Rubber Duckie Congress Down The Drain

Note that POTUS never seems to stick around when big things happen. This week saw Benjamin Netanyahu - our only reliable ally ‘east of Greece and West of India’ - come to Washington. Why? Because something is not right in Washington – and all Israel knows it.

We saw two leaders side by side – only one of which is actually a leader in the traditional sense. The other showed himself as a ‘leader’ in name only. The difference between the two men was obvious for all to see. Some stated publicly that our president stood out as an utter embarrassment. While Mr. Netanyahu was still in Washington, Obama fled to Europe - the latest hotbed of anti-Semitism – looking for LTC. Good for him! As the saying goes, ‘If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.’

What’s wrong in Washington is not that Obama is not an effective leader; or, as some have suggested, that ‘he leads from behind’. What’s wrong in Washington is that Obama sides with the Palestinians. Many in Congress – even Democrats – have already spoken out, saying they disagree with Obama’s approach. In Europe he will not likely encounter that particular sentiment. Note: While the Palestinians speak openly about what they intend for Israel, our president speaks merely in broad, platitudinous arcs that can be interpreted anyway you want; but his actions are unmistakable. Netanyahu has figured it out. That’s why he is in Washington. Israel is in trouble and Washington won’t help. It’s not even help the Israeli PM is pleading for. All he wants is for America to stop making it worse.

Unfortunately, foreign policy is something that falls totally under the purview of the president. Congress does not have much if anything to say about what the president does. Everyone now seems to accept the president’s contention that he is not subject to the war powers act as pertains to Libya, for example. And on a whole host of other issues, Congress has already been edged out of its traditional ‘checks and balances’ mandate as proscribed by the Constitution.

So, what Netanyahu says to Congress is just talk. Congress has stood idly by while this president has turned it into a rubber duckie stamp; and, along with it, the people have lost their franchise as well. What is never said or even whispered has now become true: The United States of America has become a dictatorship: one vote, one man, one time.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Cinderella's Bloody Glass Slipper

Since I had to carry a gun for my work, I needed to qualify every six months. Missing the target was not an option. It never is.

This morning I went downstairs for breakfast. I turned on the radio. And there it was: The obligatory jabs at both Trump and Palin – and all this by a New York local radio host who’s considered ‘conservative’. It seems we’ve all been down this road before. We just never learn. Back then, our fav piñata was Bush. What we wouldn’t give to have him back again!

Obama remains untouched. Every word of his is routinely afforded the gravitas it no longer deserves. We try so hard to fit this wicked stepsister’s foot into Cinderella’s glass slipper. It must be the slipper’s fault. And yet, midnight is fast approaching when everything turns to pumpkins.

The Left has no compunction in slicing off toes. In fact, they have the surgeons constantly standing at the ready. Never mind the spectacle of blood, smear and dishonesty which disgusts and, at the same time, fascinates. They work in tandem with the media, like a well oiled machine. Slice here and dice there, and the shoe is made to fit despite the corns.

There, on the front page of the WSJ, the headline reads, “Karzai Told to Dump U.S” – by Pakistan no less. Inside, there’s a story about the trial and conviction of ‘Big Fish’ Lee Farkas, former chairman of Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage. Only, it turns out, that Farkas wasn’t such a ‘Big Fish’ after all; that our government was behind it all (in the form of Fannie and Freddie Mac).

It’s just that the government has now assumed the status of ‘sacred cow’ and can never be touched. Instead we send up thousands to atone for the government’s sins. As Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. – author of “A Mortgage ‘Big Fish’ Disappoints” – laments, the whole thing “fails to confirm the media intuition that the housing boom and bust were brought on by the criminality by mortgage CEOs.”

Same with the spike in gas prices at the pump. It couldn’t possibly be due to Obama’s policies (even though he explicitly told us that he wants us to pay more for gas). It couldn’t possibly be due to the collapse of the dollar due to the government policy of printing images on paper and pretending it’s real money.

Overseas hangs the giant Libyan question mark – and Egypt, Iran, Syria and the entire Middle East. Then, there’s Russia and China; South America. What is it this president believes?

Bolton says there’s no rhyme or reason to Obama’s foreign policy. Really? Everywhere we look we lose. Sounds suspiciously like a plan.

At the very least, Kaddafi knows what he wants and he’s willing to go for it, even if it kills him. Anyone who can articulate what he wants, short of sh*t-canning their own nation has a leg up on Obama at this point. I’m not saying that Obama isn’t smart or doesn’t have goals. …and isn’t it remarkable how Obama just managed to get us to sh*t-can our own just by the ruse of releasing his birth certificate?

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

LIBYA: CLIMAX OR ANTI-CLIMAX?

The Western campaign ---- by exploiting the fig leaf cover of the UN Security Council Resolution 1973 for protecting civilians in Libya--- to work for a regime change in Libya has come face to face with three disturbing ground realities within a fortnight of the launching of the military campaign:

Ground Reality No.1: The campaign has been exploited by Gaddafi to skillfully transform what was a civil war between his supporters and opponents into a war of national resistance against foreign invaders from the West, who are projected as the modern day crusaders. He has been able to successfully appeal to the sense of patriotism of the soldiers of his Army and para-military units. The results: His soldiers are fighting with greater skill and greater competence than those of the rebel armies. The initial gains made by the rebels under the air and missile cover provided by the US and other NATO countries have been reversed in many places. Desertions from the Libyan security forces, which were threatening to gather momentum before the Western military campaign, have practically stopped.

Ground Reality No 2: US military commanders have started developing a feeling of disquiet that they have rushed to the help of a rebel army about which they know so little. The disquiet has been caused by a gnawing realization that some of the rebels had fought with Al Qaeda in Iraq and are Iraq returnees. There was never much love lost between Gaddafi and Osama bin Laden. They strongly disliked each other. Gaddafi saw to it that Al Qaeda did not develop roots in Libya . He prevented those Libyans who had gone to Iraq from coming back to Libya . The suspicion that some of these Libyans of Iraqi vintage have now come back to Libya and have joined the anti-Gaddafi groups has created fears that the Libyan misadventure might provide fresh oxygen to Al Qaeda. The good rebels vs the bad rebels syndrome has started haunting NATO military commanders.

Ground Reality No 3: An unanticipated outcome has been the feeling in Iran and North Korea that Gaddafi was unwise in surrendering his nuclear option under Western pressure. While Iran has not publicly expressed this feeling, North Korea has not concealed it. It is being pointed out that if Gaddafi had retained Libya ’s nuclear option, the West would not have dared to intervene. Gaddafi’s experience is being cited as an argument to justify North Korea ’s resisting the US pressure to give up its nuclear option. The impact on the USA ’s non-proliferation campaign is going to be negative. After what happened in Libya , Iran and North Korea would be even more determined than in the past to resist US pressure on this issue.

2. There are signs of a re-think in the West on the advisability of carrying on the campaign in its present form. The US has reportedly stopped firing Cruise and other missiles against Libyan Govt. positions. Air strikes have been reduced in intensity. So too, the anti-Gaddafi rhetoric. The US seems to be looking for a face-saving solution. Will Gaddafi provide a face-saving formula? Like Saddam Hussain, he is a defiant fighter who is prepared to fight till the bitter end if that becomes necessary. Unlike Saddam, he is amenable to compromise solutions which would safeguard his position, protect Libyan national interests and prevent an irreparable breach with the West. One saw these qualities in the way he handled the nuclear issue.

3. Is the Libyan imbroglio moving towards an interesting climax or anti-climax? ( 5-4-11)
-------------------------------------------
(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi , and , presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)

Massacre At Mazar-i-Sharif: It’s A U.S. Pastor’s Fault

In order to bring back any semblance of sanity to our public and private affairs, our people have to be re-educated, all the way from basic math to an understanding of right and wrong. In the absence of any standard - which is where we are now - who is to pass judgment? For far too long we’ve been drifting. Every issue has become existential; a tug of war, pulling our nation apart. We have yet to learn that our near paralysis in responding to events stems from being so utterly disorganized; that the most organized – not the most powerful, not the most tolerant, not the kindest – invariably win the day. The storming of the UN (do-gooder) compound in the Afghan town of Mazar-i-Sharif earlier today drives this thought.

It’s hard to imagine any outrage building in the West over the burning of a Bible or an American flag. In fact, this would likely be applauded by untold numbers of our own. We even tolerate the daily shredding of our own Constitution. We tolerate gross incompetence in leadership. We tolerate insult. We tolerate the erosion of our living standards. We tolerate decline. We even tolerate the intolerant.

At this point we lose. We declare ourselves ‘good people’. Why? Because we are tolerant, of course. At the same time, we have no idea that ‘good’ actually means standing for something. Without any discernable standards to go by, who is to say? We are fruit, ripe for the picking. We will not defend ourselves because we have nothing to defend. A man robs us on the street and we say, “He probably needs it more than us.” And, once again, we fall for the ruse of equating tolerance with virtue.

Our enemies have noticed. They are advancing without feeling the need even to disguise themselves. The drama of vultures feasting on a corpse is unfolding right before our eyes. Despite our considerable arsenal of bombs - which is larger than all the bombs in the world combined - no one respects us.

It’s open season. Libya is not the arena to demonstrate our roar – like Iraq was, and (to a lesser extent) Afghanistan. In Libya we lose no matter who wins. Our immediate focus should be on Iran. Instead we ignore it.

The world wonders and waits, vying for position for the privilege of driving the final stake through America’s heart. At this point, it’s no contest. Anyone can do it. Buried up to our necks in our own justifications for our limitless tolerance, anyone can throw the stone that will put out the lights.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Traipsing Around In The Hallway

There have been other instances when we first sent in ‘advisors’; then we armed our preferred side; then we provided air support; and, finally, we put American boots on the ground. It did not end well. You’d think we would learn. But aren’t we starting the same cycle all over again in Libya?

There was a time when we went all out in support of the notion that we are killing our planet, based on ‘irrefutable’ scientific evidence, graphs and projections - which were then proven to have been manufactured for political advantage. Yet, we are still operating on the original premise and demanding wholesale changes in the way that we live.

There was a time when Keynesian economics was the talk of the town. It dictated hiking Federal spending in order to increase prosperity and jobs. We were told that that economic activity increases by $2 for every dollar spent on unemployment insurance, and the like. We were told, we had at last discovered the golden goose; we had invented a perpetual motion mechanism that would spew greenbacks forever. Two for one. The more unemployed, the better for our economy… It’s not working.

The result of all these things should have been foreseen by those who promoted such policies. They should have known that it wouldn’t end well. These are the brightest among us, after all. If they don’t know, how should we with our mere high school education and a couple of college credits in basket weaving?

I maintain they did know – maybe not the first time it was tried, but certainly the second and third. And here we’re repeating all the same mistakes over again. Why?

Isn’t it obvious? Redistribution of wealth. It’s a core belief among those now in power that this must absolutely be done. They know the people bought it the first time around. And they know the people will buy it again: all the same promises; all the same lies. And then, when they figure out it’s not working, we’ll simply say, “Oops!” And they’ll assume we noticed our mistake and will correct it. This will give us time to do it again. And, again, we'll say, “Oops!” And “Oops!” it is until they’re ready to revolt, but by then it’s too late. They will have been bled of all their power to seriously resist.

Why Libya? It’s the same principle that applies: “Oops!” and “Oops!” again, until our precious army has been discredited beyond redemption. With the economy in tatters; Congress in tatters; the military in tatters, America’s enemies will have won. That’s when we’ll get Israel!

Don Trump has been getting a lot of press attention for keeping Obama’s birth certificate controversy alive. He himself is not exactly strident about it, knowing it’s become the third rail of American politics …and he does want to be president. It does give an opening, however, to those who want to keep the issue going. Why is it an issue in the first place?

Carter made a lot of mistakes, both in foreign policy as well as domestic. These can be filed away as teachable moments for future American presidents. These were teachable moments too for America’s enemies.

The law draws a distinction between someone falling asleep while smoking a cigarette in bed and someone deliberately pouring gas into the stairwell of a building and setting it on fire. Granted, the end result is the same.

Obama has been in office long enough for us to question his motives. As such, it is logical for us to question which team he’s actually playing on. His birth certificate would provide a clue; as would his school records. The fact that these are unavailable to us just goes to intensify our suspicions. Obama’s reluctance to provide this evidence is an indication of something being seriously amiss: Someone has been, or is about to be, snookered.

At the very least, we would find out if our president is merely a guy with a cigarette, or the guy with the red 5 gallon can, traipsing around in the hallway.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Guest Contributer: Tom From NJ

On John Batchelor’s blog, Tom from NJ responded to president Obama’s speech on Libya. I have asked him for permission to post his response on my own blog because it introduces some names we should all become familiar with. These people were not elected but exert much influence over our government’s policies:

On the domestic side, the Obama Administration, led by czar-of-czars Cass Sunstein, is "nudging" the USA step by opportunistic step into a state of "de-development" and rule by executive fiat, often of doubtful constitutionality. On the foreign policy side, Mrs. Cass Sunstein -- aka. Samantha Power -- aided by her accomplices Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice, is performing a similar "nudging" operation, using Libya as her wedge issue.

What specifically is the "nudge" in operation here? Stated simply, it is to gradually disenfranchise We the People from any effective control over our foreign policy -- just as on the domestic side over everything from health care to light bulbs -- with a view towards decoupling the deployment of America's crown jewel - her dedicated, highly skilled, and popular military - from any meaningful connection with the real interests and concerns of We the People.

To this end, Samantha Nudge-nik and Co. are creating a precedent which, if allowed to stand, will operationalize the long-time internationalist-progressive wet-dream of routinely deploying the brave men and women of America's super-powerful armed forces in the service and at the behest of the UN, the EU, the Arab League, the "international community," faceless "democratic rebels" or anybody else deemed worthy by the PC crowd, rather than in defense of We the People. Integral to this precedent are several fundamental assertions: (1) The single most significant problem facing our world today is genocide, and therefore; (2) Only a truly international effort -- i.e., one sanctioned by some recognized international body like the UN -- can legitimately and effectively act to eliminate genocide, therefore; (3) "American exceptionalism" today can only mean that our country must take the lead in quashing this primary international menace, and by whatever means necessary.

To be fair to Samantha Power, we should not simply dismiss her constant critical focus on international genocide as just so much cynical political game-playing. It seems she really cares about this undoubted historical scourge and no decent human being can disagree with her condemnation of it. That said, we must also note that Mr. and Mrs. Sunstein, as the quintessential Harvard Power Couple from Hard-Left Hell, seem convinced that their personal agendas represent the only wise solutions to all of our tired old Western world's problems.

On the foreign policy side, we may boil down the Sunsteins' latest paroxysm of arrogant "We the Elitists know best" to the deceptively simple formula of R2P -- "responsibility to protect." According to this sunburst of superior wisdom, the only morally and politically legitimate use of military force is to rescue current and prospective victims of genocide from their dire fate as allegedly decreed by those nasty old nation-states like the USA and Israel.

These Sunstein-esque assertions only beg a series of critically important questions. Who will decide what constitutes "genocide?" Not We the People, but We the Elite. Who will decide what measures to take in any given international crisis? Not We the People, but We the Elite. More specifically, who will decide when and where and under what conditions to commit our splendid armed forces to action? Not We the People, but We the Elite. And from now on just whose interests will our splendid military "protect" when they strike to kill and be killed? Not We the People, but We the Elite. See the pattern forming? It has begun in the Obama Administration's bogus "kinetic military action" in Libya, and who knows where and how it will end. God save America!

Iraq vs. Libya

Soros: Out For Revenge

Obama’s obvious and consistent mishandling of things has led some to suspect more sinister motives. In the case of Libya, why should any nation allow our president to put it on the hook, especially while Obama himself appears to be in full retreat? Neither has he, our president, demonstrated any particular fealty to the concept of alliance. I do believe that word has gotten out that Obama is only in it for himself – and, quite possibly, for something much worse. I can’t see anyone sticking his neck out for him.

I will say that we, the American people, will ultimately be stuck with what Hillary started. I’ve said it before: the way it stands now; it looks like a win-win for Kaddafi. The only way we can salvage anything at all is by forestalling any outcome whatsoever for as long as possible. I never thought I’d come even close to agreeing with anything Keith Olbermann says. That would put Obama to the left even of Olbermann. Never thought there was so much room remaining there.

What I’m saying is that there may be much more to this (and a whole host of other stories) than how it appears. For instance, why is it that, ever since Obama has been in office, virtually everything has been going south for us? Why does it continue to be so impossible to view every one of Obama’s policy objectives as viable solutions? There appears to be a pattern.

There’s one thing that Beck never mentions: the timeline. I personally believe they’ve already started rolling up the carpets and what remains of our country along with it. It will all be over and done with within the next two years.

Do explore the Soros connection to the ‘London School of Economics’. Make note of all the names that pop up even during a most cursory search – names we have come to associate with the Fabians of today. Imagine how insulted Soros must have felt when the Kaddafi’s kid embarrassed him after he (Soros) had gone to all the trouble of vouching for him, urging his entry into LSE.

There’s a lot more to this story. And it isn’t over yet. There may not be much we can ultimately do about it but, purely out of curatorial interest, let’s begin connecting some dots, just to let them know that we’re on to them; that we’re not total morons.

I don't know if you know this, but Kaddafi is said to have once been on board with Soros' 'Open Society' crap. After the scandal involving his son at LSE, Soros probably got on the phone with Kaddafi and told him his kid is a wanker. And Kaddafi probably told him to kiss his a** and hung up. Nobody talks this way to the man who has all the money in the world.

You want a nice neat string to tie it all together? Maybe it all hinges on an aging nutcase individual having decided to get back at all those whom he perceives as having slighted him. His ‘Open Society’ has probably very little to do with some illusory Utopian vision. What is more than likely is that the whole thing has been constructed as a platform from which to exact revenge.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

WAR: Comic Relief

Everywhere I turn today on the radio dial, I hear the usual yuck-yucks and clucks about what Obama did today. The war in Libya is topic number one of course. Japan has fallen to a distant third behind the many marriages of Elizabeth Taylor. Actually, the past few days we’ve seen very little of Obama. It has been Hillary Clinton who’s been out front, trying to explain this and that.

What’s curious about this is that war isn’t at all funny. The yuck-yucks center on the administration’s failure to explain how we got into it and what we can expect. The details we’re given change by the hour and are often contradictory. For instance, Obama claims that it’ll last just a few more days with us in charge, and then we’ll hand it off to some unspecified 'other'. Then, we learn, that nobody else wants it. It’s like watching a group of kids playing hot potato. Or, the kitchen sink gets clogged and we go in with all kinds of ‘shock and awe’ (to borrow a phrase). We ask the kid next door to come over and help. All he brings with him is a screwdriver while we’ve got the 130 ft. snake out. Whom are we hoping to hand off to? It’s comical, in a macabre kind of way. But here we are. The Germans have already pulled out. NATO is hiding in the tall grass. The others were never in. ‘Allies in disarray’ is how Drudge put it.

We’ve seen this before: an administration getting pummeled for deciding to go to war. Whether Kaddafi lives or dies is almost beside the point. It almost seems like the U.S. president is always the ultimate target of our scorn and ridicule; that as soon as any U.S. leader orders military intervention, it’s like, at the same time, he’s holding a loaded gun to his own head.

You might get the impression from reading this blog that I dislike Obama. The truth is I really don’t dislike him at all. His exploits have taken us in many unforeseen (and foreseen) directions. It’s been a blessing to be alive during these times of tumultuous change. The Obamas (in one incarnation or another) have always been with us. We’ve just never put them in charge of anything before. This time we did. And what did we expect? We got exactly what we voted for.
----------------------------------------------
On today’s Glenn Beck radio program, the name Stephen Lerner surfaced in connection with a union plot to collapse the American economy. Later in the day, Limbaugh also spent a segment on it. This seems consistent with what happened before (just preceding the 2008 election). When the Justice Department was notified, they ignored what must surely constitute a serious threat. Say, the kid with the screwdriver (above) goes home and were to fantasize on Facebook about putting that screwdriver of his through Obama’s eye; he would no doubt get a visit from the Secret Service before sundown. Lerner, apparently is playing for the right team (unions). So, we can assume he can happily fly under the radar, as far as Big Sis is concerned.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

LIBYA : INCREASING CONFUSION

“The rebels' strategy is to push west but this has got off to a halting start, and without further concerted air strikes it is difficult to see how this rag-tag army will ever achieve its aim of unseating Col Gaddafi.”

---Ian Pannell, the BBC correspondent in East Libya , in a dispatch of March 21,2011
-----------------------------------------------
Increasing confusion over basic aspects of the Western-led military operations --- ostensibly with the authorisation of the UN Security Council (UNSC)---- in Libya doesn't bode well for the achievement of the principal objective of the operation as authorised by the UNSC, namely, the protection of civilians in the areas outside the control of Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan despot.

2. The No Fly Zone was authorised by the UNSC to protect the civilians from air strikes by the Libyan Air Force. States of the Arab League supported the proposal for a No Fly Zone under the impression that it meant patrolling by the planes of the members of the coalition in the Libyan skies in order to immobilise the Libyan Air Force.

3. The UNSC resolution has been interpreted by the US , the UK and France as authorising not only the immobilisation of the Libyan Air Force, but also its destruction on the ground. Hence, the repeated air and missile strikes for three nights in succession on ground positions in Tripoli , the capital, and other areas under Government control. This destruction, instead of immobilization, is causing large civilian casualties in the areas under the control of the Government. Even if one does not accept the figures of civilian casualties as given out by the Libyan Government, the fact that there have been civilian casualties in the Government-controlled areas cannot be denied. Civilians are being killed in Government-controlled areas in attempts to protect the civilians in the rebel-controlled areas.

4. The severity of the air strikes----- which is totally disproportionate to the requirements of a No Fly Zone to protect the civilians--- has already started causing disquiet in the ruling circles of the Arab world, but not yet amongst the population. There has not yet been any public demonstration against the disproportionate air and missile strikes under the pretext of preparing the ground for effective enforcement of a No Fly Zone. Amr Moussa, the Secretary-General of the Arab League, has been the first to give expression to this disquiet. One could expect others to do so in the days to come if this disproportionate resort to air and missile strikes continues.

5. The reported destruction by a missile strike of a building near Gaddafi’s place of residence under the pretext that it housed the command and control of Libyan air defence forces has given rise to suspicions that the Western-led coalition has arrogated to itself without the authority of the UNSC the objective of removing Gaddafi through military action. There have been vague answers from Western leaders to the question as to Gaddafi’s removal is one of the objectives of the military action. While the Americans have been somewhat vehement in their denial, the British have not been. While denying that Gaddafi is a direct target, the British do not rule out the possibility of his becoming an indirect victim of the air and missile strikes.

6. This calculated ambivalence results from Western realization that there is unlikely to be an early end to the military operations so long as Gaddafi continues to be in power in Tripoli . Even if the Libyan Air Force is totally destroyed on the ground, the rag-tag army of the opponents of Gaddafi is not in a position to move by road over a 1000 kms from Benghazi to Tripoli , defeat Gaddafi’s forces and remove him from power unless it is assured of sustained air support. Moreover, it has to pass through areas inhabited by tribes loyal to Gaddafi. Unless their ground fighting capability is degraded, the rebel army could face difficulty in reaching Tripoli . Having degraded Gaddafi’s air capability under the pretext of facilitating the No Fly Zone--- which itself was more than what was authorized by the UNSC--- the West now faces the prospect of having to mount more air and missile strikes on Gaddafi’s ground troops in order to degrade their fighting capability. This could aggravate the disquiet among the Arab members of the coalition.

7. If the rebel army does not capture Tripoli in another two or three weeks it is likely to face another adversary en route to Tripoli----the desert storms which could increase in frequency and intensity in the days to come. During the Iraq invasion of 2003, desert storms immobilized some US tanks and slowed down the advance to Baghdad . Fortunately, the desert storms did not last long. If they last long in Libya , not only it could slow down the rebel advance to Tripoli , but it could also hamper air strikes due to poor visibility thereby increasing the reliance on missile strikes which generally cause more civilian casualties than air strikes.

8. These problems---actual and potential---have been confounded by the lack of convergence over the command and control of the entire operation. Presently, the command and control is being temporarily exercised by the Americans, but President Barack Obama is anxious to erase as rapidly as possible the impression that this is an US-inspired, US-led and US-manipulated military action using the fig-leaf cover of the UNSC resolution. He wants one of the European members of the coalition to take over as quickly as possible the leadership of the command and control. What role should the NATO play in this command and control? Germany , Turkey and the Arab members of the coalition are not comfortable with the idea of a NATO role. The UK and Italy are in favour of it.

9. If these problems are not sorted out in the coming days and if there is no convergence on what exactly the UNSC resolution means and how to achieve the objectives as laid down by the UNSC resolution, one could find the situation in Libya becoming messier than it is today. ( 22-3-11)

(The writer, Bahukutumbi Raman, is Additional Secretary, (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi , and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

Dilma's Dilemma

Another teachable moment. Another glimpse into the mind of our president, Barack Hussein Obama. How he is handling Libya could have been foreseen long ago. Other commanders-in-chief have done as much at the mere drop of a hat. It’s not what happens there that should be of concern to us. Of far greater concern should be what we ourselves have become.

We have become a nation of lawless and corrupt governance. Our Constitution specifies that Congress must be consulted, and be made to approve any deployment of American troops overseas. Barack Hussein Obama is the first president to bypass this convention. Instead, he claims to derive his power from what he refers to as the ‘international community’ (UN). As such, he has further shredded the Constitution of the United States. At the same time, he is continuing to marginalize the role of Congress. So much for representative governance.

Again, all this could have been foreseen. Months back, I wrote that the deliberate chaos in the 111th Congress would serve to discredit the institution irreparably. Here we have it in black and white. What does this say about the sanctity of our vote? In a short two years we have devolved from a constitutional republic to a tyranny.

Our media does not appear to grasp the enormity of what has happened to us. Small wonder. The success or failure of any quasi-democratic setup depends on an educated public. Our schools have become mere cookie cutters. The level of understanding among recent graduates is astoundingly below par. It cuts across the board from math through English. “When NEWSWEEK recently asked 1,000 U.S. citizens to take America’s official citizenship test, 29 percent couldn’t name the vice president. Seventy-three percent couldn’t correctly say why we fought the Cold War. Forty-four percent were unable to define the Bill of Rights. And 6 percent couldn’t even circle Independence Day on a calendar.”

I understand that polls are often skewed to elicit certain answers; to show specific results, most likely ones that grab headlines and spur magazine sales; and, don’t forget, of course, to promote the urgency for more money for favored institutions (such as teachers unions) and in NEWSWEEK’s case, Democrats. In this particular survey, published this week, I suspect, the numbers are probably even worse. The teaching of civics and history has perhaps suffered most in recent years. It’s natural that these would be edged out by an ever greater emphasis on ideologically based solutions. Let’s face it, Marxism is now in vogue.

As our president travels splendidly throughout Brazil, burnishing his Marxist credentials, his unconstitutional behavior with regard to Libya goes almost unnoticed. Obviously, most Brazilians have not yet gotten the message that he is one of them as evidenced by the feisty street demonstrations against him. But Dilma knows why he’s come. She’ll let him grovel and beg for her validation. Still, she must weigh her ultimate approach to him against her own need for a demon. The U.S. has always served admirably in this regard.

Even if the new Brazilian president should withhold her favors, the trip should still be regarded as a success. When things go wrong in Libya, Obama can always say, “It wasn’t me. It’s all Hillary’s fault. I wasn’t even there.”

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

LIBYA: OBAMA'S IRAQ

Note: By bringing Ram's posts to your attention, it does not mean I agree. Still, I feel, it's useful in any case to present a coherent view from another part of the world. - P

LIBYA: OBAMA'S IRAQ
by B.RAMAN

"Despite the fact that it was French war planes which launched the first attacks, it's clear that this early phase of the operations is an overwhelmingly American affair - all but a very small number of cruise missiles have been fired from American ships and submarines, " said Paul Adams, the BBC correspondent in Washington DC, while commenting on the air and missile strikes launched by the US, France and the UK against ground targets in Government-controlled areas in Libya on the night of March 19,2011.

2. As I watched the TV visuals and read reports on the strikes, I was reminded of what the George Bush administration called the decapitation strikes before it started the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The military action in Libya has been projected as having the limited objective of a humanitarian intervention to protect civilians in the areas under the control of the rebels. But its real objective is to have Muammar Gaddfi, the Libyan despot, removed from power as quickly as possible and instal a pro-Western leader at Tripoli so that Western oil and gas companies could return to Libya and resume oil/gas production.

3. Oil--- and not human rights or concern for democracy--- is the driving force in Libya as it was in Iraq. Saddam Hussein paved the way for his own isolation and destruction by antagonising his own people through cruel repression and his neighbours through his arrogance. Muammar Gaddafi has similarly paved the way for his own isolation and ultimate destruction through similar policies of repression and arrogance. No force on earth could have saved Saddam in 2003. No force on earth could save Gaddafi in 2011.

4. Gaddafi is politically doomed. When a ruler---- be a democrat or a despot---- loses the support of his people his end is inevitable. The question is no longer whether Gaddafi will fall, but when and under what circumstances. What suffering it would cause to the Libyan people? Are they going to be the real beneficiaries of the UN-authorised and Western-manipulated intervention or the consumer economies of Italy and other European countries dependent on the flow of oil and gas from Libya?

5.The Iraq invasion set in motion the train of events that ultimately led to the discrediting of the policy-makers of the Bush Administration in the US and the Tony Blair Government in the UK. As Obama himself had often conceded, the involvement in Iraq contributed to the USA's difficulties in the Af-Pak region.

6.One thought Obama had learnt the right lessons from Afghanistan and Iraq. It is apparent he has not. After the Second World War, the US had rarely covered itself with glory when it embarked on external adventures----whether it be in Kora or in Vietnam or in Somalia or in Afghanistan or in Iraq. If Obama thinks Libya could be an exception, he is mistaken.

7. The only effect of the Libyan adventure will be that the march of democracy, which started in Tunisia and spread to Egypt, will be stopped.The Arab despots, who have jumped into the Western bandwagon against Gaddafi, have done so not because their hearts bleed for the civilians in Libya and for their human rights. They have done so because they calculate that the diversion of the Western attention to
Libya enables them to crush the human rights and aspirations for democracy of their own people.

8. The Western need for Arab support in Libya in order to show it as a truly international coallition of Western crusaders and Islamic people has already led to a cruel suppression of the pro-democracy agitators in Bahrain with Western voices and conscience remaining muted as the Sunni ruler, with the help of 2000 ground troops from the States of the Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC), crushes the Shia protesters. Western near-silence in Bahrain today and in Saudi Arabia tomorrow is the quid pro quo for the Arab support in Libya.

9. Whatever be the outcome in Libya, its echoes will be heard wherever American lives are threatened and American interests are endangered---whether in the Af-Pak region, or in Yemen or in Egypt or elsewhere. We have seen the resurgence of the Afghan Taliban in Afghanistan with a Neo Taliban keeping the NATO troops bleeding. We will be seeing a resurgence of Al Qaeda with a Neo Al Qaeda endangering American lives and interests everywhere. Anger breeds terrorism. More anger will breed more terrorism. 20-3-11)

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

My comments:

I do not accept that oil is the primary factor this whole mess hinges on, though it will be promoted as such by anti-Western, anti-capitalist factions around the world including those in the West. If it were so, we would have insisted on free oil for services rendered in Kuwait, Iraq, etc. Instead, we deliberately made it a point not to benefit materially from any U.S. led intervention in the region. It didn’t work and nobody basically believes it.

This Libyan exercise bears the stamp of previous interventions of this kind: intervention for humanitarian reasons. I don’t buy that as well. More likely it was something relatively as trivial as retribution for Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s release from a Scottish prison under questionable circumstances in which the West had its nose publicly rubbed in the dirt. (Also, if you’ll recall that one of the raps on Saddam was that he tried to kill Bush the elder.)

Thus far, there is nothing to suggest that Kaddafi will not survive this. The Ummah will rally around him in an effort to defeat Israel and the West. Kaddafi remaining in power would bookmark this victory as another in a series of victories against infidels. If Obama indeed sees himself fundamentally as an Islamist, it would represent a victory for him as well.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Sleepless in Chatham (NJ)

Obviously, not everyone agrees. There must then be more than one side to the story. Russia, China, India, et al were maneuvered into ‘agreeing’. They agreed by voting ‘present’ – which is a way of saying, “Do what you want, but we’ll have no part of it.”

Action involves risk. Risk must be balanced by benefit. For far too long American foreign policy has excluded any notion of ‘benefit’. It has been unbalanced. In Iraq we never insisted on payback. Its oil is now going to our rivals. As the chaos and killing there continues, we cannot even claim ‘victory’ on that front. Neither do we insist on Libya’s oil in exchange for our effort. And indeed, Libya’s oil is already spoken for and going to those who voted ‘present’.

You would think that Obama, of all people, would understand the benefits that accrue by voting ‘present’; that voting otherwise engenders risk which, in turn, invites loss. It has been my contention that Obama – whether by way of retribution or an affinity for victimhood - deliberately invites loss. Neither revenge nor national suicide are attractive to anyone but himself.

Saw the French film “Of Gods and Men” last night. As my friend and I settled ourselves outside afterwards to discuss the merits of the film, a woman approached us. She clearly had been disturbed by it. She said it was the worst film she had ever seen. She said it was good to have someone to talk it out with and hoped that she would not have bad dreams.

It was basically an anti-war film. In addition, it blamed the West. As such, it entered the realm of propaganda. Propaganda can never rise to the level of art. It targets those lacking any clear cut principles …and leaves them sleepless.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Holding the Bag

What we are witnessing on every front is quite remarkable. It’s tough to keep up with it all and even tougher to make sense of it. Whatever happens in Libya, we now own it. There’s one school of thought that thinks it’s already too late; that the civil war there is already over; that Kaddafi has won; that to interfere at this late date will only serve to forestall the inevitable.

So why did we do it? My guess is we were stung by the Saudi’s sending troops into Bahrain without telling us. To make up for it, we decided we must do something to show that we’re still relevant. (Democrats are always asking themselves if they’re relevant.) Never mind; when push comes to shove, our allies can be expected to excuse themselves to go to the bathroom. Many in our Congress know this; that we’ll be left holding the bag. They also know that we’ve had no time to prepare. It took Bush many months to launch an invasion into Iraq. I remember, even the weather became a factor. It pays to remember that initially Bush was hugely successful. Our troops hardly had to fire a shot. We could hardly believe our luck when our objective was met in record time.

But we just couldn’t leave it at that. We just had to embark on ‘nation building’, changing hearts and minds and all such rot. And even this would have succeeded if we hadn’t politicized it here at home. Democrats wanted Bush discredited at all costs. They were quite willing to gamble away all just to see it happen. As such, they happily undermined America’s effectiveness and prestige. They destroyed the levee known by its age old dictum that ‘politics stops at the water’s edge’, inviting a flood of recrimination and abuse from abroad. It worked and we lost our way.

What a price we’ve had to pay!!! Now we truly are irrelevant. Nobody takes us seriously anymore. Even the guy at the gas station on the corner can hardly stand to look at us. We have shamed ourselves in the eyes of the world, hastening our own demise to no purpose.

I say this in response to John Batchelor’s words last night when commenting on the self-immolation of a Tunisian fruit vendor and likening it to the recent self-immolation of a Tibetan monk. These were brave and honorable deeds that will go down in history as important turning points. When a rich and powerful country does the same, however, it is seen as utter folly.

What exactly is our goal in Libya? When will we know we have won? What exactly will we have won? And should we lose, and Kaddafi stays in power?

It has been my contention from the start that Obama is out to wreck every one of our key institutions. Already he’s done a fair job of it. The only thing remaining is the military.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Silver Linings

You know as well as I do that any Republican frontrunner daring to show themselves as such will be trounced by the press. It’s a small wonder that anybody is even willing to call themselves ‘Republican’ anymore. Obama sits in the catbird seat. He has academe, the media and the unions running interference while he plays golf. Meanwhile Republicans are getting their heads handed to them – not by Democrats, but – by their own, for not being able to turn things around on a dime after years of cumulative mismanagement.

We foresaw this strategy and it works. In Obama’s last news conference, he blamed Republicans for forcing the insipid CR dance without mentioning that it was his and his Democrat majority’s failure to pass a budget in the first place. Every unpleasantness from now on will be blamed on Republicans and they will continue to accept the premise while insisting on playing by Queensberry Rules. This puts them in a similar position as the Libyan rebels - their backs to the wall.

Republicans fear Damocles’ sword too much. It is an illusion of their own creation. As government shut down looms like a puffy white cloud, clouds will be clouds and their silver linings will split the darkness equally. Yet, GOP leadership appears prepared to do practically anything to avoid it. Even though some are now saying this is exactly what has to happen. No chance of Republicans not taking the blame. That much is understood. Still, it would show some spine.

Voters are well aware of what happened in Wisconsin. They have identified the players and have taken sides. It is now up to Republicans to decide whether or not they want to take up the fight of saving the country in earnest or remain satisfied with making only symbolic gestures.
-------------------------------------------------------------
On a previous thread I mentioned the gruesome murder of members of the Fogel family in Itamar. The Israeli government took the unusual step of releasing pictures of the carnage. Missing from these were pictures of what they had done to the woman. We can only imagine. I heard in passing that a memorial service is to be held in New York. It was said to have been organized by the ‘Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations’, Malcolm Hoenlein’s group. Stay tuned for details.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Itamar

It is one thing when some technology that was built in the earnest belief that it will benefit mankind goes awry. It is quite another when we go to considerable lengths excusing, encouraging and funding terrorist organizations who have proven over and over again their intent to massacre the innocent.

Last Friday night, in the West Bank settlement of Itamar, five members of the Fogel family were brutally butchered - the youngest, only three months old. Within hours, the militant wing of president Mahamoud Abbas‘ Fatah party, Al-Aqsa, took credit for the carnage only to withdraw it later (and then again reaffirm unofficially). No doubt, the human animals who did this will be feted and lauded by Palestinians who are well known for naming significant landmarks after dead ‘martyrs‘.

Here in this country, we continue to support such people with millions of (albeit now worthless) dollars annually. Our news media sweeps their U.S.-funded atrocities routinely under the proverbial rug while continuing to demonize the victims.

Peter King’s ‘controversial’ hearings started last week - in my view - 10 years too late. No major news organization reported that the Obama administration sent its representative, National Security Advisor, Denis McDonough, to a Washington-area mosque with close ties to terrorism in advance of the hearings with a clear mandate to undermine the hearings’ importance. I’m leaving out a lot of detail here with the understanding that most of you are already well aware of the facts, none of which have been overtly raised in the mainstream media.

Speaking of the media, every report about the resolution re Libya by the Arab League that I’ve heard mentions that the League endorsed the imposition of a no-fly zone (over Libya). Missing from every one of these reports was that the League also, in the same breath, ruled out international intervention. This I found out from reading The John Batchelor Show website.

Never mind acts of God. We are slitting our own wrists, people!

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

America: Not For Profit

There have been calls for revolution right here in America. Most prominently such calls have recently been heard at the protests in Wisconsin‘s state capital. Neither did the oft stated comparison to Egypt’s revolution escape public notice.

As in a series of strokes, first symptoms are seldom recognized as dangerous. Our first rattling of the cage came with the election of Barack Hussein Obama. We’ve been in revolution mode ever since. It’s reached a point where a counter-revolution is now building: the Tea Parties.

When Americans speak of revolution as pertains to their own country, it is difficult to determine what exactly they are talking about. ‘Revolution’ has become a sort of shorthand for ‘change’ popularized in 2008 during Obama’s election bid. Back then, it essentially meant nothing. Change would happen no matter which candidate were to be chosen. Bush was no longer on the ballot after all.

Perhaps, revolution can be identified as ‘accelerated change'. No doubt, this is what we got with Obama. Few would have envisioned how much this administration would be able to accomplish in just two short years. In the process, it has managed to bludgeon any number of sacred cows. (We’ve already gone through the list dozens of times.) These are now screaming to high heaven.

What we are seeing now can perhaps more properly be termed ‘civil war’. Revolution always comes first. With Obama’s election in the history books, the revolution is effectively behind us. Conventional wisdom has it that those best organized tend to come out on top (in a revolution). The American Left was far better organized than the Right, evidenced by the Left winning hands down.

Conservatives may be late to the dance, but they are organizing. There are other factors, of course, that will determine the ultimate result. Of these, enthusiasm may be the most potent. It can gather itself into real momentum. Momentum can only be temporarily halted by ‘organized’ force.

And this is where we find ourselves today. With the media being on the lam, it’s hard to tell at the moment which side will ultimately prevail. Libya is far easier to predict. Kaddafi will use all he has to quell the uprising. Unlike other Middle Eastern tyrants, he must have been planning for this eventuality all along. It won’t be pretty.

Any outside help offered to his regime will be handsomely rewarded. No doubt Russia and others are considering it. We have already stated publicly that we will not make any move that could be construed as an attempt to profit. This makes us unique among nations; and is yet another indication of the direction in which our own revolution is headed.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Cucible

If any should doubt that we are deeply entrenched in a clash of cultures - a war, if you wish - I direct you to Caroline Glick’s opinion piece entitled “The West’s proxy war against the Jews” in yesterday’s Jerusalem Post. She lays it out clearly as few can and have. The crucible, in her view, is Israel. That is to say, the fate of Israel is the metric that will define the ultimate winner of the struggle.

To live side by side in relative peace (like sticks of furniture in an otherwise empty room) with the current Islamic/communist coalition assault now in full swing is out of the question. It is now fully in attack mode. One of its goals is to push Israel into the sea. (Envision anything I might mean by that.) It’ll mark the defeat of the West. The victorious coalition will at first gather ‘round to congratulate themselves; then, they will begin fighting each other, for they are only united on one issue: their hatred of Israel and western capitalism.

Whereas America will remain relatively unscathed by the fall of Jerusalem into Arab hands, Europe will likely not be so lucky. To be sure, America will have its own problems. For one thing, it will be difficult to convince the entire country to salute the red flag. This will have to play out over time.

In today’s WSJ, Mark Helprin tells of America’s retreat from the high seas in an article entitled “The Decline of U.S. Naval Power” We see it ourselves in the continuing saga of pirates successfully negotiating ransoms and killing civilians. It seems incredible that we cannot do much about it. Similarly, as pertains to Libya (or any other trouble spot on the globe), our hands appear to be tied by outside interests and internal concerns (and distractions).

The media has been gearing up to tell us just how bad Kaddafi is (and has been). This is the likely view of the Obama administration as well. It makes me suspicious, however. It’s been a long time since either the media or the government has told us the truth about anything. It may simply reflect Obama’s calculation as to what he believes Kaddafi’s staying power to be, and this administration’s scrambling to get out in front of the curve for once (of course hindered somewhat by - as JB points out - Tripoli’s long and well-established connections to radical elements in Chicago (Farrakhan).

Realistically, you’ve got to go all the way back to 1988 when Pan Am flight 103 crashed at Lockerbie following an in-flight explosion, killing all on board and scattering wreckage all over the area to pin anything of substance on Kaddafi. Since then, I’ve been under the impression that Kaddafi has undergone semi-successful rehabilitation and earned his way back into the fold of the human community. In light of what else is going on in the world today, the springing of bombing suspect Abdelbaset al-Megrahi from a Scottish hospital/jail seems more of a prank, designed to redden the faces of the pompous, than a full-blown crime against humanity.

There is no doubt in my mind that the relatively recent upheavals we are witnessing in the Middle East and elsewhere is due to America’s deliberate distancing itself from its traditional international obligations. This has, at the very least, left a vacuum for sinister forces to exploit. The end result continues to be the chaos of birth. We definitely appear to be on the cusp of some momentous change. This (chaos) is only the first step. What will eventually emerge is anybody’s guess.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Kaddafi Blames bin Laden

Three days ago, JANA (Libya’s official news agency), blamed Israel for the unrest. It didn’t convince anyone (or at least not enough) to unite the country. Now, the blame shifts to bin Laden, self-declared - raised to the status of mythical arch - enemy of the West. Kaddafi is grasping at straws. In some part of what's left of his mind he remembers how the West is in the process of destroying itself with the notion that ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’.

Not everything Kaddafi says is mad. In fact, when viewed objectively, he makes several good points - and all, seemingly without the help of a teleprompter. No one can doubt that at least some of what he says about AQ is true. No one can doubt that, to some extent, children have been deliberately wrested from their parents’ beliefs and control. Hell, it’s happening in our own country; schools teaching kids a lot of BS that their parents would never openly approve of! Parents, in both subtle and overt ways, are routinely accused by their kids of committing crimes against the planet; against humanity. It’s well documented that parents often find themselves on the defensive. As such, many have taken a back seat in hopes of avoiding arguments with their eco-fascistic offspring whom they are condemned to love.

With Kaddafi it’s not so complicated. I don’t know to what extent bin Laden is involved in the Libyan turmoil (if at all). He mentions bin Laden merely for the effect it might have in the West. Will the West mobilize to save him under the notion that ‘the enemy of my enemy…”? Probably not. Still, it was worth a try; and it does prove that he’s still out there punching, and not folding like a cheap camera - like Mubarak did.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Lions And Ducks And Bears

The Middle East is burning. Protests spreading in Libya; protests spreading in the Middle East and beyond. Once the cat is out of the bag, everything becomes unpredictable. In Libya, the prize is light crude. Many nations - especially in Europe - depend on it. Oil prices rising everywhere - affecting everything. Someone in Libya shouts, “Where is America? Where is the UN? This is a massacre! We need help. Now!”

They don’t ask for Chinese intervention. They don’t ask for Russia - or Europe. They ask for America. An automatic reflex.

“Sorry guys, you’re on your own. We’ve got our own insurrection to deal with. Wisconsin. And it’s spreading to other states.“

“But what about the oil? We’ll pay!”

“Sorry again, guys. We don’t need your oil. We’re ’green' now. Don’t you see? We’re green. Oil is a cancer. We’re trying to choke it off. We’ve got windmills, batteries, solar panels - and mercury light bulbs. Besides ….besides what?

“While we may have started all this mess with the likes of Google, Facebook and the unions, it’s out of our hands now.”

Kaddafi is toast. He burnt us once too often. No sympathy for that dictator. He’s fresh out of IOU’s - and so are we. The rest will fall in place after the dust has settled. Blame it on Israel.
---------------------------------------------------------------

In the center of the town, opposite the station, is the village green. There, right in the middle, is a pond. The family often goes there to feed the ducks after dinner with the bread that’s left over.

Dad says, “Look kids! They’re over there.” And the kids run over to where they are.

When the parents catch up with them, mother remarks, “My, how they’ve grown!”

Dad is unsure whom she’s referring to - the children or the ducks - and says nothing. When their bags are empty, the children are anxious to leave.

“Say good-bye to the ducks,” Mom says.

“They’re not ducks,” chime the children in unison.

“What are they then,” asks Mom.

“Bears,” say the children.

Mom and Dad laugh. They think it’s cute. From then on, the family refers to the ducks floating silently on the surface of their own reflections on the village pond as ‘bears‘.
----------------------------------------
Later that year, the county proposed a bear hunt to cull the sloth that’s become a nuisance to garbage cans and pets. There were so many people against it that the idea was scrapped.

Mom mentions it one evening to Dad. “They’ve banned duck hunting,” she says.

Dad looks up from his paper. He seems annoyed. He liked to go duck hunting with his friends - in season, of course. “What’s wrong with duck hunting?” he exclaims.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/