another glance at some Islamic "love" for the West

Response to a friend upon viewing video:

Video - An Alarming video every Westerner should see - tangle.com


Unfortunately consistent with my readings & feelings. I googled Abdallah Fahd Abd Al-Aziz Al-Nafisi and got results showing that the video shows excerpts from a speech by Kuwaiti Professor Abdallah Al-Nafisi, which aired on Al-Jazeera TV on February 2, 2009 - all kinds of links such as the transcript :

http://mychristianblood.blogspirit.com/archive/2009/03/23/kuwaiti-professor-abdallah-al-nafisi.html )

Interesting to jump through if you've got to the time . I agree - let’s not be naive regarding what we’re dealing with. Paraphrasing the “good” professor’s comments on Israel, let’s face it, Christianity (the West – despite Obama’s comments, Christianity and the West are pretty synonymous , don’t you think?) and Islam are incompatible. They consider us infidels which can ultimately be justifiably exterminated – let’s not paint it all pretty and rosy – that’s their core belief despite what might be said to the contrary. The only way I will believe different is if I see the true Muslim community (not the U.S. watered down, politically convenient black pseudo-Muslims or Americanized muslims that conveniently want all that’s good from this country while conveniently disregarding the pure venom that exists in their brothers overseas), but the true Middle East Saudi/Gulf Region Muslim, decrying/condemning terrorism and any such talk such as what was done on this video. Something tells me this won’t happen. Perhaps I’m just cynical and close-minded. Or perhaps I’m a realist. Difficult to wrestle this when I actually know good people who are muslims – but the core beliefs are the core beliefs and the good professor was very candid about them as are many other scholars on a regular basis. How are we supposed to contend with this – we who ultimately believe in goodness, justice, fairness, etc......always giving others the benefit of the doubt.

I’m reading a book now called “Sole Survivor “ by Navy SEAL Marcus Luttrell which discusses his experiences in Afghanistan. Really something to read. Talks about the training to become a SEAL , etc. What is really striking me hard is the concept of Rules of Engagement that have been established by “suits” in Washington D.C. that are essentially castrating our armed forces in the face of this vicious enemy. They essentially have to wait until they are getting slaughtered before they can retaliate in fear of being prosecuted in federal courts upon their return to the USA for war crimes, etc.. Unbelievable. They literally have to second guess everything so that the liberals on this side don’t have anything to press charges on. The Taliban know this and happily exploit it as the huge weakness that it is using civilians as shields, then broadcasting any our our troop’s transgressions on “Al Jezeera” TV for the whole world to condemn, etc.... unbelievable.

editorial " A lot of talk, too little clarity" by Glenn Garvin, Miami Herald

“A lot of talk, too little clarity” – Glenn Garvin, Miami Herald, 5/6/09

As I wrote to a friend:

Just a quick note of encouragement that there are those out there in the media that aren’t “star struck” by the current administration and all of the Democrat histeria!

If you didn’t read his editorial this morning, here’s the link:

http://www.miamiherald.com/columnists/garvin/story/1032870.html .

I like his commentary and hope to continue to see good things from him in the future!

One thing for sure – they can’t accuse him of being irrational. His commentary is scathing yet very finely expressed - something I’m striving to achieve.

Enjoy,

Ed

And as I wrote to Glenn Garvin & the Miami Herald:

Dear Glenn,

Just wanted to voice my appreciation for your " A lot of talk, too little clarity" editorial. I feel that I'm being bombarded by a constant onslaught of anti-Republican, anti-conservative, all things anti-Bush rhetoric. Any disagreement is portrayed as obstructionistic (if that's even a word) , and the accusation that "if you're not willing to agree and be part of the "solution", you're just part of the problem" . Tough environment but one where I'm being forced to refine and truly understand my core positions, and learn to convey them rationally. I imagine many are doing the same and ultimately the opposition is going to be quite formidable - I just hope it doesn't take too long.

Today's other editorials by Pitts & Robinson were brutal and joyfully jumping on the bandwagon to"kick them while their down" bashing Republicans, conservatives, and why not also start attacking Christians while we're at it. Tough times but hopefully clarity of thought and resilience, and the ability to effectively convey dissent will result.

Your commentary illustrates that we haven't reached the political Promised Land as many would like us to believe.

Thanks again,

Ed

President's Apology Tour

I struggle with our new adminstration’s approach to using apologies as an apparent cornerstone to making foreign policy inroads. There seems to be chronic need to be liked (and thus clearly demonstrate how the new administration differs from the old – what better way than to be able to claim that we are now “liked” again?).

The following articles touch on this topic:

When Slapped, Slap Back – by Eugene Robinson - Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/20/AR2009042002814.html

“...One was his encounter with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, whose public persona is the polar opposite of Obama's. Chávez is all theater, all the time. He made the most of his introduction to the new American leader, enfolding him in an all-smiles handshake and presenting him with a book that harshly indicts the long, painful history of U.S. intervention in Latin America...
Chávez can be charming. But when Obama shook the man's hand, he should have telegraphed clearly, through posture, expression and language, that he was not amused. Chávez's gift of the book was meant to affront, not to enlighten, and I would have advised Obama to reciprocate in kind. ...
The other moment for presidential theatrics was Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega's 50-minute speech excoriating, yes, the long and sordid history of U.S. meddling in Latin America. Asked later about Ortega's peroration, Obama replied curtly that "it was 50 minutes long." ...
Obama was correct not to walk out on the speech. But as was the case with Chávez's tendentious present, Ortega's speech was intended as a slap. When Obama spoke later, he should have prefaced his promising call for an "equal partnership" with other countries in the hemisphere with some strong pushback against those who would rather relive the insults of the past than move forward....
Chávez, Ortega and a few others, however, made a show of being rude. A flash of presidential anger from Obama would have been in order.
My argument isn't that Obama should try to be someone he's not. It's that he's declining to use one of the tools at his disposal. As public anger over the U.S. bank bailouts was rising, a well-timed burst of presidential outrage might have allowed him to get out in front of it....”
I, for one, don’t appreciate our country or our president being disrespected.

WSJ.com - Opinion: The President's Apology Tour* - Karl Rove, The Wall Street Journal 4/22/09-->
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB124044156269345357-lMyQjAxMDI5NDIwMzQyNDMxWj.html



“President Barack Obama has finished the second leg of his international confession tour. In less than 100 days, he has apologized on three continents for what he views as the sins of America and his predecessors.
Mr. Obama told the French (the French!) that America "has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive" toward Europe. In Prague, he said America has "a moral responsibility to act" on arms control because only the U.S. had "used a nuclear weapon." In London, he said that decisions about the world financial system were no longer made by "just Roosevelt and Churchill sitting in a room with a brandy" -- as if that were a bad thing. And in Latin America, he said the U.S. had not "pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors" because we "failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas."
By confessing our nation's sins, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that Mr. Obama has "changed the image of America around the world" and made the U.S. "safer and stronger." As evidence, Mr. Gibbs pointed to the absence of protesters during the Summit of the Americas this past weekend.
That's now the test of success? Anti-American protesters are a remarkably unreliable indicator of a president's wisdom. Ronald Reagan drew hundreds of thousands of protesters by deploying Pershing and cruise missiles in Europe. Those missiles helped win the Cold War.
There is something ungracious in Mr. Obama criticizing his predecessors, including most recently John F. Kennedy. ("I'm grateful that President [Daniel] Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old," Mr. Obama said after the Nicaraguan delivered a 52-minute anti-American tirade that touched on the Bay of Pigs.) Mr. Obama acts as if no past president -- except maybe Abraham Lincoln -- possesses his wisdom.
Mr. Obama was asked in Europe if he believes in American exceptionalism. He said he did -- in the same way that "the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks in Greek exceptionalism." That's another way of saying, "No."
Mr. Obama makes it seem as though there is moral equivalence between America and its adversaries and assumes that if he confesses America's sins, other nations will confess theirs and change. But he won no confessions (let alone change) from the leaders of Venezuela, Nicaragua or Russia. He apologized for America and our adversaries rejoiced. Fidel Castro isn't easing up on Cuban repression, but he is preparing to take advantage of Mr. Obama's policy shifts.
When a president desires personal popularity, he can lose focus on vital American interests. It's early, but with little to show for the confessions, David Axelrod of Team Obama was compelled to say this week that the president planted, cultivated and will harvest "very, very valuable" returns later. Like what?
Meanwhile, the desire for popularity has led Mr. Obama to embrace bad policies. Blaming America for the world financial crisis led him to give into European demands for crackdowns on tax havens and hedge funds. Neither had much to do with the credit crisis. Saying that America's relationship with Russia "has been allowed to drift" led the president to push for arms negotiations. But that draws attention away from America's real problems with Russia: its invasion of Georgia last summer, its bullying of Ukraine, its refusal to join in pressuring Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions, and its threats of retaliation against the Poles, Balts and Czechs for standing with the U.S. on missile defense.
Mr. Obama is downplaying the threats we face. He takes comfort in thinking that Venezuela has a defense budget that "is probably 1/600th" of America's -- it's actually 1/215th -- but that hasn't kept Mr. Chávez from supporting narcoterrorists waging war on Colombia (a key U.S. ally) or giving petrodollars to anti-American regimes. Venezuela isn't likely to attack the U.S., but it is capable of harming American interests.
Henry Kissinger wrote in his memoir "Years of Renewal": "The great statesmen of the past saw themselves as heroes who took on the burden of their societies' painful journey from the familiar to the as yet unknown. The modern politician is less interested in being a hero than a superstar. Heroes walk alone; stars derive their status from approbation. Heroes are defined by inner values; stars by consensus. When a candidate's views are forged in focus groups and ratified by television anchorpersons, insecurity and superficiality become congenital."
A superstar, not a statesman, today leads our country. That may win short-term applause from foreign audiences, but do little for what should be the chief foreign policy preoccupation of any U.S. president: advancing America's long-term interests.
Mr. Rove is the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.”


With the following editorial, Ms. Rabinowitz’s critique of this international campaign of “un-Bushness” resonates deeply and sums up my feelings on this liberal fixation with disempowering the United States, and reducing our role internationally to one of equivalence and subservience.


WSJ.com - Opinion: Obama Blames America* - Dorothy Rabinowitz, Wall Street Journal, 4/22/09

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124035759650041105.html

“The president of the United States has completed another outing abroad in his now standard form: as the un-Bush. At one stop after another -- the latest in Latin America, where Hugo Chávez expressed wishes to be his friend -- Barack Obama fulfilled his campaign vows to show the nations of the world that a new American leadership stood ready to atone for the transgressions of the old....

No sitting American president had ever delivered indictments of this kind while abroad, or for that matter at home, or been so ostentatiously modest about the character and accomplishment of the nation he led. He was mediator, an agent of change, a judge, apportioning blame -- and he was above the battle.

None of this display during Mr. Obama's recent travels could have come as a surprise to legions of his supporters, nor would many of them be daunted by their new president's preoccupation with our moral failures. Five decades of teaching in colleges and universities across the land, portraying the U.S. as a power mainly responsible for injustice and evil, whose military might was ever a danger to the world -- a nation built on the fruits of greed, rapacity and racism -- have had their effect. The products of this education find nothing strange in a president quick to focus on the theme of American moral failure. He may not share many of their views, but there is, nonetheless, much that they find familiar about him.

The same can't be said for the large numbers of Americans who caught up with the details of the president's apology tour. Presidents have been transformed by office, and Mr. Obama may yet be one of them. But on the evidence so far, he has, as few presidents before him, much to transform. Or, at least, to understand.

Since that bridge too far to Europe, ordinary Americans, including some who voted for Mr. Obama, have shown evidence of a quiet but durable resentment over the list of grievances against the United States that the president brought to the world's attention while overseas. There are certain things that can't be taken back. There are images that are hard to forget. Anger of this kind has an enduring power that could, in the end, haunt this presidency.”


Thank you Ms. Rabinowitz.



And now a quick glimpse on where all of this leads us.......!!


Bow & kiss the hand of the king and this is what you get:


** Saudi Arabia rebuke over US claim **
Saudi Arabia says the US must retract a claim that King Abdullah met Israeli President Shimon Peres in 2008.
< http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/8029435.stm >


Time to apologize again.............................................................

Who's the "voice' of conservatism ? & the need for auto dealers!!

I read an editorial yesterday by Francis Wilkinson in The Week which really struck home, since I am prone to be very radical at times thus am likely to embrace anything that criticizes that which I am against. I’m beginning to realize that this may simply feed the “enemy” and facilitate their agendas.

Instead of great thinkers setting agenda, taking leadership, etc., we’re letting media guys take up the flag and ultimately pushing conservative thought to the fringe and/or making the differences between people into a real “great divide”. I’m outraged by certain new policies , statements & actions , etc. of the new administration . I'm probably even more outraged by the outright trashing of the Bush adminstration. Now the struggle is to somehow combat the left/liberal/”intellectual” (cloaked as "moderate") with stronger right/conservative/intellectual powerful counter-arguments & commentary. . There’s nothing an intellectual enjoys more than to make somebody look like a blithering idiot . At times, I feel that I’m being “baited” so that my reaction makes me appear to be out on the fringe. Hopefully, the conservative movement will fortify itself and find a unified voice without “reacting” to the b.s. that’s thrown at it to purposely taunt it into a display that can be pointed at and called “irrational”.

Here it is: http://www.theweek.com/article/index/95905/Conservative_media_clobber_the_GOP

Thank you Mr. Wilkinson. I agree.



The auto industry is one that poses grave concern to me for a number of reasons. This is an interesting perspective coming from somebody who’s been not only in the auto industry but also in Washington:

Engines of Main Street
By Mack McLarty
Clinton's former chief of staff, now chair of an automotive group, says you can't help Detroit if you hurt car dealers.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/29/AR2009042904017.html?referrer=emailarticle

News and views

NUCLEAR REALITY IN IRAN

http://www.theweek.com/article/index/95334/Nuclear_reality_in_Iran : 4-13-09

I think Roger Cohen is delusional. We haven’t “squandered” anything when it comes to interacting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.


Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, center, waves during the inauguration of the country's first nuclear fuel manufacturing plant on April 9, 2009.(EPA/Corbis/Abedin Taherkenareh)
Reality is that his/their agenda is in no way aligned with ours. As Michael Rubin in the Wall Street Journal asserts, Obama’s idea of “negotiating with an insincere opponent is “arrogant, naïve, and dangerous.”

Big question: Why does Iran need to so urgently pursue nuclear power anyway???? They’re in the epicenter of cheap oil.


The Lure of Foreign Travel by Frida Ghitis
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/tms/politics/2009/Apr/14/the_lure_of_foreign_travel.html

I seem to enjoy Frida’s perspectives and think that she’s right on. Travelling suits Obama, “he could speak in generalities, in concepts, and in vague, pleasing notions.” He makes a good celebrity but where’s the substance? What is the cost that the world is going to expect us to pay in order to like/approve of us? While he calls on a new era of diplomacy and a diminishment of the USA’s power on the world stage, North Korea & Iran are going to happily push forward with their nuclear programs, Europe is going to have us bear as much of the financial burden as possible for this worldwide financial crisis, and who’s going to get in deeper & deeper into Pakistan/Afghanistan while everybody else watches from the sidelines?
But then again, there’s nothing like “Giving speeches to cheering crowds; speaking to world leaders eager for the magic to rub onto their unpopular shoulders is surely much more energizing than watching petty politicians squabble, hapless diplomats talk in circles or dull bureaucrats wrestle bailouts from their calculators. Ah, home, sweet home. It's no wonder the president is planning a busy schedule of international travel.”
Obama: Economy showing `glimmers of hope'
http://www.miamiherald.com/business/story/994918.html : 4-11-09

“President Barack Obama declared Friday that the slumping economy has begun to show ''glimmers of hope,'' but cautioned that it remains severely stressed and will require lots more work to turn it around...

''We're starting to see progress,'' Obama said. ``And if we stick with it, if we don't flinch in the face of some difficulties, then I feel absolutely convinced that we are going to get this economy back on track.''

First of all, what does “glimmers of hope” mean. Does this mean that prior to Friday, there was a time when he had no hope?????? There was always, should always be, and will always be hope Mr. President. I suggest you rethink what you say. Also, how convenient it is to acknowledge how bad things are but that if we stick with it long enough, his policies will get us back on track. He’ll continue to ask us to bear with it, be patient, etc...etc.... etc... yet what policies are being put in place to really stimulate the economy???? How is the American entrepreneurial spirit being fostered??Not at all – at least that’s my perspective. Everything is about subsidy, equalizing, taxes, and big government. But he’ll continue with the town hall meetings and the campaigning – why bother stopping after you’ve been elected. It’s a good strategy , keep campaigning throughout your first four years and when it comes time for reelection you’ve already got an enormous head start on any opponent.

As of a this week, per NPR, 1 in 6 people in the USA are either unemployed or under-employed (part-time employed people looking for full time work) and the rise in unemployment is not expected to crest until 2010. Building roads may help a bit but long term you’d better get American business back on track and somehow get America manufacturing again because a service economy , equalized ala Obama isn’t going to cut it.

Obama seeks $83 billion for Iraq, Afghan wars

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30140288 AP , 4/9/09

http://www.drudge.com/news/119800/obama-seeks-83-billion-wars


”President Barack Obama is seeking $83.4 billion for U.S. military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, pressing for special troop funding that he opposed two years ago when he was a senator and George W. Bush was president” - my how things change when one actually has the burden of dealing with issues and not just talking/criticizing.

As is so succinctly commented in the Drudge posting:
“It's easy to be against something when you're not accountable for its success or failure. The left dearly wanted to pin an Iraq defeat squarely on Dubya & the Reps. But Bush and enough Reps held firm regarding withdraw. Now that Dems have enlarged their margins in both houses of congress and added the POTUS, it seems as though they (Obama at least) have changed their tune. No longer do we hear how we need to get out of the region, etc. To the contrary, we're shuffling deck chairs, moving troops to Afghanistan. “

My take – I think our involvement is the region is totally no win. Noble but a no win. No matter what, we’ll be blamed for something, will be expected to foot the bill for everything, and will have the gratitude of small minority. Perhaps it’s time to leave and let them sort things out themselves. Should things get bad enough in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, surely the UN will do something? or will it do nothing? It would be cheaper to send in special forces periodically to exterminate any problem organizations/people than try to reshape cultures that don’t think like we do, don’t like us and never will (unless we make all the concessions).

death tAX
GOP comes to the rescue -- of the rich
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other-views/story/993218.html : 4/10/09
It makes me sick to see the blatant hostility some people have to success or should I say to the success that is probably always going to be out of their reach. What else would explain this absurd point of view. Somehow, it seems “fair” to tax somebody their entire life yet, if they’re industrious enough and lucky enough to accumulate any sort of wealth, let’s tax that money again when they die. Perfect....typical liberal b.s.

The meaning of soothing, missing words
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other-views/story/993230.html : 4/10/09
Bravo Mr. Thomas. I agree.

''Words must mean something,'' President Barack Obama said in Prague last week in response to North Korea's missile launch. He was speaking about the numerous resolutions and condemnations of North Korea's actions over the years by the United Nations and others. It is a standard the president should apply not only to North Korea, but also to the Middle East and the Muslim world.
In a speech to Turkey's Parliament, the president said, ''The United States is not, and never will be at war with Islam.'' It was a noble sentiment. Such a unilateral declaration may soothe many in the West, but there is a central question that comes from Obama's declaration of conscientious objection: What if Islamic extremism is at war with America, Europe and Israel and everyone who stands in the way of its attempt at supremacy in religion and politics?.....
In some Muslim media, in some textbooks produced for Middle Eastern schoolchildren, at some Islamic schools in America and in recruitment films that urge ''jihad'' and declare martyrdom to be the highest goal of a Muslim person, one might conclude (if words mean something) that a significant portion of Islam is at war with Judaism, Christianity, and strains of its own religion that do not embrace the extremist view of hell on earth for all who disagree.
In his soothing words to the Islamic world, it would have been useful to hear Obama challenge Muslims to put their own house in order and evict extremists from it. He might have asked for a reciprocal statement from Islamic scholars, heads of Islamic states, and people in charge of spreading hate directed at the West that Islam is not at war with America, Israel and Europe. It would also be helpful to hear a pledge that Muslim extremists intend to assimilate in countries to which they have immigrated, embracing the history, language and culture of those nations and eschewing attempts to impose Sharia law, not only on people of their faith, but on others who do not share it.”

They don’t play by the same set of rules , Mr. President............

At Summit of Americas, U.S. May Face World of Blame for Economy 4-14-09
By Scott Wilson
President Obama plans to take his message of partnership to Latin America and the Caribbean this week, but he will face a group of leaders far less forgiving than their European counterparts were about the United States' central role in the global financial crisis.

His celebrity status is definitely not going to get him far – only his concessions will (and do we really need to make concessions!!!!!!!). "He is not going to Trinidad with a plan for the hemisphere," said Jeffrey Davidow, a former ambassador to Mexico and Obama's special adviser for the summit. "He is going to Trinidad with the intention of listening, discussing and dealing with his colleagues as partners." Who needs a plan when you can listen & discuss?????????????Discuss what?????? I suggest it be what is best for the USA since you’re our President! Colleagues/partners – what is that??? We’re talking leaders of sovereign nations not colleagues /partners – each who is responsible for taking care of the interests of his/her nation – this isn’t a partnership. To the contrary , it’s a chess game, a power struggle, an attempt to gain more control or diminish that of another. We best not give in to our “colleagues” – they’ve shown all to well how quickly they’ll jump on another bandwagon when it so benefits them. We’re in a position of power because we’ve earned it – let’s not give it up just to make somebody like us more. No matter what , they’ll have to deal with us if we’re relevant. Better to be respected than liked.

News and views

Skipping thru my daily aggregators , some articles that were of particular interest:


http://www.theweek.com/article/index/95188/The_Obama_seder : a man for everybody, a Christian who celebrates Pass-Over, invites gay/lesbian families to the White House Easter egg roll, etc...... why not define yourself as everything for everybody. He should consider celebrating Ramadan as well. Surely there must still be some honor in being who you are. I wouldn't expect my Jewish friends to celebrate Easter, nor would I take offense if they didn't. Perhaps he can attend a New Age festival and do some type of pyramid/crystal ceremony as well to get their favor?

http://views.washingtonpost.com/leadership/2009/04/obama_abroad_all_soft_no_power/all.html : different perspectives / arguments on the need to draw a line vs. the wisdom of not drawing one, and demonstrating "leadership". When does one make a stand? Are principles something one maintains simply nebulous ideas that are interpreted differently depending on circumstances?



How Bernanke Staged a Revolution
By Neil Irwin
Every six weeks or so, around a giant mahogany table in an ornate room overlooking the National Mall, 16 people, one after another, give their take on how the U.S. economy is doing and what they, the leaders of the Federal Reserve, want to do about it.

- take a peak on the Federal Reserve & how its policies are set. interesting & scary.




U.S. to Join Talks on Iran's Nuclear Program
By Karen DeYoung
The United States said yesterday that it would directly participate "from now on" in international talks with Iran over its nuclear activities, the latest move in the Obama administration's promised diplomatic outreach to the Tehran government.

- It’s nice to know that Iraq is willing to work with us provided we’re “honest”. I bet we start giving them money.


Finally a sobering parody on the Obama opposition:

http://www.theweek.com/article/index/95186/Jon_Stewarts_Obama_defense

Jon Stewart: Mocking 'Baracknophobia' (Corbis)

Jon Stewart's Obama defense
Jon Stewart has just claimed his next victim, said Jonathan Stein in Mother Jones. On “The Daily Show,” Stewart ruthlessly ridiculed conservative commentators who are “shrieking about America’s descent into tyranny” under President Obama. (watch Jon Stewart’s bit on “Baracknophobia”) Stewart’s on target—“when the federal government is doing all sorts of things that you disagree with, it doesn't mean that America is becoming a fascist state. It just means you lost.”

-nothing like making the opposition look like idiots. Conservatives better get the "A" game together - an empowered liberal can be a most formidable foe.

Pakistan - who are we kidding?

Driving to work & listening to NPR, I was astounded to hear of our new adminstration's strategies moving forward & plans to provide approx. $1.5 billion in civilian aid to Pakistan , as a means of showing that we're not only interested in subsidizing military-related aspects but in improving the human condition in the country. A quick bounce through the web indicates that we've pumped about $10 billion into Pakistan since 2001 and what is the net result - single digit approval ratings ( over 90 percent of Pakistanis "dislike" us - to put it mildly ), the Taliban & al-Qaeda are having a field day and we're criticized for sending in drones to hunt down these animals. Somehow despite this overall general hatred for us, the Pakistan hand is still held out for more. We're criticized for just about anything we do, but Obama's message while in Europe is apologetic for what he apparently feels are past transgressions and that "America's back" and that things will be different - a new softer, more understanding, reasonable nation "unlike" the past administration. One that's apparently willing to give despite being spit on. Let's not forget that we're not a Christian nation according to Mr. Obama, further empowering those that despise us. Oh, how the Muslims enjoyed that comment. I just don't understand it. I for one, am a Christian, as is a substantial portion of the USA. We'd beg to differ. Sure we're a nation of many and that's a wonderful thing, but we're primarily a nation of Christians - why are we trying to make that something bad or evil? It's the foundation of nation and the faith of our founding fathers.



Being the most powerful nation, has it's complications. For one, not everybody is going to like you. Secondly, not everybody is supposed to like you. Thirdly, our national interests come first - I realize this sounds radical but that's life. Nobody is going to look after our interests but ourselves. Should I go on.......



In any case, my rant stems from the below article for "The WEEK" and the link which brings you to glimpse of what the enemy (because that is what they are like it or not) really think of us (but let's continue to give them money anyway....:



"Great Satan" from the Week :http://www.theweek.com/article/index/95152/Great_Satan


Since 1971, American has been living high on “nothing more than bits of paper,” said Muhim Iqbal Khan in Pakistan’s Ausaf (via Watching America). To protect this fraudulent currency “shell game,” America persuaded Saudi Arabia and OPEC to use its “fake dollars” as the currency for oil. When Saddam Hussein started selling oil in euros, American overthrew him. Now Iran is threatening the “Great Satan” by abandoning the dollar, thus turning “the idols of American pride and conceit to dust.” America beware: “When the real value of these fake dollars is revealed to whole world, America will see only darkness everywhere.”



Click on the link to Muhim Iqbal Khan's article for a sobering glimpse of what we're up against & why Bush's policies were justified.