Number 9, number 9, number 9, number 9, number 9

Remember The Beatles Revolution 9? Very Strange. Sorry, That Was Penny Lane
President Obama Could Potentially Hold The Ninth Meeting On Afghanistan This Week

President Obama is off on his trip to the Far East, ready to come home to deal with the many items piling up on his plate: healthcare, the economy, Thanksgiving, Democrat fundraising, the environment, early Christmas shopping, you name it. Busy, busy schedule. Somewhere in all of that he will fit in his ninth meeting with his war council on the troop decision in Afghanistan. To date he has spent a good 20-30 hours with them. That 20-30 hours has been spread over many months (close to 11 in office to date), leading one to believe that this decision is not his number one priority.

He probably spends more time than that in a week lobbying for his healthcare bill. What message is this sending to the rest of the world, let alone his troops and the country.

Multiple Choice Problem

(A)Meticulous decision maker? (B)Dotter of I's and crosser of T's? (C)Focused leader? (D)Procrastinator? (E)Unfocused? (F)Weak? (G)Indecisive? (H)Unable to prioritize? (I) Military and the troops a low priority? (J) Worst kind of politician putting a healthcare bill ahead of the safety and lives of our troops?

1. A, B and C
2. A, B and not C
3. A,C and not B
4. B,C and Not A
5. D, E, F, G, H, I, J (and more)
Hint: #5

Even The MSM Is Catching On 
Things are getting a little dicey when members of the press actually ask questions with bite, rather than giving the President the free ride that he has had since the time he began running for office. The President and his handlers obviously do not like being held accountable, as the tone of response shows.

This from the AP's Jennifer Loven in Shanghai: (Post-Gazette)"Can you explain to people watching and criticizing your deliberations what piece of information you're still lacking to make that call."


The President then countered with what appears to be the official talking point on the matter.

"With respect to Afghanistan, Jennifer," the president scolded, "I don't think this is a matter of some datum of information that I'm waiting on. Critics of the process tend not to be folks who are directly involved in what's happening in Afghanistan. Those who are, recognize the gravity of the situation and recognize the importance of us getting this right."

Maybe General McCrystal should get more involved, because according to the President's statement he is not.

The President: "I am very pleased with how the process has proceeded," he said. "And those who participated I think would acknowledge that it has been not a academic exercise, but a necessary process in order to make sure that we're making the best possible decisions."

20 - 30 of discussion hours spread over 11 months is not an academic process or any other type of process. It is neglect. With soldiers lives on the line. The same soldiers he professes concern for in photo ops at Dover AFB.

Sphere: Related Content

2012: An Article Of What Constitutes Off Limits In The New World

2012

The following article is a discussion of the movie which looks at the supposed end of the world in 2012. Within the movie there are depictions of the destruction of important religious icons around the world but for one religion. Why? The reason is fear. Not fear of offending because many of the pictures and scenes in the movie have the potential to offend one religion or another. No, it is fear of violent retribution. This poses a problem going forward, as the situation stands to only get worse.

Article by David Rusin: 2012: Rated D for Dhimmitude

"Who will survive 2012?" asks a website promoting Roland Emmerich's new end-of-the-world film set three years from now. The answer: Muslims — or at least their cherished holy places:

For his latest disaster movie, 2012, the 53-year-old director had wanted to demolish the Kaaba, the iconic cube-shaped structure in the Grand Mosque in Mecca. …

But after some consideration, he decided it might not be such a smart idea, after all.

"I wanted to do that, I have to admit," Emmerich told SciFiWire.com. "But my co-writer Harald [Kloser] said I will not have a fatwa on my head because of a movie. And he was right."

Just about every landmark on the planet gets pummeled in the CGI-heavy 2012, including the Vatican and the statue of Christ overlooking Rio de Janeiro. But naturally the director expresses no worries of being targeted by Christians. Instead, he proudly explains that seeing St. Peter's Basilica crash and the statue crumble pleases him "because I'm against organized religion."

Emmerich's frank admissions echo those of British artist Grayson Perry, who has stated that he trashes Christianity but avoids Islam "because I feel real fear that someone will slit my throat." Yet while their candor about not wishing to become the next Theo van Gogh may be rare, examples of creative types pussyfooting around Muslims are not. A 2008 IW essay explores this phenomenon in the art world. Cases from film and television are just as common. Among them:

• For the 2002 movie The Sum of All Fears, Arab Muslim terrorists from Tom Clancy's novel were turned into white neo-fascists, thus satisfying the demands of CAIR.

• The 2005 season of the Fox drama 24, featuring a Muslim family as a sleeper cell, ran a disclaimer with Kiefer Sutherland offering assurances that the plotline is not meant to besmirch American Muslims. CAIR's fingerprints are here as well.

• Comedy Central censored an image of the Islamic prophet in a 2006 episode of South Park. Yet the same episode depicts "Jesus defecating on the American flag."

• In 2008 British comedian Ben Elton argued that a "scared" BBC "will let vicar gags pass but they would not let imam gags pass." He even reported that he had been warned against using the rather innocuous phrase "Muhammad came to the mountain."

Recently HBO's Curb Your Enthusiasm had star Larry David urinate on a picture of Jesus. Jamie Glazov asks whether we might ever see him similarly profane books and symbols sacred to Muslims. And, if not, "what meaning and lesson do we draw from this?"

The answer is no; the lesson is that political correctness and fear are turning Hollywood into Dhimmiwood, where eager capitulations by Roland Emmerich and company will only embolden Islamists and soften us up for disasters far worse than computerized explosions.

Sphere: Related Content

Iran: What Credibility Do The Words Of This Man Have?

Not Ahmadinejad But Barack Obama

I don't know about the rest of you, but the fact that Iran is running this show, making the international community look like fools on the subject of the nuclear armament of this rogue country is extremely troubling. It is unfortunately very obvious that Iran is going to be able to play out the string due to the United States lack of resolve and the double dealing of our negotiating partners.

(Fox News) "President Obama told Iran Sunday that the international community will not wait in perpetuity for the regime respond to a UN offer over its nuclear program. "We are now running out of time with respect to that approach," he said, sitting alongside Russian President Dmitri Medvedev."


Unfortunately, when the time comes that the patience runs out our next step will be sanctions in the hands of the impotent United Nations, along with our partners who will likely go back door to violate them. But first let's look at the time factor.


I suppose that the underlying question regarding President Obama's statement would be just how big the hourglass filled with sand is. Is it an egg timer, or as big as all outdoors. Judging by his decision making prowess concerning troop deployment to Afghanistan, why would one believe that his definition of time is anything more than just another open ended statement. There is a lot of space between today and in perpetuity, and it is anyones guess where President Obama would be on that timeline. By the time any credible action is taken the Iranian missiles could already be airborne. Or worse the nukes that they develop could be in the suitcase of a terrorist making his or her way to a world city.


While both the Iranian and Afghan policy decisions are complex and critical, Iran has many more moving parts to the extent that coalition building is required and there is an unknown involved as to just how close that country is to deployable nuclear weapons. And what exactly is the President's resolve to make a decision that may involve a unilateral move as our allies China and Russia are playing both sides of the issue? Sphere: Related Content

It's 10:00 PM, Do You Know What Your Children Are Playing With?

Modern Warfare 2: MA

Disclaimer: I do not play video games, and the only snippet that I have seen of the recently released Modern Warfare 2 is in the video below.

I am not here to provide my moral judgement of this game which appears to be incredibly violent, and that seems to my untrained eye to reward that violence as being the key in the players quest to "win".

This genre of game is now an ingrained part of our society for better or worse, and a huge money maker for the companies that develop them (MW2 opening day sales of 4.7 million copies or $310 million). They are not going to be taken off of the market now or at any time in the future. As with most entertainment, future releases will have to keep pushing the envelope in order to maintain the excitement level among the players that buy them. This was apparent in the morphing of the Grand Theft Auto series.

Therefore, the short answer is that these games will continue to be produced and continue to be purchased aggressively by gamers around the world.

PG or Parental Guidance


This is where the art of parenting comes into play, with the need for adults to set limits for children. While young kids may want Modern Warfare 2 or other games like it, it is up to their guardians to say no and to attempt and exert the oversight that will prevent them from playing somewhere else. This is the difficult part of being a parent, the part of saying no and sticking to it.

Nobody said being a parent was easy, but it are the kids that will benefit in the future from the limits set for them today. There will plenty of time later on for a 14 year old to play these games once they turn 18, and think how much better the graphics will be.


Sphere: Related Content

Saluting The American Flag Optional?

No Flag Pin On The Lapel. No Salute Or Hand Over The Heart For The National Anthem!

From the one picture speaks 1,000 words department, here are 2,000. Just a little food for thought on a Friday afternoon. The picture on top is Memorial Day this year, and the one below is during the Presidential campaign. Unless the music is over and the others on the podium are frozen in position, President Obama was just not inspired to show his respect for the American flag and by extension the Country. Now there is different protocol for the Pledge of Allegiance and the National Anthem, but not for a President. And apparently not for the others he is standing with.

This our Commander-in-Chief who professes love of country and love for the troops. Is this just another administration example of rhetoric over reality? Is this a red flag? Just some food for thought for Friday Happy Hour.

Sphere: Related Content

Examiner.com

Homeland Security Columnist At Examiner.com

I am one of the Homeland Security columnists at Examiner.com (over 18MM unique monthly visitors), which offers my readers an alternative way to read my thoughts, opinions and commentary on national and homeland security issues as well as any other topics I feel have the potential to impact our society and way of life.

It is simple to subscribe for email delivery straight to your inbox. Simply go to my specific page, New York Homeland Security. Then, by clicking on the subscribe button to the right of my name and entering your email address, you will be one of the first to know that an article is available.

As always you can continue to read articles at the The Political Commentator, subscribe for email delivery or receive articles as a feed. It is always good to have options! Any way you read it, I am always eager to receive your thoughts and feedback.

Mike Sphere: Related Content

From The Picture Archive and A Rhetorical Masterpiece, Now What?

From The Archives: Pakistan Airline Ad Circa 1979

(Gothamist) "This ad for Pakistan Airlines is real. And in the history of advertising, it really takes the creepy cake. Even worse than babies endorsing cigarettes! Seriously, if Nostradamus ran an ad firm to warn the world aboutblowback, this would have been in his portfolio.

It appeared in the March 19th, 1979 issue of Le Point (and surely countless other publications). Yes, the shadow is in pretty much in the same place as where the planes hit on September 11th, and there's no way the shadow should be that big unless it's seconds away from hitting the towers...but we don't think this should evoke any conspiracy theories. Right?" 

President Obama Gives Good Speech: Afghanistan Ad Nauseum

No question about it. When he is scripted he will typically deliver well as he did at the memorial ceremony at Fort Hood. He spoke for an un-Obama like 15 minutes with little of the speech focused on himself as it so often is. He spoke of his admiration and respect for the soldiers in the military, saying "We need not look to the past for greatness, because it is before our very eyes."

Strong words. Words fraught with emotion that indicate his overwhelming support for the military he commands. But as always, actions speak louder than words, and his actions are indicative of a politician who is more concerned with protecting his base and edge in Congress than he is in dealing with the pressing issues of Afghanistan, Iran and North Korea. This has nothing to do with the many days it took to get down to the base after the attack, but more to due with his procrastination and indecisiveness in the face of ever increasing violence and death in both Pakistan and Afghanistan.

In the many months since the McCrystal troop surge request was leaked, President Obama has been moving in relative slow motion. Eight meetings in the four months since the request was made, and only this week did the ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, provide his assessment which recommends no troops until the Karzai government proves that it is up to the task of cleaning things up. This is the opinion of a man the President apparently has much faith in, so why is it only being provided now? Is it possible that he is more forthcoming now that the healthcare vote is done in the House? I certainly hope that is not the reason but one is left scratching the head of the lack of any urgency to deal with this problem.

If you don't want to rush the decision, and not rushing is the correct thing to do, then accelerate the delivery of the information that you need to make the decision. The President has the entire world at his beck and call, and the process could have been condensed. It now appears after yesterdays summit that any decision is going to be pushed back weeks. This is due to the fact that the four options currently on the table due not adequately address the ultimate endgame of Afghani takeover and the United States ability to withdraw.

Now I am not an expert on the inner workings of this foreign policy decision, but it would seem to me that these questions, only now arising, would have been questions that could have been foreseen and addressed months ago. Why does this process seem so haphazard and seat of the pants. Is it at all possible, that despite the rhetoric, this was actually a back burner issue while healthcare is pending?

The fact that commentary on the lack of an Obama decision in Afghanistan continues to get ink is unfortunate, both for the readers and for the country. This situation will be rectified when the long awaited strategy is announced. Until then.... Sphere: Related Content