Posts Tagged ‘crisis’


April 20, 2009

Today, I have a few questions for you.  I would like you to seriously consider your answers, and be able to defend them.

           1.  Do you BELIEVE that waterboarding is TORTURE and should not be used against TERRORISTS?? 

Here is an aticle from the NY Times that describes the process that has been banned by President Obama.  There have been a number of CIA Directors, from both sides (Democrat and Republican), that have stated that these techniques worked and actionable intelligence was obtained, after all other processes were exploited. 

Also, I am ONLY asking if these techniques should be used on TERRORISTS, not foreign fighters.  Foreign fighters can be IDENTIFIED on the battlefield and would be subject to the Geneva Convention rules.  Terrorists do NOT wear a uniform and “hide” among INNOCENT civilians.

           2.  Do you believe that the recent rescue of  Captain Phillips, was right and the Navy Snipers were heroes??

Here is an article from CNN.  This action was AUTHORIZED by President Obama on TWO different occasions.  In this “situation”, President Obama GAVE the order to KILL three “pirates”, who were trying to provide for their families.  He gave this order to KILL three individuals, in order to save one AMERICAN captain.

In my OPINION, I believe that WATERBOARDING should be allowed IN EXTREME conditions.  The recent report states that America has only used these techniques on five individuals in the eight years that we have been at WAR against terrorism.  That sounds to me like the Government was DOING it’s JOB.  As a side note, America subjects MANY of it’s Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines to waterboarding, to show them waht COULD happen to them if they are captured by the ENEMY.  In other words, the ENEMIES of the United States WILL use these techniques, and worse.

Second, I believe that the Navy Snipers ARE heroes and they have just shown how highly trained they are.  America’s enemies SHOULD be afraid.  I believe that President Obama DID the right thing in this situation.

Back to my questions, Obama feels that waterboarding should be against the rules, while at the same time, Obama feels that it is OK to kill individuals without warning.  HUH???  Does ANYONE else see a problem with these positions??

In summary, according to President Obama, it is OK to kill someone to save one American life, but it is NOT OK to make a terrorist uncomfortable if it could save MANY lives.


What do YOU think?

Rep. Frank Pushes For Prosecutions Over Meltdown

March 26, 2009

First read this article that has been posted at CNBC.

In an interview with CNBC, Representative Barney Frank says he wants to push for prosecution of the people who caused the country’s financial meltdown.

The Massachusetts Democrat says he has no specific targets in mind, but says the most significant thing lawmakers can do is make past bad practices illegal.

Frank also said that he was glad some U.S. banks had been returning government TARP money and said that was a sign that the banks were feeling more stabilized.

Earlier in the day, Frank, who is chairman of the U.S. House Financial Services Committee, told reporters that he plans to move legislation this month on mortgage origination, predatory lending and credit cards. Vowing to turn his focus from stabilizing the financial system to reshaping it, Frank said he will hold hearings to examine creating “a strongly empowered systemic risk regulator.”

Hearings are set for March 17, 20, 24 and 26.

Frank has said in the past that he expects the Federal Reserve may be handed the new role of monitoring the financial system for risk.

Some lawmakers are concerned such duties could distract the Fed from its core role as manager of the nation’s monetary policy.

“While we will continue to work with the Obama administration on stabilization, it is now essential that we continue work on our reform agenda and address the need for financial regulatory restructuring,” Frank said in a statement distributed ahead of a news conference.

“Perhaps most importantly, the American public has the right to know what enforcement actions are contemplated against those irresponsible and, in some cases, criminal actions that lead to the current situation,” he said.

At a House financial services subcommittee hearing on Thursday, Wall Street groups agreed there should be one one risk regulator but were split on who should have that role.

The Financial Services Roundtable, which represents the largest financial services firms, advocates giving the Fed the responsibility for looking across the entire financial system and identifying risks.

But the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, said it has not decided whether the Fed should play that role.

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners, a collection of state regulators, oppose the creation of one super regulator.

And some key lawmakers have reservations giving the Fed more powers, citing potential conflicts with the board’s current responsibilities of setting monetary policy and supervising banks.

“Are any of you troubled with giving the Fed so much power?” asked Alabama Rep Spencer Bachus, the top Republican on the full House Financial Services committee.

Lawmakers at the subcommittee hearing also expressed reservations about rushing ahead with a plan to create a systemic risk regulator.

“We have to get this one right. We can’t just hurry to expeditiously conclude something that appears to be a fix, when it does not accomplish something of a significant nature,” said Pennsylvania Rep Paul Kanjorski, the Democratic chairman of the House subcommittee on capital markets and insurance.

I agree wholeheartedly with this article and Rep. Frank, and since Rep. Frank does NOT(?) know where to start, let me make a suggestion. 

I believe that we should start with the criminally negligent behavior and obvious conflicts of interest that are associated with Rep. Frank.

 The following are a few links to details of the specifics.

and from U.S. News and World Report:

These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Democrat Barney Frank, then ranking member and now chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said, “I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing

From the Boston Globe:

And from Fox News:

Detailing the fact that Frank was dating/living with an Executive of Fannie Mae.,2933,432501,00.html

And the Wall Street Journal:

And the Tax Foundation:

And Barney Frank was one of the Top 30 politicians receiving campaign contributions from Fannie Mae

Along with Christopher Dodd and John Kerry and (although he only voted present, so maybe this does not count) Barack Obama.

Lets start with Representative Barney Frank in front of a Congressional Inquiry and Independent Prosecuter and we will go from there.

And for those that need more information from the beginning of the problem, here is an article from the New York Times, dated 1999 (Thank you President Clinton), written by Steven Holmes.

“But the government-subsidized corporation (Fannie Mae) may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980’s.” (emphasis added)