and a fixture at Democratic conventions and fundraisers. For a celebrity, in other words, she's been far more of a political workhorse than, say, fellow small-screener and loud mouth Al Franken.

The rap on Ms. Drescher, of course, has always been that she's too annoying to listen to. Then again, being known for whining isn't necessarily a liability in politics. As she told People Magazine, her audiences on the lecture circuit have been goading her to get into politics for ages. "It was one of the single most-asked questions: When are you going to run? Only second to: Is that your real voice?"

Why should New York Gov. David Paterson pick her to fill the Hillary seat? "I would hope he would take into consideration that I'm a beloved New Yorker who gets the New York constituents probably as good, if not better, than any of the other people being considered," she told People magazine.

One other potential qualification is that Ms. Drescher was an energetic Hillary supporter in the Democratic primaries. If Mrs. Clinton has a say, the Nanny might be a shoo-in compared to current pollster favorite Caroline Kennedy, who famously stiffed her home-state senator and instead came out for Barack Obama.

-- Collin Levy



25033  DBMA Espanol / Espanol Discussion / Agradecimiento de cada dia on: December 11, 2008, 12:00:38 PM
Guau a todos:

Como se ve en el foro "Martial Arts", hay un hilo llamado "Daily Expression of Gratitude".  Con este hilo se comienza aqui lo mismo en espanol.

El concepto basico es muy simple y, en mi opinion, sumamente potente:  Expresar abiertamente cada dia algo por lo cual este's agradecido.  Puede ser algo profundo, o algo muy pequeno.  Por supuesto, habra'n dias en los cuales se nos hace dificil encontrar el espiritu de gratitud, pero precisamente en estos momentos que es el mas importante que conectemos con agradecimiento. 

Es posible sentir "tonto" haciendo eso, pero ofrezco que en mi opinion este ejercicio, este meditacion, es muy potente.

Comienzo:

"Hoy agradezco haber encontrado un software que traduce English-Epanol y Espanol-English.  Eso me permitira' contribuir mas a este foro."

?Ven?  No esa cosa complicada-- y pido que Uds participen cada dia.

La Aventura continua,
Marc
25034  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Obama Phenomena on: December 11, 2008, 11:49:22 AM
FWIW what I see so far is a lot of sound and fury signifying , , , I'm not sure what. 

I think my hardcore rightwing bonafides to be in reasonably good order  wink  but so far I have not seen anything that puts BO in a bad light.   Indeed, what seems to be known so far does not contradict the possibility that BO has acted with integrity.
25035  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Gender issues thread on: December 11, 2008, 11:45:25 AM
Two interesting posts there Rachel.

Turning to the Dating Darwin one, I commend the author for what seems to be a honest search for Truth.

She writes:

"As girls overturn traditional gender roles, boys are forced to do the same, leaving both sexes in scary, unscripted territory. This has, indeed, come as a result of feminist advancements -- but  feminist advancements within a culture that is not yet egalitarian. I think many young women are still in search of an empowered and authentic sexual identity -- a way to be active participants in our sexual culture. Given that they are doing this within a culture than defines sexual power in male terms, , ,"

The word "egalitarian" is a slippery one.  Properly understood, it simply means "equal in value" but in point of fact it is often used to mean "identical in all ways"-- which IMHO is foolishness.

As I see it, the underlying Darwinian question is presented by the interregnum between the onset of puberty and actual childbearing in the modern era.  In many cases, this lasts for decades!!!  The consequences of this separation of sex and reproduction, greatly enabled by technology (the various forms of birth control) and fetus-cide) are as profound as they are outside of Darwinian logic.
IMHO THIS is what drives the dynamic the author seeks to address.

What I sense feminists (even a lucid one such as this author) imply when they use the phrase "traditional gender roles" is that these traditions are simply some sort of arbitrary social construct with oppressive overtones-- one that can be replaced by the "identical in all ways" construct.  Men and women are equal in value, but they most certainly are not the same, and the liberal PC feminazi ideology that says they are ultimately will fail.

A very simple and direct Darwinian example of this is the dramatic decline in birth rates below replacement rates.  I submit the proposition that the more "egalitarian" the culture, the lower the birth rates.  Look at Europe for example.  In many major countries such as Germany, France, and Spain the birth rates are as low as 1.1- 1.4!!!  In contrast, the Muslim birth rates (both Turkish and Arabic) are way above the replacement rate of 2.1.   The net result is the pre-emptive dhimmitude chronicled in various nearby threads.

A large subject, but right now my day takes me elsewhere.

TAC!
Marc

25036  DBMA Espanol / Espanol Discussion / Re: Seminario con Guro Marc Denny en Argentina on: December 11, 2008, 10:54:02 AM
Nico:

Disculpe la tardanza en mi respuesta.

Te felicito la tarea de DBMA comenzada tan bien y espero con ganas ver donde el futuro nos lleve.

!La Aventura continua!
Guro Marc
25037  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Washington on: December 11, 2008, 10:41:05 AM
"No compact among men ... can be pronounced everlasting and inviolable, and if I may so express myself, that no Wall of words, that no mound of parchment can be so formed as to stand against the sweeping torrent of boundless ambition on the one side, aided by the sapping current of corrupted morals on the other."

--George Washington, draft of first Inaugural Address, April 1789
25038  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Vote Fraud (ACORN et al) on: December 10, 2008, 08:06:25 PM
Ann Coulter IMHO has become highly erratic in the quality of her work.  That said, this one seems rather lucid.  Here's her take on the shenanigans in Minnesota:
=============
Minnesota Ballots: Land of 10,000 Fakes
by  Ann Coulter

 
What is the point of having a hand recount of ballots in the Minnesota Senate race if the Democratic secretary of state is going to use the election night totals in precincts where it will benefit Democrat Al Franken?
   
Either the hand recount produces a better, more accurate count, or there was no point to the state spending roughly $100,000 to conduct the hand recount in the first place.
   
But that is exactly what the George Soros-supported secretary of state has agreed to do in the case of a Dinkytown precinct near the University of Minnesota. The hand recount of the liberal precinct produced 133 fewer ballots than the original count on election night and, more important, 46 fewer votes for Franken.
   
So he's proposing to defer to the election night total over the recount tally.
   
There are no "missing" ballots in Dinkytown. Ballots were run through the voting machines twice on election night. Last week, Minneapolis elections director Cindy Reichert explained they already knew for a fact that 129 ballots had been run through machines twice on election night, which pretty closely matched the 133 allegedly "missing" ballots.
   
As Reichert said, "There are human errors that are made on Election Day." According to an article in the Dec. 2, 2008, St. Paul Pioneer Press, Reichert was "confident that that's what happened" and that "we have all the ballot envelopes here."   
   
But after relentless badgering by the Franken campaign, now Reichert isn't so sure anymore. So the new plan is for Minneapolis to submit both the election night total from Dinkytown -- which gives Franken an extra 46 votes -- and the meticulous hand recount total, which does not, and allow the canvassing board to decide which to use.
   
The 129 ballots that Reichert said were run through the machines twice on election night could end up being counted twice. 
   
In all other precincts, the initial tallies from election night are treated as highly unreliable rough approximations of the actual vote, while the results from the hand recount are regarded as the absolute truth.
   
Only in the Dinkytown precinct, where the election night total gave Franken an additional 46 votes, does the state treat the hand recount as an error-prone joke compared to the highly accurate election night vote.
   
The Soros-supported Secretary of State Mark Ritchie explains that there is "precedent" for counting election night totals rather than the recount totals. If so, how about using the election night tally from some of the precincts that gave Coleman more votes on election night?
   
Highly implausible, post-election "corrections" in just three Democratic precincts -- Two Harbors, Mountain Iron and Partridge Township -- cost Coleman 446 votes. But I note that Ritchie doesn't propose deferring to the election night totals there.
   
The Minneapolis Star Tribune attributed the 436-vote "correction" in Franken's favor to "exhausted county officials." Were they more exhausted in those three precincts than in Dinkytown?
   
Either the post-election tally is better than the election night tally or it isn't. Cherry-picking only those election night results Ritchie likes isn't an attempt to get an accurate vote-count; it's an attempt to get a Democrat in the U.S. Senate.
   
If Minnesota is going to accept the election night tally from Dinkytown, why not from any of these precincts where Coleman lost votes under far more suspicious circumstances?  And why are guys named "Al" always caught trying to steal elections?
   
Wholly apart from the outrageous inconsistency of deciding that some election night tallies trump the hand recount and some don't, Franken's miraculous acquisition of more than 500 votes from heavily Democratic precincts in post-election "corrections" wasn't believable on its face -- and that's even accounting for the fact that Franken voters tend to be stupider than average and therefore more likely to fill out their ballots incorrectly.
   
Corrections in all other 2008 races combined led to only 482 changes in the entire state of Minnesota. The idea that typo "corrections" in one single contest from only three precincts, out of more than 4,000 precincts, could lead to 436 "corrections" benefiting Franken is manifestly absurd.
   
Ritchie's proposal to accept the election night count from one precinct is a stunning admission that even he doesn't believe a hand recount is any more accurate than the original election night tally. 
   
To be sure, endlessly recounting ballots doesn't yield more accurate results, it just creates different results. There is no reason to think a tabulation is more accurate because it occurred later in time.
   
But then why have a recount at all?  If the state of Minnesota is going to spend $100,000 and endless man-hours to conduct a meticulous hand recount on the grounds that it is more accurate, the state ought to at least pretend to believe in its own recount.
   
Election recounts are never intended to get more accurate results. They are simply opportunities for Democrats to manufacture new votes and steal elections.
   
And once again, Republicans are asleep at the wheel while another close election is being openly stolen by the man whose contributions to western civilization include the "Planet of The Enormous Hooters" sketch on "SNL."

25039  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Question from a friend in Iraq on: December 10, 2008, 08:03:58 PM
From behind a full nelson to keep the hands from the bomb trigger?

From in front , , , double underhooks?

25040  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Golfer heroes on: December 10, 2008, 06:58:30 PM
Notice the age of the defenders of justice.

Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Life of Reilly

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Rick Reilly
ESPN The Magazine

We golfers are sick of all you Americans who call us useless Crisco butts wearing clothing salvaged from a Sherwin-Williams paint factory explosion. To you, we offer The Fab Foursome.


These four golfers not only fought off an armed robber, they chased him down in a golf cart and held him for police. And all without resorting to a single Big Bertha!

OK, true, the assailant was wearing underpants on his head. And, yes, the weapon was only a kitchen knife. And yes, he did move at the speed of Willard Scott on stilts, but what did you expect? We did say the guy got caught by golfers.

It all happened on Monday, Nov. 24, at around 4 p.m. at the Central Valley Golf Course in Salt Lake City. A, ahem, brief summary:

Scott Flick, 34, an assistant golf pro, was alone in the shop when, according to the charges, Barry Kramer, 48, entered wearing a pair of brown men's tighties on his head and carrying a 10-inch kitchen knife in his fist. Seeing nobody behind the cash register, he surprised Flick in his office and said, "Money!"

Then Flick said something very clever, which was: "Are you kidding me?!" Question No. 1: Why was the man wearing underpants on his head? A: Perhaps he planned to take the money and launder it.

Question No. 2: Was the color of the underpants originally brown or were they … A: "No," answers Flick. "They were not stained from the day before."

The point is, this man, who Flick thought outweighed him by 70 pounds, aimed to give Flick a slice that no lesson could cure. He thrust the knife at Flick's bellybutton, menacingly. "People ask me why I didn't just do what he wanted," recalls Flick, "but I was trapped in that office. I really felt threatened."

Surveillance cameras caught Flick grabbing the man's arms and shoving them above his head. The knife caught Flick's ear. Now it was Van Gogh time, pal. Flick wrestled the assailant out of the office, into a supply closet—carving up his own hand along the way—and hip-checked him into a shelf, breaking the knife off at the handle.

Finding himself at a golf course without a shank, the assailant fled, with Flick following him as he called 911. "I didn't even know my ear was cut until I looked at my phone and saw all the blood."

At that instant, three golfers were coming in from their round. Flick saw them and hollered, "Get this guy! He tried to rob me! I'm cut!"

Library custodian Bob Brewer, 58, spun the cart around in hot pursuit, with his friend, real-estate agent Reed Madsen, 57, sprinting behind. Next on the Golf Channel: America's Most Unforgettable Cart Chases!

In the parking lot, the third buddy—groundskeeper Gary Itow, 58—gave chase, too, a golf shoe on his right foot, a running shoe on his left, neither of them tied. "The guy still had the underwear on his head," Itow remembers. "He looked like maybe he was having trouble seeing."

Robbery 101: Leghole faces out.

As the assailant ran across the driving range, Brewer ran the nose of the cart into the back of his calves, felling him on the spot. He then jumped out and, along with his two buddies, stomped him flat while Itow kicked the knife handle out of his hand. A passing golfer came over offering aspirin. He thought the robber was having a heart attack. When they told him the man was actually a knife-waving maniac, the Good Samaritan moved away quickly. Exactly, son. Leave this to the experts.

Question No. 3: Did guys try to hit Bob's cart with seven-iron shots as he drove across the practice range? A: Surprisingly, no.

Police charged Kramer with aggravated robbery. And it turns out this may have been No. 2 for the Underpants Robber. A week before, a knife-wielding man walked into a suburban Salt Lake City pro shop with men's undergarments on his head and tried to rob it. Detectives for both cases say it's "possible" the cases are linked. (OK, so they're not exactly Scotland Yard.)

Rightly, the Fab Foursome is being hailed as heroes. Flick got 10 stitches in his right hand and a bonus which was way more than the nearly $200 in the register. For their courage, Flick gave the three buddies a free round of golf.

As for those three, they get out of their cart now with a certain bounce, according to Itow. "We say stuff to each other like, 'Go ahead, punk. Make my putt."

And get this: Hollywood executives have approached them about starring in a new TV series—CSI: Pro Shop. Question No. 4: Did you make that one up? A: Yes.
25041  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Question from a friend in Iraq on: December 10, 2008, 06:50:47 PM
My sentiments exactly. grin

 I suspect what my friend has in mine though is a situation wherein the GG has to jump on the BG HTH.
25042  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Men: Stay out of the doghouse! on: December 10, 2008, 05:11:48 PM


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SecVCh9dg4I
25043  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Joe the plumber appalled on: December 10, 2008, 09:26:25 AM
'Joe the Plumber' told conservative radio host Glenn Beck on Tuesday that he felt "dirty" after hitting the campaign trail with Republican presidential nominee John McCain and "seeing some of the things that take place," Politico reported.

Joe Wurzelbacher said he was specifically put off by McCain when it came to talk of the $700 billion bailout.

"When I was on the bus with him, I asked him a lot of questions about the bailout because most Americans did not want that to happen,"

Wurzelbacher told Beck. "I asked him some pretty direct questions. Some of the answers you guys are gonna receive they appalled me, absolutely. I was angry. In fact, I wanted to get off the bus after I talked to him."
Wurzelbacher said he stayed on the trail with McCain "honestly, because the thought of Barack Obama as president scares me even more."

Wurzelbacher, however, offered kind words to McCain running mate Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

"Sarah Palin is absolutely the real deal," he said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elec...cain-appalled/
25044  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Obama Phenomena on: December 10, 2008, 09:10:07 AM
My initial impression is that I am not seeing anything terrible by BO here.  Politics is not beanbag.
====================
http://www.newsmax.com:80/headlines/Blagojevich_Indictment/2008/12/09/160064.html?s=al&promo_code=7403-1

Blagojevich Scandal: What Did Obama Know, and When Did He Know It?
Tuesday, December 9, 2008 7:04 PM
By: David A. Patten  Article Font Size   


Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich wanted “something big” from the Obama administration in return for naming its preferred candidate to fill Obama’s Senate seat — and he delivered an expletive-filled tirade when Obama’s representatives apparently refused to go along.

Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, were arrested Tuesday on charges that they tried to “sell” the U.S. Senate seat that Obama recently vacated. Under Illinois law, naming a replacement falls to Blagojevich.

The FBI says it taped Blagojevich complaining that Obama advisers were telling him that he had to “suck it up . . . and give this mother----er [the President-elect]] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”

Obama briefly addressed the arrests Tuesday afternoon, telling the media, “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so I was not aware of what was happening. It’s a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don’t think it’s appropriate to comment.”

The criminal complaint was announced Tuesday by federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who came to national prominence during the investigation that led to the conviction of Scooter Libby on charges related to the Valerie Plame case.  Fitzgerald stated Tuesday that “there is no allegation in the complaint that the president-elect was aware of it and that is all I can say,” according to ABCNews.com. The 76-page criminal complaint refers to the president-elect and his representatives at least 40 times, however.

Item No. 99 in the document states that Blagojevich and Harris spoke on Nov. 7 with “Adviser B,” a Washington, D.C.-based consultant presumably working on behalf of the Obama transition team. During the call, Blagojevich indicated that he would appoint a person the complaint identifies only as “Senate Candidate 1” -- presumably a candidate preferred by the Obama administration -- in return for Blagojevich being appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services by Obama.

Candidate 1 is generally believed to be Obama insider Valerie Jarrett, who has been mentioned as among the favorites to replace Obama in the Senate.

Harris stated “we wanted our [request] to be reasonable and rather than . . . make it look like some sort of selfish grab for a quid pro quo."

During the call, Blagojevich stated he was hurting “financially.” And Harris said the “financial security” of the Blagojevich family was an issue. At one point, Blagojevich stated outright, “I want to make money,” according to the indictment. Also discussed during that conference call was a “three-way deal” between the SEIU union, Blagojevich, and Obama. The deal was that Blagojevich would appoint Obama’s preferred candidate, and in return Obama would help Blagojevich win the SEIU appointment to head an organization called “Change to Win.”

ChangetoWin.org describes itself as an organization created by “seven unions and six million workers” to “restore the American Dream of the 21st Century.”

Harris said the three-way deal would give Obama a “buffer so there is no obvious quid pro quo for [the appointment of Senate Candidate 1]. The criminal complaint states, “Adviser B said that he liked the idea of the three-way deal.”

Three days later, the indictment said, Blagojevich told Harris it was unlikely that Obama would name him Secretary of Health and Human Services, or appoint him to be an ambassador, due to the investigation looming over him. The complaint states that Adviser B and another consultant are believed to have participated in a call during which Blagojevich said they were telling him to “suck it up” for two years, and give this “motherf---er [the President-elect] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”

Next, states the complaint, Blagojevich says he would appoint another candidate, Senate Candidate 4, “before I just give f---ing [Senate Candidate 1] a f---ing Senate seat and I don’t get anything.”

Senate Candidate 4, the complaint states, is a deputy governor of the State of Illinois. Dean Martinez, Bob Greenlee, and Louanner Peters currently serve as deputy governors.

During the conversations with Obama’s representatives, Blagojevich repeatedly made it clear he would not agree to name “Senate Candidate 1” to fill the position without a quid pro quo from the White House, if only indirectly, according to the complaint. Blagojevich stated he wanted to make $250,000 to $300,000 annually.

The criminal complaint indicates Blagojevich and his staff were confident they could exact something from at least one candidate for the seat, Senate Candidate 5. Senate Candidate 5 is not identified.

Based on the complaint, it remains unclear whether any close Obama associate knew that Blagojevich was seeking monetary gain in return for the Senate appointment. It is possible that having such knowledge without reporting it to authorities in a timely way could raise serious legal issues.  If nothing else, the complaints represent an embarrassment to Obama given his support for Blagojevich’s gubernatorial reelection bid.

The RNC responded to the indictments in part by circulating an Associated Press report from August 2006 in which Obama stated, “We’ve got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois.”

Also, RNC Chairman Robert M. “Mike” Duncan released a statement calling Obama’s reaction to the arrests “insufficient at best.”

He added, “Given the President-elect’s history of supporting and advising Gov. Blagojevich, he has a responsibility to speak out and fully address the issue.”

© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
 
 
25045  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Washington: on: December 10, 2008, 08:59:23 AM
"No pecuniary consideration is more urgent, than the regular redemption and discharge of the public debt: on none can delay be more injurious, or an economy of time more valuable."

--George Washington, Message to the House of Representatives, 3 December 1793
25046  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: New to forum on: December 10, 2008, 01:21:14 AM
That's the spirit!

I remember being very surprised when that happened.

Welcome aboard!

25047  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Healing Aspect of DBMA on: December 10, 2008, 01:19:45 AM
If you use the Advanced Search function to look for "Dit Da Jow" you may find something , , ,
25048  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Question from a friend in Iraq on: December 10, 2008, 12:36:16 AM
Woof All:

A friend who is in Iraq training the Baghdad police in modern police skills emails me the following question:

"Are there/is there a pressure point that when pressed would prevent/significantly limit a person from effectively pressing a button (like on a suicide vest switch)?"

Comments/suggestions?

TAC!
CD
25049  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Stratfor:The quasi surge on: December 09, 2008, 11:47:08 PM
Geopolitical Diary: The Afghanistan Surge and Pakistan's Role
December 9, 2008

Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar remained defiant as ever Monday, declaring in a message posted on an Islamist radical Web site that a planned surge of foreign troops to Afghanistan would result only in more targets for Taliban fighters. He also refused to negotiate with Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government in Kabul so long as foreign soldiers remain in Afghanistan.

Though such a statement is not exactly surprising, coming from a hardliner like Mullah Omar, even his more moderate colleagues are not feeling compelled to entertain negotiations with the government at the moment. Despite U.S. President-elect Barack Obama’s statements about a “soft surge” strategy analogous to a model used in Iraq — a surge that could total 20,000 U.S. troops, on top of more than 60,000 U.S. and NATO forces already present — the Taliban movement is not quaking in its boots.

No one is suggesting a cut-and-paste application of the Iraq strategy, but the underpinning is the same: A significant influx of combat forces to turn the tide of the conflict and change regional perceptions.

In the Iraq experience, it is not that the 30,000 extra troops altered the balance of power — far from it. It was the arrival of those troops in context that was significant. U.S. President George W. Bush committed the forces immediately after his party lost the 2006 congressional elections and thus control over both houses of Congress. The obvious decision would have been to throw in the towel and begin a withdrawal from Iraq. Instead, Bush surged forces. The general feeling in the region — and particularly in Iran — was shocked confusion. For if the Americans were willing to double down after a bad election result, what would it take for them to back off? The result was a shift in calculus in Tehran and among Iraq’s sectarian groups that led to negotiations, a significant reduction in violence and ultimately the Status of Forces Agreement, which defines terms of the U.S. military presence in Iraq for the next three years.

The U.S. hope now is that the architect and implementer of the Iraq surge strategy, Gen. David Petraeus, can translate the Iraq success to the Afghan theater, largely using forces that are being freed up from Iraq. Just as the surge into Iraq caused the Iranians to wonder if the Americans had lost their minds, the logic goes, a surge into Afghanistan might cause the Pakistanis to shift their position. Specifically, the Americans want the Pakistanis to take a much firmer line against militant Islamists in the region bordering Afghanistan.

However, a direct Iraq-to-Afghanistan comparison is impossible because the war theaters are quite different — perhaps too different to make the surge strategy applicable.

First and most critically, there is no single government in Pakistan. In fact, many of the factions in Pakistan fully side with the radical Islamists that the United States wants to target in the border region. And as the last couple of weeks have illustrated, there are sound reasons to doubt that Pakistan’s government would be able to effect a difference in the security situation, even if it does possess the will to crack down on the Islamist rogues that are causing trouble.

Second, there is a belief within the Pakistani government — among those who are making at least some efforts to help out the war effort — that the Americans surely will not take any steps that would threaten the coherence of the Pakistani state itself. To do so would, in their eyes, destroy Pakistan and release what pressure that has been brought to bear on the militants in the first place. The key bluff (assuming it is a bluff) of an Afghan surge would be for the Americans to convince this faction that, no, Washington is less concerned with the fragility of the Pakistani state than with eradicating Islamist militants, so Islamabad had better step up.

Third, even if the bluff works, there is always the concern that India will be compelled to take military action against Pakistan itself — with or without U.S. consent — in retribution for the Mumbai attacks, and in hopes of keeping such an attack from occurring again. In other words, if the Pakistanis become all the more concerned about rival India to the east, they will have even less incentive to worry about problems on their western border with Afghanistan. In fact, Pakistan could grow even more reliant on Islamist militant irregulars to use against India as tensions escalate.

It is an imperfect comparison, and applying the surge strategy to Afghanistan is probably a long shot at best. But right now it is the only page in the game book that appears to have some relevance.
25050  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Mexico-US matters on: December 09, 2008, 09:59:23 PM
second post of the day:

WHY ARE MEXICAN PASSPORTS SHOWING UP IN MUMBAI, INDIA?

By Todd Bensman
The San Antonio Express-News

Three Afghani Muslim men caught posing as Mexican nationals last month while
en route to Europe were part of a human smuggling operation and carried what
are now believed to be altered but genuine Mexican passports for which they
paid $10,000 each, Indian investigators told The San Antonio Express-News.


An ongoing transcontinental investigation, which now involves Mexican and
Indian authorities, began Feb. 11 when a suspicious airport customs official
in Kuwait noticed the three Afghanis, traveling under Mexican pseudonyms,
could not speak Spanish during a layover on their air trip from New Delhi,
India to France.

The three Afghani travelers were detained and deported to India, where they
remain in custody while Mexican and Indian authorities try to learn about
their backgrounds, where they were going and who sold the apparently real
government-issue passports. A U.S. source confirmed the FBI and Immigration
and Customs Enforcement investigators also are looking into the matter.

At issue to some U.S. national security experts is whether another of
Mexico's embassies and consulates abroad might be implicated in selling
travel documents to people from countries like Afghanistan where terrorist
organizations are active, a circumstance that potentially could bring
terrorists to American borders. It wouldn't be the first time a Mexican
embassy was implicated in such an affair.

In 2003, a Mexican investigation into a Lebanon-Mexico human smuggling
operation produced firings and indictments of Mexican embassy personnel in
Beirut for allegedly selling travel documents to Lebanese citizens. One man
who bought a Mexican visa for $3,000 turned out to be a ranking Hezbollah
operative smuggled over the California border in the trunk of a car. Mahmoud
Kourani was convicted in 2004 of supporting the terrorist group from
Detroit.

Interdicting U.S.-bound travelers from the Middle East "was our number one
concern," said recently retired FBI Assistant Legal Attaché James Conway,
who for four years after 9-11 oversaw the bureau's counterterrorism programs
in Mexico City. "That's the national security concern from our southern
flank."

Travelers from Islamic countries carrying passports that are valid but
altered with fake names and photographs are among the most difficult to
detect, he said. In the black markets of human smuggling, real national
passports with embedded security bar codes rank among the most valuable
travel documents because they enable their bearers to more easily slip
through airport inspections.
==============
"If you've got a Mexican passport you've already crossed the bridge," Conway
said. "And you can become part of the flood of people who cross into the
U.S. If terrorists wanted to exploit the infrastructure in place, they can.
It's there."

TERRORISTS OR REFUGEES?

V.G. Babu, superintendent of immigration police at Cochin International
Airport, told the Express-News in a telephone interview the passports were
genuine government-manufactured passports and that the three men admitted to
buying them for $10,000 each in Mumbai, formerly known as Bombay, which
hosts a Mexican consulate office.

Babu said the three men initially tried to convince Indian authorities that
they were Mexicans. But the story quickly fell apart when two of the three
couldn't prove they spoke Spanish, he said.

"We broke them," because of the language issue, he said, and handed the men
over to federal Indian police for further investigation.

Investigators learned that a third Afghan who did speak some Spanish had
more than casual dealings with the Mexican embassy personnel in New Delhi
and was known to speak several languages, according to one Indian news
report.

Babu said he could offer no further details. Mexican foreign service
officials would only confirm that a multi-ministry investigation was
underway.

The Mexican Embassy in New Delhi declined to comment on the case. However, a
Feb. 16 Newindypress.com report cited New Delhi-based Ambassador Rogerlio
Granguillhome as confirming to Indian authorities that the passports were
likely real and asking that the documents be handed over so they can be
traced to their origins at an embassy or consulate office.

Ricardo Alday, a spokesman for Mexico's embassy in Washington D.C., also
would not answer questions specific to the investigation. But he did say his
government "has applied strong measures and invested considerable resources
to continuously improve the security of its travel documents."

"Mexico is a committed partner with the U.S. in ensuring . our borders are
not used to threaten or undermine our common security," Alday said in an
email.

Whether the Afghanis are connected to terrorist organizations battling with
American troops in Afghanistan and how they obtained the passports remain
unknown as the obscure investigation unfolds.

But Afghanistan is one of 43 predominantly Islamic nations listed by the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security as "countries of special interest"
because Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups operate in them.

Many Afghans caught crossing the U.S. southern border in recent years have
been determined to be economic immigrants, not terrorists, but many others
are presumed to have crossed and not been caught. Between 2002 and 2006, the
U.S. border patrol caught about 63 Afghanis crossing the borders, according
to agency capture data.

Conway, the former FBI legal attaché to Mexico, said that during his tour
the FBI got many "hits" running the names of captured immigrants from those
countries through terror watch list databases. He declined to elaborate,
citing national security rules against disclosure, and it remains unknown
what was learned of those individuals. But terrorists have illegally crossed
into the U.S. from Mexico and Canada since the mid 1990s.


THE WEAK LINK

The India case highlights concern felt among homeland security officials
since 9-11 about a continuing stream of immigrants from countries of
interest who illegally cross U.S. borders every year using Latin American
travel documents, often provided by paid human smugglers.

The chief concern, according to current and former FBI and ICE agents
familiar with the issue, is how well Latin American countries police the
supplies of travel documents emanating from their embassies and consulates
in Islamic countries.

According to federal court records from prosecutions of Middle Eastern
smugglers, thousands of Iraqis, Syrians, Lebanese and citizens of many other
Islamic countries have been able to travel illegally to Latin American
countries, then over U.S. borders. They were often able to do so by using
real travel documents originating from embassy offices of Mexico, Guatemala,
Ecuador, Venezuela, Colombia and Peru.

Conway said the ability to obtain real passports from any of those countries
represents a high danger.
================
"If you've got diplomatic establishments, like in Beirut, handing out
passports, there's little you can do," he said. "They come to Mexico, dress
like Mexican businessmen and you think they're going to pop up on our radar
screen? Absolutely not. They're going to walk on through."

In recent years, U.S. authorities have sought to make Central- and South
American countries more aware of the security threat presented by their
consulate offices and embassies. But some of those countries, such as
Venezuela and Guatemala, have proven less than responsive when asked to
tighten controls on foreign service personnel stationed abroad.

Among countries south of the U.S., Mexico has proven to be among the most
cooperative, Conway and other federal agents who have worked
counterterrorism programs there have said. Mexico has collaborated
extensively with American agencies to interdict travelers from countries of
interest, going so far as to allow American agents to interrogate captured
detainees inside Mexican facilities.

As part of those efforts, the Mexican government has taken some steps to
fortify confidence in its embassy personnel. For instance, after an
investigation in 2003 Mexico purged its Beirut embassy of personnel thought
to have been supplying travel documents to a Lebanese human smuggling
operation run by Salim Boughader, a Lebanese-Mexican.

Then, after U.S. courts were through convicting Boughader of smuggling
hundreds of Lebanese into Mexico for journeys over the U.S. border, Mexico
prosecuted and convicted him.

Mexico also has intensified a program of vetting its consuls and actively
monitoring the activities of staff elsewhere. Last year, the Express-News
reported that Iraqis and other citizens of the region had offered hundreds
of thousands of dollars in bribes to Mexico's honorary consul to Jordan, for
travel visas that would get them to Mexico and then the U.S. (SEE BREACHING
AMERICA SERIES)


Raouf N. El-Far, a Jordanian businessman who was appointed Mexico's honorary
consul to Jordan in 2004, said he refused all offers. He also said he
underwent an intensive intelligence background check before his appointment,
part of a new program at the time.

Still, word that three Afghans caught using passports to pose as traveling
Mexican nationals struck counter-terrorism expert Steven Emerson as lucky -
and alarming.

"If these three Afghanis figured out how to infiltrate under false Mexican
identifies, you can be sure that Islamic terrorists have done the same,"
said Emerson, who runs the Washington D.C.-based Investigative Project on
Terrorism.

"This needs to be investigated by Congress and the FBI."

Express-News reporter Sean Mattson in Mexico contributed to this report
=================
Pages: 1 ... 499 500 [501] 502 503 ... 671
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!