Blogging Fearlessly

Papua New Guinea Blogs: PNG's woes matter to us: Downer

2012-01-29T21:00:00.000-08:00

Papua New Guinea Blogs: PNG's woes matter to us: Downer: OUR neighbour's political crisis should serve as a wake-up call for Canberra, writes Alexander Downer I was in New Yor...

GOP Debate: Ridiculous Questions, Weird Answers

2012-01-26T20:50:00.000-08:00

The debate tonight is critical because it is the last debate before Floridians head to the polls on Tuesday [Jan 31] - though a good junk of the voting population already cast their ballots. The questions dealt with the "direct" attack ads between the candidates, then moved on to the housing and others issues, then mostly went completely off track. Whether it was by design or not, the overall tone of the debate was not quite what I anticipated.

This is a night that Newt Gingrich needed to perform well to hold on to any shade of hope left from his faded South Carolina victory. He went after the media like he did before hoping to ignite the enthusiasm that he ignited in South Carolina Conservative voters, but he didn't find it. The voters in Florida know that the questions asked by the moderators were legitimate and warranted personal answers. He failed to defend some of his prior comments about Gov.Mitt Romney and also did badly when Ron Paul challenged his claim that under him he balanced the budget in the House 4 times. Paul challenged Gingrich by pointing out the huge deficit they had as a result of his leadership and he agreed instead of offering an effective rebuttal. He failed miserably to attract the kinds of support he had in South Carolina.

Paul on the other hand did very well in the issue of the economy and government overreach, but - again - his foreign policy and idea of trading with Cuba when that regime had just let a political activist died after weeks of hunger-strike, is quite off the Conservative ideals. Besides, Paul seems to stretch the responsibility of the president and I believe that his promises to deal with the economy are just bound to fail. For instance, all candidates want to cut spending, but he proposes an ambitious one that aims at cutting a trillion dollar in his first year. Everyone knows that the Congress will have to give him that or else they'll vote to over-ride his executive power. It is near impossible in my view! In all, Paul's views are far from the responsibility of the presidency. The president is the "commander in chief" whose primary responsibility is to "defend" United States from foreign enemies. Congress - Senate and the House - is responsibility for the most part in shaping and reshaping the economic growth and president as the guiding voice in implementing the president's policies. He has a huge influence in putting forward legislation that are important to his and the country's course. For instance, he can veto any bills he see unreasonable while signing bills that are important to his administration.

Rick Santorum did exceptionally well except that he is no way near the top and even finding it hard at times to beat Paul. He needs to appeal to the broadbase of the Conservative and also to independents who want to hear more about the economy than mere political rhetoric. He went after the two front runners in his closing remarks, which was quite impressive, but maybe too late. The two front runners have already established themselves as front runners and are protected by donors and supporters.

Finally, Gov. Romney had a decent night though his answer on his "personal ads" made the audience stun. To have his voice approved a message on an ad that attacked Gingrich on on comments he made about "Spanish as a language of the Ghetto" then said he didn't know the content, was quite interesting. However, his overall presentation was better than his performance in the previous debate. His defense of "Free Enterprise" was received well because Florida is one of the states that was hit hard by the recession and Gov. Romney's business background appeals to the people more than the "smooth-talking" Gingrich. I also believe Gov. Romney's attack on Gingrich's ambitious plans for space and colonization of the moon was extremely effective because - as he pointed out - the GOP wants to cut spending and Gingrich's proposals are way over the top and may drive US deeper into debts and plunge this superpower into the abyss of an economic depression.

If Gingrich fell and Gov. Romney won Florida, there is no reason for Senatorum to move on to other states. He basically underfunded and no big money donors out there who is willing to risk it all on him so I will not be surprised if he dropped out after the Florida primary. It is more likely, than not, that only three candidates will appear on the stage in the next debate.

How South Carolina Just Lost its Tradition

2012-01-21T16:55:00.000-08:00

South Carolina just lost its tradition of electing GOP candidate after giving the primary to one of the most questionable candidates of the four contenders, Newt Gingrich, the victory in this SC 2012 GOP primary.

Newt Gingrich has more dirt than any of the candidates, he has no money to compete compares to the front runner, and he also failed to get on the Virginia ballot, essentially giving away tens of delegates to Gov. Romney. However, it is understandable, pundits believe that South Carolina voters want to keep this going so that the best candidates gets out in the end. With that, it is reasonable to assume that the SC tradition of choosing the GOP nominee is essentially over. They kill it!

Renbel People Should Ask Themselves in 2014

2012-01-20T19:45:00.000-08:00

Rennell Bellona province needs a serious leader who prioritizes the development of the province and their livelihood. It is important in my view that in 2014, voters ask themselves the following questions:

Are we better off now than 5 years ago?
Do we need the same kind of leadership that we have since our province was created?
How are we going to bring changes to the province if we keep electing people with no clear vision for the province?
What areas should our leaders reform?

Bob McDonald Endorsed Gov. Mitt Romney

2012-01-20T06:36:00.000-08:00

I am glad to see our governor (Gov. Bob McDonald of Virginia) endorsed Gov. Mitt Romney this morning. He stressed the point that I believe is extremely important at this critical time of the GOP Primary that Gov. Romney is in the best position to defeat President Barrack Hussein Obama and also noted that while SC are extremely excited about the straight-talk and bold criticism of the media by former Speaker Newt Gingrich, he had been disqualified from the Virginia primary because of failure to adhere to Virginia's requirements for GOP primary, sadly he lives in Virginia!
It is also important to note that Gov. Romney has more influence outside of SC than Gingrich, and it is important to remind voters and undeciders that underneath everything - the character of the the man that seeks the United States' president's office is vital. For the GOP to send someone with a life full of questions and reputation tainted by years of sexual immoralities and corruption against a Democrat party that is headed by one of the most talented and eloquent president and backed by multi-millionaires, is political suicide.
In our State - Virginia - the winner is obviously Gov. Romney because majority of Conservatives in Virginia see Rep. Ron Paul who is the only candidate that will compete with Gov. Romney in Virginia, extremely dangerous to the defense of this country. Virginia is home to many military and intelligence installations: This is home to CIA, NASA, NSA, Marine Corp, Army, Air Force, the largest Naval base in the world - Norfolk, and there is no way that Rep. Paul would convince voters to vote on his anti-military agenda.
Another thing I observed from Gingrich's surge in the polls - something I wrote about earlier - is that his surge is not really the result of his speeches and ideas. He is obviously benefited from from Gov. Rick Perry and Gov. Huntsman's exit. It is important to note that many of the supporters of Huntsman dislike Gov. Romney on a variety of issues, and it is more likely that they would support someone other than him despite the fact that Gov. Huntsman endorsed Romney. It is evident from the polls that Gov. Romney didn't gain any surge after Gov. Huntsman's endorsement, except Gingrich's poll.
My contention is this: If Gingrich's surge is attributed to his performance in debates - which is the case to a degree - he would have shot to the top after the debates. However, that is not the case. Polls showed that he gained about 10 points [after Monday's debate] bringing him to a step closer and another step ahead of the front runner Gov. Romney. Interestingly, after Gov. Perry's endorsement, he gained a few more points putting him ahead of the front-runner by a single or two points.
What the pundits want voters to know - which is somewhat dishonest in my opinion - is that they want voters to believe that every surge in these candidates poll must always attribute to their performances or hard-work. They refused accept that fact that voters are moving around, paying little attention to the polls.

They Forgot they have more skeletons? lol

2012-01-19T22:09:00.000-08:00

A few things:
I blogged - after watching the GOP debate on Monday - that the position Newt Gingrich brought to the debate [an argument that received a standing ovation], is a position that many Conservatives don't accept. In fact, I wrote that what Gingrich was saying smells more like a "Child-labor" crime, and today on my way to pick up my daughter, a radio commentator mentioned. He mentioned the fact that if these kids had to work to earn a paycheck at a certain age - the parents maybe breaking the "Child-labor" law. That is exactly what I was saying. Conservatives want a government that helps not only families across America to save money, but also make college more affordable for students to go to school. But to get a standing-O for something that may possibly harmful to the American children, is somewhat ironic, too bad, Gingrich had already received praises for his performance that night.
I want to make make a few observations here before weekend gets here.
It is important for Governor Romney to explain his positions when he was Governor of one of the most bluest of states, Massachusetts, but it is hypocritical for the two tag-alongs to demand them. Former Senator Rick Santorum accused Romney of not being "Conservative" when he was governor and pressed him hard regarding the issues of "abortion" and "health-care/individual mandate", but the truth is Sen. Santorum and Gingrich, themselves have questionable characters; from voting to morality.
Sen. Santorum was asked why he voted against "Right to Work" legislation, and he explained that because he came from a State that doesn't support "Right to Work", he had no choice but to vote against it. This is what you called POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY" and it is extremely arrogant to say that while attacking Gov. Romney who presided over a Legislature which is 85% Democrats. So let get this right: It was ridiculous for Gov. Romney to sign legislation that Democrats pushed through with the majority support of the voters, but it was okay for Sen. Santorum to vote against the "Rights to work" [essentially protecting the Unions] then later changed his mind because he wants to be president? How is this possible? Is it because Sen. Santorum is way down is on the bottom of the polls that nobody seemed to care? It may return to bite him if he won the GOP primary and facing Obama and his cohorts of billionaires with big moneybags ready to defend the President.
And for Gingrich to scream at the CNN moderator for asking him personal question about his marital history, and then turned and accused Gov. Romney of being dishonest is indeed laughable. Voters may not like Gov. Romney's answer on his tax-returns, but who cares? If Gingrich believes hat something is incredibly wrong with the way Gov. Romney made his fortune, then why can't he just explain why he cheated on his dying wife, married to his second wife, and took off with another women after his second wife refused to accept his for an open-marriage request, to the people of South Carolina? For all fairness, Gov. Romney had to answer SC over his tax-return but so as Gingrich on personal matters that are the defining values of the office they are competing for. If Gov. Romney was extremely dishonest about his dealings as CEO of BAIN CAPITAL, why was it unfair for the moderate to ask about Gingrich about his personal life, isn't cheating a serious character flaw in any leader?
It is absurd to assume that the only man that should be literally stoned over his leadership as a politician and a capitalist, while ignoring the fact that the ones throwing the stones are themselves littered with serious flaws.
Gingrich accused the media when he was the one carrying out all these under-the-table relationships or affairs at the same time attacking Clinton over his relationship with a White House intern. This is the real definition of "hypocrisy".
Besides, social Conservatives attacked Gov. Romney - calling him a "flip-flopper" yet no one points out that Sen. Santorum and Gingrich are big-time flip-floppers. They, in an attempt to pull Gov. Romney down, "confessed" that they TOO changed their minds on many things. It is simply surreal - to say the least - for Sen. Santorum to say that he voted to protect the Unions because he came from a state that doesn't support "right to work", yet attacking Gov. Romney for voting on legislation pushed through by a house dominated by Liberal Democrats. If he voted in the Senate to deny Pennsylvanians of their rights to work for political purpose and then telling South Carolina voters that he is NOW a huge supporter of "the right to work", then what? What should we call him? Well, it smells like flip-flopping on steroid!
In the next round of questions - dwelling on the issue of character and judgement - Sen. Santorum pointed out that when he was working with Gingrich on issues that were important to the American people, Gingrich said he didn't want any "social issues" discussed. Interesting though he had an explanation for it: He said [in this debate] that he had to deploy that tactic in order to win the house, what the hell is that? He is big time "flipping and flopping"!
I know TV viewers and parochial listeners SC will go on to say that Gov. Romney changed his mind so they aren't going to support him, which - in my view - will be a serious travesty considering the positions that the two supposedly conservative candidates flipped on. But the narrative had already been laid.
In my view, Gov. Romney did pretty well tonight compares to the Monday debate and I believe that when he said he wouldn't "apologize" for being successful, he really hit the nail on the head of those Conservatives who have subscribed to the notion that it is wrong for an individual to be wealthy. He doesn't need to fight hard but to focus on his strength with is the "economy".

A Marvelous Line that is not a Conservative position!

2012-01-17T13:28:00.000-08:00

Conservative leaders have one thing in common that you may see in many public debates i.e. small government. In the literal sense, Conservatives dislike the government's far-reaching arms; they don't want government to tell you what to do, how to do it and when to do it. This is why Conservatives screamed every time the US first lady, Michele Obama, goes on TV and promotes her program to encourage children to eat health food etc. However, the standing ovation that voters' in South Carolina gave Newt Gingrich over his argument that children should be encouraged to work as janitors, cleaners, librarians, etc., confused me greatly because this is government reaching further into the lives of American families.
Telling a child to work for money because he or she needs the money is not a government's responsibility. It sounds good simply because Conservatives believe that the Democrat Party had been for many years advocating a "welfare state" where their lives depend on government hand outs. He argued that growing up with a habit to work and the joy of accomplishing something is the key to welfare reform, but the audience obviously didn't know that this is his "sometimes leaning left" view of what government should do. This is the candidate that once said that he agreed with Liberals like Pelosi that Climate Change ought to be addressed and later confessed it was one of the dumbest things he'd done. If his administration thinks that children should work to end money, how can we define "child-labor" then? and how is that so different from the Obama administration advocating for healthy eating habit? Fact is, it is a good idea only if parents and children themselves decided to do, not government.
The second part of his answer to the question which is posted above will hurt him if facing President Barrack Obama in the national debate. Singling out a group of people - black Americans - as disproportionately on welfare because of government influence and lack of will to work, implies many things. It may sound reasonable in the eyes of the Conservatives - in a GOP primary - but race and class have been the biggest tools of the Democrat party. Yes, it is political correctness and it is not good to avoid real issues like this, but how is so-called "straight-talking" beneficial to the GOP party in a country mired and scarred by centuries of racial division and ethnic discrimination? Perception plays a tremendous role when it comes to choosing leaders and even if the argument Gingrich puts forward makes sense to many, it is equally damaging to the public image of the Republican party.

Eloquence is cheap!

2012-01-17T07:49:00.000-08:00

The final debate in South Carolina before GOP candidates' turn their attention to the next hot-spot, Florida, was nothing more than an opportunity for the desperate candidates to beat up the front-runner. The candidates - former Senator Rick Santorum and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich - came to the scene knowing they needed to do something about the front-runner former Massachusetts' Governor Mitt Romney. While some of their questions and attacks on Gov. Romney maybe legitimate, the crowd seemed to love the "fine lines" and eloquence of the candidates, especially Gingrich, that they failed to scrutinize the substance of his statements. It is reminiscent of President Obama (then a DNC candidate) and his performance in DNC Primary prior in 2008. One analyst said that Obama is "eloquent" but when putting that aside, his statements or arguments don't hold water. The real danger in this is that the smooth talking often always eclipsed the real issues.
In 2008, Gingrich made a statement that sent the GOP and Conservatives into a tail-spin. He wrote "The Era of Reagan is Over" which enraged many Conservatives including the GOP radio man, Rush Limbaugh. Yet, through out this election, he kept referring to himself as a "Reaganite Conservative" or a Reagan kind of a candidate. If this is not what you called U-Turn, I don't know what it is. He also attacked Rep Ryan Paul's economic plan that aimed at saving Social Security and Medicare instead of destroying them slowly - by cutting back benefits - to pay for the Obamacare, calling it a "Right-wing social engineering" which he later repudiated. This is the man that Conservatives want instead of Gov. Romney?

On taxes, Gingrich joined the Demcrat Party's class warfare and attacked Gov. Romney on his time with Bain Capital and during last night's debate (Monday 16), he again asked Gov. Romney to release his Tax returns. He made it sound as if Gov. Romney was dishonest and that his has nothing but dirty money - a fine line that embraces the 99% protestors through the country. I thought the GOP wants a Conservative candidates. Even if Gov. Romney's answer is seen by many people as not so genuine, it is essential to note that every candidate will soon release their asserts and Tax-papers. However, voters need to know that Gov. Romney and Gingrich have many differences in the way they make money. For instance, Gov. Romney made millions of dollars as a CEO of a private firm, while Gingrich made millions as a politician. If a politician becomes filthy rich while the rest of the country is filthy poor, what is that? Isn't that real hypocrisy?
Evidence also shows that when Gingrich became a politician he only make $10,000 and when he became speaker he made over $600 thousand and at the end of his leadership as Speaker of the House, he had $7 million, and also made a million dollar lobbying for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - a group responsible for the housing bubble that busted just after he left. Yet, he had the audacity to ask Gov. Romney's tax-return and attacked him of being a dishonest capitalist, really?
And when explaining how he would reform the "Social Security", Gingrich started off by saying that individuals - members of the Social Security - will have each savings account after the Chilean model. When Sen. Rick Santorum pointed out that it would be extremely expensive to run such a program that may also add a huge strain on the already weak economy, Gingrich again said something that I believe the SC voters missed. He said he would "consolidate" the more than 100 agencies he views as waste, into one and take the money that these agencies would loose and pay for his plan. He then went on to say that he would "find-ways" to pay for it. In other words, he will have to lay-off people for the express purpose of enforcing his program. We all know that to install a humungous program then looking for ways to pay for it is almost synonymous to Rep. Nancy Pelosi who - when explained the support for Obamacare - said that the bill was needed to be passed before people would see what's in it.
Again, when it comes to Gingrich's eloquence, supporters don't really care whether his argument made sense, they applauded the eloquence in which the ideas are expressed. This is exactly how President Obama was elected. One commentator once said that when President Obama speaks, he sounds more convincing but when someone dives deeper into the substance of his arguments or statement, they don't really make sense. SC voters would be so dumb to fall for the smooth-talking Southerner without reading what this man is saying line-after-line.

Newt Gingrich - Didn't Create Jobs

2012-01-14T06:11:00.000-08:00

Former Speaker of the House of Representative, Rep. Newt Gingrich senselessly and relentlessly attacking Governor Mitt Romney's job creating record, arguing that Gov. Romney distorted his record when he was CEO of Bain Capital. He argued that Gov. Romney didn't create hundreds of thousands of jobs as he claimed in Iowa and New Hampshire. However, it is ironic that Gingrich would credit himself for jobs created during his tenure as Speaker of the House of Representative while attacking Gov. Romney's record, when his part in the whole process is almost nonexistent.
Gov. Romney's record is obvious - he was the CEO of a company that turned around 70+% of the failed companies they helped rescued. These companies went on to create tens of thousand of jobs. It is fitting for Gov. Romney to generalize the number of jobs created considering the success of these companies. He has all the rights to take credit himself for these companies created because many of them turned to Bain Capital for their survival. On the contrary, Gingrich claimed he created 11 million jobs when he was "Speaker of the House", but how can he lay claim on millions of jobs when he didn't in any way directly involved in the creation of these jobs? As speaker, a political office, he may have created the environment where by jobs are created, but it is a joke to claim he created Jobs in millions and disputing Gov. Romney's jobs creation. Those who created these jobs are small companies, big corporations who who got money to take more people in as employees. If Gingrich claimed jobs created in his term, what is it there for President Clinton who had to inked his signature on legislation that were favorable to the private sector?
It is important to compare orange to orange and apple to apple - in that - it is fair to look at these candidates' direct involvement in these so-called job creation processes. In fact, everyone knows that Gingrich presided over the House of Representative that was "shut-down" as a result of stalled negotiations with Democrat Representatives and Senators. People lost their paychecks, jobs closed their doors and thousands were hurt! All in order to push the President and Democrats to act on policies the GOP - under the leadership of Gingrich - puts forward. Should Americans who were affected by this move blame Gingrich? He cannot take responsibility for the positive things he did as speaker while ignoring the darker side of his leadership. But we all know it is simply ridiculous to hold him responsible for all that! That is why his criticism of Gov. Romney is being met with severe push by from the conservative leaders.
Gov. Romney worked in the real free-market enterprise and is credited for helping companies that had no leg left to stand on and turned to Bain Capital as the last resort, survive. And it is extremely dishonest for the Newt's PAC to misrepresent Gov. Romney's record. For instance, they accused him of a company that laid off thousands as it went bankrupt, but investigators found that the company was bought by Bain Capital as it was on the brink of bankruptcy, and Bain Capital tried to negotiate the terms for workers in order to save the company but Unions chose to go on strike and essentially paralyzing the operation of the company and went bankrupt. Yet, the Gingrich's PAC blames the whole thing on Gov. Romney. This and many other criticisms were found to be false!
This is petty politics and Gingrich just demonstrate how bitter his his. He exhibited the truest nature of a lose-canon politicians whose temperament is extremely dangerous for America.

Like I said before

2012-01-11T15:17:00.000-08:00

Tonight is a wonderful night for Governor Mitt Romney, but many GOP leaders felt he should have done better, however, winning two elections (Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary) is a good record for him. The biggest loser of this night is Senator Rick Santorum. While pundits on both sides marveled over Santorum strong finish in Iowa, having emerged from a single digit to almost defeat front runner Gov. Romney. What was obvious in Iowa's caucus is that Santorum's sudden surge couldn't be attributed to any of impressive policy nor would be be fair to say that it was hard work that paid off. The truth is that Santorum spent most of his time in Iowa and visited almost every strategic places important to the caucus, yet his poll remained in the lower single digit until the final weeks of the leading up to the Iowa caucus. He didn't do anything personally to move up in the polls.

The first few weeks of the GOP primary, candidates appeared on the scene in different ways. The first debate featured just a few faces including GovernorTim Pawlenty who had a very impressive record and who argued that he had the best policies to win the presidential election. The only female and the darling of the Tea-party - Michele Bachmann - became the party's favorite. She was active the "teaparty" movement that criticized Obama's policies. After a few appearances, Gov. Pawlenty exited and his support went to his fellow Minnesota Representative, Bachmann. In Iowa, Bachmann won the straw poll, and again, experts attributed that victory to her persistence and anti-Oabam message. They were wrong!

What Iowans wanted is someone to take on Gov. Romney. They turned their focus in the early weeks and months of the Iowa caucuses on Rick Perry who obviously possesses the record they believe that the nation needs, but after his bad performance in his first couple of debate they turned away from him. The drop in his polls benefited the most eloquent black candidate Mr. Cain. Again, pundits attributed this to Cain's 999 proposed Tax reform, which - in my view - is not the case. If his 999 was the reason for the surge, Iowans would have embraced this in the beginning because this is all that he talked about in debates and television interviews, his 999 plan.

The reshaping of the political landscape since one of the favorites GOP candidates, Herman Cain, exited, benefited the more social conservatives on the race. Cain supporters and a few last-minute deciders looked to the most likely winner, Newt Gingrich. That Newt Gingrich surge to the first and second places is the effect of this whole shakeup. I disagree with many of so-called experts that the surge was due to Gingrich's brilliant performance in various debates. In fact, it this is the case, he would have been on the top two in the first place because he exhibited leadership and clear understanding of how government works and ways to revive the United States' economy. Yet, he was polled in the lowed single digit then.

Gingrich took off and declared himself the nominee of the party - an arrogant attitude that Iowan resented. The negative attacks on Gingrich gave voters doubts that he would be best at being president of the best country in the world. His polls suddenly dropped and those who left him voted for Santorum. This is a whole different situation in New Hampshire where voters looked for the man with the experience and records to help them. The pundits were disappointed that Santorum didn't do well! Well, it is because he didn't win Iowa based on a specific plan!

This is the only election in my view that polls didn't reflect the voters' views. These polls report the support for the candidates, and there's no evidence that the polls predicted the support for a specific candidate before they occurred.

Romney Survived Iowa by less than 10 Votes

2012-01-04T08:19:00.000-08:00

Christians Tried to Destroy Romney but Failed!

Evangelicals and anti-Romney's section of the Conservative voting population in Iowa have failed to destroyed Gov. Mitt Romney. As time ticking away, battered Gov. Romney emerged to greet his supporters and also to thank the candidates of Iowa for rallying behind him against an army of evangelical, hard-core Conservatives, and anti-Mormon voters last night. He won Iowa caucus by less than 10 points which is still a win in a three-men tight race.

Gov. Romney is the only candidate in this race whose followers are loyalists who have been with him from the first day. Pundits pointed out that 75% didn't support nor vote for Gov. Romney and predicted a more tougher road ahead for the winner of the Iowa caucus, but that is not the case. Out of Iowa, Gov. Romney has a huge support in New Hampshire and all the money he needs - including his own pocket - to go all the way. Even if Newt Gingrich takes South Carolina and Florida, he will not be able to command a huge following in the Midwest, Western, and northern States.

It is fair to say that Gov. Romney's Massachusetts' healthcare law carries individual mandate, and seen by many Conservatives as a model which President Obama used in his Healthcare law, but he had openly pledged to repeal it. All the GOP candidates pledged to repeal Obamacare and it seemed that Conservatives give others the nod but rejected Romney's pledge as just words. Gingrich also called him a "liar"! The interesting thing about this whole anti-Romney saga is that they accused him of flip-flopping on many issues including his support for "pro-life" and Climate change, which he later rejected. Yet, they decry the fact that Gov. Romney didn't reject his healthcare law. It is obvious that if he did (rejecting his healthcare law in when he was governor), he would still be accused of flip-flopping!

His opponent Senatorum almost defeated him and his surge had always been framed by the pundits as an indication of his brilliance and "old-school" style politics. Old style politics where sweats paid off in the end. I don't really see this that way. As a matter of fact, the rise of Sentorum was inevitable with the collapse of the Gingrich surge. I did not hear any specific economic plan(s) from the Sentorum's camp to address the impending economic disaster that is awaiting us if the government keeps going down this road of mass government's borrowing and spending. In most cases and in many debates, he merely heralding the already accepted narrative of the anti-Obama Conservative right. He talks about cutting taxes, working on partisan bills, etc. but the problem is that all of them have the same message. Therefore, it is right to conclude that his rise didn't occur as a result of his efforts or his brilliance, but the mere collapse of on of hard-right Conservatives, Gingrich. Sentorum will come crushing down in the near future as fast as he rose, which is a cycle that we've seen over the past few years amongst far-right Conservatives.

The Rejection of the ones with the Only Plans, why?

Ironically, the only two people, excluding the ambitious Ron Paul, that came out with two specific plans: Governor of Texas Ricky Perry and Gov. Romney. So, if the only candidates with the only specific plans didn't receive the support from the Conservative voters, then what is it? There are ample evidence from watching the campaign trail and interview of various Conservatives pundits that the Conservative Christians have a real problem with the Mormon candidate and have openly calling for the Christians to rally behind one "true Conservative (also known as non Mormons or true Christians)" to defeat Gov. Romney. Even the most affluent, eloquent and reasonable Conservative leaders, rejected him and pointed out his past Liberal positions, when all indicators pointed to Gov. Romney's faith as the real reason why this rejection. What are these indicators? The following explains why Conservative Christians voted against Gov. Romney because of his faith not his political past.

The reason why Christian voters embraced Gingrich and later Senatorum is obvious - they aren't Mormons. They are ready to support a Catholic candidate against a Mormon follower at all cost. President Obama puts in to law two most horrendous legislation - the Obamacare (the overhaul of the most effective quality healthcare system in the world) and the Cap-and-Trade law which rewards his extreme left environmentalists and his far left loons who had waged wars against Coal mining and other environmental issues in United States. Gingrich supported the later - which is the Liberal green-agenda, something he said was a completely stupid move - and yet they are willing to overlook Gingrich's view on environmental issues while hammering Gov. Romney of "individual mandate".
This video (part 1,2,3) shows a different Gingrich!

Again, if Christian Evangelicals support Gingrich despite his (Gingrich) support for the Environmental issues and a string of other Liberal positions listed by the presenter of this video, whats in there that the the far-right Conservatives dislike about Gov. Romney other than his faith?

When it comes to president election, Gov. Romney will defeat Obama because of his appeal to moderate Liberals, and Conservative Democrats and Independents - groups that detested Christian elements of the GOP wing.

Negative - Positive Campaign - Why?

2012-01-02T08:19:00.000-08:00

Political pundits in both parties have lashed out at candidates for going "negative" - in other words - campaigning against their opponents by digging up their records. To me, candidates need to do exactly that because voters need to know who the candidates are and in many ways, they are the only checkers of the candidates.

First of all, the Primary is in fact the only time where candidates are tested, purified and blessed with the GOP's approval before running in the national election against the incumbent or against the challenger. It is this process that a party chooses the right candidate - a person whom the majority of the conservative agreeing with. There is only one way these candidates, that is holding them accountable for what they did in the past and their political views. For instance, Gov. Romney, in my view, must be held accountable for his "individual mandate" healthcare policy when he was Governor of Massachusetts. And it is also equally reasonable to go after Newt Gingrich for his "pro-environmentalism" and "progressive" ideologies, and off-course voters need to know Sen. Santorum's outrageous spending and year-marks, and Rep. Ron Paul's outrageous foreign policies. These candidates cannot pretend to represent Conservatives of America by burying their past dealings.

Secondly, the office which these candidates are seeking is the office of the people, therefore the country needs a man in there who is honest, eloquent, confident, and be able to stand up to criticisms, threats etc. from within or without, and run on his record. It is therefore paramount that candidates proved themselves capable of the magnitude of the responsibility of the office they seeking. There are no ways to chose the suitable candidates other than to bring out everything that the candidates have done in the past.

However, there is a danger of overstepping and misrepresenting each other maliciously or by simple errors, but it is a huge part of the process. Candidates have the right to go after other candidates since they are competing for the same office, and if a candidate misrepresents the other, it is the responsibility that candidate that is to put things straight. Because of that, it is important that the party puts in place some kind of boundaries for candidates to follow, for instance, if a candidate fails to prove his criticisms, he or she must be fined. Since this is a primary, the party is charge of the organization and who should represent the party and the Conservative voters. They need to take complete control of the situation.

Whether voters or Americans in general approves of the way the ads played out int the past few months, these ads simply worked. And it is a chess game candidates play at this state of the game. Even those who promised not to go against their opponents found themselves abandoning that pledge because it is simply natural to defend your reputation and taking jabs at your opponents. John McCain is a classic example of a candidate who was sooo careful with the way he talked about his opponent. He was careful about Obama's middle name - HUSSEIN. He was careful about how that name used or pronounced in his campaign rallies and most of the time praised Obama. Later he began taking johnny-come-lately hits against Obama. Had he went after his opponent, there would be no room for pretension and "guess-work". In truth, Gingrich is heading down hill faster than he ascended, and now taking shots at his opponent, esp. Gov. Romney. But voters now appeared comfortable with his (Gov. Romney) positions and Newt will be sliding off hill as a result.

Two things that will determine who the winner of Iowa will be tonight: Money and Love. Money is the most important asserts for any campaign teams because it enables them to inform voters through TV or internet ads. And it is a fact that winners of party primaries are often the ones with the most bucks. Secondly, the primary actually tests the love and dedication of voters - whether DNC or GOP. For the hardcore supporters of the two political spectrum turn to vote consistently and are rarely undecided on election eve. What we've seen so far is a battle between Independents and hardcore dedicated voters, and off-course the investors who don't want to lend money to weaker candidates.

At the end of the day, the winners will be determined not by ideas but by money and party loyalists and each candidate needs to find common-grounds amongst these divided voters. You cannot appeal to one side of the camp and expect to win major electorates in Iowa or anywhere in the South.

WAYN - Aggressive Exploitation

2012-01-01T08:55:00.000-08:00

Just recently I got an email from a friend who I haven't heard in years. However, the message came from a website "www.wayn.com". I clicked on it and it required that I signup to read it. When I did, there was no message at all, but obviously my friend had joined WAYN sometimes earlier.
Interestingly, friends from my email contact list started sending me message asking if I sent them a message or "request" to join the site to which I said no. I began seeing friends joining WAYN. But when talking to one of my friends who had signed up after receiving an invitation from me that he had received from friends in his contact last asking if had sent them a message to join. Quickly, I decided to contact WAYN.
This is the letter I got back from them:

Correction: "You should leave their contact lists alone"...(Line5).

A few days after I submitted this message, I got a reply back from WAYN. The email was a complete mess: WAYN blamed me for choosing an recommending option that resulted in the messages sent to friends to join WAYN, something I didn't really see at the beginning of the signing up process. This is their letter.

First explanation:

I am not sure what WAYN is talking about because the signing up process is just normal. And there is no reason for me to upload my contacts from hot-email or outlook. This is not related to my concern and WAYN is obviously dumb enough to think I should upload my Contacts this way to their website.

Second explanation:

WAYN also stated that the "automatic" invitation is "aimed at giving" me the opportunity to "track your friends and family"? In fact, this is not an option or an opportunity that I agreed on in the beginning. I never asked WAYN to track my family. There's a difference between WAYN notifying me that a friend uploaded photos etc. and WAYN sending request to my friends on my behalf. This is absolutely ridiculous because WAYN flooded my email-contacts without my approval and it is not an option they give their members during the signing up process. They use this without the knowledge of their members. In addition to that, not all contacts in my address book are family members, yet they receive false notification from me.

Third explain - I got blamed

In an interesting twist, WAYN stated that if I "add any further contacts either manually, or by using the import button, they will not be blocked from receiving invitations" ... WAYN trying to make the argument that because I added or imported friends to WAYN that they received request directly from their website. There are no import or uploaded buttons when someone signed up for WAYN. They simply took my contact list - in my opinion - and flood them with "invitation" to join their site.

Check this out:

This is a note one of my friends received from me the moment I signed up. All of my contacts received this request after I signed up and the same goes to my friends when they join WAYN. I also instantly received messages from them too, similar to this.

In fact, I didn't send them a message at all, but this WAYN's tactic is working because friends were joining WAYN in mass. Sadly, this is a huge exploitation and demonstrated just how ridiculous social networking sites had become. I joined social-sites such as "Bebo, hi5, facebook, Myspace" etc. but I had not seen such exploitation.

The competition between social networking websites had gotten extremely ridiculous that some of them resorted to tactics that average users rarely notice how these tactics exploited them.

If you consider Joining WAYN, remember this, WAYN will flood your contact list with invitations to join you on WAYN, something they do without your knowledge.

Happy New Year

2011-12-31T05:32:00.000-08:00

2011 has been a very tough year in many ways, and the promising of a new year is shadowed by rumors of a looming catastrophe, even so it is an opportunity to reflect on the past year and events.
Its just a few hours to go before Time Square in New York once again lit up in welcoming the new year. Iam sitting in my room just trying to absorb all the events that took place this year. I realize how complicate it is to try and go back in time - event after event. But I am so excited that another year is just at our doors, and it also means that more hard-times to come.
It maybe the most toughest year in my lifetime, but I am all prepare to live through it. To the people that make a difference in my life, love you all! To all my enemies - I forgive you! To my love ones - love you all!
HAPPY NEW YEAR

Renbel Needs a Ministry of Tourism

2011-12-28T06:55:00.000-08:00

Rennell Bellona province doesn't have the kind of resources that big provinces in Solomon Islands have. The only three major resources Renbel has are Marine Resources, Tourism and Human-resources. We don't have any competitive fishing companies and the national government controls who should run fishing operations throughout Solomon Islands, and lacking financial capital is the biggest setback for our people. Fishing industry needs to be improved as well. We also need to improve the quality of our education and produce the kinds of specialized Tainas we need to compete in Solomon Islands and help develop our province. Sadly, education remains a family affair, however, tourism can be promoted.
If you look carefully at the Ministries of Renbel province; the Ministry of Works should be replaced with a Ministry of Tourism. The Ministry of Works doesn't create jobs other than a being a burden to Renbel developments. It takes in money and doesn't return any.
The Member of Parliament and Renbel premier should work together to promote Renbel tourism. It also mean finding funds to fix the roads from Lavagu to Tegano and Tegano to Tigoa. Make the road economically viable so that business can be easily mobilized in Rennell Island especially.
Lake Tegano should be promoted and Tigoa should be developed. We need people to go to Renbel and spend money there so that the businesses and tourism industry are benefited.

Romney is Rejected by Conservatives because of His Faith

2011-12-28T06:27:00.000-08:00

The real problem with Conservatives is that Mitt Romney is a Mormon follower. At a time when United States really needs an alternative leader to President Obama, Conservatives refused to embraced Romney and have been using his "Liberal" positions on many issues as the main reason why they don't support him. You would hear "I don't want a president who would be far to the left of Obama" on many social issues. You also would hear Conservatives going through issues as to why Romney shouldn't be the GOP nominee. But the bottom line is, many Conservatives are bothered by the fact that a Mormon is heading the GOP race and may become the first Mormon US president in US history. This race brings about the severe bigotry on the Conservative world - a serious lack of understanding of the rights of individuals to lead regardless of what their beliefs are as sanctioned by the US constitution. To the hard-core far-right Conservatives, their leader must be a born again Christian, an Evangelical, and are willing to let an Anglican or a Catholic leader, but are extremely uncomfortable with a Mormon man who is more than qualified to be the president of United States.

Bigotry and Leadership
There is a silent majority on the right extremity of the Conservative wing that believes that Evangelical has the monopoly over the Conservative leadership. Rick Perry, Christian Governor of Texas, whose pastor openly rejecting Romney on grounds that he is a Mormon, refused to "refute" the statement saying that the pastor is entitled to his views. It is obvious that the Governor is is uncomfortable with Romney's religious faith.
Just recently a Republican strategist made a statement on TV that Romney is no way going to win South Carolina because of his Mormon faith. That is the defining argument on the far-right of the Conservative wing.
If political leadership in US is defined by the one's religious faith and beliefs, US voters and politicians alike should shred to piece the US constitution which was created - in the first place - to unify all Americans regardless of faiths. If this Christian conservatives' notion that a leader should be defined by how closer his/her beliefs are to the protestant teachings, the Puritans and other non Christian Americans who fought and shed their blood for the freedom of this country, should have been lined up and executed for not being Christian Evangelicals. Sadly, today, Christians have hijacked the GOP party and have alienated many potentially strong leaders who happened to be outside the mainstream Christian league.

Character Defines Leadership
Governor Romney is not a perfect man in many ways, but he is not way near the candidate whom the Conservatives vowed to support to the end in terms of business experience, and turning around businesses. Bigotry on the right is reaching new heights with Christian Conservatives willing to support a candidate (Newt Gingrich) who cheated twice, and married three times, and was actively cheating on his wife while beating up President Bill Clinton over his sexual relationship with then White House's intern Monica Lewinsky. The Conservatives on the right hated Mormonism so much that they are willing to tolerate adulatory and infidelity - or sexual sins.
First they supported a woman, Michele Bachman, but aren't so comfortable with her style. It is not surprising that to Evangelicals, women are not always favorable to hold higher positions to men. This is prevalent in the world of protestantism and for a while, women didn't hold offices in church and advocate a stay home women for Evangelical women. This doctrinal practice had been eased in the last 40 years since the human-right movements started and the rise of Feminist Activism worldwide. It may explain why Mrs. Bachmann's support - winning Iowa stawpoll - dropped when hardcore Evangelical governor of Texas, Gov. Perry entered the race. He had been sliding ever more and now in the lower four slots. Thus, the Christian Conservatives appeared to be having problems with women and Mormonism.
The new darling of the right-wing Conservatives - Mr. Gingrich - made the argument that he had prayed and asked to forgive him, but confession for the sake of political expediency is ungodly in many ways. True repentance should mean that Gingrich should stay out of politics if his repentance was was genuine; so far his re-entrance in to the world of politics shows just how religious manipulation and political strategy can be utilized for personal gains. If there is a word that is completely absent from Gingrich's vocabulary - its the world genuine. Mr. Gingrich's arrogance is evident wherever he goes, and all Christians know that Christ rejected this kinds of behavior when he was on earth.
Recently Gingrich made public statements that put frowns on many genuine conservatives' faces. For instance, he would be the GOP nominee despite the fact that his polls and two others - Romney and Cain's - were virtually tied based on the "margin-of-error". Many Conservatives called Gingrich's statement out of touch and prideful, and to his credit, Gingrich alter said he should not have said that or phrased it in a different way. He is now slipping on the polls because of many things he said including his personal attack on the Supreme Court and the relentless attack on his political history by many of his opponents.
If all these unChrist like attributes defined the candidate that the Christian Conservative promised to support for 2012 president Election, what then can we call those who criticize those who support him?

You make your call!!

Herman Cain is out the door!

2011-12-02T14:02:00.000-08:00

I find this whole saga extremely disturbing for a number of reasons. First of all, Herman Cain has lost the confidence of his supporters, the GOP hard right – conservative voters. Conservatives see family as the foundation for their stand against Liberal agenda. It is conservatism the defines what a GOP candidate should be like and what the moral values of that candidate ought to be. Just recently, a woman came forward and accused candidate Herman Cain of a clandestine affair they had for more than a decade. But unlike other accusers who revealed secret meetings they had with Cain and his behavior, this accuser stood out as a genuine individual, and unlike other criticisms, Cain didn’t deny this accuser and maintained that he was just someone who he had helped over the years. I’ve also watched Cain on Fox Channel and just saw a desperate man who tried to sway criticism when they are directly aiming at him. In the end, the media he pointed to and his rivals will be winners and himself paying the price for his infidelity. He didn’t provide a reasonable answer why he had called his accuser early in the mornings for almost a hundred times. He said he was trying to help her, but everyone knows that a 5 am call is not business call – its booty-call! While it is not my job to judge a person I hardly known, it is important that the person who wants to lead America comes before the American people with clean hands. By this, it is simply impossible for voters who view their GOP candidate as not only a viable individual with credentials and who also possessed the abilities to run against President Obama, but someone of moral standings. That alone is reasons to quite, and I won’t be surprised if Cain chose to hang on in the GOP primary knowing he is slipping ever more rapidly in the GOP favorable ladder.

Secondly, the hype over Cain’s extramarital affairs just shows who owns the Media. The saddest truth is that the Media is the government’s biggest critic and the moment the government owns it and refuses to criticize everything the government does, the biggest loser in the end is the general public. Information is what drives society to success or utter failure. It is so-called “Information” that helps shape the perception of the public – especially on issues so dear to the average population.
A good example of this is how the media treated Clinton’s sexual affairs in the White House and how reporters sought to protect President Barrack Obama instead of questioning his controversial past. Over the cause of 10 years, reporters in the media had not even look at Obama and asked why his views are completely socialistic and anti-capitalistic, and whether she should have released his college record and essays like they did to George W. Bush. The so-called media aided a man who is now turning America upside down, dividing America along rich, class, and racial lines. The most divisive president to ever enter the White House. Maybe if the media had read his book which he made clear that his best friends in colleges were the “low-class, communist sympathizers” and yes if the media looked at Obama’s mentor in Hawaii who was also a sworn Communist poet and a man considered by the FBI as a threat, maybe we could have avoided the utter destruction of the best system in the world. I guess if the media had looked into the relationship between Obama and Bill Ayers – the man who headed a domestic terrorist gang that blew up police stations in NY in the past, and off course, had the Media took a closer look at Obama’s pastor’s sermons and why how Obama sat in this anti-

American church for 20 years, maybe the danger that Israel is facing today is no way near brinkmanship as it is now! These are the failures of the media that had been hijacked by the Left Wing Liberal Democrats.

It is obvious from the beginning that the only reason why Obama is doing well compared to Jimmy Carter is because the media loves him. They reported on angry protesters even though Obama’s new polls fell lower than before. They didn’t talk about Obama’s pledging US marines to Australia a move he arrogantly scolded Bush about when he was a senator back then. When Bush was caught cussing (not knowing he was being recorded) the media went absolutely bananas, yet when Obama and French Prime Minister caught saying all kinds of nasty things about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu, the media was talking about something else. And no one will forget all the rockets that rained down on Israel and all that the media was reporting was some criminals being caught robbing a convenient store.

If I was advising the GOP party, I would get rid of Cain and set up a strong media counter-attack station. It seems – from my observations – that the GOP is not smart when it comes to the media and the population. It is clear that Liberal Democrats determined the news of the day. The only right-wing radio and TV that offers counter arguments is FOX, but at times too afraid to offend “corporate sponsors”. It is up to the party to come up with a strong media strategy because Obama and his left-cohorts will unleash the Media smear and will do all they can to put Obama back in the White House. Their agenda now seemed to focus on toppling Cain because the last thing they needed is to have a black man running up against Obama, and secondly going after Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.

My Take on Perry's "mind-freeze" Moment- and My Prediction

2011-11-10T23:17:00.000-08:00

I have watched the recent GOP debate from midnight till early in the morning and I must say that those who didn't watch the debate will forever fall prey to the deliberate cut-and-edit of the Perry's gaffe, which is now dominating the entire left-wing gossip media and many Liberal websites.
It is true that he had indeed threw dust in the air when he didn't remember the third agency he planned to eradicate if elected president. But to judge him based on a minute long clip, is quiet unfair considering Perry's tremendous background and political and economic achievements.

To the left-wing gossipers, Perry is done! They've ruled him out! But if the Liberal media wants to destroy Perry based on this short - loss of memory moment - they are indeed wrong, and that judgement simply foolish. Look if these bloopers hold everyone to that standard, we would never witness the first African American president, nor would Vice President Joe Biden be permitted, let alone elected, to hold his current job. In my opinion, the two men that are now leading America - the President and his VP - made serious gaffes that the left-wing media completely ignored. Instead of reacting to these mess as professional journalists, they tried to explain what may have gone wrong and tried to put a positive spin on it. Below are some of the worst moments of the two leaders, the president and his VP.

Here, Obama obviously didn't mess things up, he didn't forget the number of States in United States, which is 50. He firmly believe that US has 57 states. Territories aren't included because they don't vote on presidential election. In Liberal standard, Obama is completely dumb!

Its all about the "3 Letter Word" Jobs - J.0.B.S - thats four letters fool. For someone to say its about the three letter word and spelled out a four letter word is indeed laughable.

This is the president of America trying to explain medical procedures in relation to medical costs and got completely lost. Was the Liberal media calling it a "time-over" or "time-out" for Obama? Off course not, the media loves him and they came up with countless explanations as to why he screwed up.

So I think Perry's own moment, a few seconds from the two hours he was there, is a minor issue. He is running for the office of the President as a commander in chief and also as an executive officer of this great country, and yes if he becomes President, he'll be giving speeches - which Perry is more than capable of. The most important responsibility the resident is "making wise" decisions and coming up with 'economic driven' policies and not the 'class-warfare' Obama had been promoting since taking office in 2009. As the longest serving governor of Texas, Gov. Perry made more executive, tough, and important decisions for his state than Obama himself. He will be a job creator, not just a teleprompter reader!

Having said that, let me make some predictions here.

My Prediction for the GOP primary
After all these, I can see a shift and major shakeup in the GOP primary in weeks and months to come, determined by voters themselves. The front runners now will be out of the scene. I base this prediction on two things - the polls and the performance of the candidates themselves.

1. Romney - It is obvious since my last editorial on Romney that nothing in this GOP primary had shaken his base and his polls. He had commanded a good double digit lead and dropped by only a couple of points. In order for Romney to lose the battle; at least 3 candidates must disappear from the campaign trail. The real hardcore Conservatives are divided and reshuffled amongst Perry, Cain, Bachman, Santorum, and Ron Paul. In order for the "hardcore" Liberals to defeat Romney, one of them needs to take the leader and the rest bowed out! But this is not how you win national election, a candidate needs the "Independents" and "some Liberal conservatives in order to win. Obama won by the support of minorities, whites, disgruntled conservatives and Independents.

2. Gingrich - the only reason why I keep placing Gingrich on the second spot even though his polls are still very low, is the fact that he made more sense when discussing the economy and the politics of Washinton D.C. he knows what it is to be a politicians and also runs on a very strong conservative and political background.
I predicted that if the Cain's campaign decided its not worth running anymore, and if Perry decided to quit, all those supporters will go to the next ultra-conservative candidate. They may not choose Bachman and Santorum because they aren't good in debates, and run on thin political careers. Bachman is a Congresswoman who hasn't done anything that impact the nation, and virtually unknown to many voters. Santorum is a conservative man, but also quite unknown and lack the ability to raise funds or attract donors.
Gingrich is not only very smart, but he knows how to irritate political analysts and the media. He knows when to ridicule the media and how to shoot back when a particular question is not sound reasonable. He may be the only conservative "alternative" to Romney.

The only problem though is that he has a past and even if he said he had asked the Lord for forgiveness for cheating on his wife, he will come under the vicious attack of the media if he soared in polls like they did Herman Cain.

The Vietnam War on HD - A Gripping Shameful US HIstory

2011-11-09T20:27:00.001-08:00

Click Here

Of my 1000 + channels, I only watch the following channels on a regular basis: Fox News - for my daily news intake; the CSPAN - (18 and 128) - to keep me up with the current political issues in America... these two channels bring to American homes debates in Congress, and yes I also like NATGEO - only a few segments such as the "Border War" and "Locked Up Abroad". I sometimes watched the Animal Planet channel when I am bored. Umm, and off course the Spike channel for weekend Ultimate Fighting Championship. I would turn to the History Channel when nothing else excites me, but I noticed that they talk more - in my view - about NAZI and WW II. Why? I sometimes I asked myself. This is not the only war America fought. There was the Korean War, and then the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, and the current "War Against Terror".

Tonight, a new Vietnam War documentary got my attention. I was really moved by it!

The Vietnam War on HD

The Vietnam war is a war that the American public and politicians refused to go back to for a number of reasons, but paramount of which was the nasty treatments brave American soldiers endured upon returning home from a war they fought without a clear objective. It was a war American politicians and Left-wing Liberals exploited for their own political gains. They exploited the nastiness of the Vietnam war for their own ends, forgetting the very innocent people who were fight for their survival; young men of all ethnic backgrounds who were fighting in the jungle by the order of their government.

Look at John Kerry, Viet veteran now a Senator; he was one of those young leaders who lead the effort to stop the war, calling brave soldiers - murderers, and a man who ran for the White House in 2004 and arrogantly brandishing his Vietnam record only to face a number of angry Vietnam veterans he betrayed. He had to face his own past, and the fact that he himself tossed his medals in protest of the war. These opportunists exploited the Vietnam war - not in the interest of those dying in the battle fields - but their own political and future ambitions.

These Left wing radicals didn't only protested US political leaders but also those who risked their lives to defend their country - at least they believed in what they did!

Off course, many people refused to go back and examine the way the American government handled the war and how the government sent American young people - many of whom were college students - through a "draft" to fight someone else's war.

This documentary would move you to tears like it did me. Soldiers who were sent there through "government order" - or the so-called draft were sent to keep a particular government policy intact - the "Containment Policy". These men had no one to depend on but themselves. Some were killed trying to rescue their friends, others refused to retreat because there were wounded soldiers whose lives depended on them, and others fought really hard and brave because they wanted to see their love ones back home. However, they returned home only to be spat on and ridiculed; they called these brave soldiers murderers etc. This is a history that demonstrated just how arrogant and vicious the Left-wing radicals of this country can be!

The lack of emphasis on the Vietnam war in the American education system is, in my view, seemed to be an attempt to suppress the horror and the scars the US government bore since entering this war through controversial means, and exiting after losing tens of thousands soldiers. They simply don't want to talk about it!

To many who fought hard by government's order, and never got the praise from the American people, the country owes you an apology. These men and women not only lost their friends, their families, but they also their country, and their fellow countrymen - those damn stupid hippies!

This documentary deserves awards and those - like the two brave men who cried while talking about returning home with pride only to be trashed at the airport and constantly harassed and ridiculed - should receive awards for their service and from the government that threw them in the jungle in the first place. And to those who live through the Vietnam-war error and who joined the effort to undermine the war efforts; like the ones occupying Walstreet in New York, you these brave men a HUGE APOLOGY!

Where Liberal Media Fails the American People!

2011-11-09T05:41:00.000-08:00

This is not my favorite week; it is extremely cold and off-course, the media is spending its time on petty issues rather than reporting on major major issues that are currently threatening the world. A few things I find extremely weird about this week.

The Cold Weather

For those who live in the Northern hemisphere, Fall, Winter, and Spring are the most unforgiving months of the year. And to the immigrants from the tropical areas, like myself, these are torturous months even if these retarded Americans think the weather is beautiful! HELL NO!! The cold enduring period between October and May, sometimes feel like "eternity" and the Summer can only be appropriately described as just a "blink of an eye" - in other words, it goes by so fast! This cold weather leans on you everywhere you go - drying up your lips, burns your cheeks, and umm simply terrible 0r should I say "horrible"?

Last Saturday I was down at the soccer field with my U5 kids - my team (3 girls) took on a team of boys - we put up a good fight, but besides the annoying screaming of the other coach, the cold was just too much for my system. I felt as if my brain was about to explode. To make a long story short; I was coughing nonstop in the evening. Okay that wasn't nice!

Political Craptastic!

You know when you are outside in the cold for a while, you would just wanna be in your recliner again with a warm, dripping, creamy cup of cappuccino. That was exactly how I felt when I was out running around with the kiddos (by the way, they made me look like a sissy in the cold) for a few hours. Sooner, I found myself in my favorite spot exactly as I wanted with a cup of "coconut creamy hot coffee" with whipped cream floating on it like a drifting iceberg in the arctic. But for a moment like this, nothing more pleasing than watching TV.

I prefer the News around the world and perhaps a few alternative channels like the "Military or the History channel", or maybe the "NATGEO". Other juvenile, MTV crap channels just make me sick to the stomach. There are more fake "reality" shows on TV in the US than anyone can imagine.

I began sipping while switching from one news channel to the other and realized that all that the US Media been focusing on is the "sexual harassment" cases brought against GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain by women who allegedly being sexually harassed some decades ago. To be honest, there are more important issues to talk about other than these cheap innuendo craps. How about a report on the advancement of Ian's nuclear program? How about the US economy which has been sliding ever since 2009, how about the rise of Islamic Nations through out the Middle East and North Africa supported blindly - in my view - by the NATO?

These are the most important things that the media should be talking about instead of focusing on a man who may not even get the GOP presidential nominee!

I am tired of this crap!

Crazy Americans the Reasons Why USA is Vulnerable!

2011-09-30T16:57:00.001-07:00

Some Americans lawmakers and civil liberty groups are the reason why America is extremely vulnerable. Look at the hijackers of 9/11, most of them entered USA with visas that were incomplete (esp. Mohammed Ata). Their application would have to go through the embassy and reviewed by officials and the Ambassador before approval. Yet they were allowed to enter America, and were allowed to attend US schools.

At the airports before boarding the planes that were later crashed into American buildings, they were constantly stopped by TSA after alarms went off, but each time TSA let them go for perhaps fear of being labeled racism or engaging in some sort of racial profiling. We all know what the alarms were screaming at; the weapons they used inside those planes. We all know the end of this story; these men brought down the Twin Towers - the icons of US prosperity and economic power.

I remember watching the testimonies of the former Attorney General John Ashcroft before one of the committees investigating 9/11, and just marveled at how arrogant some lawmakers on the left are when it comes to "homeland security". In that testimony, the AG recounted the activities of the hijackers of 9/11 through the eyes of the special agent the followed them around US. The AG recalled the agent watching Ata and reading his every move and knew that he was up to something really bad. The AG recalled the agent making urgent request to arrest the would-be hijackers and each time he was turned down because of some legal issues the AG described as "THE WALL." An imaginary wall created by politicians by way of the legislative process that prohibit intel-agencies from sharing information.
After 9/11, American politicians quickly reacted and waged two wars that lasted for more than ten years, overshadowing the fact they were the reasons why these hijackers got away with murder.

Years gone by and the memory of the horror of 9/11 gradually diminished and here they are, the US politicians and leftist civil liberty groups, once again zooming back to the pre-9/11 mentality, evident by the amount of criticism that the US government, the president, and the advocate of the eradication of terrorists, received after the killing of US top wanted terrorist, US citzen Anwar al Awlaki. Their main argument is that this terrorist was an American citizen who should have been tried for their crimes. This is the prevailing mentality that is ripe in the Left and throughout the country. To them, no one is a terrorist; everyone is a criminal and subjected to the rule of law.
We all know politicians are opportunists. Liberal politicians, esp., don't don't support the killing of terrorists because these they are somewhat political chips that they can use to bargain for important things. They know very well that the notion that America doesn't kill its own citizen is a huge lie. US law-enforcements across the country gunned down more Americans than those killed by terrorists combined. These law-enforcement officers often kill those who robbed banks and refused to surrender and those who are dimmed extremely dangerous to the public, some are shot more times than necessary and the killers walked away because their acts by law are justified by the actions of the victims. At no time did politicians come out screaming that innocent Americans are being slaughtered by their fellow country men and women.

In one case, two heavily armed men robbed a bank in CA but were quickly surrounded by armed cops. These two men fought their way out and were finally overpowered by police officers. The "take-no-prisoners" attitude of American law-enforcement, is an example of why Americans who hurt Americans don't deserved civil treatments. This man al Awlaki, however, posed a tremendous threat to America - threats that are massive in scale and had more far-reaching effects. He could be tried for treason for fighting against his own country in foreign lands. Remember this, the US president is the commander of the US Armed Forces and this man had been fighting against the president by planning attacks on US targets, inspired his drones who massacred dozens of innocent people back here in US, and constantly planning attacks against America. He had dedicated his own life to hurting Americans, preaching against America in mosques and inspired a number of failed hijacking. He is in many ways the enemy of the state and didn't deserve the due course of the law. When you fight against your country in foreign lands, the FBI and law-enforcement officers can't come after you so the Military has all the power to take you out. In my views, they have a the reasons in the world to kill terrorists and their supports and even governments that harbors them.
He is more dangerous than an armed bankrobbers confronting police officers with a small handgun. And if the civil societies think that those robbing banks deserved to be shot if resisted, then they should accept the fact that the crimes Awlaki committed against his country justified his killing.

AND STOP SUPPORTING the enemies of this country; domestic and foreign.

GOP cannot ignore Romney

2011-09-29T10:31:00.000-07:00

The American right, the conservative realm, is obsessed with the so-called "right candidate", which is more likely to to destroy the GOP like it did in 2008. Indeed, the GOP cannot ignore the fact that all the shake-ups that occurred since the opening of the presidential campaign, had not shaken Governor. Mitt Romney. A few factors to be considered; Gov. Romney has a strong base, built since he bowed out in 2008 GOP primary, and the Independents aren't so thrilled with the far-right of the GOP. And despite the fact that the hardcore Conservatives tried to destroy him now like they did in 2008, he remained steady and only dropped from the top just once (a couple or few points in polls). If all the indicators are accurate, Gov. Romney is the most likely candidate to appeal to Conservatives, the centrists, the moderates and some in the left like what President Obama did in 2008, in order to give the GOP the victory it needs.

Gov. Romney understands that the candidates' performances through the primary don't really matter. To win a presidential election, a candidate must appeal to the moderate Democrats and the majority of the Independents that the GOP failed to win over in 2008. It is here that presidents are elected. Obama couldn't have won the 2008 presidential election had the Conservatives held their grounds. However, it was obvious that after eight years of economic ruin and two wars that were fought without specific end-game strategies, a substantial number of Conservatives were willing to vote for a Democrat candidate. The GOP also lost the support of the Independents who felt neglected by a president whose focus instantly shifted from domestic to foreign policies and wars shortly after 9/11. Likewise, the next President has to have the same appeal while maintaining a huge portion of his/her Conservative credentials. Gov. Romney beats all of them in this.

I blogged sometimes ago and I removed it because I wanted to wait for Gov. Rick Perry's first GOP Primary debate but I didn't have time to post my analysis. I made the point in that piece that Gov. Perry had not been beaten up by the entire nation or had not come under serious scrutiny. I also commented that he was vulnerable to the media and his opponents and this is exactly what happened. Matching up a somewhat unknown candidate to a man who went through the same brutal scrutiny of the presidential battle, Gov. Romney is way ahead. By that, I mean he had been hammered about his "politics, religion, marriage, hair, money, policies, media statements, etc. and almost all voters in the Right, in my opinion, knew what Gov. Romney was and who he is today.

Unlike Gov. Romney, Gov. Perry is relatively knew to the national presidential race. He would have to go through the brutal torture of the Primary (GOP) before taking on the nation in the presidential race against the most ambitious Democrat Party. As many would recall, the reason why Perry runs is because he was dubbed the "Job creator" of America and urged by his supporters to run. He didn't jump in, he took the encouragement slowly, assessing and analyzing his positions before he made his decision to join the race.

However, after three debates, Gov. Perry's solid foundation - his conservative credentials and policies starting to rattled. Those who held him to the highest degree of respect in the Conservative realm began to have doubts whether he is the man they thought was three months ago. I compared Gov. Perry to former Presidential Candidate and former Senator Fred Thompson whose polls skyrocketed until he joined the race. His pools quickly plunged after a few debates. Realizing he had no chance to win, he dropped out. Gov. is likely to go down this road if maintained his attack on Social Security and Immigration. .

The decline in Perry's poll numbers demonstrated his inability to explain some of the most pressing issues so dear to the hearts of the Conservative right. His somewhat controversial positions on immigration, guns, health issues, and financial dealings, now beginning to emerge and now he appears a different kind of a man. Gov. Romney's attack on his "jobs creation" credential was quite effective and now his support for the children of illegal immigrants and border issues are turning against him in every turn.

The reality is - Gov. Romney is still standing. The rise and fall of Rep. Bachman and Rep. Paul, the fall and rice of businessman Herman Caine, shows that the only unstable people in the whole race are the hardcore Conservatives who don't like Gov. Romney's past "flip flops" and yes his being a Mormon candidate. This is a huge problem for Gov. Romney, but the fact that his base remain unmoved indicated that a good number of Conservatives and Independents don't have any problem with his post political leadership nor his religion. They believe that his business credentials give him the strength to lead America. If his support remained till next year, there is not reason for the GOP to overlook Gov. Romney's ability to appeal to a wider- range of voters. If the GOP nominated someone other than Gov. Romney, that would be the end of the GOP battle to unseat President Obama.

This Report is Unreliable: Solomon Star

2011-08-31T05:51:00.000-07:00

Solomon Star News:

SOLOMON ISLANDS could relapse into turmoil within weeks if RAMSI is withdrawn from the Solomon Islands, a secret US diplomatic assessment highlighted.

The secret assessment has made headlines in the Australian media recently and published in the Sydney Morning Herald.

The Sydney Morning Herald reported that despite the massive aid effort, US officials have approvingly quoted the assessment of key diplomatic contacts in Honiara that if RAMSI departs ''it would only take about a week for trouble to break out again since RAMSI and the Government has failed to address the underlying issues [which caused widespread...

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

The current situation in Solomon Islands has been extremely exaggerated, and the Australian led peace mission to Solomon Islands is long overdue - it needs an overhaul. This is the longest peace keeping force that may, if allowed to remain in SI for another 10 years, outlive the US peace keeping mission in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Why I think the Report is Bogus

This report is not based on a scientific research, just mere assessment. You can assess something and make inferences that may not be true. The report stated that a US secret assessment believes that a renewed ethnic crisis is eminent if RAMSI withdrew from Solomon Islands. What that report didn't provide is data to support this assessment. It drew conclusions based on the already held view that because some criminals were not brought to justice, an absence of RAMSI maybe catastrophic than otherwise. It is important, however, to note that the report didn't provide the names and how many people out there that might bring back the ethnic crisis. The report also assumes that many former militants have not been tried. That is not good enough data to support an extension of RAMSI's operation in Solomon Islands for the next five to ten years.

Secondly, the "assessment" points to the "unresolved" demands that were the heart of the ethnic crisis as evident of a looming second ethnic tension. But we all know that addressing the underlying causes of the Ethnic Crisis is not a RAMSI's responsibility rather a Solomon Islands' government's responsibility and the obligation of our courts. It is obvious that RAMSI and the US diplomats or officials, don't understand the scope of the Guadalcanal demands. They aren't demands that can be addressed by a regional organization, rather the offices responsible for land disputes in SI. These demands deal with the lands- most lands within Solomon Islands' town boundaries. Thus, any resolution to these demands must be reached on the floor of Parliament, and the High Courts. There should be committees appointed to tackle these demands. If these legislators failed to resolve this longstanding dispute between the Solomon Islands' government and landowners, the issues should be brought before a judge.

The failure of the Guadalcanal people to come clean with their demands, prior to the coup of 2000, was so obvious. They did not take the government, individuals, and other companies who have purchased lands prior to 2000 to court, instead they drew up their demands merely to intimidate the government and at a time when Guadalcanal thugs already armed to take on Malaitan settlers. All the avenues available at the time to address these issues were completely ignored because the leaders of Guadalcanal weren't interested in seeing these issues resolved. They were ready to tear down the government. Interesting to note that while Guadalcanal thugs ran around chasing Malaitan settlers from lands they settled for five generations, Guadalcanal leaders elevated their demands, making them completely hard to address.

It is also important to note that the thugs that led this Guadalcanal uprising and Maaitan retaliation are now behind bars.Though some were released and become leaders, most of them went through the courts.

RAMSI Should Leave our Shores

The regional peace keeping operation in Solomon Islands must end now. It is obvious that after 8 years, Solomon Islands has returned to its original state, and peace already restored. With that, RAMSI operations should switch from an armed enforcing force to an economic and logistic advising task force. We all know Solomon Islands has successfully returned to its pre-2000 coup conditions, and RAMSI is basically a force with no enemy to fight against.

The report suggests that RAMSI may remain in Solomon Islands for another decade while slowly withdrawing, what? It is simply unnecessary for RAMSI draw down its troops in a space of 10 years or more. This draw-down should be done quickly and allow Solomon Islands' to revive itself.

My Pick for the GOP - Not a Scientific Analysis

2011-08-11T19:24:00.000-07:00

1. Mitt Romney

Romney is one of the most important candidates because of the following reasons: First, he is a successful business man, a former governor of Massachusetts, and a humble man. Secondly, Romney is ahead on the polls, have millions of dollars in his own pockets, and the other candidates failed to bring him down.

Voters want to hear solutions and plans to accomplish them. Romney outlined seven points to roll-back the Obama failed policies, and as a business man and a former head of a state, he has the capability to do it.

He is perhaps the most competent of the whole bunch and because his record in the business sector experience - including turning around the crumbling Utah Olympic, he is walking on real solid grounds that the candidates are aware of it. Unless he did something dramatically dumb. May analysts expected those running neck-to-neck with Gov. Romney to really hit him hard on his liberal policies when he was the governor, but at the end the debate, he walked away from this debate unbeaten.

2. Rick Santorum

Senatorum is passionate about his moral beliefs and is not afraid of talking about his own record. He defended his positions well and was quite aggressive on issues he loved and championed during his time in the Senate. His rebuttal of the Iranian nuclear issue against Libertarian runner Rep. Ron Paul, was his best, in my opinion.

Conservatives are aggressive defenders of America and American interests, and the fact that Libertarians and Liberals pretending that people are out there to harm America is one of the reasons why terrorists attacked America on 9/11. The "pre-9/11" era was built on the notion that America is untouchable. Off-course, after 9/11 and the wars, many have returned to this mindset. This is a position that will hurt Rep. Paul in the GOP primary because everyone knows that USSR played fair, but Iran is indeed a different story.

3. Newt Gingridge

He is an angry man but he got the audience behind him because his message resonated with majority of American conservatives who had been let down by the Obama administration. Fox Sunday's host - Chris Wallace and Brett Biar - quoted Gingrich and asked him whether he held the same positions on certain issues or whether he had changed his mind. And he darted back criticizing the media of paying too little attention of the most important issues.

For a man full of knowledge of how the Congress operates and one that credited for the revival of the US economy in the mid 1990s when he became speaker of the House, to spend his time talking about petty issues is indeed a waste of time, and he wasn't afraid to criticize the moderators of going out to catch him instead of focusing on these issues. But American voters cannot deny the fact that it was then Speaker of the House Gingrich that revived the US economy and balanced the national budget and helped strengthened American economy in the last term of President Bill Clinton. That's in itself a tremendous experience and credential that the GOP needs if the American economic status and strength is to be revitalized.

4. Michel Bachmahn

The spur between former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty and current Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann was indeed predictable, but I believe that she defended herself well. The two leaders have known each other on issues facing the nation and their state for a long time.

I also observed that Bachmann really wanted to take on President Barrack Obama and she did that. She pledged to work hard to repeal Obama care if elected president. Asked why she claimed she fought really hard but Obama's socialistic agenda went through, and she answered that she did her best but to no avail as the entire Congress was dominated by the Democrats. She also stated that she gave the DNC leadership a run for their money and that's how a fighter in my view should take on issues in Congress.

5. Time Paulenty

Former Minnesota Governor, Tim Pawlenty, is an eloquent speaker but his strategy is indeed ineffective. He started out by talking about his experience as a governor - a very impressive career - but most of his policies have been challenged by not only conservative rivals but by a relentless democrat party and their ally, the media. To make it worst, most of his achievements have Liberals signature on them.

His worst moment came when he was challenged by Rep. Bachmann on his taxs on cigarette, and after denying everything, he later apologized for that saying that they gained a lot of money on that tax but his government didn't really need it. Conservatives probably listened to him and wondered he really is a "Tax-cut" kind of a leader. Rep. Bachmann also remarked that gov. Pawlenty's leadership was more like Obama's leadership because he wasn't hesitate to raise taxes on his people. At times, he exhibited fear and weakness which President Obama could utilize if facing the President as the GOP nomination.

6. Jon Huntsman

I admire him for standing up for his beliefs and running on his records. But I doubt he would make it to the end without a black eye.

His weakest point was when he was asked about his records. In fact, Gov. Huntsman boasted about his private sector career of job creations, but when the moderator pointed out that he created more jobs overseas than jobs in America, I thought he would lose his cool.

He, however, pointed out that the reasons why many jobs went overseas is because they can't survive back in the US. He was right that American jobs are going overseas because the government is not doing anything to create a better business environments for American jobs. States and the federal government taxed the heck out of many American companies who are now operating in foreign countries, mainly China.

He then cited his record as governor of Utah as evidence of his ability to leader and create jobs which is record that is quite tough to challenge.

He will have to answer the voters on his stance on illegal immigration and other issues, but he is an good man for running on his records, not running away from them.

7. Herman Cain

I used to like Herman Cain and I would vote for him. He has the charisma and ability as a successful businessman to leader a good government, but he obviously have serious issues in understanding major issues. His failure to demonstrate competency in the area of foreign policy, and even admitted he didn't know much about Afghanistan, Iraq and Iraq, demonstrated just how weak a president he could be if America is dragged into another international crisis. These are things you should have known before you join the race for the most powerful office in the world.

Secondly, he had made very damaging remarks about religions and directly about Romney's Mormonism faith and Islam - Muslims. He made direct statements about Islam that can be construed in different ways. Though he attempted to clarify what he was saying about Mormonism and Islam, most Americans are latched on to the implied part of his statements that he is an anti-Mormon and anti-Muslim candidate.

The irony is that he said he heard it from Christian folks in the south and he just repeated what he heard. That's dumb, if he wants to become the president of the entire nation, he should know that he would be the president of all including those who don't hold the same views as him and he needs to keep those discussions away from him as much as possible. If he knew he would be quoted, he should never let any protestant influenced his views and compromised his reputation which he just did. The last thing that the GOP needs is a nominee that would be attacked as a real BIGOT!

8. Ron Paul

Congressman Paul is an old man who served 15 terms in the House of Representative, but so detached from realities of today. His biggest applause came when he talked about ending the war and bringing home the military so the money can be spent back in America.

However, his constant denials that the key to peace and prosperity and economic strength is isolationism, makes many wondered whether he was in the wrong room and debate. He argued that terrorists hate America because we are over there.

He stunned the viewers, and myself, of his position on Iran. When was asked about a statement he made about the rights of Iran to make a Nuclear Bomb, he didn't deny it but expounded on it. He seemed to think that it is Iran's right to build Nuclear bombs because that country is surrounded by Nuclear powers including Israel and the US. And he also pointed out that USA and USSR fought each other for years and have far more greater Nuclear arsenal than Iran. He, in my view, missed many important things in the Nuclear weapons' debate and conservative voters won't vote for a passive leader if he chose the Libertarian and Liberal view that Iran has the right to a massive bomb.

Rep. Paul forgot a few things: Iran is a member to the None Proliferation Treaty which bands nations from trading or building Nuclear weapons. Iran is violating an international treaty which it signed during the cold-war era. Secondly, Iran's Nuclear program may spark capable nations in that region to pursue such programs. Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt, Syria, Turkey etc., are nations that have the ability and oil money to build their own Nuclear bomb just as did Pakistan when Indian built and launched its own Nuclear weapons. In the wake of the North Korean nuclear test, Japan threatened to also build a Nuclear weapon's program if the UNSC failed to stop the North Korean pursuit of WMD. That's something that Rep. Paul didn't address.

In addition to that, Iran is a state that not only pursuing a powerful bomb but threatened to use it. He should know that the US and USSR used their Nuclear weapons as "deterrence" and never threatened to use Nuclear weapons against each other. In fact, the two powers signed agreements as guidelines on how they would use their weapons should the need to use them arise. It is this mutual understanding that the two powers fought proxy wars without even using any of their powerful bombs.

Iran on the contrary had threatened to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and had so-far sponsored attacks against Israel for years and the coalition in Iraq. It is this behavior that Iran had been named a "rouge state", one that would more likely to use a Nuclear weapon against its own enemies.

Thus, for Rep. Paul to mouthing off garbage about the rights of Iran without addressing the possible consequences, is indeed dangerous. This is one of the reasons why Rep. Paul never got the votes and nomination of the GOP every time he contested at the GOP primary. Everyone knows that he would be a very weak president when it comes to foreign policy and the defense of this country.

-Personal opinion, not based on any expert of scientific analysis of the debate -

Liberalism - Socialism vs. Conservative in UK

2011-08-10T06:22:00.001-07:00

What is going on in United Kingdom is a clear demonstration of how intolerant the LEFT are when it comes to tackling major economic issues. Iam a conservative and I believe - like my fellow conservatives - that the only way to tackle the economic problems across the globe is to end social welfare system where ever it exists.

One of the major reasons why UK's far-left nutheads extremely pissed is the Conservative pledge to end social welfare in UK. Like Athens and Paris, UK has a humongous social welfare system that sucks in billions of dollars in non-revenue generating programs. Conservatives were elected in UK - with the backing of Liberals coalition - to clean up the economic mess left behind by previous Liberal governments of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, two of the most outrageous spending freaks in UK history (my opinion). The first major reform that the Cameron's Conservative government wanted to do is cutting benefits on areas that can thrive without or with limited government subsidy, and the unions hit back with nothing constructive but CHAOS and ANARCHY!

They got on their Cellphones and text each other: HEY LETS BURN DOWN LONDON!! These are the truest characteristics of Liberalism - intolerance and violence.

Crisis and Liberalism
But off course, the FAR LEFT - of any country - loves chaos because this is how they get their words across. In many instances, Liberalism and Socialism worked hand-in-hand to bring down powerful countries, and yes, in many instances, Liberals don't win any face-to-face argument. For instance, the mayor of the city of Chicago and former President Clinton and President Obama's Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel explained how Liberals see crisis:

Emmanuel explaining how Liberals (far-left) view crisis.

Mayor Emmanuel explains - in many ways utters in its pure form the Liberal's approach to crisis - that a crisis gives leaders the opportunity to do things that they couldn't before. While many pays attention to the argument he puts forward in that clip, such as the failure of the various industries precipitated from years of failed policies which gave the government the opportunity to do something that would have, his opening remarks shows just how the FAR left sees crisis and chaos. Exploitation of crisis for the benefit of the State. In other words, those who believe in such ideology are bunch of Statists. They believe that the government should govern not the country but individuals.

The irony of that is that Liberals only see "violence, chaos or crisis" as a good mission only when it benefits their course. For instance, he Obama administration and the Democrat leaderships have leveled "Tea-partiers" as "terrorists" for protesting peacefully in the capital (no cars destroyed, no house burned, no confrontation with the police etc.), but when riots broke out in Egypt and Libya, Obama and his supporters came out publicly denounced the government of Egypt and telling these rioters "we understand why you do this", or something to that effect. So if you are a LEFT WING using violent act against government, you are a hero!

Off course Conservatives have their own way of addressing social issues - through Tea-party gathering and what the FAR LEFT did was simply "demonizing" them. The truth is that every TP gathering had always peaceful. So is it because the Tea-partiers and their supporters didn't burn houses down therefore they are terrorists? The LEFT nutheads referred to the Tea-partiers as "terrorists" and "radicals", oooh really? Doesn't that a distortion and inversion of the true definition of the word "Terrorism"? Is meeting and peacefully demonstration against federal intrusion on their privacy changes in government policies the new definition of the word "Terrorism"? Doesn't make any sense, does it?

The riots in France, Greece, and UK are driven by Liberal leftists whose socialistic agenda had been challenged by the incoming Conservative governments. The same can be said of the Union protesters who stormed the government house in Wisconsin and violently attacking counter-protesters, in response to massive cuts in their government subsidized benefits. This is a classic example of why Socialism, embodied in Liberalism, and its failure in the Western world. It is a fact that when a government pumps in millions and even billions of dollars on none-revenue generating social programs to please the mass - and in order to fulfill the LEFT socialistic utopia where workers should share revenue regardless of work efforts and qualification - that government is bound to fail. For instance, a massive train system was built and used to transport people for FREE during the Olympic, and up to this day that subway is still in full operational mode for FREE. In other words, since 2000 Olympic, the people have used this subway transport system for free until today: In my estimation that government may have lost billions and even trillions of dollars just to keep this transportation working. Make it worse, Athens had been rioting because of higher employment and economic crisis, but how a welfare nation expected to rise above the mess? And how is that for a socialist utopia of living in a fair and free society?

In France, the Conservative government of Nickolas Sarkozy proposed an extension of the retirement age by a single year or two in order to counter France's massive deficit and debt, but that infuriated the left, esp. unions. The FAR LEFT rallied, and cars burned, building torched and stores looted. This is the FAR left radical approach to social and economic issues. Use force to exploit economic crisis for their own benefits not the benefit of the people and what many protesters do is that they make life extremely miserable for themselves.

Wake up Europe - Home of Nobel Peace Price, Attacked!

2011-07-24T07:23:00.000-07:00

My heart goes out to the victims of the Oslo senseless killing-having say that-lets get to the truth; Europe ought to wake up to the real world of violence: A world where immunity doesn't exist!

The days of boasting about peace and liberalism is over for Europe. The massive attack in the heart of the home of the Nobel Peace Price, Oslo, Norway, demonstrates just how unpredictable human beings are and how violence isn't unique to a specific country.

Recently, Islamic extremists attacked Spain, France, and UK and while other plots to attack specific targets within UK and Germany were foiled by the intelligence of these countries and the United States. But despite the elevation in attacks against innocent civilians across Europe, socialists nuts in Europe still arguing that American foreign policies are the reasons why people hated and attacked America, and making it sound as if Europe is immune to such violence.

The bombing and attacks on innocent people in Oslo, demonstrated just how vulnerable European nations are when it comes to this kinds of violence. Whether this domestic terrorist acted alone or not, the matter is - this man had shaken the very peaceful fabric of the Scandinavian region. The question becomes - how exactly should the Norwegian government reply to the instigators/masterminds of such atrocities?

Punishment for Murderers

In Norway, the ultimate punishment for the most serious criminals is a couple of decades behind bars. Unlike US where murderers and terrorists - foreign or local - are executed once found guilty of first degree murder, Norway is completely unsure just how exactly it should handle, let alone punishing those responsible for these horrendous crimes. So if the Norwegian instituted "death penalty" in an attempt to match the magnitude of this crime, it may forever change the dynamics of the entire region where authorities are not equipped to address violence of this magnitude. It would also mean that other countries may follow suit if Norway changed its approach toward crimes of mass murder. One thing is clear that Europe is ripe with this kind of lunacy.

Not a Christian Issue

That man is a lunatic and should be tried and punished according to Norwegian laws, but this whole event calls to attention most European nations' view on violence, crimes, and police authority. In Norway, police aren't allowed to use arms unless permitted by the police chief or some other higher offices, but what would happen if a police officer arrived at the shooting scene on this remote Island with a rile, would he have to wait for green-light from the police chief? That is absolutely ridiculous!
The anti-Christians who have been using this issue to attack Christians are so dumb! This man has no Christian affiliations thus, he doesn't speak for Christians. Where are all these idiots when Muslims attacked France, Spain, UK, and Germany?

Its time for Europe to WAKE UP, the worst is coming!!

Fiji Should be Criticized, Why Scared of Accusing Bainimarama?

2011-06-23T05:57:00.000-07:00

I read a few blogs on the issue of Fiji and just marveled at the "kiss-ass" attitude of some regional political analysts toward Fiji and its dictatorship regime; the only atrocious, dictatorship in the peaceful region.
Recently the Fiji government and their supporters scattered throughout the Pacific, criticized the leader of Samoa for comments he made against Com. Frank Bainimarama and his support for the pro-democratic movements in Fiji. This Fijian government's criticism, in my humble view, is extremely misleading.

First of all, the Fijian administration needs to be choked to its last breathe by tougher sanctions. There must be tough sanction against Fiji for the way its government abused the democratic process and the used and perpetual use of force against those who voiced their criticism of the government through peaceful means. Democracy - which the Pacific nation adopted for hundreds of years since colonialism - gives all parties the right to agreeing and disagreeing on major issues: Public or external, regional issues. That process had been trashed and removed from the people of Fiji through lethal force, sanctioned by the Bainimarama's government.
Thus, the Bainimarama's government can be, in my view, equated to the dictator regimes of China, North Korea, Syria, Iran, and even Libya. These are governments that suppressed, killed, and robbed innocent people of their right to fair election, access to resources and freedom to express their views.
Any continual supply of goods and services to Fiji with little regard to the way the Bainimarama's administration treating its people, only perpetuates government's atrocities and aggression against innocent people. Sanctions means the exhausting and starving of the military which is the main enforcer of the regime's atrocity.
And because the Fiji uprising affects our region, all regional governments, international governments must take action against the dictatorship regime of Bainimarama. There shouldn't be any question because Fiji no runs by the military.

Secondly, all Pacific Island nations must condemn the Fijian government. In this age of regionalism, states unification based on common interests and goals, must be the priorities of regional bodies. And all states must be given the right to express, disagree, and oppose to any states deemed dangerous to the security of the any region throughout the world. We have the international organization called the United Nations with which nations come together to find peace, and in most cases criticize each other on foreign policies and even domestic issues. Then we have the Pacific Islands' Forum (PIF) which made up of Pacific Island states, and the Melanesian Spear Head Group. These organizations have the ultimate freedom to criticize and be criticized.
For instance, the President of Mahmoud Amadinejad of Iran criticized Bush on foreign policy while calling for the destruction of the Jews State. The head of Venezuel, Huge Chavez, called Bush on the floor of the UNGA, the devil, the list goes on. But this organization also gives smaller states equal right to voice their opinions, and also the accused states to defend themselves.

And if these bodies are the only avenues to turn to when domestic issues become regional/ international issues, why shouldn't Samoa criticize Fiji of turning the most economically powerful island nation of Fiji into a tiny dictatorship? It is increasingly frustrating that a nation founded on so-called "Democracy" failed to apply, to the fullest, the rights and all the freedoms outlined in its own Constitution. And because many regional and international organizations are in Fiji, it is of vital interest that the region have their voices heard and for that reason alone, the Samoan government was right in criticizing Fiji and encouraging Democratic movements in that beautiful nation (without any physical interference whatsoever in any transitional government).

Solution

Tougher sanction against Fiji
Relocation of international organizations based in Fiji to other regional countries.
Remove Frank Bainimarama from the Chairmanship of the Melanesian Spear Head Group.
Removing all Fijian diplomats in the West nations : US, Canada, US, UK, and other parts of the world.
A fact finding mission by the UN to Fiji.

For your reading:

An article about Fiji. Click here

Asylum Solution-Regionalism or Nationalism?

2011-06-20T11:03:00.000-07:00

The above title comes from a USP student - Presley Mauniala - who wrote in opposition to the Asylum idea brought about by the Philip's government. I find the article quite interesting and I agree - somewhat - with the main idea of the article, but I see this saga as a move that may benefit our people instead.

First of all, Mauniala is right about the security of the nation. Asylum seekers have different backgrounds, political views, and experiences. It is therefore essential that our government reconsiders its decision or proposal to hold Asylum seekers far far away from the capital city and from law-enforcement (if the proposal materialized).

Secondly, Mauniala contention on sovereignty is also important. There is no doubt that relocation of individuals based on insecurity in their own home countries, also comes with tremendous cultural conflict. Blending in often like opposition weather patterns that often causing tornadoes. I remember some years ago in PNG when a group of Afghans were rejected by the Australian embassies in PNG and were thrown out of the embassy for the mercy of the PNG government. My friend happened to drive by the yard next to the embassy and saw them lying around with virtually nothing to eat. He brought them to his house, gave them food and assisted in deportation process. When I visited his house, none of these Afghans spoke English; the one with little English only said express the group's gratitude in two simple words - THANK YOU. One of the man never smile made me wonder how many war he had been in.
It is a fact that Asylum seekers and their hosts don't care much about cultural assimilation and the steps which seekers should take in order to assimilate or become part of the host society. This, in my view, may become a serious threat to the sovereignty of the state because we know that when minorities or seekers find themselves sandwiched between cultural barriers and dominance, violence often the result.
In US some years ago, an immigrant from Vietnam went to his work place with a rifle and shot his coworkers before turning the weapon on himself. Not until investigation revealed that the man was being bullied for the way be spoke English, being treated like a trash by his workmates. This is often the failure of Asylum seekers: sometimes money is the priority not the quality and potentials of the seekers. With that, it is important to note that to bring in foreigners and dump them on an Island surrounded by people with completely different culture would be a burden to the state, not now but maybe in the next hundred of years.

But I think Mauniala would also agree with me that if the Asylum seekers are brought to Solomon Islands with a huge fortune for the State, mi agri witim nomoa. Look, there are more illegal Chinese and foreigners living in Solomon Islands because of our failures to watch the comers and goers in our country. There were more than 300 Chinese deported back in the 90s, but the deportation suddenly stop when the government was toppled. And besides, the ones that enabling illegals in our country are the politicians themselves.

In 2005, I was helping my brother serving summons and taking evidence photos of Asian fishermen who were found to have been living in extremely terrible conditions in Ranandi area, and yes - illegally. I was sent there to take photos of the ships, their foods, crews and also talk to a few of them who knew how to communicate in basic English. In the ensuing weeks and months, we began to have regular visitors (30 of them) from these desperate Asians.
Their leader brought with him all the passports of his coworkers and we were surprised to learn that these men had legal entries to Fiji but not Solomon Islands. Further investigation revealed that the Japanese who managed the fishing operations in Solomon Islands conspired with a local politician who wavered the application process and brought these Asians to Solomon Islands illegally. The case was opened against the company and all them were flown back to their country (Indonesia).
To this day I still believe that Asians have taken over our country illegally and our country is completely incapable of monitoring who is in the country legally and who's not. You can tell by how many local Asians owning small canteens in Solomon Islanders who don't speak English or Pidgin.
Thus, if Asylum seekers entered Solomon Islanders on legal means and with huge monetary compensation to our government, I would support that idea.
My only recommendation is for the government to find a local place near the capital city so that the government keeps an eye on them. If there is an eminent danger with these seekers, the government intervenes swiftly and effectively. Instead of trying to control or monitor these seekers in a remote island near the SI / PNG border. It is indeed impractical and maybe a recipe to create instability in a region still scarred by the GRA / PNG war.

It is important that we weigh controversial issues like this one and find out how it would benefit our people before we decide whether to accuse or support.

Hem nomoa

Read Mauniala's article on Solomonstar ... CLICK HERE.

Mitt Romney - Conservatives Will Crucify Him

2011-06-15T05:32:00.000-07:00

I blogged about former Massachusetts' governor Mitt Romney sometimes in 2008, and predicted that he would be back as a front runner in the 2012 presidential race. My prediction hits home, but I am going to make another prediction - Gov. Romney will be crucified by the hardcore, far right-wingers who proud themselves as the keeper of the Christian faiths, because of his Mesachussett's Healthcare and his Faith.

Conservatives love to do things on their own. Smaller government means less regulations and government interference in the private sector; their personal lives. This is the main argument of the Conservative people (voters) or the right-wingers of the political spectrum. And this is also why Reagan had been the champion of the right; he was a smaller government and less regulation kind of a president. Even today, right-wing or conservative leaders want to call themselves Reaganites or Reagan conservatives; anything outside of the views of Reagan are often branded too Liberal or "extremely moderate" conservatives.
In 2009-2010, President Barrack Hussein Obama, being true to his promises to remake America, shoved the Health-care reform legislation down the throats of the American people using a parliamentary maneuver which gives the ruling party the power to pass a bill without 60 votes needed to pass a bill in the Senate. The president quickly signed it into law making Healthcare Universal.

In this new legislation, Americans are required to buy healthcare insurance or facing penalty and jail time. The legislation main objective is to punish big insurance companies which - according to experts - may gradually transforming America into a single payer system as in Canada. Not surprisingly, Obama had made such pledge before taking office, to changing the way Healthcare is operated in the US into a single-payer system.
The "individual mandate" in the Healthcare overhaul law is the center of the Conservative fight to unseat Obama in 2012. Weeks prior to the signing of this Healthcare law, the State of Virginia passed a law banning government from forcing individuals to buy Healthcare insurance. Making Obama care incompatible with the Virginian State law. Virginia was the first to challenge this law in federal court followed by more than 20 other states. The States won the battle when a Federal Judge concluded that the Healthcare law was unconstitutional. The Obama administration had appealed this ruling and this law is now going before the Supreme Court.

Healthcare (Obamacare) vs. Massachusetts Healthcare law
To many Conservatives, Healthcare issue is important and that President Obama and Gov. Romney hold the same view on Healthcare. When Romney was governor of Massachusetts, his government instituted a Healthcare law - with an individual mandate exactly as the Obama Healthcare law - which requires all citizens of Massachusetts to buy Healthcare insurance. That, to the Conservatives, is unacceptable and so far Romney had not backtracked or apologized for such Liberal legislation which takes away the "right" of individuals to chose what to buy.

It is a tough fight for Gov. Romney because his criticism of the Obama Healthcare legislation is futile considering his own law in Massachusetts, which is bankrupting right now!
Last Monday's debate, Conservative candidates didn't attack Gov. Romney on this issue, but it is predicted that when the going gets tough, they may resort to it. Even so, the power to remove Romney from the front line will come from the voters themselves, not the candidates.

Mitt Romney as a Mormon
I was debating with some Conservatives and found out that despite Mitt Romney's business background and his dedication to the Republican party, voters may not vote for him because of his denomination, the Mormon Church (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints).
Mormonism was founded in United States in 1820 and established into an organized denomination decades later. But with the controversial life of its founder (Joseph Smith) - who was assassinated by mobs (most of whom were protestant believers) - and his teachings on marriage and life after death made the Mormon church a target of the Christian faith for heresy and apostasy. The enmity between the Protestant believers and the Mormon followers have been raging on for more than a hundred years. The animosity toward Mormonism today is the same as back in the days of Joseph Smith (founder).
To this very day, Mormonism had not been admitted to Christendom or being accepted as a Christian sect because of its deviance in fundamental Christian beliefs. Besides the Bible, the Mormon Church also believes the Book of Mormon - a book Joseph Smith found and translated into English in 1820 - to be another testament of Jesus Christ. Christians refused to accept this and referred to the Mormon church as nothing but a Cult. This is the Church that Mitt Romney was born into and served for two years.

I think that majority of open-minded Christians may overlook Romney's faith and vote for him in a hope of changing the Obama's economy's down-hill journey. But the hardcore Christian conservatives may not vote for him at all. Worst, they may campaign against him.

Osama Bin Laden is Dead - Like it or not!

2011-05-02T13:47:00.000-07:00

The man who founded the world's notorious organization that called for the killing of innocent Americans everywhere, Al Qeada, and a a man who also took credits for the attack on the World Trace Center (WTC) and the Pentagon back on the 9th of September 2001, is DEAD! Kill by American Navy Seals flown into Pakistan from Afghanistan.

Why Took so Long?

When I posted this on my FB page, someone replied ... "US had been hunting for him for 10 years", so what? This is not an ordinary man hiding in the desert. His hideout turned out to be right in the heart of one of the US allies, and a country that received billions of dollars from US while harboring him for years, Pakistan. His compound is situated just yards away from a " Pakistani Military Academy"; something is completely wrong with that picture. It is apparent now that Pakistan can't be trusted.

Back in the 1990s when Al Qeada started attacking America - the bombing of two US embassies in Africa and the USS Cole in the ME - Clinton administration hits back, but made a huge mistake of informing Pakistan that US were going to fire TMH missiles over Pakistan into Afghanistan, surprisingly the camps were miraculously empty. To this day, the US government believed Pakistan had tipped off OBL and playing double-agent game between the Al Qeada leader and the US.

Even after the hills of Tora Bora, OBL escaped and was living under the protection of Pakistani tribal leaders and the moved to the city where he was hiding in a million dollar mansion. It is also important to note that the Taliban had been using Pakistan as their launching ground - this is where they escaped to knowing that US soldiers would not pursue them without the approval of the Pakistani government.

Besides, the Afghan government is nothing but a weak, corrupt government who don't have the guts and the military claws to stand on. While NATO-led by the US-fought the Taliban and keeping them away from retaking Afghanistan, Afghan government still entertained the idea of negotiating and making peace with the Taliban.

Thus, having two countries right in the middle of US' hunt forOBL made it completely impossible to take him out. This is why the hunt for OBL went on for more than a decade.

Justice and Justification, and Political Ramifications

Hours after raid in Pakistan which resulted in the killing of the US most wanted, OBL, criticisms from government critics back here in US and Pakistan officials, dominated the media. These criticisms missed a simple truth though; the target of this raid was the man who masterminded, funded the attack on US World Trade Center on 9/11 that brought US and its allies to their knees; he is not an ordinary man. It is also ironic that whilst America pumps in billions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan in an attempt to sharpen up the capability of the Pakistani intelligence, that man who hurts American lived safely there for a few years. Pakistan may have purposely protected him till US Navy Seals took him out in a daring raid.

The killing of OBL is justified in a sense that this man killed more innocent people across ethnic lines than any renegade in the world. He had killed innocent Americans, Africans, Arabs, Muslims, Christians, Europeans, since his group, Al Qeada, declared war on Americans and other infidels - none Americans. One way or another, he had to be stopped! His consistent calls for Muslims to kill Americans anywhere they see them had resulted in killing and the death of many innocent people; in Bali, Indonesia, Madrid, Spain. There were other planned hacked inside the OBL camp but were foiled before they could be carried out. In that, justice had to be met no matter what the tactics were or how long it takes.

The political ramifications, however, maybe extremely severe than originally anticipated. The raid was said to have been carried out without the knowledge of the Pakistani government, though US secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, revealed that Pakistani government and its intel were working closely with the US in this operation. But the notion that US operated without the authorization of the Pakistani government will remain with Muslims everywhere in the world, and the clueless wannabe journalists whose main interest is not to find the truth through objective means, but things that would hurt the government, will find ways to demonize the US government.

OBL - Did not Deserve any "Islamic Funeral"

During his announcement, President Obama made clear that OBL was not a Muslim as he did things contrary to the teachings of Islamic (implied) religion. He then quoted Bush's statement to the Muslims that US is not at war with them. But then words come out of the White House that OBL's body was disposed somewhere in the ocean "in accordance to Islamic Practices". If OBL was never been a legitimate Muslim, burring him in the ocean to satisfy Muslim critics, is indeed weird. His body should have been preserved so that countries and Americans see for themselves and prove that he was indeed killed.

The Obama's decision to rid of OBL's body hours after he was killed, sends mixed messages to Americans, and is going to give birth to another huge conspiracy theory.

Confirmation

DNA and facial recognition confirmed that dead man was OBL.

Are Obama Voters Going to Come out Again? Is "Hope and Change" still Burning?

2011-04-10T04:33:00.000-07:00

I was driving around Virginia Beach when I spotted this Bumper Sticker (on the left) and I couldn't wait to get home and search for it online. I googled phrases similar to what I thought I saw and yup I saw it right there. The BS makes fun of Obama's 2008's campaign mantra, "Change We Can Believe In".
This administration under Obama who snatched the Democrat nominee from the Clintons and defeated the Conservative's hawkish leader John McCain to win the presidential election of 2008, is struggling to keep everyone happy. The question now is, after his first term in office, a period of time rigged with scandals, mass resignations, poll plummeting and downright mean criticism from both sides, are Obama voters going to turn out again like they did in 2008?

Prediction 1. Young Voters will Turn up
In the book "Game Changer", which was written by those who were following the Obama campaign and received "first-hand" inside information from the candidate camps, described the Clinton's defeat in Iowa as the most stunning political miracle Obama ever had since entering politics a few years back. What took the ever confident Clintons by surprised was the sudden overwhelming turning out of young voters. They were mainly students and youngsters who do not really care about the questionable characters and the rather weaker resume their chosen candidate was running on. Despite that, the young voters turned out everywhere supporting him and made stunning historical vote.
In an investigation launched by a Conservative radio talk host which I blogged about some years back, found that 80% of these voters didn't know who Obama exactly was nor his political achievements either in the US senate or the Illinois state senate. They didn't even know who controls or runs the Congress at the time of the election. They had no clue about the leaders of the two parties, who they are and what they do over the years, but they knew a lot about the Republican contenders. When asked where they got their information, most of them pointed to MNBC, CNN, NRP, ABC, and other media outlets that were in cahoot with the Democrat Party.
Thus, it is fair to say that this category of voters aren't easily swayed by campaign speeches or attacks. In other words, they are voters who are not easily swayed by "knowledge" or "critical information" about their preferred candidate (Democrat or Republican), therefore, their votes and dedication remained unwavering. It is highly likely that Obama still commands young Liberal voters as opposed to Conservative or Independent youths. And it is more likely that they will turn out for Obama again in the 2012 presidential election.

Prediction 2. Blacks and Latinos
Over the course of two years, Obama's support amongst Blacks and Latinos remains unmoved. Back in 2008, 90% of black American (African American) voted for Obama and he also received a huge support from the majority of Latino voters. Obama's victory in 2008, to many Blacks, symbolizing the final chapter in their racial emancipation. Although blacks were liberated in the 1960s with the government's enforcement of the "civil rights" law, and even though blacks are amongst some of the most privileged Americans compared to their cousins in Africa and throughout the world, the election of Obama gave them the sense of being completely free, as one of my friend's best friend who is a teacher for a long time, expressed it when she heard of Obama's victory ... "IAM FREE".
Even Collin Powell, the right hand man of George W. Bush and the General who made the case for the invasion of Iraq in the UN Security Council, defected from the Conservative realm and the Republican party to support Obama. His endorsement demonstrated just one thing -- color made the difference in 2008 Presidential election.
Latinos were also supporting Obama in mass because of their protest against various immigration reforms and "English only" legislation puts forward by the Bush's administration. To many Hispanic voters, a candidate who is not a white man and who is a Liberal maybe their last home. There are at least 12 million illegal immigrants in United States and the majority are Hispanic (Mexicans). Liberals are known to be sympathetic to illegals and most of the time advocating open-border and in the past pushed legislation that would have given them their citizenship.

3. Independents, Women, and Far-Left Hardcores are Leaving Obama
Independents - No voters analyzed government policies better than the independent voters. These are voters who don't have party affiliations, they tend to vote when their interests are be threatened, and the choices always the ones that promised things they like to hear. Two of the most defining issues for the Independents during the 2008 election were "JOBS" and "WAR AGAINST TERROR". The recession started with George W. Bush and was spiraling out of control just in time for the presidential election. Obama made a very compelling argument that he would fix the economy and create more jobs.
In addition to that, the "War in Afghanistan and Iraq" exhausted many Americans. Obama made a "flat" promise to end the war, shutdown Guantanamo and bring home our troops and this two promises burned the 2008 election like gasoline. Sadly, however, these two promises have not been kept and Obama had moved from the middle to the Right of the political spectrum leaving these two promises unfulfilled. After two years into his administration, Iraq situation is still under the control of the US using Iraqi army trainees to do most of the heavy patrolling; GITMO is still opened despite Obama's order its closure shortly after taking office.
Women - These were Obama's hardcore supporters in 2008. His fight for organization that cares for women, such as Planned Parenthood, and the promises for better medical care disappeared when he became president. Under his leadership, women are losing the fight for free mammogram and right to abortion. During the last budget debate, Republican successfully banned funding for abortion and Obama curved in to save his Healthcare law. These woman are deserting Obama. In fact, one of Obama's biggest support and critical endorsement back in 2008 came from the most richest black woman, Oprah Winfrey, but this time the rich lady signaled she will not support Obama in 2012 re-election.

Far-Left - These are the committed Liberal Democrats who wouldn't take any bargain for any of their values or beliefs. They are anti-war fanatics, extreme socialists who believe in the distribution of wealth in America, and are also advocates of human-rights and open-border. Their support for Obama wears thin over Obama's Foreign Policy. They criticized Obama for not closing GITMO, prolonging the Iraqi and surged the US armed forces in Afghanistan. The only think Obama did that pleased the left is his removing of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" legislation with which gays and lesbians are given the equal opportunity to serve in the US military, but Obama falls short on introducing a bill that successfully allowing same-sex marriage. In a strange move by the Obama administration, the Attorney General was told not to defend the traditional law that defines married to be between a man and a woman as it is unconstitutional.

The defining moment for Obama and the Far-Left nuts, is the US involvement in the ongoing Libya campaign. This is the anti-war president on ran on the platform and political mantra of ending all wars waged by the US in foreign soil. Entering another war, to the Fare-Left, destroys Obama's credibility and ant-war sentiments.

To be continued!

A Date Gone Wrong?

2011-04-08T05:45:00.000-07:00

A spokesman for the rebels bluntly accused NATO of not doing enough to topple Qaddafi, while NATO pointed to the UNR that calls for the use of force against Qaddafi only to protect civilians but not to topple his government. It is like a valentine date gone wrong, extremely wrong. As of now, the rebels do not know exactly what the NATO's intention is, while NATO still struggling to define exactly what the rebels have been or are doing on the ground since advancing toward the capital weeks ago.

These two sides who attempted to squeeze the life out of Qaddafi's government, but are yet to do so, do not seem to work together as partners in the Libyan uprising. The NATO military is bound by the UNR and only act accordingly, while the rebels only advanced when they had the opportunity, but retreating every time Qaddafi forces mounted a counterattack. This is a recipe for a catastrophic end if the two sides don't agree on what to do with the Libyan government inside the highly fortified Tripoli or how to fight this war.

The open-ended mission to Libya is not effective as initially thought, and if it drags on, the US and NATO may have no choice but to either put soldiers on the grounds or arming the ant-Qaddafi forces. That option is still on the table according to the former US-Libyan operation commander, but that is something Obama would not risk. His priority now is to get the government going while tackling the economy's tough issues that will define his re-election bid in 2011. Libya is his nightmare.

The fear I get from watching the Libyan and Afghanistan's development is that the US, if not careful, may create terrorist havens in these two countries as it always had been in past wars US engaged in. It happened during when Russia withdrew from Afghanistan in the late 8os, and the end of the Kuwait-Iraqi war (dubbed the Gulf War I).

One way or another, the US and allies will have to get down on the ground and neutralize Qaddafi. But for the rebels, this is their country and their destiny. They cannot expect others to do their work for them, they must be willing to die for what they believe in. Unless these two parties changed their approaches to this war, this partnership may turnout to be the a bitter relationship that will define exactly how the new Libya will view the West in a post-Qaddafi Libya.

The both need to change tactics.

Just as I've Predicted: US and NATO Flexing Muscles

2011-03-01T05:17:00.000-08:00

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I am no Qaddafi fan but it is interesting that the West is now flexing its muscles against Libya while ignoring the other three violent nations that went through the similar insurrection. This selective intervention only demonstrated one thing; if you kill your own people and you are a friend its okay, we come after you if you are not a friend. While it is true that Qaddafi had killed his own people, so too did Hosni Mubarak and the government of Tunisia and Bahrain - home of the US Navy Fleet in the Gulf. Bellow are some reasons, amongst others, why the West is flexing its muscles against Libya.

Qaddafi is indeed an insane, polarized man, but very predictable. This is the man who ordered some hijackings, assassinations and terrorist attacks against the West, particularly US, in the past. He was behind the hijacked plane which was blown up in the air over Lockerbee, Scotland. He remained an enemy of the US up until the War Against Terror started when he made an "about-face" turn. Watching US and UK rolled into Iraq and toppled Saddam Hussein in matter of days, Qaddafi announced that he wanted to give up his nuclear program to the US led coalition and vowed to support the war efforts. As a payback for this courageous move, the US lifted sanction against Libya.

However, the relationship between Libya and the US became sour yet again when the only survivor convicted in Scotland over the bombing of the flight over Lockerbee that killed more than two hundred Americans, was released through some under-the-table deals with UK and Scotland administrations. It was a move described by many in the US as cruel and a deal made to satisfy some oil deals between UK and Libya as sources released by the "Wikileaks" explained. To this day, the relationship between Libya and the US still remains somewhat fluid.

But is this why the US and EU flexing its muscles against Qaddafi? To punish him of the crimes he committed during the Cold War error or is it something else? Is it because of Qaddafi ordered his military to suppress Libyans or is it because the oil-fields are at stake and the West don't have any readily available solution to a serious hike in gas price?

The events in Tunisia, Egypt and Bahrain are not far removed from what is taken place in Libya. These regimes have something in common, they cracked down violently on protesters; in Tunisia, civilian protesters were killed, so were the crackdowns on protesters in Egypt and Bahrain. Even when civilians were mowed down by police and military in these countries, President Barrack Hussein Obama and the EU did not condemn the acts until much later when condemnation (weak at best) began pouring out. Had they done that earlier, lives would have been spared.

The way I see it, this Libyan uprising is more important to the West, esp. US, for reasons I've stated earlier. I wont be surprised if the US/NATO intervened militarily in Libya. As of now, US warships closing in on Libya and the West now began talking with the leader of the uprising in Libya. I think that government installed hereon would be seen as a government installed by the West and would more likely, than not, to change the narrative; it may give Qaddafi an alternative to his claims that the uprising is an Al Qeada orchestrated demonstration, and fueled by some kind of "hallucinating" drugs. His next claim would be that the uprising was instigated by the West and the West toppled him and installed a puppet regimes. If things turned out like this, future Libyans will see Qaddafi as their leader who was overthrown by the West.

Qadafi's Final Strategy

2011-02-22T19:10:00.000-08:00

After weeks of rioting and military assault on protesters throughout Libya, Muammar Qadafi, the military leader who rules the nation of Libya for the past four decades, now trying every single way to hold on to power, no clear solution within reach. But his latest move maybe a poison to the Western world, especially the United States, and it would be interesting to see if the West buys it.

Just a couple of days ago, Qadafi claimed that Al Qeada is behind all the uprisings in Libya and threatened to kill those who are fighting against his regime. While many people frowned up such unbelievable claims, some people in United States already made comments as if Qadafi's statement is indeed true.

It will take years to prove his claim valid, but for now, the claim is a mere bait. Since the uprising through the ME and Northern Africa, no Arab leaders keen on calling for a UN Resolution to condemn these violence because the Arabs are split on this cancerous uprising which started out of Tunisia. To some Arabs, government in Muslim nations such as Egypt, Bahrain (home to the US navy in the Gulf), Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and now Libya, are Western puppets. They want to see these dictators leave so that the Muslims established what they called the "Caliphate" of the Islamic order, or Muslim dominant government that should unite the world under Islamic rule. This was the case with the pro-democratic uprising of Iran in the 80s when many people thought to be a "pro-democratic uprising" only to become an Islamic Republic where Sharia is the rule of law.

However, it is a whole different story in Qadafi's playbook. He is not calling on Arabs' assistance but trying to play games with the Western nations who depend much on his oil reserves.

Seeing his support within the military and civil society dwindled, he hired mercenaries from nearby countries to do his dirty work; targeting, assassinating, and murdering protesters in cold blood. He then announcing that if the uprising continue squeezing his regime's life to the end, he would burn the oil fields. And then he claimed that Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qeada network are behind the ongoing uprising in Libya and bows to crash them eve if it means, massacring his own people.

While experts in conflict and resolution around the world may take Qadafi's word to mean he is just a desperate man who wants attention, some already shown interest in this. In US, experts now fearing Al Qeada may take hold of Libya in a post Qadafi era. Nothing more fearful to US terrorist experts than an unstable nation in Northern Africa that is a few steps away from Europe and the Western world.

How valid are Qadafi's statements? It is hard to verify whether his claims are based on intelligence collected in the cause of the insurrection, or whether he just bluffing to gain Western attention. However, the US government fears that if Osama Bin Laden finds himself a new home other than the region loyal to his cause, between Afghanistan and Pakistan, more trouble for the West would follow suit. But to this point, no experts is able to pinpoint exactly where OBL is and whether his network is really behind such uprising.

If the West takes this claim seriously, Libya may be the only country where military intervention maybe eminent for obvious reason. The oil price soared in the West, esp. in US, and the stability of Libya and the nearby European nation may be predicated upon Libya's stability. If a civil war broke out, Europe may see a serious hike in oil prices and security and leaders may scrambled to find a solution before things got out of hands.

I hope Qadafi doesn't do what the PLO was doing in the past; PLO agents were sent to attack European targets and US citizens in order to get support for its cause. It is more likely that Qadafi could resort to such if the West ignores his plea. Besides his brutal and autocratic regime's history of suppression of Libyans' rights and freedom, its his oil and the security of the West that are at stake. It will take the leader of US, UK, and France to instigate an intervention using NATO. Whether this thing will materialize or not, it is just a matter of time.

Is this the Rise of Islamic Rule in Egypt?

2011-01-28T19:10:00.000-08:00

While it is true that Egypt is a moderate and peaceful semi-Democratic state in a region so crucial to world peace, about 90% of Egyptians are Muslims. And its history is filled with anti-Western/Israel assassination and there is an apparent vulnerability in that country. But the US government in my view is not is not taking the right road that may lead into a catastrophic miscalculation of the whole issue.

The US government is speaking as if it is in favor of a change in regime, but the question remains "who is there to lead Egypt" but Islamic radicals? There is no secret that radical Islamic terrorist organizations are behind the move to oust Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak. They think he is too corrupt and to dictatorial in his leadership, but I think they want to rid of him because he is a pro-Western Egyptian leader. There is not doubt about this!

It is also important to note that Islamic extremists and their sponsors are throwing a long rope around Israel in an attempt to choke Israel to death in the next ensuing years. We may even see a repetition of the wars waged against Israel in the past six decades.

Just recently, Hezbollah withdrew its support for the Lebanese government after the government calls for an investigation to the assassination of Lebanese leader Rafic Hariri, which everyone knows was Syrian/Iranian planned and supported assassination.

Protests are expected almost everywhere in the ME including Israeli neighbor and one that recognized the state of Israel, Jordan. This is protest has a potential to become a world wide issue.

It is important to note the different reactions of this US administration toward Iran and Egypt. There was no urgent meeting, nor was there criticism and forceful rhetoric against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad like what the Obama administration is doing to the Egyptian government today. But to topple this government in a hope of reforming Egypt may leave a huge gap that can only be filled by radical Islamic organizations deeply embedded in Egyptian society, with the help of the majority of Egyptians who are Muslims.

I think this administration is striking the wrong tone in this approach. It should refrain from any involvement in this Egyptian uprising for this is the same issue that people in this administration criticized President Bush of doing; toppling and bullying smaller states. While the Egyptians are clearly frustrated about their government, so are people in this country over the overextending of government powers under Obama. It is a huge mistake to support rioters when this administration got no clue as to who the leaders or the orchestrator of this mass protest is or are. To rush into demands for reform in Egypt,which may soon lead to the fall of Mubarak without understanding first hand the intentions of protesters, is indeed alarming. It is more likely, than not, for a radical Islamic regime to emerge in this whole chaos just as it did in the Iran in the 80s. And if it does, US and its ally Israel will face a very tough future henceforth.

Some Work Hard, Others Don't but Pay More!

2011-01-24T20:37:00.000-08:00

The biggest problem, in my opinion, about the Western world is the fact that there are are snobs who get paid for doing nothing and the hardworking class who work too hard and achieved little. Show more skin and you get paid more than those who have Masters and PhD in their respective areas of expertise. It sickens me because this is highway to moral decline in the US.

I've watched celebrities talked about political issues and just marveled at how dumb they are. I mean, I don't know everything but the political issues that make up the day to day news in America are simply easy to comprehend. Amazed me when majority don't even know their political leaders, what Conservatives and Liberals stand for etc. But looking at their pay-checks; they earned more than our politicians and many hardworking business people.

Political Arrogance -- Tucson, Arizona Massacre!

2011-01-11T06:17:00.000-08:00

I am appalled by the political blame-game hours after the horrible shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D) and others at her rally in Tucson, Arizona by a sick man. The level of arrogance of politicians of this country is ever more disgusting. The media is also flaming such arrogance by quickly point fingers at political opponents of the Congresswoman.

While it is impossible to prove beyond a shed of doubt that the Republican party's campaign rhetoric ever contributed to the fiasco, the Democrats are doing exactly what they are actually good at; trying ropes of different sizes and lengths. In other words, they would compare and contrast things and events that aren't even related or matched in any way, shape of form.

Their target is former Governor of Alaska and former VP candidate, Sarah Palin. Why? It is simply a tactical move to blame the fiasco on a woman whom the Conservatives of this country look to as a potential 2012 presidential candidate. When Sarah Palin ran in 2008 as a VP, the base who were reluctant to support the Liberal Republican nominee John McCain became animated and actively participated in the electoral process in such a way that never before seen in the Republican leadership. Thus, tying Palin to the whole saga is coldly and malicious calculated move.

The irony is this: can we blame the Black Panther's voter intimidation on President Obama's campaign rhetoric? Off course not.

There is no substitute for insanity and this case is a huge example of the kind of cases that could have been avoided had not the "political corrected" laws of this country are redefined to protect the innocent people. For instance, that man was an insane man whom classmates and fellow acquittance declared insane and capable of killing people, yet the police were unable to touch him for fear of being sued. According to the law, he is not a guilty man unless he had committed serious offence. In other words, before Gov. Palin and the Republican contenders made their statements, this man had already made serious threats to individuals, teachers, and friends. To say that the Republican candidates and Tea-party leaders motivated him to shoot a Democrat Congresswoman is incredibly stupid!!

In retrospect, this is the kind of crisis that Obama's Chief of Staff, R. Emmanuel, alluded to in the past. He made the comment not to let a "good crisis" go to waste or something close to that statement. This is what Democrats are good at; they always seized the opportunity to exploit crisis for their own benefit even if that crisis had nothing to do with either party.

New US Congress to Tackle Major Issues

2011-01-08T09:06:00.000-08:00

The best thing ever happened last year, November, in the US Congress was the toppling of the Socialist agenda of the Democrat House of Representative and the disabling of the Filibuster proof Senate by angry voters. Leading up to this very important year, the Republican Conservatives and some Conservative Liberals have fought a tough fight to undo some troubling issues facing the Obama Administrations and won by way of popular vote.

The House Democrats got their butts whupped for playing with tax-payers money and for failing to listen to the desires of voters. In other words, the only power the voters have in the whole process is the power to unseat Members of Congress when their voices are ignored at the polls.

In the Senate, Democrat candidates were not only distancing themselves from the Socialist administration of Obama, but were vowing to support any efforts to undo them and returning the Constitution to its rightful place in the US political system. Those who ran on the Obama's socialist agenda were thrown out of office by voter. Some to extreme measures to get elected by promising not to support any more legislation that would harm the US and the local economy. The most popular governor of the State of West Virginia did exactly that. During the campaign weeks, he was trailing his Conservative Republican opponent. West Virginians openly criticizing him of his support of Obama and his unpopular bailout of major banks and corporations. Just before before the election, his made a video commercial in which he put a huge flier of Obama Cap-and-Trade bill and shot it with shot gun and promised West Virginians he would not support any legislation that would hurt his state. He won.

Healthcare and Cap-and-Trade

When Obama was a State senator, he was openly supportive of a "single payer system" and vow to punish health insurance companies if he had the opportunity (paraphrase). When he ran for the Senate, he made similar promises to his Labor cronies and like minded Washington elites. When he entered the White House, one of his first priorities was the complete overhaul of the Healthcare industry that made America the most advanced and most competitive care system in the entire world.

However, those who supported the Obamacare met staunch resistance from both Democrats and Conservatives because of threat to their benefits and care providers . Surprisingly, the Obama, Pelosi, and Reid's reply was "shove your anger up yours", which in many ways contribute to their huge lose last election.

Another thing that got Americans angry leading up to last year's election was the idea of purchasing credits from countries developing countries which would result in the lose of millions of jobs in America. Under heavy lobbying from third world country's representatives, Obama and the Democrats proposed a trade in which third world countries who have no laws to protect their own environments, would have get paid in order to further pollute the environment. The sophistication of the wordings or languages of the bill were such that the average people thought it would help the US economy and the environment when the truth was exactly the opposite. Many Democrats voted against it and those who supported that job killing legislation didn't want to be part of it during the campaign to save their jobs as Congressmen/women. They knew that such legislation would be like a hurricane against privately owned factories because they would have to give money away by force in order to satisfy the status quo.

This year, the Conservative Republicans are on the march to undo Obama care and the Cap-and-Trade legislation.

Terrorism, Cronyism, and Favoritism

Another biggest relieve in Conservative victory in the House and the destruction of the Obama Senate Filibuster proof is the investigation as to how the US Congress got to where it is today. Whether such investigation warranting impeachment or not, it is important to get to the bottom of it all.

On Terrorism, the Congress should investigate just exactly how the Obama administration handled the war they blamed on George W. Bush. In this investigation, the Congress would focus basically on how the Obama administration handled the GITMO issue and why the Executive Order to close GITMO was done and forgotten a few months later and to this date still operational. In this same investigation, the prosecution of wanted terrorists and those who were behind the idea of trying them in civilian courts should also focus on who lobbied for such radical move. It is also important that this Congress investigated just exactly how Black Panthers' case of voter intimidation got thrown out by the Obama DOJ.

Part of this terrorism investigation should be focused on how a Private First Class (PFC) in the Army was able to transmit highly classified documents to the cyber terrorist Julian Assange. And why this administration seemingly reluctant to pursue him back in 2009 when he started releasing important documents.

Looking forward to a new Congress and see how it will change this nation!

Tough Years Ahead for America

2011-01-01T17:12:00.001-08:00

Tough years to be in America, but thank God, the Republicans won the House of Representatives. I only hope, with every ounce of my being, that these Republicans don't screw up the country like they did in the past eight years of Bush's administration.
One of the reasons, in my view, why polls showed Americans are more conservative in their view on government, is because this country was founded basically on the notion that all humans should be given the rights and freedom to work and earn a living as opposed to authoritarianism in Europe. That idea-that basic philosophy can only be found in Conservatism, which discourages massive government expansion while encouraging smaller government and lower taxes for the people. These are the issues so important to the American people, not how popular a president should be.

This administration had done more harm to American average families, middle-class families, than any government since FDR. It is because America is being radically altered by President Barrack Obama despite that fact that majority of American opposed to his socialistic ideologies. Many people criticized Conservatives for calling President Obama out on variety of issues and in all, they didn't what to be called "socialists" or the President a Marxist Socialist. Yet, only those who lived in society controlled entirely, or in most part, by the government, understand what this really means. It was Obama who said to a business man that Americans need to "distribute" their wealth. Distribution of goods and services not according to who worked to earn them, but but according to the desires of government, is the trademark of Socialism.
Is Obama a socialist? He is. Even the Socialist leader of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, a year back at the UN General Assembly, calling President Obama the most socialist president he ever seen and even saying that Obama needs to go to their side. According to Chavez, Obama is on the wrong side. He probably wants Obama to be on the side of "authoritarianism and dictatorship". Why do Liberal Democrats hate, with passion, the term socialism? Because socialism equates "dictatorship" and that characterization, to them, must be avoided at all costs.

Besides, President Obama failed miserably to focus on the two most important issues that he ran on in 2008:
1. Jobs
2. the economy.
Instead, he decided, just as any socialist leader would do, to focus on issues that serve only his cronies. He had taken over major private corporations and programs such as Student Loans program, and Healthcare than any US president in history.
The President of the people is one that doesn't care how unpopular he/she is amongst his fellow party members or comrades. He needs to listen to the people and rule according to the wishes of the people, not lobbyists, not party members, not special interests but those of the electorates. In fact, Obama is completely the opposite. Majority of Americans voted for him based basically on his promises of fixing the economy and ending the war. He promised to fix the economy and "change" the country from George Bush's policies, which upset many Americans. Never in their imagination did they ever thought they elected someone that would transform the face of the Country from what it is to what he envisioned. A total collapse of capitalism!
Just recently, he, with the Senate, ratify the START treaty, which has nothing to do with the economy. His vision of turning this planet into a nuclear free planet is extremely presumptuous. I will write about this later, but his focus should be on JOBS and the ECONOMY.
The best thing ever happened last November was the election of Conservative Representatives and Senators. Majority of Democrats who supported President Obama's socialist agendas never made it back to Washington, DC. In fact, the Super majority of the Democrat party in the House of Representatives had been decimated thanks to their refusal to listen to the American people. They lost their election because Americans didn't like to see their country taken over by bunch of wackos who think that shoving down legislation after legislation without consulting their constituents, is funny! The votes to install a new House of Representative is crucial because this is the House that deals with the money.
The new House of Representatives promises to undo many programs that President Obama installed that are harmful to this nation. Since Obama took office, unemployment rose to 10% (rounding off) and debts rose $13 million USD. It will take a vigorous work to undo the damage, and maybe taking years to restore confidence in the economy and private sector and hope this time Politicians in DC do the right thing.
It make take a while.

My view on President George W. Bush will be posted soon!!

Credit-card Scanner: Scary!

2010-12-18T20:06:00.000-08:00

I was switching from one channel to the other until I came to Fox News, and just before I could switch to another channel, the interviewer began speaking to a guy about credit cards and caught my attention right away. Its about stealing credit cards "electronically". Not pickpocketing the normal way we know it but in such a way that can only be made possible by Holly Wood movies.

The man was carrying an "electronic gadget" which can steal any credit card number anywhere as long as the scanner is within range. With credit/debit cards, the most important things are the numbers on the front and back and the names on them. The demonstration was also stunning because the interviewer had his credit card right inside his wallet, deep inside his pocket. The man with the scanner walked up to him and simulated a situation in a train where passengers are just inches apart and sometimes rubbed against each other. In matter of seconds, the man activated the scanner just as he came near the interviewer. The duo walked to the table and the man opened his gadget and pulled up the credit card number exactly as it appears on his card, right on the LCD of his gadget. That credit card was in his wallet inside his suit, oh my! Just how that gadget penetrated the clothing to get the credit card is indeed stunning.

The guy explained that after they got the credit card number from victims, they created fake credit cards using the numbers, as part of the experiment, and bought a few things with them. That proven to be very effective at least for the inventors but not credit card holders.

It also demonstrated how no one can escape the advancement of technology. Computers are so powerful nowadays that no one is immune to the danger that comes with it. The more computer programmers coming up with, the different programs and tech capabilities they produced, the more we become so vulnerable and a the more our privacy remains behind thin wall.

Assange is a Celebrity? For what?

2010-12-17T06:34:00.000-08:00

I was watching the news last night and was interrupted by a "breaking news"; it was Julian Assange's coming out of jail to greet fans and news reporter as if he is a "celebrity" but for what? Releasing stolen memos? Is that what it takes to make a hero out of some unknown wacko, in Britain? A judge in Britain granted him bail of (equivalent) USD 300,0000, while his lawyers and Sweden government negotiating his extradition. I am not interested in the circumstances surrounding Assange's rape case in Sweden, but the perceived notion that Assange is a "hero, a messenger, and a real journalist". No he is none of the above!
The jubilation exhibited in UK when Assange met the press and fans on his way out, shows just how much hatred many people in UK and Europe have toward America. To many, the release of the documents is transparency and, by Assange's and Michael Moore's words, "Save lives". Just how they came up with that conclusion is shear insanity! It is impossible to estimate how many lives were saved as a result of what he did, but it is easy to tell how many recruits terrorists have result of these documents. So far, terrorists have drummed up these documents as justification for their attacks on America and for the killing of innocent lives here and in Europe. These documents don't save lives, they have the potential to destroy the world, not saving it!
These "documents" play right into the hands of "Islamic radicals" who see these documents as justification of the war it wages against the West. Remember this, Islamic extremists not only attacked America, but UK, Spain, and France. And other plots to attack the West were foiled in UK and Germany. Islam envisions a world rules by the Islamic Faith under the Sharia law and all humans subjected to Allah. Unless such war is accomplished, wars against the West and US will linger as long as human civilization existed.
If the "release" of these "classified documents" was done in the true nature of "transparency and accountability" why did Assange see fit to release points of interest of the US government across the world? What is that got to do with transparency? And how did Assenge saw fit to release documents that may harm Americans, Australians, Europeans, and Brits in the long run?
Assange is not a celebrity, he is a criminal who needs to shut up! He is a nut-job and a insane lunatic who doesn't deserve to be treated as if he is a hero or a celebrity. The irony is this; his mother asked him in jail if "its worth it", ironically, he is following is parents' footsteps. He is, like his parents, is an activist. There's a saying that goes like this, breed a python and it will take your life in the end.

Miss Home this Christmas!

2010-11-28T07:44:00.000-08:00

Another year is taking its last breathe. 2010 has been a very challenging but enjoyable year for me. Many things went down this year that kind of changed my views about life itself. Some of them I wish to erase in memory for the rest of my life, others I wish they here to stay!

If theres' anything I am going to say about this Christmas, I will certainly miss home! :(

The warmth fresh air of my home

The bright sunny days

and the cool evenings on the grass

The laughter of people, old and young

The smiles that don't know sorrow

the hugs that tighter than bounds of grief

the joy that rings out all day long

The greens of a land untouched

the fresh air not polluted

the beautiful trees swaying in the air

Under the bluest sky

Under the starriest night

Where I lay and gaze beyond the galaxy

Where my heart-beats louder than thunder

Thats where my heart is!

Missing you everyday!

How to Extract MP3 from a Video

2010-11-26T15:11:00.000-08:00

It is beautiful here this week. The weather had been mild, long standard blong town ya, but still cold for me. Trees are changing colors for the final few weeks of Fall before the arrival of the bitter Winter. I love Fall or Autumn for the beautiful colors, each tree yields its own beautiful unique colors. Some are red, others orange, some are pink, others just brown, others remain green! It just beautiful outside.

Anyway, I am tired of the politics so I am going to blog on something completely different. The internet is full of excitement and there are thousands of tricks out there so I am going to show you a few.

How to Extract an Mp3 Song out of a Clip

Video clips are created with embedded videos and audios, they are then converted to video formats (AVI, MPEG, WMV, Flash) that the web-browsers (IE, Mozilla, Safari, Opera etc) can read or play through built-in audio player. If you don't have it, you can install a plug-in mp3 player. All browsers do come with built-in mp3 player. If not, you can download the mp3 file and play it with your Windows media player. Because of movies are end products of audio and video streams, it is impossible to separate the mp3 from the video clips. But there are websites that made this very easy.

Step 1

Find a video clip from youtube to extract its embedded mp3 song. It is better to find a video clip with a clear mp3 background music. Some video clips have poor audio or mp3 file in them, so you need to use a good headphone. Turn the volume of your PC all the way up and see how loud the song is.

Step 2

Open up this website VIDEO-MP3 BETA in a different different window; minimize the window so you can see other windows on your desktop. Some websites may ask you to subscribe, others may require you to wait for a little bit, but this website should download your song without hustle.

Step 3.

Enter the URL (The website address) in the search box provided then click on download. There are two links there: Standard Quality and Higher Quality. The standard is better if you have a very slow internet connection. Higher Quality is good for fast internet speed. Ignore "download " and "Play Now" buttons. You will require to install something on your desktop and perhaps requiring you to pay some services for faster download.

Step 4.

Click download and wait. When the download is completed, look at the status bar on the bottom of your browser. If the destination folder is shown, click on it to open or play the file. If the download is done and you don't know where to go, always go to your computer, my documents, and check our the "download" folder. If the MP3 player is there, it will have a weird looking name. Double click on it to play, if the song is exactly what you expected. Do the next step.

Step 5.

Right click on the song and go down to "Rename" link. Click on it and it will allow you to edit the name. Type the name of the song and press enter.

You just successfully extracted an MP3 out of a video clip on youtube.

How to Convert WMA, WAV etc.

Why is mp3 extremely popular? mp3 stands for:

MP3 stands for MPEG Audio Layer III and it is a standard for audio compression that makes any music file smaller with little or no loss of sound quality

This is exactly why mp3 is extremely popular for emailing and video clips. The song is compressed but the quality is preserved. It is also the preferred format for many audio devices and car stereos.

Follow these steps to convert your songs to mp3 format.

Step 1

Open your music folder where your songs reside. Place the mouse on your songs and the songs' file information will show up or pop-up. It should show you the song's audio type. In old computers, right click on the songs and go to "properties" and see the audio type information.

Step 2

To convert these songs to mp3 format, first, click on this link. Click here. This is a free software. If you want a fancy converter with all the features that are not on this free version, you may do so, otherwise this free version is awesome.

After installing, all you need is "add files" and convert.

Step 3

Click on the add file and browse to your music folder and chose the songs you want to convert. You can select more than one by click on CTRL+A to select all or CTRL+ALT while clicking on songs you want to convert. These songs will be added to the console.

Click on the "output" folder to pick a destination for your mp3 audio files. You can save them to the same root directory as well. Then chose the type of format you want to convert the songs to. Chose mp3 then click "convert". The instructions on different software may varied but they carry the same directives.

Step 4

After the conversion, click on computer and then browse to the destination folder. Make sure the songs are correctly converted.

.... to be edited.

North Korea Warns US of War!

2010-11-26T08:37:00.000-08:00

The developing crisis in the Korean peninsula is indeed disturbing and a test of President Obama's mantle. Since elected to the White House, President Obama, had done nothing to protect America but tearing down simply everything necessary to defend this country. Since taking office, Obama slashed the US defense system by almost half, removing American/allies missile defense system in Europe and replacing them with a mobile system that may take hours to deploy if someone deploy a missile to Poland, for instance. How realistic is that? Remember, Poland is sandwiched between two bully countries and both of them invaded Poland consecutively. Germany invaded Poland during WW II and and later the Soviet or precisely Russia at the height of Soviet expansionism policy. President Obama is doing more harm to the defense of this nation than any sitting president, all in the name of "hope and change" and he is doing this while Iran, North Korea, and even Syria are developing nuclear programs.

South Korea is being Bullied under Obama's Nose

This is not a new battle ground. When the Allied Forces left the Peninsula after defeating Japan, North Korean Communist regime invaded South Korea, slaughtering innocent people and burning everything in its path. They were pushed North by a US led forces beyond Yalu river, China. North Korea survived when China intervened with hundred of thousands of soldiers. Warring factions signed a ceasefire to stop the war and a borderline was drawn, known today as the "Demilitarized Zone" or the DMZ manned by US military as part of the ceasefire agreement.

However, since the signing of that peace agreement, North Korea had constantly harassed South Korea and even killed soldiers and civilians in a number of unprovoked attacks. Latest of this North Korean attacks took place sometimes this year in which North Korea sunk a South Korean warship killing more forty South Korean sailors. Recently, North Korea shelled innocent villages killing innocent civilians.

Yet, all that America had done so far is reluctantly condemning the attack, and instead of pushing for tough actions against North Korea, Obama announced a US-South Korean military exercise. Just how on earth is this going to deter a nation headed by a sick man, Kim Jong Ill? It is impossible to fathom Obama's views, let alone his understanding, on matters of defense and global security. It is likely that this situation, if not properly address, may be blown to an all-out "military confrontation". Obama can't just sit in the White House pretending that the nation is heading the right way, he should pushed harder in the UN and the 6-Nations peace-talk while condemning North Korea in the strongest of terms.

The saddest thing is that Obama is completely oblivious to international crisis, a sure sign of his apparent inexperience in this area. It also demonstrated his anti-US military defense. He had politicized almost everything in the military including trying to set up a positive relationship between NASA and the Muslim world, a move seen by many critics as nothing more than political posturing. NASA is not a diplomatic entity and should never been used for politics or diplomatic reasons.

Obama's promise of making the world love America once he gets elected is simply flawed. Every enemy of the West never backed down since his inauguration, why? It is because the hatred of America and the Western world is more of a religious and cultural issue than what Obama imagined. He had failed miserably grasped the truth!

To date, the Obama administration had completely pushed US backward. His policy on Afghanistan is being dubbed a one-night stand because of his ideas of pulling troops back to satisfy his far left Marxists liberals.

Renbel Constituencies Need to Reduce

2010-11-25T07:38:00.000-08:00

Solomon Islands is a small country with a very weak economy, a result of decades of social instability and corruption. The value of our dollar had been reduced, trade and export reduced, and now we are surviving primarily on foreign aid money. However, there is one thing that is growing steadily; the bureaucracy of the central government and provincial governments. The impact of this huge economic downturn, which also brings about astounding inflation, on our province is indeed catastrophic. We can't go on pretending that things are okay.

Solution

The solution to this is to reduce the number of bureaucracy and in my view we should also reduce the number of Wards in our province. This will save tens of thousands of dollars in the next few years and perhaps to develop our province.

Breakdown of the Constituencies:

Wards:

Rennell Island

Ward 1-Tegano, Ward 2-East Central, Ward 3-West Central, Ward 4- West Rennell.

Bellona Island

Ward 5--East Bellona and Ward 6--West Bellona.

These six constituencies should be enough to take our province forward. Our province will save enough money if we do this, but just how practical this idea is is quite another story. But I believe that this is the only solution to the stagnancy we are experiencing today in terms of development.

We need new ideas!

2010-11-25T04:28:00.000-08:00

I read a few excerpts of Bush's new book and also watched his interviews with a number news agencies. These are interesting stuff. The book is available online and in book stores across the States.
This book gives readers an in-depth view of what US former President Bush went through at the morning of 9/11 to his last day in office, in his own words.
Bush took on Al Qeada shortly after 9/11 and also invaded Iraq as part of his broader strategy to defeat this terror network. He made some very controversial decisions in his presidency and he may be the most polarized leader of his time, but his book explains the decisions he made after 9/11; the ups and downs of his presidency.
Its a must read book if you are interested in a balanced view of President Bush's policies.

Five things our new Premier MUST do!

2010-11-19T03:44:00.001-08:00

Renbel province needs an overhaul, and a Premier who knows what to do and is wiling to take the criticism and the risks to carry them out. The MPA who will take this responsibility during this coming year should address these five issues.

1. Assess the cost of Renbel operation in Honiara

There's a need to find out how much exactly did Rennell Bellona province spent in Honiara since moving back to Honiara some years ago. Any assessment of the cost of our province's operation in Honiara should also include the following; rental properties--hotels, motels, rest-houses, traveling expenses, allowances incurred as a result of the rise in cost of services in town, and any other expenditures and stuff that got nothing to do with the province. Or money that was spent on things that aren't beneficial to the province.

The new administration should hire someone to evaluate these things before proceeding with the next four years plan. It is essential to carry this out for the purpose of transparency and for the benefit of the newly established government, and to hold those who abused the province accountable for their own failures and corruption.

2. Audit of previous government

This assessment should also include an overall audit of the entire province since its inception. Rennell Bellona province is the tinniest of all provinces in the Solomon Islands, and the funds that poured into our province in the last decade should be enough to develop the province substantially. To this day, our province remains underdeveloped. Thus, it is important to know just exactly how much of the provincial funds had been used on developing our province, and how much of it had been used for personal gain or just wasteful spending.

This audit should also cover every expense of the Province since becoming a province in the 1990s. The auditor should find patterns in the manner with which previous governments expended our provincial grants. In other words, find spending patterns amongst previous administrations and find ways to either minimize these pattern, or just do away with these wasteful spending so that Rennell Bellona retains at least a good junk of its cash now and in the future.

The auditor must also evaluate the efficacy of all the programs put forward by previous governments and how they impacted Renbel in the past decade. This audit should provide our next provincial government (and future ones) exactly the kinds of road it needs to take in the next four years.

3. Leadership Training

It is essential that the first term MPA goes through, in my humble opinion, some form of political orientation. This orientation should give freshman MPAs the opportunity to learn their responsibilities, their roles and limitations in the provincial system. They should have each a copy of their Provincial Act and have them study it. A clear understanding of the roles of MPAs, the Premier, the Executives and the Non-executives, etc. is the key to a better leadership in the province.

There will be MPAs who will enter the political arena for the first time and may not know what and how to participate in the political process. The orientation should include a demonstration of the Assembly's protocols; how to address the speaker, how to address the chairman, and what to expect when the speak presides over the Assembly. How to respond to an MPA or how to address MPAs and how to participate in any Provincial proceedings.

This should give each new MPA a glimpse into what lies ahead, or what will happen in the next four years. This orientation should be designed as an educational tool so that the new MPAs will trained the next new set of MPAs who will enter the house in the near future as freshmen.

The Province should also hire an expert administrator, like in the case of late Wilfred Hatigeva, whom Taupongi hired, to trained the Assembly on basic administrative skills. Well, let assume that each MPA is a potential Premier and head of the cabinet. It is critical to have someone with the knowledge on administration to train these MPAs in the art of administration in relation to politics and government.

4. Draw up a Developmental plan for Renbel

The newly established provincial administration should draw up a plan for development. This should be done by inviting all MPAs to share ideas on how to tackle our socioeconomic issues. A well thought out development scheme is drawn up and a budget is set to meet this plan.

I said earlier that I don't favor "budgetary" in the provincial leve because it filters much needed funds from reaching village people, but as a matter of practice, a budget should be drawn up according to this development scheme puts forward by the administration and have each MPA executes it in his/her Ward.

There are ways to go about it and it is the responsibility of the provincial government-both sides of the aisle to find out exactly how to come up with one in the most effective and time saving way. Today, each MPA is left to come up with his idea on how to spend his Ward's money. Thus, a development plan, in my view, will equip our MPAs in addressing much needed development in our various Wards.

5. Make preparation to return to Renbel

Talking about transition, this administration should be the one that overhauls our system and bringing back the Provincial government to Tigoa, Rennell Island. Look around Honiara, only Rennell Bellona province operates out of Honiara. This is a huge disadvantage for our province in many ways. We didn't acquire a piece of land in Honiara, instead our province operates in the city on a rental basis. The money spent on rental properties must be accounted for.

It is time to return to Rennell Bellona province. If this administration unable to do it, at least it will open up the road to returning home. Preparations must be made as soon as possible. If each provincial government refuses to return the provincial operations to its rightful place, no body will! It is important to return to the province and develop it.

I suggest that the major provincial meetings are held in our province. Money can be spent on resorts, resthouses, transports, etc. An office is opened in Rennell for basic operations. The rest should follow through.

My Last Words to my Rennell Bellona voters

2010-11-15T11:14:00.000-08:00

Before my good people of Rennell Bellona head to the polls to select the next bunch of leaders to lead our province in the next four years, I just feel obliged to share some thoughts about our politics for the sake of those who love, as I do, politics. And I am not going to point fingers at the current office holders in our province so I will talk about them in general terms. Well, let assume that none of them cares to read this blog.

There is a saying in our language that goes like this:

Kokoe manga hakabangebange, ai tu'atunga' po ni'a'au ka hai.

People are too scared to speak out because of this, but healthy criticism is important. It is the cornerstone of Western politics, and it doesn't matter whether the criticism is personal or jut about issues. But in our case, this concept often go overboard. So today, I wanna talk about two important things; the word politics as it applies to our system and the role of our leaders in that system.

Politics: Games and Attributes

Politics is about attitude and attitude shapes public perception. We often view politics on the prism of corruption and dishonesty, or in other words, politics is viewed as a subject, thus, the culprits are often exempted from public scrutiny. Wen someone highlighted corruption of political leaders, the reply is often; "ma hem politics nomoa".

Political actors need to rise above this perception and deal with politics as it is intended. Politics is about policy and law making, and development. The our version of the Westminster system is extremely interesting. It is structured in a way that a group of elites are elected by the mass who then become mouthpieces in the legislative process. The anticipation is for these leaders to serve the interest of the voters, in that, actors are expected to make life easier and comfortable for the voters themselves. That is why the "Mantra" of Democracy has always been "The government of the people, by the people, and for the people".

When is politics becoming a "game"? It is when politicians see politics as a life time career not an opportunity. To these politicians, the seat must be retained at all coasts; it doesn't matter how he/she won, what matters is he/she is re-elected. They don't see their being MP as an opportunity to serve. As a result of that, politics becomes a game played by the elected ones at the expense of poor voters.

In parliament, MPs are voted in as law-makers and the Prime Minister and his government set policies for the entire nation. As law-makers, they determined what bill to pass, which policies should be installed and how they should sell these ideas to the average voters who in many ways don't know how to play the game. Who don't know the twist and turns of the game.

However, in the provincial system, MPAs perform similarly but with significant differences. One of the major differences is that MPAs don't hold legislative powers. Because the provincial system was established with limited legislative power, MPAs are nothing more than caretakers of the provincial grants and other funds trickled down from the central government. In this case, it is sufficient to call our MPAs as financial handlers, but I prefer the word "controllers" who don't care whether funds do reach their intended targets.

MPAs as Financial Controllers

These are long economic words or phrase that average voters don't identify with, but it is basically means "distributing of money" or "appropriating funds" according to the way MPAs see fit. MPAs aren't politicians per se but representatives of so-called provincial Wards. Thus, the question whether educated, less educated, and the completely uneducated, should run for the provincial seat is extremely important during campaign season. The answer, in my view, is this--it is "attitude" that matters, not how intelligent a person is.

Yes, it is important to have intelligent candidates who know basic finances, but it is also important to have candidates with the right attitude to filter arrogance and personal greed when it comes to being stewards of the people's money.

Why do we need intelligent candidates? It is important to elected educated candidates because budgets and other financial issues do need radical assessments and oftentimes, than not, MPAs with background in finance or sufficient knowledge in business understand it than say the average and the uneducated.

On the other hand, less educated and perhaps the under-educated (in our standard) with the right attitude toward money may govern effectively by sharp contrast to those we discussed earlier. Many people don't know why Asians who don't hold degrees in accounting become successful business men, its because they are careful about money. We need honest MPAs to ensure our province is developed.

Voting Culture

The main indicator and actor in our provincial system, and in many ways, the decider in election day is "family unit". Educated or not, voters go to the polls to elect their own cousins, uncles, dad, sisters, brothers, etc. At the end of the day, voters created a provincial assembly of very educated, uneducated, clueless, overconfident, and rookies of the villages, a bunch of confused MPAs. Sadly, good candidates are often expelled because of either lack of family support, or just simply unpopular amongst voters.

It is wise to chose the right person based on the of attributes I've laid up there. It is out of character for a voter to caste a ballot for a candidate who is not a relative, but until that day comes, we'll keep electing fools into our provincial assembly.

Again, our MPAs are financial controllers not policy makers, representatives of our Wards, not Politicians. We need members with visions on how to properly utilize ward grants. And we also need a strong Premier and an administration to do exactly that. For MPAs to go in thinking they are bunch of politicians is simply a recipe for a failed provincial government.

I also think it is rather stupid for a provincial government to put forward a BUDGET. Provinces were created as caretakers of the Provincial grants and what it should do is distribute this money equally amongst provincial Wards. Drafting a budget is another way of finding ways to minimize Wards' allocations. Over the years, extra funds were created for administrative purposes with money intended for the people, and they achieved that through manipulation of the budget. That should end immediately because I don't think the system was design to create a filter for Ward grands--people's money.

I hope our new MPAs fight for the rights of villages to develop instead of sitting in the assembly as listeners. Don't let hawkish MPAs take the leading role in what to do on behalf of your voters. Each MPA should pressure the provincial government to give out all due funds to most rhw needed constituents and stop robbing them of their right to their money.

Long live Renbel

Voters Rejected President Obama's Agenda

2010-11-03T11:45:00.000-07:00

Every two years, the House of Congress up for election, giving a very important opportunity for voters to decide who should go back to Washington, DC, and who should be retired. Last night, voters, Conservatives and Independents, flocked into voting polls and openly rejected President Barrack Hussein Obama's socialistic agenda. The stunning result of the midterm election paves way for a new administration to begin to undoing the damage that President Obama and his far-left government had done to the free-market America in a space of two years. Many Democrats now regretted supporting Obama and in many cases tried to distance themselves from him and his unAmerican agenda. Democrats have lost their seats as the nation rebelled by way of the ballots, and acknowledged that wishes of the voters, but one man just doesn't seemed to get it, President Obama.

Results of the US Mid Term Election 2010

2010-11-02T16:01:00.001-07:00

Indiana (R)

Dan Coats

Kentucky (R)

Rand Paul

South Carolina (R)

Demint (Re-elected)

Two Biggest Mistakes in US Approaches to Afghanistan

2010-10-19T18:50:00.001-07:00

NATGEO (National Geography) is one of my favorite channels simply because of the variety of shows and documentaries it puts out in the evenings. One evening NATGEO featured a documentary about the US hunt for the father and financier of Al Qeada, Osama Bin Laden. Because I knew little about the US efforts to kill the mastermind of 9/11, I decided to watch it to the end. It started out with the US plans to pursue the 9/11 culprits in a "kill-or-capture" mission dubbed the "War Against Terror". The documentary centers on a few CIA officers sent ahead of the US invasion of Afghanistan to secure intelligent agents on the ground to assist in providing targets for US bombers. According to Tom Frank, head of Centcom (Central command), the plan was to weaken Taliban and Al Qeada from relentless air assault before ground troops moved in.
The CIA was fortunate to have the Northern Alliance, a group of Northern tribes opposed to the Taliban rule and who had waged and managed to hold on to their territory since Soviet pulled out. The CIA officers were paying them millions of dollars to look out, pick out targets and assist the air raids. But what struck me as I watched the documentary was the comment made by the CIA officer when recounting his meeting with some of his Northern Alliance comrades, those who he helped during the anti-Soviet war. They told the CIA officers that they hope America was there to stay and not betraying them like they did back in the late 1980s when the Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan. US left Afghanistan to utter chaos.

Obama's Policy on Afghanistan is Flawed
Two of the biggest errors of the US actions in the Middle East after the collapse of the Soviet empire, in my view, were its abandonment of Afghanistan and its reluctance to pursue Saddam Hussein at the end of the "Operation Desert Storm" (1991). It is a known historical fact that every time the US left something incomplete, it comes back to hit its homeland.
First, the US used Afghanistan as an apparent retaliation for the USSR support for North Vietnam. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan relied heavily on the use of its newly produced helicopters and tanks. The whole Arab nations sent fighters to Afghanistan, but as time passed, it turned out to be a burial site for brave Arab Muslims. It takes a single US politician to convince US government to supply the Mujaheddin fighters with modern technologies that led to the Soviet withdraw. US quickly left Afghanistan to radical Muslims who quickly turned Afghanistan into a hardcore Islamic state ruled by thugs most of whom had fought against the Soviets.

After decades of Taliban rule, Afghanistan had created one of largest refugee camps, highest crime rate against women, and pretty much operated under Islamic Law. Thousands of people died, many were tortured, women were murdered, many were driven out of their homes. Taliban became extremely vicious.
This is the country where Bin Laden found as a home after successfully attacking US embassies across Africa and the USS Cole. The Al Qeada network flourished in Afghanistan until they brought the war to the US homeland, now they are back to do complete what they had left in the late 80s. Many analysts criticized US of waging wars on mere expediency and to many Afghans, the US and NATO presence there may be a repeat of the late 80s' experience.
Secondly, in 1991, US led a coalition of nations against Saddam Hussein who invaded the sovereign state of Kuwait. The US showcased some of the most advanced weapons including its Stealth fighter planes and smart bombs, and in matter of weeks drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait. Having refused to sign a peace-deal, US special forces pursued Iraqi forces deep into Baghdad. Finally, Hussein surrendered and signed a peace-deal. US forces were told to stop its assault on Iraq and returned to Kuwait. Years later, Saddam had sponsored more deadly attacks on US citizens than any known ME leader, including the attempt assassination of President Bush senior. And according to European sources, Saddam met some of the 9/11 hijackers before arriving in the US. Whatever they shared during their clandestine meetings remained a mystery. However, sources indicated that Hussein also gave more money to Palestinians suicide bombers than any other ME leaders. These evidence were uncovered by the IDF in Gaza.
In 2003, US finally saw the necessity of toppling Hussein. The US and UK led a coalition of so-called "willing nations" and overthrew Hussein, installed a new democratic government and left. To this day, the Iraqi government can be classified as extremely fluid and fragile. It can collapse anytime and the military dissolved into the population and drive up a more violent civil ethnic violence bigger than any in the history of the ME.

OBAMA Doesn't Understand the Danger; in many ways Sympathized with Arabs

Obama: Sure, I'll meet with Castro, Chavez, Ahmadinejad, etc

Before taking office, President Barrack Hussein Obama promised to open up diplomatic dialogue between US and Iran. Despite Iran's open defiance of the UN Resolutions and sanctions, Obama still believe solutions can be reached with the participation of Iran. Even when Mahmoud Amadinejad called 9/11 a US inside job, and calls for the eradication of the Jews State, Obama still holding out hope.
Its been two years and a half since Obama took office and the indicators of Iran turning moderate aren't there, which means that Obama's notion is flawed. Iran doesn't need Obama to survive such as other tiny ME nations that still depending on US military for their survival. Iran is still the biggest force in the region.
Just recently, the US allowed Taliban and Iran to attend negotiation for a US exit strategy, despite the fact that US forces intercepted a shipment of weapons to Taliban marked as foods. This is a very dangerous maneuver for a the US government and one that has the potential to destroy, yet again, the trust of anti-Taliban forces and pro-democratic movements inside Afghanistan. This is also taken place a couple of weeks since intelligence revealed Pakistan intelligence agency had been encouraging Taliban to fight keep fighting.
The idea that Iran should play a major part in assisting Afghanistan when US withdraws is perhaps the most extremely controversial and highly dangerous move coming out of the Obama administration. But this is Liberalism at best, pretending that people would love them once they are opened up to negotiation. That is flawed as noted by Tony Blair.

Even with Iran's recent visit to South Lebanon, a move viewed by Israel and US as provocative, Obama and his government still moves ahead with the withdrawal plan for the Afghan war. It is appalling how the Obama administration approach Iran and Afghanistan; it constantly denying the reality that Iran is looking to play a major role in the ME and the fact that it continually threatening Israel. It keeps pretending that Iran is not a threat to the world.

The biggest mistake the US government would do is leaving at a time when Afghanistan barely holding on. It is appalling to let Iran into the discussion table despite the fact that it supplied Shi'ite insurgents in Iraq, sponsoring Syria and Hezbollah who killed innocent citizens. Despite the fact that Iran's shipment to the Taliban was intercepted by US soldiers, US let them to in to negotiate with the Afghanistan government.

Afghanistan is a country that is extremely backward, and susceptible to civil war. This is a breeding ground for terrorism and Obama is going to pull America and NATO out simply for political reasons.

Summary

The two biggest mistakes;

1. Opening up negotiation with stubborn Iran

2. Dateline to withdraw from Afghanistan amidst violence

..... to be edited....

Miss the 80s and 90s Music

2010-10-02T06:21:00.000-07:00

Prisoners in Paradise... one of my all times favorite.

Guns & Roses... "November Rain"
Lovely song.

Watch this video on VideoSurf or see more Bon Jovi Videos or Videos

Bed of Roses. The best love song ever of the 90s.

Watch this video on VideoSurf or see more Mercury Videos or The Blaze Of Glory Videos

Jon Bon Jovi-- Blaze of Glory

Def Leppard -- When Love and Hate Collide

Def Leppard - Have You Ever Needed Someone So Bad

Def Leppard

Poison--Unskinny Bop

Watch this video on VideoSurf or see more Sebastian Bach Videos or Videos

Skid Row--I remember you

Lynyrd Skynyrd - Sweet Home Alabama, Live Nashville, TN, USA

Richard Marx - Endless Summer Nights (Remastered Audio)

Kakabona: The Real Victims of the Ethnic Crisis!!

2010-09-27T12:04:00.001-07:00

The Ethnic Crisis touches many of us who lived through the horrors of that conflict in many ways. Some lost love ones, others lost millions of dollars in investments, many lost their homes. Friends were torn apart, ethnic divisions ripped through the hearts of many places inside Honiara including the multi-ethnic and cultural settlements such as White River. But the Conflict itself affected me in a profound personal way. Looking back, it was like a story out of a Holly Wood movie!

Let me begin with Betikama. I spent six years in high schools outside of town and had my final year in Su'u High School before moving to Honiara. I went to Su'u for two years doing Forms 4 and 5. Prior to my final exams, I picked Betikama as my first choice. Back in those days, only a handful of High Schools had Form 6 classes. To make a long story short, I was selected to do my Form 6 at Betikama High School in 1995. That year was not a good year for me, as it was also my first taste of education next to the city and the city lifestyle. The urge, or tendency to escape school was always there, hanging right in front of me like a precious jewel. Missing school for days and even weeks never bothered me, but the consequences hit me pretty hard on Finals day. Though my name was down for the SICHE intake for 1996, I was on my way back to Bellona Island. The following year, when I returned to Honiara, the reality of town living found me.

Kakabona: The Village Dear To Me!
Jobless, I moved out to the countryside and resided at

Kakabona. It was one of the most enjoyable places I've ever lived because of the people I lived with and friends I made. I stayed with my cousins and oh yeah they were hilarious in every way. It was 1996. The only important part of the day to us was 4 pm because we got to play Touch Rugby at White River school or volleyball in the neighborhood. Fried fish and rice was our usual meals. We didn't have much money, but we enjoyed each others' company. We would go out snorkeling and just enjoying the crystal clear water of Kakabona. On the other side is former LDA. It used to be a government subsidized live stock farm and a coconut plantation. We went there allot on small canoes to get coconut fruits, and sometimes walking further up into the bush and dipped in the clean river. We hardly afford beer so we made our own beer (homebrew), and took magic-mushrooms as a supplement. It was helluva enjoyable time!

Kakabona was a typical Guale village but quite mixed. There were Malaitans, wantoks, Temotuans and Westerners there. There were three small canteens. And yes, betelnut vendors would keep the main road busy till midnight. There was a local in-home movie theater with an admission fee of $2.00. We would find ourselves crammed inside this house watching some old movies. The place was small and the odor was quite unpleasant, but it was the only place we would go in the evening if we didn't afford to go to White River theater; a move place owned by an American man and his Bellonese wife. Our neighbor, George Fafale, used to export wild-life creatures such as snakes, lizards, birds, crocs, parrots, etc. to foreign countries. He also imported cars from somewhere in Asia and displayed them just outside his house. Sometimes I would just stand there admiring these cars and imagining me driving one of them. Fafale was a huge friendly man from Temotu whose accent and voice reminded me of Mufasa the Lion king.

My favorite time of the year was the "Mango season" toward the end of the year. There were at least three huge mango trees near our house. We used to pick them and sell them to people on their way to the beaches down Westside, and then took the money and spent them all down town. Because buses those days didn't serve the Kakabona area, we would walk miles to catch a bus to down-town around White River area. A trip down to Point Cruz was like heaven those days! We sometimes walked from Kakabona to Point Cruz because we didn't want to spend our money on buses. Back in those days, $5 meant a lot to us.

Oh, I spent two years here 1996 to 1997 before leaving for Papua New Guinea in February 1998. I remember the last morning when I left Kakabona; it was sad. I left my cousins and walked to White River where I caught a bus to Point Cruz and caught up with my Samoan friends who dropped me off at the old International Airport. Flying over Honiara I could see the white sand of Kakabona, the beautiful Lela and Ela Beaches, and yes my favorite beach - Eden Bay. I also could see the wrecked ship by Lela Beach--a popular place to kids around Kakabona area.

In 1998, when I returned from Goroka, Eastern Highlands, to Port Moresby, the news of a civil war broke out between Malaitans and Guadalcanal people reached PNG media, and I was surprised to learn that Kakabona was raided by the Police Field Force (PFF), the armed wing of the Solomon Islands' Royal Police (SIRP). I had not heard from relatives in Kakabona area but I always looked for the regional news column of the PNG National newspaper, or the Post Courier regional news hoping to learn more about Kakabona area. I learned that Kakabona had been used as a GRA strong-hold and had been the location of many encounters between the SII Police Field Force and GRA. I also read that the SIRP raided Kakabona area with an armed truck, a hired-helicopter, and a Patrol boat.

Toward the end of 1999, the news from Honiara weren't all good. The MEF was not even formed, but the PFF was still trying to keep GRA off Honiara town. I often thought about my friends, my cousins, and just felt a strange feeling inside. When 2000 arrived, my visa was extended till March and later I was on my way to Solomon Islands.

Homecoming Experience

My homecoming was a little sad. In March of 2000, I was on my way home via Air Niugini not knowing the status of Honiara; the danger that awaited me esp. My first impression of Honiara was the new International Airport, it looks huge. This airport was half-way complete when I was on my to PNG in 1998. When a friend picked me up at the airport, he turned to me and said "let me know where you want me to drop you and I will take you there"... I said please drop me off at Kakabona. He just frowned at me and said, allot had gone down since you left and Kakabona to be honest is a NO GO ZONE! I told him, that's where I live. The first thing I noticed on our way toward Kakabona was that Honiara was soooo dirty and that the mood was not good. He started telling me stories of killings, kidnappings etc. and I began to wonder if it was a good idea going to Kakabona, but I didn't know where else to go. When we drove passed Kakabona, I began to notice also the height of grass passed White River, at Kaugere, the houses were basically abandoned. Bobo's house and Lucas' houses were completely abandoned. Just a few yards from Lucas' area, was a check point. There was a man standing at the gate with a gun and a few more sitting in a military like tent. I know these guys - we used to play Soccer and hangout together and I knew them personally and by names. One of them came and looked inside the car then without a smile he said, you need to turn around here. I wanted to talk to him but he walked away and though I knew everyone sitting there, no one even cracked a smile! We turned and drove back toward White River and found my sister's new home. They were relocated to the Independence Valley.

In the evening I decided to go back to Kakabona area. I came face to face with a taller looking guy with a high powered rifle. He asked where I was going and I explained to him where I used to live and my cousins. He looked me up and down then said 'we don't let people through this point but its okay... go and see your cousins but make sure you leave before nightfall.' I arrived and found my cousins and other relatives sitting outside talking. When they saw me they all freaked out! It was a sad reunion. We spent the whole afternoon talking about the crisis and the Police raid at Kakabana a couple of years back. I left them and returned to White River, it would be the last time till many years later. My cousins also left Kakabona in the ensuing months and after three months the country's government was overthrown.

Coup of 2000

When the Paramilitary took over Honiara in June of 2000 and overthrew the Ulufa'alu's government, I decided hem taim fo ranawe. My friends who were watching the news in New Zealand reached me by phones. It was the beginning of another journey that would take me away for a few more years. I didn't have money so I made collect calls to NZ to my friends in Auckland and Whangarei area. The arrangements didn't go anywhere and countries were canceling their flights to Solomon Islands every week. My attempts to fly to NZ via PNG and Australia also didn't work out, and I lost all hopes. The final flight out of Solomon Islands was the Air Vanuatu, which was leased by Australia to carryout flights to Solomon Islands to transport the last remaining foreign nationals. Foreigners were flocking to the airport hoping to find their way out, and so was I.

During that final week, I visited the Airline's office (one of the many visits) and was told that things would be ready for me the next day. I spent the night at Kolaa Ridge and around 4 am, my friend and I went to White River to get my stuff. We were stopped by MEF guys around Point Cruz and Rove. Lucky, my driver was a Malaitan guy and an MEF man as well. We arrived at White River at dawn just when MEF and the Paramilitary forces attacked Kakabona. We could hear the gun-battle as we made our way out to the main-road. It was dawn--a beautiful but sad day.

After a few hours at the airport, I was in the air looking down to Kakabona. It was engulfed by smoke. The newspaper I bought that morning heralded the story of the attack at Kakabona as a success and other MEF stories. It was a three hours flight that would take me five years away from home.

RETURNING to KAKABONA (2004)

Many things occurred during my absence. I arrived in NZ around June 2000 and went to school in Hawaii from 2001 to 2004. After my graduation I was on my way back to Honiara (Honolulu - Fiji - Vanuatu - Honiara). RAMSI had landed in Honiara a year earlier providing security inside Honiara. I arrived at the new Henderson airport, it was a breathtaking experience. RAMSI officers were everywhere, things had been restored to its pre-coup conditions, although pockets of stubborn Keke loyalists still causing trouble in remote parts of Guadalcanal. But the scars are still fresh!

After two days in Honiara, I took a visit to Kakabona. Houses were burned to the ground. Almost every house was burned to the ground. I passed Kauare and arrived at where I used live. All the big houses around this area have been burned to the ground when MEF attacked GRA. I stood there just looking at the foundation of our house. It was sad. Our neighbors house had been abandoned for months--the entire village bears the scar of that terrible morning in 2000 when the paramilitary invaded the area. What left were foundations of homes, many of which belonged to innocent families.

Some photos I took sometimes in December of 2004

George Fafale's house (Left). Right behind me was the canteen.

There's the foundation of Peter's house and the new police post.

The remains of our outdoor rest-room.

Foundation of our house: View from Eastern side.

Foundation of our house: View from the west-side. Shaded area-used to be my room.

Kemakeza: From Prime Minister to Jail and Jail to Speaker of Parliament!!

2010-09-26T19:05:00.000-07:00

There is a general feeling of unfortunate mistrust between political leaders and ordinary people of Solomon Islands. Ask any civilian in Solomon Islands whether he would want to be a politician in the future and the answer you would get is "no". This general feeling precipitates from the notion that politicians are bunch of corrupt puppets who do not serve the interests, or at least address the needs of the people they represent but their own and that of their cronies. Allan Kemakeza is the living proof of this whole mess.

Well, let me give the man some credits. Asking Australia to come to Solomon Islands was not an easy task, but one that worked for him and the entire nation in different ways. The Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands, known as RAMSI, had made significant contributions to the restoration of the rule of law and sovereignty of the Solomon Islands. It had also brought back businesses and investors to Solomon Islands and quelled all conflicts within Honiara and through out Guadalcanal. Without Kemakeza, Solomon Islands would have reached a complete state of anarchy from 2003 onward.

On the other hand, the man is corrupt. He is, in my view, the most corrupt politician ever walked the floor of the parliament of Solomon Islands. He was incapable of leading Solomon Islands at a time when thugs ruled the streets, however, the punishments he got after being convicted of a host of crimes, were extremely mild and inadequate. His exploitation of the situation for his own benefits demonstrated his inability to make rational judgment and further demonstrated his lack of leadership at a time when Solomon Islands' future was at stake. His only interest at that time was his job as the Prime Minister and his safety in a nation roamed by lawless thugs. His refusal to do what was right back then, like standing up for the rule of law, should have given all MPs a simple question, "is he capable of making the right judgments and fit enough for the job of the Speak of Parliament?". Obviously, that question never crossed the hearts and minds of those who nominated and voted him in as the Speaker of Parliament for the Solomon Islands' parliament.

When all the fighting ceased and the people settled back into their offices and homes, the truth about Kemakeza revealed. The revelation of the dirty underground dealings of the head of the government; the man who took the oath to defend the constitution of the country and protect its sovereignty as their Prime Minister (Kemakeza), came from none other than the former Commander of the Malaita Eagle Force (MEF) Jimmy Rasta and Su'u, one of the leaders of MEF who claimed he received orders from the PM to commit serious crimes, or to be precise; to act contrary to the law of the nation.

Three serious charges, amongst many, were brought against Kemakeza: 1. He advised MEF soldiers to hold on to their weapons despite the TVA which called for both factions to return their arms. 2. He ordered the ransacking of a law firm in Solomon Islands (read the story). 3. Stealing Solomon Islands money, almost a million Solomon Islands dollars, to enrich himself (read it here).

These charges and many others are extremely serious. These charges would land a man in jail for decades if its a developed country, but not in Solomon Islands. You see, Solomon Islands' political leaders are the most corrupt in the region, in my opinion, and I can't go any further to find an example of this statement, because their stories and photos are all over the Solomon Islands media, and now the internet. In all, he is a crook and a corrupt, self-serving politician.
Sadly, he is the man been elected to succeed the outgoing Speaker of Parliament, Sir. Peter Kenilorea. The saddest thing about this whole saga is that our legal system is designed, in my humble assessment, in a way that once you are a prominent political figure or a business man, you are more likely to escape the justice system through manipulation, cronyism, and bribery. Those who nominated Kemakeza and enthroned him obviously don't have any problem with the meaning of the word "corruption", but it doesn't matter at all because they are just like him in many respects. Our laws were created in a manner that the weak, ordinary people are susceptible to be punished severely in courts, but not the high-ups.

Prior to the handing down of the judgment against Kemakeza, politicians, leaders, and his cronies rallied around him. They mitigated on his behalf; pleading for a reduction of his judgment. The number of good things he did for Solomon Islands' were thrown out in the open and his cronies sung in unison the plea to let their so-called "good man" go. However, in the eyes of ordinary people, Kemakeza needed to be put away for a while to compensate for all the mess he brought to the country. Not surprising though, he received only a slap on the wrist; he saved a short time in jail and zoomed back to his volcanic island of Savo. Then on, he fought the law to re-enter government and failed miserably, but he had his cronies in Parliament waiting to drag him back in. They were those he had spoon fed as rookies in Parliament when he was the captain of the sinking boat. Today, he is now the Speaker of Parliament.

This is my message to the criminals out there: If you are a criminal serving time in jails somewhere in the world for corruption, embezzlement, attempt murder, accessory to a crime, ordering the destruction of a private company using illegal weapons and organization, stealing money from a bank, and for bribery, I urge you when your time is up to relocate to Solomon Islands. Here, in our democratic nation, criminals like you, not only walked free, but holding higher offices.

+++God have mercy on our souls+++

The UNGA 2010 Should be dubbed the Israeli Bashing Assembly, Led by Obama

2010-09-24T22:38:00.001-07:00

This is a very interesting week, its the United Nations General Assembly week where all leaders come together and "accuse" each other in polite and sometimes harsh ways. It is the only time that leaders of nations, even those that US called "axis of evil", attended. I stayed glued to the TV screen trying to see changes within the tone of the international community since the election of President Barrack Obama and the UNGA of last year. The two things I gathered from this meetings are 1. 2010 UNGA is an Israel bashing session 2. It is a chance to attack the weakest president ever led the world's only superpower.

First, President Obama never mentioned 'terrorism' but other heads of states did. Most of the leaders who spoke at the UNGA believed in a global 'terrorism' network, while the US administration demonstrated it doesn't believe terrorism ever existed. In his appearance Obama spent a few seconds on the Iranian nuclear program and even extended an indirect invitation to Iran for further negotiation despite the fact that Iran had defied four UN-Resolutions and tougher sanctions. He then spent the rest of the speech addressing Israel and Palestine issues in a not so optimistic tone. Amongst his optimism is the notion that once a Palestinian state is established, terrorism may come to an end and that the Palestinians will live peaceful co-existence. What he failed to understand is that Palestinians never wanted peace. They destroyed ever single opportunity to create a state of their own, and every time Israel signaled its willingness to negotiate, they either fire rockets to Israel or attack Israeli citizens knowing that Israel would react with military force. It was the case with Yassar Arafat's administration to Abbas' government.

Even with a so-called 'moderate' leader like Abbas, Palestinians demonstrated they didn't want a state of their own. This is evident in the Hamas invasion of Gaza in an effort to topple the government of Abbas. To date, Hamas continues to rule Gaza while Abbas controls the West Bank. This is in keeping with the Hamas 'charter' which does not recognize Israel, and a document which inspired young men and women of Palestine to become 'suicide bombers' in order to called 'martyrs' of Allah. Since its inception, Hamas had been calling for the destruction of Israel and making the killing of Jews an honorable responsibility and blessed the mothers whose children committed suicide and killed innocent Jews. In fact, the Hamas Charter is reflected in the Hezbollah's Charter and the Iranian regime's talking points which didn't only denied everything from the 'Israeli Holocaust' (despite the fact the denial of the holocaust is illegal in Germany), but also call for the 'annihilation of the state of Israel.

Secondly, Obama based his views on the fact, as he explained in the above video clip, America had no direct communication with Iran since the Islamic revolution in Iran. This isolation, Obama argued, is indeed laughable and somewhat flawed even if over the years, Iran had not been been deterred by its isolation. But its been two years since Obama extended his hand to the Iranian nut leaders for direct negotiations. He did that in his speeches and on a direct youtube address to the Iranian people. However, this session, the Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmedinejad showed Obama just exactly the opposite. His speech on Thursday (two days ago) debunked the democratic belief that direct talks would make the world love America.

Recently, Iran announced it had enriched its nuclear facilities, and threatened America of any attack against it. Under president Obama's watch, North Korea sunk a South Korean warship, and continued to pursue its nuclear ambitions. These are instances reminiscent of the 1990s when America was attacked everywhere when its leader was too busy cheating on his wife. One would ask, where's the love and friendship that Obama promised to bring to America if he opened up to the world? the answer is simply, there's no LOVE for America.

In this video clip, Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, after Obama's call for close negotiation, claimed America orchestrated the 9/11 events in order to save its economy and save the Zionist regime. Interestingly, the US delegation had sat through his first speech and even in this speech, in a good-will gesture, but how come they walked out? Where is the proof that Iran would love America if the US government extends its hand to it? Where is the truth in Obama's claim that isolation only empowers them and that an open diplomacy would quench the anger amongst political leaders? The answer is this; Obama is not living in the real world where issues aren't defined by how and what a person believes, rather by a whole array of socioeconomic and sociopolitical factors. The differences between Iran and US are more than just political--they are based on elements of history and core values of the religions the two nations embraced for centuries.

Yes, President Reagan spoke to his counterpart, but he did so on mutual interest of keeping the world safe. Reagan was more intimidating than just a handshake and back patting, and the two Superpowers knew the danger of their arsenal and were constantly seeking ways to avoid a nuclear world war. And even the most hawkish Democrat leader John Kennedy, he was in many ways too weak. It was under his watch that nuclear weapons were mounted in Cuba and under his leadership, Cuban Americans were sent without backups only to be slaughtered at the Bay of Pigs. He didn't achieve any positive result as a byproduct of face-to-face diplomatic approach to the USSR. But there's one clear in this analogy--Obama is no Reagan and noo he is no Kennedy either. Ahmadinejad's outburst and the US delegation walking out of the session points to Obama's inexperience in the real world. His limited experience in the world of politics, international diplomacy and his distorted views of the relationship between US and Muslims' world is taking America in a completely dangerous road.

The question remains, what is the best way to approach Iran? There is no better way to approach Iran other than a robust sanction that would squeeze Iran out of its comfort zone. This would mean that those European nations that still supporting Iran must also back off! and let Iran feel the financial agony that comes with isolation.

This session is anti-semitic in all aspects. It is a time where anti-Israel regimes of Europe and around the world took most of their time bashing Israel of its handling of the Flotilla which IDF killed nine people who were armed with pipes and knives and aggressive, YET no one mentioned the fact that North Korea sunk a South Korean warship and killed 43 people. And the US administration failed miserably to bring home the message that Israel has the right to defend itself from terrorists just as the US did around Cuba in the 1960s. The US president failed miserably too to cool off the anger toward Israel as the US government had always done in the past as the true and real ally of Israel, and never even acknowledge the fact that Israel cannot exist without being recognized as a state of its own right.

Instead, the US president made this session and the opportunity to address nations of the world, all about himself. What he did, his domestic policies and his ambitions for America. Who cares? All nations of the world come to the UN to find ways to work together on issues crossing international boundaries. Certainly leaders of the countries present at the UNGA have done marvelous things in their own country. Germany can bear witness to that, so would China and Jan, and even South Korea. President Obama failed miserably to adequately addressing world issues!

A Country of about 600,000 and a Massive Bureaucracy!

2010-09-22T11:04:00.003-07:00

Solomon Islands is a small country of about half a million people and with a massive government. The bureaucracy is ever increasing and so are the benefits that attach to it. More offices were created under Prime Minister Sogavare, others were created under Dr. Derek Sikua. The Entitlement Commission also increased benefits for Parliamentarians (serving and on retirement) and went through with little public protest. Interesting, however, is that the chairman of that commission is now the Prime Minister of Solomon Islands. And one of the major players in the increased benefits for Parliamentarians, Snyder Rini, is still a Member of Parliament and a Minister himself.

The latest from the grapevine is that this government has just created another "entitlement", and education benefit for MPs. Each MP will have an education fund of about $10,000 at his disposal, which means that despite the huge paycheck they take home on paydays, taxpayers and foreign aid money will also pay for the education of their children. If this is the case, Solomon Islands is heading down the toilet tube.

In 2005, under the government of Sogavare, education funds were diverted to universities in Australia and New Zealand where about a handful of children of MPs were studying. Critics argued that such fund would have educated at least 11 Solomon Islands under-privileged students at the University of South Pacific (USP).

This is just another example of the ever growing bureaucracy in Solomon Islands. The question is when will our leaders put the needs of Solomon Islands' first? When will they prioritize the country and not their personal needs and corrupt ambitions?

It is time for Solomon Islanders to rise against this massive expansion and give to the people what they dearly needed. Even if it means, an uprising of some sorts. Force the government to get rid of all these benefits and restore the trust of the people in their government.

Lessons from Iraq, What Lessons Seni Maziola?

2010-09-20T12:26:00.000-07:00

Seni Maziola's article "Lessons from Iraq" is pathetic. He attempts to draw parallel between Iraq and Solomon Islands' situations and in doing, he brought up some ridiculous charges and innuendos and presenting them as facts and credible analysis. This is an example of the decaying level of understanding amongst our people, students and leaders likewise. The failure to present adequate analysis of crisis; analysis that are based on facts and not emotions, is prevalent today in our society. Objective analysis is not an easy task. However, to write to a national newspaper and presenting to the nation thing baseless accusations in order to tarnish other people's reputation, is indeed cheap.

The fact that my reply to this Maziola is more likely to be thrown out by the Solomon Star like they always do to sensitive letters, I decided to just reply to it on my blog.

First of all, Maziola misrepresented the the whole Titinge issue in an attempt to compare RAMSI soldiers to US/NATO soldiers in terms of failure and using of excessive force. After seven years in SI, Maziola should now have, at least, a fair knowledge of RAMSI operations. Maziola should also know that RAMSI soldiers are far from US/NATO soldiers by comparing combat operations and outcomes. I'll come back to this later in this article, but let first address the issues raised in Maziola's article:

"Our problem of violence and law and order, can never be erased neither stopped by military firepower nor whatever technology under the sun man could ever muster." (Maziola)

If Maziola's contention is based mainly on our social problems or issues in general, he is absolutely right. No social problems in the world can be quenched or quelled by armed soldiers and that's a fact. However, if his article focuses on the ethnic crisis in relation to the peace keeping operation in Solomon Islands, then he is dead wrong. There is no doubt that RAMSI had ended the ethnic crisis and put to rest the chaos and anarchy that were ripe in town prior to its arrival. It had thwarted every criminal ring around Guadalcanal and Honiara through peaceful means and arrested their leaders who are now in jail; some being convicted, others still on the list. RAMSI brokered a peace deal with both sides resulting in the successful returning and destruction of fire-arms used by both militant groups. RAMSI also brought back investors, businesses and other operations and restored peace in Solomon Islands. Thus, the argument above is rather misleading.

Secondly, Maziola's analysis of the Iraqi war and the US "counterinsurgency" policy, indeed flawed. I have written extensively about the 'War Against Terror', the invasion of Iraq, and the 'Counterinsurgency' and I don't want to repeat myself, but I am going to say this; the invasion of Iraq was, to many Liberal Democrats in America and nations outside America, simply "irrelevant" to the 'WAT'. The whole invasion gave birth to a score of conspiracy theories that can easily debunked if one is equipped with sufficient necessary information.
In truth, conspiracy only appeals to those lacking in proper knowledge of the circumstances. , However, the saddest thing is that there's conspiracy about pretty much anything, including Jesus and the Bible, and yes Global Warming. Everyone has the right to also write about anything, but not everyone is privy to information and scholarly analysis about every circumstances. Those abusing this freedom often mislead the unlearned.
Take this statement for instance:

Besides the failure to find any weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the US dethroned Saddam Hussein’s Baathist’s regime and its monopoly on force in Iraq, but they failed miserably to fill the resulting power vacuum of which the consequence was anarchy. (Maziola)

On face value, this is a very powerful argument. However, Maziola should know that it is not a function of a peace-keeping force organize that is to organize a domestic government. That is interfering with the function of any particular country. A peace keeping force only paves ways for that country to established itself. Hussein was a dictator whose torture chambers were discovered everywhere in Iraq who had murdered millions of people in cold-blood. The failure to form a government lies in the hands of government leaders, not the US or NATO. This is the same argument that anti-RAMSI people in Solomon Islands have always raised in the media.
This is why Solomon Island's Prime Minister in 2006 kicked the Australian High Commissioner out of Solomon Islands. Maziola probably forgot that our government accused RAMSI and the AHC of meddling in the domestic affairs of Solomon Islands. For that reason, it would be rather stupid for US/NATO to form a government for Iraq.
Besides, Iraq had adopted democracy since 2003 and two Prime Ministers led two different governments since the invasion of Iraq. They were elected by their own people, but the current situation is not any one's fault; it is the fault of parliament members who have their own political and party differences. It is not unique to Iraq, its a democratic process. So to accuse US of not creating a government for Iraq is indeed laughable.

Hon. Lusibaea (aka Rasta) Must Go!

2010-09-18T12:24:00.000-07:00

Articles all over the Solomon media about Hon. Lusibaea's upcoming trial have been extremely apologetic. Many sought to defend his innocence but I think its time for him to get out, or should I say BUTT OFF parliament?

Is there any word in our legal system called "ethic" or are we the only country in the world that do not understand the meaning of that word? Well lets pretend that we don't understand the meaning of that word, which seemed to be the case since independence. In other words, there seemed to be a complete absence of that word, which is, perhaps, one of the reasons why our government, under Sogavare (2000-2002) drafted uneducated former MEF thugs as police officers back in the days. Its maybe why corrupt people such as Charles Daosabea served time in jail for corruption and stealing, returned and became a law-maker (MP). The absence of that word is perhaps why Prime Minister Solomon Mamaloni headed a country at the same time engaging in raw under-table deals with logging companies and diverted funds sent to fix the roads to arms dealers for in exchange for weapons for fear of being invaded by PNG during the height of the Bougainville crisis. It is perhaps the reason why our Prime Minister in 2006 decided to appoint a man convicted in Vanuatu for child sex crimes as the first legal officer of Solomon Islands. This is perhaps why our country is heading down the septic tank.

Why is it that Solomon Islands' government allowed this man to head a Ministry, let alone becoming a lawmaker in a country he destroyed back in 2000-2003? Where is our legal system? Where did we go wrong with our entire system? The last I checked, our leaders blamed England for the mess created by the GRA and MEF. Pointing fingers to the colonial masters who left in our shoes in 1970. That was simply a ruse to allow those instigated the ethnic cleansing of Malaitans, those who committed treason against our government to go free. Any sensible person would see the inappropriateness, for a lack of a better word, of giving and rewarding those who destroyed the SOVEREIGNTY of Solomon Islands since 2000, with a portfolio in government.

It is better to conclude that what left of Solomon Islands are people with no balls who have no guts to call people what they really are!

Matter of fact, we have a legal system that doesn't have claws to grab on to those who cross the path of our laws. A system where lawyers, prosecutors and defense lawyers, are too afraid to question the nature by which our leaders are elected, let alone screaming at our legislative body when those in that body tuck-tail, sitting back and suck their thumps for fear of being either attacked or even undermined by their cronies. Who is left there on the side line to raise the flag when everyone becomes a player in this dirty game with no referees? Is there any single MP in this legislative body that have at least a few hair of moral leadership left to take the lead when everyone else didn't want to take the blame?

Hon. Lusibaea's election was a controversial one, but what more gripping and idiotic is his insistence that he is innocent. And his insistence on holding on to his job as a Minister and not taking the most honorable thing a 'true' leader would do that is to resign and face the charges brought against him in court. Any country outside Solomon Islands, Lusibaea would never hold any public office, let alone insisting of leaving a job when charges are being filed against him in court. It is only in Solomon Islands, and I don't care how many countries in Africa, Asia, or the Middle East, are doing the same thing. Lusibaea is being, just like in his day as the RAMBO of Honiara in 2000-2003, left untouched because people (MPs) are scared of him.

Besides, whose interest is Solomon Islands' Prime Minister Danny Philip serving regarding this whole matter? Is he serving the people of Solomon Islands or his cronies in the house? The Prime Minister is the boss of the Cabinet, the head of the government and he has the right to boot Lusibaea's butt off the government and replacing him with someone else, if there is any left, who is fit to hold that portfolio. It is apparent, however, that Mr. Philip, as controversial as he had always been, may never fire the man whose pending charges are serious enough to land his bottom (that's if our laws have the nuts to do so) in jail for the long run.

When the judicial watchdogs failed to bark and scream at leaders, as they should when "ethical issues" and the future of our sovereign nation at stake, the PM is the last man with the pen and paper to do the firing. And for the benefit of the nation he must do so. If his handing of the Parliamentary Entitlement Regulations fell flat on its belly, this is his chance to show the nation true leadership and fire Lusibaea from the Ministry until he is cleared from all the pending charges.

Well, I know my readers will bring up the "not guilty until found guilty by the laws" but this is more than guilty or not guilty. This is about justice for Solomon Islanders who have suffered because of Lusibaea and his thugs, and an opportunity to show leadership by moving to the side and let those with no controversial backgrounds, if there's any left, to make laws and regulations for the country. If the courts finds him innocent of all the charges, good! He can retain his job. To be the leader of one of the most important ministries in Solomon Islands when your are being charged with 'attempt murder' and other serious crimes, is indeed unethical.

Last I checked, Solomon Islands' is Gaza under the Hamas style of leadership. We are not ina country where murderers are called martyrs and awards are given those killing or plotting to kill Israelis, but if we aren't careful we are moving toward that state of anarchy. This is Solomon Islands where the rule of law should be paramount, and this is a nation whose national anthem embraces God, prosperity and peace. Sadly, there is no prosperity and peace when people are left unchecked and unpunished!

Lusibaea must go and anyone of the same shady past with huge baggage on their shoulders must follow suit!

American Dependency on the Internet

2010-09-17T11:16:00.000-07:00

The Internet takes control of everything in America, traveling, shopping, letter writing, news analysis, weather, booking reading, etc. The advancement of technology also brings the internet to pretty much any gadget with computer built in software that enables internet connection. Cellphones now connects to the internet; the new iphone, blackberry and even my cheap cellphone all have internet capability.
Its getting to a point that when your personal computer crashes you pretty much "lost". Your addresses gone, your emails disappeared, you can't go anywhere you never been before, you don't know what to wear because you don't know how hot or cold the day gonna be, and you can't buy your stuff online because you have no computer and internet connection. Your digital TV isn't working either because you got the internet, phone, and TV bundle. You are basically in the dark.

to be continued...

Forgot I am in America!!!

2010-09-16T07:35:00.001-07:00

Before coming to America I taught myself about the differences between the outside world, by that I mean countries that don't use the American system, and America that includes US territories. These are some of the things that I needed to know before coming to school in America.

America--Left Hand Drive

Outside--Right Hand Drive

America--Miles

Outside---kilometers

America--lbs

Outside--kgs

America--Fahrenheit

Outside --Celsius

America--uses 110v

Outside--uses 240 v

America--yards

Outside--meters

Shoe sizes

America--- 10

Outside----9

I am now used to almost everything that is different in America, except for one thing; shoe sizes. I forgot that US 9 (my size) is UK size 8 and I'd been buying that size ever since moving to United States. I found out the hard way.Not until I purchase a pair of shoes that didn't fit my big-wide Polynesian feet.

My newest pair of shoe kind of reminded me that I am in America and I must wear size 10, UK size 9, and for Summer shoes I wear 10.5 which is UK 9.5. I had to return to the shoe place and explained to them that I made a mistake buying 9.5 US size shoes because its 8.5 UK which cut off the blood circulation to my toes! hahaa. After listening to me, he smiled and gave me a new pair. It seems like someone had been through the same prob as me. I hope that after this pair of shoes I will buy the right pair.

Don't Blame Tony Blair and George Bush

2010-09-14T09:03:00.000-07:00

I was at the Laundry Mart drying up a couple of loads since my drier broke, and sat there killing the last 30 minutes. There are three humongous television screens in there and different programs displayed on each screen. One caught my attention; its "The View" (bunch of women with opposing political views) facing off with former Prime Minister of Britain, Tony Blair. I moved closed to that screen and watched the most Liberal laughable women trying to grill one of the finest British leaders. The session appeared to be in half-way and I didn't hear other craps that may have been darted at Mr. Blair, but the question that the ugly, lesbian looking woman, Joy Behar, asked Mr. Blair pissed me off. Not because the question should not be asked, but the way the question was framed. It was just an outright insult to Blair's intelligence in my judgement. Like many leftist journalists, Behar's style of questioning does not only reflected the level of intelligent these people have, but is a reflective of how objective journalism lost its footing since Obama took office.

The View

Behar asked Mr. Blair about his thoughts on his so-called "Controversial" decision, like Bush's decision, to invade Iraq when they had 'no Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)'. The question was framed in such a condescending way which attached to a single line of condemnation of the US/ UK invasion of Iraq. The buzz words are "controversial" and "no WMD". This is a classic liberal tactic-pretending they don't understand what's going. Even if US enemies attacked America, to the Liberals, US deserves it. As President Obama's mentor proclaimed on the podium of his church, "Americans chicken coming home to roast!" (a reference to the attack of 9/11). And like the Liberals who called the prisoners of Guantanamo freedom fighters and are defending them in courts while calling American soldiers cold-blooded murderers, Behar is not interesting in the perspective of the leaders of UK and US and the circumstances leading up to the war.

Off course war is not fun. Its ugly and nasty. It brings chaos and anarchy to every nation engaging in it. However, war is oftentimes necessary if the circumstances permitting it and also if all options are exhausted. The 'war against terror' was a war supported by Americans, including Democrat leaders such as Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. John Kerry, and majority of the Democrats leadership. Even when President Bush decided it was time to force Iraq into giving up its WMD, Democrat leaders, not only supported it, but made public speeches against Saddam Hussein.

Watch these Democrat leaders who are now acting as the biggest opponents of the war against Iraq. Its interesting how they turned against their own country when their political futures at stake. It is simply impossible to change their words because they are on video and all over the internet. The ones that look like fools are those who are now pretending President Bush invaded Iraq without any support from their side.

People who spoke in support of the plan to invade Iraq weren't rookie Democrats. They are the leaders and the Liberal Dems who hold important offices: Clinton (Former President: Demo), John Kerry (Former Presidential candidate 2004: Democrat), Cris Dodd (Former Presidential candidate 2008), Al Gore (Vice President and Presidential candidate 2000), Tedd Kennedy (The most feared senator: Democrat), Hillary Clinton (Presidential candidate 2008: Democrat), Dean Howard (Presidential candidate 2004: Democrat)

Whose Fault?

Was it the fault of President Bush and Blair that no WMD was found in Iraq? Off course not. Any reasonable person would understand the circumstances surrounding the invasion of Iraq, and it is easy to point fingers after the facts and after the dusts settled. However, it was impossible to determine what exactly Hussein had in his arsenal, but that is why the whole process sought to do, which is to force him to give his weapons. While the war was looming, if Saddam didn't have any weapons, he would have provided to the UN Inspectors the proofs he had no weapons, instead he booted them off Baghdad.

Let me explain why it wasn't Bush's/Blair's fault.

First of all, the war against terror was approved by Congress. In other words, it wasn't Bush's self-enforced war. As the commander in Chief, Bush had the Constitutional right to mobilize the US Armed Forces, he didn't have the right to go to war without Congress' approval. All Democrat leaders supported it and voted to fund that war as you see in the video above. They also made public speeches condemning Hussein for attempting to build a more deal stockpile of chemical weapons.

Secondly, the intelligence that laid the foundation for the invasion was an inter-nations' effort. There were at least information given to the US government by countries such as UK, France, Germany and even Russia. There were information which pointed to raw materials transported to Iraq from countries in Africa and US and UK feared were brought to Iraq to enriched its nuclear program. If these were flawed intelligent information regarding Iraq's nuclear program, the blame should be shared amongst the Western leaders, not President Bush.

Another reason why blaming the Iraqi war on Bush is unreasonable is that the Bush Administration brought to the UNSC the idea of stopping Hussein from obtaining WMD. The resolution was supported by more than 20 nations including some Middle Eastern nations who were concerned about Hussein's WMD. These nations felt strongly of the danger Iraq posed on the world. France, however, flipped and expressed reservation so were Germany and Russia. After the war, evidence of these countries underground dealings with Hussein surfaced. There are bunkers through out Baghdad that were built by European engineers that were made specifically to protect the Ba'ath Party from Chemical weapons. It is interesting to note that if Hussein never had any stockpile of WMD, there was no need to build a multi-million dollar bunker underground. The sophistication of the bunker meant that Hussein may have planned something bigger only to be stopped.

In addition to that, the Iraqi government under Hussein had already committed atrocity with his WMD. The idea that Iraqi never had any WMD is laughable because Hussein used his chemical weapons against Iran, the Kurds in the North after blaming them for supporting Iran against Iraq in one of the most bloodiest of a wars fought between the two nations, and during the Gulf-war 1 (1990-1991) in Kuwait. The use of Chemical weapons had been well documented by reporters and dissenters themselves, esp. the survivors of the Kurds' massacre. Children, men, women--old and young were disfigured by the Chemical weapons. Many of them died instantly and others escaped with serious injuries. And in 1990 to 1991, the Allied Forces responded to Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and pushed Iraq back beyond its border. After weeks and months of fighting, Hussein agreed to surrender. A major part of the agreement was for Hussein to give up information about his Chemical stockpile; Hussein agreed to the terms and the 1st Gulf ended. The UNSC passed the 1441R which Collin Powell explained when making his case before the UN:

The purpose of that resolution was to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction. Iraq had already been found guilty of material breach of its obligations stretching back over 16 previous resolutions and 12 years. (collin powell)

The UN already had a list of WMD given to them by non other than Hussein. That UNR1441 called for the disarming of Hussein--in other words he was to disarm and then report evidence to the UN. Instead, he defied this resolution for more than a decade and attempted to build more. The saddest thing is that Hussein did all these dirty games under the nose of the UNSC and at a time when the US was headed by a man who was only interested in women, President Clinton. When evidence reached Bush that Hussein was in the process of acquiring more WMDs, Bush didn't instantly go to war, he followed every step necessary to avoid arms confrontation. He went to the US Congress and got the approval, then he approached the UNSC only to be held up by the EU, particularly France. They asked for a revised version of the US resolution, but while the Bush administration was working on it, words from France that it would block the resolution no matter what. This is why the US led what is known as the "coalition of the willing" against Iraq. If Hussein did destroyed his WMD which was agreed on with the UN, he should have produced the evidence. Instead he mocked the US and UK and even called Bush for a public debate.

One thing that Blair alluded to in his book that I think the US government failed to understand is the fact that the foreign nations, especially in Asia and Middle Eastern nation, don't like America. In other words, the American foreign policy is based on a flawed ideology that once they treated Muslims and US enemies nicely they will, in return, respect the US. This, Blair added, doesn't hold waters and no matter how hard the US tries to please the ME, they will continue to dislike America. A good example is the recent killing of American soldiers by an Iraq police officer. Someone they trained, turned around and short two American soldiers. And in the past years, naturalized Americans of ME descents turned against America. This is because the ME is a religiously driven region where government is based on Theocracy and they see America as the greatest enemy. They feel it is their duty to kill the infidels and unbelievers, or Americans and Jews.

From Micro to Nano

2010-09-12T20:55:00.000-07:00

I was driving around town one evening and then packed outside a fast-food and switched from channel to channel till I came across my favorite radio program "Science Fantastic". My burger was so yummy I couldn't help myself; coke added to the sweetness of the moment. After eating a huge burger, I reached for my fries reluctantly, not sure what to do with them. A few fries found the way down my esophagus as leaned back and ate my fries.

There was a program on the radio, but my conscious mind had completely switched off. As I put down my drink, I caught something that got my attention, the word "nanotechnology". I began to listen carefully and wawww myself with the main theme the program.

In the past, "microchip" was the biggest buzzword in the world of computer technology. The reduction of computer from a huge building like computer to a small box and with tiny chips was indeed a jaw-dropping experience. However, with the advancement of technology, chips will now completely invisible to the naked eye. This technology is sooo powerful that researchers think it will be a life saver. This is the so-called "Nanotechnology".

Researchers explained that if this tiny invisible chip is programmed to identify bad abnormal cells in the body and treat them on contact, it maybe the cure for all forms of cancer. It would mean that this nanochip would be inserted to human's blood stream to track down cancerous cells and kill them before they cause harm to human beings.

It may sound extremely scary, but this is what computer scientists are working toward for the near future's scientific adventure. It will take some times, even years to put this into real actions.

This technology is still in its infant state and may take a while to implement but its not impossible.

To get an idea of how Nanotechnology works, consider this.

a. Kilo ..... 1,000

b. Micro .........1,000,000

C. Nano ..........1,000,000,000

American Sensitivity, Islamic Advantage!

2010-09-11T19:55:00.001-07:00

Today is the 9th year since America was attacked. I didn't go anywhere far away from home, I just want to be here and watch the nationwide events on TV. Something caught my attention; it is called the "read the qu'ran" event which occurred in various locations in America. It is the idea that Christians should read the Qu'ran and understand its. This, many argued, would ease the tension between the Muslims and Americans and reduce misunderstanding between Islam and Christians. My first reaction was, ooooooh reall?

What I've seen as an immigrant to this nation is that the attack on America over the years by Muslims probably pays off. It is not a secret anymore. It's happening everywhere in the country, thanks in part to Politicians who have exploited the vulnerability of United States and its cultural sensitivity and political culture. Without strong leaders to lead this nation, Islamization of America will over-ride this nation in the next two generations.

The Violent Religion of Islam

Islam is a religion founded around 600+ A.D after Mohammed claimed he had a vision from Allah and led a small ground of men against h

is enemies and defeated them in a swift victory attributed to the mighty hands of Allah. Mohammed and his band of brave men executed those stood before him and organized what is now called Islam. In a religion emerged from the dust of a region colonized by European powers, Islam reformed constantly to fit the political cultural changes of the time. As a result, more radical views toward non-believers made their way into what is now the qu'ran--the Islamic scripture. It is simply impossible, however, to imagine that a poor man from Mecca would have written such a huge book in his remain days on earth. Mohammed was illiterate and couldn't have written such a book, but is is a common practice of the region to write books and attribute them to people just as in the Bible. The five book of Moses obviously evolved overtime and many could have been written by Jews scholars and attributed to Moses. Some of the New Testament epistles were written by followers of Paul either through direct dictation, which was highly unlikely, and then attributed them to the man in jail. The same thing can be said about the rise of Islam.

What the qu'ran does is strengthening the identity of the Arabs in defiance of foreign occupations. To survive, Islamic clerics began to teach a more radical form of Islam where all scriptures are take not literally but figuratively. Thus, the adherents of this religion made killing of the 'infidels' mandatory, or a duty. The conquest of the Middle East by Islamic warriors demonstrated the radicalization of this religion. It is not longer a spiritual battle between humans and the devil as preached by Mohammed, radical Islam teaches that taking up arms against the enemy is justified in the eyes of Allah. Muslims armed with the re-reading of the qu'ran conquered most regions in the ME and even the holy-city of the Jewish people, Jerusalem. And every where they defeated enemies they built mosques. Muslims also invaded Europe only to be stopped by powerful Christian king of Spain and the Catholics. To this day, Muslims in Europe had grown immensely with the help of politicians who exploited their ambitions for their own political ends. Muslims are advancing quite well throughout Europe because of intimidation terrorism, and through the utilization of the democratic political processes etc.

Islam invasion of America, Why it is possible!

After the fall of Germany, US, UK, and France and basically the Western world banded together to fight against the spread of Communism. However, one of the biggest event that destroyed the relationship between the US, the UK, and the Middle East had changed forever, took place in 1949.With the blessing and approval of the UN, the State of Israel was born. To many Arabs, the creation of Israel should never have happened and had united and waged wars against Israel from since then. With the backing of the USSR, one of the world's most feared superpower before 1990s, Arabs provoked every war in the ME up until the Yom Kippur war of 1973 which brought the two (US and USSR) superpowers to the brink of nuclear holocaust. Between the 1949 to 1990s, Muslims waged war against the US and UK. Interestingly, their only book of inspiration--one which justifies every atrocity created by Muslims, is the qu'ran. Murder, assassination, execution, hijacking of all forms came form the qu'ran.

Muslims see America as the protector of Israel and vowed to bring it down to its knee. Confronting US in arms conflict would be suicidal, they began indoctrinating young people who grow up and becoming martyrs for Allah. In this mission, clerics taught, Allah would reward those who died in his course with 72 virgins in paradise. And in a stretch of lands with nothing but a few palm trees and houses made of mud bricks, that promise is something to die for. For decades, men and women looked to be suicide bombers instead of being computer experts, doctors, or lawyers. The anger toward America is so profound that people, like Ramsey Yosef who first attack the WTC in 1993, gave up impressive careers as engineers in order to be suicide bombers. Many Islamic clerics believe that by weakening America, Jihadists would be able to bring down Israel and wipe it off the face of the earth. This is one of the fundamental beliefs of the Arabs' efforts to eradicate Israel.

In America, the target is made possible by Americans themselves. There are documents called the "Constitution" and the "Bill of Right" that the Arabs have been using, like the Liberals always do, to destroy America. The so-called "rights to do to many things including speech, religion, and expression" and the sensitivity that Americans have for "other" groups of people only empowered Jihadists and their mission to destroy America. It is a known fact that when America is headed by a Conservative, Jihadists tuck-tail and run, but when Liberals take control, the suicide bombers aren't afraid of hitting America. Under Democrat Liberal president Bill Clinton, Americans were slaughtered by Muslim warlords in Somalia; Al Qeada attacked the USS Cole killing scores; two US embassies in Africa were bombed. They knew that Liberals care so much about "ideology" than actual protection of the nation.

Take for instance the hijackers of 2001, they should have never entered America. These hijackers entered the US despite the fact that their documents were incomplete. Mohammed Ata's documents were incomplete and should have raised an alarm, but he was granted a visa. They entered America on student visa and were studying as pilots. It was interesting though because White Americans are always afraid of being called "racists" and for them to question why more than a dozen Muslims arrived in the US and all attended flight schools would have been accused of being racists. The American sensitivity toward people of other race became the demise of the most powerful nation in the world. Even at the airport on the morning of 9/11, security cameras showed these men going through metal detectors a few times because the machine keeps beeping. It is highly likely that the airport people were afraid of patting the suspects down or even interrogating them, let alone stripping them naked, for fear of being called a racists, anti-Islam and bigots, and above all they could have been fired for racial/ethnic profiling.

In Europe, the expansion of Islam threw up a storm, esp. with conservative hardliners in countries such as Switzerland who voted to block of a Mosque in certain parts of the country. A movement to thwart this Islamic expansion had been criticized with all sorts of nasty things, paramount of the accusations was the fact that the failure of the democratic governments to allow Muslims to build mosques were undemocratic. Other European leaders aren't afraid to speak out, the way American leaders should.

France's government v Muslim

In France, President Zarkosy discourages the Burqas when addressing the French Parliament. He said that there is no place for Burqas in France as it represents repression and represents everything contrary to the French way of life. Muslim leaders somewhat agree yet pointing to the fact that women's modesty is important, how on earth is uncovering of the face immodesty?

Former PM of Australia and his government called for Muslims to assimilate to the Australia way of life, or else "leave". These kinds of statements by former Australian Prime Minister John Howard and France's president Nicholas Sarkozy are viewed in America as insensitive, bigotry and outright wrong.

There is an apparent shift in the American Psyche that only supports the theory that bullies often feared not because of their strengths but their persistence. Muslims have attacked Americans from the kidnapping of the Americans from the US embassy in Beirut to the USS Cole. Even after two embassies were bombed and flattened, Americans have demonstrated obvious signs of fear; fear of fellow Americans, fear of being leveled bigots, fear of being called racists, and fear of being called "intolerants" and anti-Islam. The irony though is that, the onces that the world should condemn are the ones calling for the destruction of Israel and consistently attacking American and Americans around the world in the name of Allah. They ones that attack America with the Koran in their hands are the ones that should be condemned, not those speaking out against violence.

US and Muslims

This is Obama praising Islam and Muslims despite the fact that Muslims attacked a few months earlier. Since come to power, President Obama accused America of not talking to the enemies. He took a trip to Egypt and the ME, showing that he is a new leader. He believed that talking directly to them, things would be different and people would like America. This notion is seriously flawed. After opening up to Iran, Iran didn't slow down its nuclear program rather expanding it. Under Obama watch, Muslims are out and about plotting to attack America and its allies.
Juxtapose this clip of Obama and what radical Muslims have done to America since his election, does anything President Obama said in his speech hold any water? The teachings of Islam inspired Muslims to kill America. A distortion of the scriptures is taking a peaceful passages of the qu'ran and twisted their meaning to hurt other people. But there is not "distortion" nor is there any "perversion" of Islam when the Qu'ran itself states exactly what they do, that is killed the unbelievers, beheading those who work against the will of Allah. Again the greatest danger to America are Americans themselves as they make things possible for terrorists. The home grown radicalized Americans are the greatest threats today as the 9/11 Commission found out in their investigation.

There is a huge contrast between the way the leaders of France and Australia speak of Muslims and the way the American president and his far left cooks address Islam. All that this administration is doing is praising Islam while the adherents of Islam are looking for openings to sneak into America and attack it.

December 2010 (Xmas bomber)

This is another man inspired by Islam to kill US military personnels at Fort Hood, Texas. He was screaming "Allah Ahu Arkbar". There is no reason why a man would kill in the name of Allah without being attach to Islam. Americans are so-scared of offending Muslims and that has proven fatal.

Ft. Hood Shooting (14 Dead)

These police officers were trying to bring down the terrorist Muslim who killed at least 14 Americans and wounded more than 30 people at Ft. Hood. The most appalling thing though is that President Obama praised Islam after all these killings.

Shahzad Attempted to Bomb Time Square, New York

By why are so many Americans afraid of speaking out? Because of political correctness and because of Obama administration's idea that Islam is peaceful and that America must lead by example. These are classic examples of this flawed ideology. To assume that everyone would love America because the president loves Muslims, is indeed a fairytale. When is President Obama and the left wing nuts going to open their eyes? When a nuclear bomb goes off at Time Square?

This is Oreilly trying to put things straight and call them exactly what they are. For American left wing media to pretend that the man didn't killed Americans because he is a Muslim who believes in Islam and the qu'ran, is indeed appalling.

Again, terrorists attacked America because of the American system and its ignorant leaders. The American way of life is designed in such a way that protects terrorists. The time to pretend that if America is nice, people will love America, is, or should be over. It is simply unreal!

This is what Obama and the Attorney General said about Radical Islam. To them, it doesn't exist at all, or simply a myth.

The new attitude toward Islam is expressed well by the Obama Administration's Attorney General Eric Holder. This administration is pretending that Islam doesn't hate America despite the fact that three attacks were carried out by Muslims this year and last year and who have been inspired by the qu'ran.

To be continued....

September 11, a Faded Memory?

2010-09-10T11:33:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow marks the 9th year since America was attacked by Islamic terrorists. That day terrorists brought down two American iconic buildings, the Twin Towers (World Trade Center), slammed a jetliner to the side of the Pentagon, and the one bound for the House of Congress and possibly the White House was brought down by civilian passengers--it vaporized on impact in an empty field somewhere in Pennsylvania. Many important events emerged from these rubbles that had changed the world for ever.

I want to take this blog to reflect on the events of 9/11 and why that day must not be forgotten.

The attack not only unified United of America, but has changed the world forever. Two wars have been fought as America and its NATO allies sought to punish the instigators of this senseless attacks. Churches were filled with people who have lost loved onces and fellow workmates during that event, hard

working Americans volunteered to join the military. Patriotism had again returned to America.

However, after nine years of chasing the enemies many people changed their minds about 9/11. Some began to question whether it was indeed an American conspiracy to punish the Middle East nations. Others began to point fingers at the Jews--claiming the Jews were the ones behind the attack. Many have now questioned the war efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq whether they are necessary anymore. Others think that the war is being fought on behalf of special interest and not the interest of the nation. More than 4 thousand soldiers have lost their lives in this mission to give America the justice it so needed.

All the tears and anger toward terrorists wore off. Instead of thanking the soldiers for fighting on behalf of the American people and to protect their peace at home, anti-war protesters gathered each time to protest against the war at funeral services of slain soldiers brought from the battle fields. Over the years, military installations were attacked by anti-war people, many of whom had ties with Muslims, and so on.

Ideas and identity have taken a huge leap. Division amongst political parties, division between religions and faith, etc. also also taken a huge turn. For instance, Islamic leaders wanted to build a Mosque about two blocks from the capital, Americans hit back. Many people like to call it racism and bigotry, but it shows the intolerance born on the ashes of the WTC.

Americans also took to the streets to protest the proposed building of a Mosque a couple of blocks away from Ground Zero. Hatred and animosity began to swell. Many attempts attack.

My Thoughts about 9/11

I was in Hawaii when the World Trade Center was attacked. I remember joining my fellow school mates in a vigil while watching the impact over and over again. It was sad. Like many Americans, there was a sense of revenge in the air. The US Army was also actively recruiting. Though I didn't make it, at least I tried.

What we've seen since that day is an America of ideas not actions. The America that is filled with wannabe sensible people who are afraid of hurting the feelings of others, especially the Muslim world despite the fact that America was attacked by 14 Muslims majority of them from Saudi Arabia.

To continued!!