So POTUS Why Are You Sending U.S. Troops To Uganda-Africa Again? Is This Going To Turn Into Another 'Blackhawk Down' or Another Seek and Find ?

LRA Joseph Kony

TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT

President Barack Obama has decided to send 100 Special Forces troops to the Heart of Darkness in order to defeat evil. That, at any rate, is how critics of the president’s decision to help the Ugandan army track down Joseph Kony and his gang of psychotic murderers known as the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) have described the undertaking. As Gerry Connolly, a Virginia Democrat, put it at a congressional hearing earlier this week, “What is the strategic interest of the United States in doing this? I mean, there are lots of unpleasant people in the world…. The United States obviously cannot try to dethrone every one of them.”

 A senior administration official blandly reassured me that the troop commitment constitutes the same “capacity-building” efforts the Pentagon has undertaken elsewhere in Africa, and even offers “a unique opportunity for our guys to train” — in a vast, trackless jungle in pursuit of maybe 250 lunatics. Assistant Secretary of Defense Alexander Vershbow told Congress that “it is in the interest of the United States to lend our support to partners in Africa so they can address threats to their citizens and help achieve the conditions necessary for regional security and broad-based development.”

Well, come on. This is not a training exercise, and the deaths of literally millions of civilians in central Africa over the last 15 years has had little discernible impact on American national security. In fact, the President has dispatched troops to the jungle and mountains of northeastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and southwestern Central African Republic (CAR) to fight evil — and he should be congratulated for it. The moral case for action against the LRA is much stronger than, say, the case for joining the NATO bombardment of Muammar al-Qaddafi’s Libya. No less important, the Obama White House, State Department, and Pentagon have designed a complex and sophisticated approach that seems to have a real chance at bringing the LRA to book.

The United States Army in Somalia
1992-1994

“]”]

The body of a dead US soldier being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu. [Source: History Channel

Americans consider themselves to be a compassionate people, and the United States Army has a long tradition of humanitarian relief operations both within and outside the continental United States. Never has this humanitarian impulse proven more dangerous to follow than in 1992 when the United States intervened to arrest famine in the midst of an ongoing civil war in the east African country of Somalia. Ultimately hundreds of thousands were saved from starvation, but unintended involvement in Somali civil strife cost the lives of thirty American soldiers, four marines, and eight Air Force personnel and created the impression of chaos and disaster. How could a mission that had accomplished so much have ended in such unhappy circumstances?

The LRA stands out even among the amoral hierarchy of the bandits and self-styled insurgents who roam Africa’s Great Lakes area. Despite its “Christian” rhetoric, the group has no program save for killing and raping, and abducting children as slaves and soldiers; atrocities, that is, are not the means to some programmatic end, no matter how ugly, but the end itself. The group’s top leaders, including their apparently charismatic supremo, Kony, were indicted for war crimes by the International Criminal Court in 2005, but have eluded capture. The United States has targeted them before. In late 2008, the George W. Bush White House provided crucial intelligence support for Operation Lightning Thunder, a Ugandan campaign to attack LRA forces by air and ground. The mission was a complete fiasco: Kony smelled out the attack and fled, and the Ugandans failed to get the support of their neighbors in Congo and South Sudan, while keeping U.N. forces completely in the dark. The LRA scattered throughout the region and proceeded to carry out a series of gruesome killings as retribution for the invasion.

Operation Lightning Thunder was a ham-fisted response to a very complicated problem. In an April 2010 report, the International Crisis Group suggested that any future U.S. attempt to rout the LRA should focus on “civilian protection” rather than just hot pursuit, and proposed that the United States send a team to the battlefield to coordinate intelligence from armies throughout the region and help the Ugandans put their soldiers where the bad guys are.

US to spend $200 mn a day on Obama’s ‘big ticket’ Mumbai visit

US to spend $200 mn a day on Obama’s ‘big ticket’ Mumbai visit

 

Mumbai: The US would be spending a whopping $200 million (Rs. 900 crore approx) per day on President Barack Obama’s visit to the city. “The huge amount of around $200 million would be spent on security, stay and other aspects of the Presidential visit,” a top official of the Maharashtra Government privy to the arrangements for the high-profile visit said.

Now here is the cost of let’s say a(U.S. Citizen) visitor/tourist to India:
Preparing for Your Trip to India
A Short Guide
CURRENCY EXCHANGE
If you are traveling with a group tour, they will often make arrangements for your currency exchange. They will probably provide arrangements for your travel from the airport to the hotel, so you wouldn’t need to have money for taxi or the hotel to start off with. However, if traveling alone or with a few friends, things will be different. So this is what I do.
When I arrive at the airport in Dehli, I will first stop at the bank exchange window that one of the banks will have not far from the luggage pick up area and exchange $100 or $200 of cash or traveler’s checks into rupees. It is better to do it there than at the hotel, where exchange rates are not as good, although this is not the problem that it used to be. After I’m in town, later I’ll go to a bank where I can exchange more money if I need to. You can go to the American Express office for America Express Traveler’s Checks, or to the Thomas Cook Travel Agency, or one of the prominent banks.
Another consideration is that I usually bring about $1000 for every month I’ll be traveling in India. Now I don’t spend that much on travel, 

About 3,000 people including Secret Service agents, US government officials and journalists would accompany the President. Several officials from the White House and US security agencies are already here for the past one week with helicopters, a ship and high-end security instruments.
“Except for personnel providing immediate security to the President, the US officials may not be allowed to carry weapons. The state police is competent to take care of the security measures and they would be piloting the Presidential convoy,” the official said on condition of anonymity.more

 

Rev. Jones cancels Quran burning, after given promise of mosque move

The White House added its voice to warnings that the move could trigger outrage around the Islamic world and endanger the lives of US soldiers. A spokeswoman for EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton said the European Union roundly “condemns” the plans.  “The High Representative respects all kinds of religious beliefs and this is not the right way to go,” the spokesperson told reporters.

Arab League chief Amr Moussa dubbed Jones a “fanatic” and urged Americans to oppose his “destructive approach.” Moussa, who heads the 22-member pan-Arab body based in Cairo, said: “There is an increasing majority in the United States against this fanatic. “We want to see the reaction of the educated in the United States against this fanatic’s destructive approach,” he said.


US Attorney General Eric Holder met religious leaders to discuss ways of stemming the anti-Islam tide, with calls from the broad coalition of faiths to make a strong speech condemning hate crimes.more arabnews

– A Florida minister who had created an international furor with his plan to burn the Quran on the ninth anniversary of 9/11 canceled the event under intense pressure Thursday, saying he agreed to back off after reaching a deal to move the location of a controversial mosque near New York’s ground zero. The imam planning the New York mosque said no such deal has been reached.
The Rev. Terry Jones announced his decision Thursday afternoon, standing outside his small church alongside Imam Muhammad Musri, the president of the Islamic Society of Central Florida. However, Musri and the imam planning the New York mosque disputed Jones’ contention that a deal had been cut.

After the news conference, Musri told The Associated Press there was an agreement for him and Jones to travel to New York and meet Saturday – on the actual anniversary of the 9/11 attacks – with the imam overseeing plans to build a mosque near ground zero.


“I told the pastor that I personally believe the mosque should not be there, and I will do everything in my power to make sure it is moved,” Musri said.more

Jones, the pastor of a Florida Pentecostal church of 50 members, has said that he believes the Quran is evil because it espouses something other than biblical truth and incites radical, violent behavior among Muslims.
Jones on Thursday said he prayed about the decision and that if the site of the mosque was moved, it would be a sign from God to call off the Quran burning.

“We are, of course, now against any other group burning Qurans,” Jones said during the news conference. We would right now ask no one to burn Qurans. We are absolutely strong on that. It is not the time to do it.”
His decision comes after a firestorm of criticism from leaders around the world. President Barack Obama, the top U.S. general in Afghanistan and several Christian leaders had urged Jones to reconsider his plans.more

Free Speech or Something Like That

Ky. man, New Saxon, Free Speech, Obama
Although speech is freer in the United States than in many societies, federal and state laws do restrict many kinds of expression. Some kinds of speech regarded as damaging to individual interests (e.g., libel and slander) are limited primarily by the threat of tort action; other forms of speech (e.g., obscenity) are restricted by law because they are regarded as damaging to society as a whole. Speech that is regarded as disruptive of public order has long been beyond protection (e.g., fighting words that cause a breach of the peace or false statements that cause general panic). more

From US Code: Title 18,871 – Threats against the President and Successors to the Presidency:
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in
the mail or for a delivery from any post office or by any letter
carrier any letter, paper, writing, print, missive, or document
containing any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict
bodily harm upon the President of the United States, the President-
elect, the Vice President or other officer next in the order of
succession to the office of President of the United States, or the
Vice President-elect, or knowingly and willfully otherwise makes
any such threat against the President, President-elect, Vice
President or other officer next in the order of succession to the
office of President, or Vice President-elect, shall be fined under
this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(b) The terms “President-elect” and “Vice President-elect” as
used in this section shall mean such persons as are the apparent
successful candidates for the offices of President and Vice
President, More

While freedom of the press remains strong in the U.S., where it is guaranteed in the Constitution, it is under fire in other parts of the world. In recent opinion columns, both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times have sounded alarms over several fronts that threaten a free press globally.

Subjects of negative stories may forgo a lawsuit in the U.S., figuring American protections set the bar too high for plaintiffs, and instead file a lawsuit in Britain. In the U.S., the subject would have to prove that the book or article was false, defamatory and recklessly reported; under British law the burden of proof is on the author to prove that the reporting is true.

Result: Important stories may not get reported and written. Exhibit 1 is the work of Rachel Ehrenfeld, who wrote a book in 2003 alleging that a prominent Saudi businessman financed Islamic terrorism. The book was published in the United States and not widely available elsewhere,
This sort of “libel tourism” is a not just a threat to the livelihood of writers. It threatens important investigation that only a free press can do.
“The Web means publishing anywhere means publishing everywhere, thus subjecting authors and publishers to litigation in pro-plaintiff jurisdictions,” Crovitz wrote. “Exposes that meet U.S. standards for fairness and accuracy may not get published anywhere for fear of litigation.”  The Internet has the power and reach to expand freedom by making sure people around the world have information about what their country and other countries are doing. We should at least do our part in the U.S. by making sure that material published here is protected from lawsuits brought in overseas courts.More

Wiped Clean Law limiting release of gun-trace data

As a candidate, Barack Obama promised to get rid of a law – quietly passed by Congress – that hides information from the public about guns used in crimes and the stores that sell them.
Instead, President Obama has embraced most of the law and added even more rules that could make it harder for law enforcement to crack down on dealers and stores selling guns to criminals.
While supporters of the secrecy law say shielding crime-gun data and dealer violations protects police officers, Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn labels that notion “a crock.”
Before the law passed, it was easier to see such trends and Badger Outdoors ranked at the top, according to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. In 2005 alone, the store sold 537 crime guns – most in the nation.
As public pressure mounted on gun dealers, a little-known congressman from Kansas slipped sweeping secrecy rules into a giant federal budget bill, protecting law-breaking gun stores from scrutiny and making it harder for law enforcement to get information it considers vital.
U.S. Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), who is the second-largest congressional recipient of National Rifle Association cash, said his legislation – commonly referred to as “Tiahrt” (pronounced TEE-heart) – is intended to protect undercover officers.
Flynn called the congressman’s rationale for the law “a cynical fig leaf.”
Campaign literature read: “Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information . . . .”
However, in his first budget, Obama included much of the Tiahrt limits. He cut out a line saying police and prosecutors need an investigative reason to get the data.
The president’s supporters said that change means police chiefs can get all the gun-trace data they want, but ATF officials don’t see it that way. ATF is considering a new system for police to share more data, but even then it won’t be the unfettered access Flynn and others want, ATF officials said.

New restrictions

Obama also added new restrictions, saying the data couldn’t be released if it jeopardized a criminal case or undercover officers and made it illegal to release the information publicly, for any reason.
In a statement, White House spokesman Matt Lehrich said the changes to the Tiahrt Amendment delivered on Obama’s priority to address law enforcement’s need for information.
The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence blasted the president.More

Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty?

On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton, a noted climate change skeptic, gave a presentation at Bethel University in St. Paul, MN. In this 4 minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty, scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009. A draft of the petition can be read here:
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/docu...

Lord Monckton served as a policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher. He has repeatedly challenged Al Gore to a debate to which Gore has refused. Monckton sued to stop Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" from being shown in British schools due to its inaccuracies. The judge found in-favor of Monckton, ordering 9 serious errors in the film to be corrected. Lord Monckton travels internationally in an attempt to educating the public about the myth of global warming.