“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Thursday, October 13, 2011

When Netanyahu Exchanges 1,027 Palestinians for one Israeli soldier, is that Not Capitulating to Terrorism?


Everyone Has a Price. 

When it comes to negotiating with terrorists, there is a clear disconnect between what governments profess and what they actually do.  Believe any politician or bet your life, libery or property  on what they say and you will be in danger. 


At the time Benjamin Netanyahu was elected in 1996, the New York Times wrote, "Mr. Netanyahu also indicated what he meant by negotiating with Arabs during his debate with Prime Minister Shimon Peres. The Arabs, he said, were 'realistic'—'when they see a weak government like Mr. Peres,' they demand everything, they get everything, and they demand more.'"


Strong words from good old Bibi, but he is not alone and Israel is hardly the exception.


The British dealt with the Irish Republican Army even after the IRA had launched a mortar attack on 10 Downing Street that nearly eliminated the entire British cabinet in 1991. In 1988, the Spanish negotiated  the ETA only six months after the group had killed 21 shoppers in a supermarket bombing. The government of Israel in 1993, secretly negotiated the Oslo accords while the PLO continued its terrorist campaign and refused to recognize Israel's right to exist. 


If they are politicians, any of them, all of them, trust them at your peril.


------------------------------------------


Robert Fisk, Inedpendent: 


Democratic governments don't deal with terrorists – until they do

In three decades, the Israelis have freed 7,000 prisoners in return for 19 Israeli prisoners


Once upon a time, we lived in a world where democratic governments did no deals with "terrorists". No country promoted this nonsense more than Israel. And no Israeli leader repeated the mantra so often as one B Netanyahu Esq. After all, America never "gave way" to "terrorists". No deals would ever be done by Britain.

Indeed, if France were to release 1,000 prisoners for one French hostage – heaven forbid – Obama, La Clinton and Cameron would be loud in their fury at French cowardice. But yesterday there came not a squeak from Washington or London about Israel's latest "deal" with its supposedly "terrorist" enemies: 1,027 Palestinians for one Israeli soldier.

Of all nations on earth, Israel regularly "gives in" or does "deals" over "terrorist" demands more than any other. A quick trip down memory lane: in 1985, Israel released 1,150 prisoners for three captured Israeli soldiers in Lebanon. In 1998, for the remains of an Israeli soldier killed the previous year, Israel released 65 prisoners and the bodies of 40 dead Hezbollah men. I watched the grim procession of the latter to a south Lebanon village where the bodies reeked so badly that families were sick at the stench as they wept in mourning.

In 2004, I watched the arrogant figure of Samir Kantar – convicted of murdering a policeman and an Israeli civilian and his four-year-old daughter – stride across the Lebanese frontier from Israel a free man (along with two tractor loads of Hezbollah bodies, released in return for an Israeli agent lured into Beirut by Hezbollah). He was proclaimed a hero in Lebanon.

And so it goes on. In three decades, the Israelis have freed 7,000 prisoners in return for 19 Israeli prisoners and the remains of four dead Israeli soldiers. Quite an exchange rate. Ironically, Israel's latest "deal" – 1,027 Palestinians for one Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, captured in Gaza in 2006 – suggests that one Israeli life equals 1,300 Palestinian lives; this was almost the exact number of Palestinians killed in Gaza in the 2008-09 invasion when 13 Israelis were killed.

Oddly, Israel never explained – and most journalists never asked – why its soldiers simply could not discover where Shalit was held in Gaza. It must have been Israeli military incompetence on a massive scale – unless the missing soldier was taken briefly through the Gaza tunnels to Egypt. Perhaps, when he is released, he will tell us.

In the past 30 years, the hostage swaps have been engineered by the International Red Cross, the German intelligence service, the United Nations and now the Egyptians. Hamas, crowing as usual at its "success", might choose to hold its tongue. Arrangements currently suggest that in return for Shalit they will receive 500 Palestinians now and 527 Palestinians "later". More than 10 years ago, the UN engineered a similar swap. Half the Lebanese prisoners came home during the hostage swap; then the Israelis decided to keep the other half.

The UN's special negotiator told me personally that when he pointed this out to then-UN Secretary General, the latter said of the remaining prisoners: "Forget them." No doubt Hamas can be equally as ruthless. Since they are now trying to force journalists and others to obtain "visas" before visiting their Republic of Gaza, we may not know.

In any case, it's a dirty and outrageous business, doing deals with "terrorists". Do not utter the word hypocrisy. And don't expect Obama to say a word. After all, the poor man is seeking re-election

120 comments:

  1. This is a thoughtful and legitimate question. We have been asked by our politicians to pay any price in treasure or blood to fight terrorism, to never give in to the cost or the time. We have sacrificed tens of thousands of dead and wounded on a never-ending war on terrorism.

    Israel is often held up as an example of a country and a democracy that does not deal with terrorists, of course until they do. Clearly Israel negotiates with anyone, as they should.

    If we are ultimately going to negotiate, which we always do, then it makes sense to exert your violence promptly and dramatically, make your point and then negotiate.

    Try and argue the merits or fallacy of the premise and back your arguments with facts. Do not bore us with back and forth nonsense that we will simply ignore.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Quit serving the stupid ambitions of politicians less smart than yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is witness to how much the Chosen Ones value life, in contrast to the death worshipers. They lost just 777 soldiers in the Six Day War, and it was a terrible burden for every affected family or cooperative farm, because at that time there were not even 3 million people in the country, and it was a very tight group, almost like a single giant kibbutz. In the immediate aftermath of the October 1973 "Yom Kippur" war the government put out a figure of 1,500 dead and everyone thought there had to be a mistake, it was too high. Then a few days after that the real tally came in, 2,522 dead, and there was a kind of hush throughout the land.

    --
    "His people scream his name as they leap into battle. The women throw their babies at us and hurl themselves onto our knives to open wedge for their men to attack us. They have no ... no ... decency!" (Frank Herbert, "Dune")

    ReplyDelete
  4. .

    If we are ultimately going to negotiate, which we always do, then it makes sense to exert your violence promptly and dramatically, make your point and then negotiate.

    Words are meaningless when no one believes them. There have been prisoner exchanges forever. Most countries exchanges captured spies.

    There is obvious moral hazard involved. A good example is the kidnappings by the Mexican cartels or the piracy by the Somalis, where paying the ransom merely provides incentives for more kidnappings.

    That being said, there is nothing to prevent you tracking down the culprits and punishing them after the fact. Actions are much more effective than words.

    One wonders though, given that some exchange was probably inevitible, why it took so long to get the fellow released.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  5. Like it or not Israel is the focus of the world.

    Like it or not the arabs set the value of a Jewish life.

    One Jew is worth 1,300 arabs.

    This is codified by the world.

    Never again should we castigate Israel for disproportionate response to arab violence.

    The ratio has been set.

    One arab rocket opens the door for 1,300 Israel rockets.

    It is fair, it is just.

    One arab life is worth 1/1,300 of a Jewish life.

    One can only hope that the Arabs celebrate the return of the thousands of terrorists to their homes.

    Like a cancer being injected into a host these murderers will reinfect an already sick, death oriented host.

    The exchange is actually even more unbalanced. It's ONE INNOCENT Jew, doing nothing other than standing at his post on his side on the border. (pre48 if you will) verses 1,300 convicted terrorists.

    And America just paid what? 1/2 million for 2 hikers?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Love the Title of the tread...""When Netanyahu Exchanges 1,027 Palestinians for one Israeli soldier, is that Not Capitulating to Terrorism?""

    Just shows the Bar's bias...

    again..

    but I dont expect any decent coverage of any issue that concerns Israel or jews on this blog.

    Not let down again!

    Congrats.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Last night I listened to the Republican debate. Herman Cain, a nice guy, would be a poor candidate and I have doubts about him as a president. The doubt is both heightened and lessened by the current disaster and the previous disaster, George Bush.

    Cain was too quick with glib answers. Perry does not belong there, especially with his immigration views. Huntsman was more focused on being humorous than was appropriate. Bachmann sounded better than she has in the past and would have some serious headwinds with the media.

    Rick Santorum would, in my opinion, be up for the job as well as Romney and Gingrich. Ron Paul is not a serious candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  8. .

    For those who think Herman Cain's 999 tax plan is the greatest thing since sliced bread, something to mull.


    999 or 666

    .

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's a tough question, no simple answer and the USA government has a history of dealing with those they label terrorists. Americans seem to be more absolutist in word and reluctant to negotiate but compromising.
    It could be argued that Israel has to negotiate with terrorists as terrorists are the ones that give them the problems. It would be hasty to say that no negotiation is necessarily the one best answer, but it has it's pros and cons, and at some point you have to decide on a strategy. In reality, you probably have to just try out strategies and do what works best. Now, negotiating sets a bad precedence. After all, what if the person says, "I want $100 more." Or what if one person asks for 100, gets it, and the next asks for 200, the next terrorist asks for 500, 1000, 1 million, etc. Also, someone might want to look at the pros and cons of terrorism, i.e. the pros are that you might get the ransom, the cons are that you might get killed/caught. A no-negotation policy eliminates any chance that the terrorist will have any pros in choosing terrorism.

    However, a terrorist might want to call your bluff. He might say that I have a man hostage, I just want $100. He thinks that you won't really stick to your ideals. Would you be better off having sent the message to terrorists that you won't negotiate with terrorists, and will have lost, say 10 lives, or are you better off with 10 lives, having lost $100 and lost credibility when you say that there are no pros for terrorists? It's hard to just say that the human lives are worth maintaining credibility, but in the long run, credibility might be what saves more humans. Again, on the other hand, despite this policy there is still terrorism. What if every idiot tries to call your bluff? Then, in the name of maintaining credibility, you will just keep losing lives (because some terrorists will not think you're credible no matter what).

    So basically:
    no-negotiation: maintains credibility which may save later lives, but only works if future terrorists really take your credibility into account.
    negotiation: saves lives, this is a key bonus, but loses plenty of money and of course maybe even some lives, allows terrorists to disrupt life and gives them no reason to avoid terrorism.

    If terrorists are expected to be reasonable enough (and take credibility into account), then we shouldn't negotiate, if they are not reasonable at all, then we may as well negotiate if the losses are less than the gains. Determining how reasonable terrorists will be is very tough, very subjective, and very complicated, and this is why there is really no clear-cut answer as to what the best approach is.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I could care less what they do.

    ReplyDelete
  11. .

    I wasn't sure what T was alluding to when she mentioned Obama's opology tour to Japan until I saw this.

    Obama’s perilous ‘Hiroshima’ gambit

    A stunning revelation from a Wikileaks document dump shows President Obama badly bungling relations with our oldest democratic ally in Asia.

    In a September 2009 cable prior to Obama’s official visit to Tokyo, our ambassador informs Washington that Tokyo had denied Obama’s bid to go to Hiroshima to publicly apologize for America’s dropping the atom bomb there -- in short, to turn the defeat of Japan into a matter of national humiliation for America.

    The Japanese government told the ambassador this would be a “non-starter,” because the gesture would encourage domestic anti-nuclear groups and leftist groups opposed to Japan’s military cooperation with the United States...


    Apologizer-in-Chief


    The man has no shame.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  12. Rufus II said...
    I could care less what they do.


    Great, then why do you post on the topic?

    BTW how's that ostrich head of yours doing?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Fuck you, Wio. I'm not in the mood for your shit today.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Q that is a stunning revelation. Obama wants to grovel and the Japanese refuse to give him the stage. He really is pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You could make a list of the top 1,000 things I care about, and the Jews/Palestinians would not be on it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I'm suspicious someone is trying to maneuver us into another (and, bigger) war om the middle east.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The lament that I am hard on the Israeli government is laughable. I am nowhere near as tough on themm as I am on the US government. I can do both without being anti-semetic or anti-American. It is called being responsible to what one believes in. I find Netanyahu every bit as loathsome as Obama and Bush and the jack-in-the box US Congress.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Deuce said... Q that is a stunning revelation. Obama wants to grovel and the Japanese refuse to give him the stage. He really is pathetic.

    If you went back in time to 1942, right after Pearl Harbor and the Bataan Death March, and said here's a picture from 67 years in the future showing the President of the United States bowing to the Emperor of Japan, the US would have surrendered right there and then. Save the blood and treasure.

    ReplyDelete
  19. We're looking a Worldwide Depression right in the eyes, and someone is trying to distract us with phony, emotional issues that don't concern us in the least.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Missing therefore is any disclosure of how the US and Egypt used the Shalit case to legitimize Muslim Brotherhood participation in the Egyptian government, the establishment of ties between the Brotherhood and Washington and the Egyptian Brothers' expanding clout in Ramallah and Gaza.
    The Palestinian Authority's ties with the rejectionist Hamas-Gaza were one of the stumbling blocks which held Israel back from negotiating a permanent peace with the Palestinians. By signing the prisoner swap deal, Israel confronts the formidable Muslim Brothers, parents of Hamas, and paved their path into the West Bank.
    None of Israel's talking heads has been able to explain what made Hamas suddenly flexible enough on its toughest terms to swing the deal. For instance, the top terrorist guns of both Hamas and Fatah were not included in the prisoner swap and will stay in jail.
    The answer is revealed here: It was not Hamas' decision to give way; it was forced to do so by its Egyptian Brotherhood masters. US officials in Cairo for talks with the Brotherhood leaders and Gen Mowafi led them in the real negotiations for the Shalit deal.
    They first established its fundamental and left the Israeli prime minister's emissary David Meidan and the head of Hamas' military wing Muhammad Jabari to tie up the technical ends.
    The Americans pushed Israel hard to accept the deal, while the Brothers gave Hamas no choice.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Rufus II said...
    Fuck you, Wio. I'm not in the mood for your shit today.



    LOL now that's funny...

    Dear Rufus...

    Must suck to have Israel in your face day in and day out..

    hour by hour...

    cant avoid it can you?

    Yep, the world is obsessed with Israel and the Jews...

    You aint..

    you have made that clear...

    But all your alternative fuel passions are because the arabs control the current supplies of cheap energy.

    Solve the energy issue?

    Solve the problems in the middle east. There would be no issue with israel if OIL was not as important from OPEC.

    But it sucks I know, you could care less about Jews Israel or arabs/islamists...

    Newsflash, the arabs/islamists? they are the core reason we have international terrorism, it all comes from there.

    Ignore it at your own peril.

    ReplyDelete
  22. So there it is, right of the pages of the Story of "o", the US influence with the Rulers of Egypt, their Army, forced the hand of Hamas and Israel, both.

    Another win on the Foreign Policy field, for Team Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Deuce said...
    The lament that I am hard on the Israeli government is laughable. I am nowhere near as tough on themm as I am on the US government. I can do both without being anti-semetic or anti-American. It is called being responsible to what one believes in. I find Netanyahu every bit as loathsome as Obama and Bush and the jack-in-the box US Congress.



    You give yourself way to much credit on this specific issue.

    I simply pointed out many times that you have a double standard for "bartenders", no Jews, 2 anti-israel zealots...

    I also pointed out that your post heading was biased.

    Didnt call you anti-american or anti-semitic.

    However since you bring it up?

    This blog has a deep dark anti-semitic stink. It comes into almost every tread by rat and Ms T.

    From Rat's israeli abortion rants, Lester Crown zionist plots, Israel's disproportionate response to "harmless terror", international war crimes and Ms T's replacement theology and anti-zionist screeches (and a host of other anti-judaism, anti-israel and anti-zionism talking points) the bath water is clearly spoiled by the flavor of Jew hatred.

    It's clear to everyone except you and a few of your fellow bartenders.

    Ms T is openly called anti-semitic BY MANY at the Belmont Club.

    So many, before just calling ME an asshole you should look in the mirror and examine the daily allowing of garbage against israel, Jews and Zionism by those that you hold in a position of "responsibility" at the bar.

    Write me off, I could care less, Write Allen off, Write Micah off...

    Notice a trend?????????

    Every Jew that walks into this blog gets trashed.

    It's a hostile environment.

    Just a fact Jack...

    ReplyDelete
  24. Notice the slander never stops...

    " desert rat said...
    So there it is, right of the pages of the Story of "o", the US influence with the "


    Story of "o"

    Porn at it's worst...

    Slander of course...

    Par for the course...

    ReplyDelete
  25. Team Obama which has been calling for negotiations 'tween Israel and the "Others", got its' way.

    I do not see where Hamas has changed its' position, vis a vie the legitimacy of the government in Israel.

    Yet there are Bibi's agents, cutting a deal, regardless.

    Three cheers for the USA.

    Shin Bet security service director Yoram Cohen said Wednesday ...

    "If there was a better alternative, operationally or via negotiations, perhaps we would have chosen it," Cohen said during a press briefing. "But I think we got the best deal in terms of security parameters. This was a difficult deal in terms of diplomacy, security and morals, but to bring our soldier home in the relevant time frame, negotiations were needed, and the other side lowered its demands significantly on all aspects."


    The Egyptian and Israeli were pressured by US, Hamas by the Egyptians.

    Negotiations over the borders and settlements will commence, shortly.
    Or the UN will "Internationalize" the process.

    ReplyDelete
  26. WiO: Every Jew that walks into this blog gets trashed.

    Not Allen, not Micah. Just you. My boss is a Jewish carpenter. He says I have to love my neighbors. But I don't have to like everything they say.

    ReplyDelete
  27. You admit, Story, that I am referencing YOU.. You readily admit that you are, the Story of "o"...

    And doth protest, to much.

    Study Jewish propagandists of the past, then you will learn that you fall right into the web they advise weaving, to capture fools and knaves.

    ReplyDelete
  28. There could have been any number of Jews that have commented over the years, that were not trashed.

    If they did not propose that Israel could be conflated with Judaism.
    If they did not advocate that the US should continue to subsidize Israel.
    If they did not advocate that tribal cultures were the apogee of social development.
    If they did not defend Jim Crow discrimination in Israel.
    If they acknowledged the righteousness to had by embracing the Rights of Man and the Enlightenment.


    If they were not hyphenated Americans.

    It is the political positions you advocate, Story, that are trashed, not your religion.

    Have a nice day.

    ReplyDelete
  29. The polite Jew hater....

    Yep using sweet nice words to hide the hatred that they spin day in and day out.

    It's like the polite rapist, the polite murderer or robber..

    They say please, they joke, they speak so carefully..

    In the end?

    What they do is criminal.

    A rose by any other name is still a rose...

    Or to quote a more recent saying...

    Ms T and rat?

    Lipstick on a pig.

    ReplyDelete
  30. It is you, Story, that disrespects and belittles the position of the Chief Rabbinate Of Israel, referencing the murder of Jewish souls.

    How could anyone be more anti-Judaic, than to take that position?

    ReplyDelete
  31. The Story of "o" is correct.

    Words have meaning.
    They are precise instruments.

    He looks in the shadows, vainly, for something that is not there.

    But insists it is, regardless of his inability to find it.

    Paranoid schizophrenia, defined.

    ReplyDelete
  32. The Story of "o" advocates for a nuclear attack upon Mecca.

    Nothing could be more anti-Semitic.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Hamas became flexible, as soon as Mubarak was gone.

    Cohen said that in the five years since Shalit was captured there was an unbridgeable gap between Hamas' demands and what Israel was willing to agree to.

    The situation began to change three months ago when it became clear that Hamas was ready to be flexible on which prisoners be released and on the demand that they be allowed to return to the West Bank.


    The German mediator was not involved in the talks in recent months. Rather, Egyptian intelligence services managed the process.


    The part of the Egyptian government most allied with US, leads the way.

    It's good to have proxies.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Reality refutes those that feared that the situation in Egypt has deteriorated, for US or Israel, with the departure of Mr Mubarak.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Yep...


    The truth continues to march.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Without even an attempt at rebuttal.


    Story takes an old lawyers advise

    “When the facts are on your side, argue the facts. When the law is on your side, argue the law. And when you don’t have either the law or the facts on your side, pound the table!”

    ReplyDelete
  37. No pounding on the table...

    No discussion with anti-semites on the issues concerning Israel, Zionism or Judaism...

    What was that saying...

    Swine before pigs?


    yep....

    Fits in with the lipstick on a pig...

    You cannot argue, discus or talk about Jews, israel or Zionism with anti-semites.


    Rat and Ms T? Your comments speak volumes without any discussion.

    Lipstick on a pig

    ReplyDelete
  38. Feelings,
    he has nothing more
    than feelings.

    Not a single quote to back his schizophrenic positions.

    Nothing but his feelings.

    Awakened Liberal that he is, he still is impassioned by the paranoia and delusions of the "Liberal Left".

    Exemplified by the continued attempts to profit from perpetual victim-hood.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Now the Story is telling us we are unworthy of continued discussion, because he has neither the facts, nor the law on his side.

    Pounding sand, he is.

    ReplyDelete
  40. desert rat said...
    Now the Story is telling us we are unworthy of continued discussion, because he has neither the facts, nor the law on his side.

    Pounding sand, he is.


    YES CORRECT YOU ARE NOT WORTHY but not because of lack of facts or law...

    I am saying you are not worthy of discussion BECAUSE that you are a jew hating, israel hating and zionist hating troll.

    Please do not inflate your ego thinking that facts and truth are not on Israel, zionism or Judaism's side.

    It's just that you are incapable of reasoned discourse.

    You are a troll.

    So argue with yourself, continue to post all your jew hating, israel hating and zionist aryan nation nonsense....

    It shows clear as day who and what you are...

    troll.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Now, students, watch the rants expand, exponentially.

    They will become increasingly less reasoned.

    The sand, it's taking a beating.

    ReplyDelete
  42. On the subject of Israel, I mostly quote Defense and Foreign Ministry statements, rabbinical students, the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and other real Israelis.

    I doubt that they are all anti-Judaic.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Or the position of the United States, which has rocked steady, since 1967.

    ReplyDelete
  44. 26. swami Let the record show that the last time Shermans and Panthers were on opposite sides was 1967 in the Golan heights. I do not know how often, specifically, they fought each other, but the last Panther destroyed in battle was destroyed by a Sherman, and on the whole it came out very, very badly for the Panthers.

    Israel couldn't get tanks from the United States at that time. They had some surplus Shermans which they retrofitted with diesel engines and 105mm. So they weren't really Shermans anymore. More impressive was the Golan Campaign of the 1973 War, when a main assault force of 600 Syrian tanks were held off for four days by about 60 Israeli ones (plus a lot of mines and artilery), despite the Syrians having night-vision. Poor leadership on the Arab side to blame there, and strict adherence to a planned timeline that failed to exploit breakthroughs, giving the Israelis time to reinforce from the southern front as the Egyptian side collapsed. Also the Syrian officers tended to run away to save their own hide, leaving the enlisted to wither on the vine.

    ReplyDelete
  45. .

    Story of "o",

    Rat, why don't you give it a rest?

    The 'Story of O', somewhat cute when you first used it, has grown old after a year or more.

    Your constant use of it, after the person it is aimed at asks you to stop, appears to be mere baiting.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  46. We should have crushed the Syrian armor capability, back in '04.

    It would have been possible, in '04, to have destroyed the Syrian threat, without occupying the country.


    That we did not, exemplifying the limits the US was willing to accept, in the "War on Terror".

    There was more evidence of Syrian interference in Iraq, back in '04, than there is of an Iranian attack planned for Washington DC, in '11 or '12.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I might, Q, but for the continue references he makes to the "confession".

    That is pure fiction.
    Thus, the Story of "o" lives.

    He has the tiller.
    He sets the course.

    I'll stay it.

    ReplyDelete
  48. He admits the confession does not exist, I'll never mention the Story of "o ', again.

    ReplyDelete
  49. .

    I might, Q, but...

    Merely, as has been pointed out before, puts you on the same basis as him, childish provocateurs.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  50. There is a place ...


    For petulance.

    There are times when fire must be fought, with fire.


    As I say, he sets the course.

    A simple admission of the truth, and I'll bury that particular axe.

    ReplyDelete
  51. A simple tit for tat.

    Even Bibi bends.

    I'm not asking for 479 acknowledgements.

    Just one.

    For one.

    ReplyDelete
  52. .

    There are times when fire must be fought, with fire.

    Peevish and petty and carrying about as much substance as WiO's claim that his rants are to protect Israel, Jews, and Zionism when in fact they do the exact opposite.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  53. .

    Surely, based on experiance, you are not holding WiO to a bar first set by Buddy Larsen are you?

    :)

    .

    ReplyDelete
  54. The lessons of the whirled, writ small, at the Elephant Bar.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I realize that "o" alienates.

    He, more than most, changed my position on Israel, from '01 until now.

    I advocated taking down Saddam, in part because he was paying $25,000 to the families of Pali suicide bombers. Definitely part of what I considered part of the US, "War on Terror" prior to '04.

    The US bogging down in Iraq, was an eye opener.

    But researching the claims of "o" made me realize the realities of the situation in the Levant.

    His rants alienate, and I'm all for it.

    ReplyDelete
  56. .

    Missing therefore is any disclosure of how the US and Egypt used the Shalit case to legitimize Muslim Brotherhood participation in the Egyptian government, the establishment of ties between the Brotherhood and Washington and the Egyptian Brothers' expanding clout in Ramallah and Gaza...

    A link to show where this came from would be helpful WiO. I've found some of the sources you have listed before appear less than unbiased observers.

    I've seen the same concerns raised about the Shalit deal and how it has the possibility of shaking up relationships in the ME. Yours is the first that 'blames' the US and Egypt for the Israel/Hamas deal.

    Sounds a little Machivellian to me.
    Especially for the nitwits we have in the White House and State.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  57. It started back at the Belmont Club.

    There was a poster there, helo driver, as I recall, an ex-Navy pilot, that made the case that the US was allied with segments of Islam, and had to be.

    I came to realize that the "best" way forward was through proxies, not direct overt involvement by US.

    Pork Rinds, he made me reevaluate my positions with regards to Israel and Islam. To look beyond the propaganda into the historic realities of the conflict.

    I thank him, for that.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Here you go, Q

    Egypt defies Sinai peace terms, hosts Hamas in Cairo before Shalit's release



    DEBKAfile, We start where the media stop

    ReplyDelete
  59. .

    The lessons of the whirled, writ small, at the Elephant Bar.

    What? That there are agitators and apologists no matter where you go?

    .

    ReplyDelete
  60. Prior to "o", my views of Israel had been shaped by Leon Uris, Kirk Douglas and Paul Newman.

    Read most of Uris's work.

    "Cast a Giant Shadow", a defining movie, I saw the analogy to "Stonewall" Jackson, even as a child.

    Newman, made the case in "Exodus, the Movie"

    As is typical of most of US, I was quite pro-Israeli.
    Until I learned more.

    Became, I think the term in use today:

    Awakened

    ReplyDelete
  61. .

    Egypt defies Sinai peace terms, hosts Hamas in Cairo before Shalit's release...

    Here you go Q?

    Here I go where? The article complains about things Israel has complained about for weeks.

    It doesn't prove any manipulation by the US or Egypt in forcing the deal.

    I have seen other articles on the Shalit deal showing Egypt was helping facilitate the transfer. Probably true.

    I saw other articles indicating the deal was possibly the result of Israel wanting to get back at Abbas and the PA for going to the UN even at the risk of building up Hamas. All speculation at this point.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  62. And mediators, Q.

    You come to me, and ask for unilateral concessions in my "conflict" with "o".

    I respond with an offer of negotiation.

    An obvious win/win/win for all around.

    Every participant, from posters to management gains something they have stated publicly they desire.

    The endless references to the non-existent "confession" end. There is an admission that no such "confession" exists.

    This is something that all the readers of the blog know is a truth. That there was never such a "confession".

    I will desist from using the moniker 'Story of "o"', when referencing Pork Rinds.

    In free and fair exchange.

    ReplyDelete
  63. That is correct, Q.

    Perhaps why "o" did not post that link.

    Just more feelings.

    No facts.

    Mr Cohen, he was there.
    Mr. Panetta, he was there a couple of weeks ago.
    Mrs Clinton, in it up to her waist.

    Who Is Omar Suleiman?
    Posted by Jane Mayer


    As laid out in greater detail by Stephen Grey, in his book “Ghost Plane,” beginning in the nineteen-nineties, Suleiman negotiated directly with top Agency officials. Every rendition was greenlighted at the highest levels of both the U.S. and Egyptian intelligence agencies. Edward S. Walker, Jr., a former U.S. Ambassador to Egypt, described Suleiman as “very bright, very realistic,” adding that he was cognizant that there was a downside to “some of the negative things that the Egyptians engaged in, of torture and so on. But he was not squeamish, by the way.”

    ReplyDelete
  64. .

    I have to admit you make a good point about WiO's references to the alleged crimes.

    The offer you make is probably the best we could expect given the participants.

    However, again given the participants, I'm less than confident that it will happen.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  65. As I said, the whirled writ small, here at the EB.


    A reasonable win/win/win for all concerned.

    We'll see what the response is.

    Who in the real whirled will it mirror?

    ReplyDelete
  66. I'll follow Bibi's lead ...

    ... and ...

    Compromise

    ReplyDelete
  67. Now that the Occupation Forces are mobilized it is time for them to implement ...

    Rule 11:
    Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame


    If I'm correct in the analysis of the Occupation Forces, it'll be Mr Bernanke and his Bank that are the "responsible" party that needs to face "Accountability".

    We know where Mr Romney will stand.

    Dr Paul has a large segment of the GOP base that think "Accountability" at the Fed is the paramount issue, with regards the economic independence of the people.

    The Democrats will make hay, of the issue. Demonizing the Republican establishment in the process, tying them to the 1%ers.

    ... Outlaw Biker Gangs ...

    ReplyDelete
  68. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”

    ReplyDelete


  69. Rule 10:
    The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says,
    “Okay, what would you do?”

    ReplyDelete
  70. Alinsky pursues the same themes as Sun Tzu, in the "Art of War".

    Mao also echoed Sun Tzu.

    "Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."

    "The enemy advances, we retreat;
    the enemy camps, we harass;
    the enemy tires, we attack;
    the enemy retreats, we pursue"

    Mao Tse-Tung quotes

    ReplyDelete
  71. .

    Dr Paul has a large segment of the GOP base that think "Accountability" at the Fed is the paramount issue, with regards the economic independence of the people.



    Cut it out rat, you're killing me.


    :)


    .

    ReplyDelete
  72. A solid 3 or 4% of the GOP, Q ride with Dr Paul, the people's posse..

    Plus a point from the ever diminishing Perry pile.

    ReplyDelete
  73. That these Tea Partying "Conservatives" are backing a candidate that advocates for a National Sales tax, in addition to an income tax, unfathomable.

    Whatever being a "Conservative" means, the idea of expanding Federal prevue into the daily or monthly reporting of retail sales, from every grocery store and merchant in the US, certainly not part of the conservation of our National Heritage.

    ReplyDelete
  74. A National Sales Tax and Immigration compliance audits for all employers.

    Large and small, to include domestic help and nannies.

    Zoe Baird leading the way in exemplifying the depth of the challenge.

    Don't cry for Zoe Baird

    ReplyDelete
  75. Knock out 3 or 4% of the opponents base. Even if they do not "Vote Obama", they certainly won't "Go Romney" either.

    Especially if the point is pushed.

    The cost benefit ratio, it favors the Democrats. Especially if we see the focus of the Occupation Forces continue to be on the "Banks".

    They will begin to focus upon a distinct target.

    It's a Rule, you know.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Attorney General -- Don't Cry For Zoe Baird

    Zoe Baird wouldn't be out $12,000 in back Social Security taxes, the $2,900 penalty and a baby-sitter if she hadn't been nominated to the Cabinet post.

    She has alerted us to the fact that an estimated 3 million undocumented workers are employed in the U.S. and if each of these owes $12,000 back taxes then it is $36 billion that our deficit will not see.

    ReplyDelete
  77. .

    The cost benefit ratio, it favors the Democrats. Especially if we see the focus of the Occupation Forces continue to be on the "Banks".



    This is the point we continue to argue about. The focus on the "Banks" is the agenda of a part of OWS, the Paulanistas. While the rest may recognize it as an issue, it hardly appears to be their prime focus. At least from the commentary and participant comments I have seen.

    You build mountains out of mole hills.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  78. I see targets of opportunity, or strategy.

    Depending upon the depth of spontaneity to the Occupation Forces.

    I'm listening to David Stockman outlining a Fed reorganization, in part, taking the Fed out of managing the discount rate.

    On MSNBC, mouthpiece media of the Progressive position.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Stockman's Plan to Create Jobs:
    is the cutline.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Mr Stockman:



    You know, the banking system has been saved on the back of the savers of the United States. We have totally destroyed any incentive for thrift, for deferred gratification. The Fed has become more Keynesian than Keynes. And to think that a Republican White House appointed this Bernanke guy who had, you know, he was recorded everywhere at that point as talking about dropping money out of helicopters. There was no doubt he was an out-and-out Keynesian. They appoint him, and here is what we get. Now, the fact is, if you were going to bail out the banking system with this kind of transfer – I calculate it at three or four hundred billion a year – the suppression of interest rates on depositors, on the seven trillion or so of deposit base that we have, is at least three or four hundred billion a year. And that’s the same thing as taxing the public by three or four hundred billion and redistributing it to banks based on the distribution of their deposit base.

    That wouldn’t get one vote. Okay, in other words, what I’m saying is, if it were done in a proper way as a fiscal transfer, put before the democracy to review and vote up or down, it would be voted down, overwhelmingly. It would be shouted down. It would not even see the light of day out of committee, to say nothing of the floor of the House or Senate. And yet, we have twelve people who can sit on the open market committee and affect a half-trillion-dollar transfer arbitrarily. They haven’t been elected, they haven’t been authorized to do this, they’re totally twisting and exaggerating their mandate, their so called "dual mandate." This ought to be grounds for a serious constitutional crisis, if nothing else. The Fed is operating as the central planning agency of the US economy. It is exercising plenary power from stem to stern in the US economy, and that is not the kind of system, 1) that’ll work, or 2) that’s compatible with all of our traditional notions of a private sector of a free market economy, of a distinction and separation between the realm of the State and the realm of private activity.

    You cannot say enough about the danger of the deluded people who were running the Federal Reserve, and that’s why I’m so happy to see, finally, the Republicans waking up and the letter that came out a couple days ago warning them no more of this, you’ve done too much already. At least there’s a dawning recognition that we have a profound constitutional crisis emerging as a result of the Gang of Four. Yes, there’s twelve people on the open market committee. It’s the Gang of Four – Dudley, Bernanke, Yellen, and Evans – who have seized power in this country and really need to be called out.

    ReplyDelete
  81. David Stockman, the man that engineered the practical economics of the "Reagan Revolution"

    The Federal Reserve is an issue that crosses the aisle.

    ReplyDelete



  82. It’s the Gang of Four – Dudley, Bernanke, Yellen, and Evans – who have seized power in this country and really need to be called out.

    D. Stockman


    Former US Representative and Director of the Office of Management and Budget under Reagan, does not mince words.

    ReplyDelete
  83. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Better than a 9% National Sales Tax we could institute ...



    ... a tax of 0.1 percent on all trades of stocks and bonds and a 0.01 percent tax on all trades of derivatives ...

    ReplyDelete
  85. A .1% tax or Federal fee on the transfer of real estate, as part of a package of non-retail sales taxes, certainly a better option than 9% Federal tax on all retail transactions.

    ReplyDelete



  86. In his first public remarks on the issue since it was revealed on Tuesday, Mr. Obama sought to counter skepticism about whether Iran’s Islamic government directed an Iranian-American car salesman to engage with a Mexican drug cartel to assassinate Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States and carry out other attacks. Mr. Obama insisted that American officials “know that he had direct links, was paid by, and directed by individuals in the Iranian government.”

    “Now those facts are there for all to see,” Mr. Obama said. “We would not be bringing forward a case unless we knew exactly how to support all the allegations that are contained in the indictment.”

    The president said the administration had reached out to its allies and the international community to make its case. “We’ve laid the facts before them,” Mr. Obama said at a news conference conducted with the visiting South Korean president, Lee Myung-bak. “And we believe that after people have analyzed them, there will not be a dispute that this is in fact what happened.”

    ReplyDelete
  87. Somebody is fucking with us, and it's not Imadiddlebad.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Well, rufus, it could be the "justification" for the US to take a tougher stance against Iran, as part of "The Deal" to get Israel to come to terms with Hamas.

    ReplyDelete
  89. More recently, they're questioning whether Attorney General Eric Holder might have committed perjury when -- after being asked by the committee in May 2011 when he had learned of the operation -- he responded: "I'm not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks."

    Internal e-mails obtained by CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson -- who months ago was the first reporter to break this story on a major network with the help of ATF whistle-blowers -- suggest otherwise. The e-mails show that Holder was given regular briefings on the program as far back as July 2010. That would appear to contradict his testimony to Congress.

    When Attkisson asked Justice Department officials about the apparent contradiction, their initial response was to claim that the e-mails in question were about a different operation that started before Holder took office. Then they shifted gears and claimed that Holder misunderstood the question. He did know about Fast and Furious, they said, just not the details. More recently, the administration has shifted gears once again and apparently decided that the best defense is a good offense.

    Not surprisingly, Attkisson is now intensely unpopular with both the Justice Department and White House. The reporter told radio talk-show host Laura Ingraham that -- as she worked the story -- a woman from the Justice Department (whom she identified as Tracy Schmaler) "was just yelling at me" and that someone from the White House (whom she identified as Eric Schultz) "screamed at me and cussed at me."

    Last week, Holder went on the attack. He lashed out at Issa and other Republican critics of his handling of the operation, charging them with using "irresponsible and inflammatory rhetoric."

    ReplyDelete
  90. Tapis Crude (Singapore) finished the night at $120.91 last night.

    Louisiana Light finished at $113.23 today.

    ReplyDelete
  91. But the Solyndra scandal is far from Kaiser's first brush with political controversy. As the Sunlight Foundation's Bill Allison reports today, Kaiser has become extraordinarily wealthy by taking advantage of the federal tax code in ways that some tax experts - including the IRS - believe to be illegal.

    As Allison describes it in his Sunlight post today, "in one six year period, during which he increased his net worth enough to land him on the Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest Americans, Kaiser reported taxable income to the Internal Revenue Service just once, totaling $11,699--equivalent to a full-time hourly wage of $5.62."

    During the 1980s bust in the oil industry in Oklahoma and Texas, Kaiser bought up struggling energy companies whose losses provided him with tax deductions that effectively hid his own income.

    As an example, Allison points to Kaiser's purchase of Waterford Energy, "which had all of $7 million in assets and some $151 million in losses on its books. The losses were valuable--under the Internal Revenue Code, a company can use past losses as credits, known as net operating losses, to reduce their tax burden in profitable years."



    Naw, I can't imagine why the OWS crowd is pissed. But, I know why I'm pissed. I've been the sucker.

    Kaiser

    ReplyDelete



  92. President Barack Obama collected $43 million for his 2012 re-election campaign and helped raise an additional $27 million for the Democratic National Committee over the past three months, according to an email sent to supporters by campaign manager Jim Messina this morning

    ReplyDelete
  93. Who's behind the Wall Street protests?


    Soros in 2009 wrote in an editorial that the purchase of toxic bank assets would, "provide artificial life support for the banks at considerable expense to the taxpayer."

    He urged the Obama administration to take bolder action, either by recapitalizing or nationalizing the banks and forcing them to lend at attractive rates. His advice went unheeded.

    The Hungarian-American was an early supporter of the 2008 election campaign of Barack Obama, ... He has long backed liberal causes - the Open Society Institute, the foreign policy think tank Council on Foreign Relations and Human Rights Watch.

    According to disclosure documents from 2007-2009, Soros' Open Society gave grants of $3.5 million to the Tides Center, a San Francisco-based group that acts almost like a clearing house for other donors, directing their contributions to liberal non-profit groups. Among others the Tides Center has partnered with are the Ford Foundation and the Gates Foundation.

    Disclosure documents also show Tides, which declined comment, gave Adbusters grants of $185,000 from 2001-2010, including nearly $26,000 between 2007-2009.

    Aides to Soros say any connection is tenuous and that Soros has never heard of Adbusters. Soros himself declined comment.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Adbusters was definitely "on the bench".

    Whether the owner knew the names of the players or not, matters not so much.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Coach was left to "Make the Call"

    ReplyDelete
  96. CBS News reports:


    25% of millionaires pay lower tax rates than many middle-class Americans

    Roughly 25 percent of American millionaires pay a lower tax rate than millions of middle class earners, according to a new study by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

    According to the report, which was based on 2006 data, about a quarter of millionaires (about 94,500) paid less than 26.5 percent of their income in federal taxes, while about 10 percent of moderate-income taxpayers (about 10.4 million taxpayers) paid more than 26.5 percent in taxes. Moderate-income taxpayers were defined as those with an adjusted gross income less than $100,000.

    The study validates claims recently touted by billionaire investor Warren Buffett, that the percentage he paid on his taxable income in a given year was "a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people" in his office. Buffett argued in an August opinion piece that lawmakers in Washington should raise taxes on the "mega-rich" who have been "coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress."

    ReplyDelete
  97. Speaks volumes for the perceived worth of a human life by both sides.

    ReplyDelete
  98. The plant of my dreams comes online in 2012, In Italy?


    Notice the size - 13 mgy. Just what a nice little Southeastern County would want. Thie first one will be expensive, but they figure they can get it down to around $40 Million ($3.00 per g/y of output) = very affordable. And, about what I predicted, btw. :)

    This is a large, experience company that has been working with this stuff for many years, and they're financing the plant out of their own piggybank.

    ReplyDelete
  99. I think, el, it is more a reflection of the real danger, or lack of it, that those Palestinians pose to Israel.

    ReplyDelete
  100. And the high numbers of Palestinians that have been incarcerated, by the Israeli.

    ReplyDelete
  101. A US official on Thursday confirmed that a top Haqqani commander had been killed in a strike in Pakistan.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Sen. Claire McCaskill (Mo.), who raised eyebrows when she did not join Obama at a St. Louis event earlier this month, voted to move the bill forward. “This plan won’t solve all of our economic problems, but it would be a step in the right direction,” she said in a statement.

    Also voting yes were Sens. Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) and Robert P. Casey Jr. (Pa.). Each of them faced a GOP television campaign urging them to vote against the package, as well as a 5.6 percent surtax on millionaires that Democrats have proposed to pay for it.

    At a Wednesday luncheon, Senate Democrats weighed which piece of the president’s plan to put forward for a vote next. Leaders indicated that they may consider appropriations measures next week and return to the jobs proposals the first week of November, after a scheduled week-long recess at the end of this month.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Despite the Justice Department’s focus on insider trading, Mr. Rajaratnam’s case and the government’s broader crackdown have been something of a sideshow to the larger problems related to the global financial crisis and America’s continued economic woes.

    For instance, insider trading at hedge funds — and the notion that the stock market is a rigged game — does not rate on the list of grievances from the anti-Wall Street protests spreading across the country.

    “Unless people can identify lost money as a result of insider trading, or have had their savings stolen by Madoff, they don’t view their own economic difficulties as being caused by a few bad apples,” said Mr. Berman, the Ohio State law professor. “They see the problems with our economy and financial markets as far more systemic than that.”

    ReplyDelete
  104. “9-9-9 will pass, and it is not the price of pizza because, it has been well-studied and well-developed… The problem with that analysis [that it will not raise enough revenue] is that it is incorrect. The reason it's incorrect is because they start with assumptions that we don't make. Remember, 9- 9-9 plan throws out the current tax code. ... Now, what 9-9-9 does, it expands the base. When you expand the base, we can arrive at the lowest possible rate, which is 9-9-9.”

    — Herman Cain, Washington Post-Bloomberg debate, October 11, 2011

    A family of four making $50,000 a year “are still going to have some money left over.”

    — Cain, on MSNBC, October 12, 2011

    ...

    The “9-9-9” label is actually a bit of misnomer. Cain would toss out much of the current federal tax code and replace it, eventually and only temporarily, with three taxes — a 9 percent income tax, a 9 percent business transactions tax and a 9 percent federal sales tax.

    ReplyDelete
  105. The terror plot unfolded during a months-long sting operation. The conspirators allegedly planned to bomb a Washington, D.C., restaurant where undercover federal agents said the Saudi ambassador was a regular customer.

    The plotters also discussed bombings of the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington and the Israeli embassy in Argentina, US officials said.

    After the details of the foiled plot were announced Tuesday, the US Treasury Department moved to block the assets of five individuals directly linked to the alleged assassination conspiracy.

    ReplyDelete
  106. NASA says it's embarking on a third year of aerial surveys of Antarctica's ice cover, as scientists are concerned about ongoing thinning of key features.

    ...

    "With IceBridge, our aim is to understand what the world's major ice sheets could contribute to sea-level rise," Michael Studinger, IceBridge project scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., said. "To understand that you have to record how ice sheets and glaciers are changing over time.

    ...

    A DC-8 operated by NASA completed its first science flight Oct. 12 and will fly through mid-November while a Gulfstream jet operated by the National Science Foundation and the National Center for Atmospheric Research will fly through early November, a NASA release said Thursday.

    ReplyDelete
  107. On Sept. 30, Burns ordered that Loughner remain committed for an additional four months because he determined there was a "substantial probability" that medical care at the hospital would restore Loughner to competency within the time period.

    Loughner's attorneys appealed Burns' decision and requested that Loughner be permitted to stay in Tucson while the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit considered the matter. The Ninth Circuit ruled last week that Loughner must return to the Springfield hospital during the appeals process.

    The Ninth Circuit has scheduled a hearing on the commitment issue for Nov. 1.

    ReplyDelete
  108. .

    Adbusters was definitely "on the bench".

    Whether the owner knew the names of the players or not, matters not so much.

    Coach was left to "Make the Call"





    Well I know what to get you for Christmas rat. A subscription to Conspiracy Theory Magazine.

    Mr. Lasn, the Adbusters editor, denied receiving any money from Mr. Soros.

    “We do have a relation with Tides — it’s just a conduit” for money from small donors, he said. “There has been no direct funding from George Soros or anybody like that.”


    :)

    .

    ReplyDelete
  109. .

    Trigger? What Trigger?

    McCain vows to nullify defense cuts if they’re triggered

    Sen. John McCain thinks there’s an obvious solution to the sweeping defense cuts that will be automatically triggered in 2013 if the congressional supercommittee fails to come to a deficit agreement: Congress should simply overturn them, and he’ll help lead the charge.

    On Thursday, a reporter asked the Arizona Republican to react to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s recent warning that the triggered cuts would do “catastrophic damage” to national security.

    If there’s a failure on the part of the supercommittee, we will be among the first on the floor to nullify that provision. Congress is not bound by this. If something is passed, we can reverse it,” McCain responded...


    Don't Like It? Change It.

    The same thing happened with Pay-go. When it got in the way they got rid of it.

    The military/industrial complex is alive and well and ready to rock.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  110. The only survivor of a Russian plane crash that killed almost an entire professional hockey team said the flight went wrong from the beginning.

    ...

    The aircraft engineer, who was in the cabin during takeoff and did not have his safety belt fastened, added, "Everything flew on impact. I was hit hard by something -- the right side of my body is all broken.

    ...

    The 52 year old said he "survived by a miracle" but added that he would not quit flying.

    ReplyDelete
  111. .

    I've always kind of liked David Stockman and I agree with much of what he is saying now philosphically. However, while he decries the actions of the current FED, that position is just one he has taken against most of the actions the government has taken in the last three years.

    He has condemned tax cuts in the absence of budget cuts. He has proposed tax cuts as part of the solution to the current budget problems. He has pushed for a reduction in the size of government. He has railed against everyone involved in the housing bubble. It goes on and on. He was for 'supply-side' economics before he was against them.

    As I said, I agree with most of what he has been preaching for the past couple years. That being said, the guy is kind of a mixed bag. He gained his rep here in Michigan (during the good times) when he made a bundle for the state managing Michigan's portifolio. He used his success there to get elected as Rep to Congress. He quit that job to run Reagan's Office of Mgt and Budget.

    He managed Reagan's tax cuts and helped institute 'supply-side economics'. He later got into trouble by saying in a magazine article that 'supply-side' was just a Trojan horse designed to lower the tax rates and that no one really knew what the numbers meant anyway.

    He left the Reagan administration under a cloud and joined Blackstone. Made a lot of money for them, again got into an argument, and left.

    Set up his own investment group, Heartland, did ok for a while and then watched it go bust. He ran Collins and Aikman and watched it go bust.

    A few years back he was indicted but never prosecuted for actions taken at C&A.

    Like most well known convicted or merely indicted guys he makes his living these days as a commentator and op-ed contributor.

    A fairly intelligent guy.

    Someone to lead the charge on the FED? Hmmm, looking at it objectively, I don't think so.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  112. .

    Obama Dismissive of Catholic Swing Voters

    ...The president's hard-line, anti-freedom stance threatens to alienate millions of Catholics, including many who disagree with their church's teachings but resent the prospect of government officials dictating which doctrines Catholic institutions may follow and which ones they must violate. For these voters and millions of their fellow travelers of other faiths, Obama's election in 2008 is looking more and more like a mistake — one they do not intend to repeat in 2012.

    Voter's Remorse

    .

    ReplyDelete
  113. .

    Obama's off-target class war

    For many conservatives, the notion of class warfare that President Barack Obama now evokes is both un-American and noxious — a crass attempt to cash in on envy among the masses. Yet the problem is not in class warfare itself — but in being clear what class you are targeting.

    In this sense, Obama’s populism is little more than a faux version. He is not really going after the privileges of the super-rich — that would involve actions like removing the advantages of capital gains over earned income or limiting dodges to nonprofit foundations or family trusts. Rather than a war against plutocrats, Obama’s thrust is against the upper end of the middle class, whose income is most vulnerable to higher taxes...



    Obama is Off Target

    .

    ReplyDelete
  114. .

    Obama's Jobs Program is Way Off Target

    Some aspects of Obama's Jobs Plan such as investment in infrastructure projects make sense for the medium to long term but they do little to take of the immediate problem of unemployment.
    What the plan proposes to try to help the long-term unemployed is ill-advised and will likely be as ineffectual as previous plans to help people seeking mortgages.

    The Economist has some terrible statistics:

    Over 6 million Americans, more than 40% of all those unemployed, have now been out of work for more than six months. Most of these, 4.5 million, haven’t worked for a year or more. This crisis of long-term joblessness is unprecedented in the post-war period.

    […] Workers are escaping unemployment more slowly than at any time since 1948. The long-term unemployed are struggling most; in the year to June, the newly jobless were three times more likely to find new work in a given month than the long-term unemployed. Many of the latter have given up hope. For the first time in decades, jobless workers are more likely to drop out of the labor force (and cease to be counted as unemployed) than to get a job...



    You Can't Dictate Who a Company Must Hire

    .

    ReplyDelete
  115. CIA-DA will now have an additional 7,000 soldiers on its payrolls to overthrow nationalist governments in the ME, so it can implement the Banksters/Vatican New World Order and expand the fascist Reich.

    ReplyDelete