Why does al Qaeda (translated “the base’) want to destroy us, and why can’t we find its leaders?
They hate us for a number of reasons.
First and most compelling is that, to Muslims, those of us who aren’t subscribers to Islamic beliefs and laws are considered infidels to al Qaeda. Infidels are worthy only of death unless we convert to Islam.
Second, rewind to 1948. Israel is reborn in Palestine. The U.S. quickly backs the infant state and feeds it a steady supply of war materiel. Palestinians are displaced and refugee camps built.
A series of wars, launched by Israel’s irate neighbors, soon follow. But Israel wins each conflict, decisively and quickly, and seizes more territory.
Islamic terrorist groups sprout from the poverty and pestilence of the refugee camps. Suicide bombers are sent into Israel. Innocent civilian Israelis die by the score. Israel responds, but fire only at military sites and terrorists in cars. Inevitably innocent Muslims are killed by the rockets we made. So, we become complicit.
Third, democracy in Iraq. To Al Qaeda, democracies bring with them a Western taint and mores, many of which violate their obsessive interpretations of Islamic laws and traditions.
Fourth is Wahibism. This hateful teaching narcotizes a loathing of the West in the fertile minds of Muslim school children. It guarantees al Qaeda of future generations of dedicated terrorists.
Where Are They Being Protected and by Whom?
While the War on terror has largely crippled much of al Qaeda’s leadership, we still don’t have the big planners in custody. U.S. intelligence thinks the leadership is given sanctuary in Peshawar province in Pakistan with President Pervez Musharraf’s secret wink-and-nod blessing.
The Pentagon has planned scenarios to capture what’s left of al Qaeda’s brain trust, but there’s no getting into Pakistan because Musharraf won’t allow it. That puts him between a rocket and a tank.
If he doesn’t help us ferret out the terrorists, he risks the loss of substantial U.S. financial support. And his troops may wind up face-to-face with our Special Forces who are ordered over the border despite Musharraf’s objections.
On the other hand, if he okays our crossing the border, he risks facing more assassins, each powered by the growing outrage against him in the Islamic world.
For us, Musharraf’s headaches are our migraines. President Bush’s first War-on-Terror speech made it very clear that “any nation” harboring terrorists was as culpable as the terrorists they protected. It was easy and timely bravado then, but our shaky relationship with Pakistan is a good example of why politicians should avoid creating policy based on absolutes.
Musharraf did help us in the beginning and was well compensated, but a few assassination attempts have him frantically tacking “NO BIN LADEN HUNTING” signs on every rock along the border with Afghanistan. At the same time, as if to appear cooperative with us, he points to the 90,000 troops he’s ordered into the Northwest provinces to root out terrorists. Trouble is, they’re looking in all the wrong places, and they know it.
In this case, time equals lives. Every hour al Qaeda has to plan costs us more American lives. If we fail to capture bin Laden, his close associates and main planners soon, we’re giving them time to get their hands on nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.
President Bush said his warning applies to “any country,” thus it applies to all countries. We need to think damn the consequences whenever national security is involved. Send in Delta Force now to get bin Laden and his whole entourage or be not surprised by the magnitude of the next attack.
by: James H. Hyde
Monday, November 10, 2008
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Why We Need A Culture of Preparedness
First there was 9/11, then Katrina and Rita. We’ve all seen the pictures, and heard the horror stories of what happened when people were caught unable to keep their families operating even for a few hours. Some of this was unavoidable. After all if your home is under 20 feet of flood water, or just plain gone you need an immediate place to be etc. But if your biggest problem is the electricity is out, your probably going to have to wait. This is where preparing our homes and families makes a big difference in how well they get through a disaster.
Naturally during such times we depend on first responders from government, and groups such as the American Red Cross to come to our aid. They do so, and usually they do so very well. But getting help to those that need it during a large scale emergency takes time, and everybody can’t be first. So each individual, and family must be able to do what they can to prepare themselves for the first hours or days following a disaster. Currently the Department of Homeland Security recommends that American households aim to be self sufficient for up to 72 hours following a disaster. Those 72 hours allows your family to function while additional resources are brought in to finish the job.
One of the hardest things for someone recovering from a disaster to understand is why does it take so long to get them the help they need ? Admittedly during Katrina/Rita mistakes were made that slowed response, especially at the federal level. However even when the response effort runs perfectly (it never does) response can only be accomplished so fast. I want to look at a few reasons why.
1) The situation must be evaluated. Every disaster is different. Emergency responders never exactly know what they are dealing with until after the disaster has already happened or is happening. How many homes are flooded ? How many without power ? How many roads are blocked/ damaged. All these questions need to be answered before we even know how much of what kind of help needs to be where. Prior history can give us some idea but there are always surprises. Obviously fires and other immediate threats to life must be dealt with immediately at the same time as this evaluation process is ongoing.
2) Our first Responders had a disaster too ! The same flooded roads, power outages etc. that are making your life miserable are slowing down the ability of first responders to get you the help you need. Granted they do have larger trucks, and other equipment that helps, but it still may take them longer than usual to get to you, and there is only so much of it.
3) Volume of Service Requests. Most first response agencies are used to dealing with situations involving a handful of people at once. During a disaster they deal with hundreds or thousands of people needing help all at once. Everybody can’t be first. Priorities have to be set, and they are constantly changing. Add to this the “dual use of equipment” Some places use fire trucks to rescue people who are flooded, and need to be evacuated. However if a fire breaks out when the fire truck is on its way to you, obviously the fire truck will be diverted to the fire.
4) Outside help is not immediate ! FEMA/Department of Homeland Security are not 911 ! State and federal agencies do plan ahead. Often they have people and supplies on alert if there is advance notice. However these resources must be staged a great distance away. This is so they will not accidentally get caught up in the disaster itself. Don’t forget that during Hurricane Rita projected landfall changed from Houston to Beaumont with less than 24 hours before landfall. Some people who evacuated to the Beaumont area actually got caught in the brunt of the storm instead ! Agencies at the federal level also have to wait for local governments to tell them how much of what kinds of help are needed.
Even in the best of circumstances those who respond in times of crisis are going to need time to get to everybody. Extra bottled water, extra batteries, food that doesn’t need to be cooked aren’t just good ideas during hurricane season. Other things happen too. In fact these simple steps we take 6 months out of every year would help a lot in the event of a bio-terrorism attack etc. . I’ve been telling people for years that it is always hurricane season ! Preparedness is essential for the safety of our families. No matter what the weather, no matter what the time of year preparedness simply must become a part of our common culture. It must become that basic to all of us.
By: Robert A. Crutchfield
Naturally during such times we depend on first responders from government, and groups such as the American Red Cross to come to our aid. They do so, and usually they do so very well. But getting help to those that need it during a large scale emergency takes time, and everybody can’t be first. So each individual, and family must be able to do what they can to prepare themselves for the first hours or days following a disaster. Currently the Department of Homeland Security recommends that American households aim to be self sufficient for up to 72 hours following a disaster. Those 72 hours allows your family to function while additional resources are brought in to finish the job.
One of the hardest things for someone recovering from a disaster to understand is why does it take so long to get them the help they need ? Admittedly during Katrina/Rita mistakes were made that slowed response, especially at the federal level. However even when the response effort runs perfectly (it never does) response can only be accomplished so fast. I want to look at a few reasons why.
1) The situation must be evaluated. Every disaster is different. Emergency responders never exactly know what they are dealing with until after the disaster has already happened or is happening. How many homes are flooded ? How many without power ? How many roads are blocked/ damaged. All these questions need to be answered before we even know how much of what kind of help needs to be where. Prior history can give us some idea but there are always surprises. Obviously fires and other immediate threats to life must be dealt with immediately at the same time as this evaluation process is ongoing.
2) Our first Responders had a disaster too ! The same flooded roads, power outages etc. that are making your life miserable are slowing down the ability of first responders to get you the help you need. Granted they do have larger trucks, and other equipment that helps, but it still may take them longer than usual to get to you, and there is only so much of it.
3) Volume of Service Requests. Most first response agencies are used to dealing with situations involving a handful of people at once. During a disaster they deal with hundreds or thousands of people needing help all at once. Everybody can’t be first. Priorities have to be set, and they are constantly changing. Add to this the “dual use of equipment” Some places use fire trucks to rescue people who are flooded, and need to be evacuated. However if a fire breaks out when the fire truck is on its way to you, obviously the fire truck will be diverted to the fire.
4) Outside help is not immediate ! FEMA/Department of Homeland Security are not 911 ! State and federal agencies do plan ahead. Often they have people and supplies on alert if there is advance notice. However these resources must be staged a great distance away. This is so they will not accidentally get caught up in the disaster itself. Don’t forget that during Hurricane Rita projected landfall changed from Houston to Beaumont with less than 24 hours before landfall. Some people who evacuated to the Beaumont area actually got caught in the brunt of the storm instead ! Agencies at the federal level also have to wait for local governments to tell them how much of what kinds of help are needed.
Even in the best of circumstances those who respond in times of crisis are going to need time to get to everybody. Extra bottled water, extra batteries, food that doesn’t need to be cooked aren’t just good ideas during hurricane season. Other things happen too. In fact these simple steps we take 6 months out of every year would help a lot in the event of a bio-terrorism attack etc. . I’ve been telling people for years that it is always hurricane season ! Preparedness is essential for the safety of our families. No matter what the weather, no matter what the time of year preparedness simply must become a part of our common culture. It must become that basic to all of us.
By: Robert A. Crutchfield
Friday, September 26, 2008
Healthcare - Why Congress Can't Fix It
Hillary Clinton says she will fix our health care system. Barack Obama says he can fix it better. The fact is that neither of them will “fix” anything. Either of them will change system, but there are some serious issues as to why neither of their plans will actually do anything to lower the cost of health care in the United States. The reason is very simple when you stop and think about it rather than get emotional about the issue.
You cannot solve a problem until you know what the cause(s) of the problem are. As with most problems of the self-inflicted kind, no one in the government can look in the mirror and see himself or herself as a part of the problem. Are drug companies, insurance companies, hospitals, and doctors regulated? Yes, they are, and guess who creates the legislation to regulate them. Congress does. Who are the people claiming to have the plan to fix health care? The very people who have been regulating it in the first place. Until Congress can look itself in the eye and realize that it is the cause of our health care problems, the problems will not be fixed. The problems in our health care system are multi-layered and Congress is at the center of every layer.
Nearly everyone agrees the cost of health care in the United States is dramatically higher in the United States than either Canada or Mexico. Just how much so is astounding. A prime example was when I was working in Montana on the Canadian border. I injured my leg, and as the closest medical facility was i across the border in Canada. The total cost of the visit (including doctor’s fees for stitching my leg, admittance, and drugs) was under $50. In the United States, we pay that much just for the local anesthesia. It does not stop there. I have worked in the livestock industry for over thirty years. We use many of the same drugs in cattle that are administered to people for respiratory illness. If it cost twenty-five dollars to treat on a three hundred pound calf on a five-day treatment, we consider it an expensive medicine. This is about the same as treating two average sized people. The drug dexamethasone, purchased through a veterinarian, costs roughly five and a half cents per mil-liter. It your child is born prematurely, he/she will be administered the same medicine for a hundred dollars a mil-liter. Even giving consideration to the fact there are different strengths of this drug the markup for the higher strength (at $0.25 per ml) is still a four hundred percent markup
Over charging the American people for drugs is just one layer. While I have nothing against drug or insurance companies making a profit, a four hundred-time markup is more akin to robbery than it is to profit. If drug companies make a profit on the drugs they sell in Canada and Mexico, they should be able to sell them at the same price here in the United States and still make a decent profit.
Another layer is malpractice suits and the costs of malpractice insurance that is passed on to the consumer through higher prices in actual medical costs, and medical insurance as well. The biggest problem with malpractice suits is that the insurance companies want to save the money of going to trial so they settle out of court. This protects doctors from actually being found, in court, of being negligent. It also encourages attorneys to take on frivolous malpractice suits on a contingency basis because the odds show that it will be settled out of court. Congress needs to pass legislation demanding that all malpractice suits go to trial and that if the doctor is not found guilty, that the attorney filing the suit cover all court costs and legal fees.
Along this same line, currently if a doctor loses their license due to malpractice in one state, they simply go to another state, get a new license and start over. Congress needs to pass legislation requiring all doctors to have a federal license to practice medicine. Before a state could issue a license to practice medicine they would need to cross reference the doctor with the federal data base. In this manner, a doctor guilty of malpractice could not just start over in another state.
The third layer is health insurance. While the advertised purpose of health insurance companies is to provide you with health care, the real reason behind these companies is for them to turn a profit for their shareholders. When you buy a policy, the company is gambling that you will pay more into the system than you take out. Your premiums are combined with those of others buy from them as well as other investments they make in order to hedge against their losses. Most will not pay for pre-existing conditions because that is a bad bet. Your pre-existing condition assures them that they will have to pay out more than you will put into the program. This is a perfectly understandable practice. However, setting limits on how much they will pay, or canceling your policy, if and when you do have a catastrophic illness shows only a concern for the bottom line and not for the customer. The bottom line is that cancellation should only occur if a client does not pay the premiums for reasons other than catastrophic illness. There needs to be provisions made to protect the policies of those who become so sick they cannot work enough to pay their policy premiums.
Along the same lines, if you lose your job, you also lose your company provided insurance. Help is available with the COBRA plan, but it is expensive and unaffordable for many of those being forced to live on unemployment while searching for another job. It is just another quasi safety net to make it look like the government understands, and is taking action on the problem. Something needs to be done to assure that if one loses their job, that their company provided insurance would not lapse. Legislation could be passed to continue covering employer provided insurance through unemployment.
Another big cost of health care is advertising prescription drugs. Billions of dollars are spent by drug companies advertising in multi media formats like modern day snake oil salespersons. Drugs are advertised along with their symptoms to get people to visit their doctors and ask for the drug. It should be the other way around. If you don’t feel well and go to the doctor, you should be able to tell him/her what your symptoms are and he should tell you what kind of drug you need. These advertisements only add to the healthcare problem by increased costs, and by instilling general hypochondria in the general population.
While this is but a short version of the problems with our health care system, it shows some of the biggest flaws. It also demonstrates that, at the middle of each problem, is our very own Congress. Before Congress can develop a health care program there is a list of things they need to do:
1. Determine the cost of drugs in neighboring countries
2. Regulate drug costs in this country to be more in line with our neighbors to the north and south of us (as well as in line with the rest of the world.)
3. Have a national program to register doctors and keep doctors who lose their license from starting practice in a new state
4. Prevent malpractice lawsuits from being settled out of court, with the attorney filing the case paying court costs and doctor’s legal expenses.
5. Standardize insurance policies
6. Pass legislation to preventing insurance companies from canceling policies for any reason other than non-payment (for reasons other than hospitalization or being disabled from medical conditions)
7. Pass legislation preventing insurance loss from job loss by paying premiums through unemployment benefits
8. Cut billions out of the cost of drugs by prohibiting the advertising of prescription drugs
Congress could, and should have addressed all of the above items to lower the price of healthcare. Yet they have not been addressed. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both claim to have the cure for our healthcare crisis yet they have not mentioned any of the above problems within our healthcare system. Before you can fix anything, you have to know what the problem is. Fixing our healthcare system by instituting a national healthcare system (paid for by taxpayers) is akin to painting a car to fix a faulty transmission. It may look better from the outside, but it does not fix the problem. The only way to fix the problem is to actually address the issues causing the problems. While this is only a partial list of what needs to be done, it does address the real problems behind our healthcare issues. These are all problems which need to be addressed by Congress. The only way to get Congress to look at the situation in a different manner is to change Congress. We need to level the power base in Washington.
The only way of doing this is to set term limits on all Washington held elected offices. This is a Constitutional amendment we can make as provided by article V of the Constitution You may visit my website and download a copy of a petition to do just that from my Constitutional Conventions page. Be sure to read the requirement for this petition to be legal. Check the threads in the forum. If there is not one for circulating the petition in you state, start one by clicking on “post” and you will be able to start the thread. Inform all of the people in your email address book about this campaign and urge them to join and notify their friends and family.
Government for the people, by the people is dependent upon the people. If we do not take individual action for change, we will be dependent upon change from those whose main interest is their own power, and their own place in history. We have the tools imbedded in our Constitution to change our government for the better. We also have the tools of communication to efficiently use those tools. The only way our government can go against our will, is for us to allow it. If we do not work towards change, than we cannot complain when government does not follow our wishes.
by: Bob Kinford
You cannot solve a problem until you know what the cause(s) of the problem are. As with most problems of the self-inflicted kind, no one in the government can look in the mirror and see himself or herself as a part of the problem. Are drug companies, insurance companies, hospitals, and doctors regulated? Yes, they are, and guess who creates the legislation to regulate them. Congress does. Who are the people claiming to have the plan to fix health care? The very people who have been regulating it in the first place. Until Congress can look itself in the eye and realize that it is the cause of our health care problems, the problems will not be fixed. The problems in our health care system are multi-layered and Congress is at the center of every layer.
Nearly everyone agrees the cost of health care in the United States is dramatically higher in the United States than either Canada or Mexico. Just how much so is astounding. A prime example was when I was working in Montana on the Canadian border. I injured my leg, and as the closest medical facility was i across the border in Canada. The total cost of the visit (including doctor’s fees for stitching my leg, admittance, and drugs) was under $50. In the United States, we pay that much just for the local anesthesia. It does not stop there. I have worked in the livestock industry for over thirty years. We use many of the same drugs in cattle that are administered to people for respiratory illness. If it cost twenty-five dollars to treat on a three hundred pound calf on a five-day treatment, we consider it an expensive medicine. This is about the same as treating two average sized people. The drug dexamethasone, purchased through a veterinarian, costs roughly five and a half cents per mil-liter. It your child is born prematurely, he/she will be administered the same medicine for a hundred dollars a mil-liter. Even giving consideration to the fact there are different strengths of this drug the markup for the higher strength (at $0.25 per ml) is still a four hundred percent markup
Over charging the American people for drugs is just one layer. While I have nothing against drug or insurance companies making a profit, a four hundred-time markup is more akin to robbery than it is to profit. If drug companies make a profit on the drugs they sell in Canada and Mexico, they should be able to sell them at the same price here in the United States and still make a decent profit.
Another layer is malpractice suits and the costs of malpractice insurance that is passed on to the consumer through higher prices in actual medical costs, and medical insurance as well. The biggest problem with malpractice suits is that the insurance companies want to save the money of going to trial so they settle out of court. This protects doctors from actually being found, in court, of being negligent. It also encourages attorneys to take on frivolous malpractice suits on a contingency basis because the odds show that it will be settled out of court. Congress needs to pass legislation demanding that all malpractice suits go to trial and that if the doctor is not found guilty, that the attorney filing the suit cover all court costs and legal fees.
Along this same line, currently if a doctor loses their license due to malpractice in one state, they simply go to another state, get a new license and start over. Congress needs to pass legislation requiring all doctors to have a federal license to practice medicine. Before a state could issue a license to practice medicine they would need to cross reference the doctor with the federal data base. In this manner, a doctor guilty of malpractice could not just start over in another state.
The third layer is health insurance. While the advertised purpose of health insurance companies is to provide you with health care, the real reason behind these companies is for them to turn a profit for their shareholders. When you buy a policy, the company is gambling that you will pay more into the system than you take out. Your premiums are combined with those of others buy from them as well as other investments they make in order to hedge against their losses. Most will not pay for pre-existing conditions because that is a bad bet. Your pre-existing condition assures them that they will have to pay out more than you will put into the program. This is a perfectly understandable practice. However, setting limits on how much they will pay, or canceling your policy, if and when you do have a catastrophic illness shows only a concern for the bottom line and not for the customer. The bottom line is that cancellation should only occur if a client does not pay the premiums for reasons other than catastrophic illness. There needs to be provisions made to protect the policies of those who become so sick they cannot work enough to pay their policy premiums.
Along the same lines, if you lose your job, you also lose your company provided insurance. Help is available with the COBRA plan, but it is expensive and unaffordable for many of those being forced to live on unemployment while searching for another job. It is just another quasi safety net to make it look like the government understands, and is taking action on the problem. Something needs to be done to assure that if one loses their job, that their company provided insurance would not lapse. Legislation could be passed to continue covering employer provided insurance through unemployment.
Another big cost of health care is advertising prescription drugs. Billions of dollars are spent by drug companies advertising in multi media formats like modern day snake oil salespersons. Drugs are advertised along with their symptoms to get people to visit their doctors and ask for the drug. It should be the other way around. If you don’t feel well and go to the doctor, you should be able to tell him/her what your symptoms are and he should tell you what kind of drug you need. These advertisements only add to the healthcare problem by increased costs, and by instilling general hypochondria in the general population.
While this is but a short version of the problems with our health care system, it shows some of the biggest flaws. It also demonstrates that, at the middle of each problem, is our very own Congress. Before Congress can develop a health care program there is a list of things they need to do:
1. Determine the cost of drugs in neighboring countries
2. Regulate drug costs in this country to be more in line with our neighbors to the north and south of us (as well as in line with the rest of the world.)
3. Have a national program to register doctors and keep doctors who lose their license from starting practice in a new state
4. Prevent malpractice lawsuits from being settled out of court, with the attorney filing the case paying court costs and doctor’s legal expenses.
5. Standardize insurance policies
6. Pass legislation to preventing insurance companies from canceling policies for any reason other than non-payment (for reasons other than hospitalization or being disabled from medical conditions)
7. Pass legislation preventing insurance loss from job loss by paying premiums through unemployment benefits
8. Cut billions out of the cost of drugs by prohibiting the advertising of prescription drugs
Congress could, and should have addressed all of the above items to lower the price of healthcare. Yet they have not been addressed. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both claim to have the cure for our healthcare crisis yet they have not mentioned any of the above problems within our healthcare system. Before you can fix anything, you have to know what the problem is. Fixing our healthcare system by instituting a national healthcare system (paid for by taxpayers) is akin to painting a car to fix a faulty transmission. It may look better from the outside, but it does not fix the problem. The only way to fix the problem is to actually address the issues causing the problems. While this is only a partial list of what needs to be done, it does address the real problems behind our healthcare issues. These are all problems which need to be addressed by Congress. The only way to get Congress to look at the situation in a different manner is to change Congress. We need to level the power base in Washington.
The only way of doing this is to set term limits on all Washington held elected offices. This is a Constitutional amendment we can make as provided by article V of the Constitution You may visit my website and download a copy of a petition to do just that from my Constitutional Conventions page. Be sure to read the requirement for this petition to be legal. Check the threads in the forum. If there is not one for circulating the petition in you state, start one by clicking on “post” and you will be able to start the thread. Inform all of the people in your email address book about this campaign and urge them to join and notify their friends and family.
Government for the people, by the people is dependent upon the people. If we do not take individual action for change, we will be dependent upon change from those whose main interest is their own power, and their own place in history. We have the tools imbedded in our Constitution to change our government for the better. We also have the tools of communication to efficiently use those tools. The only way our government can go against our will, is for us to allow it. If we do not work towards change, than we cannot complain when government does not follow our wishes.
by: Bob Kinford
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
