Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

The Myth of Foreign Fighters

Posted By: see yet another article. on 2005-09-23
In Reply to:

Report by US think tank says only '4 to 10' percent of insurgents are foreigners.
By Tom Regan | csmonitor.com
The US and Iraqi governments have vastly overstated the number of foreign fighters in Iraq, and most of them don't come from Saudi Arabia, according to a new report from the Washington-based Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS). According to a piece in The Guardian, this means the US and Iraq feed the myth that foreign fighters are the backbone of the insurgency. While the foreign fighters may stoke the incurgency flames, they only comprise only about 4 to 10 percent of the estimated 30,000 insurgents.

The CSIS study also disputes media reports that Saudis comprise the largest group of foreign fighters. CSIS says Algerians are the largest group (20 percent), followed by Syrians (18 percent), Yemenis (17 percent), Sudanese (15 percent), Egyptians (13 percent), Saudis (12 percent) and those from other states (5 percent). CSIS gathered the information for its study from intelligence services in the Gulf region.

The CSIS report says: The vast majority of Saudi militants who have entered Iraq were not terrorist sympathisers before the war; and were radicalized almost exclusively by the coalition invasion.

The average age of the Saudis was 17-25 and they were generally middle-class with jobs, though they usually had connections with the most prominent conservative tribes. Most of the Saudi militants were motivated by revulsion at the idea of an Arab land being occupied by a non-Arab country. These feelings are intensified by the images of the occupation they see on television and the internet ... the catalyst most often cited [in interrogations] is Abu Ghraib, though images from Guantánamo Bay also feed into the pathology.

The report also gives credit to the Saudi government for spending nearly $1.2 billion over the past two years, and deploying 35,000 troops, in an effort to secure its border with Iraq. The major problem remains the border with Syria, which lacks the resources of the Saudis to create a similar barrier on its border.

The Associated Press reports that CSIS believes most of the insurgents are not Saddam Hussein loyalists but members of Sunni Arab Iraqi tribes. They do not want to see Mr. Hussein return to power, but they are wary of a Shiite-led government.

TheLos Angeles Times reports that a greater concern is that 'skills' foreign fighters are learning in Iraq are being exported to their home countries. This is a particular concern for Europe, since early this year US intelligence reported that Abu Musab Zarqawi, whose network is believed to extend far beyond Iraq, had dispatched teams of battle-hardened operatives to European capitals.

Iraq has become a superheated, real-world academy for lessons about weapons, urban combat and terrorist trade craft, said Thomas Sanderson of [CSIS].

Extremists in Iraq are exposed to international networks from around the world, said Sanderson, who has been briefed by German security agencies. They are returning with bomb-making skills, perhaps stolen explosives, vastly increased knowledge. If they are succeeding in a hostile environment, avoiding ... US Special Forces, then to go back to Europe, my God, it's kid's play.

Meanwhile, The Boston Globe reports that President Bush, in a speech Thursday that was clearly designed to dampen the potential impact of the antiwar rally this weekend in Washington, said his top military commanders in Iraq have told him that they are making progress against the insurgents and in establishing a politically viable state.

Newly trained Iraqi forces are taking the lead in many security operations, the president said, including a recent offensive in the insurgent stronghold of Tal Afar along the Syrian border – a key transit point for foreign fighters and supplies.

Iraqi forces are showing the vital difference they can make, Bush said. 'They are now in control of more parts of Iraq than at any time in the past two years. Significant areas of Baghdad and Mosul, once violent and volatile, are now more stable because Iraqi forces are helping to keep the peace.

The president's speech, however, was overshadowed by comments made Thursday by Saudi Arabia's foreign minister. Prince Saud al-Faisal said the US ignored warnings the Saudi government gave it about occupying Iraq. Prince al-Faisal also said he fears US policies in Iraq will lead to the country breaking up into Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite parts. He also said that Saudi Arabia is not ready to send an ambassador to Baghdad, because he would become a target for the insurgents. I doubt he would last a day, al-Faisal said.

Finally, The Guardian reports that ambitions for Iraq are being drastically scaled down in private by British and US officials. The main goal has now become avoiding the image of failure. The paper quotes sources in the British Foreign department as saying that hopes to turn Iraq into a model of democracy for the Middle East had been put aside. We will settle for leaving behind an Iraqi democracy that is creaking along, the source said.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0923/dailyUpdate.html


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

So much for that myth...sm
I can only speak for my interpretation, but I'm for gay equality, i.e. in housing, employment, etc.

I don't love the gay way of life, but to each his own.


Did anybody every tell you that urban myth
su
Yes. That the media liberal is a myth.sm
We have a state media and they speak for the corporations who pay them who are ______ (fill in the blank).

The so-called faces of the liberal media:

The Beltway Boys: Your daily dose of liberalism out of Washington, DC.

Sean Hannity: A progressive Christian who likes to speak his mind.

Chris Matthews: A Clinton apologist.

Robert Novak: Champion of the poor and spokesman for social justice.

Tony Snow: Cutting through the GOP spin.

Paul Zahn: On the edge of progressive journalism.

John Stossel: Holding corporations accountable for greed and exploitation and pollution.

Bill O'Reilly: Notorious left-wing muckracker.

Brit Hume: Always fair and balanced.

Rush Limbaugh: The Master of Extreme Left Talk Radio.

Pat Buchanan: Pro choice, gay rights activist, part-time CNN pundit.

MSNBCs Alan Keyes: They do not come anymore liberal than Alan Keyes.

Larry King: Progressive intellectual feared by conservatives for tough follow-up questions.

Tim Russert: Never one to let Republicans get away with softball questions.

Coulter/Malkin: Not worth commenting on, they belong in a cage together.
Exposed urban myth. nm
.
Already proven but the myth continues. nm
.
You and Myth make sense
I had forgotten to look at it that way, but on reflecting on it, that does make sense. Heck, I even voted for Jimmy Carter when I was a young wild-child. I, too, have grown a bit more conservative, but I'm somewhere in the middle. It also does make sense about the celebs. Much like back during the red scare when McCarthy had anyone with suspected communist sympathies blacklisted, the pendulum has swung to where anyone with a conservative viewpoint would probably have a hard time finding work.

Thanks for 'splaining, Lucy!
Claim: US Created al-Zarqawi Myth
Claim: US Created al-Zarqawi Myth
    By Jennifer Schultz
    UPI

    Thursday 10 November 2005


The myth of al-Zarqawi, Napoleoni believes, helped usher in al-Qaida's transformation from a small elitist vanguard to a mass movement.
















The myth of al-Zarqawi, Napoleoni believes, helped usher in al-Qaida's transformation from a small elitist vanguard to a mass movement.
(Photo: spacewar.com)
    The United States created the myth around Iraq insurgency leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and reality followed, terrorism expert Loretta Napoleoni said.


    Al-Zarqawi was born Ahmad Fadil al-Khalayleh in October 1966 in the crime and poverty-ridden Jordanian city of Zarqa. But his myth was born Feb. 5, 2003, when then-Secretary of State Colin Powell presented to the United Nations the case for war with Iraq.


    Napoleoni, the author of Insurgent Iraq, told reporters last week that Powell's argument falsely exploited Zarqawi to prove a link between then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida. She said that through fabrications of Zarqawi's status, influence and connections the myth became the reality - a self-fulfilling prophecy.


    He became what we wanted him to be. We put him there, not the jihadists, Napoleoni said.


    Iraq's most notorious insurgent, Napoleoni argues, accomplished what bin Laden could not: spread the message of jihad into Iraq.


    In an article of Napoleoni's in the current November/December issue of Foreign Policy, she said, In a sense, it is the very things that make Zarqawi seem most ordinary - his humble upbringing, misspent youth and early failures - that make him most frightening. Because, although he may have some gifts as a leader of men, it is also likely that there are many more 'al-Zarqawis' capable of filling his place.


    The myth of al-Zarqawi, Napoleoni believes, helped usher in al-Qaida's transformation from a small elitist vanguard to a mass movement.


    Al-Zarqawi became the icon of a new generation of anti-imperialist jihadists, she said.


    The grand claim that al-Zarqawi provided the vital link between Saddam and al-Qaida lost its significance after it became known that al-Zarqawi and bin Laden did not forge a partnership until after the war's start. The two are believed to have met sometime in 2000, but al-Zarqawi - similar to a group of dissenting al-Qaida members -rebuffed bin Laden's anti-American brand of jihad.


    He did not have a global vision like Osama, said Napoleoni, who interviewed primary and secondary sources close to al-Zarqawi and his network.


    A former member of al-Zarqawi's camp in Herat told her, I never heard him praise anyone apart from the Prophet [Muhammad]; this was Abu Musab's character. He never followed anyone.


    Al-Zarqawi's scope before the Iraq war, she continued, did not extend past corrupt Arab regimes, particularly Jordan's. Between 2000 and early 2002, he operated the training camp in Herat with Taliban funds; the fighters bound for Jordan. After the fall of the Taliban, he fled to Iraqi Kurdistan and set up shop.


    In 2001, Kurdish officials enlightened the United States about the uninvited Jordanian, said Napoleoni. Jordanian officials, who had still unsolved terrorist attacks, were eager to implicate al-Zarqawi, she claimed. The little-known militant instantly had fingerprints on most major terrorist attacks after Sept. 11, 2001. He was depicted in Powell's speech as a key player in the al-Qaida network.


    By perpetuating a terrifying myth of al-Zarqawi, the author said, The United States, Kurds, and Jordanians all won ... but jihad gained momentum, after in-group dissension and U.S. coalition operations had left the core of al-Qaida crippled.


    In her article, Napoleoni says, [Zarqawi] had finally managed to grasp bin Laden's definition of the faraway enemy, the United States. Adding that, Its presence in Iraq as an occupying power made it clear to him that the United States was as important a target as any of the Arab regimes he had grown to hate.


    ... The myth constructed around him is at the root of his transformation into a political leader. With bin Laden trapped somewhere in Afghanistan and Pakistan, al-Zarqawi fast became the new symbolic leader in the fight against America and a manager for whoever was looking to be part of that struggle, she wrote.


    The author points to letters between al-Zarqawi and bin Laden that have surfaced over the past two years, indicating the evolution in their relationship, most notably a shift in al-Zarqawi which led to his seeking additional legitimacy among Sunnis that bin Laden could help bestow.


    In late December 2004 - shortly after the fall of Fallujah - the pan-Arab network Al-Jazeera aired a video of what was bin Laden's first public embrace of Zarqawi and his fight in Iraq.


    ... We in al-Qaida welcome your union with us ... and so that it be known, the brother mujahid Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is the emir of the al Qaida organization [in Iraq], bin Laden declared.


    Napoleoni believes that al-Zarqawi, however, is still largely driven by the romantic vision of a restored Caliphate, and that his motives still are less political than some other factions participating in the Iraq resistance.


    She questions whether he has actually devised a plan for what he will do, if and when, he wins.


The myth of the Clinton surplus - been disproved -sm
A lot of democrats keep pushing this bogus claim that there was a surplus when in fact there never was. This has been discussed on this board, so by this message I'm assuming you never saw the message or went the the US Treasury website to check it out. Below is a link to it and explains what really happened.

The US National Debt proves there was never a surplus, and the article explains why people claim otherwise for political reasons. - good read. Even my most conservatives friends bought into this surplus craze, and said they were glad their eyes were opened.

I'll credit another poster for origianlly posting this (it's been so long I forget who now).

http://www.letxa.com/articles/16
The myth of the Clinton surplus...I'm a libertarian but I am sick of hearing this..SM
http://www.letxa.com/articles/16
Foreign language
Forgot to say that my foreign language was Latin and my memory is about as dead as the language.
Yeah. That "I don't think much about foreign
nm
Why should she think about foreign policy?
She was the governor of a state and that should have been her focus. Your #1 also has zero foreign policy experience. That is why he has Joe Biden. That is why Sarah has McCain. If something happened to McCain, she would have foreign policy advisors, just like Obama has in Biden. The thing is...she is the #2. If we elect Obama, we have zero foreign policy experience from day 1. It's pretty clear to me what I would rather see. I would like to at least start out with someone with several years foreign policy experience. But that is just me.
RE: Foreign Policy. Sam says we'd be just as well off

On the issues


Sarah Palin on Foreign Policy.


            No stance


Obama on Foreign Policy



  • Meet with Cuban leaders only with agenda of US interests. (Feb 2008)

  • Cuba: Loosen restrictions now; normalization later. (Feb 2008)

  • Important to undo the damage of the last seven years. (Feb 2008)

  • Never negotiate out of fear, and never fear to negotiate. (Jan 2008)

  • Ok to postpone Pakistani elections, but not indefinitely. (Dec 2007)

  • Pakistan crisis: secure nukes; continue with elections. (Dec 2007)

  • President must abide by international human rights treaties. (Dec 2007)

  • Obama Doctrine: ideology has overridden facts and reality. (Dec 2007)

  • China is a competitor but not an enemy. (Dec 2007)

  • Willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Kim Jung IL & Hugo Chavez. (Nov 2007)

  • Wrote 2006 law stabilizing Congo with $52M. (Oct 2007)

  • No Obama Doctrine; just democracy, security, liberty. (Oct 2007)

  • Invest in our relationship with Mexico. (Sep 2007)

  • Strengthen NATO to face 21st-century threats. (Aug 2007)

  • $50B annually to strengthen weak states at risk of collapse. (Aug 2007)

  • No "strategic ambiguity" on foreign policy issues. (Aug 2007)

  • At college, protested for divestment from South Africa. (Aug 2007)

  • Increased aid to Republic of Congo. (Aug 2007)

  • Visited largest slum in Africa, to publicize its plight. (Aug 2007)

  • My critics engineered our biggest foreign policy disaster. (Aug 2007)

  • China is a competitor, but not an enemy. (Aug 2007)

  • Meet with enemy leaders; it's a disgrace that we have not. (Jul 2007)

  • No-fly zone in Darfur; but pay attention more in Africa. (Jun 2007)

  • Europe & Japan are allies, but China is a competitor. (Apr 2007)

  • Palestinian people suffer-but from not recognizing Israel. (Apr 2007)

  • FactCheck: Palestinian suffering from stalled peace effort. (Apr 2007)

  • U.S. needs to ameliorate trade relations with China. (Mar 2007)

  • U.S. funds for humanitarian aid to Darfur. (Mar 2007)

  • We cannot afford isolationism. (Mar 2007)

  • Protested South African apartheid while at college. (Feb 2007)

  • Focus on corruption to improve African development. (Oct 2006)

  • Supports Israel's self-defense; but distrusted by Israelis. (Oct 2006)

  • Visited Africa in 2006; encouraged HIV testing & research. (Oct 2006)

  • Never has US had so much power & so little influence to lead. (Jul 2004)

  • US policy should promote democracy and human rights. (Jul 2004)

  • Sponsored aid bill to avert humanitarian crisis in Congo. (Dec 2005)

  • Urge Venezuela to re-open dissident radio & TV stations. (May 2007)

  • Let Ukraine & Georgia enter NATO. (Jan 2008)

  • Condemn violence by Chinese government in Tibet. (Apr 2008)

  • Sanction Mugabe until Zimbabwe transitions to democracy. (Apr 2008)

Sarah Palin on Homeland Security



  • Strong military and sound energy. (Aug 2008)

  • Armed forces, including my son, give us security and freedom. (Jan 2008)

  • Ask all candidates "Are you doing all you can for security?". (Oct 2007)

  • Visits Kuwait; encourages Alaska big game hunting to troops. (Sep 2007)

  • Promote from within, in Alaska's National Guard. (Nov 2006)

  • Let military personnel know how much we support them. (Nov 2006)

Obama on Homeland Security



  • No torture; no renditions; no operating out of fear. (Apr 2008)

  • Unacceptable to have veterans drive 250 miles to a hospital. (Feb 2008)

  • Pursue goal of a world without nuclear weapons. (Feb 2008)

  • Al Qaida is stronger now than in 2001 as Iraq distracted us. (Jan 2008)

  • Colleges must allow military recruiters for ROTC on campus. (Jan 2008)

  • Rebuild a nuclear nonproliferation strategy. (Jan 2008)

  • FactCheck: Promised to repeal Patriot Act, then voted for it. (Jan 2008)

  • No presidential power for secret surveillance. (Dec 2007)

  • No holding US citizens as unlawful enemy combatants. (Dec 2007)

  • Congress decides what constitutes torture, not president. (Dec 2007)

  • No torture; defiance of FISA; no military commissions. (Dec 2007)

  • Restore habeas corpus to reach Muslims abroad. (Dec 2007)

  • Human rights and national security are complementary. (Nov 2007)

  • Don't allow our politics to be driven by fear of terrorism. (Nov 2007)

  • 2006: Obama-Lugar bill restricted conventional weapons. (Oct 2007)

  • Judgment is as important as experience. (Oct 2007)

  • If attacked, first help victims then prevent further attacks. (Oct 2007)

  • America cannot sanction torture; no loopholes or exceptions. (Sep 2007)

  • Repeal Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell. (Aug 2007)

  • 2005: Passed bill to reduce conventional weapon stockpiles. (Aug 2007)

  • We are no safer now than we were after 9/11. (Aug 2007)

  • Close Guantanamo and restore the right of habeas corpus. (Jun 2007)

  • Homeland security must protect citizens, not intrude on them. (Mar 2007)

  • America must practice the patriotism it preaches. (Mar 2007)

  • Protecting nuclear power plants is of utmost importance. (Mar 2007)

  • Personal privacy must be protected even in terrorism age. (Mar 2007)

  • Get first responders the healthcare and equipment they need. (Mar 2007)

  • Need to be both strong and smart on national defense. (Oct 2006)

  • Grow size of military to maintain rotation schedules. (Oct 2006)

  • Battling terrorism must go beyond belligerence vs. isolation. (Oct 2006)

  • Going after AL Qaeda in Pakistan is not Bush-style invasion. (Jan 2006)

  • Rebuild the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. (Jan 2006)

  • We are currently inspecting 3% of all incoming cargo. (Oct 2004)

  • Increase funding to decommission Russian nukes. (Jul 2004)

  • Give our soldiers the best equipment and training available. (Jul 2004)

  • Balance domestic intelligence reform with civil liberty risk. (Jul 2004)

Sarah Palin on War and Peace



  • We don't know what the plan is to ever end the war. (Aug 2008)

  • Wants exit plan; also assurances to keep our troops safe. (Mar 2007)

Obama on War and Peace


            Iraq War



  • President sets Iraq mission; Generals then implement tactics. (Apr 2008)

  • President sets Iraq mission; give generals a new mission. (Apr 2008)

  • $2.7 billion each week of Iraq spending is unsustainable. (Feb 2008)

  • Humanitarian aid now for displaced Iraqis. (Feb 2008)

  • FactCheck: Overstated displaced Iraqis; actually 4.2 million. (Feb 2008)

  • The Iraq war has undermined our security. (Jan 2008)

  • Iraq is distracting us from a host of global threats. (Jan 2008)

  • End the war, and end the mindset that got us into war. (Jan 2008)

  • The Iraq war was conceptually flawed from the start. (Jan 2008)

  • Title of Iraq war authorization bill stated its intent. (Jan 2008)

  • Get our troops out by the end of 2009. (Jan 2008)

  • No permanent bases in Iraq. (Jan 2008)

  • FactCheck: No, violence in Iraq is LOWER than 2 years ago. (Jan 2008)

  • Congress decides deployment level & duration, not president. (Dec 2007)

  • Surge strategy has made a difference in Iraq but failed. (Nov 2007)

  • Leave troops for protection of Americans & counterterrorism. (Sep 2007)

  • Hopes to remove all troops from Iraq by 2013, but no pledge. (Sep 2007)

  • Tell people the truth: quickest is 1-2 brigades per month. (Sep 2007)

  • No good options in Iraq--just bad options & worse options. (Aug 2007)

  • Be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in. (Jul 2007)

  • We live in a more dangerous world because of Bush's actions. (Jun 2007)

  • Case for war was weak, but people voted their best judgment. (Jun 2007)

  • War in Iraq is "dumb" but troops still need equipment. (Apr 2007)

  • Open-ended Iraq occupation must end: no military solution. (Apr 2007)

  • Saddam is a tyrant but not a national security threat. (Mar 2007)

  • Iraq 2002: ill-conceived venture; 2007: waste of resources. (Feb 2007)

  • Saddam did not own and was not providing WMD to terrorists. (Oct 2004)

  • Iraq War has made US less safe from terrorism. (Oct 2004)

  • Invading Iraq was a bad strategic blunder. (Oct 2004)

  • Democratizing Iraq will be more difficult than Afghanistan. (Oct 2004)

  • Never fudge numbers or shade the truth about war. (Jul 2004)

  • Set a new tone to internationalize the Iraqi reconstruction. (Jul 2004)

  • Iraq war was sincere but misguided, ideologically driven. (Jul 2004)

  • Not opposed to all wars, but opposed to the war in Iraq. (Jul 2004)

  • International voice in Iraq in exchange for debt forgiveness. (Jul 2004)

Trouble Spots



  • Iran is biggest strategic beneficiary of invasion of Iraq. (May 2008)

  • Military surge in Afghanistan to eliminate the Taliban. (May 2008)

  • Take no options off the table if Iran attacks Israel. (Apr 2008)

  • Two-state solution: Israel & Palestine side-by-side in peace. (Feb 2008)

  • Al Qaida is based in northwest Pakistan; strike if needed. (Jan 2008)

  • No action against Iran without Congressional authorization. (Dec 2007)

  • Iran: Bush does not let facts get in the way of ideology. (Dec 2007)

  • Meet directly for diplomacy with the leadership in Iran. (Nov 2007)

  • Committed to Iran not having nuclear weapons. (Oct 2007)

  • Iran military resolution sends the region a wrong signal. (Oct 2007)

  • Deal with al Qaeda on Pakistan border, but not with nukes. (Aug 2007)

  • Military action in Pakistan if we have actionable intel. (Aug 2007)

  • FactCheck: Yes, Obama said invade Pakistan to get al Qaeda. (Aug 2007)

  • Focus on battle in Afghanistan and root out al Qaeda. (Jun 2007)

  • Bush cracked down on some terrorists' financial networks. (Jun 2007)

  • Iraq has distracted us from Taliban in Afghanistan. (Apr 2007)

  • Iran with nuclear weapons is a profound security threat. (Apr 2007)

  • We did the right thing in Afghanistan. (Mar 2007)

  • We are playing to Osama's plan for winning a war from a cave. (Oct 2006)

  • Al Qaida is stronger than before thanks to the Bush doctrine. (Jan 2006)

  • Terrorists are in Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran. (Oct 2004)

  • Problems with current Israeli policy. (Jul 2004)

  • Engage North Korea in 6-party talks. (Jul 2004)

  • Use moral authority to work towards Middle East peace. (Jul 2004)

Voting Record



  • Voted to fund war until 2006; now wants no blank check. (Nov 2007)

  • Late to vote against war is not late to oppose war. (Jun 2007)

  • Spending on the Cold War relics should be for the veterans. (Jun 2007)

  • Would have voted no to authorize the President to go to war. (Jul 2004)

  • Voted YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008. (Mar 2007)

  • Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007. (Jun 2006)

  • Voted YES on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005)

JM/SP foreign policy exactly what?
I notice you have expressed no defense of SP regarding the points I have raised in the previous post regarding her breathtaking lack of knowledge and experience in foreign policy as was so painfully obvious in her first interview with Gibson and will be even more visible when she debates Biden. So you did what you always do and resorted to attacking Obama instead. OK. Let's go there for a minute.

You failed to mention who is the Chairman of the (full) Senate Foreign Relations Committee where hearings and strategies relative to NATO-Afghanistan relations are conducted. Lo and Behold. Would you look at that? It's Joe Biden, who served as chairman of that committee Jan 2001 to Jan 2003 and assumed his current incumbent chair position in Jan 2007. Looks like O made a pretty good choice of VP running mate when it comes to foreign policy experience. So if O is Chairman of the Subcommittee on European Affairs, why shouldn't he be in California for a debate? I would argue that if the Foreign Relations Committee IS the place where policy is debated relative to NATO and its relationship to Afghanistan (last time I checked, NOT in Europe) and O has (according to you) 300 advisors, his attendance is not expected or required, then evidently he feels that he can confidently rely on his advisors to keep him up to speed on what actually IS within the realm of his duties as Chairman of the Subcommittee on European Affairs since he is running for president.

By the way, how many foreign policy advisors does SP have at her disposal? Just curious. Also, it is notable that JM does not serve on any committees and his foreign policy experience is exactly what now? Speaking of advisors, for the life of me I cannot understand why you think there is something wrong with Obama having access to the insight of more than 300 people when it comes to foreign affairs. Sounds like a pretty impressive staff to me. Some might argue that that is an asset, not a liability. The world is a mighty big place and it is ludicrous to think that a president or a senator on a committee should not be taking advice and guidance from the experts on a given region.

Here's some foreign affairs stuff Obama did do during his time in the Senate before the campaign. Notice his interest in WMDs and his involvement in the strategy planning for controlling them in defense against terrorist attacks.

1. Introduced expansions to Cooperative Threat Reduction Program to secure and dismantle weapons of mass destruction and their associated infrastructure in former Soviet Union states.
2. Sponsor of Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security and Democracy Promotion Act, signed by Bush, to restore basic services like clinics and schools, train a professional, integrated and accountable police force and military, and otherwise support the Congolese in protecting their human rights and rebuilding their nation.
3. As member of Foreign Relations Committee, he made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa. His 2005 trip to Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan focus on strategy planning for the control of world's supply of conventional weapons, biological weapons and WMDs and defense against potential terrorist attacks.
4. January 2006, met with US military in Kuwait and Iraq. Visited Jordan, Israel and Palestinian territories. Asserted preconditions that US will never recognize legitimacy of Hamas leadership until they renounce elimination of Israel.
5. August 2006, official trip to South Africa, Kenya, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Chad where he made televised appearance addressing ethnic rivalries and corruption in Kenya.

So that's about it for now. JM/SP foreign affairs experience is what now?

However, if foreign investors own some of those...
mortgages, then I guess we are...in a way. Need to do some more research on that.
Foreign leaders

I've seen a lot of the video clips and pictures also.  You know there is so much hoopla about everything in politics, it's really hard for me to believe anything I see much less anything I hear.  I think we've sunk so low in our politics that the one who can throw the most mud is the one who will win. I don't care about Obama's association of 40 years ago.  I do care about his recent so-called church affiliation.  I do not care if Palin fired the guy for not firing her ex-brother-in-law (of course she did).  I do care that all she can talk about is how "bad" Obama is and how "saintly" John McCain is.  Pull the string and see what Sarah says.


The common sense side of me tells me that most of the garbage we hear from both campaigns is stuff dug up by the other side trying to discredit the other candidate. 


A MOST aggravating thing happened this morning.......a REPUBLICAN acquaintance stopped by to see us this morning.  The unexpected call was to campaign for John McCain.  He got ANGRY when I told him I wasn't voting for either candidate. Pretty much called me a redneck hillbilly for not agreeing with him.  LOL


VOTING WITH A WRITE IN VOTE FOR LOU DOBBS.


And do you buy foreign or domestic gas?
xx
I'd like to see a foreign car outdo that! n/m
x
Foreign Legion?


by: William Astore, TomDispatch.com


photo
New US Army recruits. (Photo: Tech. Sgt. Mike R. Smith / USAF)



    A leaner, meaner, higher tech force - that was what George W. Bush and his Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld promised to transform the American military into. Instead, they came close to turning it into a foreign legion. Foreign as in being constantly deployed overseas on imperial errands; foreign as in being ever more reliant on private military contractors; foreign as in being increasingly segregated from the elites that profit most from its actions, yet serve the least in its ranks.


    Now would be a good time for President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to begin to reclaim that military for its proper purpose: to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Now would be a good time to ask exactly why, and for whom, our troops are currently fighting and dying in the urban jungles of Iraq and the hostile hills of Afghanistan.


    A few fortnights and forever ago, in the Bush years, our "expeditionary" military came remarkably close to resembling an updated version of the French Foreign Legion in the ways it was conceived and used by those in power - and even, to some extent, in its makeup.


    For the metropolitan French elite of an earlier era, the Foreign Legion - best known to Americans from countless old action films - was an assemblage of military adventurers and rootless romantics, volunteers willing to man an army fighting colonial wars in far-flung places. Those wars served the narrow interests of people who weren't particularly concerned about the fate of the legion itself.


    It's easy enough to imagine one of them saying, à LA Rumsfeld, "You go to war with the legion you have, not the legion you might want or wish to have." Such a blithe statement would have been uncontroversial back then, since the French Foreign Legion was - well - so foreign. Its members, recruited worldwide, but especially from French colonial possessions, were considered expendable, a fate captured in its grim, sardonic motto: "You joined the Legion to die. The Legion will send you where you can die!"


    Looking back on the last eight years, what's remarkable is the degree to which Rumsfeld and others in the Bush administration treated the U.S. military in a similarly dismissive manner. Bullying his generals and ignoring their concerns, the Secretary of Defense even dismissed the vulnerability of the troops in Iraq, who, in the early years, motored about in inadequately armored Humvees and other thin-skinned vehicles.


    Last year, Vice President DickCheney offered another Legionnaire-worthy version of such dismissiveness. Informed that most Americans no longer supported the war in Iraq, he infamously and succinctly countered, "So?" - as if the U.S. military weren't the American people's instrument, but his own private army, fed and supplied by private contractor KBR, the former Halliburton subsidiary whose former CEO was the very same DickCheney.


    Fond of posing in flight suits, leather jackets, and related pseudo-military gear, President Bush might, on the other hand, have seemed overly invested in the military. Certainly, his tough war talk resonated within conservative circles, and he visibly relished speaking before masses of hooah-ing soldiers. Too often, however, Bush simply used them as patriotic props, while his administration did its best to hide their deaths from public view.


    In that way, he and his top officials made our troops into foreigners, in part by making their ultimate sacrifice, their deaths, as foreign to us as was humanly possible. Put another way, his administration made the very idea of national "sacrifice" - by anyone but our troops - foreign to most Americans. In response to the 9/11 attacks, Americans were, as the President famously suggested only 16 days after the attacks, to show their grit by visiting Disney World and shopping till they dropped. Military service instills (and thrives on) an ethic of sacrifice that was, for more than seven years, consciously disavowed domestically.


    As the Obama administration begins to deploy U.S. troops back to the Iraq or Afghan war zones for their fourth or fifth tours of duty, I remain amazed at the silent complicity of my country. Why have we been so quiet? Is it because the Bush administration was, in fact, successful in sending our military down the path to foreign legion-hood? Is the fate of our troops no longer of much importance to most Americans?


    Even the military's recruitment and demographics are increasingly alien to much of the country. Troops are now regularly recruited in "foreign" places like South Central Los Angeles and Appalachia that more affluent Americans wouldn't be caught dead visiting. In some cases, those new recruits are quite literally "foreign" - non-U.S. citizens allowed to seek a fast-track to citizenship by volunteering for frontline, war-zone duty in the U.S. Army or Marines. And when, in these last years, the military has fallen short of its recruitment goals - less likely today thanks to the ongoing economic meltdown - mercenaries have simply been hired at inflated prices from civilian contractors with names like Triple Canopy or Blackwater redolent of foreign adventures.


    With respect to demographics, it'll take more than the sons of Joe Biden and Sarah Palin to redress inequities in burden-sharing. With startlingly few exceptions, America's sons and daughters dodging bullets remain the progeny of rural America, of immigrant America, of the working and lower middle classes. As long as our so-called best and brightest continue to be AWOL when it comes to serving among the rank-and-file, count on our foreign adventurism to continue to surge.


    Diversity is now our societal byword. But how about more class diversity in our military? How about a combat regiment of rich young volunteers from uptown Manhattan? (After all, some of their great-grandfathers probably fought with New York's famed "Silk Stocking" regiment in World War I.) How about more Ivy League recruits like George H.W. Bush and John F. Kennedy, who respectively piloted a dive bomber and a PT boat in World War II? Heck, why not a few prominent Hollywood actors like Jimmy Stewart, who piloted heavy bombers in the flak-filled skies of Europe in that same war?


    Instead of collective patriotic sacrifice, however, it's clear that the military will now be running the equivalent of a poverty and recession "draft" to fill the "all-volunteer" military. Those without jobs or down on their luck in terrible times will have the singular honor of fighting our future wars. Who would deny that drawing such recruits from dead-end situations in the hinterlands or central cities is strikingly Foreign Legion-esque?


    Caught in the shock and awe of 9/11, we allowed our military to be transformed into a neocon imperial police force. Now, approaching our eighth year in Afghanistan and sixth year in Iraq, what exactly is that force defending? Before President Obama acts to double the number of American boots-on-the-ground in Afghanistan - before even more of our troops are sucked deeper into yet another quagmire - shouldn't we ask this question with renewed urgency? Shouldn't we wonder just why, despite all the reverent words about "our troops," we really seem to care so little about sending them back into the wilderness again and again?


    Where indeed is the outcry?


    The French Foreign Legionnaires knew better than to expect such an outcry: The elites for whom they fought didn't give a damn about what happened to them. Our military may not yet be a foreign legion - but don't fool yourself, it's getting there.


    --------

    William J. Astore, a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF), taught for six years at the Air Force Academy. He currently teaches at the Pennsylvania College of Technology. A TomDispatch regular, he is the author of "Hindenburg: Icon of German Militarism" (Potomac Press, 2005), among other works. He may be reached at wastore@pct.edu.


»


concerning foreign politics he does..nm
nm
I wish he was in foreign politics
nm
Dirty foreign policy
Well, seems to be if we didnt have such a murderous dirty foreign policy for the last 50 years, the rest of the world might not be wanting to blow us to kingdom come.  You have to wonder why other people of the world hate us so.  It is because we have overthrown third world governments and placed puppets in, undermined elections in other countries, murdered duly legally elected leaders in other countries.  Heck, we were bombing Iraq nonstop through the 1990s and stepped it up right before this illegal criminal war.  The great thing is lots of those soldiers who took part in the bombing are now speaking out.  It has been my experience, from what I have seen in life, you can only bully for so long, then others will definitely strike back.  We are now being struck back. 
So sad..we need a foreign leader to help our poor
Venezuelan heating oil will be distributed to poor
U.S. communities via the
Venezuelan-owned oil company Citgo.
Credit: Venezuelanalysis.com
<
http://Venezuelanalysis.com>

Caracas, Venezuela, November 18, 2005—The
Venezuelan-owned and
U.S.-basedfuel refiner and distributor Citgo will
begin distributing discounted heating oil to poor U.S.
communities next week. Rafael Ramirez, Venezuela's
Minister of Energy and Petroleum, made the
announcement yesterday, saying that the measure is
meant to show Venezuela's commitment to disadvantaged
sectors in the United States.

Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez had originally
announced the measure last August, while the U.S.
civil rights activist Jesse Jackson was visiting
Venezuela.

The launch of the discounted heating oil program is
meant to coincide with the Thanksgiving holiday and
will benefit communities in poor communities of
Boston, Massachusetts and of the Bronx, New York.

The first phase of the program will begin in Boston
and will provide 4.5million liters (1.2 million
gallons) of heating oil at discounted rates, which
will mean a savings of approximately $10 million.
According to the Venezuelan government, the discounts
will be achieved by eliminating middle-men and
having Citgo deliver the heating oil directly to the
communities.
Accordingly, the plan does not involve any losses to
Citgo itself.

The logistics of the plan will involve non-profit
community organizations, which will help with the
selection of beneficiaries, distribution, and billing.
Heating oil costs are expected to reach historical
heights this year, which means that many poor
households might have to go without heat, despite
limited state programs to subsidize heating oil for
low-income
families.

Citgo is a wholly owned subsidiary of Venezuela's
state-owned oil company PDVSA and operates five
refineries and licenses 14,000 gas stations throughout
the U.S.


For those who follow foreign politics...
I just heard on NPR that Gary Kasparov has been arrested in Russia during a marching and protest of Russia's voting practice.  This is NOT good.  Putin is a very dangerous individual who has been funding the middle east conflict and selling weapons to those who really shouldn't have them.  Kasparov is a potential light at the end of the tunnel for a more democratic and liberal Russian state.  I am afraid for him.
don;t forget foreign banks
successfully lobbied to be included in this bailout.  (John McCain's financial advisor Phil Gram is head of USB, Swiss bank)
Foreign cars are not better or cheaper.

If they are cheaper it is because they are literally that....cheaper cars.  You pay for what you get.  I've seen so many American made cars throughout my family where they have put 200,000+ miles on vehicles and they keep going.  I've driven so many different types of vehicles since my husband runs a car dealership and I have to say that American trumps foreign any day in my opinion.  I will NEVER own a foreign car.  Ain't happenin.  You will more than likely see my happy butt in a Chevy of some type.  I'm currently driving a Chevy Uplander and I friggin LOVE it!  I have no problem telling someone their vehicle is a foreign piece of crap.  In fact, I recently told my best friend's sister that was what her Honda was.  LOL!


you should update yourself on foreign politics,
especially North Korea, Israel and Iran, instead of trying to prove IN VAIN that Obama's and Biden's decisions are wrong!

They know what they are doing!
you should update yourself on foreign policies
He most certainly does NOT know what he is doing.
He has more experience than Obama in foreign policy and that cannot...
be disputed. He did add that with Joe Biden; however, I still say it will look odd to foreign leaders if Biden goes to all his meetings with him. McCain can instill any number of advisors and/or his VP pick to help where he lacks in knowledge of the economy. Frankly, I would rather have the economy knowledge in the second chair than the foreign policy knowledge. Because if we get pulled into a confrontation with someone who we know for sure unequivocally DOES have nukes...well, you get my drift.

McCain does not plan to stay at war for 100 years. That was taken completely out of context and not what he said at all. What he said was that there could be an American presence there for 100 years in the form of bases. There are American bases all over the world. We still have bases in Germany and that war has been over for what...60 years or more? If the world lasts 100 years past WWII, those bases will still be there. THAT is what McCain was talking about. Not staying at war for 100 years. We have bases in South Korea, and that war has been over for 50+ years.

I could start pulling out all the Obama quotes but his followers don't care. I have never seen such a group myopic view about one individual. It seems like if he got up on a podium and said I really don't plan to do anything I say I will do, I am just like all the politicians before me, they would chant back "we don't care, we don't care, we don't care." Such is blind devotion. This goes way past a politician and party members.

How do you know McCain has no plans to help Americans through hard times? I can tell you one thing that should not be done is impose harsher taxes on the small family businesses in this country who employ a lot of people. All that does is either cause those companies to go offshore or fold, and then you have even more unemployed and add to the government ticket. But oh...what am I thinking. That is what Democrats want. The more beholden people are to the government, the better Democrats like it. When I say Democrats, I mean the Democratic party hierarchy. I do NOT lump all Democrats together and demonize the whole group as other posters here tend to do with Republicans. Even lump Independents in with the Republicans because they are "not Democrats." That is a decidedly unDEMOcratic attitude, unAmerican attitude. One would surmise the socialism thing is already working...well of course it is. How many times in the speech did we hear tax the rich and the disappearing middle class? Class socialism...redistribute that wealth.


Link to current law regarding foreign birth...sm
to American citizens.  http://www.aca.ch/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=91&Itemid=80
That's ridiculous. This is a foreign policy debate...
mccain still leads all the polls on foreign policy. He has no reason to try to duck this, and that should not even be an issue...they should both be back in Washington doing their jobs as leaders of their parties, not to mention as senators, which they both still are and drawing checks for.

I am glad one of them is doing it, and believe it or not, if Obama had said it first he would be getting the kudos from me too. If he even agreed to it I would give him thumbs up. But he chose not to.
Stop importing foreign cars won't help a bit

People in this country want them because they get better gas mileage. Like I said before, Toyota has plants here in America and they are doing good.


The problem with the big 3 is they sat back and forgot about the past (1970s gas crunch), not into the future. They got a winner with those big SUVs and decided, "Hey, let's concentrate on all the big SUVs, big V8s, etc. That's what the American people want" and they did want them.


Car dealers are falling by the wayside in large numbers because of the problems, too. Lots of them are closing because they can't hang on any longer.


Looks like foreign ears are picking up on the right wing...sm
chatter about Obama's birth certificate. People spreading ilk about Obama are not doing our country any favors.
People have been buying foreign cars
for years.  What does that have to do with losing our jobs due to fewer patient visits to doctors or hospitals?  Actually, a lot of so-called American-made cars are made in Mexico, like the PT Cruiser.  In fact, a lot of cars are made in Mexico because of cheap labor, including VW.
Cheney 'cabal' hijacked foreign policy
Cheney 'cabal' hijacked foreign policy
By Edward Alden in Washington
Published: October 20 2005 00:00 | Last updated: October 20 2005 00:19

Vice-President Dick Cheney and a handful of others had hijacked the government's foreign policy apparatus, deciding in secret to carry out policies that had left the US weaker and more isolated in the world, the top aide to former Secretary of State Colin Powell claimed on Wednesday.


In a scathing attack on the record of President George W. Bush, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff to Mr Powell until last January, said: “What I saw was a cabal between the vice-president of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made.

“Now it is paying the consequences of making those decisions in secret, but far more telling to me is America is paying the consequences.”


Transcript: Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson
Click here http://news.ft.com/cms/s/c925a686-4...000e2511c8.html

Mr Wilkerson said such secret decision-making was responsible for mistakes such as the long refusal to engage with North Korea or to back European efforts on Iran.

It also resulted in bitter battles in the administration among those excluded from the decisions.

“If you're not prepared to stop the feuding elements in the bureaucracy as they carry out your decisions, you are courting disaster. And I would say that we have courted disaster in Iraq, in North Korea, in Iran.”

The comments, made at the New America Foundation, a Washington think-tank, were the harshest attack on the administration by a former senior official since criticisms by Richard Clarke, former White House terrorism czar, and Paul O'Neill, former Treasury secretary, early last year.

Mr Wilkerson said his decision to go public had led to a personal falling out with Mr Powell, whom he served for 16 years at the Pentagon and the State Department.

“He's not happy with my speaking out because, and I admire this in him, he is the world's most loyal soldier.

Among his other charges:

■ The detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere was “a concrete example” of the decision-making problem, with the president and other top officials in effect giving the green light to soldiers to abuse detainees. “You don't have this kind of pervasive attitude out there unless you've condoned it.”

■ Condoleezza Rice, the former national security adviser and now secretary of state, was “part of the problem”. Instead of ensuring that Mr Bush received the best possible advice, “she would side with the president to build her intimacy with the president”.

■ The military, particularly the army and marine corps, is overstretched and demoralised. Officers, Mr Wilkerson claimed, “start voting with their feet, as they did in Vietnam. . . and all of a sudden your military begins to unravel”.

Mr Wilkerson said former president George H.W. Bush “one of the finest presidents we have ever had” understood how to make foreign policy work. In contrast, he said, his son was “not versed in international relations and not too much interested in them either”.

“There's a vast difference between the way George H.W. Bush dealt with major challenges, some of the greatest challenges at the end of the 20th century, and effected positive results in my view, and the way we conduct diplomacy today.”

www.newamerica.net

How much did Barack Obama think about foreign policy before he decided to run...?
I would say...none. There is certainly no proof that he DID, that is why he chose Biden. So, if HE has to make a crucial decision that does not involve voting present or yelling at Michelle for spending $10,000 to send their kids to camp, or which Britney Spears designer to use for his next big speech...what's he gonna do? All I can say is, if he is elected, he better put Biden on speed dial or handcuff him to himself. You act as if your guy is ready!! And no one has to keel over for HIM to be in charge...he is in charge on day 1. Yeah, THAT IS scary!!

I don't know in what alternate universe you think Karl Rove is advising him. Karl Rove and John McCain detest each other. Have you not paid ANY attention these last few years??
Sarah Palin's foreign policy experience...
http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/08/31/foreign-policy-experience-what-americans-dont-know-about-sarah-palin/
We're pussycats compared to some foreign leaders. sm
What's she going to do with them, and anyone else she can't just bully and fire?
Biden's giving a speech on foreign policy right now..
sure doesn't sound like he is stepping down any time soon, but don't want to burst your bubble.
Biden has plenty of foreign policy experience.
n/m
Because they were roasting the economy, foreign and domestic policy
I am a firm Obama suppoter but I concede on this point. McCain out-roasted Obama. He was clever, not over the top, comfortable with himself and amazingly gracious in his concluding remarks...in stark contrast to his demeanor when debating the more difficult issues of this election.
So businesses can use foreign labor for their products and services? nm
x
I stated 8 years ago that Bush' foreign "Policies"
,
One's child being in the military doesn't mean foreign policy experience...
the site I posted lists several things that do constitute foreign policy experience...more than Barack has. That is not a slam, it is just the truth. And she is the #2 person, not the #1 person. I don't know if she said she doesn't know anything about Iraq or not. She is a governor, in state politics, and that should have been her focus. She was running a state government. Obama has never run any kind of government,so she has more executive experience than he has...well, in fact, more than any candidate running, including her running mate. John McCain has more foreign policy experience than Obama. Obama's #2 has more foreign policy experience than he does. That is why he is the #2 guy. As far as experience goes...Sarah Palin has more than Barack Obama. That is fact on paper. Not trying to downgrade Obama. Contrary to popular opinion, I think he is a likable guy. I think he is a good orator. I think he has a beautiful family he loves and who love him. I don't have anything against Joe Biden, other than he can be condescending and hateful sometimes...there are sound bites all over the internet. I just don't think he is right to lead either. I just think Obama is wrong for the Presidency and so would Joe Biden be. Apparently holding that opinion put me on the tracks in front of the hate train with a target painted on my back. But that is okay...I can deal with that. My country is too important to me to throw my values under the bus for the "party." I am with PUMA...party unity my tailfeathers.

More foreign political news...Australia..So long, John Howard..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071125/ap_on_re_au_an/australia_election
New Bush rule makes it easier to hire foreign workers

Dec 10, 8:43 PM EST


Administration changes to farm worker hiring afoot


By SUZANNE GAMBOA
Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) -- As it prepares to leave office, the Bush administration is moving to make it easier for U.S. farming companies to hire foreign field workers, which farmworker groups say will worsen wages and working conditions.


Farm groups said that changes to the H2A visa program, used by the agriculture industry to hire temporary farm workers, were posted on the Labor Department's Web site at midnight Tuesday but have since been taken down.


Labor Department spokesman Terry Shawn said whatever was posted wasn't the final version of the new rule, which Shawn said would be released Thursday and published in the Federal Register on Dec. 18.


The Bush administration published a proposed version of the new rule last Feb. 13 and received nearly 12,000 public comments, Shawn added. The next version will be a final rule and can take effect 30 days after publication. Some of its provisions would take effect in mid-January and others later in the year, the farmworker groups said.


Farm worker advocates and the United Farm Workers union said the version that appeared on the Web site would lead to a flood of cheaper workers.


"The government has decided to offer agriculture employers really low wages, low benefits, no government oversight to bring in foreign workers on restricted visas and thereby convince them they should do this instead of hiring undocumented workers," said Bruce Goldstein, executive director of Farmworker Justice, a group that advocates for farmworkers.


The changes in the posted version would drop a requirement that an employer get the Labor Department to certify it faces a worker shortage before it can get visas for foreign workers; instead, employers would be allowed to simply attest in writing to a shortage. That version of the new rule also would change the method for calculating wage minimums for workers and relieve employers of a requirement to recruit in states or communities where other employers already are hiring farm workers, Goldstein said.


But Assistant Labor Secretary Leon Sequeira said Wednesday evening the agency is not dropping the obligation to obtain certification, which is required by law.


Paul Schlegel, American Farm Bureau public policy director, said many of the changes will make the program a little less burdensome for employers. He said existing laws prevent employers from hiring foreign workers if the jobs can be filled by U.S. workers.


"My members want to make sure they have a legal supply of labor," said Schlegel, who added that he had not reviewed all the proposed changes.


The rule changes are a part of a pattern of last-minute regulatory changes being rushed into effect by the Bush administration before President-elect Barack Obama's Jan. 20 inauguration.


The effect is to make it harder for Obama to change course on some policies favored by Republicans and the business community.


"We are hopeful that the Obama administration would recognize the utter mistake and unfairness of this proposal," Goldstein said. Congress has a procedure for reversing the rules, he said.


Many of the last-minute changes by the Bush administration have come in the area of public lands and the environment, including easing regulations on mining waste and allowing handguns in national parks. Another pending rule would grant greater leeway to railroads to transport hazardous materials through densely populated areas.


Foreign investors. China and Russia insisted on Fannie Mac bail out.
dd
Yep, pretty dumb to claim you have foreign policy experience from 3 weeks in Pakistan!!!...

Obama started off saying he was confident in his FOREIGN POLICY experience ("Foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain"). He then proceeded to talk about his visit to Pakistan.


SO WHAT? I visited and lived in several foreign countries, too. Does that mean I understand foreign policy better than someone who may have spent less time but has had actual interaction and policy discussions with those countries' leaders? And with the leaders of 80 countries?


If 3 weeks in Pakistan is the extent of Obama's foreign policy credentials, then I am way more qualified on the "foreign policy" front.


My point is that Obama's claim is ridiculous. Better that he stick to his "better judgement" mantra, since the "3 weeks abroad = foreign policy experience" is just pathetically weak.


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/04/obamas-college.html


McCain and his foreign policy would have pushed America into total isolation from the rest of the w
and the world would have disrespected us even more.
There are different ways to SHOW STRENGTH, it must not always be BOMBS !
Europe - Swastika vigilantes kill foreign students to keep their city 'clean' ...see article.












Swastika vigilantes kill foreign students to keep their city 'clean'


src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif





THE African students did not even see the man raise the swastika-emblazoned shotgun as they emerged from the Apollo nightclub in St Petersburg.

When he opened fire from the shadows behind them, some of the group thought it was a firecracker going off.









Then they saw Samba Lampsar Sall, a 28-year-old student from Senegal, lying dead on the pavement with his throat blown apart.

Within hours, a sinister message had appeared on the website of a group called the Party of Freedom. “The clean-up of the city continues,” it said.

Mr Sall had come to study at St Petersburg’s State Communications University in 2001 in the hope of finding a better life when he went back home.

Instead, around dawn yesterday, he became the latest victim of a hate campaign by neo-Nazi extremists on the streets of Russia’s cultural capital.

“How can people be so evil?” asked Michael Tanobian, an African student who was with Mr Sall when he was killed. “We come here just to study, for nothing else. We don’t take anything here.”

Mr Sall’s brutal murder exposes one of Russia’s most disturbing problems as President Putin prepares to host the G8 summit in St Petersburg in mid-July. For all its grandeur and impressive art collections, Russia’s second city is fast becoming the racist capital of the world.

Critics say that the authorities are not doing enough to combat the extremists who routinely attack, and kill, Africans, Asians and immigrants from the Caucasus or Central Asia.

Seven people have been killed, and 79 injured, in more than 40 racist attacks this year, according to Sova, a non-governmental organisation that monitors extremism in Russia.

Last year, 28 people were killed and 366 injured in racially motivated crimes, it says.

The Interior Ministry sent a team of special investigators from Moscow to work on yesterday’s murder. The Foreign Ministry expressed “sincere condolences to the relatives and loved ones of the deceased”. The Prosecutor’s Office said that the case was being treated as a racist killing.

But dozens of similar cases have been treated as “hooliganism”, a crime that carries a far lighter sentence. One of the most shocking attacks occurred in 2004, when teenagers stabbed to death a nine-year-old Tajik girl in St Petersburg. Last month, a court convicted them of hooliganism, giving six of them 18-year jail sentences and one of them five years.

Desire Defaut, chairman of the local community group African Unity, urged Mr Putin to lead the fight against neo- Nazism. “They must make an announcement at a state level that such a problem exists and state organs must work on it,” he said. “We can’t say they are doing enough if there are two attacks within one week.”

Last week, the nine-year-old daughter of a Russian woman and her African husband was wounded in a knife attack in St Petersburg. “What more proof of extremism do they need in St Petersburg?” asked Juldas Okie Etoumbi, chairman of the Association of the African Students of Moscow. But, he added, the problem is not confined to St Petersburg. In the past week, skinheads in Moscow beat up a journalist of Caucasian origin and the culture minister from the Caucasus region of Kabardino-Balkaria.

Mr Putin has called racism “an infection” and pledged to stamp it out. But critics say that the Kremlin has tolerated, and even encouraged, ultra-nationalist groups to foster loyalty to the State and make itself look relatively liberal.

MURDER CITY

Sept 2003 Tajik girl, 5, beaten in St Petersburg

Feb 2004 Tajik girl, 9, stabbed

Mar 2004 Syrian student pushed in front of train

June 2004 Anti-Nazi campaigner shot dead

Oct 2004 Vietnamese student stabbed

Sept 2005 Congolese student beaten

Dec 2005 Cameroonian student stabbed

Feb 2006 Malian medical graduate stabbed

Apr 2006 Senegalese student shot