The United States plans to offer more than $900 million to help rebuild Gaza after Israel's invasion and to strengthen the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, U.S. officials said on Monday. The money, which needs U.S. congressional approval, will be distributed through U.N. and other bodies and not via themilitant group Hamas, which rules Gaza, said one official.
There are two obvious problems with this scenario. The Palestinian Authority does not rule Gaza. Any rebuilding of Gaza will only strengthen Hamas. Secondly, any foreign organizations operating in Gaza either answer to Hamas or are Hamas run outright.
Take the UNRWA, the refugee arm of the UN which despite multiple refugee crises worldwide, focuses on working for the Palestinian Arabs. While there is a great deal of focus on foreign aid to Israel, the taxpayer money that goes to the UNRWA goes unnoticed. In 2006 alone the US contributed 135 million dollars to the UNRWA, out of an over half a billion dollar budget.
The UNRWA also, in their own words, employs "99 per cent locally-recruited Palestinians". The UNRWA is actually the second biggest employer in the territories, after the Palestinian Authority itself. (Both funded by the US and other foreign donors.) That means the structure of the UNRWA in Gaza is composed of Gazans under Hamas control.
By 2006 the UNRWA had only 25 "internationals" or non-Palestinian Arabs left in Gaza. After Hamas' takeover and the latest war, that number is likely to be smaller. Which means that the UNRWA is effectively under Hamas control, which Hamas demonstrated when they seized UNRWA aid and drove it away in their trucks.
While UNRWA "internationals" such as Karen Koning AbuZayd or Fillippo Grandi issue press releases from their comfortable offices in Amman, the real UNRWA is run on the ground, and despite the denials from Amman, it has routinely employed terrorist affiliated personnel.
All this has been extensively documented;This past September, Democratic Rep. Steve Rothman, with a bipartisan group of five co-sponsors, submitted a concurrent resolution noting that "UNRWA has employed staffers affiliated with terrorism."
The resolution cited specific examples of UNRWA ambulance and schools having been used to abet terrorism and mentioned a number of figures, including Awad al-Qiq, headmaster of an UNRWA school in Gaza, "who also led Islamic Jihad's engineering unit that built bombs and Qassam rockets."
However humane the intent of UNRWA officials, they have become de facto enablers of Hamas' terrorist fiefdom in Gaza.
over and over again. Time and time again.Since many UNRWA teachers are alumni of the UNRWA school system, they often perpetuate the vitriolic curriculum they were taught, vilifying Israel and the West. For example, Suheil al-Hindi, an UNRWA teachers' representative, openly applauded suicide bombings at a school in the Jabaliya refugee camp in Gaza in 2003. Instead of a condemnation, al-Hindi received a promotion and was subsequently elected to UNRWA's clerks union.
UNRWA teachers who publicly identify with radical groups have created a teachers' bloc that ensures the election of Hamas members and other individuals committed to Islamist ideologies. After using their classrooms as a place to refine their radical messages, these teachers gravitate to politics. As such, UNRWA's education system has become a springboard for Hamas leaders. For example, Said Sayyam, the Hamas minister of interior and civil affairs, was a teacher in UNRWA schools in Gaza from 1980 to 2003. He went on to become a member of UNRWA's Arab Employees Union, and headed the teachers sector committee.
Notable graduates of the UNRWA school system include former Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, and Abd al-Aziz Rantisi, the former Hamas chief who attended UNRWA secondary school in Khan Younis and graduated top of his class.
UNWRA has produced graduates like Ibrahim Maqadama, who "helped create the military structure of Hamas." Gold notes that, "at least 46 terrorist operatives were students in the UNRWA schools."
There have also been widespread reports of terrorism from UNRWA-supervised facilities, including sniper attacks from UNRWA-run schools, bomb and arms factories in UNRWA camps, the transport of terrorists to their target zones in UNRWA ambulances, and even UNRWA employees directly tied to terrorist attacks against civilians.
Nidal Abd al-Fattah Abdallah Nazzal, an ambulance driver for UNRWA from Kalqiliya in the West Bank, was arrested by Israeli security services in August 2002. Nidal admitted that he was a Hamas activist and that he had transported weapons and explosives to terrorists in his ambulance, taking advantage of the freedom of movement afforded to UNRWA vehicles by the Israelis.
Nahd Rashid Ahmad Atallah, a senior official of UNRWA in the Gaza Strip, was also arrested by Israeli security in August 2002. In his capacity as an UNRWA official, he provided support to families of wanted Fatah and PFLP terrorists. He used his UNRWA car to transport armed members of the "Popular Resistance Committees," a militant faction of the Fatah movement, to carry out attacks against Israeli troops at the Karni Crossing.
The UNRWA is less of an aid agency that a blank check to the tune of half a billion dollars a year that's poured into the domain of whoever is already in control on the ground. In Gaza that's Hamas, and the situation isn't much different for many of the other agencies that will be the recipient of the nearly billion dollar payout from Hamas.
UNRWA also appears to be in the business of cultivating new terrorists. The New York Times exposed in 2000 that UNRWA allowed terrorist groups to use their schools as "summer camps" so that 25,000 Palestinian children could receive paramilitary training, including instructions on how to prepare Molotov cocktails and roadside bombs.
The UNRWA has already taken the lead in promoting contact between Hamas and Obama. The proposed 900 billion package will rebuild Gaza's infrastructure for Hamas' benefit, and open the door to a Hamas overthrow of the PA in the West Bank, followed by US recognition of Hamas.
The policy will be camouflaged by claims that the UN will prevent the aid from going to Hamas, which as demonstrated above is an absurd claim, because there is no wall of separation between the UN and Hamas whatsoever.
Piggybacking a pro-Hamas policy on NGO's comes naturally to the core Obama team. Unlike the more mainstream Clinton dems running the above ground foreign policy, their more radical politics and international agendas link them to the NGO's, allowing them to undermine Hillary Clinton and her envoys. While the State Department may hold press conferences, the real decisions will be made in the White House and the NSC, current power base for Samantha Power.
At a time when the US economy is in bad shape and the US national debt is rising to an all time high, sending nearly a billion dollars to Hamas is nothing short of sheer madness or treason. Yet it's the opening stages of a policy that will empower and reward Islamists across the Middle East.
Source..
Obama's 900 Million Dollar Payout to Hamas
Obama Plans $75 Billion Outlay to Fight Foreclosures
MESA, Ariz. — President Obama announced a plan on Wednesday to help as many as nine million American homeowners refinance their mortgages or avert foreclosure, saying that it would shore up housing prices, stabilize neighborhoods and slow a downward spiral that was “unraveling homeownership, the middle class and the American Dream itself.”
The plan, which was more ambitious and expensive than many housing analysts had expected, drew praise from consumer advocates as well as the financial industry.
It could ultimately cost taxpayers as much as $275 billion — $75 billion in direct spending to keep people in their homes and the rest in additional financial backing for the government-controlled mortgage giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
But analysts and administration officials alike cautioned that it would not come close to halting the tidal wave of foreclosures. Nor would it provide much help to millions of homeowners who are “under water,” or holding mortgages that are bigger that the market value of their houses.
“This plan will not save every home, but it will give millions of families resigned to financial ruin a chance to rebuild,” Mr. Obama told a crowd here, in one of the communities hardest hit by the housing crisis. “It will prevent the worst consequences of this crisis from wreaking even greater havoc on the economy. And by bringing down the foreclosure rate, it will help to shore up housing prices for everyone.”
Almost one in 10 home mortgages is either delinquent or in foreclosure, and analysts estimate that at as many as six million families could lose their homes over the next three years in the absence of government action.
The plan has three components. The first would help homeowners who are still current on their payments, but who are paying high interest rates and cannot refinance because they do not have enough equity in their homes, a problem afflicting growing numbers of people as housing values tumble.
A second component would assist about four million people who are at risk of losing their homes. It would provide incentives to lenders who alter the terms of loans to make them affordable for the troubled borrowers. A third component would try to increase the credit available for mortgages in general by giving $200 billion of additional financial backing to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Beyond luring lenders with government money, the plan also calls on Congress to give bankruptcy judges the power to change the terms of mortgages and reduce the monthly payments.
The banking industry has vehemently fought that proposal for more than a year, saying it would make investors unwilling to finance future mortgage lending. But Democratic leaders in Congress strongly support the idea and banking executives are putting up less resistance than before.
Republican lawmakers reacted cautiously to Mr. Obama’s plan. Representative John Boehner of Ohio, the House Republican leader, called it “an important step,” but raised questions.
“Does your plan compensate banks for the bad mortgages they should never have made in the first place?” Mr. Boehner asked. “Will individuals who misrepresented their income or assets on their original mortgage application be eligible to get taxpayer-funded assistance?”
Mr. Obama’s announcement came a day after he signed his $787 billion economic stimulus package, and administration officials said that the initiatives would work in tandem to stabilize the economy.
The plan will take effect March 4, when the administration publishes detailed rules explaining it.
Except for the provision that empowers bankruptcy judges, almost all the other elements can be enacted by Mr. Obama without further action by Congress.
To help the estimated four million homeowners in danger of foreclosure, Mr. Obama will create a $75 billion program to subsidize loan modifications that would reduce a family’s monthly payment to as little as 31 percent of its gross monthly income.
As envisioned, a mortgage lender would have to first make enough concessions to reduce a borrower’s payments to 38 percent of monthly income. To encourage lenders, the government would offer incentives, like a $1,000 upfront payment for every loan modified and more payments if the borrower stays current.
If the lender gets the monthly payments down to 38 percent of the borrower’s monthly income, the government would then match, dollar for dollar, additional reductions to bring the payment as low as 31 percent of monthly income.
The changes could be accomplished in several ways, from stretching out the repayment period of a loan to reducing the interest rate or reducing the outstanding principal.
But analysts noted that lenders, or the mortgage-servicing companies that administered the loan, would still have the last word on whether to make concessions. If a lender decides that the cost of the concessions is higher than the cost of foreclosing, even with the government subsidies, then a borrower would probably still lose the property.
A potentially big limitation on the rescue portion of Mr. Obama’s plan involves second mortgages. To avoid the need for a down payment, or to minimize the down payment, millions of people bought homes with piggy-back mortgages that went alongside the primary mortgages.
Administration officials said on Wednesday that their plan to help homeowners facing foreclosure did not deal with second mortgages. Because those second mortgages were often made by a different lender than the first mortgages, that could greatly complicate negotiations over a loan modification.
To help homeowners who can still keep up with their payments, but who may resent the idea of rescuing others, Mr. Obama’s plan would make it easier to refinance at today’s very low interest rates.
The plan would apply to people with fairly traditional loans that are owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — about 30 million homeowners. The new loans would not be subsidized, but borrowers would not need to have a 20 percent equity stake in the house.
Normally, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac require that such borrowers pay private mortgage insurance, which can add hundreds of dollars to a monthly payment. Administration officials estimated that this portion of the plan could help 4 million to 5 million borrowers.
The big limitation of the refinancing portion of the plan is that it would not help borrowers who are current, but under water. It would only be available for mortgages that are not more than 5 percent above the current market value of the house. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com, estimated that the plan would help only a million of the 14 million homeowners who are under water.
A third, more vague component of the plan is aimed at propping up the mortgage market as a whole by having Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac step up their purchases of mortgages and mortgage-backed securities.
Source..
Obama celebrates Lincoln bicentennial
The 44th president of the United States tonight honored the 16th president. President Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln share not only a connection to Springfield as the city that launched their presidencies, but Obama said they also share an appreciation of the ideology that "individual liberty is served -- not negated -- by a recognition of the common good."
Obama said during a Springfield event honoring Lincoln's 200th birthday that the experience was humbling, "humbling for me, in particular, because it's fair to say that the presidency of this singular figure, who we celebrate in so many ways, made my own story possible."
Sounding much like one of his campaign speeches, Obama's roughly 16-minute talk emphasized Democratic ideology that government can play a positive role in channeling energy and innovation for a common cause, particularly in times of crisis.
"Only by coming together, all of us, in union and expressing that sense of shared sacrifice and responsiblity -- for ourselves, yes, but also for one another -- can we do the work that must be done in this country. That is part of the definition of being America."
He inserted some comedy by laughing at his own troubles in trying to appoint a secretary of commerce. Obama described Lincoln, the Springfield lawyer, resting his heels on a cluttered desk, "maybe wondering if someone might call him up and ask him to be commerce secretary." Obama's second nominee, Judd Gregg, a Republican, today withdrew his name and cited irreconcilable differences with the president's economic policy. Obama's first nominee, New Mexico's Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson, withdrew his name because he was subject of a federal investigation.
Two years ago this week, Obama launched his presidential candidacy from the Old State Capitol in Springfield, the city where Lincoln served as a legislator and where he departed from on his train ride to Washington, D.C. "It was here nearly 150 years ago that the man whose life we are celebrating today, who you've been celebrating all week, bid farewell to this city that he had come to call his own. And has already been mentioned on a platform at a train station not far from where we're gathered, Lincoln turned to the crowd that had come to see him off and said, 'To this place and the kindness these people, I owe everything.' And being here tonight, surrounded by all of you, I share his sentiment."
He closed with a challenge. "As one nation, as one people -- that's how we will beat back our present dangers. That is how we will surpass what trials may come. That's how we will do what Lincoln called on us all to do and nobly save the last best hope on earth.
"That's what this is: The last best hope on earth. Lincoln has passed that legacy on to us. It is now our responsibility to pass it on to the next generation."
His speech capped off a day of nationwide attention on Lincoln's birthday and his Illinois connections, as well as his appearance in East Peoria, where he campaigned for public support of his economic stimulus plan at Caterpillar Inc.'s headquarters.
Throughout Springfield, Gov. Pat Quinn appeared at Lincoln-related events. He later hosted an open house at the Governor's Mansion, where he greeted a line of visitors that wrapped around half a block.
Source..
Obama Justice Department Supports Bush ‘State Secrets’ Claims
In a move that’s sure to dismay some of President Obama’s faithful, the new administration today stood up in a federal appeals court and reiterated the Bush administrations’ arguments that victims of “extraordinary rendition” and torture should not be allowed to bring their claims in federal court because doing so would reveal “state secrets” and harm national security. As we first reported in late January, the Bush administration had succeeded in getting the case, Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, dismissed by arguing that subject of the lawsuit — the CIA’s extraordinary rendition program — was itself a state secret, regardless of how many times President Bush and various CIA directors had talked publicly about it. Countering the arguments of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represented five victims of the program who all claim they were abducted abroad and shipped to a foreign country to be brutally tortured, the government claimed that even allowing the federal judge overseeing the case to review any classified evidence behind closed doors would endanger national security. The ACLU, the bipartisan Constitution Project and others have been watching this case closely. Since we first reported on it, in the past week The New York Times and The Los Angeles Times‘ editorial boards have both weighed in, urging the Obama administration to reconsider the Bush Justice Department’s claims. Today, we got our answer: Obama’s executive orders and presidential memoranda on ending needless government secrecy notwithstanding, the Bush administration’s view that allowing torture victims to have their day in court is a danger to national security still stands. It’s worth noting that while it’s still early in the new administration and Attorney General Eric Holder was just recently confirmed, the Justice Department did NOT ask the court for more time to consider its views on the case. Instead, it supported the Bush administration’s position that the case should be dismissed. The Obama administration took a similar position in a related British case that I wrote about last week. None of this bodes well for the likelihood of obtaining additional information about the Bush administration’s interrogation policies in the future. Update: Here’s what ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero had to say after today’s hearing: Eric Holder’s Justice Department stood up in court today and said that it would continue the Bush policy of invoking state secrets to hide the reprehensible history of torture, rendition and the most grievous human rights violations committed by the American government. This is not change. This is definitely more of the same. Candidate Obama ran on a platform that would reform the abuse of state secrets, but President Obama’s Justice Department has disappointingly reneged on that important civil liberties issue. If this is a harbinger of things to come, it will be a long and arduous road to give us back an America we can be proud of again. I’ll be writing this week about an important FOIA case in which the Obama Justice Department will soon have to take a stand as well. Stay tuned.
Source..
A New US Foreign Policy? The Biden Speech in Munich Yesterday
The media chat this morning will be about Vice President Joe Biden’s speech to the Munich Security Conference yesterday. Our own reading is that the easy part was Biden’s signals of difference from the Bush Administration. The US would act “preventively, not pre-emptively” (no more Iraq 2003, at least over the pretext of weapons of mass destruction) and multilaterally. The emphasis will not be on magic capabilities like Missile Defense, but on a wider range of diplomatic, economic, and military instruments.
“America will not torture. We will uphold the rights of those we bring to justice,” Biden asserted, and he also said that the US would be constructive in finding solutions to climate change.
At the same time, Biden was careful to play the “America will be tough” card, saying the US would “vigorously protect [its] security and values, and he had a not-so-veiled challenge, if not warning, to international partners. The US would uphold alliances if they were “credible and effective” (think back to George W. Bush’s 2002 lecture to the UN that it would not be “relevant” if it did not back military action over Iraq), and “America will ask for more from its partners”.
Which brings us to the hard part. The Obama Administration may be far more “realist” in its approach to foreign affairs than its predecessor, but the up-front choices are daunting. Biden tried to match the Russians in the competitive co-operation, saying the US would not tolerate a Russian “sphere of influence” but continuing, “The United States and Russia can disagree and still work together where our interests coincide, and they coincide in many places.”
On Iran, Biden stuck to the current script of possible diplomacy first but waved the stick: “Continue down the current course and there will be pressure and isolation; abandon the illicit nuclear program and your support for terrorism and there will be meaningful incentives.”
OK, so the hope of “engagement” continues to flicker. What the media missed is that, on two other cases, Biden’s signal is that the Obama White House may be charging ahead against perceived enemies, even if that rips up possible settlements and co-operation.
Consider this on the Middle East, which no one seemed to pick up yesterday or this morning: “We must consolidate the cease-fire in Gaza by working with Egypt and others to stop smuggling, and developing an international relief and reconstruction effort that strengthens the Palestinian Authority, and not Hamas.” So, despite all the evidence that beating up on Gaza — be it through Israeli military action or economic strangleholds — is not dislodging the Gazan leadership and actually weakening Mahmoud Abbas, the US (at least in its public signals) is going to keep playing at the game that it doesn’t have to accept the political realities. It will do so even if that means more deprivation and destruction in Gaza.
It is on Afghanisan/Pakistan, however, that this Administration could meet its downfall, and here Biden’s “realism” led him to say, if we go down, we all go down together: “”We look forward to sharing that commitment with the government and people of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and with all of our allies and partners, because a deteriorating situation in the region poses a security threat not just to the United States, but I would suggest, somewhat presumptively, to every one of you assembled in this room.”
The glimmer of light is that Biden also said the US “strategic review” on the two countries is not completed — code for the battle between President Obama and the military on the way forward — so Washington may pull back from its full-speed, military-first surge in Afghanistan.
If not, you can go back to Biden’s speech and see where all the talk of a new, multilateral relationship actually had the makings of an almighty bust-up between the US and its European partners.
Source..
Top Obama Economic Adviser Admits Stimulus Bill Might not Create Jobs
The great secret about President Obama’s stimulus bill is that it is not a stimulus bill. With only 12 cents on the dollar going to actual stimulating projects this bill is actually the biggest spending bill ever proposed in congress. And people wonder why Democrats are called tax and spend liberals. A close look at this bill is justification of that label.
One of the claims that then president-elect Obama claimed was that this stimulus bill would create 3 million jobs. This claim was later amended to the less aggressive claim that the bill would create or save 3 million jobs.
Now that has changed again because according to this article President Obama’s top economic adviser is admitting that there is “considerable uncertainty” in regards to any of Obama’s claims of job creation. And this is coming from the woman who created that number in the first place.
It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error,” they said. “There is the obvious uncertainty that comes from modeling a hypothetical package rather than the final legislation passed by the Congress. But, there is the more fundamental uncertainty that comes with any estimate of the effects of a program. Our estimates of economic relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly in any given episode. Furthermore, the uncertainty is surely higher than normal now because the current recession is unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity.
Let me sum up that statement for you.
President Obama had no real plan, that is evidenced by the phrase, “There is the obvious uncertainty that comes from modeling a hypothetical package”, he has to wait to see what congress sends him. There is a huge margin of error calculated into the number of jobs that would be created even though the administration promoted these numbers as facts, so in other words, either President Obama, or more likely Christina Romer, pulled these numbers out of his/her ass.
I think they can put these numbers right back where they came from.
Source..
Obama performance chief Killefer out, citing taxes - Yahoo! News
Killifer's issue was actually pretty minor. I don't really think she should have to back out. But all the other nominees with problems were dealing with significant amounts of money and pretty clear culpability.
Tom Daschle is out as Secretary of Health and Human Services, because he didn't pay his taxes.
Tim Geithner didn't pay his taxes, and he even bilked his employer, but he is Secretary of the Treasury anyway.
There is something especially hypocritical about liberal Democrats not paying their taxes. They are constantly criticizing Republicans for giving "tax breaks to the rich," while they themselves are (a) rich, and (b) creating nonexistent tax breaks for themselves. They even lecture us about how patriotic it is to pay taxes (VP Joe Biden, during the campaign). When they cheat on their taxes, as somebody said, it is like an evangelical preacher getting caught with a prostitute.
Bill Richardson was to be Commerce Secretary, but unfortunately he happens to be under investigation by a grand jury in connection with issuing state contracts to political donors. Maybe he and Rod Blagojevich can cut some government waste by sharing a cell.
Several questions come to mind. What was that stuff about "reform" and "change" again? And what kind of half-baked vetting are these nominees getting by the Obamelot brain trust--all these smartest people in the world who have graced us with their presence? How hard is it to ask "Did you pay your taxes?" I hope they do a little more homework before Obama sits down to parlay with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
And finally...tell me again why we little people have to pay our taxes?
Source..
Judd Gregg Will Destroy the Commerce Department from the Inside

Looks like Republican Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire (the We Vote First So You Have to Pretend We're Important State) is President Obama's pick for Commerce Secretary, that thankless job that Bill Richardson scandaled his way out of.
Gregg is well-qualified to lead the Commerce Department, in that he once tried to abolish the Commerce Department...
President Obama’s new candidate to run the Commerce Department voted in favor of abolishing the agency as a member of the Budget Committee and on the Senate floor in 1995.
Gregg also fought President Bill Clinton’s efforts to increase funding for the Commerce Department to administer the 2000 census. Indeed, Gregg’s commitment to basic functions of the department has been questioned at times.
"He was generally pretty harsh on them and not really interested in their programs, especially the commerce side of things," said a Democratic appropriations aide.
Um, maybe he left that part off his resume?
[E]ven some Republicans are surprised by Gregg’s apparent enthusiasm for the job. "I guess if you can’t destroy it, go be in charge of it," said a Senate Republican aide.
Which, incidentally, was Barack Obama's rationale for forging his birth certificate and covering up his secret Muslim terrorist roots in order to run for president of the United States.
So they do have that in common.
Source..
Tom Daschle Tax Cheat
Barack Obama sure knows how to pick 'em.
Another cabinet pick has tax trouble.
It looks like Tom Daschle is an even bigger tax cheat than Tim Geithner.
And as usual, the damaging information is dumped very late on Friday afternoon.
From the New York Times:
President Obama’s pick for secretary of health and human services, Tom Daschle, failed to pay more than $140,000 in taxes, mostly for free use of a car and driver that had been provided to him by a prominent businessman and Democratic fund-raiser, administration officials said on Friday.
Mr. Daschle, concluding that he owed the taxes, filed amended returns and paid more than $100,000 in back taxes and interest on Jan. 2, the officials said.
Daschle is a crook.
There's no way this tax cheat would have paid these back taxes if Obama hadn't picked him to be a part of his cabinet.
The car and driver were provided by Leo Hindery Jr., a media and telecommunications executive who had been chairman of YES, the New York Yankees regional sports network. In 2005, Mr. Hindery founded a private equity firm known as InterMedia Advisors. Mr. Daschle was chairman of InterMedia’s advisory board.
In a financial disclosure statement filed this month with the Office of Government Ethics, Mr. Daschle reported that he had received large amounts of income from InterMedia, including more than $2 million in consulting fees and $182,520 in the form of “company-provided transportation.”
The belated tax payments help explain delays in the confirmation of Mr. Daschle, a former Senate Democratic leader who had been expected to win swift approval.
Despite the embarrassing admission — the second for one of President Obama’s cabinet choices — the White House and Democratic senators quickly released statements on Friday evening in Mr. Daschle’s support.
I love how the Times refers to Daschle's lawbreaking as an "embarrassing admission."
The guy is corrupt.
And Obama and Dem senators willing to support Daschle are just as slimy.
"New era of responsibility" keeps echoing in my head. What an absolute crock!
...An administration official said Mr. Daschle had paid $32,090 in back taxes and interest for 2005, $38,507 for 2006 and $69,570 for 2007.
The official said Mr. Daschle’s failure to pay the taxes was “a stupid mistake.”
We should not have to tolerate all these "stupid mistakes." These crooks are not fit to serve. Period.
A Senate aide said Mr. Daschle also had a tax issue that involved charitable contributions.
This is shocking. A Democrat involved in making charitable contributions is almost unheard of.
Administration officials said Mr. Daschle should not be penalized because he had discovered the tax liability himself, paid up and brought it to the attention of the Finance Committee, which is vetting his nomination. They said he realized in June 2008 that he might have a tax problem.
If that's the stand that administration officials are taking, then I think they are complicit in Daschle's corruption.
...The White House and the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, affirmed their support for Mr. Daschle on Friday.
James P. Manley, a spokesman for Mr. Reid, said: “Senator Daschle will be confirmed as secretary of health and human services. He has a long and distinguished career in public service and is the best person to help reform health care in this country.”
Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, used almost identical words, predicting that Mr. Daschle “will be confirmed.”
Sure, tax cheat Daschle will be confirmed. Even though he has other issues, some related to lobbying, Daschle will be confirmed.
The Democrats can do whatever they want. They can be as corrupt as they want to be.
...Mr. Obama has named Mr. Daschle to a second position, as director of a new White House Office of Health Reform. That job is not subject to Senate confirmation.
Obama has found a way to guarantee that Daschle will be at his side. Slick.
So just what is the change that Obama is bringing to Washington?
Here's a change: Obama has broken his promise about lobbyists working for him. He's changed his position on that.
This is also new: Obama and his comrades are excusing lawbreaking and setting a new standard -- Pay your taxes when you're nominated for a cabinet position. You can hold off until then. No problem.
Source..
Missile Strike in Pakistan May Have Killed "High-Value Target"
While many in the media, including Rachel Maddow, have acted surprised that there was a missile-strike into Pakistan under President Barack Obama's watch, I am not surprised. This was a part of candidate-Obama's foreign policy position dating back to August of 2007 during the contentious Democratic primary. It is also, in my humble world view, the right position. It reaffirms out commitment to dismantling Al-Qaeda without having to rely on unreliable Pakistani-security services or sending soldiers into Pakistan.
These most recent strikes were done so due to actionable intelligence, and one Pakistani security official believes that a high-level target might have been taken out.
* Setrak's diary :: ::
*
The Washington Post has a must read article in today's paper that offers a far more objective view of the subject than most of the commentary that we have heard thus far. In it, one Pakistani security official offers the following;
A Pakistani security official said in Islamabad that the strikes appeared to have killed at least 10 insurgents, including five foreign nationals and possibly even "a high-value target" such as a senior al-Qaeda or Taliban official.
Another Pakistani official put a possible name to the man; suspected Al-Qaeda operative Mustafa al-Misri. It's unclear how significant of a figure he was, or if that was even his real name.
These are the people that former President George W. Bush promised to get. This is Al-Qaeda and their closest allies within the Taliban. These are the guys that would gladly murder innocent civilians, as they have demonstrated in the past. These are not people that respect the rule of law, but rather use it to their own whims. If we are going to get them, we have to get them by any means necessary. We can't send boots into the tribal areas of Pakistan without causing a huge firestorm of controversy and risk of a wider conflict. We also can't rely on the compromised Pakistani security forces, despite some reform, or the anti-Taliban militia that we have been assisting. And before anyone pretends like President Obama's actions are genuinely angering President Zardari, think again. People should always remember that President Asif Ali Zardari is the widower of Benazir Bhutto.
President Barack Obama may not see the end of bin Laden as the end of Al-Qaeda, but the end of bin Laden and his network is closer than ever before. There is no longer any safe-haven.
Source : http://www.dailykos.com
Obama Allowed to Keep BlackBerry, Must Use Sectera Edge For Official Business


It looks like President Obama has outlasted the Secret Service and will be allowed to keep his beloved BlackBerry 8830 for "personal use" provided that he use the Sectera Edge for official business.
As mentioned last week, the Sectera Edge is a bulky WinMo 6.1 phone that features various security enhancements—a far cry from the sleek lines of the BlackBerry. Perhaps he should celebrate his victory by upgrading to the 8900 or the Bold. I'm sure the folks at RIM would be thrilled.
Source : http://i.gizmodo.com
Obama to KEEP his Blackberry

Yes, we can! Maybe all the hootin’ and hollerin’ about Barack’s quandary regarding the status of his BlackBerry actually ended up helping the President keep the addictive device. For personal use only, Mr. Obama’s BlackBerry will still be in commission, though we do hope he opts to upgrade to a Bold or 8900, at least (give us a call Mr. President, we’ll hook you up)! It will make it more worthwhile since he will be forced to use an awkward and clunky-looking Sectera Edge, which has been approved by the NSA for official use, as a business device. As if this news wasn’t the best free advertising anyone can get, the folks at RIM must be bursting with glee. While we’re all familiar with the device that has been like an appendage for Obama, you might be interested in taking a peek at the Sectera Edge, so hit the jump for an image and details!

Source : http://www.mobilecrunch.com/
Video Barack Obama Inauguration Speech January 20
Middle East responds to Obama with hope, skepticism
Many across the Middle East heralded the inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama on Tuesday but expressed reservations about how much he will actually change US policy in a region where anti-American sentiment spiked during the Bush administration.
Those doubts have become more pronounced in recent weeks with the devastating Gaza offensive by U.S. ally Israel that killed over 1,250 Palestinians.
But Obama still retains a great deal of goodwill in the Middle East from people who feel his multicultural background allows him to relate to the region better than past U.S. presidents.
Source : http://fatihsyuhud.com/2009/01/20/middle-east-responds-to-obama-with-hope-skepticism/
Text of President Barak Obama Inaugural Speech

Full transcript as prepared for delivery of President Barack Obama’s inaugural remarks on Jan. 20, 2009, at the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C.
My fellow citizens:
I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.
Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents.
So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.
That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.
These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land - a nagging fear that America’s decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.
Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many.
They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America - they will be met. On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.
On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.
We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.
In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted - for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.
For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life.
For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth.
For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn. Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.
This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions - that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.
For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act - not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.
Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions - who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them - that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account - to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control - and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our Gross Domestic Product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart - not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.
As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more.
Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.
We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort - even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.
To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.
To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society’s ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.
To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world’s resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.
As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us today, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages.
We honor them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And yet, at this moment - a moment that will define a generation - it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.
For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter’s courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent’s willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.
Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends - hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism - these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility - a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.
This is the price and the promise of citizenship.
This is the source of our confidence - the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.
This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed - why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.
So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America’s birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:
“Let it be told to the future world…that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive…that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it].”
America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children’s children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God’s grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.
Courtesy: huffingtonpost.com
Obama Seeks Halt to Legal Proceedings at Guantanamo
In one of its first actions, the Obama administration instructed military prosecutors late Tuesday to seek a 120-day suspension of legal proceedings involving detainees at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay
more
Source : http://fatihsyuhud.com/
Obama the First US President with a Blog

A day Obama is anaugurated on January 20, the first post of his blog were born. Visit his blog at http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/. The first post was written by apparently his Director of New Media (or should I call Director of Blogging?) named Macon Phillips. He writes
A short time ago, Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th president of the United States and his new administration officially came to life. One of the first changes is the White House’s new website, which will serve as a place for the President and his administration to connect with the rest of the nation and the world.
Millions of Americans have powered President Obama’s journey to the White House, many taking advantage of the internet to play a role in shaping our country’s future. WhiteHouse.gov is just the beginning of the new administration’s efforts to expand and deepen this online engagement.
Just like your new government, WhiteHouse.gov and the rest of the Administration’s online programs will put citizens first. Our initial new media efforts will center around three priorities: Communication - Transparency - Participation -
A blog owned by President Obama is certainly the first in US or may be by any head of state in the world. Indonesian President SBY has a website, but it’s a website. Not a blog.
In the footer of the blog we can see many links directed to some informations concerning Obama’s future plan including his agenda on Iraq, Civil Rights, Defense, etc.
The latest post dated January 21, was the transcript of President Obama inaugural address and the video.
Unfortunately, it seems Obama will never write the blog himself. All posts so far were written by his staff. Had he written his blog by himself every now and then, he would have been the real Blogging President. Since a blog is originally defined as a personal diary which implies that it’s written by a blogger himself. Another flipside of Obama’s blog is the comment box is closed making its intention to open a dialog less credible. Although we see some blogs which closed the commenting facilities, it’d be better off if the comment box is open.
Source : http://fatihsyuhud.com/


