Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Gutman Gone, Scandals Seem Endless! Happy 4th!

My wife has a slight impediment in her speech. Every now and then she stops to breathe.
- Jimmy Durante
                                                                          -0-
 By the time a man is wise enough to watch his step, he's too old to go anywhere.
- Billy Crystal
                                                                        -0-
Finally the Cardiologist's Diet: - If it tastes good spit it out.
                                                                       -0-

Israel's reach according, to Prime Minister Netanyahu, is vast! (See 1 below.)
---
So much for Obama's desire to strangle the coal industry to appease Greens!  (See 2 below.)
---
Jeffrey Folks wrestles with whether Obama is simply incompetent or has some angst against America. (see 3 below.)

Jonathan Kraushaar asks when will Obama realize he is surrounded by fires and responds by suggesting he is too  incompetent to put them out. (See 3a below.)
---
Gutman is gone as Obama's State Department gets caught in sex cover up and you have to ask yourself how many more atrocities has this administration engaged in or sought to sweep under the rug?

What say Hillary?  (See 4 below.)
---
Jonathan Tobin still believes 'Obamascare' will crash and a one year delay only postpones the inevitable.  (See 5 below.)
---
Many mistakes were made in Iraq. However, are some benefits beginning to reveal themselves. (See 6 below.)
---
There  are so many events occurring beyond our shores the press and media are able to finesse the myriad tragic scandals that surface almost daily involving Obama and his corrupt administration.

All the various cover-ups have become a blanket covering the entire nation.  They are not isolated events effecting certain citizens, they encompass and impact every American.

From Benghazi, to the IRS, to The State Department, to NSA, to 'Obamscare' to payoffs to constituents who supported his campaign, to appeasing Greens which impacts energy development as well as restricts employment, to a foreign policy Obama purports would make America safer and loved when, in fact, his support of The Muslim Brotherhood and the Arab Spring, to undercutting the lone democracy in the Middle East, to ignoring pleas of protesting Arabs, has resulted in the collapse of Obama's ill conceived  foreign policy  around his ankles.
---

Happy Fourth!
---
Dick
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Netanyahu: There's no place Israel can't reach
Lahav Harkov
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu gave an emotionally charged speech in the Knesset on Tuesday, during a special meeting marking the 37th anniversary of the Entebbe raid – in which his brother Yonatan, who led the operation, was killed.
Netanyahu warned that “the threats we faced 37 years ago continue, and today I say there is no place the long arm of the State of Israel cannot reach and will not reach in order to defend the country.”
At the time of the operation, Netanyahu said, he was studying in the US, and the moment he heard IDF soldiers had landed in Entebbe, he knew his brother had to be there, and called his parents.
“This day changed my life and the lives of my parents and my brother [Ido]. My parents have died since then, but I will never forget their grief over the fall of their firstborn son,” the prime minister said.
Netanyahu also recounted attending a ceremony in Uganda honoring his brother and the others who fell in the Entebbe operation, saying he does not take it for granted that a foreign country would honor IDF soldiers.
Opposition leader Shelly Yacimovich said Netanyahu must use Israel’s “long arm” to bring peace.
“Like it or not, you, Netanyahu, are our leader. Not every leader faces the same challenges,” she stated. “Just as we need courage to fight terror, courage and wisdom are needed to maintain a Jewish and democratic state.”
Yacimovich called on Netanyahu to show the level of courage displayed in the Entebbe raid to ensure that Israel does not become a binational state and to fulfill the Zionist vision.
The Labor leader repeated her promise to offer support to the prime minister if he begins peace talks, quoting former prime minister Menachem Begin, who was opposition leader during the Entebbe raid, as having offered support to thenprime minister and rival Yitzhak Rabin.
MK Omer Bar-Lev (Labor), who was a commander in the raid, initiated the special Knesset meeting and asked Netanyahu to initiate a “social and economic Entebbe operation.”
“Today, when social gaps are widening, when we are at a dead end in peace negotiations, when the Iranians threaten us, we must renew the spirit of Entebe, the spirit of Zionism,” Bar-Lev said.
“We seem to have lost our daring, which allowed Zionism reach where it has over the years.”
Bar-Lev added that he would expect a country with so many successes to be able to make diplomatic progress, and that there should be “no excuses, just action.”
“We are strong! We need brave leadership that is determined and takes initiative, and will lead us to our goal: a Jewish and democratic state,” said the MK. “[Netanyahu] has the historic privilege of being that leader.”
Kadima leader Shaul Mofaz, who was Yoni Netanyahu’s deputy in the Entebbe raid, said the operation helped Israel stand tall.
“We need to have a reason to stand tall today, in every issue with which we deal. The tests of leadership and action stand today, too,” said Mofaz. He recalled Yoni Netanyahu as “strong as a rock” and having a decisive say in the decision to start the operation.
Several other lawmakers spoke about the Entebbe raid, including MKs Ya’acov Margi (Shas); Shimon Solomon (Yesh Atid); Yoni Chetboun (Bayit Yehudi), who was named after Yoni Netanyahu.
MK Reuven Rivlin (Likud Beytenu) said the country cannot give in to terror and called into question the wisdom of releasing terrorists from prison in exchange for captives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)Where Does the Carbon Dioxide Really Come From?

Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better!
If you've read his book you will agree, this is a good summary.

PLIMER: "Okay, here's the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland . Since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.

Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - it’s that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life. I know....it's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs.....well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days.

The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days - yes, FOUR DAYS - by that volcano in Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time - EVERY DAY.

I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.

Yes, folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over One year - think about it.

Of course, I shouldn't spoil this 'touchy-feely tree-hugging' moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.  And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.

Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the bogus 'human-caused' climate-change scenario.
Hey, isn’t it interesting how they don’t mention 'Global Warming'
Anymore, but just 'Climate Change' - you know why?
It’s because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down.

And, just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed on you that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer.
It won’t stop any volcanoes from erupting, that’s for sure.
But, hey, relax......give the world a hug and have a nice day!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) Obama's Fundamental Transformation of a Nation He Despises
By Jeffrey Folks

Is it just incompetence, or is there something else going on here?
Obama's only real competence, it seems, lies in spying on Americans and imposing new restrictions on their liberty.  This fact may be the key to understanding this president.  He has shown himself sympathetic toward every anti-American dictator on the planet, warmly embracing Hugo Chávez, lifting travel restrictions to Castro's Cuba, and (when he thought no one could hear him) promising a cozy second term with President Putin.
Obama's love affair with Marxist tyrants has not earned him any favors -- not even the return of one globe-trotting traitor.  The best he can do is issue a weak protest and direct his new secretary of state to remark that Hong Kong's and Russia's actions in regard to Snowden are really "disappointing."  That kind of swagger should make the Chinese and Russian leadership wet their britches.
For his part, Obama has done nothing, perhaps because he is still in thrall of anyone who calls himself a Marxist.  The only people he really distrusts are Americans, especially those patriotic Tea Party members who care about their country's future.
Does President Obama really hate the American people that much?
I think he does.  He hates America as it is and as it has been, and, as he openly admits, he wants nothing less than to "fundamentally transform America."  One does not completely transform a nation into the opposite of what it is unless one hates that nation as it is.  That fact explains why Obama has done so little to protect America while doing so much to spy on, disparage, and attack ordinary Americans. 
Obama seized on the financial crisis of 2008 as the pretext for passing a sweeping stimulus bill, the Dodd-Frank financial services regulation, and the seriously mislabeled "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."  Now, with the help of "extreme weather" coverage on every mainstream news service, he has been ginning up another crisis as the pretext for sweeping regulation of the entire economy.  And just last week, in a speech at Georgetown University, he has announced what that regulation will cover.
It will cover just about everything.  Every activity that uses energy, or that used energy in its manufacture or requires energy for its maintenance, will be regulated -- not by Congress but by the president directly.
That is the strategy behind Obama's new pronouncements on the "social cost" of carbon emissions.  As Obama put it in his Georgetown speech, "the costs of these [climate] events can be measured."  Nothing could justify the actual cost of Obama's new emissions push, which will raise the cost of electricity along with everything else from cars to refrigerators to new homes.  But if the "social cost" of carbon emissions is factored in, suddenly the new guidelines are made to seem affordable.
But what is the "social cost" of carbon? It is the cost of future climate events that "might result" from increased carbon emissions.  In fact, no one knows whether there actually will be more extreme weather events -- or even what constitutes such an event.  Is a cold winter such an event?  An abnormally wet spring?  An average year, with its share of tornados and wildfires?  The truth is that the president is engaging in pure speculation as the basis for policies that will cost hundreds of billions in spending and millions of new jobs.
As Obama himself pointed out at Georgetown, America's carbon emissions are "at the lowest levels in nearly 20 years."  Yet, according to the president, it is in precisely in this period ("the last 15 years") that scientists have recorded rising temperatures.  The president's science seems a bit confused.
It is all too much like Stalin's fascination with the pseudo-science of Trofim Lysenko.  Stalin's faith in Lysenkoism set Soviet agriculture back decades.  Yet Lysenko's theories of the heritability of acquired traits became the basis of Soviet agricultural policy -- just as the unproven science of global warming has become the basis of American energy policy under Obama.
Lysenkoism ended in disaster for the Soviet Union, and the science of global warming is leading the U.S. and western Europe toward a similar economic disaster.  This year, California's Central Valley, which supplies much of America's fresh fruits and vegetables, will receive only 20% of its normal water allocation for fear of harming the Delta smelt.  A president with real leadership qualities would suspend the efforts to save the smelt and save the humans instead.  But this president is terrified of offending the environmental lobby.  In fact, he wants to go farther.  Why should farmers have any water at all if the smelt's future is at stake?
It's not difficult to see where the pseudo-science of global warming is taking us.  Obama has already declared that, in effect, there shall be no new coal-fired power plants and that at least one third of existing coal-fired plants are to be shuttered in the near future, and all of them eventually in the carbon-free future he dreams of.  He is preparing regulations that will make it impossible to produce efficient and economical full-size trucks in the numbers now needed to run our economy.  His next step will likely be an assault on our nation's ability to produce shale gas through the safe technology of hydraulic fracturing. 
And that's just the beginning of the total makeover that Obama has in mind for America.  Did I mention persecution of journalists?  Forced unionization of workplaces?  Abortion on demand, funded by every employer?  Racial discrimination in perpetuity against non-minorities?  And environmental regulations as far as the eye can see, affecting every aspect of life?
From the flow per second of your morning shower to the temperature at which you set your thermometer at night, from the car you drive to what you eat, from where and how your children are educated to how you fund your retirement, Obama wants government to control every moment of your existence.  Long ago, in a glorious revolution, Americans rejected this sort of tyranny when it was imposed on them by the British Crown.  Our only chance now is at the ballot box in 2014 and 2016. 
Jeffrey Folks is the author of many books on American politics and culture, including Heartland of the Imagination (2013).

3a)Obama's Crisis of Competence

The White House seems more comfortable stage-managing the news than dealing with the uncomfortable crises that inevitably crop up.

By 

President Obama returned last night from a weeklong trip to Africa, seeking to position himself as part of ailing Nelson Mandela's legacy and generating strategic photo-ops. On the other side of the continent, Egypt is awash in revolution, with hundreds of thousands of protesters in Tahrir Square railing against the American-backed president, with some chanting slogans against the American passivity in the face of crisisThe Washington Post editorialized Tuesday: "For months, as the Morsi government has taken steps to consolidate power, quash critics and marginalize independent civil society groups, President Obama and his top aides have been largely silent in public. No effort was made to use the leverage of U.S. aid to compel a change of policy."
While the president was in Africa, Secretary of State John Kerry spent time in Israel, using valuable political capital trying to jump-start peace talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians, at a time when few serious foreign policy analysts believe it has any chance of succes—beyond garnering favorable press for trying. (The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg calls Kerry's a "delusion of the foreignpolicy elite" in his column today.) This, while the administration appears utterly feckless in neighboring Syria, where civil war worsens, chemical weapons-wielding dictator Bashar al-Assad strengthens his hold on power, and American influence dwindles. "The military situation in Syria is slipping away as the president ponders," Washington Post columnist Jackson Diehl wrote last week.
And on the domestic front, Obama was comfortably traveling on Air Force One when a Treasury Department functionary announced late Tuesday it would be delaying the mandate that businesses provide health care for their employee—a crucial component in the health care law that is shaping up as the president's main legacy. Rather than give a speech explaining the delay, and informing the public about how this could affect their health care options, the administration dropped the bombshell news right before the July Fourth holiday weekend.
The administration is facing a crisis of competence. At a time when trust in government is already at an all-time low, the events of this past week illustrate the limits of this president's power. The White House seems more comfortable stage-managing the news than dealing with the uncomfortable crises that inevitably crop up. (If there's anything to learn from the Benghazi crisis, it was the administration's attentiveness to detail in how to avoid blame in the aftermath of the crisis but a lack of focus in how to react as the crisis was occurring.)
The other worrying sign, is that politics is getting in the way of smart policymaking. Wary of the last war in the Middle East, Americans don't want the United States to intervene in Syria. The White House, heeding the polls, gladly obliged, even figuring out ways to forestall proof that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its people—the red line that the president famously set. Obama doesn't want to say anything to take sides between the Egyptian president he backed and the growing throngs of protesters, and then take ownership in a crisis that's showing no signs of abating. Politically speaking, it's a lose-lose situation.
On health care, with the 2014 midterms approaching and control of the Senate in play, the administration decided to buy time by delaying the employer mandate until after the elections. Former HHS spokesman Nick Papas said the delay was "about minimizing paperwork, not politics." But it's awfully politically convenient to delay implementation of a law that's been growing more unpopular and whose implementation is shaping up to be a "train wreck," in the words of Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Democrat.
Obama's second-term legacy is shaping up to be more about avoiding crises than accomplishing big things. Salvage the core of a health care law, avoid worst-case scenarios in Egypt and Syria, and don't get in the way of his party's efforts to win Republican support for a landmark immigration reform plan. It's a far cry from the idealism of his second inaugural. But at this point, the president needs to simply show that he's paying attention to the fires burning around him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4)State Department's Sex Trafficking Scandals
By Brenda Zurita

Pssst, did you hear? President Obama is replacing Ambassador Howard Gutman in Belgium. You remember Ambassador Gutman, don't you? He's the big Democrat donor President Obama nominated to represent his policies in Belgium and who, it is alleged, trolled for prostitutes -- some of them children! -- in a park near his official residence.
Late in the day on Friday, June 21, the White House released a list of new nominees for various posts, and Denise Bauer was listed for the United States Ambassador to Belgium post. For the cynics, this is similar to a Friday night document dump -- a strategy the Obama Administration employs to release controversial information or items unflattering to them after the nightly news cycle is over and most people tune out for the weekend.
Denise Bauer was the Finance Chair of Women for Obama during the last election and served on the Obama for America National Finance Committee for the 2008 and 2012 elections. She was also a donor and a bundler. According to the New York Times, Bauer has raised $4,367,187 for Obama since 2007.
In a speech on May 5, 2013, Ambassador Gutman announced that he was leaving the post. CBS News reported about a month later that a memo obtained from the Department of State (DOS) Inspector General's (IG) office noted that the DOS has known about the prostitution rumors since 2011, but higher-ups in the DOS stopped the investigation of Ambassador Gutman. He was allowed to remain America's representative to Belgium for two more years, and, if the speech is any indication, he is leaving with his head held high, even amidst rumors that his pants had been around his ankles during much of his tenure.
The biographical information about Gutman on the website says he was a "Special Assistant to F.B.I. Director William H. Webster, focusing on counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence." What do you think counter-intelligence officers from other countries would do with information that a U.S. Ambassador bought prostitutes of all ages in a park in Belgium? Can you say "blackmail"? His background seems to imply he should have known how risky and stupid actions like that could be, and yet, if the rumors prove true, he jettisoned his judgment in favor of his sexual proclivities.
Guess what else was released last week? The 2013 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Report was made public on June 19. The TIP Report is the product of the U.S. State Department's Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (TIP Office), as mandated by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000. The 2013 Report ranks the United States in the highest tier, Tier 1, and states, "The U.S. government fully complies with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking."
What does that mean? In part, it means the United States ranking takes into consideration U.S. policy enacted to eradicate modern-day slavery. There are two indicia listed which are used to judge a country's "serious and sustained efforts to eliminate severe forms of trafficking in persons" that are interesting in light of recent scandals:
  • Whether the government of the country vigorously investigates, prosecutes, convicts, and sentences public officials who participate in or facilitate severe forms of trafficking in persons, including nationals of the country who are deployed abroad as part of a peacekeeping or other similar mission who engage in or facilitate severe forms of trafficking in persons or exploit victims of such trafficking, and takes all appropriate measures against officials who condone such trafficking.
  • Whether the government of the country has made serious and sustained efforts to reduce the demand for
(A) commercial sex acts; and
(B) participation in international sex tourism by nationals of the country.
Can you name two U.S. public officials recently alleged to have purchased sex from children found in prostitution in other countries? (That is called "sex trafficking" and "sex tourism," by the way.) Yes, Ambassador Gutman is one, and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-New Jersey) is the other. Sen. Menendez is alleged to have flown to the Dominican Republic and had sex with teenagers engaged in prostitution.
So, following the first bullet point, has the Obama Administration vigorously investigated either case? It is alleged in the DOS IG's memo that during former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's tenure, the situation with Ambassador Gutman was ordered dropped. Would that indicate "officials who condone such trafficking"? Has Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) urged the Obama Administration to look into allegations that the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee may have engaged in sex trafficking and international sex tourism in the Dominican Republic?
How about the prostitution scandals involving Secret Service agents engaging prostitutes in Colombia when they were there to do advance work for President Obama's visit, and the security detail assigned to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hiring prostitutes during trips with her to Russia and Colombia? In both cases, the problem of agents engaging prostitutes was portrayed as a common occurrence in federal agencies. Those agents were involved in commercial sex, which exacerbates sex trafficking and international sex tourism. Without the demand for commercial sex, there would be no sex trafficking.
In 2009, then-Secretary Clinton wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post to announce the release of the 2009 TIP Report. She wrote, "To some, human trafficking may seem like a problem limited to other parts of the world. In fact, it occurs in every country, including the United States, and we have a responsibility to fight it just as others do."
Yes, she had a responsibility to fight it when her security detail and an ambassador under her authority engaged in commercial sex and allegedly the sex trafficking of a minor.
She also wrote, "Human trafficking flourishes in the shadows and demands attention, commitment and passion from all of us." By covering up these scandals and allowing the perpetrators to remain in their jobs, she cast a huge shadow over the plight of sex slaves found in the commercial sex industry.
In 2012, President Obama gave a speech at the Clinton Global Initiative on the topic of human trafficking. He said, "First, we're going to do more to spot it and stop it.  We'll prepare a new assessment of human trafficking in the United States so we better understand the scope and scale of the problem."
Given the examples above, it seems when they spot it they cover it up.
President Obama also said, "In short, we're making clear that American tax dollars must never, ever be used to support the trafficking of human beings.  We will have zero tolerance.  We mean what we say.  We will enforce it."
Except when you don't.
Brenda Zurita is Research Fellow for the Beverly LaHaye Institute, the think tank and research arm for Concerned Women for America.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After years of critics predicting that ObamaCare was too cumbersome and intrusive to implement without causing major dislocations for the American economy and workers, that opinion was finally confirmed by what we in the media would, in another context, probably term a highly placed government source: the Obama administration. Yesterday afternoon’sannouncement that implementation of the Affordable Care Act’s mandate to require businesses with more than 50 employees to offer them health insurance or face crippling fines will be put off for a full year until 2015 rather than being rolled out in January 2014 is the first official signal that even the White House is now aware that ObamaCare is a disaster that can only be managed rather than averted. Though the administration says the rest of the president’s signature health care plan—including the individual mandate to buy insurance and the creation of state insurance exchanges—will still be put into effect on schedule, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that even its supporters are coming to grips with the fact that the law is a mess.

It should be remembered that the original schedule for ObamaCare implementation was wisely crafted with an eye on the president’s reelection. Though passed in 2010, the law was not to be put into effect until after President Obama was safely reelected in 2012, meaning that the devastating impact on employment and on the cost of insurance for many Americans was not an issue last year. Instead, Obama was able to claim that he had merely pushed for a measure that would ensure more people were insured without having to be held accountable for the impact this system had on everyone else. The same political motivation appears to be behind the decision to put off the business mandate since a postponement will make it harder for Republican critics to claim that ObamaCare is sinking the economy and causing layoffs during next year’s midterm elections.

It’s not clear whether that will help many Democrats next year. Nor can we be certain just how effective a campaign focused on stopping ObamaCare will be for the GOP. But we do know that the ObamaCare crackup is inevitable and will be felt throughout the economy once it is in place. What this first official indication of distress tells us is that no delay in implementation will be long enough to avert the looming economic disaster that is ObamaCare.
The excuse we’re hearing from the administration is that the extra year will somehow make it easier for businesses to comply with a system that is so complex that few have much confidence that they can navigate it with assurance. Given the potentially catastrophic penalties that the government can assess against a business that it deems to be not in compliance with the law, it is little surprise that many are contemplating changes that may drastically reduce the number of full-time employees, thus dealing a devastating blow to employment in the name of granting insurance to all.

Rather than this move being, as Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett claimed yesterday, merely an effort to “get this right,” there’s little doubt the decision was based on the idea that postponing implementation will function as a reprieve for Democrats next year. Americans are not likely to fully grasp just how intrusive the law is or how badly it will affect the economy until all parts of it are enforced. But whether that realization comes before the midterms or after them, the day when most Americans understand just how badly this massive expansion of government power will impact their lives is not long in coming. Putting off the moment when the backlash against ObamaCare is truly felt in Washington until after 2014 will not make it any less potent.

This move should encourage Republicans to keep chipping away at the law and to try and stop it via funding cuts or any other measure (such as preventing the Internal Revenue Service from being placed in control of much of the penalties to be assessed) they can try to pass. The assumption on the part of the administration has always been that once this law is functioning it will be too late to repeal it no matter how angry it makes some people. But what yesterday’s announcement tells us is that even the White House is starting to understand that they may have made a drastic miscalculation about how awful the reality of life under ObamaCare will be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) Opening a New Era in U.S.-Iraq Relations

We Iraqis, grateful for America's sacrifice, now seek an economic partner.



  • By LUKMAN FAILY


  • Last week, the United Nations Security Council voted unanimously to lift international trade and financial sanctions on Iraq that have been in effect since Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in the 1990s. Iraq's exit from Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter—and the substantial progress it has made with Kuwait—is a major accomplishment, and one of several recent developments we Iraqis are celebrating.

    Though most Americans probably believe that Iraqis are fed up with the U.S., the truth is that Iraqis appreciate what the U.S. has done and are looking for more U.S. involvement—not more sacrifice of blood and treasure, but more diplomatic, political, trade, investment and economic partnership.
    The next clear step is for the U.S. and Iraq to fully implement the Strategic Framework Agreement, signed prior to the 2011 withdrawal of U.S. forces, which defines the overall political, economic, cultural and security ties between our two countries. Americans should see this agreement not as a ticket out of Iraq, but as the foundation for a long-term partnership with the people and government of Iraq.
    At a time of profound change in the Middle East, the implementation of the agreement has so far been slow and uneven. While security coordination through military sales and financing programs continues, an expedited delivery of promised sales, better intelligence sharing, and stepped-up assistance in counterterrorism and training is essential for Iraq's fight against terrorism—a clear national security interest of the U.S. Implementing this agreement should not be linked to regional issues, such as the conflict in Syria.
    As we look forward to full implementation of the Strategic Framework Agreement, the legacy of the past 10 years is something to build on. After decades of dictatorship, three disastrous wars, international isolation, economic sanctions, the displacement of more than a million Iraqis and the deaths of tens of thousands more, Iraq has begun to build a multiethnic, multiparty democracy with respect for the rule of law.
    It hasn't been easy. But Iraqis are making progress towards creating a democratic system. All the political parties have accepted elections as a method of power-sharing and peaceful change. Terrible as it is, the current violence in Iraq is primarily caused by terrorism, not civil war. As the recent provincial elections affirmed, Iraqis are developing a culture of democracy—something that many of our neighbors do not yet have.

    With Iraq taking its place as a partner, not a protectorate, Americans can help by providing political, diplomatic and security assistance, in addition to technical know-how and investment capital.
    On the political front, the U.S. can serve as an honest broker among Iraqi factions that are learning to work with each other. Americans are seen as mature partners who have proven their commitment to Iraq, and their involvement is not perceived as a threat to our sovereignty or national interest.

    On the diplomatic front, Iraq has rejoined the international community by exiting Chapter VII, and it has done important work with the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the Arab League. Looking ahead, Iraq and the U.S. can cooperate to resolve broader regional challenges.

    Now that Iraq is moving toward a market economy friendly to foreign investment, Americans can provide what our nation needs: expertise on energy technologies, engineering, design, construction and financial services. Iraq offers tremendous investment opportunities for developing and servicing telecommunications, health care, education, water treatment, and bridges and highways, to name a few.
    Meanwhile, oil production has increased by 50% since 2005, and our economy is expected to grow by at least 9.4% annually through 2016. Iraq expects to increase oil production to 4.5 million barrels per day by the end of 2014 and nine million barrels a day by 2020—a 157% increase from our current production levels. With the goal of diversifying our economy beyond energy, Iraq plans to invest these oil revenues in education and critical development projects, including restoring electrical power and rebuilding our transportation system.

    Moreover, Iraq is in the process of purchasing over $10 billion worth of military equipment, paid for with our own revenues, and we are eager to buy this hardware from the U.S. Iraq's recent purchase of 30 Boeing BA +1.40% planes for our national carrier testifies to our potential as a market for U.S. goods and services.
    Iraqis will be forever grateful to Americans for sacrificing alongside us to overthrow Saddam's brutal tyranny. We now look forward to working together to build a strong and prosperous democracy in Iraq and to cement a strategic partnership between our nations.
    Mr. Faily is the newly appointed ambassador of Iraq to the United States.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No comments: