Thursday, November 01, 2012

The Management of Savagery: Arab Spring, Libya, and beyond

This post has been previously posted at DLSF.

For those unfamiliar with al Qaeda doctrine, my first intro to it was via The Management of Savagery: The Most Critical Stage Through Which the Umma Will Pass by Abu Bakr Naji, Translated by William McCants (hosted at Harvard here for pdf).  I did a quick review of it as a first hit and a bit more, and looked at its views towards Nation States, particularly weak ones.  This is a multi-step system of proselytizing, getting sharia law put in place:

As for the current of popular jihad (like the movement of Hamas and the Jihad Movement in Palestine), in comparison with the four previous programs and what you have learned about this current, you can understand the nature of its program. In short, it resembles the program of the current of jihadi salafism, except that it goes further in its political thought, in the manner of the archetypal Brethren and the Brethren of Turabi. Furthermore, it is deficient in disseminating the correct scientific method among its followers when implementing the pedagogical method. One of two fates is feared for it: either the loss of the fruit (of its labors) in the end and its falling into the hands of the secular apostates and the nationalists, or the establishment of a state resembling the state of al-Bashir and al-Turabi in Sudan. The explanation of the details of all of that takes a long time...

The text was written prior to the US invasion of Afghanistan and looks at a pre-9/11 world which is still most of the world, today, in the Middle East and Africa.  The Management of Savagery is aimed at establishing a Caliphate via the encroachment of radicalized, jihadist Islam into States, shifting the law basis of States and, when that is not possible, fracturing States so as to spread jihad violently into neighboring States.

The management of savagery is the next stage that the Umma will pass through and it is considered the most critical stage. If we succeed in the management of this savagery, that stage (by the permission of God) will be a bridge to the Islamic state which has been awaited since the fall of the caliphate. If we fail – we seek refuge with God from that – it does not mean end of the matter; rather, this failure will lead to an increase in savagery!!

This increase in savagery, which may result from failure, is not the worst thing that can happen now or in the previous decade (the nineties) and those before it. Rather, the most abominable of the levels of savagery is (still) less than stability under the order of unbelief [niz?m al-kufr] by (several) degrees.

Again, this mindset sees violence due to Islam as better than being in a secular State.  This continues since jihadism is not an end, in and of itself, but a means to an end.

Despite the violence of Satan, a small group of thinkers and noble people remain who oppose tyranny and seek justice. This group wants to use the power they possess to change this reality for the better in accordance with their belief system. However, a second consideration that occurs to them is the existence of a criminal force in these armies which does not pay heed to values. Even if, in the best of circumstances, there is a clear plan for uniting [lit. encircling] the disharmonious elements of the (military) power, one or both of the superpowers will, under the cover of the United Nations, compel the new regime – through trickery, force, pressure, or all of these – to continue circling in the orbit of one of the superpowers and they will force new beneficiaries upon the new regime. This honored person who came to power comes to resemble those who went before him, like al-Bashir in Sudan.

Continued a bit later:

Therefore, the two superpowers must resort to using a deceptive media halo which portrays these powers as non-coercive and world-encompassing, able to reach into every earth and heaven as if they possess the power of the Creator of creation.

But the interesting thing that happened is that these two superpowers believed, for a time, their media deception: that they are actually a power capable of completely controlling any place in the entire world, and that (this power) bears the characteristics of the power of the Creator. According to the media deception, it is an all-encompassing, overwhelming power and people are subservient to it not only through fear, but also through love because it spreads freedom, justice, equality among humanity, and various other slogans.

When a state submits – whatever the extent of its ability – to the illusion of the deceptive power and behaves on this basis, that is when its downfall begins. It is just as the American author Paul Kennedy says: “If America expands the use of its military power and strategically extends more than necessary, this will lead to its downfall.”

Now do remember how easily the UN became the umbrella to Libya was quite astounding.  With that said the cover by the Arab League Nations gave it a patina of legitimacy and allowed Russia and China to abstain from vetoing the move.  On the ground, however, this has a different view not just to the 'rebels' but to al Qaeda.  Kaddafi had an air force which could only be countered either by MANPADs or by an opposition air force.  With Kaddafi's forces neutralized in the air, the rest is pretty simple since the UN forces weren't 'boots on the ground'.  This allows multiple elements, not just the rebels, to act freely in Libya.

The organization used to establish a toehold: Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.  From - 

Country Reports on Terrorism 2006

Released by the Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism
April 30, 2007

Concentrating on Chapter 6 – Terrorist Organizations.

Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) 1

Description
The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) emerged in the early 1990s among Libyans who had fought Soviet forces in Afghanistan and the Qadhafi regime in Libya. The LIFG declared Libyan President Muammar Qadhafi un-Islamic and pledged to overthrow him. Some members maintain a strictly anti-Qadhafi focus and organize against Libyan government interests, but others, such as Abu al-Faraj al-Libi, who was arrested in Pakistan in 2005, are aligned with Usama bin Ladin and believed to be part of al-Qaida's leadership structure or active in the international terrorist network. The United States designated the LIFG a Foreign Terrorist Organization in December 2004.

Activities
Libyans associated with the LIFG are part of the broader international terrorist movement. Spanish media in August 2005 linked Ziyad Hashem, an alleged member of the LIFG's media committee, as well as the imprisoned amir Abdullah al-Sadeq, with the Tunisian Islamist Serhane Ben Abdelmajid Fakhet, the suspected ringleader in the 2004 Madrid attacks. The LIFG is one of the groups believed to have planned the Casablanca suicide bombings in May 2003. The LIFG continues to target Libyan interests, and attempted to assassinate Qadhafi a total of four times; the last attempt was in 1998. The LIFG engaged Libyan security forces in armed clashes during the 1990s.

Strength
Probably has several hundred active members or supporters.

Location/Area of Operation
Since the late 1990s many members have fled to various Asian, Arabian Gulf, African, and European countries, particularly the United Kingdom. It is likely that LIFG maintains a clandestine presence in Libya.

External Aid
Unknown. The LIFG has used Islamic charitable organizations as cover for raising and transferring money and documents.

This group is thought to be defunct as of 2007 and formally announced its end in 2009.  In that 2009 update there is also indications that LIFG had gotten into organized crime for external aid.  And utilizing that 2009 report the next group to stand up can be seen:

AL-QA’IDA IN THE ISLAMIC MAGHREB

aka AQIM; formerly known as Group for Call and Combat; GSPC; Le Groupe Salafiste Pour La Predication Et Le Combat; Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat

Description: The Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC) was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization on March 27, 2002. The GSPC officially merged with al-Qa’ida (AQ) in September 2006 and subsequently changed its name to al-Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) in January 2007.

Despite its affiliation, AQIM remains largely a regionally-focused terrorist group. It has adopted a more anti-Western rhetoric and ideology and has aspirations of overthrowing “apostate” African regimes and creating an Islamic Caliphate. AQIM numbers under a thousand fighters and is significantly constrained by its poor finances and lack of broad general appeal to Sufi Muslims in the region. Some senior members of AQIM are former GIA insurgents.

Activities: AQIM has not been able to conduct spectacular attacks in over two years since it bombed the UN building and Algerian government buildings in 2007. AQIM continued to conduct small scale attacks and ambushes in northeastern Algeria against Algerian security forces and regularly used improvised explosive devices there. AQIM in northeastern Algeria was under significant pressure by Algerian security forces. AQIM’s goals of expanding into Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, and Europe have failed thus far.

AQIM factions in the northern Sahel (northern Mali, Niger and Mauritania) conduct kidnap for ransom operations and can conduct small scale attacks and ambushes on security forces there. The target for kidnap for ransom is usually Western citizens from governments or third parties that have established a pattern of making concessions in the form of payment of money or release of operatives in custody. Last year, one citizen from the United States and the United Kingdom were murdered in Mauritania and Mali respectively.

Strength: AQIM has under a thousand fighters operating in Algeria with a smaller number in the Sahel. Abdelmalek Droukdel, aka Abu Mus’ab Abd al-Wadoud, is the leader of the group.

Location/Area of Operation: Northeastern Algeria (the Kabylie region) and northern Mali, Niger, and Mauritania. AQIM aspires to expand into Europe but its efforts to do so thus far have failed.

External Aid: Algerian expatriates and AQIM members abroad, many residing in Western Europe, provide some limited financial and logistical support. AQIM members also engage in hostage-taking for ransom and criminal activity to finance their operations.

And who are the IG?  Why a Muslim Brotherhood off-shoot!

GAMA’A AL-ISLAMIYYA

aka al-Gama’at; Egyptian al-Gama’at al-Islamiyya; GI; Islamic Gama’at; IG; Islamic Group,

Description: Gama’a al-Islamiyya (IG) was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization on October 8, 1997. IG, once Egypt’s largest militant groups, was active in the late 1970s, but is now a loosely organized network. The majority of its Egypt-based members have renounced terrorism, although some located overseas have begun to work with or have joined al-Qa’ida (AQ). The external wing, composed of mainly exiled members in several countries, maintained that its primary goal was to replace the Egyptian government with an Islamic state.

IG announced a cease-fire in 1997 that led to a split into two factions: one, led by Mustafa Hamza, supported the cease-fire; the other, led by Rifa’i Taha Musa, called for a return to armed operations. IG announced another ceasefire in March 1999 that the majority of its leaders have held to through the end of 2009, but its spiritual leader, Sheik Umar Abd al-Rahman, sentenced to life in prison in January 1996 for his involvement in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and incarcerated in the United States, rescinded his support for the cease-fire in June 2000. IG has not conducted an attack inside Egypt since the 1997 Luxor attack, which killed 58 tourists and four Egyptians, and wounded dozens more. In February 1998, a senior member signed Usama bin Ladin’s fatwa call for attacks against the United States but may not have been acting as part of the IG.

In early 2001, Taha Musa published a book in which he attempted to justify terrorist attacks that cause mass casualties. Musa disappeared several months afterward and the United States has no information about his whereabouts. In March 2002, members of the group’s historic leadership in Egypt declared the use of violence misguided and renounced its future use, prompting denunciations from much of the leadership abroad. The Egyptian government continued to release IG members from prison as part of its rehabilitation program; approximately 900 were released in 2003 and most of the 700 persons released in 2004 at the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan were IG members. In August 2006, Ayman al-Zawahiri announced that IG had merged with AQ, but the group’s Egypt-based leadership quickly denied this claim which ran counter to their reconciliation efforts. Supporters of Sheikh Abd al-Rahman still remain a possible threat to U.S. interests as both ‘Abd al-Rahman and his supporters have previously called for reprisal attacks in case of his death in prison.

Activities: Before the 1997 cease-fire, IG conducted armed attacks against Egyptian security and other government officials and Coptic Christians. After the cease-fire, the faction led by Taha Musa launched attacks on tourists in Egypt, most notably the 1997 Luxor attack. IG claimed responsibility for the June 1995 assassination attempt on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. IG was dormant in 2009.

Strength: At its peak, IG probably commanded several thousand hardcore members and a similar number of supporters. Security crackdowns following the 1997 attack in Luxor, the 1999 cease-fire, and post-September 11 security measures and defections to AQ have probably resulted in a substantial decrease in what is left of an organized group.

Location/Area of Operation: The IG maintained an external presence in Afghanistan, Yemen, Iran, the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria, and France. IG terrorist presence in Egypt was minimal due to the reconciliation efforts of former local members.

External Aid: AQ and Afghan militant groups provide support to members of the organization to carry out support on behalf of AQ but not in conjunction with the IG. IG also may have obtained some funding through various Islamic non-governmental organizations.

Thus AQIM has direct ties to al Qaeda and through them the Muslim Brotherhood, and the IG is also part of the AQIM, which has relations to the Blind Sheikh.  With AQIM displacing or absorbing the LIFG, the inroads into Libya are made prior to the 2011 uprising.  This explains some of Kaddafi's worries about al Qaeda:

17 MAR 2011 - Gaddafi fears Bin Laden's occupation of Libya (Source: RIA Novosti via GlobalSecurity document cache)

16:58 17/03/2011 MOSCOW, March 17 (RIA Novosti) - Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi fears that number one terrorist, al-Qaeda's Osama Bin Laden, will take control over Libya making it "the second Afghanistan," Gaddafi told Russia Today (RT) satellite TV channel on Thursday.

"Al-Qaeda will establish Jihad in Northern Africa and the West will have to oppose the dangerous challenges, triggering a new crusade," Gaddafi said in an interview with RT.

[..]

Early on in the conflict was a military worry about the MANPADs (Man Portable Air Defense systems, aka shoulder launched SAMs) in Libya:

30 MAR 2011 - US Lawmakers Vent Frustrations About Libya (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)

[..]

Democratic Congressman Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland said he did not believe Libyan rebels have requested arms. "Well the first thing, I don't believe the rebels have asked to be armed because I have been to Libya, I have met with Ghadhafi, there is a tremendous amount of ammunition all over Libya. There are over 20,000 manpads [man-portable air-defense systems, commonly known as shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles], and the opposition has been able to secure a lot of this. Now whether they know how to use it, that is another issue."

In an interview late Tuesday with NBC news, President Obama said he is not ruling out arming Libyan rebels, but said he has also not made a decision to arm them. He says right now coalition forces are degrading Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's forces' capabilities.

[..]

These are the items that can be used to track the links of terrorists and Nation States.  The majority of Kaddafi's MANPADs are of the SA variety (likely the SA-7 at least), which do require some training to use.  This would explain the likelihood of the CIA being involved ( 31 MAR 2011 - US May Use Covert Action Against Gadhafi (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)) and the CIA with British Intelligence (05 APR 2011 - CIA Secretly at Work Inside Libya (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)).  President Obama issued a memorandum to use FAA reserve funds to be used for the Libyans (26 APR 2011 – GlobalSecurity document cache).

As AQIM follows the AQ doctrine, they sought to gather arms to spread into other areas of Africa, which is part of their area of operations.  First mention of arms going to al Qaeda from Libyan conflict and it will not be the last of these reports. Note ethnic role and which Nation is involved.

30 JUN 2011 - AU condemns French arms drop to Libyan rebels - media

(Source: RIA Novosti via GlobalSecurity)

MOSCOW, June 30 (RIA Novosti) - African Union Commission Chief Jean Ping condemned on Thursday French arms supply to Libyan rebels, world media said on Thursday.

France has confirmed media reports that it dropped weapons to Berber tribal fighters in mountains southwest of the Libyan capital Tripoli without informing the other coalition countries taking part in a military operation against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

"What worries us is not who is giving what, but simply that weapons are being distributed by all parties and to all parties," Ping said ahead of an African Union summit in Equatorial Guinea. "We already have proof that these weapons are in the hands of al-Qaeda, of traffickers. These weapons will contribute to the destabilization of African states."

[..]

It is likely that the Berbers are associated with the GIA (Armed Islamic Group) which has associations with al Qaeda, which developed over the Algerian Insurgency.  Back to the 2009 terrorist group listing:

ARMED ISLAMIC GROUP

aka GIA; al-Jama’ah al-Islamiyah al-Musallah; Groupement Islamique Arme

Description: The Armed Islamic Group was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization on October 8, 1997. The GIA aims to overthrow the Algerian regime and replace it with a state governed by Sharia law. The GIA began its violent activity in 1992 after the military government suspended legislative elections in anticipation of an overwhelming victory by the Islamic Salvation Front, the largest Algerian Islamic opposition party.

Activities: The GIA has engaged in attacks against civilians and government workers. The group began conducting a terrorist campaign of civilian massacres in 1992, sometimes wiping out entire villages and killing tens of thousands of Algerians. Since announcing its campaign against foreigners living in Algeria in 1992, the GIA has killed more than 100 expatriate men and women, mostly Europeans. Almost all of the GIA’s members have now joined other Islamist groups or have been killed or captured by the Algerian government. The Algerian government’s September 2005 reconciliation program led to an increase in the number of GIA terrorist suspects who surrendered to security forces, and the GIA has not conducted attacks since that time. Some senior members of AQIM are former GIA insurgents.

Strength: Almost all former GIA members have accepted amnesty or joined other terrorist groups; precise numbers are unknown.

Location/Area of Operation: Algeria

External Aid: Unknown.

Well good that its gone, bad that some of it was absorbed by AQIM.  Or morphed into the GSPC and then turned into AQIM:

Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC)

The Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC) was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization on March 27, 2002. The Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) aimed to establish an Islamic state within Algeria. Addtionaly it sought to destroy western targets. The GSPC had been visible since 1996 and is an offshoot of the GIA.

On March 11, 2004 news sources reported that a firefight had occurred between the Chad military and an Algerian terrorist group, Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC). This firefight, which is believed to have resulted in the death of some 43 GSPC members, apparently began in Niger and crossed into Chad. The fighting took place over two days. The group, led by a former Algerian soldier named Saifi Ammari and nicknamed "the Para," had been tracked across the Sahara from its bases in the Algeria-Mali border area. It is not clear if "the Para" was involved in the attack.

After the GSPC officially merged with al-Qa'ida (AQ) in September 2006 the organization became known as al-Qa'ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). On February 20, 2008, the Department of State amended the GSPC designation to reflect the change and made AQIM the official name for the organization. Some senior members of AQIM are former Armed Islamic Group (GIA) insurgents.

So the groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood in the region have been pre-positioned, perhaps weakly in Libya but strongly in Algeria.  The cross-border Berbers do allow for the movement of men and arms throughout the area they are in which includes Libya.
 
Now there can be some perspective put onto the prospect of French arms sent to the Berbers winding up in the hands of AQIM.  In fact those border regions are extremely susceptible to the movement of men and arms and by putting the Libyan forces under Kaddafi in check, this allowed for the freeing up of other AQIM elements to spread the instability to weaker Nations. More reports of al Qaeda getting weapons from Libya:

08 JUL 2011 - Niger: Libyan Conflict Impacting Sahel Security (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)

Scott Stearns | Dakar July 08, 2011

Niger President Mahamadou Issoufou says the longer the Libyan conflict drags on, the worse it will be for Libya's neighbors in the Sahel.

President Issoufou says the Libyan crisis has security consequences for Niger including the spread of arms, sometimes heavy arms into the Sahel.

Security forces in Niger recovered detonators, more than 600 kilograms of semtex explosives and $90,000 in cash during a shoot-out with suspected terrorists last month. President Issoufou's government says the arms came from Libya and were intended for Al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM,) which is responsible for a string of kidnappings and ambushes across the Sahel.

Mauritania and Mali are fighting AQIM militants in the Wagadou forest region along their common border. Mauritania, Mali, and Niger all say they are concerned that some of the weapons captured by insurgents in Libya are being sold to the al-Qaida-affiliated group.

NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen says the Libyan conflict risks destabilizing the region further.

[..]

Libya, Algeria, Mali, Mauritania all start to become an integrated operation with the flow of arms and fighters shifting through Libya to other countries.  More al Qaeda worries going official as the conflict continues:  24 AUG 2011 - West fears Al-Qaeda could seize Gaddafi weapons – paper (Source: RIA Novosti via GlobalSecurity)

15:13 24/08/2011 CAIRO, August 24 (RIA Novosti) - The United States, France and Britain have asked Libya's neighbors to beef up security on their borders to prevent the possible smuggling out of weapons, Algerian paper al-Habar said.

The West is afraid that in the chaos of Gaddafi's downfall the leftovers of his military capabilities could fall into hands of al-Qaeda or other militant groups.

No one can be sure who is now controlling the Libyan government's weapons stockpiles, a stew of deadly chemicals, raw nuclear material and some 30,000 shoulder-fired rockets, the paper said.

The leaders of Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Chad and Niger received letters in which Western leaders requested that measures be taken to prevent such groups obtaining the weapons, the paper said.

Anyone with any illusions as to the point of taking down Kaddafi from the perspective of al Qaeda should begin to  have doubts about them.  In this perspective, the loss of the grip of Kaddafi on Libya means the expansion of al Qaeda influence and terrorism into northern Africa.  The Western perspective doesn't matter much, at all, as this sub-theme becomes an important one for the longer-term consequences in the Middle East.

Getting a handle on Kadaffy's WMDs and those pesky MANPADs is vital to the West, but only one of them is critical to al Qaeda:25 AUG 2011 - US: Libyan Uranium, Chemical Weapons Secure (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)

August 25, 2011

David Gollust | Washington

The U.S. State Department said Thursday it believes that Libyan stockpiles of mustard agent and uranium are secure, despite continuing turmoil there. U.S. officials are less sure about the status of shoulder-fired anti-aircraft weapons that were in Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's military arsenal.

The Gadhafi government, in a bid to escape terrorism-related sanctions and political isolation, renounced weapons of mass destruction in 2003 and later gave up key components of a nascent nuclear weapons program.

But Libya’s continued to possess large quantities of mustard agent -- a potential component of chemical weapons. And a stockpile of low-enriched uranium, or yellowcake, has been a matter of international concern as the country descended into conflict.

[..]

“It is at the Tajoura nuclear research facility. It is safeguarded there. We are able, through our national technical means, to assert that we believe it is secure. And in any case, Libya doesn’t have the means right now to turn yellowcake into anything dangerous,’ Nuland said.

Nuland said that in the process that led to the normalization of relations between the United States and Libya in 2006, the Gadhafi government surrendered nuclear weapons equipment it had obtained from Pakistan’s A.Q. Khan network two years earlier. She said it gave up its last highly-enriched uranium in 2009.

[..]

Nuland said the main proliferation concern from Libya involves portable shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, or MANPADS -- short for Man Portable Air Defense System. The Gadhafi government is thought to have stockpiled perhaps thousands of the weapons, which could be used to shoot down commercial airliners.

Since the Libyan conflict began, U.S. personnel have been working with countries bordering Libya, and more recently with the TNC, to try to detect MANPAD smuggling attempts.

Nuland decried what she called ”fear-mongering” reporting on the subject, but also said that there is no reliable information on the extent of the Libyan MANPAD problem, if there is one.

MANPADS have rarely been linked to terrorist attacks. One attack was an unsuccessful attempt by an al-Qaida-affiliated group to shoot down an Israeli airliner at the Kenyan port city of Mombassa in 2002.

Actually MANPADs can directly be related to terrorism via the birth of al Qaeda's early military successes with the Taliban in Afghanistan by getting rid of Soviet airpower advantages.  Neutralizing airpower during an insurgency, not during a terrorist attack, is vital and not something lost on AQIM.  Attempts to play down the use of them is misplaced, at best, and inviting disaster, at worse.  Notice that the Israeli airliner most likely had automated anti-missile systems (chaff and flares) that could make them harder to hit.  Name another civilian airfleet that has such defenses on-board their aircraft.

During the Libyan conflict the new Egyptian government (controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood) seeks to help out the new Libyan transitional council (29 AUG 2011 - Egypt ready to help riot-torn Libya – media (Source: RIA Novosti via GlobalSecurity)) although calling Libya 'riot-torn' suggests more of a widespread set of soccer hooligans rather than a civil war.

HRW releases files to show work between CIA, MI6 and Kaddafi regime: 03 SEP 2011 - HRW releases secret files on US, UK ties to hunt Libyan dissidents (Source: GlobalSecurity document cache)

IRNA - Islamic Republic News Agency

New York, Sept 3, IRNA -- Secret files released by Human Rights Watch show close relationship between United States, UK and Libyan intelligence agencies to hunt dissidents of Muammar Gaddafi's regime.

They reveal that MI6 and the CIA had a regular dialogue with their counterparts in Libyan Intelligence, in particular Musa Kusa the former head of Libya's intelligence service and foreign minister who defected to the UK earlier this year.

Kusa flew to Britain in March and was allowed to fly to Qatar the following month, despite being accused of rights violations.

The papers reportedly include letters and faxes to him headed 'greetings from MI6' and a personal christmas greeting signed by a senior spy as 'your friend'.

The New York-based Human Rights Watch said that the documents were apparently found in Musa Kusa's former offices in Tripoli.

[..]

Also among the files is evidence that the United States used Libya as a base for its rendition programme - transporting prisoners it believed to be a threat to its national security for further interrogation on foreign soil.

Human rights organisations claim that the real purpose was to torture these prisoners outside of US jurisdiction.

Bouckaert said the documents about alleged CIA renditions to Libya included some on the man who is now head of the Tripoli Military Council, Abdel-Hakim Belhaj.

'He was captured, abducted together with his pregnant wife and flown on the so-called black flight to Tripoli for his interrogation,' Bouckaert said.

There is no suggestion that the UK was involved in the rendition process but there are allegations from the secret papers that UK intelligence gave its Libyan counterparts information on dissidents to the Gaddafi regime who were living in Britain at the time.

'Libya asked the US to send Abu Abdullah al-Sadiq, an opposition leader, to Libya and a CIA case officer wrote back in March 2004, that 'we are committed to developing this relationship for the benefit of both our services,' and promised to do their best to locate him, according to another document.'

Islamic Republic News Agency/IRNA NewsCode: 30546930

Yes it is a Leftist talking point, but this does point to the CIA and MI6 having contacts within Libya and not just with the old regime, either.

Speaking of which, as the old regime started to lose its hold on its forces, those forces started to head to other places:  06 SEP 2011 - Libyan Convoy in Niger Where Gadhafi Has Tuareg Ties (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)

September 06, 2011

Scott Stearns | Abuja, Nigeria

A convoy of up to 200 vehicles carrying forces loyal to Libya's Moammar Gadhafi has crossed into Niger.

The ousted Libyan leader has close ties to Tuareg nomads based in northern Niger who Colonel Gadhafi has supported in the past and who may support him now.

The head of Colonel Gadhafi's security brigade, Mansour Dhao, crossed into Niger hours ahead of a larger convoy which quickly moved on toward the capital Niamey.

Officials in Niger said Colonel Gadhafi is not with the convoy, and it was not clear whether any Gadhafi family members or senior political allies were with it either.

Niger's capital in the far southwest of the country is close to the border with Burkina Faso, where officials offered Colonel Gadhafi asylum about two weeks ago.

It is believed the convoy may have first crossed into Algeria before entering Niger through an area that is home to Tuareg nomads with longstanding ties to the former Gadhafi government.

[..]

Less than a week later this movement is confirmed in Niger (Link: RFE/RL).  Tribal alignment is one that crosses religious lines making purely religious designation for inter-tribal conflicts questionable.  Even when not done by AQIM, such activities serve to destabilize countries that have cross-border tribes in their borders.  A tribal uprising can make a country weak against an attack by AQIM. 

From this perspective the West serves the purpose of introducing an abundance of arms, freeing up critical arms from a tyrannical regime and boosting the possibility of inter-tribal conflicts across borders to destabilize more regimes.  All of this for very little to NO time or monetary investment on their part but done freely, at great expense, by the West.

Back to the interim council in Libya.

Now isn't this wonderful? 'Moderate' Islamic rule promised in Libya! Considering that 'moderate Islam' in the Middle East tends to be semi-jihadi with better clothes and hygiene, this becomes an interesting optic. Do the Libyans really want to defang the worst of sharia or just lie about it?

13 SEP 2011 - Libya's New Leaders Pledge 'Moderate' Islamic Rule (Source: RFE/RL via GlobalSecurity)

Last updated (GMT/UTC): 13.09.2011 08:37

Mustafa Abdel Jalil, the head of Libya's National Transitional Council, has made his first public appearance in Tripoli, telling a fervent crowd at Martyrs' Square that there will be "moderate" Islamic rule for the country.

Speaking to thousands of jubilant supporters who gave him a hero's welcome on September 12, Jalil said Libya's new government "will not accept any extremist ideology."

"We are a Muslim nation, with moderate Islam, and we will maintain that so you remain with us and you support us," he said. "You are our weapon against whoever tries to hijack the revolution, from the right or from the left."

Jalil said "moderate Islam" would be the main source of legislation in Libya following the ouster of Muammar Qaddafi from power after a six-month uprising and civil war.

"It is a great honor for anyone to stand before this crowd in this situation and on this occasion, at a time when Libya and all Libyans are getting rid of the tyrants and the Libyan people emerge dignified and honored by their action and courage," Jalil said.

[..]

Is there such a thing as 'moderate' Islam?  Does a 'moderate' Islamic State depend on clerics to tell it what its laws should be, or do the clerics only get a veto?  Does that matter?  If it is a secular State, then which tenets of Islam does it keep and which does it reject to allow for religious freedom (even within Islam there are many sects)  and keep the State from dictating religious doctrine?  That is a difficult thing for the US to do with Christianity, can it be done with Islam?

Going back to the arms front, Russia has some problems with Western countries not following the UN mandates they agreed to:

27 SEP 2011 - European, Arab countries violated Libya arms embargo - Lavrov

(Source: RIA Novosti via GlobalSecurity)

15:00 27/09/2011 MOSCOW, September 27 (RIA Novosti) - Several European and Arab countries have violated the embargo on arms supplies to Libya introduced by the UN Security Council, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Tuesday.

"It has already been said openly that Resolution 1970, which was adopted by consensus and stipulated a full embargo on arms trade with Libya, as well as on certain services of a military nature, has been violated," Lavrov said in an interview with the Rossiya 24 TV channel.

"Arms have been supplied [to Libya] from a number of European countries, as well as from several countries in the Arab region," he said.

Earlier this month, the Security Council unanimously passed a resolution to ease an assets freeze and arms embargo against Libyan companies and the government.

Last week, the European Union lifted sanctions on Libya, partially removing the arms embargo, unlocking frozen central bank and oil funds and allowing Libyan aircraft to use European airports and airspace.

"There are data in Western media, which no one has yet denied, that besides instructors, special forces - namely people who planned and participated in military operations - were also working [in Libya]," Lavrov said.

He said "damage has been caused to the UN Security Council," because, "no one had violated understandable decisions so gravely and openly before."

Russia has repeatedly criticized the NATO-led operation in Libya for exceeding the UN mandate by supporting rebel forces in their fight against troops loyal to Col. Muammar Gaddafi. The colonel had ruled Libya for more than 40 years before he was deposed by rebel forces in August.

While self-serving (that is what such ministers are for, after all, to serve the Nation State) the man does have a point in that such activities are not part of the agreed-upon sanctions regime.  If you must have a treaty organization like the UN, the least you could do is what you agree to do.

Sec. State Clinton promising aid, other countries see concerns, main part is to get the militias into a unified, national force. To date, this continues to be a problem that is unsolved. Also note that the 'scholar' seems to get this idea that autonomy is provided by others... this mindset is a major problem facing the spread of the understanding of liberty and freedom on a global basis.

18 OCT 2011 - Clinton in Libya Vows Support For Democracy (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)

October 18, 2011

Elizabeth Arrott | Cairo

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went to Libya Tuesday to show support for the leaders Washington and other NATO countries helped bring to power. The visit highlights the struggle of Libya's interim government to prove it is strong enough on its own.

[..]

In a press conference with Jibril, Clinton said it was an honor to stand on the soil of a "free Libya" and a privilege to see a "new future for Libya being born."

America's top diplomat offered help for Libya to establish greater security. "I am pleased to announce that we are going to put even more money into helping Libya secure and destroy dangerous stockpiles of weapons. And the administration, working with Congress, is going to provide $40 million to support this effort. We will also work with Libya to destroy chemical weapons stock," said Clinton.

And she promised millions more dollars in aid for a nation trying to rebuild. The help ranges from military equipment to educational and economic programs, medical care for wounded fighters, and archeological help in preserving Libya's Greek and Roman-era ruins.

[..].

But such help could come at a cost. The NTC has yet to consolidate either military or political rule.

Libya scholar Ziad Akl of the Ahram Center in Cairo says the various parties contending for power could accuse the NTC of over-reliance on the West.

"There seems to be an agreement on the necessity of the role of the West," said Akl. "It's just the amount of obedience that they have to show and the amount of autonomy that the West should provide. And [it] should not condition its aid to following a specific agenda laid down by the Western allies."

[..]

"There is political capital that the West had laid down there, that even the Qataris and Turks cannot ignore or step over," said the scholar.

[..]

Clinton and Libyan leaders discussed bringing the numerous anti-Gadhafi militias carrying out those operations under unified, national control.

U.S. officials say she also pushed for a pledge that the new government abide by the rule of law, in particular concerning prisoners' rights. Human rights observers have criticized the NTC for not controlling the abuse of people in their custody.

Here is the problem – if the terrorists have weapons and the government seeks to disarm civilians and the government is weak, then how can terrorism be countered?  This article starts to outline this problem:  19 OCT 2011 - Securing Libya's weapons (Source: NATO via GlobalSecurity)

NATO - North Atlantic Treaty Organisation

19 Oct. 2011

It’s easy to see where the oil revenues of Libya were squandered over the decades of Colonel Qadafi’s rule. The streets of the country are now awash with weapons that have fallen into the hands of the National Transitional Council as they seized the caches that were built up to suppress the Libyan people.

The looting of these weapons hoards allowed the rebels to quickly acquire the firepower they needed to overthrow the regime, but it has resulted in a highly armed population. It is a problem that will need to be addressed quickly if it is not to create security issues further down the line.

Giving up the guns

The situation is serious and there have been calls for the National Transitional Council to act quickly. Recent advertising on Libyan television and radio has encouraged people to hand over their weapons to the authorities.

“It’s started to be like a daily routine where people come and give up their weapons,” says Abed, a member of the National Transitional Council in Abu Sleem. “Before, we had to go to their homes and collect the weapons, now it’s the other way round.”

It is easy to understand why Libyans are not keen to part with the weapons that have taken them through the revolution and thrown off the shackles of a hated despotic regime. Fear and uncertainty in their future has led many to feel that the time has not yet come when they can return to their old lives and put down the tools of war.

“I won’t hand it over until the country is clear and Qadhafi is captured,” says Osama, who used to be a mechanic before the conflict. “When nothing is wrong with the country, I’ll hand over my weapon.”

Others, who have a deeper trust in their new leaders, are ready to follow orders. “Even now if they want me to hand over my weapon I will happily do it, and I will go straight home. I have no problem with this. The most important thing is to have peace and stability in Libya,” says Mahmoud with an assault rifle slung over his shoulder.

The revolutionary without his rifle

One shouldn’t underestimate the power of the image of a man with a Kalashnikov in Libya now. A sense of bravado has built up around it. Before the revolution they may not have come across a weapon unless they were drafted into the army and a lot of young men had only seen guns in the movies.

“You have to be responsible of what you are doing first,” says Ahmed, “I mean holding a gun is not easy. It’s not like ‘oh look at me I’m holding a gun, I’m showing off.’ That’s not it. You’re doing something for your country, you’re supposed to save people, make people safe.”

However, unlike Ahmed, safety is not at the forefront of everybody’s mind. The recent news of the capture of one of Qadhafi’s sons brought people out onto the streets, firing wildly into the air in celebration. Smashed car windshields attest to the inevitable return of the bullets towards earth and there have been reports of injuries and even deaths.

The wrong hands

Whilst Kalashnikov rifles and other small arms such as rocket-propelled grenades have flooded Libya in their hundreds of thousands, there are weapons which although less numerous could cause an even greater threat.

It’s feared that man-portable missiles, rocket systems and even chemical weapons could fall into the hands of extremists unless prompt action is taken to secure them. Individual nations have taken steps to resolve the issue on a bilateral basis. For instance, a recent Canadian initiative saw the government pledge 10m dollars to help Libya collect and neutralise the threat from these weapons systems, while both the UK and the US also acted to deploy military and civilian personnel on the ground to help secure stockpiles.

With the country awash with weaponry, the National Transitional Council will face a tough challenge in disarming their population and creating a safe future for Libya and the region.

The UN is worried about arms, not tribal or ethnic problems which are the cause of conflicts that can destabilize a Nation. Apparently the cart gets put before the horse on this issue, yet again, in a simplistic formulation of liberty, society and arms. Arms secured for civil self-defense by individuals are NOT a problem. Ethnic strife, tribal conflicts and personal vendettas are a problem, not the positive liberty or right to DEFEND against such conflicts by individuals. Notice that the people, on the ground, have the right idea... NATO does not.

Individuals seeking civil and responsible self-defense are NOT extremists seeking to impose their wishes upon others with force of arms. Depriving a civilian of the ability to defend themselves invites repression by those willing to wage war on their lonesome. This is a human right, a natural right and a bolster for civil society not a detractor from it. In a Nation and region that has seen much turmoil and strife, someone should have figured this out by now.

This is something that al Qaeda has figured out quite well and looks forward to the misplaced trust of the Leftist Western powers in governments being armed and civilians being disarmed.  If you disarm civilians you leave them hostage to terrorists and tyrannical governments, and if you don't seek to have settlements of inter-tribal problems that cross borders, then you guarantee destabilizing conflicts.  In this set of equations the arms are not the problem.

And how do such conflicts start?  Well this might give you an example of a future conflict flashpoint:  24 OCT 2011 - Rights Group to NTC: Probe Apparent Mass Execution (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)

VOA News October 24, 2011

A human rights group reporting from the hometown of ousted Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi says it has found the bodies of 53 people who appear to have been executed by fighters for the National Transitional Council during the bitter fighting for control of Sirte.

Humans Rights Watch said on Monday it discovered the bodies in an abandoned hotel in an area of Sirte that was controlled by anti-Gadhafi forces at the apparent time of the deaths about a week earlier. The group said bloodstains on the grass, bullet holes on the ground and bullet casings scattered around the site suggest executioners killed some, if not all, of the people at that location.

Sirte residents preparing the bodies for burial said most of the victims were local people and some were Gadhafi supporters. Human Rights Watch is urging Libya's new authorities to investigate the deaths and hold those responsible accountable.

Libya's provisional authority on Sunday declared the country liberated from Gadhafi's 42-year rule. Tens of thousands of jubilant people gathered for the ceremony in the eastern city of Benghazi.

NTC head Mustafa Abdel Jalil told the crowd that Islamic law would shape the new constitution in post-Gadhafi Libya.

Libya's outgoing provisional prime minister, Mahmoud Jibril, said consultations are under way to form a new interim government within one month, followed by elections for a constitutional assembly within eight months. Parliamentary and presidential elections would be held within a year after that.

Jibril spoke from an economic forum in Jordan, where he announced his resignation to allow new leaders to oversee Libya's transition to democracy.

Concerns still linger about the circumstances of the death of Moammar Gadhafi in Sirte on Thursday. Cell phone video showed provisional government fighters taunting and beating a wounded Gadhafi shortly before he died.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the United States would like to see a U.N. investigation of Gadhafi's killing. She said she supports the investigation that the NTC has pledged to conduct, and said it is important for a democratic Libya to begin with the rule of law and accountability.

British Defense Secretary Philip Hammond said Gadhafi's killing had "stained" the image of Libya's provisional government, and that Britain would have liked to see the former leader stand trial for alleged misdeeds.

Libyan doctors performed an autopsy on Gadhafi's body in the city of Misrata and said he died of gunshot wounds to the head and abdomen. Libyan officials say the former leader was shot in crossfire between his loyalists and provisional government forces. Fighters on the scene have acknowledged beating the ousted leader after his capture.

Gadhafi's body remained on public display in a commercial freezer in Misrata Sunday. Details of his burial have not been disclosed.

Some information for this report was provided by AP.

But no one will pay attention to it.

The MANPADs, remember those? Where are they? And the WMDs, too. Who has them?  01 NOV 2011 - Security Council calls on Libyan authorities to stem proliferation of arms (Source: UN News Service via GlobalSecurity)

1 November 2011 – The Security Council has called on interim authorities in Libya to take action to prevent the proliferation of arms, missiles and related materiel, warning of the danger they pose to the newly liberated North African country and the wider region.

In a resolution adopted unanimously yesterday, Council members also authorized its committee on Libyan sanctions to draw up proposals for how to keep any stockpiles of arms and materiel away from terrorist groups, including the group known as Al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb.

The resolution, adopted hours before the mandate for authorized international military action in Libya came to an end, voiced concern about the proliferation of arms in the region, especially man-portable surface-to-air missiles – otherwise known as MANPADS.

The text said Libyan authorities must take “all necessary steps to prevent the proliferation of all arms and related materiel of all types, in particular man-portable surface-to-air missiles, to ensure their proper custody, as well as to meet Libya’s arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation obligations under international law.”

Council members called on Libyan authorities to work closely with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) with the aim of destroying the country’s stockpiles of chemical weapons. In addition, States in the region were asked to play their part to prevent arms proliferation.

The committee set up after sanctions were imposed earlier this year was asked “to assess the threats and challenges, in particular related to terrorism, posed by the proliferation of all arms and related materiel of all types.”

A report will be prepared by the committee on preventing proliferation, as well as on how to ensure that any stockpiles are managed safely and securely, that border controls are strengthened and that transport security is boosted.

Last week Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC) declared the full liberation of the country, more than eight months after a popular uprising began against the regime of Muammar al-Qadhafi, and days after his death in his home town of Sirte.

The uprising in Libya was part of the so-called Arab Spring, a wider pro-democracy movement across North Africa and the Middle East that has also led to the toppling of long-standing regimes in Tunisia and Egypt.

Really, MANPADs and WMDs do need to be kept under lock and key... right? Gotta find them all, first.

02 NOV 2011 - UN Chief in Libya, Seeks Weapons Controls (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)

November 02, 2011

VOA News

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has used a previously unannounced visit to Libya to urge the country's new leaders to secure weapons stockpiled by the former Gadhafi government.

Ban says he raised the issue Wednesday during a meeting in Tripoli with Libya's transitional leader, Mustafa Abdel Jalil. The secretary-general says it is particularly important to secure stocks of shoulder-fired missiles and chemical and biological weapons.

Some of those arsenals were left unguarded during the chaotic outcome of the popular uprising this year that resulted in long-time dictator Moammar Gadhafi's death last month. The U.N. Security Council warned in a resolution Monday of the risk that terrorists and other armed groups in the region could gain access to the former regime's weapons.

Ban, visiting Libya for the first time since the uprising began in March, told Jalil the U.N. will support the Libyan people in their transition to democracy. He offered U.N. help to Libya in preparing for its first free elections, in drafting a new constitution and in safeguarding human rights and improving public security.

From Tripoli, the U.N. chief goes to the French city of Cannes to attend a summit of the Group of 20 economic powers.

Libya's National Transitional Council on Monday appointed Abdurrahim el-Keib as its new interim prime minister. The American-educated engineering professor said he protecting human rights will be a priority for his interim government, expected to remain in power until elections next year.

Human-rights groups have expressed concern about the NTC's treatment of pro-Gadhafi fighters and African migrants during the eight-month uprising.

In another development, Italy on Wednesday became the first EU nation to resume commercial flights to post-Gadhafi Libya. An Alitalia plane left Rome for Tripoli carrying more than 100 people, mostly Libyan citizens.

Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini praised the resumption of flights as an "important signal" of the depth of Italy's involvement in Libya, a former Italian colony. Italy was one of several NATO member states that took part in an aerial bombing campaign in support of the anti-Gadhafi uprising.

Some information for this report was provided by AP, AFP and Reuters.

And here comes the 'mostly secular' Muslim Brotherhood, in Libya!

18 NOV 2011 - Muslim Brotherhood Holds First Public Conference In Libya (Source: RFE/RL)

Not that they hadn't been sponsoring IG for a couple of decades, mind you. That is why they want the Blind Sheikh: he is the bridge between MB Egypt and MB Libya. It's just another of the terror off-shoots of the MB: HAMAS, al Qaeda, IG. And more.... many, many more.

And after the warm welcome at the UN, welcoming Libya back to being a civilized Nation, there is the problem of the MANPADs.  Still.  It's like no one can find more than 1/4 of those suckers.

28 NOV 2011 - Most pressing task for Libya is consolidation of security, UN envoy reports (Source: UN News Service via GlobalSecurity)

28 November 2011 – Libya’s interim Government faces a number of challenges as it seeks to move past the recent conflict and decades of dictatorship, the most immediate of which is consolidating security, the top United Nations envoy to the country said today.

It has been just over a month since the National Transitional Council (NTC) declared the full liberation of Libya, and more than nine months after the start of the popular uprising against the regime of long-time ruler Colonel Muammar al-Qadhafi.

Over the course of the past month, the NTC approved the interim Government headed by Prime Minister Abdurrahim El-Keib.

“They know that they now face great challenges, requiring effective central as well as local governance,” Ian Martin, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative and head of the UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL), said as he briefed the Security Council on the latest developments.

“The first and foremost of immediate challenges is in the area of security,” he added, noting that this includes determining the future of the revolutionary fighters. Another major security issue is the presence and proliferation of conventional and non-conventional weapons and related materiel.

Of particular concern, said Mr. Martin, is the large number of MANPADS [man-portable air defence systems] and ammunition still unaccounted for, which pose both a disarmament problem for Libya and a proliferation risk for the region. Libya has accumulated the largest known stockpile of MANPADS outside those countries that produce such systems.

“The Government will need a little time to work out the different responsibilities of its ministries and other bodies in addressing all these tasks across the security sector – integration and demobilization, training and development of police and a new army, weapons control and border management – but there is no doubt about its sense of urgency,” said the envoy.

He added that the security situation and the way in which it develops in the near future cannot be separated from Libya’s urgent need for liquid funds, noting that “the stabilization of the country, the success of the Government and the perception of the international community are all at stake.”

Other challenges facing the new government are election preparations, fostering national reconciliation, and addressing the legacy of human rights violation and current human rights issues.

The NTC is committed to a first election within eight months, a challenging timeline, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon notes in his report, in a country where there has been limited or no electoral experience in over 45 years.

The UN has continued to stress that for credible elections for a National Congress to be held by June 2012 early decisions have to be made on a range of issues, said Mr. Martin. Among them are the electoral system, the eligibility of candidates and voters, and the authority, composition and appointment of the electoral commission.

“The challenge of national reconciliation is of overwhelming importance,” writes Mr. Ban. “However deep the anger at the war crimes committed by the former regime, the National Transitional Council must continue its calls to avoid acts of revenge and must investigate abuses by its own fighters.

“I believe that the leaders of the new Libya are truly committed to building a society based on respect for human rights. However difficult the circumstances, it is essential to take the earliest possible action to end arbitrary detention and prevent abuses and discrimination against third country nationals and against any group of Libya’s own citizens,” he states.

Makes you wonder where the MANPADs got to, doesn't it?  While they do disappear into the air, they don't disappear into thin air out of storage bunkers.  One is rocketry, the other magic.

Back to tribalism for a moment.  Remember the Tuaregs? The tribe that Qaddaffy belonged to?

Taking guns away isn't the problem. Tribal and ethnic conflict, is:  13 DEC 2011 - LIBYA: Rocky road ahead for Libya's Tawergha minority (Source: IRIN via GlobalSecurity)

TRIPOLI, 13 December 2011 (IRIN) - A major challenge facing Libya as it emerges from a nine-month civil war will be reconciling and integrating thousands of Tawergha accused of killing and raping residents of Misrata on behalf of deposed leader Muammar Gaddafi.

Theirs is the most extreme test of national reconciliation for a government that will have to integrate several groups of Gaddafi loyalists, including those in the towns of Bani Walid and Sirte, if the revolution is to be successful.

“The principle is extremely important,” said Emmanuel Gignac, head of the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Libya. “The country will not stand if you have rejected communities within it.”

The dark-skinned Tawergha minority - former slaves brought to Libya in the 18th and 19th centuries - resided until recently in a coastal town of the same name 250km east of the capital Tripoli.

With the rise to power of the rebels, the Tawergha are now on the defensive. Their town sits empty - doors hanging open and homes burned; the sign leading to the city has been changed to New Misrata and its population told not to return.

Continued harassment and revenge attacks on this minority threaten to re-ignite conflict, say aid workers.

[..]

What actually happened in Misrata?

Part of the problem is that no one really knows what and how much happened in Misrata - estimates of how many people were allegedly involved in crimes range from 1,500 to 9,000 - and for cultural and other reasons, some people are fiercely opposed to any kind of investigation.

“To have the International Criminal Court come and have doctors investigate the rapes… no way,” Maiteeg said.

Others say an acknowledgement of crimes committed would go a long way to diffusing Misratan anger. But any such truth and reconciliation process would require “a strong message and vision by the National Transitional Council (NTC) and the government,” according to Ahmed Safar, a junior minister in the new cabinet, originally from Misrata - something that has so far been absent.

On 10 December, the NTC held its first national reconciliation conference, in which interim Prime Minister Abdel Rahim al-Kib said the future “cannot be built with revenge as a base,” Agence France-Presse reported.

But among the interim government’s competing priorities are recuperating millions of dollars in frozen funds to rebuild the country; preparing elections in eight months’ time; collecting weapons which have spread across the country; and providing alternatives to the young men who fought during the war.

“The NTC doesn’t have a plan for the Tawergha,” one aid worker said. “The sensitivities of it are such that no single leader in the NTC can handle this issue without taking some significant political heat from their constituencies.” So far, Safar added, initiatives towards national reconciliation have been piecemeal, lacking a “dedicated effort”.

[..]

“We will not leave Tripoli unless it’s for Tawergha,” said Mohammed, the supervisor of the Tawergha site in Tripoli. This stems, in part, from the fear of an existential threat. “Some people will try to disperse us all around, like the Jews… We have to stay put together… If we go elsewhere, they will kill us slowly.”

He said he had hope that the new government would fix the problem - one he characterized as a national issue, not a Misrata-Tawergha issue - and arrange for the Tawergha to eventually return home.

“But if the new government refuses, we will take up arms and take it back by force.”

And, yet again, the rights of the individual reassert themselves.  Almost like it is human nature... because it is.  Peace is not the absence of war, but the building of a civil society and respect amongst societies and Nations.
 
Now if you are looking at events through al Qaeda eyes, getting arms to groups in northern Africa is a primary goal.  As almost none of the nearby regimes have a decent air force, do you really need MANPADs in, say, Mali or Mauritania or Niger?  Probably not.  Where do you need them?  Where is the next struggle of import?
 

An important article, which shows that even the loss-leader AK-47 can get a premium price, and citing a WaPo report of CIA help to the Syrian rebels:  22 MAY 2012 - Syrian rebels say Turkey is arming and training them (Source: The Telegraph (UK))

By Michael Weiss

The weekend before last I was in Hatay province, in southern Turkey, interviewing Syrian rebels and activists, who all complained of the lack of foreign assistance in toppling the Assad regime. Even the "non-lethal" aid that the Obama administration had promised hadn't seemed to make it through to these fighters, many of whom had spent as much as $6,000 of their own money to buy black-market Kalashnikovs.

A lot's changed in a week.

Rebel sources in Hatay told me last night that not only is Turkey supplying light arms to select battalion commanders, it is also training Syrians in Istanbul. Men from the unit I was embedded with were vetted and called up by Turkish intelligence in the last few days and large consignments of AK-47s are being delivered by the Turkish military to the Syrian-Turkish border. No one knows where the guns came from originally, but no one much cares.

This news, which has provided a much-needed morale boost to Syria's embattled opposition, does appear to corroborate a recent report by the Washington Post that the United States has been facilitating the transfer of Gulf-purchased weapons to the rebels:

The U.S. contacts with the rebel military and the information-sharing with gulf nations mark a shift in Obama administration policy as hopes dim for a political solution to the Syrian crisis. Many officials now consider an expanding military confrontation to be inevitable.

Material is being stockpiled in Damascus, in Idlib near the Turkish border and in Zabadani on the Lebanese border. Opposition activists who two months ago said the rebels were running out of ammunition said this week that the flow of weapons — most still bought on the black market in neighboring countries or from elements of the Syrian military — has significantly increased after a decision by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other gulf states to provide millions of dollars in funding each month.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said this about the Post's scoop: "We continue to provide non-lethal support to the opposition. And while I can only speak for the United States, we know that others are pursuing different types of support, and I'd refer you to them to characterise the nature of their actions."

[..]

Why, yes!  Syria!  A place with a despised regime, lots of ethnicities, heavy weapons, WMDs and an air force.  Just the ticket if you are al Qaeda.  Even better, since you don't have any air assets, there will be MANPADs left over if you can get your hands on them.  Wouldn't that be sweet?

Next up: 21 JUN 2012 – C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition (Source: New York Times)

By ERIC SCHMITT

Published: June 21, 2012

WASHINGTON — A small number of C.I.A. officers are operating secretly in southern Turkey, helping allies decide which Syrian opposition fighters across the border will receive arms to fight the Syrian government, according to American officials and Arab intelligence officers.

The weapons, including automatic rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, ammunition and some antitank weapons, are being funneled mostly across the Turkish border by way of a shadowy network of intermediaries including Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood and paid for by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the officials said.

The C.I.A. officers have been in southern Turkey for several weeks, in part to help keep weapons out of the hands of fighters allied with Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups, one senior American official said. The Obama administration has said it is not providing arms to the rebels, but it has also acknowledged that Syria’s neighbors would do so.

The clandestine intelligence-gathering effort is the most detailed known instance of the limited American support for the military campaign against the Syrian government. It is also part of Washington’s attempt to increase the pressure on President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, who has recently escalated his government’s deadly crackdown on civilians and the militias battling his rule. With Russia blocking more aggressive steps against the Assad government, the United States and its allies have instead turned to diplomacy and aiding allied efforts to arm the rebels to force Mr. Assad from power.

[..]

American officials and retired C.I.A. officials said the administration was also weighing additional assistance to rebels, like providing satellite imagery and other detailed intelligence on Syrian troop locations and movements. The administration is also considering whether to help the opposition set up a rudimentary intelligence service. But no decisions have been made on those measures or even more aggressive steps, like sending C.I.A. officers into Syria itself, they said.

[..]

What has changed since March is an influx of weapons and ammunition to the rebels. The increasingly fierce air and artillery assaults by the government are intended to counter improved coordination, tactics and weaponry among the opposition forces, according to members of the Syrian National Council and other activists.

Last month, these activists said, Turkish Army vehicles delivered antitank weaponry to the border, where it was then smuggled into Syria. Turkey has repeatedly denied it was extending anything other than humanitarian aid to the opposition, mostly via refugee camps near the border. The United States, these activists said, was consulted about these weapons transfers.

[..]
Neil MacFarquhar contributed reporting from Beirut, Lebanon. Souad Mekhennet also contributed reporting.

Why it's the CIA!  They have been missing from the mix just like in Libya.  Gotta have the CIA around to get rid of nefarious regimes.

And leave exploitable chaos in the wake.

All you need is MANPADs. 

16 AUG 2012 - Syrian Rebels Step Up Efforts to Get Anti-Aircraft Missiles (Source: VOA via GlobalSecurity)

by Jamie Dettmer August 16, 2012

ALEPPO, Syria - Syrian rebels are redoubling their efforts to acquire portable anti-aircraft missiles following government airstrikes on cities and towns in the north of the country.
In the latest such strike, a Syrian Air Force jet bombed the rebel-held town of Azaz near the Turkish border, killing at least 50 people and wounding more than 100.

Rebel commanders and activists say their buyers are now scouring the arms black markets in the region to get the shoulder-fired missiles that can counter the government airstrikes.

According to opposition activist “Tony” al-Taieb, who works with the rebel military council in Aleppo, representatives with cash from rich Syrian exiles are negotiating to buy the portable surface-to-air missiles, often called SAMS or MANPADS, for “Man-Portable-Air-Defense-System.”

“Don’t believe everything you hear about the Qataris and Saudis supplying us with heavier weaponry,” al-Taieb says. “We are getting hardly anything from them.”

Al-Taieb said acquiring as many MANPADS missile systems as possible was now the highest priority for the Free Syrian Army (FSA), the umbrella organization for many of the rebel brigades that have been trying to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the past 18 months.

He said the government airstrikes on Aleppo, Azaz, Tel Rifat and villages such as Akhtarin and other settlements closer to the Turkish border were apparently designed to menace the rebel enclave in the region and disrupt rebel supply routes from Turkey.

Military analysts say shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles can turn the tide of battle in an insurgency war like the one in Syria.

The example most often cited is the Afghan Mujahedeen insurgency against the Soviet Army in Afghanistan 25 years ago. Many military analysts say U.S.-supplied Stinger portable missiles downed dozens of Moscow’s feared Hind attack helicopters and helped the Afghan guerrillas defeat the Soviets.
According to the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, many of the casualties in the town of Azaz were women and children buried under piles of rubble. Opposition activists in Azaz said the death toll would likely rise to 25.
Rebel commanders say portable surface-to-air missiles could help them defend towns such as Azaz and even give them the advantage in Aleppo, where forces loyal to President Assad managed to uproot rebels from parts of the city after eight days of bloody fighting.

“We need a no-fly zone and, failing that, anti-aircraft missiles,” says Zaher Sherkat, a 32-year-old commander of the rebel Abu Bakr brigade. The unit is now down to about 120 fighters after losing 20 men in the Aleppo fighting.

“We have had 20 ‘martyrs’ from my brigade and about 30 wounded,” he says.

Sherkat says he established the brigade after Assad’s forces killed half a dozen children in his hometown of Al Bab.

Despite press reports that rebels already have a small supply of MANPADS missiles, rebel commanders insist they don’t. And there have been no verified media reports of rebels firing such missiles.

Last week, rebels in Deir el-Zour province claimed they had shot down a Syrian jet, and activists released a video they said showed the government Soviet-made MiG warplane catching fire after apparently being hit by ground fire.

The jet exploded in flames and rebels claimed to have captured the pilot. Rebels said they shot down the plane using a captured 14.5 mm anti-aircraft gun, the largest weapon in their armory.

“Machine guns were used to shoot at the plane,” says Aref Hammoud, an FSA spokesman in Turkey. “It was in a low range, which made it possible to hit.”

The Syrian government conceded it had lost a warplane, but said it crashed because of “technical difficulties.”

The U.S. and other western governments sympathetic to the anti-Assad rebellion have so far declined to supply the rebels with portable anti-aircraft missiles. One reason cited is that such missiles, capable of shooting down a commercial aircraft, could fall into the hands of terrorists or foreign Jihadists now reported infiltrating into Syria.

At a recent meeting with reporters in Washington, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro said the U.S. government hadn’t seen any evidence of MANPADS missiles getting into Syria from Libya, but acknowledged such a possibility was an area of concern.

U.S. officials estimate that the late Moammar Gaddafi’s Libya may have had as many as 20,000 MANPADS missile systems and that several thousand of them turned up missing during the civil war there last year.

Al-Taieb, the Aleppo opposition activist, would not talk about the possibility that Syrian rebels were buying some of the Libyan missiles.

“In the coming days we will have a consignment of MANPADS, Insha'Allah,” says al-Taieb. Asked whether if rebels managed to secure MANPADS, would they have trouble moving them into Turkey and then across the border, he responded:

“The Turkish government turns a blind eye to some things but not others.”

Why, its magic!

25 OCT 2012 - Syria rebels have US-made Stinger missiles: Russia (Source: AFP via asiaone news)

MOSCOW - Syrian rebels battling the regime of President Bashar al-Assad have shoulder-launched missile systems, including US-made Stingers, Russia's top general claimed Wednesday, prompting a strong denial from Washington.

Russian chief of staff General Nikolai Makarov, whose country is the Damascus regime's top arms supplier and has refused to back the opposition, said it was not clear who had delivered the weapons.

"We have information that the rebels fighting the Syrian army have shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles of several states, including Stingers made in the United States," he said quoted by the Interfax news agency.

"We need to still find out who has delivered them," he said.

The United States vehemently disputed the allegation, challenging Moscow to provide proof.

"We have provided no Stingers of any kind to Syria, nor will we," said State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland. "If the Russian Federation has evidence of Stingers in the hands of the opposition, we'd like to see it".

Makarov said it was possible that these and other weapons could have been delivered to the rebels from abroad on several means of transport, including passenger planes.

"For this, all kinds of transport could be activated, including civil aviation. This is a serious matter," Makarov said.

US broadcaster NBC News reported in July that the rebel Free Syrian Army had obtained two dozen surface-to-air missiles (man-portable air-defence systems known as MANPADS), delivered via Turkey.

"The Americans say that they have not delivered anything to the rebels," said Makarov.

"But we have reliable information that the Syrian rebels have foreign-made MANPADS, including American ones."

Nuland, meanwhile, noted that of all the images Washington has seen of MANPADS and MANPAD-like equipment in Syria "has been exclusively of a Soviet Warsaw Pact vintage - the SA-7 type vintage."

"We have not seen evidence of Stingers," she said.

Makarov's comments come as Russia is under sustained pressure from the West, Turkey and Assad's foes in the Arab world to cut its military cooperation with the Syrian regime.

Turkey earlier this month forced a Syrian Air passenger plane en route from Moscow to Damascus to land in Ankara on the grounds it was carrying an illegal Russian cargo for Syria.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said the cargo confiscated by Ankara before the plane was allowed to leave was "war equipment". Russia has insisted the cargo was perfectly legal radar technology.

President Vladimir Putin last week defended Russia's right to trade weapons with whomever it wanted, so long as sales did not break any sanctions from the UN Security Council where Moscow has a permanent, veto-wielding seat.

"In all other cases, no one can on any pretext dictate to Russia or any other state with whom and how it should trade," Putin said.

Moscow has refused to take sides against Assad, condemning the West and Turkey for making clear their support for the rebels battling his regime.

So if the MANPADs aren't US made... might they have come from... Kaddafi's weapons cache.  If you're al Qaeda this is exactly what you want so you can have a nice set of MANPADs left over for your next target.

Jordan, say.  Saudi Arabia, maybe.  Turkey, perhaps?

Lots of weapons, weapons to take out the one sort of asset you can't get nor support, and they suddenly show up just where you want them.

Funny how that works, huh?

And yet, I'm betting that it wasn't magic that got those MANPADs from Libya to 'rebels' in Syria.

Sunday, October 21, 2012

On voting

Yes another piece from my commentary at Hot Air, and it is pretty well self-contained as part of a Quotes of the Day thread, which can meander hither and yon on topics this one post-debate on Biden and Ryan.  I'm good at that hithering and yonning stuff and this time I wandered back to voting.  Again, as with all my commentary, it is in the 'as-is' format:

Just remember all the triumphalism on the Left is because of Joe Biden.

They are happy about Joe Biden, the least serious man in politics, who was sent out to rile them up.

No matter how happy the Left is, remember they are happy about Joe Biden… it is all they have left to show for their support of Obama and ideals that are bankrupting the Nation not just fiscally but morally and spiritually as well.

As Eastwood said – Biden the man who is a smile with a body behind it.

And the best part is that as people begin to see that Obama & Co. are tanking, the economy will improve. Remember what happened in OCT 2008? Gun sales went through the roof and small businesses began to pull back expansion plans, curtail future investments and set down to weather the storm.

The Left will attempt to claim vindication. Yet it is the course of events that the PEOPLE are doing that will change the course of the Nation. Not our freaking government. This the Left will never, ever understand, and they will attack you for the very idea that people should be free, actually CAN be free to lead a better life without the interference of government. Once this course begins to change this time, with the memory of what happened by not backing it fully under Reagan, this time it will start to sweep away all our notions of politics, education, energy, and production like no other time in history. The PEOPLE are about to declare the 20th century over and the 19th century ideas of the Left as done with. The Left wants Americans to be ordinary plebes, yet we hold the eternal truths as self-evident and we will be extra-ordinary citizens creating a better Nation so that all mankind will have a beacon to look up to and a standard to flock to.

That means holding ALL your elected officials to account: from dog catcher to President. We slacked off as a people and let our parties try to run things. That era not only can end but it must end and it is ending NOW. A Romney win is not something to then walk away from, but a reason to hold to your ideals and to keep on pushing at all levels of government to recognize your rights and liberties to be free FROM government and that we, the people, will take care of the rest of the stuff that we specifically do NOT hand over to government: caring for the poor, the sick, the elderly, the young, and our society. That is my job, your job and the job of all our fellow citizens, and we dare not let government even try to do them.

Why? Look where we are NOW that we HAVE let government even try to do them. This is the result.

An election is not an end goal but a statement from you of re-dedication to the cause of liberty and accountable government. It is the start of the process, not the end of it, which means it re-starts with each and every election.

Remember Joe Biden is all the Left has: the laughing spirit of derision against you, against liberty, against freedom, and meant to belittle our fellow citizens and our Nation to say that we are too stupid to lead our own lives freely. The man is an insult to us all.

You can’t get rid of stupid as it is one of the two infinites of the natural universe that Einstein coupled with space, and he wasn’t too sure about space.

But you can, assuredly, vote stupid out of office.

That task STARTS with an election.

And re-starts with each and every election at each and every level thereafter.

I am happy to vote in every election. It is my way to help safeguard freedom and liberty and it is my duty and job to do so. That doesn’t mean I have a light mood at each election and it is usually just the opposite: I keep my eye on the target through all the maelstrom so the deed that must be done is accomplished. Elections are too serious to get emotionally involved in. A duty, a job, and your means to safeguard freedom and liberty… a happy task but an earnest job not taken lightly.

ajacksonian on October 13, 2012 at 9:47 AM

I can remember the few times that I didn't vote, even in an off-year non-federal election, and those times revolved around a few topics.

First is too sick to vote.  I didn't have 'good health' at any point in my adult life and an upper respiratory tract infection could spiral from swollen glands to the awful green things from inner space in about two days and then leave me laid up for weeks recovering under antibiotics.  Other than that, with the onset of my catalepsy I couldn't really claim to track reality all that well, so that gets a hit.

Second is out looking for work.  When you spend the better part of a couple of years not at home, not in your home voting district and way before the Internet and world wide web, there was no way to keep up with what the local issues actually were.  To vote responsibly one must keep up with at least the basics, and distance killed that for me.  Also in my working life, I was in a major project that had so much time spent outside of town that I also lost track of local events as the project consumed my attention and spent my energy.  I was happy to do that project and it was worthwhile.

Third was still learning the political landscape for a couple of years out of High School.  That also was coupled with the first problem, too, and those were not happy years. 

Thus with 30 opportunities to cast my ballot, I have missed 8 of them and for only 2 of those instances can I say I was actually too unfamiliar with the topics to vote, which perhaps isn't good but there it is.

There have been times when I absolutely had no one to vote for by my own criteria, yet I voted on purely local issues and left a blank ballot for those races where nothing was satisfactory and I knew of no one, even myself, who would fit the job to write-in.  If memory serves I have written names in twice on local elections when the ballot system is set up for those things.

On the flip-side there are races when I had no clear idea of which candidate would serve better, because they would both serve about equally in my opinion and I let inspiration guide my hand.  And in one race, only, did I cast a vote that I could not in conscience give to either candidate, but knew that a third-party candidate would harm one candidate over another, and there is no long-form for explaining votes, so the short ballot must serve as a reminder to both parties to get their act together. 

After that I have generally voted down or against local spending of all sorts, save for sewer and water main upgrades: we need those as a civil society and those deserve backing to keep things running.  I've voted against school Olympic sized swimming pools, firehouses where there is already adequate coverage, parks where they aren't demanded by anyone, light rail, and other bits of crony spending that I don't see as gaining anything for the community.  Roads, bridges, sewers, water mains, electrical distribution stations... all of those get approval due to necessity.  New schools due to passing demographics, do not and I've been in schools run out of trailers that have been on-site for decades and see no suffering in the ability to teach in such places.

I am a member of a one-person party, who encourages each individual to be a one-person party and to reach out to all other parties (one and multi-person) so as to build a better way to run our republic by going across party lines.  If we must have parties, then it is best to have a fickle, non-partisan population willing to infest parties and then leave them when the louses show up, all the time stripping party structures of upper level power and prestige and putting power back down to the local and individual level.  Partisanship based on party will be the death of us yet.  I am devoted to my Nation and the liberty and freedom that we require our government to respect at all levels so that man can be free.  Good government has few things to do, short funding and is required to do the very, very few things it does in an exemplary way while staying within its budget which is what the taxpayers can afford... not what our government demands as tribute.  Government is the Punisher, that is its role, and only when that role is delimited to only that, can we keep government accountable to the people.  Anything else waters that down and is the basis for corruption giving the fertile ground of tyranny when it continues too long.

I am always happy to vote.

Yet, somehow, I never have a smile on my face when doing it.

It is a duty and an honor that my fellow citizens entrust this to me and I treat it with the solemnity it deserves because you have asked it of me via the means of Caesar.  If this is the form of which our Caesar takes, this republic with representative democracy to guide it, then I must render my judgment upon it to comply.  It is right and it is asked of me, and that rendering must take place.

I apologize for the times I didn't vote, I am not the best of all people to be sure.

I work hard to retain the recognition that we must self-govern and that your trust in me is not misplaced, even when I do not agree with you on the issues or candidates.

What happens inside that booth is between you and that which is all around us at all times.  Who and what you cast your vote for is only amenable to your conscience and, when all else fails, to inspiration in that solitude and let that be your guide.  You might be surprised that this does, actually, work if you but take the opportunity to listen to how you are spoken to alone with such a decision.

I urge everyone who is eligible to vote.

I ask it of you as a Citizen of the Republic of the United States of America.

Monday, October 15, 2012

Getting out of the fiscal hole

Our Nation has plied blithely past $16 trillion in debt, equal to our entire GDP, and barely rattled as it did so.  In truth the whole world is rattling and a bit more on our part isn't going to be quickly identified, although its longer term consequences will have a drastic impact on events at home and globally.  If the state of the federal level of government is unsustainable, a number of our States are as bad off if not worse off than the federal government.  CA is seeing an exodus of businesses and jobs as the tax rate, crony kick-backs to politicians, and bureaucracy seep into every area of life in an attempt to control it from the governmental level.  Like IL there is a huge debt problem of what is 'owed' to civil servants who have been lucky enough to get unionized and then enrich politicians via their unions so that they can have a say on both sides of the negotiating table.  Other States like NY, MA, PA, NJ and WI are not immune to this problem, as well, and each have similar problems of too much government promising and too little forethought as to what those promises actually mean.  WI is digging itself out the century-long hole of Leftist policies by simply cutting spending, requiring workers to put more into their own care and freeing up local counties and districts to be able to chart their own courses on fiscal needs.

The simple removal of bureaucratic overhead, spending mandates, and requirements to adhere to contracts that were done to reward the minority with the wealth of the majority in an unsustainable system are critical.  Sovereign governments are the source of contractual authority and, being that source, cannot be bound to the same laws that they pass for everyone else at all times.  That is a perilous thing to have sovereign government do, but it is essential to have a system of regular laws that are upheld for the benefit of all to the detriment of none, and that is part and parcel of the sovereign power, as well.  A sovereign government can, thusly, break promises and contracts for the survival of the sovereign entity.  Just as at the National level a sovereign government can break treaties with foreign Nations when they put the sovereign of the Nation at peril so, too, can lesser sovereigns exercise such authority in their domains of power.  Throughout history this is exercised only by the most corrupt of regimes or when a government is in dire peril of being liquidated for past problems it has caused: better to break the contracts, reform government and pursue the goals of the people as a whole than to be dissolved by that whole and start over.  Yet, as sovereign governments are the representation of the people who create the Nation, they can change or abolish the State (the government) when it no longer meets their needs and imposes unjustly upon them outrageous costs that no people should ever bear.

This part of the debt burden held by States is, then, amenable to State sovereign power which is recognized as distinct from the federal Nation State sovereign power.  The reason we have no laws for bankruptcy of States is that it is expected that this sovereign power will be used to address the localized problems and allow the people of a State to reform, amend, change, or abolish and create anew their government.  It is perilous to renounce debt as those depending on debt servicing get the shaft.  Russia learned this, to its dismay, when it renounced Czarist debt, Nationalized companies and then found that skilled management at home was absent and that no one abroad would invest in such a place that could not recognize its debt obligations.  When the USSR began to finally honor the Czarist debt and pay it off in the early 1980's, the end for their system was written in the need for outside help.  Socialist and Communist regimes are always born in debt and find it hard to do much of anything because they will not recognize this debt payment obligation. 

For the US, our States in the most dire of need will have to recognize the error of their ways, re-organize debt and stop accumulating new debt, which means breaking promises on retirement amounts (or even having any funds dedicated to such from government) so that the government can down-size and do its few basic functions and continue to pay its debt off.  Such debt can be re-negotiated, however, and offer pennies on the dollar but for those pennies it is expected that the debtor (the State) reform its ways and walk the straight and narrow and actually pay that amount.  If you want an example of what happens when that falls through, look at Greece, Italy, Spain and the rest of the EU that has huge debt and getting even pennies on the dollar is a pipedream.

To bring around States to the realization they can't finance their promises requires that those purchasing such debt recognize that it can't be reasonably repaid and stop purchasing it.  This has already happened at the Nation State level with the Federal Reserve now holding a massive portion of US debt.  That is to say that the ones running the printing presses get to call the shots in the very near term.  The flip side of easy lending to a government by a central bank is that the government becomes beholden to that central bank when spendthrift ideas are backed and paid for with debt obligation.  Once the Federal Reserve just acted as a for-profit pass-through of US debt (we paid for that service) but as our creditors have started to dump debt (read: China and Russia) the Federal Reserve holds such debt and can only balance it by creating new funds to pay in inflated dollars.  There are only two things the Federal Reserve knows how to do to deal with fiscal problems: inflate currency by printing more money or increase the interest rate to burn more money.  For all the window dressing on the Federal Reserve, that is what they do.

Total debt obligation for the US government and all the States is in the range of $70 trillion with some estimates putting it over $80 trillion, and none of that can be paid off with the current economy.  Even a booming economy for a decade can't do it.  Or two.  Why?  The spending doesn't stop and always outstrips tax revenue.  I've gone over the so-called 'entitlements' (basically taxes paid in to pay to current beneficiaries with IOUs from the Treasury for future payment now coming due) and would be remiss to point out that the next largest growing portion of the federal budget is debt servicing.  At some point in the near future the question will be: you can have 'entitlements' with debt servicing and NO other government, or you can have government's necessary functions with debt servicing and NO entitlements.  That choice will be yours.  The folly of the USSR points out what happens when you reneg on debt and it isn't pretty.

If the theme of the 2010 Tea Party election was 'Stop The Spending' then this message must be reinforced in this election to put it as 'Stop The Spending Now Damn It'.  Politicians, generally lacking in spine, find saying 'no' to goody giveaways very hard.  These politicians must be replaced, and if their replacements fail then they must be replaced and so on in a process I call 'Fire Until Competence Is Found'.  It is what President Lincoln did with Union Generals, and it works quite well and is eminently suited to the electoral process at all levels.  As citizens our duty is to get this message across AT all levels of government, and I heartily endorse taking part in any election at the local, county, State and federal level to drive this message home.  If we can get just a few more States beyond TX and VA into solvency, then a real path out for the spendthrifts can be pointed out as good examples to follow.

Stopping the spending is the most important part of this equation, and can (indeed must) act in concert with other portions of it to bring home the true bankruptcy of the 'entitlement' system.  Most citizens when they hear of the insolvency of, say, Social Security will point to 'guarantees', which were made by politicians.  Remind them that believing in a politician is the surest way to get in the hole and that these politicians must be held to account for their ill-actions.  No matter how 'good' the cause, the actions, themselves, are ill and need to be rethought.  With that said there now needs to be trust garnered by the federal government (and the States as well) that they understand that things not given to them to do in the small realm must be lopped off to show that government understands dire fiscal times.  At the federal level this means antiquated departments like the EPA, Education, Energy, Agriculture, Labor and choice portions of Interior that is holding land in States that the State legislatures have not signed off on the federal government having to control per parcel.  Perks must go, including large Secret Service details, flying first class and huge staff sizes at all levels of government. 

Structural reforms to get the federal government out of the home lending market ENTIRELY and to remove the ability of commercial banks to operate in that realm are necessary: a local banking system offers depth and flexibility that a larger system cannot achieve while remaining profitable and requiring local judgment on who is worthy of getting a loan.  The only requirement is that loans are given out based on fiscal background, type of loan, and if said loan actually is not at risk for being lost or devalued for the customer once given all of which are local decisions and can be handed to different officers in a company to judge just those factors shorn of all other outside factors completely.  This entire concept goes for student loans, as well, as we are moving out of the 13th century bricks and mortar schooling realm and into a 21st century realm with on-demand courses and self-paced systems now coming out to allow the bright to excel as fast as they can and the less bright to realize just what their limits are quickly so as to adapt to a better suite of skills to meet their individual talents.  For we all have talents in different proportion and they are least well served by diploma mill physical education institutions with a 'One Size Fits All, Fits None Well' approach.  And this is at the Primary, Secondary and Post-Secondary levels of education, not delimited to Colleges and Universities, although the loan part is aimed at them.  As a society we will adapt to the changing understanding that education is life-long, that touchstones are what one can do not how many classes one has attended, and that the greatest drive for education is self-education.  This will mean that what we consider 'vocational' systems will revive as those not suited to book learning but can learning engineering, physics, and chemistry by hands-on application will require these venues to expand, not diminish and they do require physical structures as they deal directly with our physical reality.

Trust building is a two-way street and government is ill-served by seeking power to control those things it is not designed to do.  Reduction in federal regulation and putting that burden on the States means adaptable responsiveness to local and regional problems as States can work with each other without the requirement of federal oversight.  So long as they do not put bias in the internal trade system of the US, States can work together to solve regional problems via State to State agreements run by the States and held accountable by the people in them.  Handing back control of natural resources (i.e. having lands held by the federal government go back to State control) means that these localized system which are adaptable to local concerns can be put into play without a straightjacket of having to put in tropical screening in facilities above the arctic circle.  As ND has shown with some spillover to MT and SD is that State and regional resource exploitation can be done competently, within reasonable accommodation to the environment and still get one heck of a return.  CA has so much oil off its coast that it comes out in seeps, but because of regulations the pressure can't be relieved by drilling because of environmental fears... which are being realized by not drilling the oil pockets.  Not everyone will succeed equally and some States may never get a clue, but that should not be for lack of good examples by other States.  As the States have demonstrated good and responsible capability for near-shore drilling and exploration, they have a track record of success and the federal government should withdraw its regulatory schema for economic zone drilling and put that in the hands of the coastal States as well.  Pipelines that cross international borders only need Nation to Nation agreement on the crossing and the internal apparatus of each Nation in Provinces and States be allowed to find the best routing solution for them.  As the Nation needs refining capacity (we are now exporting crude oil for refining) the States should serve as the focus for this local concern, as well, and perhaps provide federal land that is too contaminated to be used for much of anything to the project.  In short the federal government really can demonstrate trust by removing regulations and supporting States and the people to figure it out for themselves.

In short removal of regulations for labor, environment and agriculture, along with a host of others for education, energy and land use, puts the most capable and local of government in control of their own destiny.  Yes there will be those who don't do so well, better a few fail and we garner good examples from others, than to fail everyone by doing nothing or doing a little poorly or not well by fiat from the federal government.  Getting prosperity back requires these things and a comprehensible tax code.  As I pointed out previously to this article, exemptions must be eliminated as tax rates are lowered to get a net tax rate that is lower than the purported rate, but is closer to the rate already paid with exemptions and other write-offs.  The entire set of write-offs can be eliminated to get a flat tax, payable by all who earn income of any sort, with only some lowering of rates below the poverty line so as to lessen the impact on the poor so that their amount steps up towards the norm for those above the poverty line as they make more.  This is equality of the tax code and puts citizens into the drivers seat by not collecting taxes by having businesses do it, but by those who vote understanding the direct cost of what they vote for once per year.  This would also mean rolling in separate taxation for 'entitlements' (like FICA for Social Security) and removing them as separate line items, which simplifies the tax code.  Former Soviet States like Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Albania, Russia and others have all concentrated on this as it eliminates tax avoidance and puts a stronger assurance on compliance and a better feel for revenue over time.  An assured revenue stream is mandatory for paying down debt obligations.

Now as I am not a set-size pie person, the way to remove debt is to make more in hard currency: produce more wealth.  Remove the wealth reducers in regulation, tax policy and other bureaucratic overhead is necessary and often results in economic expansion with diminished boom and bust cycle depth as artificial causes of bubbles from government disappear.  You still get such cycles, but that is because of increased technical capability removing older industries and that takes a hard change-over as expectations for existing industries go down and new ones arise.  Creative destruction is for the betterment of all mankind, to produce more worthwhile goods at a lower cost so that more people can afford them to lead better lives.  Luckily, this is a very profitable endeavor and can't be done without the profit motive to do more and gain more for any given produced unit of an item or service.  Thus the future must be examined for what it brings.

Until we get to quantum computing we will see an expansion and filling-in of the now old cyber structure of the digital age.  With hard physical limits for silicon and reduction in circuit size now being reached the realms of nanotech, quantum tech and biotech will all serve as future platforms for expansion and they are in their most nascent stages of development at this time.  Even awaiting those areas (and the new companies and industries that will make them) the older technology for personalizing computing and laboratories will create labs on a chip for home medical diagnostics when, coupled with expert systems, will expand and reduce the cost of everyday medical care.  Put robotics in with that and you get Larry Niven's autodoc, where you step into a booth or lay down on a bed with automatic scanners and medical tools to do everything from examine your daily health to stabilizing the condition of someone who has been in a horrific accident, perhaps with some surgical needs addressed immediately and specialists on-line to deal with the worst that can happen to an individual.  This will remove Medicare, Medicaid, and even medical insurance once done and the technology is starting to be integrated today to put scanners together with expert system software.  Autonomous robotics is also advancing and when applied to medicine and surgery, the cost of everyday care and even minor surgical procedures will drop as they become mass-customizable by technology.

I have already addressed schooling and the manual arts, and these, too, will be augmented by low cost computing platforms that are autonomous or semi-autonomous.  Because our structures are not designed for automated maintenance, there will always be a requirement for manual labor to repair existing infrastructure until we can adapt technology to it or supersede it with better ways of doing things.  If you do construction in New York City you must deal not only with modern pipes, power cables, conduit, etc. but those left by previous utilities dating back to the 1840's if not earlier, and that is not something that robotics or autonomous systems will handle well for some decades yet.

Returning to space for commercial activity is already on the drawing board, and going back to the moon to exploit its resources (mostly for space use and for those items that can only be made in micro or zero gravity) may start out with remotely operated vehicles or semi-autonomous vehicles, but will require some amount of direct human oversight at some point in time.  A minor asteroid brought into Earth orbit (or Lunar orbit come to that) can be easily rendered into separate elements by the process of solar mirror melting.  Put a bore hole into the interior, deploy a few square kilometers of thin film reflector to concentrate sunlight into the center of an asteroid and perhaps a thin film enclosure to capture escaping gasses and just let nature take its course.  When thoroughly melted the micro gravity will separate out the elements and then when it cools you get concentric shells of denser and denser elements presorted by atomic mass.  Other methods can be used to remove hot melt by layer and re-melt layers so that they are more easily dealt with when solid removal can't be done quickly or efficiently.  An asteroid of just a few hundred tons might yield a ton of gold or silver, and many more tons of iron, cobalt, nickel and copper.  Essentially the same can be done on the moon, as well.  In all, expansion of an economy when done on this scale is no longer that of a Nation State as we now know it, yet the basic economics never changes and no matter how much money comes into a government, it always seems to expand to absorb more and more of it.

For all the good news to come about, it is up to the citizen to put government on the strictest of diets and boil our social questions out for open and frank discussion.  The morality of taxing the unborn to pay for the current elderly and sick is one that does need to be in the open as the deceitful discussion led over the prior century has attempted to sugar coat something that no one in their right mind would agree to.  It is up to each of us to learn how to deal with the things life hands us for good and ill.  I've made no plans based on: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, or any other 'entitlement'.  They will not last forever no matter HOW MUCH MONEY the government gets because any government that sees fit to remove liberty for this cause will do so for ANYTHING and then use its removal as a club against free men.  That money is gone and overspent many-fold, and isn't coming back, isn't in a 'lockbox' and treats our children and grandchildren as our ATMs.  We have garnered much material wealth and a bit of better health with that, and if we must do without we now have that as a cushion to fall back on when we realize that government is not a guarantor of retirement, health care or any other thing. 

We are.

As individuals and in our cooperation with each other to create accountable systems that meet our needs outside of government.

That is why we seek to have a just government that can uphold contracts amongst us, and understand that it must guarantee that system while we understand that often our best impulses come to the worst ends via government.  Our essential duty is to learn this and teach it to our children: free men take their lives into their own hands for good and ill and we also must create the means to catch those who fail in this.  That is not the task nor role of our government, to be positive to us, but to simply uphold the just means so that we can achieve the good things that create a strong society and a free population.  When we do wrong, even for the best of reasons, we admit to it, mend our ways and pay off our debts and NEVER burden others with this especially those who have NO SAY IN IT.  Which is our children and grand-children.  If we are far on the side of lax morals now, we can always straighten up, take our lumps, admit our humility and uphold our duty and right to pay off our debts and stop doing the asinine things we currently do with such good words that belie such ill outcomes.

We are can create that future and get out of this fiscal hole by forcing our government to stop trying to provide an easy life that none can afford.

Life isn't worth living because it is easy.  No it is death, death is equal to all and easily found at all times across all classes of society and respects none.

No, life is hard to fight for, hard to keep, hard to maintain and must be all those things so that we can create a better world for all mankind to enjoy the fruits of their life.  And not have it picked from them by government to go begging for the rind of the fruit while government sucks the succulent flesh from it.

It is for these reasons I vote.

I am happy to vote, but it is too important a task to not take as an earnest duty and obligation to my fellow citizens so we may all be free from government's tender mercies.

Friday, October 05, 2012

The clothes have no emperor

In watching the first Presidential debate I came away with a few basic ideas and wrote those up at Hot Air, which appears to be my initial post point for ideas.  I slept on the ideas, and posted them the day after and will now put that out with all my standard provisos on WYSIWYG, no corrections for anything, just simple copy and past and then concentrate on one area:

So much good from last night it is hard to know where to begin.

Just in overview I noticed that Romney was transitioning between topics to keep up with the debate outlines, so that when Lehrer had to go to the next area it had been softened up by Romney ahead of time. Giving Obama the lead position meant a lot in that Romney could get the last word in which shifted Obama from offense to defense at a few points throughout the night. Together this effect was devastating.

On the major plus side Romney put out how an executive deals with problems in government: you lay out a policy and then have to adapt it to the legislative branch and what it is willing to do. This is what an executive DOES – lay out policy which then drives the argument and direction of legislation. You don’t need miniscule, point by point things to do if you give the overall direction and theme of what you want to accomplish. Those were laid out quite well in multiple instances.

Taxes would go down but exemptions would be eliminated meaning that the end marginal rate is a goal and it is a rate with few exemptions to it. This reduces overhead and makes understanding the code easier, not harder. It also is an aim to remove all the loopholes put in by the letter street cronies that the Left used to complain about. In the end more people pay taxes, but the rate is lower so that there is less taken out of the paycheck, meaning more take home pay. This was not lost on me and seems like a good way to start repealing the crony tax system to get to a flatter tax. A good start.

Thematically Romney laid out that all government expenditures must be balanced by asking: ‘Do we want to pay China for this by having them bankroll our deficit spending that our children and grandchildren MUST pay off for us?’ This is killer. If he really and for true means this, then the morality of spending has just been put into play in a big, big way and everyone wanting ‘entitlements’ is now on the defensive having to justify putting future generations in debt for current spending. That is a game changer if pressed home and to the hilt. Putting the spenders in the position of immorality (instead of the cloak of doing good) is killer: put the red letter D for DEBT around their necks and point out how wicked their spending is to future generations and how lacking we are in wanting to do that.

Just so many good points… Mitt Romney did the startling thing of knowing Obamacare AND Dodd-Frank better than Obama, inside and out, which is no mean feat. Dancing through the problems of the legislation and making it sensible was stunning as NO ONE on the Left or Right has done that to-date in such a thorough way going point-by-point. And that point-by-point way of addressing concerns is yet another executive trait, meaning that problems are assessed and prioritized before-hand. Just amazing.

In one night Mitt Romney has demonstrated that he at least gets the fundamentals of the Constitution and Declaration and why they are intertwined and what that means for policy. Giving an overview of the 10th Amendment, while short, means that he has another area to flesh out beyond just block granting stuff to the States. Combined with the morality, or lack thereof, of spending, he has a potent arsenal that can only be utilized if it is backed as POLICY. Not programmatics but that thing that drives programmatics. If done as POLICY then this is the beginning of a sea-change in politics.

His job would not be one of reaching across the aisle, however, as the Tea Party begins to dominate the Republican Party… if 1/3 or more of Congress is held by Tea Party members, then they become the drivers of legislation because of the two parties and the fights become one of the establishment against the Tea Party which is a whole other fight and unlike anything seen for over a century in America. If we put in the hard work, then we will give Romney a very, very hard job to do and require him to live up to what he has laid out for us tonight. It isn’t about an election, but changing the course of the Nation away from its current disastrous path. I do disagree with some programmatics from Romney, yes, but it is up to him to show that he really does understand his policy direction… and if he doesn’t live up to those themes, I will have no problem in 4 years voting for someone else. As of last night, however, it can be said that the direction of not just this race but the entire dialogue of what is moral and just in government has been put into play. Fairness is in the eye of the beholder and that loses out to equality for all and upholding a moral standard and good so that our children will have the chance to prosper without our debt loading them down.

Prepare for weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth from the Left over this as the basis for politics is now changing beneath their feet.

ajacksonian on October 4, 2012 at 6:19 AM

Here I would like to concentrate not on the morality of debt or spending, although morality does come into play, but of taxes.  I know the morality of taxes is a dry subject that the Left figures it won somewhere around President Wilson, but lets start with the can opener and look at taxes, deductions and marginal tax rates.

For this exercise I will use totally made up numbers for a highly simplified tax system with some embedded carrots to get you, the taxpayer, to do what the government wants you to do.

In this case there will be two families, they will have definite similarities in that they will be a 4 person household with two parents and two children.  In this tax code they will each get 'benefits' of deducting $100 per person and an additional $500 per child per year.  Each family gets a 15% write-off on their home mortgage interest payments and a general write-off on all income of 5% which I'm tagging for medical expenses.

Family 1 has an aggregate income of $30,000 per year, a 25% tax rate, a home mortgage payment of $1000 per month and 95 percent of that is interest as they haven't been in the home long.

Family 2 has an aggregate income of $55,000 per year, a 30% tax rate, a home mortgage payment of $1500 per month and 90 percent of that is interest as they have been in a somewhat better home for just a bit longer.

Now let me break down the numbers a bit so you can get an idea of how this 'removing deductions and lowering rates' works.  These numbers just reflect this made-up tax code system with just a few simple parts to it, so no griping about how they don't reflect 'reality' or real numbers – they are just math.

  Family 1 Family 2
Federal Taxes $7,500 $16,500
Standard deductions -$400 -$400
Child tax credit -$1,000 -$1,000
Mortgage interest deduction -$1,710 -$2,754
Standard medical deduction -$1,500 -$2,750
Net Taxes $2,890 $9,596
     
Net tax rate 9.6% 17.4%

 

When it is pointed out that NO ONE pays the tax rate for their bracket, this is a truism as NO ONE  actually pays that load due to the loopholes, give-aways and write-offs in the tax code.

Is a tax code that rewards behavior by the power of government a moral one?

On the positive sides it does things that government in the form of Congress and bureaucrats want to see happen in the economy.  It is, in other words an enticement to you to do certain things even if they don't make any sense at all for you to do them.

Taking the deductions line by line:

1) Why should you have a deduction for being yourself?  And why do those who live with you who depend on you get a deduction?  You are a citizen, after all, and so (with a bit of luck) are the members of your family.  What is the earthly reason that you should be able to deduct anything on taxes for these people just as citizens?  And, really, isn't that a bit denigrating to say that you 'deserve' to write-off such individuals who are, after all, part of the whole of the people?  Why not lower the tax rate and just do away with that? If this is meant for 'the poor' then set a point of minimal, subsistence living under which no taxes can be paid and be done with it.  Be generous and peg that at 4x this deduction and you now have the ability of a family of 4 to earn just enough to feed themselves.  Putting this loophole in is condescending from government and treats you as a dependent of government... yet YOU are the one earning the income which government is trying to take away from you.

2) The child tax credit is a simple loophole to make children more 'affordable', sort of like that new home you wanted to buy at inflated prices, but with a higher cost of consumables over time.  This is treating children as a 'burden' to adults, not as new life to be cherished. It is also a very recent addition to the tax code (with the income tax, itself, being only 100 years old in the US) and much fought over for a few years until it got inserted due to 'family values'... of which are included kick-backs from the US government, apparently.  Isn't that a lovely 'conservative family value'?  Call it what it is, not what it is sold as, and that changes the entire view of the deductions and their purpose.  Plus it is small ball, stuff, meaning that you can be easily bribed to have a larger family.  Yet another 'family value' apparently.  Even better if you make so little in taxes that your marginal rate drops below zero, you get a bonus gift from the US government: a pay-off.  Kick-backs, pay-offs and bribes: all 'family values' via the tax code.  Just what you want children to learn about growing up, isn't it?  How to become a nice, subservient crony to the system taught right there at home with the tax code.  With the tax code as it is, why do we need a Dept. of Education?

3) Next up is the vaunted, much lusted after mortgage interest deduction, one of the two main ways to reduce your tax obligation!  Yes, say that you want to touch that and you get roasted over an open flame.  Yet what, exactly, is it?  You take out a mortgage based on a few things: you need a home, you seek to limit tax liability, you believe that you will make more in the future, you think the home will appreciate in value.   These are not the traditional things that people have thought about prior to Ginnie Mae and the 'securitizing' of debt vehicles in the home mortgage market by the federal government (done under the Nixon Administration at the suggestion of the Dept. of Labor, of all places), at least some of the latter – the need for a home and reducing tax liability were key before that era starting in 1970, and prior to the 1930's only the ability to actually pay for a home mattered due to lack of write-offs before then and the FHA.

What is this yet another side of kick-backs, pay-offs and bribes by the US federal government via the tax code?  Unfortunately, yes.

When the banks were left to their own devices they required some things of people purchasing a home: 20% down, a work history, a known business you worked for or (as an owner) a steady ownership record, and the ability to actually afford maintenance on your home (about 1% of its cost per year).  Back in that era the bank was local, the person who managed mortgages knew the area and neighborhoods, and your mortgage was kept locally as a part of a portfolio held by the bank.  You, as the lendee, were known and probably had a working relationship with that bank to start with, meaning they knew your family's situation and could give some leeway on paying back during hard times.  To achieve all of that you had to demonstrate the ability to work, to save, lead a thrifty life, manage your household expenses, be reliable and understand just what the burden of owning a home was.

Today we have the enticement to banks to lend to NINJAs, people with No Income, No Job or Assets.  Your mortgage interest deduction started as a way to 'ease the burden' of home ownership and to entice more people to purchase homes.  All well and good if you still had to place 20% down, I suppose, but it is a kick-back just the same.  Still the larger banks saw that there was an 'opportunity' in the mortgage market if only the pesky regulations could be changed to stop them from entering it and if they could get some assurance on the value of the debts in far off parts of the country.  Aren't you glad the US federal government got that done to destroy the Savings & Loan industry and press local banks out of the market and out of business?  Because of the S&L crash the opportunity to change regulations further to open up the spigots for the larger commercial banks was done through the crisis of that crash: never let a good crisis go to waste.  Through activists at the bottom, local banks were pressed into giving loans in bad neighborhoods where home values were at threat from local conditions, and then made to give loans to those with lesser work histories and less down on the mortgage.  Home values, with the entry of the commercial banks, started to rise far faster than their 1-2% appreciation that was historical to the late 1960's, and the idea of a home being an 'investment' safe from most of the problems of normal affairs took root.  Once a final safe haven of IRA's were put in, then homes just became another investment vehicle with an expectation of appreciation over much shorter periods of time.

That was achieved by the home mortgage interest deduction, the lowering of lending standards for commercial banks, and the forcing of loans into areas that were marginal and required some civic renewal (read: redevelopment and investment) to be worthy of having loans floated to them.  These conditions created a bubble in the home mortgage sector of the economy and it popped circa 2007-2008.  The regulations pushing all of this are still, to this day, in place.  Including the vaunted home mortgage interest deduction which makes it 'affordable' to own far too much home for a given income (because those restrictions were 'loosened' as part of all of this, too).

Doesn't that 'old fashioned', local and largely unregulated but highly protected banking system with stable neighborhoods and firms sound nice today?  Wouldn't it be nice to have people who actually were thrifty, were able to understand the value of a home as a place to live, and who didn't look for kick-backs and bribes (if not outright coercion) to banks to give loans?  The large commercial banks are only a part of this problem, albeit a large one with enormous long-term impact and structural degradation to local communities. Every individual who bought more than they could afford, purchased without income or assets, or who could only swing purchasing a home with the deduction or because of the deduction is part of the  problem.

Is this deduction a moral one?

Are the regulations that followed on to it, that inflated expectations, reduced valuations and were in search of more money flowing through the system to cause a large-scale systemic collapse moral?  For these regulations are the problem, not the solution.  In this imaginary system this line item accounts for 1/5 to 1/7 of the reduction in liability, but in the actual world people searching the quick flips, the quick turnarounds, the easy sale, the inflated home value up to as much as 10% per year allows for the exploitation of this write-off to reduce liability even further.  It was a tax dodge put in by cronyism with the willing assent of the bought off citizen who purchased a home.  It is the money-grubbing that was exploited by government and banks to utilize the home owner via pay-offs to inflate the system artificially to cause temporary 'prosperity' that then crashed hard and deep, and has a major crater still lingering  in the financial structure of the Nation that neither Democrats nor Republicans want to remove.

Are these the values you want to teach to your children: that pay-offs and kick-backs, cronyism and the expectation of getting ripped off are the norm for government regulations and that one should take part to make a quick buck while they can?  Is that the basis for a moral family arrangement when your children see YOU in that light?  And when you happily slap that bumper sticker on your RV that you are spending your children's inheritance then what, exactly, is the message that you are sending?  That you got yours?  Hurray for me and fuck you?  Because that is the message we get from such regulations and they do not bring about a stable nor just society, but just the opposite.

4) A standard deduction for medical expenses.  This, in various formulations, is currently in the modern tax code and became embedded in it during WWII as part of the enticement to get retirees, the unfit and those who were marginal in the workforce to join in the industrial war effort.  Women, midgets, the blind, those stricken with polio, the elderly... all of these people had to be enticed to work and the one easy way to do that was via what had been for decades, an executive 'perk': health care 'insurance'.  Prior to the war effort the idea of having health care 'insurance' was limited to the very upper class of society.  Why?  Because it is uneconomical to provide it, save as an enticement to a high experience, highly capable executive as part of a package of goodies to get them to work for a company.  To put it bluntly, that sort of coverage is too expensive to afford.  In fact companies couldn't afford it for their workers prior to WWII.  Luckily the crisis of necessary wartime production meant that businesses lobbied Congress to get a tax write-off put into the tax code so that a percentage of the cost wouldn't be taxed, which was about 40% if memory serves.  Why is this uneconomical?  And is it moral to have this in the tax code at all?

Health 'insurance' isn't real insurance where you are betting you will get sick and the insurance company is betting you won't.  The expansion to regular health visits, check-ups, tests, hospitalization and all of that has many features that are recurring on an annual basis, and often more frequently.  Covering medications also has a recurring and regular cost to it, and this is not a feature of any other type of 'insurance'.   Prior to this write-off individuals could get true insurance for forms of catastrophic care, accidental death and dismemberment, and even such things as investing in long-term care while young by having a stable family.  Thus this form of 'insurance' must have a high premium to it, because it is covering so many expenses for so many people that there is an overhead cost to it that is far beyond any other insurance around.  Instead of a secretary and a couple of actuarial people, these companies must employ a raft of experts, forms processors and other individuals that has grown larger over time.  Further they have taken on negotiating with hospitals, physicians and groups of same for reduced prices for the insurance members.  What used to be something that you paid directly and negotiated with the physician or hospital now had an intermediary involved, and whenever you get a middle-man, you get the cost of the middle-man as part of the system.  Without a write-off businesses could never afford that additional overhead cost for their workforce.  Period.  It costs too much.

When insurance companies put the screws on providers, by promising volume to make up for lower cost, any shortfall is passed on to other customers.  All well and good until you get to the Johnson Administration and the start of Medicare and Medicaid.  When the US federal government starts to tell what it will pay for procedures, and they are not the going market rates but below them, then the cost differential must be made up by physicians and hospitals to stay in business.  That is cost shifted to other patients, which means that insurance companies both inside and outside the M&Ms see the cost of care rising, which they must pass along via higher premiums only a portion of which can get a write-off.  Your cost of care rises.  The federal government only exacerbated a pre-existing problem that it caused in the first place, and neither Democrats nor Republicans removed the uneconomical tax write-off after WWII.  The very vocal minority that told of the problems of the 'Great Society' medical programs proved not only prescient but having too limited a vision of the actual rate of increase of costs involved.

Why is overhead cost important?

Overhead cost is a burden to whatever the transaction is that is going on: stores have square footage, personnel, record keeping, liability insurance, lighting, heating, janitorial work all of which are just part of overhead cost.  Insurance companies have this, as well, so that when a transaction takes place the cost of their negotiations is added into the fray, as well as the cost of making sure that charges passing through the system are not fraudulent: it is their money they are handing out, dues and such are only payments to them to do this job.  Thus whatever the actual cost of an item is, it must have the burden of overhead added on to it and medical care is no different from any other transactional service be it getting served dinner at a restaurant or purchasing a computer from an online store.  To put it simply, the cost of the system is increased with middle-men and their burden added to the system as a whole and YOU pay for it either directly or via cost shifting to others.  As with all other transactional systems, the fewer intermediaries that there are, the lower the end-user cost will be in the aggregate and often for each individual summed up for their entire usage of the system in their lives.

Today the system is so rigged, so encrusted with tax changes, with so many kick-backs at the federal and State level, with so many cronies and lobbyists seeking line items in the budget for themselves that NO ONE knows the true cost of medical care in America save that without all of this burdened overhead it would cost FAR LESS than it does now.  Coming from the federal government and seeing industrial and governmental non-productive time and generic overhead cost burdening that delta could be as small as 15% and as high as 65%: what you pay, overall, for all medical treatment and medications in your lifetime could drop by 15% to 65% overall, in aggregate without trying to make the damned system 'fair' to treat 'special cases' with high cost and even higher overhead differently from everyone else.  That delta is picked up by this thing known as 'charity' run by religious institutions, citizens dedicated to the cause of helping others, and special interest charities dedicated to single diseases and their medical costs.  By depending on insurance and government this charitable system is on the rocks and slowly being eroded away in its entirety as it doesn't have the lobbyists or the capability to write-off as much as larger institutions because they lack the scale to do so.  Once they are gone the lowest cost anchor of the system will go with it and the costs that had been merely way too expensive will go to impossible to pay because there is no way for charity to compete in a crony system dedicated to undercutting charity to the benefit of the cronies and politicians.

That is not only immoral it is reprehensible.  Yet you sustain it via tax write-offs for yourself in the tax code.

And all in search of the objective: lower taxes.

5) That bottom line is what we are all seeking via this system, and yet we achieve it in the very worst of all possible ways.  The income tax was promised as never going beyond 7% and that only for the fat cats, yet in 7 years its highest rate was 70%.  One of the interesting drivers for the tax code, beyond 'soaking the rich' was in the quest to get the US federal government another source of revenue beyond its main one: liquor taxes.  The hard drinking US had problems, which first brought about individual organizations seeking to reform drunkards (like the Washington Society) so that the familial problems of drinking could be alleviated by reforming those who drank too much liquor.  Yet most of the US government's income was on liquor and it sustained the Nation up to the Progressive era.  Temperance, sobriety and using government to enforce these things was a Progressive agenda item, backed by powerful lobbying organizations like the Anti-Saloon League.  Getting dry counties and dry States was not enough as people could go elsewhere to bring drink back home.  The idea was that if the US Constitution represented the moral fabric of the Nation, then amending the Constitution would change the people to a more sober and moral people.  Yet the only way to do this was to find an alternate revenue stream as liquor was very much the life-blood of government.  Thus the income tax, warned against and written against in the Constitution, had to be put into place before the political power of the Temperance Movement could come into play.  With an alternative revenue stream, Prohibition quickly passed and proved that human nature is stronger than the US Constitution.

We are left with the artifacts of a directly elected Senate system and an income tax system, both prohibited by the original Constitution of the Framers.  That system had everyone being assessed equally for the cost of the US government and then apportioning that to the States for getting the revenue.  The States figured out how to get the revenue: sales taxes, property taxes, direct levies, bake sales, it was left up to the more local to figure this out, not the National system.  That is both a moral system and a 'fair' system in that it adapts to local situations as dictated by the people at a much easier level to control.  Everyone gets a stake in the system.

Today the idea is to avoid taxes, have the rich pay the way of the poor and do everything in one's power to pay as little as possible to a government that must stand for all of the people.  Instead of passing the burden to States, we now have the problems of the States at the federal level and we are left with only the people as the means to address the ills of this system.  The failure of our government, our businesses and ourselves via human nature have now put us into a desperate situation.  To gain earthly goods we have accepted pay-offs to avoid questioning the moral cost of them.  For the pursuit of having someone else pay, we now pay in the dearest coin of all: our own self worth.

When Gov. Romney puts forward the morality test in spending, it must be something that is far beyond spending because spending requires a source of that revenue, and that can only be taken from the people of the Nation or borrowed from others.  We put ourselves and our future in the hands of others when we do that, and it matters not if it is other Nations or 'the rich': you dance to the tune of the piper and when you pay nothing you are obligated to dance to their tune.  It isn't immoral to hand our children and grandchildren our debt, it is immoral of us to incur it in the first place and shows our own lack of self worth and valuation to accept that cheating pays, that avoidance of paying taxes pays, and that instead of expecting all citizens to take up our common burden, we seek to shift it only in one direction: ever upwards to others.  To be a free people we must all pay our way, even the destitute as I am sure that we, as moral people, will form charities to help them pay for some small citizen so they can learn the value of being a citizen.  That is also an obligation to actually be productive, of course, and to care for not just oneself but one's fellow man.  If we do not expect it of ourselves, the non-rich but not destitute, either, then how can we expect it either of the rich or the destitute?

Once morality of government in its size, scope, power and cost are all brought into question, the very tax code we have then comes in for scrutiny.  In my fictional one for people of moderate means I get something between 10 and 17% as a net tax rate.  If we shear out the immorality of the system, get a flat tax of a given amount, and then say 'we must live within that', then we are on the path of being moral and righteous in our actions because we sustain ourselves and our society by swearing to pick up the burden for those who fare less well and to pay our own way to sustain us all.  No matter how much you may like the special treatment, the kick-backs, the pay-offs... they get you the cronyism, the complexity and the resulting immorality of treating people differently when we are all citizens and created equal.  To claim ownership of yourself you must be able to deny government the right to control you via economics and its own petite tyranny, which soon grows fat and becomes a true tyrant in its own right.  The tyrant of the bureaucrat.  The tyrant of the rules.  The tyrant of the cronies who seek to escape scrutiny by buying off government to get paid-off by you.

I am sure Gov. Romney hasn't gotten down this far in his thinking.  But that he has taken a step in this direction is not just unexpected but refreshing.  Because once you start to question the morality of borrowing and expecting your children to pay it off for you, then you must begin to question the taxation and just what it is you are seeking from it in the long run.  A Nation of free men must be able to admit the burden they bring, carry their own and help others less able and to do so openly, honestly, and not via subterfuge of collection via the shopkeeper or the ease of the transaction stealthily burdened by the politicians in the back room.  Force it into the open, force it to be discussed, and then come to an agreement in common and cement that baby down and make it toxic for any power hungry ideologue to even think of touching it.  You don't win your freedom and keep it by paying stealth taxes, but by putting the tax man out in front of all to see and saying: do your damn job and stop trying to steal us blind behind our backs.  For what they rob is far dearer than mere coin, and far harder to win back once lost.