Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

JUNE 24,  2011

SYRIAN TRAGEDY – AT 11:18 P.M. ET:  Friday is the major day for demonstrations in many Arab countries.  Today was no exception in Syria.  There was bloodshed, and plenty of it, as the regime cracked down once more.  And there was the usual wringing of hands in Western capitals.  From Fox: 

BEIRUT -- Defying government guns, thousands of Syrian protesters poured down city streets and a main highway Friday to press demands for President Bashar Assad's ouster. Security forces opened fire, killing at least 15 people, including two children, activists said.

"Our revolution is strong! Assad has lost legitimacy!" a YouTube video showed protesters chanting in Zabadani, a suburb of Damascus, the Syrian capital.

Syria's streets have become the stage for a test of endurance between a 3-month-old pro-democracy movement, bloodied but resilient, and an iron-fisted but embattled regime. The latest round of protests and killings came as international pressure mounted on Assad.

"We will not stand by while the Syrian regime uses violent repression to silence its own people," British Foreign Secretary William Hague said after the European Union expanded sanctions -- asset freezes and travel bans -- to more members of the Syrian leadership.

Take that, dictators!  Asset freezes!  Travel bans!  That's right, some Syrian leaders will no longer be able to visit Belgium!!!

The Syrian opposition says 1,400 people have been killed as the government has cracked down on a movement demanding an end to four decades of Assad family rule -- a popular uprising renewed each Friday after weekly Muslim prayers.

Five people were killed by security forces' gunfire this Friday in Barzeh, a Damascus district 3 miles from the city center, said the Local Coordination Committees, which track the protests. But Syrian state television offered another version, saying gunmen, otherwise unidentified, had opened fire on security personnel and civilians, killing three civilians and wounding several security force members.

The Syrian regime late Friday said that the demonstrations consisted of 64,000 "thugs."   Lots of thugs, apparently, in Syrian streets.

The Friday protests show no signs of letting up.  At the same time, the regime shows no signs of stepping down.  It's an ongoing tragedy, and the wrist slaps by the West are having no apparent effect.  Indeed, the Western countries, flying the NATO flag, can't even get rid of Gadaffi in Libya.

American leadership is nowhere to be found. 

June 24, 2011     Permalink

SOME LIGHT IN EGYPT – AT 9:58 A.M. ET:  For months we've been reporting on the betrayal of the Egyptian revolution, specifically the rise of Islamic group and the continued denial of basic rights.  Now some of the original revolutionaries are taking a stand, demanding that the promise of the revolution be respected and realized.  From AFP:

Egyptian activists are calling for a massive rally on July 8 to 'save the revolution' that toppled Hosni Mubarak, urging politicians to drop debates on the timing of elections and focus on the basics.

In a Facebook page entitled "The 2nd revolution of anger", activists say the fundamental demands of the uprising -- to protect rights and freedoms -- have not been met, and have instead become clouded by arguments on whether elections or a constitution should come first.

"To all rival political forces debating which should come first, constitution or elections, save your revolution first, save Egypt first. Our revolution is collapsing," the activists said on their Facebook page, which has garnered over 55,000 members.

The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, which took over when mass protests forced Mubarak from power in February, has scheduled parliamentary elections for September.

But an autumn poll is expected to play into the hands of the well entrenched Muslim Brotherhood, prompting calls from secular politicians for a delay to allow new parties to organise themselves.

Some have also called for a new constitution to be drawn up before the election, for fear that the Islamist group will otherwise have too much influence over the drafting of the charter.

But those behind the call for the July 8 protest say the debate is premature, arguing that the priority should be focused on ensuring freedom of expression, the public trial of those found guilty of abuse, and an end to military trials of civilians.

COMMENT:  We wish them well.  They have the right idea, but I fear that the regressive forces have the upper hand.  Egypt is not a country with a democratic tradition.  Its people have never known democracy in their lifetime.  The Muslim Brotherhood started in Egypt in the 1920s and is well organized.  Decades of propaganda and corrupt education have cooked too many minds.

But you never know.  Maybe, and possibly with some discreet outside help, the true revolutionaries will prevail.

June 24, 2011      Permalink

A QUIET MILITARY REVOLT IS HAPPENING – AT 8:58 A.M. ET:  We have, properly, civilian control of the military in the United States.  Military officers must follow their orders, or resign in protest. But that doesn't mean they can't have opinions.  It's been clear in the last day that military leaders do not truly endorse Obama's politically driven Afghanistan strategy, and are letting us know it in their own way.

I don't suggest that military men are always right.  McClellan was inadequate during the Civil War and was replaced.  I believe MacArthur was wrong in his desire to expand the Korean War, made his views known, and was fired.  The pompous Westmoreland, in Vietnam, was succeeded by the brilliant Creighton Abrams. 

But the advice of sound military leaders should be weighed carefully by a commander-in-chief with no military knowledge or experience.  Robert Kagan in WaPo, explains what's happening:

Make no mistake...the entire military leadership believes the president’s decision is a mistake, and especially the decision to withdraw the remainder of the surge forces by September 2012. They will soldier on and do their best, but as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, put it, in characteristic understatement, they believe the decision will increase the risk to the troops and increase the chance that the mission will not succeed. It bears repeating that the deadline imposed by the president has nothing to do with military or strategic calculation. It has everything to do with an electoral calculation. President Obama wants those troops out two months before Americans go to the voting booth.

This may prove a disastrous political calculation, too, however. If the war is going badly in the summer and fall of 2012, it will be because of the decision the president made this week. Everyone will know he did it against the advice of his commanders. Everyone will know he did it for political reasons. So if the war is going badly a year from now, whom do you think the American people will blame? There will still be 70,000 American troops in Afghanistan, but as part of a losing effort. Will Americans reward Obama at the polls under those circumstances?

Well put.  But Kagan leaves out one point:  The press, obsessed with the reelection of their hero to a second term, can "adjust" its reporting of the war to fit that need.  And sorry to say, some journalists might be tempted, such is the state of the press and its view of its "responsibilities." 

At the same time, the enemy might lie low in Afghanistan next summer to encourage Obama's pullout.  Then, after Obama's victory at the polls, they could increase the heat, inflict heavy casualties on the remaining Americans, and leave us with Vietnam-style calls to "end the war now" by getting out.

We have no real leadership, which is why we can have no real victory.  But an America, ten years out from 9-11, no longer seems that interested, which is the tragedy.

June 24, 2011       Permalink 

WE ARE HELPING TO FINANCE THIS MADNESS – AT 8:34 A.M. ET:  There are plenty of arguments for the federal government to stop funding National Public Radio.  I would humbly suggest that one of the strongest is the quality, even the sanity, of some of NPR's political analysis.  From the Weekly Standard:

The elusive distinction of most ludicrous analysis of Obama's Afghanistan speech should be awarded to NPR for its story, "Obama's Afghan Speech Echoed Lincoln's Talk." The segment was less than a minute-and-a-half, but it was a doozy. Here's the excerpt on NPR's website:

President Obama has studied the life of President Lincoln. In his second inaugural address in 1865, Lincoln spoke of the Civil War, then nearing its end: "With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in." A section of Obama's speech had a similar rhythm.

The comparable text in Obama's remarks?

With confidence in our cause; with faith in our fellow citizens; and with hope in our hearts, let us go about the work of extending the promise of America...

From here, NPR tries to draw a parallel between Obama's Afghanistan decision and the Civil War. "President Obama's speech brought Lincoln to mind and also highlights an advantage that Lincoln had in 1865," the female radio host says. "Lincoln was speaking near the end of a four-year war. Victory for the Union side was not quite won, but was in sight."

The male host continues: "President Obama spoke last night of a war that has lasted almost a decade. He faces a far more ambiguous task: starting to disengage American troops, while acknowledging that fighting in Afghanistan will continue for years."

So one leader (Lincoln) urged the nation to "strive on to finish the work we are in," shortly before winning the war the nation was fighting. And the other leader (Obama) says, "let us go about the work of extending the promise of America," immediately after calling for America to cut and run from the war the nation is currently fighting. See the parallel? Apparently it's visible only to NPR hosts.

Why of course there's a parallel.  Both Lincoln and Obama lived in Illinois.  Why can't Weekly Standard comprehend that?  That makes them equally great, doesn't it?  Oh, also, the names of the spouses of both men begin with "M," Mary for Lincoln, Michelle for Obama.  Another proof of equal greatness.  Oh yes, and both men had connections with other heartland states – Lincoln was born in Kentucky, and Obama's mother was born in Kansas.

I guess we see things the Weekly Standard doesn't.

June 24, 2011       Permalink

A REMINDER THAT THE BOYS ARE BACK IN TOWN – AT 8:17 A.M. ET:  Another terror plan stopped, but when will our luck not hold?  From The New York Times:

SEATTLE — Federal law enforcement officials have arrested two men who they say planned to attack a military processing center here using machine guns and grenades.

The men — Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif, also known as Joseph A. Davis, 33, of Seattle, and Walli Mujahidh, also known as Frederick Domingue Jr., 32, of Los Angeles — were arrested late Wednesday and charged with conspiracy to murder federal officers and employees, conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction and several firearms-related charges.

These Episcopalians.  You gotta watch 'em.

The processing center, called the Military Entrance Processing Station, is used to help process new enlistees. The building is in an industrial area south of downtown. The government said it also houses a federally run day care center.

Both men appeared in court here in a brief initial hearing on Thursday. Neither spoke beyond saying “yes” when asked to confirm that they lacked money to hire a lawyer. The magistrate judge presiding over the hearing appointed public defenders to represent them.

The 38-page criminal complaint filed against the two suggested that they had not made final plans to carry out the alleged plot. They were frustrated, it said, by American war policies and discussed how to make an attack last as long as possible in order to get the most media attention for their actions.

Multiculturalists unite!  Watch the excuses start.  All a perp has to do is use the word "frustrated" and the "it's culturally understandable" gang starts its engines. 

The complaint says federal authorities were informed of the plan in early June by the Seattle police, who had been approached by someone who involved in initial discussions about the attack with Mr. Abdul-Latif. The source, described in the complaint as having an “extremely serious” felony record, soon became a paid informant, helping agents make audio and video recordings of conversations the source had with the two defendants.

At one point, Mr. Abdul-Latif said, according to a government transcription of a recorded conversation: “We’re not only trying to kill people, we’re trying to send a message. We’re trying to get something that’s gonna be on CNN and all over the world.”

COMMENT:  The new Al Qaeda leadership will undoubtedly encourage other plots like this, if only to prove its relevance.  American interest in the war on terror has waned, in part due to economic problems at home.  But I fear that our interest will be sharpened once more, but by a plan that's carried out, and is successful.

June 24, 2011     Permalink

JUNE 23,  2011

SHAMELESS OBAMA? – AT 11:16 P.M. ET:  In monitoring the stories about President Obama's Afghanistan speech, and the reactions to it, I get the sense of a growing anger.  I'm not referring to the leftist loonies' anger over Obama not pulling out fast enough, but by a sense in some circles that the president's policies are cynical, somewhat corrupt, and mostly decided by his political needs. 

Michael Gerson, once a speechwriter for George W. Bush, put it on the line very directly in the Washington Post:

Since the beginning of his swift political rise, Barack Obama has fashioned himself a unique historical figure. With his latest speech on Afghanistan, he has finally become one.

What other American president has employed a public argument so transparently political — the need to “rebuild our infrastructure” and “find new and clean sources of energy” — to explain his choices as commander in chief? What other president has deployed the words “fidelity” and “unwavering belief” — citing examples of military tenacity and courage — to announce a policy of premature retreat? What other president has more dramatically claimed “a position of strength” while more effectively conveying an impression of weakness?

There is a boldness to this rhetorical approach, which might better be called shamelessness.

Don't you love subtlety?

The surge he ordered came to full strength only last August. American forces quickly gained control of key areas in the Taliban heartland — causing the enemy to fight for territory it once securely held. Now, with less than a year in full effect, Obama is “fully recovering the surge” by next summer, apparently without conditions. “Recovering” is an inspired euphemism, avoiding the need for “withdrawing.” He is using the success of a military strategy to justify letting up on a reeling enemy.

This may or may not be fatal to the military’s counterinsurgency strategy, but it certainly undermines it. Can there be any doubt that by 8:16 p.m. Eastern time on Wednesday our enemies in Afghanistan were relieved, our allies disheartened and the undecided encouraged to play both sides of the conflict?

And...

A president provides for the common defense and promotes the general welfare, instead of positing a dangerous choice between the two.

Given the difficulty of the undertaking, the weariness of Americans and the erosion of support in both parties, it would take exceptional leadership to achieve a good outcome in Afghanistan. Even limping across the 2014 deadline will require some positive effort of persuasion. For years, our conflicted president has been largely silent in this task. His words were worse.

COMMENT:  Gerson makes excellent points.   Whether one agrees or disagrees with Obama's course, he is no leader.  One key task of a political leader in a democracy is to organize the electorate, to persuade it, shape it.  Obama, a great campaigner, lost his voice at his first encounter with responsibility. 

He seems to think the presidency is a goal, not a job.

One interesting aspect to Obama's Afghanistan speech:  It did nothing to raise his stature.  And when a commander-in-chief speaks, and his stature doesn't rise, he is failing.

June 23, 2011      Permalink

WHERE OBAMA STANDS – AT 9:39 P.M. ET:  Today's Gallup poll continues the drumbeat of bad news for the president.

Obama's approval stands at only 43%, but disapproval is at 50%.  These are not good reelection numbers.

By contrast, Rasmussen has Obama's approval at 46%, but disapproval at 53%. 

The economic news is constantly grim.  There seem to be no bright spots on which Mr. Obama can hang a claim.

But there are no guarantees here.  The Dems will try to picture the Republicans as anti-Social Security and anti-Medicare, and some blundering by Republicans, hardly unusual, can make those charges seem at least somewhat credible. 

We also wonder whether, with so much disapproval of both parties being voiced, there will be a movement toward a third party, or at least a third candidate in the race.  Remember that the 1992 was a three-way race between Bush 41, Bill Clinton, and Ross Perot.  It is widely believed that Perot's vote handed the election to Clinton.

June 23, 2011       Permalink   

ANOTHER GREAT VICTORY FOR THE PROGRESSIVE FORCES OF SWEDEN – AT 9:46 A.M. ET:  Some years ago I was having lunch in New York with my Swedish publisher, who told me that Sweden was a country where half the population supported the other half.  I'm afraid that's turned out to be true.

I must admit that I find Sweden annoying.  I'm sure the Swedes are fine people, and they've given us some good, well-designed products, but their government types waltz around the world lecturing everyone on how they should lead their lives.  There are special messages for the inferior Americans.  At the same time, Sweden is falling apart.  In its third largest city of Malmo, firefighters can't answer a fire call in some sections without a police escort because the "immigrant" population (polite term) attacks the firemen. 

And some famous Swedish names, that came to define the nation in past decades, aren't even Swedish any longer.  Volvo is now owned by the Chinese.  That may bring comfort to Swedish leftists, but the rest of the country can't be pleased that perhaps its most prestigious marquee name couldn't make it in Sweden.

And now this, from AP:

STOCKHOLM – Saab's owner said Thursday it doesn't have the money to pay employees' wages, deepening the financial crisis that is pushing the struggling Swedish brand ever closer to ruin.

Dutch owner Swedish Automobile, previously known as Spyker Cars, has courted Chinese and Russian investors and put the Saab factory up for sale in its attempts to revive the brand it took over from General Motors Co. last year.

But after months of production stoppages and problems with paying suppliers, Saab said the situation is so dire that it won't be able to pay its 3,700 employees, adding to doubts over how long the brand can survive.

"I do not see a future for the car maker in the current position," said Ferdinand Dudenhoeffer, an auto analyst at the University of Duisburg-Essen.

Analysts have sounded the death knell for Saab several times since Spyker, a small luxury sports car maker, bought it from GM last year for $74 million in cash plus $326 million worth of preferred shares. Skeptics questioned how Spyker and its smooth-talking CEO Victor Muller could turn around a car maker that posted loss after loss during GM's ownership.

But every time the company appeared to be on the edge of bankruptcy, Muller came up with a new lifeline. His latest move was lining up two Chinese investors — Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile Co. and Pang Da Automobile Trade Co. — in a deal to make and distribute Saab in China. The deal has not yet been approved by Chinese authorities.

Well, as Bogie might have said to Bergman, "we'll always have IKEA."  But I recall when Sweden was looked to for innovation, especially in automotive design.  I guess the country will have to settle for assemble-it-yourself bookcases.  This decline is usually the path these socialist systems take.

No more lectures to us, okay Swedish government?

June 23, 2011       Permalink

FREE SPEECH VICTORY – AT 9:26 A.M. ET:  True believers in free speech are celebrating this morning.  In an action surprising in politically correct Europe, a Dutch court has acquitted one of the country's leading politicians of hate-crime charges. 

Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch parliament, came close to going for prison for expressing politically incorrect ideas about the dangers of Islam.  His case has made him famous around the world.  He speaks frequently to conservative groups in America.  From Reuters:

A Dutch court on Thursday acquitted populist politician Geert Wilders of charges of inciting hatred against Muslims, in a case that tested freedom of speech in the traditionally liberal country.

The court case has attracted attention, not just because of Geert Wilders' controversial comments about Islam -- which he compared to Nazism -- but also because of the increasing influence of his political party, which supports the minority Dutch government on economic and other issues.

Get this:

Unusually, the prosecution team have also asked for an acquittal, arguing that politicians have the right to comment on problem issues and that Wilders was not trying to foment violence or division. However, the judges have the power to convict regardless of the prosecution's stance.

That's correct.  The prosecution didn't want to prosecute, but the judges kept the case alive.  In the end, though, they acquitted Wilders.

Wilders is the latest of a number of prominent souls brought up on hate-crime charges in Western nations.  Columnist Mark Steyn faced a similar tribunal in Canada.  He, too, was acquitted.  One thing that helps in getting an acquittal is publicity.  The thought police have enough sanity to realize that publicity isn't their friend, but their enemy.  Publicizing these cases usually results in public outrage, and questions about whether these speech laws and panels have any place in a free society. 

Oh, by the way, most news outlets that we've seen this morning are reporting the story straight.  But The New York Times, outrageously, in its first reports of the acquittal said in its headline that Wilders had "beat" the charges.  The Times has since cleaned up the story and is saying, "Dutch Anti-Islam Politician Acquitted."

June 23, 2011       Permalink

BRASS WORRIES – AT 8:52 A.M. ET:  In a surprisingly straightforward piece, The New York Times reports that military leaders are analysts are seriously worried by President Obama's new withdrawal strategy for Afghanistan:

On Afghanistan’s battlefields, the most significant effect of President Obama’s latest orders will be felt at this time next year, when as many as 23,000 American troops who would have been on missions at the peak of the summer fighting season will instead be packing for home.

This will make it more difficult, if not impossible, military experts said, for the commanders to carry out one of their major goals for next year.

It's pretty clear that meeting objectives wasn't the highest goal for the president.

Senior officers said their military campaign plan for 2012 envisioned building on security gains earned by troops who had already flowed into Afghanistan’s south and southwest, with plans to turn some of those areas over to local forces. This would have freed American troops to pivot toward the vulnerable eastern border with Pakistan, but these forces may now be sent home.

Mr. Obama’s plan, announced Wednesday, has two stages. In the first, the United States will withdraw 10,000 troops by the end of this year, or about double what the military had desired. In the second, 20,000 additional troops, the remainder of the 2009 surge, will be withdrawn by the end of next summer.

And...

“Bringing 10,000 out by December is more than the military wanted, and quicker than the military wanted, but it is doable without any major impact on the ground plan this year,” said Lt. Gen. David W. Barno, who retired from the Army in 2006 after serving as the senior American commander in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2005.

“But putting a September 2012 expiration tag on the rest of the surge raises real concerns,” added General Barno, now a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, a policy research center. “That’s the middle of the fighting season.”

COMMENT:  I wonder whether the plan announced by Mr. Obama last night will actually be carried out.  What if conditions on the ground change?  Since we've now given the enemy our schedule, he practically has a script for disrupting our plans and embarrassing the president.

This story is far from over.

June 23, 2011       Permalink

BULLETIN:  WEEKLY JOB CLAIMS RISE TO 429,000 – AT 8:43 A.M. ET:  That's a rise of 9,000, and is extremely grim news.

The figures are just being released in Washington now.  The unemployment picture in America is worsening, not getting better.  That will, in turn, lead to more psychological damage in the economy.

Are we having a jobless recovery?  I don't think Americans will accept the notion that any change that involves this level of unemployment is a recovery at all.  The economy is going to be the major issue in next year's election, barring some foreign-policy catastrophe.  If numbers continue like this, Mr. Obama's reelection would become a political miracle.

We'll be monitoring reaction to these figures throughout the day.

June 23, 2011     Permalink