Saturday, November 21, 2009

Nice job, everyone. Love that picture. It has been a long road.


Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) (L), and Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) (R) watch as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) (2L) is hugged by Senator John Rockefeller IV (D-WV) (C) after a vote on healthcare reform.

...The 60-to-39 vote (click title to entry- thank you), along party lines, clears the way for weeks of rowdy floor proceedings that will begin after Thanksgiving and last through much of December.
The Senate bill seeks to extend health benefits to roughly 31 million Americans who are now uninsured, at a cost of $848 billion over 10 years....


That is cheap health care if you ask me. $85.8 billion per year to be sure an entire nation, or nearly an entire nation, is receiving health care at an affordable rate. Wellness programs and a health nation. Well done. Happy the country isn't just spending its treasury on wars and 'impoverished Wall Street Executives.' It is only just the country is doing all the people's business.

The article above is from The New York Times and below is outlined a difference between the House and Senate Bills in The Washington Post.

I think the Senate Bill probably retained some tricky language from the Finance Committee Bill and that should be scrutinized by the committee when the bills are consolidated. The House Bill is 'better' language and keeps intact the spirit of the bill.

Senate vs. House bills (click here)
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Government-run insurance

Employer mandate
...The Senate bill does not require employers to offer health insurance, but it fines employers with more than 50 employees if even one receives a subsidy through the new exchanges. The fine is equal to $750 for every person on the payroll.
The House bill requires employers to pay 65 percent of family premiums or pay a penalty based on payroll; businesses with less than $500,000 in payroll are exempt....

This is my assessment of the violence affiliated with Nidal Hasan.


Fort Hood Familes

According to people that loved Nidal Hasan, he was a peace loving man that did not want to be dispatched to a war zone. His reasons were his own, but, basically he never owned or used weapons up to the point where he purchased those he unleashed death on the soldiers at Fort Hood.

The reaction of the soldiers and the military in relation to the community was remarkable that day. The soldiers lived up to their training and saved lives and the military commanders at Fort Hood immediately reached out to the community to secure their understanding and peace of mind.

Nidal Hasan is a lone soldier in this act and it has no reflection on any 'movement' within the USA military to succumb to the violence advocated by Imams in Yemen. There is no way this is more than what it is.

Major Hasan was conflicted within his own 'person' as to how to address the 'conflict' of his 'chosen' profession, his status in the military, its quality of life and the fact he abhorred war or being involved with it.

Major Hasan was a CO. He was a conscientious objector with no way out of his profession or the military. When he was faced with being in a war zone he attempted to 'find himself' by affiliating with Imams that consented to violence.

When he confronted the issue of violence he resolved to act against 'the authority' that had control over his life and destination. That was facilitated by an Imam in Yemen, or believed to be in Yemen, that ministers 'violence' as a resolve to anger.

The Imam was 'successful' in dismantling the personality of Major Hasan because of the profound 'conflict' he was facing regarding his own values verses that of his dispatch. He simply gave over to the violent act against those that caused his anger and allowed a sociopathic Imam to evoke not only murderous rage, but, suicidal ideation to insure 'his pleasure' in the afterlife.

End of discussion regarding Nidal Hasan. The USA military investigation should definately seek to enhance mental health services to its soldiers and secure a high quality of life to the families of Fort Hood from a grateful nation.

This Imam has a significant history of 'dismantling' personality.


Basically, what is significant about the USA military experience with this Imam is the dismantling of a peacefully practicing Muslim in Nidal Hasan into a man without a country and a purpose of killing for the ideological reason of some 'idea' that Allah sanctioned such an act.

To understand the 'intricacy' of permission to kill for Allah as ministered by this Imam is to understand the alienation of citizens from their governments in nations globally.

I think the 'business card' is an American standard that was translated into an icon of importance with Nidal Hasan, illustrating the 'demoralizing' that was occurring in thoughts 'evoked' by 'permission' to act in a hierarchy of authority at a Yemen University.

Internet sites to these Imams should be blocked by most global governments. The Imam is sociopathic.

The 'act' of violence is narcisstic in its etiology. It is done for a 'reward' in the 'afterlife.' That is a narcisstic act. Pleasure principle. The ultimate 'hubris' if you will. The psychological 'triggers' this idiot pulls must be very interesting.

This is the same kind of 'portrait' that is seen with 'figures' such as the 'Sheik' in Palestine. The Sheik was responsible for random acts of violence on a regular basis. The best thing Israel ever did was to rid the planet of the jerk.

As a matter of fact, I remember Yasar Arafat being opposed to the Sheik's influence among the young men that congregated to him. Arafat was unable to win the Sheik's loyalty to the best outcome of the people of Palestine and it was a major hurdle to peace with Israel because no different that the rockets over the border, people in Israel had their lives disrupted and deaths occurred. The thing with Palestine is that it is a smaller populous and the 'incidence' of young men coming in contact and influenced by the Sheik was very high. So it was a major 'policy' issue for the USA State Department.

Not to diminish the importance of the security of the USA and its military, but, the 'incidence' of occurrence with this Imam can be controlled and isolated to those that have contact with him in Yemen if the global network works together to 'shut him down.'

That should be a priority to issues at the United Nations Security Council as well. These people are 'victims' to a sociopath.

Welcome to President Rompuy. It is good to know 'the little guy' can finish first!

“I will remain discreet.”


Belgian Herman Van Rompuy selected in a closed-door meeting to be the first permanent president of the world's largest economy and the chief representative of 500 million people.


Europe chooses a quiet president (click title to entry - thank you)
Doug Saunders
London — From Friday's Globe and Mail Published on Thursday, Nov. 19, 2009 10:45PM EST Last updated on Saturday, Nov. 21, 2009 2:59AM EST

...Europeans had barely finished their dinners Thursday night when they were introduced to their George Washington, the man who had been selected by the leaders of their countries in a closed-door meeting to be the first permanent president of the world's largest economy and the chief representative of 500 million people.
It was the shock of the strange. Few in Europe have heard of Herman Van Rompuy, the Belgian head of government, and many were doubtless startled by what they saw: a bespectacled man whose dishevelled hair producing a mad-scientist aura, avoiding eye contact with the camera as he spoke shyly in three languages and made a most unpresidential pledge: “I will remain discreet.”...

The Iraqi Nation has oil income. If the Iraqi government is not stable enough to finish projects, it is not the problem of the USA military.

The picture below is from The New York Times and the article is at the title to this entry.

The people of the United States of America has spent billions of dollars, if not trillions of dollar on assisting Iraq. We did it with the sincerest of wishes to help the people there.

If Iraq is so unstable it cannot accomplish something as valuable as a children's hospital within a reasonable period of time (four years being far too long compared to the need of the people there), then we aren't going to accomplish it in a lifetime.

Those are NOT our structures and if they fall VICTIM to sqaundering resources to complete them, employ the people and improve the life of Iraqi children it falls on the shoulders of the Central Government.

We are finished in Iraq. If 'contractors' want to remain behind to work for the government there then they are welcome to do so, but, we aren't paying their salaries anymore either!

A construction worker at the site of the Basra Children's Hospital in southern Iraq. Its completion has been delayed by more than four years, and it is still not ready.



...But there are growing concerns among American officials that Iraq will not be able to adequately maintain the facilities once the Americans have left, potentially wasting hundreds of millions of dollars and jeopardizing Iraq’s ability to provide basic services to its people....


Carl Levin and Joe Lieberman are "W"rong. Dead wrong. Their approach 'politicizes' the act of violence.

Could either of these men lead a terrorist network?

ONLY if orchestrated to have a 'greater meaning' through propaganda that directed an entire military.


The picture below is from the Washington Post and the article that accompanies it is at the title to the entry.

What Nidal Hasan did was NOT terrorism.

What occurred on September 11, 2001 IS.

Is it because of the 'volume' of the violence that September 11, 2001 is an act of terrorism? No.

Was the violence, anger and hatred of Timothy McVeigh terrorism as his act was more damaging and included a building? No. Although the argument can be made when one includes Terry Nichols and others.

However, the 'network' Timothy McVeigh belonged to was superficial in its ability to organize against the people of the USA and was isolated to the incident that occurred. Therefore, McVeigh and Nichols acted TOGETHER to carry out the attacks in Oklahoma City, but, they had NO CAPACITY to carry out more!

Terrorism is COMMITTED by a terrorist network such as al Qaeda. It is why the USA declared war with the nation of Afghanistan after the attacks of al Qaeda that killed thousands of people.


Terrorism is the act of people engaged in a war against humanity that leads to greater danger to the populous of a country. Are the suicide bombings in Iraq, Afghansitan, Israel and other places acts of terrorism? Yes. Why? Because they are conducted with the THREAT OF MORE. And that 'threat' is connected with human beings CONSENTING to carry out more violence in the same manner to obtain an ideological goal.


Is having contact with a radical Islamic Imam an act of terrorism? No.


It is however suspicious and why it wasn't questioned with Hasan is because of his 'military status.' He was an officer and it was concluded when investigated by the military that he was engaged in research in regard to his practice in psychiatry.


Professionals at any point in their career are 'granted' authority to act within their capacity to do so. That is especially true in the military where 'authority' is granted because of rank. If military investigators found that Nidal Hasan was in contact with this Imam and questioned him, they would give him the benefit of the doubt considering his rank and his status.


That would be true if the Secretary of Defense did the same thing. Scary thought to think Secretary Gates might have that kind of contact, right?


"W"rong.


Why?


Because all Secretary Gates can do is issue orders to the USA military to act. Any act of terrorism ordered by Secretary Gates would be stopped with the next person he spoke to. The ONLY capacity Secretary Gates has in this 'rank' is to do what Nidal Hasan did and seek to be full of hatred toward the military structure he found authority within and act in a single act of violence.


That is ALL any military personnel can do and it is why the USA miltiary is NOT a threat to the people of the USA and/or any other country, except, when propaganda wars against the American people are carried out, ie: The war into Iraq.


It is why the media is guilty as hell of propaganda surrounding this case and accusing the violence to the status of September 11th by a misguided and conflicted Muslim in the ranks of the USA military.


Nidal Hasan acted ALONE. There is NO further danger to the people of the USA and his contact with the Muslim Imam in question was isolated. What occurred is troubling. It occurred among people most near and dear to our democracy and we are extremely worried about this occurrence and its propagation, HOWEVER, this is NOT terrorism and this is NOT an ideological issue with Islam and its practice in a peaceful manner.

What Nidal Hasan is guilty of is murder. He acted alone as LONE WOLF does and caused the death of people dedicated to defending this country. It is NOT an act of terrorism and it never will be in a way that will wage war anywhere else in this world. Absolutely not!

The military investigation will be welcome and hopefully will include strong recommendations as to 'containment' of authority to the individual involved when this occurs UNTIL the individual is found to be 'completely' harmless. It might be that the 'intelligence capacity' of the people within its ranks has to be expanded and perhaps an 'Anti-violence' Task Force established to stop not only 'murderous acts,' but, also suicide among the soliders that serve this country.

I find the statements that Nidal Hasan is a terrorist acting in a form of terrorist act irresponsible, misguided and completely stupid UNLESS he is proven to be connected to a greater and organized threat.



file - This Oct. 2008 file photo by Muhammad ud-Deen shows Imam Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. The imam, who communicated with the Fort Hood shooting suspect Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, said he did not pressure Hasan to harm Americans, The Washington Post reported Monday, Nov 16, 2009. (AP Photo/Muhammad ud-Deen, File)
Photo Credit: AP Photo