Empire and Expansion
I. America Turns Outward
1.From the end of the Civil War to the 1880s, the United States was very isolationist, but in the 1890s, due to rising exports, manufacturing capability, power, and wealth, it began to expand onto the world stage, using overseas markets to sell its goods.
◦The “yellow press” or “yellow journalism” of Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst also influenced overseas expansion, as did missionaries inspired by Reverend Josiah Strong’s Our Country: It’s Possible Future and Its Present Crisis. Strong spoke for civilizing and Christianizing savages.
◦People were interpreting Darwin’s theory of survival-of-the-fittest to mean that the United States was the fittest and needed to take over other nations to improve them.
■Such events already were happening, as Europeans had carved up Africa and China by this time.
■In America, Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan’s 1890 book, The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660-1783, argued that every successful world power once held a great navy. This book helped start a naval race among the great powers and moved the U.S. to naval supremacy. It motivated the U.S. to look to expanding overseas.
2.James G. Blaine pushed his “Big Sister” policy, which sought better relations with Latin America, and in 1889, he presided over the first Pan-American Conference, held in Washington D.C.
3.However, in other diplomatic affairs, America and Germany almost went to war over the Samoan Islands (over whom could build a naval base there), while Italy and America almost fought due to the lynching of 11 Italians in New Orleans, and the U.S. and Chile almost went to war after the deaths of two American sailors at Valparaiso in 1892.
◦The new aggressive mood was also shown by the U.S.—Canadian argument over seal hunting near the Pribilof Islands off the coast of Alaska.
4.An incident with Venezuela and Britain wound up strengthening the Monroe Doctrine.
◦British Guiana and Venezuela had been disputing their border for many years, but when gold was discovered, the situation worsened.
◦Thus, the U.S., under President Grover Cleveland, sent a note written by Secretary of State Richard Olney to Britain informing them that the British actions were trespassing the Monroe Doctrine and that the U.S. controlled things in the Americas.
◦The British replied by stating that the affair was none of the U.S's business.
◦Cleveland angrily replied by appropriating a committee to devise a new boundary and if Great Britain would not accept it, then the U.S. implied it would fight for it.
◦Britain didn’t want to fight because of the damage to its merchant trade that could result, the Dutch Boers of South Africa were about to go to war and Germany’s Kaiser Wilhem was beginning to challenge Britain's power.
◦Seeing the benefits of an alliance with the "Yankees," Great Britain began a period of "patting the eagle's head," instead of America "twisting the lion's tale." This was referred to as the Great Rapprochement or reconciliation.
II. Spurning the Hawaiian Pear
1.From the 1820s, when the first U.S. missionaries came, the United States had always liked the Hawaiian Islands.
2.Treaties signed in 1875 and 1887 guaranteed commercial trade and U.S. rights to priceless Pearl Harbor, while Hawaiian sugar was very profitable. But in 1890, the McKinley Tariff raised the prices on this sugar, raising its price.
3.Americans felt that the best way to offset this was to annex Hawaii—a move opposed by its Queen Liliuokalani—but in 1893, desperate Americans in Hawaii revolted.
◦They succeeded, and Hawaii seemed ready for annexation, but Grover Cleveland became president again, investigated the coup, found it to be wrong, and delayed the annexation of Hawaii until he basically left office.
◦Cleveland was bombarded for stopping “Manifest Destiny,” but his actions proved to be honorable for him and America.
III. Cubans Rise in Revolt
1.In 1895, Cuba revolted against Spain, citing years of misrule, and the Cubans torched their sugar cane fields in hopes that such destruction would either make Spain leave or America interfere (the American tariff of 1894 had raised prices on it anyway).
2.Sure enough, America supported Cuba, and the situation worsened when Spanish General Valeriano “Butcher” Weyler came to Cuba to crush the revolt and ended up putting many civilians into concentration camps that were terrible and killed many.
3.The American public clamored for action, especially when spurred on by the yellow press, but Cleveland would do nothing.
◦The Mystery of the Maine Explosion
◦The yellow presses competed against each other to come up with more sensational stories, and Hearst even sent artist Frederick Remington to draw pictures of often-fictional atrocities.
■For example, he drew Spanish officials brutally stripping and searching an American woman, when in reality, Spanish women, not men, did such acts.
■Then, suddenly, on February 9, 1898, a letter written by Spanish minister to Washington Dupuy de Lôme that ridiculed President McKinley was published by Hearst.
◦On February 15th of that year, the U.S. battleship U.S.S. Maine mysteriously exploded in Havana Harbor, killing 260 officers and men.
■Despite an unknown cause, America was war-mad and therefore Spain received the blame.
■Hearst called down to Cuba, “You supply the pictures, I’ll supply the story.”
■Actually, what really happened was that an accidental explosion had basically blown up the ship—a similar conclusion to what Spanish investigators suggested—but America ignored them.
■The American public wanted war, but McKinley privately didn’t like war or the violence, since he had been a Civil War major. In addition, Mark Hanna and Wall Street didn’t want war because it would upset business.
4.However, on April 11, 1898, the president sent his war message to Congress anyway, since: (1) war with Spain seemed inevitable, (2) America had to defend democracy, and (3) opposing a war could split the Republican party and America.
5.Congress also adopted the Teller Amendment, which proclaimed that when the U.S. had overthrown Spanish misrule, it would give the Cubans their freedom and not conquer it.
IV. Dewey’s May Day Victory at Manila
1.On paper, at least, the Spanish had the advantage over the U.S., since it had more troops and a supposedly better army, as well as younger (and seemingly more daring) generals.
2.Navy Secretary John D. Long and his assistant secretary, Theodore Roosevelt had modernized the U.S. navy, making it sleek and sharp.
◦On February 25, 1898, Roosevelt cabled Commodore George Dewey, commanding the American Asiatic Squadron at Hong Kong, and told him to take over the Philippines.
◦Dewey did so brilliantly, completely taking over the islands from the Spanish.
3.Dewey had naval control, but he could not storm the islands and its fortresses, so he had to wait for reinforcements, but meanwhile, other nations were moving their ships into Manila Harbor to protect their men.
◦The German navy defied American blockade regulations, and Dewey threatened the navy commander with war, but luckily, this episode blew over, due in part to the British assistance of America.
4.Finally, on August 13, 1898, American troops arrived and captured Manila, collaborating with Filipino insurgents, led by Emilio Aguinaldo, to overthrow the Spanish rulers.
5.On July 7, 1898, the U.S. annexed Hawaii (so that it could use the islands to support Dewey, supposedly), and Hawaii received full territorial status in 1900.
V. The Confused Invasion of Cuba
•The Spanish sent warships to Cuba, panicking Americans on the Eastern seaboard, and the fleet, commanded by Admiral Cervera, found refuge in Santiago harbor, Cuba.
1.Then, it was promptly blockaded by a better American force.
•American ground troops, led by fat General William R. Shafter, were ill-prepared for combat in the tropical environment (i.e. they had woolen long underwear).
•The “Rough Riders,” a regiment of volunteers led by Theodore Roosevelt and Colonel Leonard Wood, rushed to Cuba and battled at El Caney stormed up San Juan Hill.
•Admiral Cervera was finally ordered to fight the American fleet, and his fleet was destroyed.
•On land, the American army, commanded by General Nelson A. Miles, met little resistance as they took over Puerto Rico.
•Soon afterwards, on August 12, 1898, Spain signed an armistice.
•Notably, if the Spaniards had held out for a few more months, they might have won, for the American army was plagued with dysentery, typhoid, and yellow fever.
1.Finally, TR wrote a “round-robin” letter demanded that the U.S. government take the troops out before they all died.
VI. America’s Course (Curse?) of Empire
•In negotiations in Paris, America got Guam and Puerto Rico and freed Cuba, but the Philippines were a tough problem, since America couldn’t honorably give it back to Spain after decades of misrule, but the U.S. couldn’t just take it like an imperialistic nation.
•Finally, McKinley decided to keep the Philippines, even though they had been taken one day after the end of the war, but he did so because of popular public opinion and because it meshed well with business interests.
1.The U.S. paid $20 million for the islands.
•Upon the U.S. taking of the Philippines, uproar broke out, since until now, the United States had mostly acquired territory from the American continent, and even with Alaska, Hawaii, and the other scattered islands, there weren’t many people living there.
•The Anti-Imperialist League sprang into being, firmly opposed to this new imperialism of America, and its members included Mark Twain, William James, Samuel Gompers, and Andrew Carnegie.
1.Even the Filipinos wanted freedom, and denying that to them was un-American.
•However, expansionists cried that the Philippines could become another Hong Kong.
1.British writer Rudyard Kipling wrote about “The White Man’s Burden,” urging America to keep the Philippines and “civilize them.”
•In the Senate, the treaty was almost not passed, but finally, William Jennings Bryan argued for its passage, saying that the sooner the treaty was passed, the sooner the U.S. could get rid of the Philippines. The treaty passed by only one vote.
VII. Perplexities in Puerto Rico and Cuba
•The Foraker Act of 1900 gave Puerto Ricans a limited degree of popular government, and in 1917, Congress granted Puerto Ricans full American citizenship.
1.U.S. help also transformed Puerto Rico and worked wonders in sanitation, transportation, beauty, and education.
•In the Insular Cases, the Supreme Court barely ruled that the Constitution did not have full authority on how to deal with the islands (Cuba and Puerto Rico), essentially letting Congress do whatever it wanted with them. Basically, the cases said the island residents do not necessarily share the same rights as Americans.
•America could not improve Cuba that much however, other than getting rid of yellow fever with the help of General Leonard Wood and Dr. Walter Reed.
1.In 1902, the U.S. did indeed walk away from Cuba, but it also encouraged Cuba to write and pass the Platt Amendment, which became their constitution.
2.This amendment said that (1) the U.S. could intervene and restore order in case of anarchy, (2) that the U.S. could trade freely with Cuba, and (3) that the U.S. could get two bays for naval bases, notably Guantanamo Bay.
VIII. New Horizons in Two Hemispheres
•The Spanish-American War lasted only 113 days and affirmed America’s presence as a world power.
•However, America’s actions after the war made its German rival jealous and its Latin American neighbors suspicious.
•Finally, one of the happiest results of the war was the narrowing of the bloody chasm between the U.S. North and South, which had been formed in the Civil War.
1.General Joseph Wheeler was given a command in Cuba.
IX. “Little Brown Brothers” in the Philippines
•The Filipinos had assumed that they would receive freedom after the Spanish-American War, but when they didn’t they revolted against the U.S.
1.The insurrection began on February 4, 1899, and was led by Emilio Aguinaldo, who took his troops into guerrilla warfare after open combat proved to be useless.
2.Stories of atrocities abounded, but finally, the rebellion was broken in 1901 when U.S. soldiers invaded Aguinaldo’s headquarters and captured him.
•President McKinley formed a Philippine Commission in 1899 to deal with the Filipinos, and in its second year, the organization was headed by amiable William Howard Taft, who developed a strong attachment for the Filipinos, calling them his “little brown brothers.”
•The Americans tried to assimilate the Filipinos, but the islanders resisted; they finally got their independence on July 4, 1946.
X. Hinging the Open Door in China
•Following its defeat by Japan in 1894-1895, China had been carved into “spheres of influence” by the European powers.
•Americans were alarmed, as churches worried about their missionary strongholds while businesses feared that they would not be able to export their products to China.
•Finally, Secretary of State John Hay dispatched his famous Open Door note, which urged the European nations to keep fair competition open to all nations willing and wanting to participate. This became the “Open Door Policy.”
1.All the powers already holding spots of China were squeamish, and only Italy, which had no sphere of influence of its own, accepted unconditionally.
2.Russia didn’t accept it at all, but the others did, on certain conditions, and thus, China was “saved” from being carved up.
•In 1900, a super-patriotic group known as the “Boxers” started the Boxer Rebellion where they revolted and took over the capital of China, Beijing, taking all foreigners hostage, including diplomats.
•After a multi-national force broke the rebellion, the powers made China pay $333 million for damages, of which the U.S. eventually received $18 million.
•Fearing that the European powers would carve China up for good, now, John Hay officially asked that China not be carved.
XI. Imperialism or Bryanism in 1900?
•Just like four years before, it was McKinley sitting on his front porch and Bryan actively and personally campaigning, but Theodore Roosevelt’s active campaigning took a lot of the momentum away from Bryan’s.
•Bryan’s supporters concentrated on imperialism—a bad move, considering that Americans were tired of the subject, while McKinley’s supporters claimed that “Bryanism,” not imperialism, was the problem, and that if Bryan became president, he would shake up the prosperity that was in America at the time; McKinley won easily.
XII. TR: Brandisher of the Big Stick
•Six months later, a deranged murderer shot and killed William McKinley, making Theodore Roosevelt the youngest president ever at age 42.
1.TR promised to carry out McKinley’s policies.
•Theodore Roosevelt was a barrel-chested man with a short temper, large glasses, and a stubborn mentality that always thought he was right.
1.Born into a rich family and graduated from Harvard, he was highly energetic and spirited, and his motto was “Speak softly and carry a big stick,” or basically, “Let your actions do the talking.”
•Roosevelt rapidly developed into a master politician, and a maverick uncontrollable by party machines, and he believed that a president should lead, which would explain the precedents that he would set during his term, becoming the “first modern president.”
XIII. Building the Panama Canal
•TR had traveled to Europe and knew more about foreign affairs than most of his predecessors, and one foreign affair that he knew needed to be dealt with was the creation of a canal through the Central American isthmus.
1.During the Spanish-American War, the battleship U.S.S. Oregon had been forced to steam all the way around the tip of South America to join the fleet in Cuba.
2.Such a waterway would also make defense of the recent island acquisitions easier (i.e. Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam, Hawaii).
•However, the 1850 Clayton-Bulwer Treaty with Britain had forbade the construction by either country of a canal in the Americas without the other’s consent and help, but that statement was nullified in 1901 by the Hay-Pauncefote Treaty.
•A Nicaraguan route was one possible place for a canal, but it was opposed by the old French Canal Company that was eager to build in Panama and salvage something from their costly failure there.
1.Their leader was Philippe Bunau-Varilla.
2.The U.S. finally chose Panama after Mount Pelée erupted and killed 30,000 people.
•The U.S. negotiated a deal that would buy a 6-mile-wide strip of land in Panama for $10 million and a $250,000 annual payment, but this treaty was retracted by the Colombian government, which owned Panama.
1.TR was furious, since he wanted construction of the canal to begin before the 1904 campaign.
•At this point, TR and the U.S. decided enough was enough and it was time for action.
◦On November 3, 1903, another revolution in Panama began with the killing of a Chinese civilian and a donkey, and when Colombia tried to stop it, the U.S., citing an 1846 treaty with Colombia, wouldn’t let the Colombian fleet through.
◦Panama was thus recognized by the U.S., and fifteen days later, Bunau-Varilla, the Panamanian minister despite his French nationality, signed the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty that gave a widened (6x10 mi.) Panamanian zone to the U.S. for $15 million.
◦TR didn’t actively plot to tear Panama away from Colombia, but it seemed like it to the public, and to Latin America, and his actions in this incident saw him suffer a political black eye.
•In 1904, construction began on the Panama Canal, but at first, problems with landslides and sanitation occurred.
1.Colonel George Washington Goethals finally organized the workers while Colonel William C. Gorgas exterminated yellow fever.
2.When TR visited Panama in 1906, he was the first U.S. president to leave America for foreign soil.
3.The canal was finally finished and opened in 1914, at a cost of $400 million.
XIV. TR’s Perversion of the Monroe Doctrine
•Latin American nations like Venezuela and the Dominican Republic were having a hard time paying their debts to their European debtors, so Britain and Germany decided to send a bit of force to South America to make the Latinos pay.
•TR feared that if European powers interfered in the Americas to collect debts, they might then stay in Latin America, a blatant violation of the Monroe Doctrine, so he issued his Roosevelt Corollary, which stated that in future cases of debt problems, the U.S. would take over and handle any intervention in Latin America on behalf of Europe, thus keeping Europe away and the Monroe Doctrine intact.
1.It said in effect, no one could bully Latin America except the U.S.
2.However, this corollary didn’t bear too well with Latin America, whose countries once again felt that Uncle Sam was being overbearing.
■When U.S. Marines landed in Cuba to bring back order to the island in 1906, this seemed like an extension of the “Bad Neighbor” policy.
XV. Roosevelt on the World Stage
•In 1904, Japan attacked Russia, since Russia had been in Manchuria, and proceeded to administer a series of humiliating victories until the Japanese began to run short on men.
1.Therefore, they approached Theodore Roosevelt to facilitate a peace treaty.
2.At Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in 1905, both sides met, and though both were stubborn (Japan wanted all of the strategic island of Sakhalin while the Russians disagreed), in the end, TR negotiated a deal in which Japan got half of Sakhalin but no indemnity for its losses.
3.For this, and his mediation of North African disputes in 1906 through an international conference at Algeciras, Spain, TR received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1906.
•However, due to the Russo-Japanese incident, America lost two allies in Russia and Japan, neither of which felt that it had received its fair share of winnings.
XVI. Japanese Laborers in California
•After the war, many Japanese immigrants poured into California, and fears of a “yellow peril” arose again.
•The showdown came in 1906 after the San Francisco earthquake when the city decreed that, due to lack of space, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean children should attend a special school.
1.Instantly, this became an international issue, but TR settled it eventually.
2.San Francisco would not displace students while Japan would keep its laborers in Japan.
•To impress the Japanese, Roosevelt sent his entire battleship fleet, “The Great White Fleet,” around the world for a tour, and it received tremendous salutes in Latin America, New Zealand, Hawaii, Australia, and Japan, helping relieve tensions.
•The Root-Takahira Agreement pledged the U.S. and Japan to respect each other’s territorial possessions in the Pacific and to uphold the Open Door Policy in China.
Return to the American Pageant--13th main index
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Bowring Treaty (wikipedia, read with pinch of salt)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
The Bowring Treaty is the name given to an agreement signed on April 18, 1855 between the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Siam that liberalized foreign trade in Siam.
The Treaty was signed by King Mongkut of Siam and Sir John Bowring, Governor of Hong Kong and Britain's envoy.
A previous treaty had been signed between Siam and the United Kingdom in 1826, and the new treaty elaborated and liberalized trade rules and regulations[1] by creating a new system of imports and exports.
The treaty allowed free trade by foreigners in Bangkok, as foreign trade had previously been subject to heavy royal taxes.[2] The treaty also allowed the establishment of a British consulate in Bangkok and guaranteed its full extraterritorial powers, and allowed Englishmen to own land in Siam.[1] The regulations in short are:
1.British subjects were placed under consular jurisdiction. Thus, for the first time, Siam granted extraterritoriality to foreign aliens.
2.British subjects were given the right to trade freely in all seaports, and to reside permanently in Bangkok. They were to be allowed to buy and rent property in the environs of Bangkok; namely, in the area more than four mile from city walls but less than twenty four hours’ journey from the city (calculated at the speed of native boats). British subjects were also to be allowed to travel freely in the interior with passes provided by the consul.
3.Measurement duties were abolished and import and export duties fixed.
1.The import duty was fixed at 3 percent for all articles, with two exceptions: opium was to be free of duty, but it had to be sold to the opium farmer; and bullion was to be free of duty.
2.Articles of export were to be taxed just once, whether the tax was called an inland tax, a transit duty, or an export duty.
4.British merchants were to be allowed to buy and sell directly with individual Siamese without interference from any third person.
5.The Siamese government reserved the right to prohibit the export of salt, rice, and fish whenever these articles were deemed to be scarce.[3]
Officially a Treaty of Friendship and Commerce,[4] it is nonetheless claimed to be an unequal bilateral contract as Siam was not in a position to negotiate, considering that Britain had demonstrated its military might during the First Opium War with China, thereby discouraging any attempts to prevent Western trade.[5] Siam's fears were only consolidated by the fact that negotiations that had occurred five years earlier between Sir James Brooke, the White Rajah of Sarawak and British envoy, and Siam's King Jessadabodindra had failed, and had led to Brooke threatening Siam with Britain's Gunboat Policy.[4] The treaty eventually led other foreign powers to sign their own bilateral treaty, based on the rules set by the Bowring Treaty.[1] However, the treaty also ensured that foreign powers would not intervene in Siam's internal affairs and allowed for Siam to remain independent.[2] The Bowring Treaty is now credited for having led to the economic development of Bangkok, as it created a framework in which multilateral trade could operate freely in Southeast Asia, notably between China, Singapore and Siam.[2]
The Bowring Treaty is the name given to an agreement signed on April 18, 1855 between the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Siam that liberalized foreign trade in Siam.
The Treaty was signed by King Mongkut of Siam and Sir John Bowring, Governor of Hong Kong and Britain's envoy.
A previous treaty had been signed between Siam and the United Kingdom in 1826, and the new treaty elaborated and liberalized trade rules and regulations[1] by creating a new system of imports and exports.
The treaty allowed free trade by foreigners in Bangkok, as foreign trade had previously been subject to heavy royal taxes.[2] The treaty also allowed the establishment of a British consulate in Bangkok and guaranteed its full extraterritorial powers, and allowed Englishmen to own land in Siam.[1] The regulations in short are:
1.British subjects were placed under consular jurisdiction. Thus, for the first time, Siam granted extraterritoriality to foreign aliens.
2.British subjects were given the right to trade freely in all seaports, and to reside permanently in Bangkok. They were to be allowed to buy and rent property in the environs of Bangkok; namely, in the area more than four mile from city walls but less than twenty four hours’ journey from the city (calculated at the speed of native boats). British subjects were also to be allowed to travel freely in the interior with passes provided by the consul.
3.Measurement duties were abolished and import and export duties fixed.
1.The import duty was fixed at 3 percent for all articles, with two exceptions: opium was to be free of duty, but it had to be sold to the opium farmer; and bullion was to be free of duty.
2.Articles of export were to be taxed just once, whether the tax was called an inland tax, a transit duty, or an export duty.
4.British merchants were to be allowed to buy and sell directly with individual Siamese without interference from any third person.
5.The Siamese government reserved the right to prohibit the export of salt, rice, and fish whenever these articles were deemed to be scarce.[3]
Officially a Treaty of Friendship and Commerce,[4] it is nonetheless claimed to be an unequal bilateral contract as Siam was not in a position to negotiate, considering that Britain had demonstrated its military might during the First Opium War with China, thereby discouraging any attempts to prevent Western trade.[5] Siam's fears were only consolidated by the fact that negotiations that had occurred five years earlier between Sir James Brooke, the White Rajah of Sarawak and British envoy, and Siam's King Jessadabodindra had failed, and had led to Brooke threatening Siam with Britain's Gunboat Policy.[4] The treaty eventually led other foreign powers to sign their own bilateral treaty, based on the rules set by the Bowring Treaty.[1] However, the treaty also ensured that foreign powers would not intervene in Siam's internal affairs and allowed for Siam to remain independent.[2] The Bowring Treaty is now credited for having led to the economic development of Bangkok, as it created a framework in which multilateral trade could operate freely in Southeast Asia, notably between China, Singapore and Siam.[2]
Thailand celebrates Chakri Day, April 6th
Early monarchs of the Chakri Dynasty shaped the Thailand of today
The absolute monarchs of the early Chakri Dynasty had a huge role in the development of Thailand.
The influence of colonialism on Southeast Asia was a major factor in the development of each country. Thailand’s escape from Western colonization was due to two farsighted kings who were well educated and who understood Western thought.
However, the foreigners did substantially influence the economic and social growth of the country. The trade that grew as a result of the many treaties with Western nations pushed over the first domino of modernization.
The absolute monarchs, Rama IV and Rama V in particular, displayed incredible foresight in their decisions. Colonialism was a huge threat in Southeast Asia during those early years, and Thailand is the only country in the region never to have been colonized. It was kept as a buffer state between French Indochina and the British controlled Burma. The country managed to maintain its independence because the kings realized that their country could only escape Western control by developing and westernizing the country. This led to major redevelopment of the country, reorganization of the government and increased primacy of Bangkok.
The Chakri Dynasty began in 1782 when the capital of Bangkok, or Krung Thep, was set up in a loop of the Chao Phraya River, after the golden capital of Ayutthaya was burned by the Khmer. Absolute monarchs reigned the country until 1932 when a democratic uprising changed the monarchy into a constitutional monarchy. Two of these absolute monarchs in particular had a vital role in planning ahead for their country. King Mongkut (Rama IV) who reigned from 1850-1868 and King Chulalongkorn the Great (Rama V) who reigned from 1868-1910 were the two kings that played the most important roles in Thailand’s escape from colonization. Rama IV and Rama V were experts in diplomacy as they strengthened Siam and prevented colonial powers from taking over their country. In doing so they built an infrastructure, modernized the economy and westernized Bangkok, creating the city as it is known today.
King Mongkut
King Mongkut was the first monarch receptive to Western influence, although still wary of Western dominance. He was crowned at age 48 after having been in the monkhood for 27 years. This was a huge advantage for King Mongkut as the education he received in the wat helped him understand the West and therefore he knew how to deal with them tactfully. He realized that if Siam was to be able to meet the Western world on equal terms, then they must have the modern technology to do so.
Education
The education King Mongkut received as a monk was invaluable. He learned English which enabled him to read books on modern science, geography, history and mathematics. His English skills also earned him respect from visiting foreign diplomats. As a monk, King Mongkut was able to travel around in Siam and meet people on equal terms. This gave him an open, humane attitude toward his subjects because he saw himself as an ordinary human being, and thoroughly understood the problems of his people.
Foreign Policy
King Mongkut’s foreign policy consisted of two ideas. He wanted to avoid confrontation by making concessions, and he wanted to give all Western countries equal treatment to avoid domination by one. He was responsible for the Bowring Treaty of 1855, which was a treaty of commerce and friendship with Britain. The treaty imposed concessions on Thailand that limited tariffs on trade and granted extra-territorial rights to the British. King Mongkut also established other Bowring-type treaties with the United States, France, Denmark, Holland, Portugal, Belgium, Norway, Prussia, Sweden and Italy.
The effects of these treaties on the capital and government systems were substantial. Although the treaties helped avert colonialism, problem areas arose within Thailand’s traditional economic and legal system. The country needed to modernize fast to accommodate the increase in trade, production and services. Canal digging and road construction began. Ships were built both to modernize the navy and to catch the overflow of trade. The army was reorganized. Many Europeans were employed to reorganize the government. These foreign ministers were all from different countries. The British advised on financing, the French helped reorganize the law system and the Americans were trusted to help advise on foreign affairs. With their help, the King modernized the country and centralized the government.
Domestic Policy
Thailand’s first mint was established around this time, along with new programs in schools that encouraged the study of foreign languages. Rice was beginning to be exported so new canals needed to be dug and new markets opened. The allowance of farangs, or foreigners into Bangkok for trade caused the construction of new buildings and roads. The New Road on the east side of the river was built at this time and new buildings were built along it to accommodate the growing businesses. Other roads were constructed soon afterwards, as the King was ashamed of the condition of the streets and wanted to change their appearance. At this time roads existed only in the center of the city and near markets, but the entire nature of the city changed. Bangkok was changed from its traditional small-scale economy to one focused on manufactured goods and exports.
King Chulalongkorn the Great
King Chulalongkorn the Great (Rama V) reigned for 42 years, from 1868-1910. He continued the far-sighted reforms of modernization that Mongkut had begun. King Chulalongkorn had prided himself on the methods with which he westernized Siam without subjecting it to foreign control, but King Chulalongkorn was very pragmatic in his reforms. He was critically selective of which reforms to implicate because he did not want to erase any traditional values. The most famous of his reforms was the abolition of slavery. He pronounced every person born during his reign free, and took steps to liberate the present slaves by creating incentives for their owners.
Domestic Policy
King Chulalongkorn made other important internal reforms as well. He expanded the communication and transportation system by building the first railroad, post and telegraph services. These new networks had two great effects on the growth of Thailand. First of all, every system originated in Bangkok and radiated out to the provinces, re-strengthening Bangkok’s primacy. Railroad lines were a good example of this. Not only were the provinces accessible to the city, the city became more accessible to the rural community and as a result, rapid urbanization took place. Second of all, these developments gave the Thai government much more control over the provinces. The government was able to send officials to the provinces and replace the old ruling families with those more favorable to the Chakri throne. Schools were promoted in the provinces where the Thai language was taught to give the country a common language. All of these reforms and more resulted in the national integration of the entire country. With the government in control of its outer provinces, there was less of a chance of colonial takeover. Thailand was united and the national identity that had formed made it harder for colonists to take over parts of the country.
Rama V also sent many students to study abroad for their education. He wanted them to return and be capable of replacing the foreign advisors that King Mongkut had used. King Chulalongkorn also created more government ministers using the West as a model, and thereby centralized the government even more.
King Chulalongkorn also established a variety of public utilities. Health and educational standards for the public were improved. He developed criminal and civil courts, a police force, hospitals, universities and a teacher’s college. Chulalongkorn often traveled through Thailand to personally investigate and share his subject’s conditions. These trips not only made him more aware of what was going on in his country, it also made him more popular with the people.
Result of domestic policy
King Chulalongkorn’s domestic policy was very successful. The colonists’ White Man’s Burden excuse was no longer applicable. Thailand had gained the respect of the foreigners who saw it as stable, modern, able to protect treaty rights and promote trade, all of which were ideal for the westerner’s needs.
Foreign Policy
King Chulalongkorn’s foreign policy was also very successful. He had traveled extensively in Europe in 1897 and met the European royalty on equal terms. He was the first Thai monarch to travel to the west. He knew English well and therefore had read books on Western history and was determined to resist their domination. He knew their strength and tactics and knew that Thailand could never use force against them and still be successful. Instead, Chulalongkorn based his foreign policy on establishing equal rights for all European powers. He did not want any confrontations and therefore managed to continue friendly relations with each country.
King Chulalongkorn made several land concessions to the French and British. To the French he granted Laos in 1893, which had been kept as a sort of buffer state between Siam and French Indochina. Parts of Cambodia, including Angkor Wat, had been ceded to the French in 1867. The southern Malay states were taken by the British in 1909 and thus the borders of present day Thailand were established.
In order for the country to be accepted as independent and a buffer state, the country needed to reform. Both Rama IV and Rama V foresaw this potential problem, and although it appears that they ceded many rights away, they managed to maintain their country’s independence and dignity.
The absolute monarchs of the early Chakri Dynasty had a huge role in the development of Thailand.
The influence of colonialism on Southeast Asia was a major factor in the development of each country. Thailand’s escape from Western colonization was due to two farsighted kings who were well educated and who understood Western thought.
However, the foreigners did substantially influence the economic and social growth of the country. The trade that grew as a result of the many treaties with Western nations pushed over the first domino of modernization.
The absolute monarchs, Rama IV and Rama V in particular, displayed incredible foresight in their decisions. Colonialism was a huge threat in Southeast Asia during those early years, and Thailand is the only country in the region never to have been colonized. It was kept as a buffer state between French Indochina and the British controlled Burma. The country managed to maintain its independence because the kings realized that their country could only escape Western control by developing and westernizing the country. This led to major redevelopment of the country, reorganization of the government and increased primacy of Bangkok.
The Chakri Dynasty began in 1782 when the capital of Bangkok, or Krung Thep, was set up in a loop of the Chao Phraya River, after the golden capital of Ayutthaya was burned by the Khmer. Absolute monarchs reigned the country until 1932 when a democratic uprising changed the monarchy into a constitutional monarchy. Two of these absolute monarchs in particular had a vital role in planning ahead for their country. King Mongkut (Rama IV) who reigned from 1850-1868 and King Chulalongkorn the Great (Rama V) who reigned from 1868-1910 were the two kings that played the most important roles in Thailand’s escape from colonization. Rama IV and Rama V were experts in diplomacy as they strengthened Siam and prevented colonial powers from taking over their country. In doing so they built an infrastructure, modernized the economy and westernized Bangkok, creating the city as it is known today.
King Mongkut
King Mongkut was the first monarch receptive to Western influence, although still wary of Western dominance. He was crowned at age 48 after having been in the monkhood for 27 years. This was a huge advantage for King Mongkut as the education he received in the wat helped him understand the West and therefore he knew how to deal with them tactfully. He realized that if Siam was to be able to meet the Western world on equal terms, then they must have the modern technology to do so.
Education
The education King Mongkut received as a monk was invaluable. He learned English which enabled him to read books on modern science, geography, history and mathematics. His English skills also earned him respect from visiting foreign diplomats. As a monk, King Mongkut was able to travel around in Siam and meet people on equal terms. This gave him an open, humane attitude toward his subjects because he saw himself as an ordinary human being, and thoroughly understood the problems of his people.
Foreign Policy
King Mongkut’s foreign policy consisted of two ideas. He wanted to avoid confrontation by making concessions, and he wanted to give all Western countries equal treatment to avoid domination by one. He was responsible for the Bowring Treaty of 1855, which was a treaty of commerce and friendship with Britain. The treaty imposed concessions on Thailand that limited tariffs on trade and granted extra-territorial rights to the British. King Mongkut also established other Bowring-type treaties with the United States, France, Denmark, Holland, Portugal, Belgium, Norway, Prussia, Sweden and Italy.
The effects of these treaties on the capital and government systems were substantial. Although the treaties helped avert colonialism, problem areas arose within Thailand’s traditional economic and legal system. The country needed to modernize fast to accommodate the increase in trade, production and services. Canal digging and road construction began. Ships were built both to modernize the navy and to catch the overflow of trade. The army was reorganized. Many Europeans were employed to reorganize the government. These foreign ministers were all from different countries. The British advised on financing, the French helped reorganize the law system and the Americans were trusted to help advise on foreign affairs. With their help, the King modernized the country and centralized the government.
Domestic Policy
Thailand’s first mint was established around this time, along with new programs in schools that encouraged the study of foreign languages. Rice was beginning to be exported so new canals needed to be dug and new markets opened. The allowance of farangs, or foreigners into Bangkok for trade caused the construction of new buildings and roads. The New Road on the east side of the river was built at this time and new buildings were built along it to accommodate the growing businesses. Other roads were constructed soon afterwards, as the King was ashamed of the condition of the streets and wanted to change their appearance. At this time roads existed only in the center of the city and near markets, but the entire nature of the city changed. Bangkok was changed from its traditional small-scale economy to one focused on manufactured goods and exports.
King Chulalongkorn the Great
King Chulalongkorn the Great (Rama V) reigned for 42 years, from 1868-1910. He continued the far-sighted reforms of modernization that Mongkut had begun. King Chulalongkorn had prided himself on the methods with which he westernized Siam without subjecting it to foreign control, but King Chulalongkorn was very pragmatic in his reforms. He was critically selective of which reforms to implicate because he did not want to erase any traditional values. The most famous of his reforms was the abolition of slavery. He pronounced every person born during his reign free, and took steps to liberate the present slaves by creating incentives for their owners.
Domestic Policy
King Chulalongkorn made other important internal reforms as well. He expanded the communication and transportation system by building the first railroad, post and telegraph services. These new networks had two great effects on the growth of Thailand. First of all, every system originated in Bangkok and radiated out to the provinces, re-strengthening Bangkok’s primacy. Railroad lines were a good example of this. Not only were the provinces accessible to the city, the city became more accessible to the rural community and as a result, rapid urbanization took place. Second of all, these developments gave the Thai government much more control over the provinces. The government was able to send officials to the provinces and replace the old ruling families with those more favorable to the Chakri throne. Schools were promoted in the provinces where the Thai language was taught to give the country a common language. All of these reforms and more resulted in the national integration of the entire country. With the government in control of its outer provinces, there was less of a chance of colonial takeover. Thailand was united and the national identity that had formed made it harder for colonists to take over parts of the country.
Rama V also sent many students to study abroad for their education. He wanted them to return and be capable of replacing the foreign advisors that King Mongkut had used. King Chulalongkorn also created more government ministers using the West as a model, and thereby centralized the government even more.
King Chulalongkorn also established a variety of public utilities. Health and educational standards for the public were improved. He developed criminal and civil courts, a police force, hospitals, universities and a teacher’s college. Chulalongkorn often traveled through Thailand to personally investigate and share his subject’s conditions. These trips not only made him more aware of what was going on in his country, it also made him more popular with the people.
Result of domestic policy
King Chulalongkorn’s domestic policy was very successful. The colonists’ White Man’s Burden excuse was no longer applicable. Thailand had gained the respect of the foreigners who saw it as stable, modern, able to protect treaty rights and promote trade, all of which were ideal for the westerner’s needs.
Foreign Policy
King Chulalongkorn’s foreign policy was also very successful. He had traveled extensively in Europe in 1897 and met the European royalty on equal terms. He was the first Thai monarch to travel to the west. He knew English well and therefore had read books on Western history and was determined to resist their domination. He knew their strength and tactics and knew that Thailand could never use force against them and still be successful. Instead, Chulalongkorn based his foreign policy on establishing equal rights for all European powers. He did not want any confrontations and therefore managed to continue friendly relations with each country.
King Chulalongkorn made several land concessions to the French and British. To the French he granted Laos in 1893, which had been kept as a sort of buffer state between Siam and French Indochina. Parts of Cambodia, including Angkor Wat, had been ceded to the French in 1867. The southern Malay states were taken by the British in 1909 and thus the borders of present day Thailand were established.
In order for the country to be accepted as independent and a buffer state, the country needed to reform. Both Rama IV and Rama V foresaw this potential problem, and although it appears that they ceded many rights away, they managed to maintain their country’s independence and dignity.
Egyptian minister: Obama told me he is a Muslim
Before Its News ^ | June 10 2010 | Before Its News
Posted on Saturday, June 12, 2010 1:01:16 PM by NoLibZone
This was a statement by Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit on Nile-TV. It was made on the «Round table show».
This is the statement recorded:
Adul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Obama, where the US President told him that He was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the step son of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympatetic towards the Muslim agenda.
Adul Gheit claimed Obama told the Arabs to show patience. Obama promised that once he overcame some domestic issues, like the Health care reform, he would show the Muslim World how to deal with Israel.
Posted on Saturday, June 12, 2010 1:01:16 PM by NoLibZone
This was a statement by Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit on Nile-TV. It was made on the «Round table show».
This is the statement recorded:
Adul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Obama, where the US President told him that He was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the step son of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympatetic towards the Muslim agenda.
Adul Gheit claimed Obama told the Arabs to show patience. Obama promised that once he overcame some domestic issues, like the Health care reform, he would show the Muslim World how to deal with Israel.
My week embedded with US Forces in Afghanistan
* Gary Ramage
* From: Herald Sun
* June 11, 2010 5:50PM
Photographer Gary Ramage has spent the past week embedded with US Forces. He has watched a man die; he has been present at the evacuations of several others. This is his extraordinary story.
THIS has been one of the deadliest weeks on record for coalition forces fighting in Afghanistan.
Two Australian soldiers were killed in Tarin Kowt on Monday; seven US soldiers and one contractor were also killed.
Two more US Marines died the following day in Southern Afghanistan's Helmand Province, when seven Marines were brought down by an IED blast.
Two of those casualties were later confirmed to be the result of ''angels'' - the call sign for friendly KIA (Killed In Action) incidents.
The remains of one of the dead Marines were unable to be located. It is assumed that he took the brunt of the blast.
To date, a total of 1814 NATO soldiers have died whilst serving on the frontline in Afghanistan since 2001, 1022 of whom were US service personnel. Australia has lost 13 men.
I was in Southern Afghanistan's Helmand Province on Monday, embedded with the Dustoff crews from Charlie Company 6th Battalion Combat Airmobile Brigade (CAB) of the 101st Airborne Division.
I had arrived with the Blackhawk helicopter that flew first into the battle to pick up the injured US soldiers.
It was about 9am. I had just collected my breakfast, which consisted of a boiled egg, a hamburger patty, a pastry egg roll and some slices of cooked ham.
Oh yeah, and a very good smelling cup of coffee: my first in four weeks. I went outside to the dinner table and sat down.
I had just taken my first bite of the egg pastry thingy when the radio started bellowing, "Medivac, medivac, medivac''.
I dropped everything, took a final gulp of coffee and ran to the helo. I was the second one out there.
The pilot in control (PIC) of the aircraft, Warrant Officer Joseph Wonacott, started to get his gear on.
I did the same thing. The engine started to turn over.
The Crew Chief, sergeant Ryan Hara, medic-sergeant Adam Montavon and co-pilot Rob Ware joined the aircraft and also started dressing in their gear. We were up and gone in well under 15 minutes.
The timing was, and is, essential. If the medivac aircraft is not airborne in 15 minutes or less, the crew is required to send a "please explain'' letter to the US Secretary of Defence.
The crews need to launch within that time to give the injured people the best chance of survival. The men based at FOB Dwyer usually do it in seven or less.
The Blackhawk helicopters are used as the primary vehicle and are largely unarmed, as the Geneva Convention dictates.
The crews only carry sidearms and M4 rifles for self-preservation, in case they have to defend themselves.
When airborne, the Blackhawks are escorted by a chase helicopter and/or US military Cobra attack helicopters, which are heavily armed to repel any type of attack against the Blackhawk during its vital life-saving missions.
The helicopter crew is commonly referred to as Dustoff, which means "Dedicated Unhesitating Service To Our Fighting Forces'' and as such, the men and women of Charlie Company risk their lives every time they jump in the aircraft to go and save some poor Marine who has been blown up or shot.
Their motto is, "Never refuse a mission, never return with an empty helicopter and the needs of the patient come first''.
The role of the Dustoff is to evacuate wounded personal from coalition outposts - Forward Operating Bases (FOBs); Patrol Bases (PB) and Combat Outposts (COP).
Their task is to not only pick up wounded military personnel, but also civilian casualties, including the people who are trying to kill them.
The Dustoff have three levels of priority: Alpha, Bravo and Charlie. Alpha denotes "urgent'', Bravo is "serious but not life-threatening'' and Charlie is "not urgent''.
Their main mission is to reach casualties with the "golden hour'': the window of time before it is generally accepted that victims go from being treatable to fatalities.
On Monday, the Nine Liner - a coded system used by the military to call and rate the priorities of casualties - came over the intercom.
"One injured marine, sucking chest wound,'' we heard.
The boys started prepping the medical gear for the patient.
The radio sounded again and then came the message I had been dreading, "Hot LZ [Landing Zone], enemy in tree line, have Marines are pinned down, taking accurate fire on position, break''.
This was it; I was on my way into a shitfight, along with the Dustoff crew. Call sign Dustoff 66 was flying into a hot LZ.
We arrived over the area but there was mass confusion about where the enemy were firing from.
The Marines were still pinned down and taking fire. The Cobras were trying to confirm the enemy positions so they could "light them up'' and kill them.
Another call over the radio: "Patient is crashing''.
After a minute or two, we were given approval to go in.
The engines roared as we came in quick. Nose up, and then we were on the ground.
The side doors flew open and the medic raced out towards a group of Marines.
He had run about 200m when he finally them, struggling under the weight of their badly-injured comrade.
As Sergeant Adam Montavon recalled, "By the time I reached him on the ground, I could see he was in trouble and told the Marines to get him to the bird.''
They all raced back to the helo and placed him inside.
The Marines jumped out, the doors were slammed shut and we were back in the air. The medic started work on the injured man straight away.
He was in a very bad way. He had taken a round to the upper left side of his chest.
He was bleeding profusely. The medic quickly began treating him.
"I went to work on him straight away, trying to get a pulse, but there was none. I began compressions and Ryan started squeezing the bag to get oxygen into him. He wasn't responding'', Sgt Montavan said.
Even so, the crew chief and the medic did not stop CPR during the whole flight.
They tried everything in their power to save that boy's life.
I could see Sgt Montavon kneeling upright in the back of the helo, pressing down on the Marine's chest, trying to get his heart to start. We were still a good 15 minutes out from the hospital.
We came in fast and low to the Role 3 Hospital.
The door flew open and the medic frantically waved towards the waiting staff to get to the aircraft.
It was a slow process.
The medical staff tried to get him onto a wheeled litter but it had got stuck in the makeshift hard stand.
I dropped my cameras, grabbed both stretcher handles and pulled upwards.
I took his weight so the medics could untangle the trolley. They eventually unengaged it and took him towards the hospital.
When the boys returned we lifted off and flew back to the Dustoff hardstand. The back of the aircraft was a real mess.
There was blood and used medical supplies everywhere.
"The Marine was gone - he most probably left us before being placed on the Blackhawk - but I still had to try and save him, that's my job'', Sgt Montavan said.
Once the engines were shut off, the rest of the detachment came out and started to help strip the armour platting from the floor so they could wash out all of the blood.
They handed out plastic gloves and began to scrub. I put my cameras down again, and started to help with the cleanup. After we had finished, Sgt Derek Costine called my name.
"Gary...catch.'' He threw me the unit patch and said, "Welcome, thanks for helping out''.
The time now was about 10.30am.
This was day two of my embed with Dustoff. It is going to be a busy two weeks.
The following day I went to bed at about 2am. I sat up with the first up crew in case there was a call-out. There wasn't, but then at 6am we were woken by "Medivac, medivac, medivac'' over the radios.
This time, seven Marines had been caught in an IEDs blast.
Two were confirmed "Angels'' - the call sign for friendly Killed In Action.
All birds launched.
Travelling at 30m above the deck at a speed of 225km/h, we reached the LZ in a matter of minutes.
We picked up three injured priority B patients in our helo and another Blackhawk got the rest.
We took the walking wounded. Two had blast or shrapnel injuries to their heads and the other boy had copped shrapnel in the left side of his face.
The medic, Sgt Bradley Robbins, went to work. Crew Chief Jason Norris (who hates the nickname "Chuck'') looked out for incoming rounds.
Pilot in Charge Warrant Officer Adam Stratton and co-pilot Steve King got the bird in the air and we made our way back to Dwyer to drop the patients at the Role 3 hospital. We returned to the helo pad.
A few hours later we were off again. This time to pick up a local little boy who was showing symptoms of poisoning.
As it turned out he had ingested quite a lot of diesel fuel. He was taken to the Role 3 as well.
The hospitals are starting to appear at various locations around Afghanistan - now that the fighting season is well and truly under way, the medics and hospital staff have their work cut out for them.
The evacuation process is to get the casualty back to a Role 3 facility for treatment and then evacuate to the US military hospital in Landstuhl, Germany, and later the Walter Reid Army medical facility in Washington DC.
On the frontline, the US Army medics are highly-trained and equipped for any medical emergency.
They administer life-saving first aid to the wounded men and women unfortunate enough to end up in the back of their bird.
They do their basic training at the Hunter Army Airfield in Georgia.
During the 18-week course, they are taught how to control bleeding and other basic medical skills. The helo medics do another four weeks of intensive training before joining their unit.
The medics can administer drugs and keep patients stabilised, all in the confined space of the back of a Blackhawk helicopter travelling at speeds of up to 320km/h at ground level.
The Blackhawk has twin 1600hp engines, which enable it to achieve its outstanding power and speed. The current models are due for a refurbishment by 2013.
Each is equipped with anti-missile capabilities, or decoy systems.
They have magnesium flares that trick the guidance system of incoming heat-seeking missiles, which would otherwise down the aircraft.
The war in Afghanistan is indeed an unbalanced one that sees 21st centuary weapon platforms pitted against a dedicated insurgency whose whole aim is to kill Coalition soldiers.
They are succeeding with alarming accuracy.
Whether it by Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) planted on some roadside or track, a sneak ambush utilising old captured soviet era weapons or sickening suicide attacks, they are taking the fight to the NATO forces.
The Taliban watch the soldiers and they attack them when they choose. They drop their weapons in the fields when soldiers get close and act other normal Afghani man working their fields.
"It is f...... hard for us to fight an enemy that we can not easily identify, especially with the current rules of engagement that we are bound by'', a Marine said this week.
So is the current Counter Insurgency (COIN) policy - to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people - working? That's yet to be determined.
The generals and the politicians would have you believe it is, but when you speak to the soldier on the ground whose blood is being spilled, it is a totally different story.
They believe in the cause but say they are fed up fighting an enemy with one hand tied behind their backs.
For all that though, they continue to return to the frontline. As long as soldiers and Marines continue to fall victim to the horrible injuries of war, they will continue to fly to their sides.
* From: Herald Sun
* June 11, 2010 5:50PM
Photographer Gary Ramage has spent the past week embedded with US Forces. He has watched a man die; he has been present at the evacuations of several others. This is his extraordinary story.
THIS has been one of the deadliest weeks on record for coalition forces fighting in Afghanistan.
Two Australian soldiers were killed in Tarin Kowt on Monday; seven US soldiers and one contractor were also killed.
Two more US Marines died the following day in Southern Afghanistan's Helmand Province, when seven Marines were brought down by an IED blast.
Two of those casualties were later confirmed to be the result of ''angels'' - the call sign for friendly KIA (Killed In Action) incidents.
The remains of one of the dead Marines were unable to be located. It is assumed that he took the brunt of the blast.
To date, a total of 1814 NATO soldiers have died whilst serving on the frontline in Afghanistan since 2001, 1022 of whom were US service personnel. Australia has lost 13 men.
I was in Southern Afghanistan's Helmand Province on Monday, embedded with the Dustoff crews from Charlie Company 6th Battalion Combat Airmobile Brigade (CAB) of the 101st Airborne Division.
I had arrived with the Blackhawk helicopter that flew first into the battle to pick up the injured US soldiers.
It was about 9am. I had just collected my breakfast, which consisted of a boiled egg, a hamburger patty, a pastry egg roll and some slices of cooked ham.
Oh yeah, and a very good smelling cup of coffee: my first in four weeks. I went outside to the dinner table and sat down.
I had just taken my first bite of the egg pastry thingy when the radio started bellowing, "Medivac, medivac, medivac''.
I dropped everything, took a final gulp of coffee and ran to the helo. I was the second one out there.
The pilot in control (PIC) of the aircraft, Warrant Officer Joseph Wonacott, started to get his gear on.
I did the same thing. The engine started to turn over.
The Crew Chief, sergeant Ryan Hara, medic-sergeant Adam Montavon and co-pilot Rob Ware joined the aircraft and also started dressing in their gear. We were up and gone in well under 15 minutes.
The timing was, and is, essential. If the medivac aircraft is not airborne in 15 minutes or less, the crew is required to send a "please explain'' letter to the US Secretary of Defence.
The crews need to launch within that time to give the injured people the best chance of survival. The men based at FOB Dwyer usually do it in seven or less.
The Blackhawk helicopters are used as the primary vehicle and are largely unarmed, as the Geneva Convention dictates.
The crews only carry sidearms and M4 rifles for self-preservation, in case they have to defend themselves.
When airborne, the Blackhawks are escorted by a chase helicopter and/or US military Cobra attack helicopters, which are heavily armed to repel any type of attack against the Blackhawk during its vital life-saving missions.
The helicopter crew is commonly referred to as Dustoff, which means "Dedicated Unhesitating Service To Our Fighting Forces'' and as such, the men and women of Charlie Company risk their lives every time they jump in the aircraft to go and save some poor Marine who has been blown up or shot.
Their motto is, "Never refuse a mission, never return with an empty helicopter and the needs of the patient come first''.
The role of the Dustoff is to evacuate wounded personal from coalition outposts - Forward Operating Bases (FOBs); Patrol Bases (PB) and Combat Outposts (COP).
Their task is to not only pick up wounded military personnel, but also civilian casualties, including the people who are trying to kill them.
The Dustoff have three levels of priority: Alpha, Bravo and Charlie. Alpha denotes "urgent'', Bravo is "serious but not life-threatening'' and Charlie is "not urgent''.
Their main mission is to reach casualties with the "golden hour'': the window of time before it is generally accepted that victims go from being treatable to fatalities.
On Monday, the Nine Liner - a coded system used by the military to call and rate the priorities of casualties - came over the intercom.
"One injured marine, sucking chest wound,'' we heard.
The boys started prepping the medical gear for the patient.
The radio sounded again and then came the message I had been dreading, "Hot LZ [Landing Zone], enemy in tree line, have Marines are pinned down, taking accurate fire on position, break''.
This was it; I was on my way into a shitfight, along with the Dustoff crew. Call sign Dustoff 66 was flying into a hot LZ.
We arrived over the area but there was mass confusion about where the enemy were firing from.
The Marines were still pinned down and taking fire. The Cobras were trying to confirm the enemy positions so they could "light them up'' and kill them.
Another call over the radio: "Patient is crashing''.
After a minute or two, we were given approval to go in.
The engines roared as we came in quick. Nose up, and then we were on the ground.
The side doors flew open and the medic raced out towards a group of Marines.
He had run about 200m when he finally them, struggling under the weight of their badly-injured comrade.
As Sergeant Adam Montavon recalled, "By the time I reached him on the ground, I could see he was in trouble and told the Marines to get him to the bird.''
They all raced back to the helo and placed him inside.
The Marines jumped out, the doors were slammed shut and we were back in the air. The medic started work on the injured man straight away.
He was in a very bad way. He had taken a round to the upper left side of his chest.
He was bleeding profusely. The medic quickly began treating him.
"I went to work on him straight away, trying to get a pulse, but there was none. I began compressions and Ryan started squeezing the bag to get oxygen into him. He wasn't responding'', Sgt Montavan said.
Even so, the crew chief and the medic did not stop CPR during the whole flight.
They tried everything in their power to save that boy's life.
I could see Sgt Montavon kneeling upright in the back of the helo, pressing down on the Marine's chest, trying to get his heart to start. We were still a good 15 minutes out from the hospital.
We came in fast and low to the Role 3 Hospital.
The door flew open and the medic frantically waved towards the waiting staff to get to the aircraft.
It was a slow process.
The medical staff tried to get him onto a wheeled litter but it had got stuck in the makeshift hard stand.
I dropped my cameras, grabbed both stretcher handles and pulled upwards.
I took his weight so the medics could untangle the trolley. They eventually unengaged it and took him towards the hospital.
When the boys returned we lifted off and flew back to the Dustoff hardstand. The back of the aircraft was a real mess.
There was blood and used medical supplies everywhere.
"The Marine was gone - he most probably left us before being placed on the Blackhawk - but I still had to try and save him, that's my job'', Sgt Montavan said.
Once the engines were shut off, the rest of the detachment came out and started to help strip the armour platting from the floor so they could wash out all of the blood.
They handed out plastic gloves and began to scrub. I put my cameras down again, and started to help with the cleanup. After we had finished, Sgt Derek Costine called my name.
"Gary...catch.'' He threw me the unit patch and said, "Welcome, thanks for helping out''.
The time now was about 10.30am.
This was day two of my embed with Dustoff. It is going to be a busy two weeks.
The following day I went to bed at about 2am. I sat up with the first up crew in case there was a call-out. There wasn't, but then at 6am we were woken by "Medivac, medivac, medivac'' over the radios.
This time, seven Marines had been caught in an IEDs blast.
Two were confirmed "Angels'' - the call sign for friendly Killed In Action.
All birds launched.
Travelling at 30m above the deck at a speed of 225km/h, we reached the LZ in a matter of minutes.
We picked up three injured priority B patients in our helo and another Blackhawk got the rest.
We took the walking wounded. Two had blast or shrapnel injuries to their heads and the other boy had copped shrapnel in the left side of his face.
The medic, Sgt Bradley Robbins, went to work. Crew Chief Jason Norris (who hates the nickname "Chuck'') looked out for incoming rounds.
Pilot in Charge Warrant Officer Adam Stratton and co-pilot Steve King got the bird in the air and we made our way back to Dwyer to drop the patients at the Role 3 hospital. We returned to the helo pad.
A few hours later we were off again. This time to pick up a local little boy who was showing symptoms of poisoning.
As it turned out he had ingested quite a lot of diesel fuel. He was taken to the Role 3 as well.
The hospitals are starting to appear at various locations around Afghanistan - now that the fighting season is well and truly under way, the medics and hospital staff have their work cut out for them.
The evacuation process is to get the casualty back to a Role 3 facility for treatment and then evacuate to the US military hospital in Landstuhl, Germany, and later the Walter Reid Army medical facility in Washington DC.
On the frontline, the US Army medics are highly-trained and equipped for any medical emergency.
They administer life-saving first aid to the wounded men and women unfortunate enough to end up in the back of their bird.
They do their basic training at the Hunter Army Airfield in Georgia.
During the 18-week course, they are taught how to control bleeding and other basic medical skills. The helo medics do another four weeks of intensive training before joining their unit.
The medics can administer drugs and keep patients stabilised, all in the confined space of the back of a Blackhawk helicopter travelling at speeds of up to 320km/h at ground level.
The Blackhawk has twin 1600hp engines, which enable it to achieve its outstanding power and speed. The current models are due for a refurbishment by 2013.
Each is equipped with anti-missile capabilities, or decoy systems.
They have magnesium flares that trick the guidance system of incoming heat-seeking missiles, which would otherwise down the aircraft.
The war in Afghanistan is indeed an unbalanced one that sees 21st centuary weapon platforms pitted against a dedicated insurgency whose whole aim is to kill Coalition soldiers.
They are succeeding with alarming accuracy.
Whether it by Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) planted on some roadside or track, a sneak ambush utilising old captured soviet era weapons or sickening suicide attacks, they are taking the fight to the NATO forces.
The Taliban watch the soldiers and they attack them when they choose. They drop their weapons in the fields when soldiers get close and act other normal Afghani man working their fields.
"It is f...... hard for us to fight an enemy that we can not easily identify, especially with the current rules of engagement that we are bound by'', a Marine said this week.
So is the current Counter Insurgency (COIN) policy - to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people - working? That's yet to be determined.
The generals and the politicians would have you believe it is, but when you speak to the soldier on the ground whose blood is being spilled, it is a totally different story.
They believe in the cause but say they are fed up fighting an enemy with one hand tied behind their backs.
For all that though, they continue to return to the frontline. As long as soldiers and Marines continue to fall victim to the horrible injuries of war, they will continue to fly to their sides.
It Costs $222,360 To Raise A Child
A middle-income, two-parent family will spend $222,360, on average, to raise a baby born in 2009, according to a government estimate released today.
Yes, a number like that screams false precision. Still, some of the broad outlines that go into the estimate are pretty interesting:
* Housing is the most expensive part of raising a kid. It accounts for 31 percent of the cost, followed by childcare and education (17 percent) and food (16 percent).
* The annual cost rises a bit as the child gets older — from less than $12,000 per year for a baby to more than $13,000 for a teenager.
* Among urban areas, the Northeast is the most expensive region to raise a child, and the South is the cheapest. Rural areas, which are lumped into a single category, are even cheaper.
* The cost per child for a two-child family is 25 percent lower than the cost per child for a one-child family.
Researchers broke household income into three levels: Less than $56,670; $56,670 to $98,120; and more than $98,120.
People in the lower-income group spend 25 percent of their before-tax income on a child; those in the middle-income group spend 16 percent; and those in the higher-income group spend 12 percent. But in absolute terms, spending increases with income.
The figures are adjusted for inflation, and costs are calculated through age 17.
Yes, a number like that screams false precision. Still, some of the broad outlines that go into the estimate are pretty interesting:
* Housing is the most expensive part of raising a kid. It accounts for 31 percent of the cost, followed by childcare and education (17 percent) and food (16 percent).
* The annual cost rises a bit as the child gets older — from less than $12,000 per year for a baby to more than $13,000 for a teenager.
* Among urban areas, the Northeast is the most expensive region to raise a child, and the South is the cheapest. Rural areas, which are lumped into a single category, are even cheaper.
* The cost per child for a two-child family is 25 percent lower than the cost per child for a one-child family.
Researchers broke household income into three levels: Less than $56,670; $56,670 to $98,120; and more than $98,120.
People in the lower-income group spend 25 percent of their before-tax income on a child; those in the middle-income group spend 16 percent; and those in the higher-income group spend 12 percent. But in absolute terms, spending increases with income.
The figures are adjusted for inflation, and costs are calculated through age 17.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Dear Helen Thomas, we Jews aren't getting the hell out of anywhere anymore
Anti-Semitism is just the way it is, like a natural law; none of our efforts will absolve us of our real sin: existing and overcoming.
By Sara K. Eisen
Here’s the thing. I’ve been thinking about poor Helen Thomas, who I believe was probably just saying what everyone thinks and has therefore been made a scapegoat. Not that I really care, because we ought to share the scapegoat status once in a while. It’s the least we can do to dispel the stereotype that we are stingy, us irritating Jews.
Helen Thomas
Helen Thomas.
Photo by: Reuters
Irritating enough, apparently - like the too-talented and too-bossy fame-hog Rachel Berry on Glee - in our discovery of the written word, monotheism, modern physics, psychology, vaccinations, and the film industry, that every country that has ever “hosted” us has found it necessary to tell us to get the hell out, like Thomas did. (Ironically, the aforementioned Jewish Glee character Rachel, in a particularly annoying moment in one episode, was told by classmates to move to Israel. I doubt the writers coordinated this telling joke with the State Department - sorry J Street, Jews do equal Israel in the eyes of the world.)
Helen, you know why we were in Germany and much of Eastern Europe in the first place? And by the way, if I follow your advice, do you think the nice old ladies who got my grandmothers’ large houses and farms from the Nazis in what was once Czechoslovakia will kick the property back two generations? That would be cool because I’d love a vineyard and an agricultural estate.
Well, we were in Germany and Hungary and Czechoslovakia and Russia (where we were regularly just plain killed by Cossacks), and also, for many centuries, Poland (ditto), because we were told to get the hell out of England, France, and Spain. Or, you know, just plain killed by handsome and heroic fairytale knights.
And you know why we were in Western Europe to begin with? Because we were told by the Greeks and the Romans - wait for it - to get the hell out of “Palestine,” where we had been living since the beginning of recorded history.
We also ended up in Babylonia (Iraq) and other Middle Eastern and North African countries, where we stayed as second class citizens for hundreds and hundreds of years, till the Arab world finally caught up with the pagans and the Christians in their hatred of the Jews. But I digress.
By the way, I am aware that the Arab narrative has us Ashkenazi Jews as descendants of the Khazars, but the actual facts have it different. See this new DNA study linking European Jews with their Middle Eastern counterparts, all stemming from one original population of Holy Land Jews predating Roman times. Never mind our own texts that say the same thing; I know they are inadmissible in the international high courts of justice of the mind.
In any event, there is no way around it: Jews being asked, usually not by old ladies on the White House lawn, to get the hell out of everywhere is just the way it goes.
So it came to pass that about 200 BCE the Maccabees got sick of it and established a Jewish state in Palestine, within the Roman Empire, which lasted till about the time of Jesus (another pesky Jew) and the destruction of the Second Temple.
And it also came to pass that Jews began arriving in Ottoman Palestine in the late 1800s, after the Russians and the Poles made it clear that they were persona non grata in Eastern Europe. Palestine was as good a place as any to flee to, since it was the last place, about 2,000 years before, in which the Jews had a sovereign state (see above). Never mind Jewish liturgy and texts pining for Jerusalem, since I know these, too, are inadmissible in those international mental courts.
Anyway, nowhere else wanted European Jews any more than Russia did, not even America really, where there were very strict quotas, although the Americans, again politely, refrained from all the messy European killing, which was apparently in vogue until after Adolf. Besides, those Ottoman Turks, then as now, were known around the world for their amazing human rights activism and the Jews were excited to see it first hand. No, not really. But…they were better than the Polish peasants. Unless you were Armenian.
It is true that there were people in Palestine before the Jews arrived en masse (for there was always a handful of Jews here), not "A People" per se, but rather a group of assorted regional Arabs (think Native American tribes in North America) who had settled the area with not much agricultural success and had endured various rulers over the millennia.
But when the Jews came back, it was suddenly necessary, once again, to tell them to get the hell out. There was no living side by side, even though that was an express Jewish desire right up until 1947/8, when the Partition Plan was summarily rejected by the Arab League, who started the war that Israel won. If keeping land you win in a war others provoke (when you wanted to make peace) is called occupation, dear Helen, the world’s axis of furious justice has a lot bigger fish to fry than Israel.
The Arab desire to kick the Jews the hell out of Palestine did not begin in 1967, and not in 1948. It began the moment the first groups of Jews arrived and started to make the land flower and produce crops. That’s when the attacks on Jews began, and when the Arab world decided a new Jewish presence in the land would not do, back when there were about half a million Arabs and just under 100,000 Jews in the Holy Land, in the early 1900’s. Twenty percent was too much, apparently, to bear. (The Hebron Massacre of 1929, in which dozens of Jews were killed and wounded, took place long before a single house was built over the Green Line)
I can only imagine how awful it was - probably for both the Arabs and the British - when it became clear we were here to stay and grow to much further percentages. We are that annoying, what with trying to get rid of malaria and swamps and tuberculosis and all that.
At any rate, it seems that every time a Jewish minority starts to make a society too successful, the indigenous people start to feel very uncomfortable, and tells them one way or another to get the hell out.
But now, alas, there is nowhere left for us to go, except the eternal place Ahmadinejad wants us to go, and Haniyeh and Nasrallah, and Hitler before them, and Chemilniki before him, and Haman before him, and so on.
I know that Israel has made mistakes during its 62 years, some clumsy and inept, and some borderline immoral. But none worse than every other democracy on earth has also done, and most much better than the large majority of the UN rogue nations which condemn Israel daily have done, daily.
There is much to improve in the way we govern, I will be the first to say it. I will also be the first to say that Jews of the Bernie Madoff ilk make me want to crawl under a rock. I know that the world is only waiting for these guys to pop up in order to pin their crimes on all of us, even though everything they do is in direct contradiction of actual Jewish values.
But let’s be honest, the international community’s human rights crusades on behalf of the Palestinians are just the latest Crusades, and the ones who really suffer are not the Jews or the Israelis, but the poor occupants of the Third World who are ignored while the enlightened First World castigates the Jews.
So here’s the thing: We are not going anywhere this time, Helen. We totally get it: Ya’ll pretty much hate us. It’s just the way it is, like a natural law. Nothing we can do - not giving away pieces of the land, not donating billions to charity, nor discovering a cure for polio or the Theory of Relativity, or writing revered legal and religious texts, or founding Google and Facebook, or manufacturing the microprocessor in the majority of laptops that spew Jew hatred onto the Internet, or founding Christianity itself, or championing women’s rights and gay rights in the U.S. and helping to bring about a human rights revolution in America in the '60s. None of those things will absolve us of our real sin: Existing and overcoming.
But this time, seriously. Getting the hell out is not in the cards. We’re just sick of moving all the time. I know. Irritating.
I’m really sorry they told you to get the hell out of the White House, Helen. It really wasn’t your fault that you thought you could say what you said. It’s not like it’s a secret: That’s what people think.
(Read Sara K. Eisen's full post here)
By Sara K. Eisen
Here’s the thing. I’ve been thinking about poor Helen Thomas, who I believe was probably just saying what everyone thinks and has therefore been made a scapegoat. Not that I really care, because we ought to share the scapegoat status once in a while. It’s the least we can do to dispel the stereotype that we are stingy, us irritating Jews.
Helen Thomas
Helen Thomas.
Photo by: Reuters
Irritating enough, apparently - like the too-talented and too-bossy fame-hog Rachel Berry on Glee - in our discovery of the written word, monotheism, modern physics, psychology, vaccinations, and the film industry, that every country that has ever “hosted” us has found it necessary to tell us to get the hell out, like Thomas did. (Ironically, the aforementioned Jewish Glee character Rachel, in a particularly annoying moment in one episode, was told by classmates to move to Israel. I doubt the writers coordinated this telling joke with the State Department - sorry J Street, Jews do equal Israel in the eyes of the world.)
Helen, you know why we were in Germany and much of Eastern Europe in the first place? And by the way, if I follow your advice, do you think the nice old ladies who got my grandmothers’ large houses and farms from the Nazis in what was once Czechoslovakia will kick the property back two generations? That would be cool because I’d love a vineyard and an agricultural estate.
Well, we were in Germany and Hungary and Czechoslovakia and Russia (where we were regularly just plain killed by Cossacks), and also, for many centuries, Poland (ditto), because we were told to get the hell out of England, France, and Spain. Or, you know, just plain killed by handsome and heroic fairytale knights.
And you know why we were in Western Europe to begin with? Because we were told by the Greeks and the Romans - wait for it - to get the hell out of “Palestine,” where we had been living since the beginning of recorded history.
We also ended up in Babylonia (Iraq) and other Middle Eastern and North African countries, where we stayed as second class citizens for hundreds and hundreds of years, till the Arab world finally caught up with the pagans and the Christians in their hatred of the Jews. But I digress.
By the way, I am aware that the Arab narrative has us Ashkenazi Jews as descendants of the Khazars, but the actual facts have it different. See this new DNA study linking European Jews with their Middle Eastern counterparts, all stemming from one original population of Holy Land Jews predating Roman times. Never mind our own texts that say the same thing; I know they are inadmissible in the international high courts of justice of the mind.
In any event, there is no way around it: Jews being asked, usually not by old ladies on the White House lawn, to get the hell out of everywhere is just the way it goes.
So it came to pass that about 200 BCE the Maccabees got sick of it and established a Jewish state in Palestine, within the Roman Empire, which lasted till about the time of Jesus (another pesky Jew) and the destruction of the Second Temple.
And it also came to pass that Jews began arriving in Ottoman Palestine in the late 1800s, after the Russians and the Poles made it clear that they were persona non grata in Eastern Europe. Palestine was as good a place as any to flee to, since it was the last place, about 2,000 years before, in which the Jews had a sovereign state (see above). Never mind Jewish liturgy and texts pining for Jerusalem, since I know these, too, are inadmissible in those international mental courts.
Anyway, nowhere else wanted European Jews any more than Russia did, not even America really, where there were very strict quotas, although the Americans, again politely, refrained from all the messy European killing, which was apparently in vogue until after Adolf. Besides, those Ottoman Turks, then as now, were known around the world for their amazing human rights activism and the Jews were excited to see it first hand. No, not really. But…they were better than the Polish peasants. Unless you were Armenian.
It is true that there were people in Palestine before the Jews arrived en masse (for there was always a handful of Jews here), not "A People" per se, but rather a group of assorted regional Arabs (think Native American tribes in North America) who had settled the area with not much agricultural success and had endured various rulers over the millennia.
But when the Jews came back, it was suddenly necessary, once again, to tell them to get the hell out. There was no living side by side, even though that was an express Jewish desire right up until 1947/8, when the Partition Plan was summarily rejected by the Arab League, who started the war that Israel won. If keeping land you win in a war others provoke (when you wanted to make peace) is called occupation, dear Helen, the world’s axis of furious justice has a lot bigger fish to fry than Israel.
The Arab desire to kick the Jews the hell out of Palestine did not begin in 1967, and not in 1948. It began the moment the first groups of Jews arrived and started to make the land flower and produce crops. That’s when the attacks on Jews began, and when the Arab world decided a new Jewish presence in the land would not do, back when there were about half a million Arabs and just under 100,000 Jews in the Holy Land, in the early 1900’s. Twenty percent was too much, apparently, to bear. (The Hebron Massacre of 1929, in which dozens of Jews were killed and wounded, took place long before a single house was built over the Green Line)
I can only imagine how awful it was - probably for both the Arabs and the British - when it became clear we were here to stay and grow to much further percentages. We are that annoying, what with trying to get rid of malaria and swamps and tuberculosis and all that.
At any rate, it seems that every time a Jewish minority starts to make a society too successful, the indigenous people start to feel very uncomfortable, and tells them one way or another to get the hell out.
But now, alas, there is nowhere left for us to go, except the eternal place Ahmadinejad wants us to go, and Haniyeh and Nasrallah, and Hitler before them, and Chemilniki before him, and Haman before him, and so on.
I know that Israel has made mistakes during its 62 years, some clumsy and inept, and some borderline immoral. But none worse than every other democracy on earth has also done, and most much better than the large majority of the UN rogue nations which condemn Israel daily have done, daily.
There is much to improve in the way we govern, I will be the first to say it. I will also be the first to say that Jews of the Bernie Madoff ilk make me want to crawl under a rock. I know that the world is only waiting for these guys to pop up in order to pin their crimes on all of us, even though everything they do is in direct contradiction of actual Jewish values.
But let’s be honest, the international community’s human rights crusades on behalf of the Palestinians are just the latest Crusades, and the ones who really suffer are not the Jews or the Israelis, but the poor occupants of the Third World who are ignored while the enlightened First World castigates the Jews.
So here’s the thing: We are not going anywhere this time, Helen. We totally get it: Ya’ll pretty much hate us. It’s just the way it is, like a natural law. Nothing we can do - not giving away pieces of the land, not donating billions to charity, nor discovering a cure for polio or the Theory of Relativity, or writing revered legal and religious texts, or founding Google and Facebook, or manufacturing the microprocessor in the majority of laptops that spew Jew hatred onto the Internet, or founding Christianity itself, or championing women’s rights and gay rights in the U.S. and helping to bring about a human rights revolution in America in the '60s. None of those things will absolve us of our real sin: Existing and overcoming.
But this time, seriously. Getting the hell out is not in the cards. We’re just sick of moving all the time. I know. Irritating.
I’m really sorry they told you to get the hell out of the White House, Helen. It really wasn’t your fault that you thought you could say what you said. It’s not like it’s a secret: That’s what people think.
(Read Sara K. Eisen's full post here)
New York hotel pioneers birth tourism (unbelievable)
Breaking! Travel News.com ^ | 06/10/2010 | Staff
Posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:08:16 AM by OldDeckHand
A New York hotel is staking its claim to have invented a new hospitality niche – birth tourism. The Marmara Manhattan offers “an exclusive package for new mothers that wish to give birth in the USA”, with the additional bonus of the newborn child gaining US citizenship.
The hotel, which is part of the Turkish hospitality chain, exploits the 14th amendment to the US constitution, which states that all children born on American soil “are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside”.
The Marmara Manhattan, which is located in New York’s Upper East Side, told The Times: “What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $5,100, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother.” There are also medical fees of about £20,500.
However the price is a cheap and easy one to pay for US citizenship. Many will eventually use the newborn - known as an “anchor baby” - as a stepping stone for the immigration of extended family.
The hotel has so far sold 15 of the packages.
According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services, the practice is entirely legal as long as the women can pay their medical bills.
However there are noises being made in Washington to close the loophole. Gary Miller, a Republican congressman, told The Times: “They come to this country and have babies. The children are citizens. The children are eligible to go to school.
They receive food stamps and social programmes. The American taxpayers are paying for it.
Key source markets include Hong Kong, South Korea and Turkey, where a number of travel agencies specialise in the birth tourism market.
“Many people say they are doing it because they want their kids to get a cheaper education and not deal with visa issues when they grow up,” said Levant Bas, of the Istanbul-based operator Gurib Tourism. “We have a package that covers everything from the flight and city tours to accommodation for several months and hospital expenses.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: anchorbaby; citizenship; nyc; turkey
The Grassroots Tea Party Candidate to Defeat RINO McCain!
JD Hayworth for U.S. Senate!
Free Republic Threads
We have GOT to fix our immigration laws. And, if it takes a Constitutional Amendment to fix the judicial interpretation of the 14th Amendment, then that's what we need.
I can't believe a great majority of Americans aren't completely against this kind of crap.
1 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:08:17 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
I think it is a fantastic idea.
Because it will get some of our congressmen off their asses and get the 14th changed, repealed or modified by law.
2 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:10:33 AM by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
What a tragedy it would be if that hotel burned to the ground.
3 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:10:36 AM by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
To bad Obama’s Mama could not have taken advantage of this.
4 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:12:31 AM by outofstyle (Anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
This is news?
South Koreans have been doing this since the end of the Korean war, for pete’s sake!
5 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:16:09 AM by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
Families that can afford and pay $30K medical bills aren’t a threat to our budget, let’s be honest.
Those that come and give birth at our expense are.
6 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:18:08 AM by mainsail that
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
This country is just too damn stupid to survive. Uncle Sam is now Uncle Sap.
7 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:19:07 AM by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
No other other country on earth puts up with this corruption.
8 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:19:36 AM by FormerACLUmember ("Subtlety is not going to win this fight": NJ Governor Chris Christie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
"I can't believe a great majority of Americans aren't completely against this kind of crap. "
Don't you realize that what we think and want anymore does not matter.
America belongs to the world...wrestled from those greedy White people who founded it.
9 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:19:43 AM by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
10 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:23:13 AM by Diogenesis (Article IV - Section 4 - The United States shall protect each of them against Invasion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: mainsail that
"Families that can afford and pay $30K medical bills aren’t a threat to our budget, let’s be honest."
Perhaps not. But, they certainly could be a threat to our national security. I would point out that this is a Turkish owned hotel change. I would also point out that one of the flotilla thugs was a man who was born in the US to Turkish parents who were here getting an education. He left at the age of two, never to return. But, he is considered a US citizen, or so has been claimed in media reports.
A genuine US passport is a VERY valuable commodity, especially to people who wish to do us harm.
11 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:24:12 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
the author of the Citizenship Clause—described the clause as excluding American Indians who maintain their tribal ties, and "persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers." He was supported by other senators, including Edgar Cowan, Reverdy Johnson, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lyman Trumbull.[6] Howard further stated the term jurisdiction meant "the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now"[6] and that the United States possessed a "full and complete jurisdiction" over the person described in the amendment.[7][8][6] Other senators, including Senator John Conness,[9] supported the amendment, believing citizenship should cover all children born in the United States.
The operative word here is subject to the jurisdiction and were born.
12 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:25:32 AM by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: mainsail that
Typo alert
hotel change = hotel chain
13 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:25:40 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]
To: org.whodat
"The operative word here is subject to the jurisdiction and were born. "
Yes, I am aware of the comments on this subject by the Amendments principle authors. Unfortunately, their opinions have been mooted by the opinions of several Supreme Court decisions. While there are some constitutional scholars and attorneys that believe this could be remedied with simple legislation, I would say that the prevailing wisdom, even in conservative legal think-tanks, is that it will take a constitutional amendment to fix, at this point.
14 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:28:40 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
I had the legal argument against your statement, but it is in my crashed computer, but it is on mark.
15 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:34:18 AM by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]
To: org.whodat
"I had the legal argument against your statement, but it is in my crashed computer, but it is on mark. "
I've read most of the articles in the legal journals. I'm not saying that they aren't without merit, but so long as Kennedy is on the Court instead of a more orthodox conservative, I think that as a practical matter, it's going to take a Constitutional Amendment.
16 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:36:02 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
In 1898, the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark declared that the Fourteenth Amendment adopted the common-law definition of birthright citizenship. Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller's dissenting opinion, however, argued that birthright citizenship had been repealed by the principles of the American Revolution and rejected by the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment. Nonetheless, the decision conferred birthright citizenship on a child of legal residents of the United States. Although the language of the majority opinion in Wong Kim Ark is certainly broad enough to include the children born in the United States of illegal as well as legal immigrants, there is no case in which the Supreme Court has explicitly held that this is the unambiguous command of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Based on the intent of the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment, some believe that Congress could exercise its Section 5 powers to prevent the children of illegal aliens from automatically becoming citizens of the United States. An effort in 1997 failed in the face of intense political opposition from immigrant rights groups. Apparently, the question remains open to the determination of the political and legal processes.
Edward Erler is Professor of Political Science at California State University, San Bernadino.
17 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:39:40 AM by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
Korea has universal, cumpulsory military service (draft). Wealthy (and some not so wealthy) Koreans have been having their babies in LA or Honolulu just in case there might be a shooting war 18-25 years down the road.
18 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:41:40 AM by moose-matson (I keep it in my head)
Posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:08:16 AM by OldDeckHand
A New York hotel is staking its claim to have invented a new hospitality niche – birth tourism. The Marmara Manhattan offers “an exclusive package for new mothers that wish to give birth in the USA”, with the additional bonus of the newborn child gaining US citizenship.
The hotel, which is part of the Turkish hospitality chain, exploits the 14th amendment to the US constitution, which states that all children born on American soil “are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside”.
The Marmara Manhattan, which is located in New York’s Upper East Side, told The Times: “What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $5,100, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother.” There are also medical fees of about £20,500.
However the price is a cheap and easy one to pay for US citizenship. Many will eventually use the newborn - known as an “anchor baby” - as a stepping stone for the immigration of extended family.
The hotel has so far sold 15 of the packages.
According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services, the practice is entirely legal as long as the women can pay their medical bills.
However there are noises being made in Washington to close the loophole. Gary Miller, a Republican congressman, told The Times: “They come to this country and have babies. The children are citizens. The children are eligible to go to school.
They receive food stamps and social programmes. The American taxpayers are paying for it.
Key source markets include Hong Kong, South Korea and Turkey, where a number of travel agencies specialise in the birth tourism market.
“Many people say they are doing it because they want their kids to get a cheaper education and not deal with visa issues when they grow up,” said Levant Bas, of the Istanbul-based operator Gurib Tourism. “We have a package that covers everything from the flight and city tours to accommodation for several months and hospital expenses.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: anchorbaby; citizenship; nyc; turkey
The Grassroots Tea Party Candidate to Defeat RINO McCain!
JD Hayworth for U.S. Senate!
Free Republic Threads
We have GOT to fix our immigration laws. And, if it takes a Constitutional Amendment to fix the judicial interpretation of the 14th Amendment, then that's what we need.
I can't believe a great majority of Americans aren't completely against this kind of crap.
1 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:08:17 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
I think it is a fantastic idea.
Because it will get some of our congressmen off their asses and get the 14th changed, repealed or modified by law.
2 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:10:33 AM by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
What a tragedy it would be if that hotel burned to the ground.
3 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:10:36 AM by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
To bad Obama’s Mama could not have taken advantage of this.
4 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:12:31 AM by outofstyle (Anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
This is news?
South Koreans have been doing this since the end of the Korean war, for pete’s sake!
5 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:16:09 AM by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
Families that can afford and pay $30K medical bills aren’t a threat to our budget, let’s be honest.
Those that come and give birth at our expense are.
6 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:18:08 AM by mainsail that
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
This country is just too damn stupid to survive. Uncle Sam is now Uncle Sap.
7 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:19:07 AM by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
No other other country on earth puts up with this corruption.
8 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:19:36 AM by FormerACLUmember ("Subtlety is not going to win this fight": NJ Governor Chris Christie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
"I can't believe a great majority of Americans aren't completely against this kind of crap. "
Don't you realize that what we think and want anymore does not matter.
America belongs to the world...wrestled from those greedy White people who founded it.
9 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:19:43 AM by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
10 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:23:13 AM by Diogenesis (Article IV - Section 4 - The United States shall protect each of them against Invasion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: mainsail that
"Families that can afford and pay $30K medical bills aren’t a threat to our budget, let’s be honest."
Perhaps not. But, they certainly could be a threat to our national security. I would point out that this is a Turkish owned hotel change. I would also point out that one of the flotilla thugs was a man who was born in the US to Turkish parents who were here getting an education. He left at the age of two, never to return. But, he is considered a US citizen, or so has been claimed in media reports.
A genuine US passport is a VERY valuable commodity, especially to people who wish to do us harm.
11 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:24:12 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
the author of the Citizenship Clause—described the clause as excluding American Indians who maintain their tribal ties, and "persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers." He was supported by other senators, including Edgar Cowan, Reverdy Johnson, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lyman Trumbull.[6] Howard further stated the term jurisdiction meant "the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now"[6] and that the United States possessed a "full and complete jurisdiction" over the person described in the amendment.[7][8][6] Other senators, including Senator John Conness,[9] supported the amendment, believing citizenship should cover all children born in the United States.
The operative word here is subject to the jurisdiction and were born.
12 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:25:32 AM by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: mainsail that
Typo alert
hotel change = hotel chain
13 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:25:40 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]
To: org.whodat
"The operative word here is subject to the jurisdiction and were born. "
Yes, I am aware of the comments on this subject by the Amendments principle authors. Unfortunately, their opinions have been mooted by the opinions of several Supreme Court decisions. While there are some constitutional scholars and attorneys that believe this could be remedied with simple legislation, I would say that the prevailing wisdom, even in conservative legal think-tanks, is that it will take a constitutional amendment to fix, at this point.
14 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:28:40 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
I had the legal argument against your statement, but it is in my crashed computer, but it is on mark.
15 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:34:18 AM by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]
To: org.whodat
"I had the legal argument against your statement, but it is in my crashed computer, but it is on mark. "
I've read most of the articles in the legal journals. I'm not saying that they aren't without merit, but so long as Kennedy is on the Court instead of a more orthodox conservative, I think that as a practical matter, it's going to take a Constitutional Amendment.
16 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:36:02 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
In 1898, the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark declared that the Fourteenth Amendment adopted the common-law definition of birthright citizenship. Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller's dissenting opinion, however, argued that birthright citizenship had been repealed by the principles of the American Revolution and rejected by the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment. Nonetheless, the decision conferred birthright citizenship on a child of legal residents of the United States. Although the language of the majority opinion in Wong Kim Ark is certainly broad enough to include the children born in the United States of illegal as well as legal immigrants, there is no case in which the Supreme Court has explicitly held that this is the unambiguous command of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Based on the intent of the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment, some believe that Congress could exercise its Section 5 powers to prevent the children of illegal aliens from automatically becoming citizens of the United States. An effort in 1997 failed in the face of intense political opposition from immigrant rights groups. Apparently, the question remains open to the determination of the political and legal processes.
Edward Erler is Professor of Political Science at California State University, San Bernadino.
17 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:39:40 AM by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
Korea has universal, cumpulsory military service (draft). Wealthy (and some not so wealthy) Koreans have been having their babies in LA or Honolulu just in case there might be a shooting war 18-25 years down the road.
18 posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 10:41:40 AM by moose-matson (I keep it in my head)
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Simon Cowell Grants Young Girl's Final Wish
Pop Eater ^ | Jun 9th 2010 07:00AM
Posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:33:30 AM by woofie
Simon Cowell fulfilled five-year-old Bethany Fenton's final wish before she lost her battle with a brain tumor. She achieved her dream of singing 'Twinkle Twinkle Little Star' for Cowell when she visited the 'Britain's Got Talent' studios in North London ahead of Saturday's finale on June 5 and even met some of the finalists in the competition. Following her exciting day, the young girl told UK's Daily Mail, "I loved them all, especially Kieran, who asked for my wristband to give us both luck ... Simon let me sing 'Twinkle Twinkle Little Star' to him. He's so nice and I love him."
Last year, she was diagnosed with a grade three to four anaplastic astrocytoma brain tumor. A second MRI scan last year revealed the tumor had grown and began seriously affecting her.
The youngster fought the illness for over a year and had been through radiotherapy and chemotherapy. She passed away Tuesday afternoon, June 8, at the Helen House Hospice in Oxford after a sudden deterioration in her condition at home.
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: americanidol; girl; simon
The Grassroots Tea Party Candidate to Defeat RINO McCain!
JD Hayworth for U.S. Senate!
Free Republic Threads
Gotta admit ...this story got to me
1 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:33:30 AM by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]
Comment #2 Removed by Moderator
To: woofie
That was a pretty nice thing for him to do.....Good to see he has some heart....
3 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:35:05 AM by jakerobins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Heart wrenching. Also I didnt know Simon Cowell had it in him, this changes my opinion vastly.
4 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:36:16 AM by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie; Pride in the USA; Stillwaters
Gotta admit ...this story got to me
Me too. Though it's often hard to see, I always suspect that there's a pretty decent guy underneath all of Cowell's snarkiness.
5 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:36:24 AM by lonevoice (If Fox News is the only outlet reporting it, did it really happen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Photobucket
6 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:38:49 AM by SkyDancer (Those That Turn Their Swords into Plows Will Plow For Those That Don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: lonevoice
Prayers for Bethany and her family
7 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:40:16 AM by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I think the guy's an old softie at the core of him, he just can't let it slip thru the cracks in his line of work, or he'd get eaten alive. So, he compensates by being a bastard.
Who among us doesn't, from time to time?
"But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: for men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away, for his name is Obama."
8 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:40:43 AM by Viking2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]
To: valkyry1
You just never can tell.
>>>snip<<<
It was recently revealed Cowell - who is believed to be worth $200 million - will leave $180 million to charity in his will.
The 48-year-old star, who has no children, will leave the mammoth sum to a selection of organizations helping children and animals.
>>>snip<<<
2008 article about Cowell's philanthropy
9 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:41:02 AM by lonevoice (If Fox News is the only outlet reporting it, did it really happen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]
To: valkyry1
Just because someone has the guts to tell the truth and not worry about what others think, doesn't mean they don't have feelings or a heart.
10 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:42:15 AM by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama = Epic Fail)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]
To: woofie
beautiful.. Simon you rock!
11 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:42:52 AM by Ancient Drive (DRINK COFFEE! - Do Stupid Things Faster with More Energy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: silent_jonny
Your American Idol ping list might appreciate this
12 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:44:00 AM by lonevoice (If Fox News is the only outlet reporting it, did it really happen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I have heard that people who have met Simon say that he is a nice guy in real life. So I’m not totally surprised by this story.
Watch American Idol go down the tubes next year without Simon.
13 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:48:39 AM by Ticonderoga34 (Free Obama's Birth Certificate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I don't blame Simon for telling some of those Idiots on American Idol off!
That said, he has a big heart and is really, really a good guy.
14 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:48:49 AM by spectre (Spectre's wife )(Save the Brown Pelican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Deeply touching story.
15 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:49:25 AM by steelyourfaith (America should take a mulligan on the 2008 presidential election.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]
To: TexasFreeper2009
//Just because someone has the guts to tell the truth and not worry about what others think, doesn’t mean they don’t have feelings or a heart//
I have been there and that is true but I only saw the show few times so I did not have much to make an impression with.
16 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:50:33 AM by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Somebody, Simon, has to tell these morons the truth, “your singing is forgettable”.
Prayers for Bethany.
17 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:51:01 AM by 23 Everest (0bama! America's Conduit To Destruction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: lonevoice
Just wow.
18 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:51:07 AM by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I love Simon. He’s an animal nut too. Being hot doesn’t hurt either.
19 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:52:02 AM by Raebie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Ticonderoga34
I have heard that people who have met Simon say that he is a nice guy in real life. So I’m not totally surprised by this story.
He never struck me as mean on the show. His candor is just so unusual in this politically correct era that no one knows how to deal with it.
They lost me completely when they added Ellen, though.
MM (in TX)
20 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:52:32 AM by MississippiMan (http://gogmagogblog.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]
To: TexasFreeper2009
“Just because someone has the guts to tell the truth and not worry about what others think, doesn’t mean they don’t have feelings or a heart.”
Exactly. You’d think conservatives would believe that telling the truth, tho it might hurt, would be preferable to leading someone on to believe s/he has talent when that is not the case.
The saddest contestants I’ve seen on American Idol are at the tryouts where there are those who’ve been assured all their lives that they have incredible talent, when they just don’t. Not unlike students who are told they are so bright, when in the bigger world they are, at best, average.
21 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:52:35 AM by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]
To: valkyry1
Infinite sadness... Wonderful beauty...
22 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:53:29 AM by Treeless Branch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]
To: Ancient Drive
Good for you Simon.
23 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:53:36 AM by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]
To: jakerobins
Actually he has conservative leanings in his politics.
24 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:54:31 AM by mware (F-R-E-E, that spells free, Free Republic.com baby.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]
To: wally_bert
Simon’s a conservative. I saw a show on his life story, he started with nothing, worked for free just to get into the business, was a low level runner in the music business, scouted talent, went out on his own, made some money, then lost it all, and went from Mansions to back to living with his parents, got it together, went back out and made himself what he is today. Very hard worker, his life story is inspiring.
Good for Simon, our prayers go out to you little girl, God bless
25 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:56:47 AM by Scythian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I have to wonder if this dear sweet child had been the American health care system from the moment that her parents noticed that something was “off” about her, might she have been saved? I know nothing about the tumor that took her, but I have heard plenty about the system that cared for her.
Please Lord save our children from this regime and illnesses that can be cured. And bless Mr Cowell for the kindness showed to this child.
26 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:56:59 AM by lovesdogs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Simon’s telling the truth to the contestants who stink is a good thing. I don’t see why anyone thinks that would make him repulsive.
27 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:00:34 AM by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Ticonderoga34
I've always liked Simon, even when he got “snarky” with contestants. More often than not his advice was dead on, he just had a thorny way of delivering the message sometimes. AI is in trouble without him; but I am looking forward to the “X Factor”.
28 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:06:54 AM by MWestMom (Tread carefully, truth lies here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]
To: lovesdogs
Amen to both!
29 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:07:31 AM by MWestMom (Tread carefully, truth lies here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]
To: Scythian
I vaguely remember some of his life story now that you mention it. I knew there were more reasons to like the guy. Jeremy Clarkson is my other favorite Brit entertainer/performer/commentator/etc.
30 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:07:36 AM by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]
To: woofie
God Bless.
31 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:09:17 AM by chris37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Simon Cowell does ALOT of good things for people, he makes a concerted effort of keeping it as quiet as possible because he is not doing it for the publicity but to help.
He might have a well cultivated image of being a heartless bastard, but he really is not.
32 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:09:30 AM by Nahanni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Poor girl. R.I.P.
33 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:11:54 AM by rbosque (11 year Freeper! Combat Economist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
It was nice of him to do. I don’t think I could have done it without shedding a lot of tears. And, yes, I’m a guy.
34 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:13:43 AM by rbg81 (DRAIN THE SWAMP!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
“Let the little children come unto Me.”
35 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:17:30 AM by Lobsterback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]
To: Scythian
I saw that show on Simon’s life, too...very inspiring story. Though his family was well off, I loved how his mother made him start out in the mail room if he wanted to work in the music biz. And how after he lost it all, he returned home to live with his folks without money to pay the cab fare.
36 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:28:08 AM by Miss Didi ("After all...tomorrow is another day." Scarlett O'Hara, Gone with the Wind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Ouch, that strikes at one’s heart.
37 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:34:18 AM by yield 2 the right
Posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:33:30 AM by woofie
Simon Cowell fulfilled five-year-old Bethany Fenton's final wish before she lost her battle with a brain tumor. She achieved her dream of singing 'Twinkle Twinkle Little Star' for Cowell when she visited the 'Britain's Got Talent' studios in North London ahead of Saturday's finale on June 5 and even met some of the finalists in the competition. Following her exciting day, the young girl told UK's Daily Mail, "I loved them all, especially Kieran, who asked for my wristband to give us both luck ... Simon let me sing 'Twinkle Twinkle Little Star' to him. He's so nice and I love him."
Last year, she was diagnosed with a grade three to four anaplastic astrocytoma brain tumor. A second MRI scan last year revealed the tumor had grown and began seriously affecting her.
The youngster fought the illness for over a year and had been through radiotherapy and chemotherapy. She passed away Tuesday afternoon, June 8, at the Helen House Hospice in Oxford after a sudden deterioration in her condition at home.
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: americanidol; girl; simon
The Grassroots Tea Party Candidate to Defeat RINO McCain!
JD Hayworth for U.S. Senate!
Free Republic Threads
Gotta admit ...this story got to me
1 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:33:30 AM by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]
Comment #2 Removed by Moderator
To: woofie
That was a pretty nice thing for him to do.....Good to see he has some heart....
3 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:35:05 AM by jakerobins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Heart wrenching. Also I didnt know Simon Cowell had it in him, this changes my opinion vastly.
4 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:36:16 AM by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie; Pride in the USA; Stillwaters
Gotta admit ...this story got to me
Me too. Though it's often hard to see, I always suspect that there's a pretty decent guy underneath all of Cowell's snarkiness.
5 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:36:24 AM by lonevoice (If Fox News is the only outlet reporting it, did it really happen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Photobucket
6 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:38:49 AM by SkyDancer (Those That Turn Their Swords into Plows Will Plow For Those That Don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: lonevoice
Prayers for Bethany and her family
7 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:40:16 AM by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I think the guy's an old softie at the core of him, he just can't let it slip thru the cracks in his line of work, or he'd get eaten alive. So, he compensates by being a bastard.
Who among us doesn't, from time to time?
"But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: for men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away, for his name is Obama."
8 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:40:43 AM by Viking2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]
To: valkyry1
You just never can tell.
>>>snip<<<
It was recently revealed Cowell - who is believed to be worth $200 million - will leave $180 million to charity in his will.
The 48-year-old star, who has no children, will leave the mammoth sum to a selection of organizations helping children and animals.
>>>snip<<<
2008 article about Cowell's philanthropy
9 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:41:02 AM by lonevoice (If Fox News is the only outlet reporting it, did it really happen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]
To: valkyry1
Just because someone has the guts to tell the truth and not worry about what others think, doesn't mean they don't have feelings or a heart.
10 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:42:15 AM by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama = Epic Fail)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]
To: woofie
beautiful.. Simon you rock!
11 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:42:52 AM by Ancient Drive (DRINK COFFEE! - Do Stupid Things Faster with More Energy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: silent_jonny
Your American Idol ping list might appreciate this
12 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:44:00 AM by lonevoice (If Fox News is the only outlet reporting it, did it really happen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I have heard that people who have met Simon say that he is a nice guy in real life. So I’m not totally surprised by this story.
Watch American Idol go down the tubes next year without Simon.
13 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:48:39 AM by Ticonderoga34 (Free Obama's Birth Certificate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I don't blame Simon for telling some of those Idiots on American Idol off!
That said, he has a big heart and is really, really a good guy.
14 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:48:49 AM by spectre (Spectre's wife )(Save the Brown Pelican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Deeply touching story.
15 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:49:25 AM by steelyourfaith (America should take a mulligan on the 2008 presidential election.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]
To: TexasFreeper2009
//Just because someone has the guts to tell the truth and not worry about what others think, doesn’t mean they don’t have feelings or a heart//
I have been there and that is true but I only saw the show few times so I did not have much to make an impression with.
16 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:50:33 AM by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Somebody, Simon, has to tell these morons the truth, “your singing is forgettable”.
Prayers for Bethany.
17 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:51:01 AM by 23 Everest (0bama! America's Conduit To Destruction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: lonevoice
Just wow.
18 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:51:07 AM by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I love Simon. He’s an animal nut too. Being hot doesn’t hurt either.
19 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:52:02 AM by Raebie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Ticonderoga34
I have heard that people who have met Simon say that he is a nice guy in real life. So I’m not totally surprised by this story.
He never struck me as mean on the show. His candor is just so unusual in this politically correct era that no one knows how to deal with it.
They lost me completely when they added Ellen, though.
MM (in TX)
20 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:52:32 AM by MississippiMan (http://gogmagogblog.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]
To: TexasFreeper2009
“Just because someone has the guts to tell the truth and not worry about what others think, doesn’t mean they don’t have feelings or a heart.”
Exactly. You’d think conservatives would believe that telling the truth, tho it might hurt, would be preferable to leading someone on to believe s/he has talent when that is not the case.
The saddest contestants I’ve seen on American Idol are at the tryouts where there are those who’ve been assured all their lives that they have incredible talent, when they just don’t. Not unlike students who are told they are so bright, when in the bigger world they are, at best, average.
21 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:52:35 AM by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]
To: valkyry1
Infinite sadness... Wonderful beauty...
22 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:53:29 AM by Treeless Branch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]
To: Ancient Drive
Good for you Simon.
23 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:53:36 AM by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]
To: jakerobins
Actually he has conservative leanings in his politics.
24 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:54:31 AM by mware (F-R-E-E, that spells free, Free Republic.com baby.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]
To: wally_bert
Simon’s a conservative. I saw a show on his life story, he started with nothing, worked for free just to get into the business, was a low level runner in the music business, scouted talent, went out on his own, made some money, then lost it all, and went from Mansions to back to living with his parents, got it together, went back out and made himself what he is today. Very hard worker, his life story is inspiring.
Good for Simon, our prayers go out to you little girl, God bless
25 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:56:47 AM by Scythian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]
To: woofie
I have to wonder if this dear sweet child had been the American health care system from the moment that her parents noticed that something was “off” about her, might she have been saved? I know nothing about the tumor that took her, but I have heard plenty about the system that cared for her.
Please Lord save our children from this regime and illnesses that can be cured. And bless Mr Cowell for the kindness showed to this child.
26 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:56:59 AM by lovesdogs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Simon’s telling the truth to the contestants who stink is a good thing. I don’t see why anyone thinks that would make him repulsive.
27 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:00:34 AM by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Ticonderoga34
I've always liked Simon, even when he got “snarky” with contestants. More often than not his advice was dead on, he just had a thorny way of delivering the message sometimes. AI is in trouble without him; but I am looking forward to the “X Factor”.
28 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:06:54 AM by MWestMom (Tread carefully, truth lies here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]
To: lovesdogs
Amen to both!
29 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:07:31 AM by MWestMom (Tread carefully, truth lies here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]
To: Scythian
I vaguely remember some of his life story now that you mention it. I knew there were more reasons to like the guy. Jeremy Clarkson is my other favorite Brit entertainer/performer/commentator/etc.
30 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:07:36 AM by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]
To: woofie
God Bless.
31 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:09:17 AM by chris37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Simon Cowell does ALOT of good things for people, he makes a concerted effort of keeping it as quiet as possible because he is not doing it for the publicity but to help.
He might have a well cultivated image of being a heartless bastard, but he really is not.
32 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:09:30 AM by Nahanni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Poor girl. R.I.P.
33 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:11:54 AM by rbosque (11 year Freeper! Combat Economist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
It was nice of him to do. I don’t think I could have done it without shedding a lot of tears. And, yes, I’m a guy.
34 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:13:43 AM by rbg81 (DRAIN THE SWAMP!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: woofie
“Let the little children come unto Me.”
35 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:17:30 AM by Lobsterback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]
To: Scythian
I saw that show on Simon’s life, too...very inspiring story. Though his family was well off, I loved how his mother made him start out in the mail room if he wanted to work in the music biz. And how after he lost it all, he returned home to live with his folks without money to pay the cab fare.
36 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:28:08 AM by Miss Didi ("After all...tomorrow is another day." Scarlett O'Hara, Gone with the Wind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]
To: woofie
Ouch, that strikes at one’s heart.
37 posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:34:18 AM by yield 2 the right
Monday, June 7, 2010
Proshares ETF
Most ProShares ETFs Target Daily Returns — Each Short or Ultra ProShares ETF seeks a return that is either 300%, 200%,
-100%, -200% or -300% of the return of an index or other benchmark (target) for a single day. Due to the compounding of daily returns, ProShares' returns over periods other than one day will likely differ in amount and possibly direction from the target return for the same period. Investors should monitor their ProShares holdings consistent with their strategies, as frequently as daily. For more on correlation, leverage and other risks, please read the prospectus.
-100%, -200% or -300% of the return of an index or other benchmark (target) for a single day. Due to the compounding of daily returns, ProShares' returns over periods other than one day will likely differ in amount and possibly direction from the target return for the same period. Investors should monitor their ProShares holdings consistent with their strategies, as frequently as daily. For more on correlation, leverage and other risks, please read the prospectus.
Self-Inflicted Defeat (Dhimmitude and PC nonsense in the US military)
American Thinker ^ | June 4, 2010 | Janet Levy and Nidra Poller
Posted on Monday, June 07, 2010 6:51:40 AM by 2ndDivisionVet
The highest levels of government enforce a policy on the military which effectively prevents consideration of the enemy doctrine of jihad.
At a recent briefing on cyber-terrorism in Washington, D.C., a former Navy SEAL repeatedly apologized for any statements in his lecture that could be misconstrued as anti-Muslim. He carefully qualified every negative reference to Muslims or Islam as excluding the vast majority of "peaceful[,] law-abiding" Muslims. The level of caution displayed by a military officer who had recently returned from a tour in Iraq and had served at a high level of military intelligence was disconcerting. The former SEAL wholeheartedly -- perhaps unwittingly -- accepted the role of "dhimmi," an inferior who, under the provisions of Islamic law, does not have the right to self-defense.
How could a member of an elite division of the U.S. Navy who had withstood arduous military preparation be fearful of merely offending Muslims? How does this mentality influence his effectiveness as a soldier and officer? His action in combat?
During World War II, the U.S. government and military relentlessly combated threats from Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperialist Japan abroad and acted forcefully against domestic threats. Any resident of the U.S. who might engage in subversive activities was a legitimate target. Our mission was clearly defined as a devastating defeat to the enemy to protect the nation and preserve liberty throughout the free world. Once war had been declared, it would have been unthinkable to waste precious resources fine-tuning definitions of the enemy, reaching out to "moderate Nazis" or "peaceful Fascists," putting our troops through sensitivity training, or striving to accommodate enemy demands. We could not afford the luxury of undue concern about inflicting civilian casualties in enemy territory. The primary, unassailable objective was getting the job done -- fighting ruthless tyranny and protecting American allies and interests.
American citizens, well-informed of the threats faced by our nation, fully supported our valiant troops and participated in the war effort to the point of personal sacrifice. No apologies were offered for Japanese internment camps, which were viewed as a legitimate security precaution. Though most Japanese-Americans were loyal citizens, there was evidence of espionage and treasonous activity by some. Today, on the contrary, jihadist infiltration is deliberately underestimated and overlooked.
During World War II, experts in Nazism and Japanese imperialism were viewed as vital assets to inform and assist government officials and military brass. But they were carefully scrutinized to weed out disloyal elements. Acts of perfidy were dealt with swiftly and harshly. Placing a Nazi in a high-level Pentagon position with access to top-secret war data and giving him the ability to control military strategists and censor vital information would have been punishable by death for treason.
What has happened in the interval? Today we send our military personnel into battle while on the home front, the enemy fights experts who could advise the government and military brass. In one such instance, Hesham Islam -- who has ties to a Muslim Brotherhood affiliate (ISNA Islamic Society of North America) -- served as top advisor to the U.S. deputy defense secretary and was the third person in the Pentagon chain of command. In 2008, Hesham Islam clashed with Army Major Stephen Coughlin, one of the foremost experts on the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic jihad doctrine. When Major Coughlin presented well-documented evidence that classic Islamic doctrine -- and not a radical fringe -- does in fact support global jihad with the aim of establishing a worldwide caliphate under shari'ah law, Hesham Islam admonished him to tone down his "anti-Muslim rhetoric."
In his military briefings, Major Coughlin warned of plans by Muslim Brotherhood subsidiaries to infiltrate U.S. government and military institutions and destroy Western civilization from within. An irate Hesham Islam saw to it that Major Coughlin's Pentagon contract was terminated. And, confirming Major Coughlin's warning, Hesham Islam did in fact invite leaders from ISNA -- an un-indicted co-conspirator in the Hamas terrorist funding trial -- into the Pentagon.
This is just one example of how the highest levels of the U.S. government dictate a military culture based on refusal to identify the looming threat of Islamic jihad. And the situation has worsened since the Obama administration came to power. All-out destruction of the enemy is eschewed in favor of diplomacy and appeasement. The intelligence community is hobbled by an increasingly dominant Department of Justice that treats terrorists like common domestic criminals and grants them full constitutional rights. The focus has been diverted from life-saving intelligence-gathering to the distracting and time-consuming building of court cases for prosecution. Meanwhile, critical intelligence-sharing with congressional oversight committees has been curtailed.
Now the Obama administration is searching out "moderate" elements in Hezb'allah, a designated Islamic terrorist group. Homeland security and counterterrorism czar John Brennan recently described the jihadist group as "a very interesting organization" that has evolved from "purely a terrorist organization" to a political movement whose members serve in the Lebanese parliament and cabinet. In fact, Hezb'allah, which is an Iranian proxy, has gained virtual control of the Lebanese government as a result of U.N. Resolution 1701, imposed as a "peaceful" resolution of the 2006 "Lebanon war." The promised "beefed-up" UNIFIL force that was supposed to help the legitimate Lebanese government disarm Hezb'allah has had the opposite result. Already in 2008, then Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, stated "in terms of capabilities, in terms of range of weapons they have, in terms of internal discipline," Hezbollah makes al-Qaeda look like "a minor league team." Today we learn that Iran has transferred scuds to Hezb'allah via Syria. But John Brennan explains that the administration will not use the terms "'Islamist' and 'jihadist' because jihad is holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one's community."
Our citizens at home and our troops on the battlefield are disarmed by a narrative that imposes respect for a political-religious system that seeks their subjugation and death. As we saw with the former SEAL, our troops are taught that they must not openly expose the ideology of Islam, its goals and strategy. They risk their lives not to defeat the enemy and liberate local population, but to facilitate the consolidation of Islamic states governed by shari'ah law. Instead of combating jihad, they empower it!
The war effort has been repackaged as a combination of Peace Corps, social work, and outreach to the Muslim community. Military personnel, held to strict one-way standards of religious sensitivity, are told that their mission is to build trust in the local population. This self-defeating strategy has gutted the rules of engagement, shackling our soldiers on the battlefield. Instead of fighting to kill, soldiers worry about facing charges and imprisonment for offending, harming, or frightening the enemy. Misplaced vigilance jeopardizes their own safety. Soldiers are punished not for cowardice or fraternizing with the enemy, but for lack of kid-gloves respect. Petty Officer Julio Huertas faced charges for allegedly punching and kicking Iraqi jihadist detainee Ahmed Hashim Abed, accused of the grisly murder of four American contractors whose mutilated corpses were hacked to pieces, burned, and strung up in Fallujah. In normal times, Huertas would have been hailed as a hero for capturing an archenemy. Colonel Alan West (currently running for Congress) was accused of "aggravated assault" for firing a pistol in the air to scare an Iraqi detainee into giving information on planned ambushes of his troops in Tikrit. Instead of being commended for protecting his men, Colonel West was forced into early retirement to avoid court-martial.
Captured enemy combatants benefit from legal protections guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. Duly Mirandized on the battlefield and innocent until proven guilty, they are entitled to the full benefits of criminal litigation -- due process, jury trial, the right to counsel and the privilege to bar involuntary admissions...
Our troops are in double jeopardy: facing the enemy on the battlefield and the eventual jihadist in their ranks. Federal guarantees of religious freedom and non-discrimination prevent the rejection of Muslim recruits and, as we saw with the Fort Hood jihadi Major Hassan, can protect a Muslim soldier from being discharged for obvious, repeated misconduct. No precautions are taken, despite calls by the likes of U.S.-born Anwar Al-Awlaki pushing Muslim soldiers to kill their comrades. Rather than risk being seen as "Islamophobic," officers risk the lives of their servicemen and women.
Soldiers who fought in World War II would be horrified by current rules of engagement that give enemy fighters the rights of American citizens and place the avoidance of civilian casualties over the safety of troops. Our soldiers, pitted against an enemy that fights dirty, operate under onerous prohibitions. They are not allowed to return fire unless the source -- a suspected enemy combatant -- is actually sighted. They must not shoot at unarmed individuals, even if they just set up and detonated an IED (improvised explosive device). They must issue verbal warnings and fire warning shots before shooting to kill. The exact level and danger of enemy fire must be evaluated prior to initiation of return fire. The use of heavy weapons and air strikes is strictly proscribed by complex regulations.
It has just been announced that NATO commanders, flying in the face of common sense, are awarding "courageous restraint" medals recognizing soldiers who avoid the use of force. Turning our soldiers into combatant-peacekeeper hybrids feeds into the jihad narrative that accuses us of wanton murder of civilians. In fact, it is the jihadists who maim and kill civilians by the tens of thousands in mosques, markets, hospitals, and villages and then use the casualties as a weapon against us. When G.W. Bush was president, the media and academia kept dramatic tallies of civilian and military losses in Iraq. Since the anti-Bush Obama has been in office, casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq are quietly mentioned and never dramatized.
President Obama reinforced the peacekeeping narrative in his speech at this year's West Point graduation. Addressing young men and women who will risk their lives to defend our country, the president defended the international institutions that he deems worthy of our allegiance: "We have succeeded by steering those currents in the direction of liberty and justice -- so nations thrive by meeting their responsibilities, and face consequences when they don't." Iran, for example?
In that West Point speech, the president boasted that there will be no clear-cut victory in Afghanistan, no surrender ceremony, no banner headlines -- as if, by the force of his higher morality, he has turned G.W. Bush's dirty war into a clean operation that will turn the country over to local troops and restore peace and goodwill for all. This is a smokescreen to hide the nature of jihad -- a different kind of war demanding a different kind of victory and a different but equally unconditional surrender. The refusal to identify the enemy disarms our military. And the rhetorical transformation of retreat into a quiet kind of success notifies them that they will risk their lives in vain.
General Petraeus, Robert Gates, President Obama, the infamous Professor Walt, and their minions of dutiful pundits deviously explained, during a recent spate of Israel-bashing, how the unresolved conflict with the Palestinians jeopardizes our military personal in the field. Not the failure to identify the enemy, not the misguided rules of engagement, not the refusal to fight for victory, and not the Muslim jihadists that concretely kill our men and women...but the all-purpose gripe against Israel is the thorn in our side! It's the Sabra-Chatila syndrome: Christian militia kill Palestinians in Lebanon, and it's Israel's fault. Jihadis kill Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Americans are blamed. The jihadis kill our soldiers, and it's because Israel won't surrender to Palestinian demands.
Military personnel don't revolt; they follow orders. How long can we expect them to follow orders from a commander in chief who does not honor his obligation to send them into battle under the best conditions? If they were civilians, would they obey orders from such an irresponsible leader? Would policemen risk their lives to maintain law and order if they were hobbled with such rules of engagement? In fact, that is the situation in France, where well-armed thugs fire at policemen who are either unarmed or reluctant to return fire for fear of wounding or killing a punk jihadi and triggering a generalized uprising.
The dangers faced by military personnel today stand in sharp contrast to the safe, comfortable living conditions of the general population, cushioned from distant battlefield realities, living in material abundance, and exempt from the draft. Our troops cannot prevail without material and moral support from our nation. But this support is stifled by a lethal narrative that criminalizes war, glorifies underhanded jihad fighting, and embraces subversion on the home front.
Posted on Monday, June 07, 2010 6:51:40 AM by 2ndDivisionVet
The highest levels of government enforce a policy on the military which effectively prevents consideration of the enemy doctrine of jihad.
At a recent briefing on cyber-terrorism in Washington, D.C., a former Navy SEAL repeatedly apologized for any statements in his lecture that could be misconstrued as anti-Muslim. He carefully qualified every negative reference to Muslims or Islam as excluding the vast majority of "peaceful[,] law-abiding" Muslims. The level of caution displayed by a military officer who had recently returned from a tour in Iraq and had served at a high level of military intelligence was disconcerting. The former SEAL wholeheartedly -- perhaps unwittingly -- accepted the role of "dhimmi," an inferior who, under the provisions of Islamic law, does not have the right to self-defense.
How could a member of an elite division of the U.S. Navy who had withstood arduous military preparation be fearful of merely offending Muslims? How does this mentality influence his effectiveness as a soldier and officer? His action in combat?
During World War II, the U.S. government and military relentlessly combated threats from Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperialist Japan abroad and acted forcefully against domestic threats. Any resident of the U.S. who might engage in subversive activities was a legitimate target. Our mission was clearly defined as a devastating defeat to the enemy to protect the nation and preserve liberty throughout the free world. Once war had been declared, it would have been unthinkable to waste precious resources fine-tuning definitions of the enemy, reaching out to "moderate Nazis" or "peaceful Fascists," putting our troops through sensitivity training, or striving to accommodate enemy demands. We could not afford the luxury of undue concern about inflicting civilian casualties in enemy territory. The primary, unassailable objective was getting the job done -- fighting ruthless tyranny and protecting American allies and interests.
American citizens, well-informed of the threats faced by our nation, fully supported our valiant troops and participated in the war effort to the point of personal sacrifice. No apologies were offered for Japanese internment camps, which were viewed as a legitimate security precaution. Though most Japanese-Americans were loyal citizens, there was evidence of espionage and treasonous activity by some. Today, on the contrary, jihadist infiltration is deliberately underestimated and overlooked.
During World War II, experts in Nazism and Japanese imperialism were viewed as vital assets to inform and assist government officials and military brass. But they were carefully scrutinized to weed out disloyal elements. Acts of perfidy were dealt with swiftly and harshly. Placing a Nazi in a high-level Pentagon position with access to top-secret war data and giving him the ability to control military strategists and censor vital information would have been punishable by death for treason.
What has happened in the interval? Today we send our military personnel into battle while on the home front, the enemy fights experts who could advise the government and military brass. In one such instance, Hesham Islam -- who has ties to a Muslim Brotherhood affiliate (ISNA Islamic Society of North America) -- served as top advisor to the U.S. deputy defense secretary and was the third person in the Pentagon chain of command. In 2008, Hesham Islam clashed with Army Major Stephen Coughlin, one of the foremost experts on the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic jihad doctrine. When Major Coughlin presented well-documented evidence that classic Islamic doctrine -- and not a radical fringe -- does in fact support global jihad with the aim of establishing a worldwide caliphate under shari'ah law, Hesham Islam admonished him to tone down his "anti-Muslim rhetoric."
In his military briefings, Major Coughlin warned of plans by Muslim Brotherhood subsidiaries to infiltrate U.S. government and military institutions and destroy Western civilization from within. An irate Hesham Islam saw to it that Major Coughlin's Pentagon contract was terminated. And, confirming Major Coughlin's warning, Hesham Islam did in fact invite leaders from ISNA -- an un-indicted co-conspirator in the Hamas terrorist funding trial -- into the Pentagon.
This is just one example of how the highest levels of the U.S. government dictate a military culture based on refusal to identify the looming threat of Islamic jihad. And the situation has worsened since the Obama administration came to power. All-out destruction of the enemy is eschewed in favor of diplomacy and appeasement. The intelligence community is hobbled by an increasingly dominant Department of Justice that treats terrorists like common domestic criminals and grants them full constitutional rights. The focus has been diverted from life-saving intelligence-gathering to the distracting and time-consuming building of court cases for prosecution. Meanwhile, critical intelligence-sharing with congressional oversight committees has been curtailed.
Now the Obama administration is searching out "moderate" elements in Hezb'allah, a designated Islamic terrorist group. Homeland security and counterterrorism czar John Brennan recently described the jihadist group as "a very interesting organization" that has evolved from "purely a terrorist organization" to a political movement whose members serve in the Lebanese parliament and cabinet. In fact, Hezb'allah, which is an Iranian proxy, has gained virtual control of the Lebanese government as a result of U.N. Resolution 1701, imposed as a "peaceful" resolution of the 2006 "Lebanon war." The promised "beefed-up" UNIFIL force that was supposed to help the legitimate Lebanese government disarm Hezb'allah has had the opposite result. Already in 2008, then Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, stated "in terms of capabilities, in terms of range of weapons they have, in terms of internal discipline," Hezbollah makes al-Qaeda look like "a minor league team." Today we learn that Iran has transferred scuds to Hezb'allah via Syria. But John Brennan explains that the administration will not use the terms "'Islamist' and 'jihadist' because jihad is holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one's community."
Our citizens at home and our troops on the battlefield are disarmed by a narrative that imposes respect for a political-religious system that seeks their subjugation and death. As we saw with the former SEAL, our troops are taught that they must not openly expose the ideology of Islam, its goals and strategy. They risk their lives not to defeat the enemy and liberate local population, but to facilitate the consolidation of Islamic states governed by shari'ah law. Instead of combating jihad, they empower it!
The war effort has been repackaged as a combination of Peace Corps, social work, and outreach to the Muslim community. Military personnel, held to strict one-way standards of religious sensitivity, are told that their mission is to build trust in the local population. This self-defeating strategy has gutted the rules of engagement, shackling our soldiers on the battlefield. Instead of fighting to kill, soldiers worry about facing charges and imprisonment for offending, harming, or frightening the enemy. Misplaced vigilance jeopardizes their own safety. Soldiers are punished not for cowardice or fraternizing with the enemy, but for lack of kid-gloves respect. Petty Officer Julio Huertas faced charges for allegedly punching and kicking Iraqi jihadist detainee Ahmed Hashim Abed, accused of the grisly murder of four American contractors whose mutilated corpses were hacked to pieces, burned, and strung up in Fallujah. In normal times, Huertas would have been hailed as a hero for capturing an archenemy. Colonel Alan West (currently running for Congress) was accused of "aggravated assault" for firing a pistol in the air to scare an Iraqi detainee into giving information on planned ambushes of his troops in Tikrit. Instead of being commended for protecting his men, Colonel West was forced into early retirement to avoid court-martial.
Captured enemy combatants benefit from legal protections guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. Duly Mirandized on the battlefield and innocent until proven guilty, they are entitled to the full benefits of criminal litigation -- due process, jury trial, the right to counsel and the privilege to bar involuntary admissions...
Our troops are in double jeopardy: facing the enemy on the battlefield and the eventual jihadist in their ranks. Federal guarantees of religious freedom and non-discrimination prevent the rejection of Muslim recruits and, as we saw with the Fort Hood jihadi Major Hassan, can protect a Muslim soldier from being discharged for obvious, repeated misconduct. No precautions are taken, despite calls by the likes of U.S.-born Anwar Al-Awlaki pushing Muslim soldiers to kill their comrades. Rather than risk being seen as "Islamophobic," officers risk the lives of their servicemen and women.
Soldiers who fought in World War II would be horrified by current rules of engagement that give enemy fighters the rights of American citizens and place the avoidance of civilian casualties over the safety of troops. Our soldiers, pitted against an enemy that fights dirty, operate under onerous prohibitions. They are not allowed to return fire unless the source -- a suspected enemy combatant -- is actually sighted. They must not shoot at unarmed individuals, even if they just set up and detonated an IED (improvised explosive device). They must issue verbal warnings and fire warning shots before shooting to kill. The exact level and danger of enemy fire must be evaluated prior to initiation of return fire. The use of heavy weapons and air strikes is strictly proscribed by complex regulations.
It has just been announced that NATO commanders, flying in the face of common sense, are awarding "courageous restraint" medals recognizing soldiers who avoid the use of force. Turning our soldiers into combatant-peacekeeper hybrids feeds into the jihad narrative that accuses us of wanton murder of civilians. In fact, it is the jihadists who maim and kill civilians by the tens of thousands in mosques, markets, hospitals, and villages and then use the casualties as a weapon against us. When G.W. Bush was president, the media and academia kept dramatic tallies of civilian and military losses in Iraq. Since the anti-Bush Obama has been in office, casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq are quietly mentioned and never dramatized.
President Obama reinforced the peacekeeping narrative in his speech at this year's West Point graduation. Addressing young men and women who will risk their lives to defend our country, the president defended the international institutions that he deems worthy of our allegiance: "We have succeeded by steering those currents in the direction of liberty and justice -- so nations thrive by meeting their responsibilities, and face consequences when they don't." Iran, for example?
In that West Point speech, the president boasted that there will be no clear-cut victory in Afghanistan, no surrender ceremony, no banner headlines -- as if, by the force of his higher morality, he has turned G.W. Bush's dirty war into a clean operation that will turn the country over to local troops and restore peace and goodwill for all. This is a smokescreen to hide the nature of jihad -- a different kind of war demanding a different kind of victory and a different but equally unconditional surrender. The refusal to identify the enemy disarms our military. And the rhetorical transformation of retreat into a quiet kind of success notifies them that they will risk their lives in vain.
General Petraeus, Robert Gates, President Obama, the infamous Professor Walt, and their minions of dutiful pundits deviously explained, during a recent spate of Israel-bashing, how the unresolved conflict with the Palestinians jeopardizes our military personal in the field. Not the failure to identify the enemy, not the misguided rules of engagement, not the refusal to fight for victory, and not the Muslim jihadists that concretely kill our men and women...but the all-purpose gripe against Israel is the thorn in our side! It's the Sabra-Chatila syndrome: Christian militia kill Palestinians in Lebanon, and it's Israel's fault. Jihadis kill Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Americans are blamed. The jihadis kill our soldiers, and it's because Israel won't surrender to Palestinian demands.
Military personnel don't revolt; they follow orders. How long can we expect them to follow orders from a commander in chief who does not honor his obligation to send them into battle under the best conditions? If they were civilians, would they obey orders from such an irresponsible leader? Would policemen risk their lives to maintain law and order if they were hobbled with such rules of engagement? In fact, that is the situation in France, where well-armed thugs fire at policemen who are either unarmed or reluctant to return fire for fear of wounding or killing a punk jihadi and triggering a generalized uprising.
The dangers faced by military personnel today stand in sharp contrast to the safe, comfortable living conditions of the general population, cushioned from distant battlefield realities, living in material abundance, and exempt from the draft. Our troops cannot prevail without material and moral support from our nation. But this support is stifled by a lethal narrative that criminalizes war, glorifies underhanded jihad fighting, and embraces subversion on the home front.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Gary Coleman's Quick Removal off Life Support and Resulting Death Raises Questions
Commentary by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
May 31, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The death of Gary Coleman has elicited reactions of surprise and sadness from Americans who had come to know and love the actor through his role on the popular situation comedy Diff'rent Strokes during the late 70s and early 80s.
However, what is not being discussed in the mainstream media, what is being assiduously avoided, are the obvious questions: is it certain how Coleman sustained his deadly head injury, and why did his wife "pull the plug" on her husband only hours after he was put on life support, and only two days after he entered the hospital?
Coleman was hospitalized on May 26 after sustaining a traumatic head injury that was severe enough to cause bleeding inside of his skull. The injury was said to have resulted from a fall. Still, the severity of the injury, other issues surrounding his death and events in the recent past would seem to have called for at least a preliminary police investigation.
It is public knowledge that the Coleman and his much larger wife, Shannon Price, had a stormy, conflictive relationship that led to her arrest in 2009 on charges of domestic violence. Coleman, who was also irascible, was also arrested on abuse charges early this year.
Despite the disturbing circumstances surrounding Coleman's death, the Santaquin police chief, Dennis Howard, told People Magazine that "there was absolutely nothing suspicious about [Coleman's] death. There is no [criminal] investigation going on."
Coleman has been presented in the media as a man whose life and health were in decline. However, his health problems were fundamentally related to his kidney disease, which reportedly required regular dialysis. Kidney diseases do not cause traumatic head injuries -- that requires a heavy force applied to the head. That force could have resulted from any number of causes, ranging from something as innocent as a slip in the bathtub, to something as sinister as a blow from a heavy blunt object.
After his arrest in January of this year on domestic abuse charges, Coleman appeared on The Insider, a celebrity gossip show, to give his own side of the story. During a heated exchange with one of the show's guests, who insisted that he answer the question of whether or not he had abused his wife, Coleman strangely pointed to an injury on his head and said that he had received the wound from a fall down the stairs, and didn't want anyone to think that his wife had hit him -- a comment that was taken by some to indicate that he was implying the opposite in an attempt to defend himself.
Days after the incident that eventually took his life, Price and her family have been strangely reticent about giving details regarding the cause of his injury. They only claim he somehow "fell," with no further explanation.
The apparent ease with which Coleman's life was ended especially raises questions about the culture of death that has seemingly become the norm in American and European hospitals.
A person on life support, even for a few hours, is vulnerable to being dismissed as a "vegetable" and his life terminated on the most flimsy criteria. Not only does such a standard indicate a distressing contempt for the sanctity of human life, but it also opens the possibility of serious abuses by relatives or friends, who might have a conflict of interest in making such a decision.
URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10053109.html
Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: coleman; garycoleman; moralabsolutes; prolife
1 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:08:23 PM by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Or he slipped in the tub and had told everyone “do not keep me on life support”.
2 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:12:24 PM by TheZMan (Just secede and get it over with. No love lost on either side. Cya.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
3 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:12:36 PM by null and void (We are now in day 494 of our national holiday from reality. - 0bama really isn't one of US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
That force could have resulted from any number of causes, ranging from something as innocent as a slip in the bathtub, to something as sinister as a blow from a heavy blunt object.
... or a dwarf toss gone bad.
4 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:16:36 PM by gov_bean_ counter (Obie Wan Nairobi from the 1/2 dark side. The farce with this one strong, it is...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Well, the wife can’t just say I want him off life support, if there was no brain wave activity, then life support doesn’t do anything for anyone...... these decisions are not made in a vacuum...
5 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:21:30 PM by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Check the life insurance policies....
6 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:21:33 PM by ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton (To those who believe the world was safer with Saddam, get treatment for that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
I hope someone looks into this. After reading this, I am reminded of how I wondered if he was murdered. It was just a thought that popped into my mind, but I dismissed it.
7 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:27:50 PM by PghBaldy (Like the Ft Hood Killer, James Earl Ray was just stressed when he killed MLK Jr.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Hmmm, the first reports I heard attributed his death to a brain hemorrhage. Mentioned previous health problems, but no mention of any accident or blow to the head.
8 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:27:51 PM by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
9 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:28:46 PM by Tai_Chung
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Perhaps you should call up Dr. Frist to watch him on TV and give a “diagnosis”?
10 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:31:18 PM by PatHimself
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
I have had to make that same decision for a family member and would never judge another person who was faced with the same decision.
11 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:32:37 PM by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
RIP, Gary Coleman. Other than some money (most of which was pilfered by others) and fame as a child actor, he was dealt a pretty lousy hand in life. He did the best he could with it.
And by the way: Making jokes about a guy right after his untimely death... well, that just ain't right.
12 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:38:23 PM by Mike-o-Matic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Or .. his wife was tired of the fighting .. tired of the daily treatments .. and all the money that was being spent on somebody who was apparently close to the dying process.
I’d follow the money .......
13 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:12:51 PM by CyberAnt (God Bless Our Troops Who Have Given the Ultimate Sacrifice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Arizona Carolyn
Yes, in fact the next of kin can and often does decline extraordinary life support measures.
“[N]o brain wave activity” is very much not the standard used.
14 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:16:51 PM by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]
To: PatHimself
*rim-shot*
15 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:20:06 PM by Eyes Unclouded ("The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." -George Carlin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]
To: trumandogz
“I have had to make that same decision for a family member and would never judge another person who was faced with the same decision.”
Thank you for sharing this. It really hit home.
Sadly, I had to make such a decision of removal off life support for my only brother this morning, only hours after he was admitted to the hospital.
There were limited options given to us by the physicians but the end results would all be the same.
It was one of the most terrible things I ever had to deal with, but I know in my heart it was the right decision.
16 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:22:34 PM by ThE_RiPpEr.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]
To: iowamark
I just went through this last October with my husband.
17 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:22:51 PM by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
I wonder if she was strongly advised by doctors to be that hasty??
18 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:36:36 PM by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Arizona Carolyn; ThE_RiPpEr.
May God bless you both, that is a hard thing to do.
19 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:37:44 PM by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]
To: ThE_RiPpEr.
I'm sorry for your loss and I know it must have been all the much more difficult due to the suddenness of his health crisis.
With my dad, I knew it was the right decision medically and I knew it was he would have wanted. Even with that, it was not an easy decision.
20 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:38:53 PM by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Stories like this take away from Life Site’s credibility, at least with me. To publish a sinister speculative article within days of Coleman’s demise, to question the family’s decisions about life support is really tasteless.
21 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:41:12 PM by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: iowamark
My father has insisted that ‘DNR’ be entered into his medical records. For those who are unaware of the meaning, that is ‘Do Not Resuscitate’.
I disagree with it totally but have to respect his wishes.
22 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:41:56 PM by SatinDoll (NO Foreign Nationals as our President!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]
To: Irish Eyes
Thank you.... yes, very, but as much as I miss him, I would not have him live as a vegetable, it was not what he wanted nor what I would have wanted to subject him to... it is actually something we discussed with each other more than once.
23 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:41:58 PM by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Chronic renal disease does cause osteoporosis, so he could have had a skull fracture and bleed, e.g. a sub dural hemorrhage from a minor fall. Common in the elderly (my aunt had one...) but with his long history of renal failure, his body was pretty old.
But the stories originally said he had a sub arachnoid hemorrhage, which can be from high blood pressure or from an aneurism.
The original injury is bad, but what kills the patient in all of these things is the swelling of the brain, which usually occurs on one or two days later.
I don't have a problem with the case, knowing that the chance of making it through after brain death was declared is low to zero...
His chronic renal disease might mean he was prone to bleeding problems and high blood pressure. Was he on dialysis?
24 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 2:06:08 PM by LadyDoc (liberals only love politically correct poor people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: TheZMan
I have it written in my will and in the Power of Attorney for health care, No Heroics...that includes machines and definately NO CODE I also told my doctor.....I am not quick to jump to conclusions on what he may have told his family...
25 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 2:15:08 PM by goat granny
May 31, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The death of Gary Coleman has elicited reactions of surprise and sadness from Americans who had come to know and love the actor through his role on the popular situation comedy Diff'rent Strokes during the late 70s and early 80s.
However, what is not being discussed in the mainstream media, what is being assiduously avoided, are the obvious questions: is it certain how Coleman sustained his deadly head injury, and why did his wife "pull the plug" on her husband only hours after he was put on life support, and only two days after he entered the hospital?
Coleman was hospitalized on May 26 after sustaining a traumatic head injury that was severe enough to cause bleeding inside of his skull. The injury was said to have resulted from a fall. Still, the severity of the injury, other issues surrounding his death and events in the recent past would seem to have called for at least a preliminary police investigation.
It is public knowledge that the Coleman and his much larger wife, Shannon Price, had a stormy, conflictive relationship that led to her arrest in 2009 on charges of domestic violence. Coleman, who was also irascible, was also arrested on abuse charges early this year.
Despite the disturbing circumstances surrounding Coleman's death, the Santaquin police chief, Dennis Howard, told People Magazine that "there was absolutely nothing suspicious about [Coleman's] death. There is no [criminal] investigation going on."
Coleman has been presented in the media as a man whose life and health were in decline. However, his health problems were fundamentally related to his kidney disease, which reportedly required regular dialysis. Kidney diseases do not cause traumatic head injuries -- that requires a heavy force applied to the head. That force could have resulted from any number of causes, ranging from something as innocent as a slip in the bathtub, to something as sinister as a blow from a heavy blunt object.
After his arrest in January of this year on domestic abuse charges, Coleman appeared on The Insider, a celebrity gossip show, to give his own side of the story. During a heated exchange with one of the show's guests, who insisted that he answer the question of whether or not he had abused his wife, Coleman strangely pointed to an injury on his head and said that he had received the wound from a fall down the stairs, and didn't want anyone to think that his wife had hit him -- a comment that was taken by some to indicate that he was implying the opposite in an attempt to defend himself.
Days after the incident that eventually took his life, Price and her family have been strangely reticent about giving details regarding the cause of his injury. They only claim he somehow "fell," with no further explanation.
The apparent ease with which Coleman's life was ended especially raises questions about the culture of death that has seemingly become the norm in American and European hospitals.
A person on life support, even for a few hours, is vulnerable to being dismissed as a "vegetable" and his life terminated on the most flimsy criteria. Not only does such a standard indicate a distressing contempt for the sanctity of human life, but it also opens the possibility of serious abuses by relatives or friends, who might have a conflict of interest in making such a decision.
URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10053109.html
Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: coleman; garycoleman; moralabsolutes; prolife
1 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:08:23 PM by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Or he slipped in the tub and had told everyone “do not keep me on life support”.
2 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:12:24 PM by TheZMan (Just secede and get it over with. No love lost on either side. Cya.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
3 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:12:36 PM by null and void (We are now in day 494 of our national holiday from reality. - 0bama really isn't one of US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
That force could have resulted from any number of causes, ranging from something as innocent as a slip in the bathtub, to something as sinister as a blow from a heavy blunt object.
... or a dwarf toss gone bad.
4 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:16:36 PM by gov_bean_ counter (Obie Wan Nairobi from the 1/2 dark side. The farce with this one strong, it is...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Well, the wife can’t just say I want him off life support, if there was no brain wave activity, then life support doesn’t do anything for anyone...... these decisions are not made in a vacuum...
5 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:21:30 PM by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Check the life insurance policies....
6 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:21:33 PM by ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton (To those who believe the world was safer with Saddam, get treatment for that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
I hope someone looks into this. After reading this, I am reminded of how I wondered if he was murdered. It was just a thought that popped into my mind, but I dismissed it.
7 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:27:50 PM by PghBaldy (Like the Ft Hood Killer, James Earl Ray was just stressed when he killed MLK Jr.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Hmmm, the first reports I heard attributed his death to a brain hemorrhage. Mentioned previous health problems, but no mention of any accident or blow to the head.
8 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:27:51 PM by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
9 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:28:46 PM by Tai_Chung
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Perhaps you should call up Dr. Frist to watch him on TV and give a “diagnosis”?
10 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:31:18 PM by PatHimself
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
I have had to make that same decision for a family member and would never judge another person who was faced with the same decision.
11 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:32:37 PM by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
RIP, Gary Coleman. Other than some money (most of which was pilfered by others) and fame as a child actor, he was dealt a pretty lousy hand in life. He did the best he could with it.
And by the way: Making jokes about a guy right after his untimely death... well, that just ain't right.
12 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:38:23 PM by Mike-o-Matic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Or .. his wife was tired of the fighting .. tired of the daily treatments .. and all the money that was being spent on somebody who was apparently close to the dying process.
I’d follow the money .......
13 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:12:51 PM by CyberAnt (God Bless Our Troops Who Have Given the Ultimate Sacrifice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Arizona Carolyn
Yes, in fact the next of kin can and often does decline extraordinary life support measures.
“[N]o brain wave activity” is very much not the standard used.
14 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:16:51 PM by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]
To: PatHimself
*rim-shot*
15 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:20:06 PM by Eyes Unclouded ("The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." -George Carlin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]
To: trumandogz
“I have had to make that same decision for a family member and would never judge another person who was faced with the same decision.”
Thank you for sharing this. It really hit home.
Sadly, I had to make such a decision of removal off life support for my only brother this morning, only hours after he was admitted to the hospital.
There were limited options given to us by the physicians but the end results would all be the same.
It was one of the most terrible things I ever had to deal with, but I know in my heart it was the right decision.
16 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:22:34 PM by ThE_RiPpEr.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]
To: iowamark
I just went through this last October with my husband.
17 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:22:51 PM by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
I wonder if she was strongly advised by doctors to be that hasty??
18 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:36:36 PM by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Arizona Carolyn; ThE_RiPpEr.
May God bless you both, that is a hard thing to do.
19 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:37:44 PM by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]
To: ThE_RiPpEr.
I'm sorry for your loss and I know it must have been all the much more difficult due to the suddenness of his health crisis.
With my dad, I knew it was the right decision medically and I knew it was he would have wanted. Even with that, it was not an easy decision.
20 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:38:53 PM by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Stories like this take away from Life Site’s credibility, at least with me. To publish a sinister speculative article within days of Coleman’s demise, to question the family’s decisions about life support is really tasteless.
21 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:41:12 PM by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: iowamark
My father has insisted that ‘DNR’ be entered into his medical records. For those who are unaware of the meaning, that is ‘Do Not Resuscitate’.
I disagree with it totally but have to respect his wishes.
22 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:41:56 PM by SatinDoll (NO Foreign Nationals as our President!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]
To: Irish Eyes
Thank you.... yes, very, but as much as I miss him, I would not have him live as a vegetable, it was not what he wanted nor what I would have wanted to subject him to... it is actually something we discussed with each other more than once.
23 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:41:58 PM by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]
To: GonzoII
Chronic renal disease does cause osteoporosis, so he could have had a skull fracture and bleed, e.g. a sub dural hemorrhage from a minor fall. Common in the elderly (my aunt had one...) but with his long history of renal failure, his body was pretty old.
But the stories originally said he had a sub arachnoid hemorrhage, which can be from high blood pressure or from an aneurism.
The original injury is bad, but what kills the patient in all of these things is the swelling of the brain, which usually occurs on one or two days later.
I don't have a problem with the case, knowing that the chance of making it through after brain death was declared is low to zero...
His chronic renal disease might mean he was prone to bleeding problems and high blood pressure. Was he on dialysis?
24 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 2:06:08 PM by LadyDoc (liberals only love politically correct poor people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: TheZMan
I have it written in my will and in the Power of Attorney for health care, No Heroics...that includes machines and definately NO CODE I also told my doctor.....I am not quick to jump to conclusions on what he may have told his family...
25 posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 2:15:08 PM by goat granny
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
