Minihan's World

Clinton Clarifications

November 2, 2009

Clarifyi ng her previous clarifications, Hillary Clinton, fearless US Secretary of State now is telling the world that she really didn't mean to be so effusive about Netanyahu, the Israeli PM's stand on settlements.

Are you confused?

Well, officially the US position, from the mouth of the President is that further settlements, to include expansion of existing ones, are illegal, and contrary to US positions and UN resolutions.  That was, of course, u ntil Netanyahu stated that he didn't really care about our or the UN position and would continue to build them.

In short order, the US position--according to Hillary-- was that his (Netanyahu's) decision to perhaps limit, in the future, some settlements was 'unprecedented' and should form the basis for further negotiations.

What happened next is classic Hillary.  The Palestinians went crazy--felt insulted--and the Egyptian President and the Jordanian King met in Egypt with the Palestinians to discuss the matter.  Hillary was in Morocco thinking she was negotiating the Palestinian future, but quickly found out that they weren't listening to her rhetoric.

SOOO, Hillary again changed gears and now clarifies her postion, says Bloomberg today in its editions. “I think President Obama was absolutely clear,” she said in an interview on Al Jazeera. “He wanted a halt to all settlement activity. And perhaps those of us who work with him and for him could have been clearer in communicating that that is his policy, that is what we’re committed to doing.”

She clarified her remarks AFTER she left Israel (Can't piss of Netanyahu or he will sic the AIPAC on Obama and his cronies).  Of course, Obama isn't much better.  While Hillary said last May only a complete construction halt in the West Bank would be acceptable, in the last month, Obama referred only to “restraint” in settlement activity, not a “freeze.”   So it seems they both had changed positions to suit the Netanyahu remarks.

VOA Reported her as saying, "We are committed to a two-state solution and we are determined and persistent in the pursuit of that goal," she said. "It is important that we all work toward that objective. And, I think that does require that all parties should be careful about what we say, the kind of recriminations that are so understandable. But we need to work together in a constructive spirit toward this shared goal of a comprehensive peace."  Imagine that--being careful about what one says--it seems with her only to apply to the Palestinians.

VOA also reported that Clinton believes that the American commitment to the peace process is understood by Arab leaders. She thinks that, with their support, the process can move forward, despite what she calls the difficult and tangled history that too often prevents progress.

"We can maintain an allegiance to the past. But we cannot change the past. No matter what we say about it, it is behind us," said Clinton. "Or we can work together and follow the vision and the inspiration of President Obama to help shape a future that will be so much better for the children of both Palestinian and Israeli families."

Let's all work together Hillary--but perhaps the US should be an honest broker instead of a syncophant for Israel.

Comments?

Once in a While Something Good Happens

November 2, 2009

I spend too much time pointing out the stupidity of the TSA and its parent the DHS.  There is a lot to write about this far from needed or successful cabinet agency.

However, down at the people level, once in a while a light shines through the otherwise murky mist.

Returning from a trip to Salt lake on Monday, I arrived at Reagan National in DC and started to exit the Delta Terminal when I saw a uniformed TSA agent helping a soldier in fatigues.  Not unusual, since there are a lot of soldiers in uniform going through the airports these days.  However, it quickly became obvious that this soldier walked with a limp, and carried a cane.  Also not unusual.  Then I saw the dark glasses, and heard some of the conversation going on between the agent and the soldier--who was obviously vision-impaired.  The agent was helping the soldier get through the screening area--explaining each of the steps, and helping him with his backpack and other things he carried.

I remembered back to my first trip home during the Vietnam-era and the total lack of any kind of help then.  You were more likely to be spit on than assisted by anybody.  But things have changed, and for the better.

I wish I had gone over to get the agent's name so that I could tell everybody about a real hero of an otherwise onerous process---one that is probably necessary but not normally well done by TSA.  I know the soldier thanked him, but I wanted to do as well.

THANKS FOR A JOB WELL DONE.

Attacking Global Terrorism

November 2, 2009

The foreign ministers of Russia, India, and China (The RIC nations) met in their Ninth Trilateral Meeting in Bangalore, India this past week, and, as expected, the major topic was terrorism and how it was affecting countries such as Afghanistan.  The countries resolved to jointly fight terrorism and narcotic trafficking, another priority concern, along with the hope of a diplomatic settlement of the Iran nuclear issue and denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. That is a weighty agenda.

The joint communique from the meeting stated their emphasis on the need for the three countries to assist Afghanistan in fighting terrorism, ensuring security, restoring peace and stability and building a democratic and pluralistic Afghanistan. "Terrorism must be combated firmly by the international community in Afghanistan,'' the communique said, and it also expressed concern at the continuing deterioration of the security situation there due to continued terrorist attacks. The Times of India had extensive reports on the meeting.

Indian Foreign Minister S. M. Krishna, center, holds hands of his counterparts from China Yang Jiechi, right, and Russia Sergey Lavrov before their meeting in Bangalore, 27 Oct. 2009

The Voice of America (VOA) also indicated that the foreign ministers of India, China and Russia were forging a common approach to global issues such as the financial crisis, climate change and security following talks in India. India and China have also held separate discussions in an effort to narrow recent differences that have emerged between the Asian giants.   

So much of the media attention is focused on US efforts here, there,and everywhere.  It is good to see once in a while that other nations have similar concerns and meet to discuss them without the Photo Op of Hillary Clinton in attendance.

The Obama-Clinton Team--Rapidly becoming an International Disaster

November 1st

First in Pakistan

The Clinton part of the team has managed through skillful diplomacy to alienate parts of this country's population with her comments on the inability of the Pakistani Government to find and kill Obama, and her refusal to commit the US to asistance in resolving the Border crises that have plagued their history for years.  As the Wall Street Journal will report in its Monday editions, Obama had indicated in his campaign that he wanted to assist in the settlement of those issues, but has apprently changed his mind -- at least at this particular time.

The LA Times published similar reports, saying, "Every time Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton tried to win over Pakistanis during her three-day charm offensive last week, they fired back a polite but firm message:

We don't really trust your country.

No matter how hard Clinton tried to reassure audiences in Lahore and Islamabad with talk of providing economic aid where it's needed most, Pakistanis seized on her visit as the perfect moment to lash out at a U.S. government they perceive as arrogant, domineering and insensitive to their plight."  That says a lot about the current status of the Obama Administration in the Muslim World.

In Pakistan, the International News was even more blunt, indicating that her visit will only increase the crisis brewing in that country.  The writer, Tahir Hasan Khan, presents a balanced view on the conflicting issues that need resolution in that country, and which will not be helped by the Clinton visit.

Meanwhile in Israel

The Jerusalem Post is reporting today (11/1) that the Palestinian Authority considers Clinton's words in Israel as a major breakdown for the potential for negotiations.  As the JP reported, "Palestinian Authority officials on Sunday warned that Washington's failure to force Israel to halt all construction in the settlements would lead to an "explosion.  The (PA) officials also criticized US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's statements in Jerusalem in which she backed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's position on the issue of settlements, calling his moratorium on new construction "unprecedented."

"One official in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post that the "mask has fallen off the face" of US President Barack Obama.  The US, he said, has once again demonstrated that it's not an "honest broker" in Middle East because of its "bias" in favor of Israel."  That comment--the US as no longer being an honest broker in the region is probably the most telling argument in favor of the administration sutting their mouth if they are not going to really attempt peace in the region.

This article is a must read for understanding the underlying issues involved in settlement negotiations.

Then its Morocco

Clinton met with several foriegn ministers in Morocco over the past weekend  for a meeting to discuss democracy in the region and ways to resolve the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. came to Marrakech for the sixth Forum for the Future, which joins civil society groups and the private sector with foreign ministers from the Group of Eight leading industrialized nations and the Middle East to talk about democracy and resolving conflict in the region.  The Israeli/Palestinian crisis is high on the agenda.

During the meetings, she addressed the issue of settlements built by the Israeli Government and what she called the 'unprecedented' agreement of the Israeli PM to stop settlements in the future.  She supported his postion in that matter.  Unfortunately, only a week before Obama was still calling for complete cessation of building in occupied territories and Jerusalem in order to start the talks.  After Netanyahu complained, the postion of the US apparently changed.  Discussion of the meeting was included in today's dispatches from Voice of America, and reported broadly in the internatioinal press.  read the complete report at VOA

Regretably, the one major player needed in these discussion is Hamas.  Clinton and Obama still hold to the ridiculous proposition that Abbas of Fatah speaks for the Palestinians, which is wholly untrue and a fantasy.  Until they get to the point of returning to the table with all parties, they have no real chance of settlement.  of course, that fits neatly into the plans the Israeli Government has for the area.

Bottom line here--- no improvement in position by any of the parties--everybody assumes that the US is speaking out of both sides of its mouth--Obama and Clinton are either out of synch or trying to create a position for themsevles they can't have.  Net gains  (or even near misses) - ZERO

 

On the Homeland Security Front...

November 1 2009

New Technology, New Problems..

Eileen Sullivan, writing for the Associated Press on October 29th, discussed the emerging problems of security at the nation's airports, even with new technology.  Sullivan writes,

"Most of the decisions to introduce new passenger screening devices at airports have been based on threats described in intelligence reports. While this is important, the Government Accountability Office said these threats also need to be measured against how vulnerable air systems are to them and against the full consequences if the threat were successfully carried out."

"The auditors said the Transportation Security Administration has not completed this full assessment of threat, vulnerability and consequences together. As a result, TSA cannot get a complete picture of the potential risk from any particular threat and it cannot be sure that its investments in screening devices address the greatest risks to aviation, the auditors said."

TSA and its parent have done this before--spend large amounts of money on what may be faulty s cience and then try to fix the mess.  Remember the sniffer machines?  How about the enhanced X-rays to ensure that shoes with steel stiffeners weren't weapons?  There are others as well--all procured based on specific incidents, such as that crazy Reed in Chicago with the shiv in his shoe.  None of them worked, and now we have an even newer generation introduced apparently without proper testing, evaluation, and risk assessment by competant bidies outside DHS.

Cyber Security in Utah?

DHS and NSA have announced the creation and development of a new National Cyber Security Center, to be built at Camp WIlliams outside Salt lake City, according to a report from Daily Tech.  The new Center will "Help combat the risk of cyber security threats," says the announcement. "The NSA is set to build a new $1.5 billion cyber security data center to help provide intelligence and warnings related to cyber security threats across the government. InformationWeek reports that the NSA will soon break ground on the project in Utah. The data center will also support and help civilian agencies and offer technical assistance to the Department of Homeland Security." 

Read the whole story here.

National Cybersecurity Awareness Month

Did anyone other than DHS know that October was National Cybersecurity Awareness Month?  Did anyone get the tee shirt?  Please let me know.  I must have missed all the secret ceremonies.  if anyone has an extra tee shirt, size XL, i am willing to trade.

Stimulus Spending by DHS Under Scrutiny--or is it?

Another article for the Associated Press by Eileen Sullivan (October 24th) discusses the latest attempt by DHS to defend some of the incredible stimulus awards, such as the money that went to ACORN in Louisiana for fire prevention, and, not surprisingly came up empty.

The DHS Inspector General was instructed not to look beyond the list itself--the spending plan-- because the Department was conducting its own internal review.  The IG came back in saying they (DHS) had a spending plan and it appeared OK, but did not look at specific grants.  The Department later came out with its own report that said everything about the grants was OK--except, of course, the ACORN Grant. Just incredible.  What happened to the independence of the Departmental IG's that is supposed to be protected by law?  Read about this ridiculous situation here.

Comments?