Great way for Liberals to start paying more taxes - just like they want!
January 31, 2008
Great segment with Glenn Beck on how liberals out there can pay more taxes. So, here you go liberals who want to increase government handouts, government programs, and just government on a whole. You can increase the taxes you pay yourself so the government can pay for all of the programs that you want.
The IRS takes checks and money orders.
Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service
Andover, MA 05501-0102
So, please liberals, if you want to increase government handouts and government programs, pay for yourselves and leave me out of it!
Here’s Glenn Beck on how liberals can send in extra tax dollars to the government:
Popularity: 31% [?]
McCain Campaign Enlists Aid Of Dr. Juan Hernendez
January 31, 2008
Update to our post: Video - Illegal Immigration: Disturbing News, McCain Campaign Advised By Dr. Juan Hernandez
I have to question and wonder why so many are going to primaries and voting for John McCain knowing his record on Illegal Immigration….and other issues. With Juan Hernandez joining McCain if you don’t think the handwriting is on the wall to eventually propose an amnesty bill AGAIN….that bridge in Brooklyn is still for sale.
President Bush said he was “bitterly disappointed” that his (illegal) immigration (amnesty) bill didn’t pass. Bitterly! If George Bush was running again - I wouldn’t vote for him - and I feel the same for John McCain. The people in this country DO NOT want the amnesty bill in any way shape or form. We have 20 million (plus or minus) burglars in our country and for anyone to tell them, “don’t worry about it,” is nuts!
CNSNews.com is confirming our post from 27 January regarding Dr. Hernandez’ position with the McCain Campaign. Please read the article below.
Former Mexican Statesman Joins McCain Camp
By Penny Starr
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
January 31, 2008(CNSNews.com) - Juan Hernandez, the man who served in Vicente Fox’s cabinet when the latter was president of Mexico, is now advising Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on reaching out to Hispanics during his presidential bid.
Hernandez is the son of a Mexican father and American mother and has dual citizenship in the United States and Mexico.
He has not responded to requests by Cybercast News Service to answer critics who say a man who allegedly took an oath of office to the Mexican government and has been an outspoken advocate for open borders and illegal immigrants should clarify how his views comport with those of McCain, who reportedly has toughened his views on illegal immigration since entering the presidential race.
“The fact that (McCain) would pick a person who has worked as a foreign government official is very troubling,” Steven Camarota, director of research with the Center for Immigration Studies, told Cybercast News Service. “That person has taken an oath to a foreign government, and now (McCain) wants to make him an integral part of his campaign.”
McCain’s campaign didn’t return calls to Cybercast News Service, but Brian Rogers, spokesman for the campaign, has told news outlets that Hernandez is only an adviser and does not have a policy role.
But Camarota said Hernandez’s job with the campaign calls into question McCain’s claim that he “gets it” concerning immigration after the collapse of the federal government’s proposed comprehensive immigration reform last year.
“It’s not at all clear if (McCain) believes in securing our borders,” Camarota said.
A Rasmussen poll in May 2007 showed that 72 percent of Americans think it is “very important” for the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration.
Some 48 percent opposed last year’s immigration reform bill, the so-called amnesty bill backed by McCain and President Bush, while 26 percent were “not sure” of their position on the legislation.
On her Web site, conservative Michelle Malkin said of Hernandez’s advisory role: “McCain knew what he was getting and so should Republican voters.”
But perhaps Hernandez himself has provided the most fodder for his critics by making countless appearances on television touting his open borders message. Diggersrealm.com posted a video montage of some of those appearances, including one on “Lou Dobbs Tonight” on CNN.
br>”If we become a different kind of nation that doesn’t open its borders to immigrants, we will lose what makes this nation work,” Hernandez said. On another show, he said if Mexicans live and work in America they should “think Mexico first.”But some experts say Hernandez has the right credentials to advise a presidential candidate, including his heritage and experience.
“My dealings with Juan Hernandez have been entirely positive,” Dan Griswold, director of the libertarian Cato Institute’s Center for Trade Policy Studies, told Cybercast News Service. “He is a very thoughtful person who brings a thoughtful perspective to a presidential campaign.”
In a May 15, 2007 essay for the Reform Institute, where Hernandez is a senior fellow, he wrote under the headline “Immigration Debate a Test of Our Core Values.”
“This debate goes to the heart of what America is all about. Two fundamental pillars of our society are our dedication to achieving prosperity through hard work and our devotion to the Judeo-Christian values of compassion, mercy and inclusion,” Hernandez wrote.
“Instead of backing away from these core beliefs and fencing ourselves in, we must renew this spirit through a sensible and effective immigration policy that provides a path to permanent legal status for immigrants who strengthen our economy and society,” he added.
Popularity: 23% [?]
McCain wins Florida - Romney second - Guiliani third
January 29, 2008
This is a big win for John McCain. To be able to go into a Republican only primary and win, is huge and could be a sign of things to come. The big question since South Carolina was whether McCain could win with just registered Republicans voting, and he did.
Sen. John McCain won a breakthrough triumph in the Florida Republican primary Tuesday night, edging past former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and seizing precious campaign momentum for next week’s string of contests across 21 states.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani was running third, and headed for the exits. Officials familiar with events said his aides were in discussions with McCain’s advisers on a possible endorsement later in the week.
“It shows one thing. I’m the conservative leader who can unite the party,” McCain said in a brief interview with The Associated Press.
“It’s a very significant boost but I think we’ve got a tough week ahead and a lot of states to come.”
The victory was worth 57 national convention delegates for McCain, a winner-take-all’s haul and the largest single prize to date in the race.
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee trailed, but told supporters he would campaign on. Texas Rep. Ron Paul was fifth, and last.
Returns from 64 percent of the state’s precincts showed McCain, the Arizona senator, with 36 percent of the vote and Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, with 31 percent.
McCain’s victory was his first-ever primary win in a state that allowed only Republicans to vote. His previous victories, in New Hampshire and South Carolina this year, and in two states in 2000 came in elections open to independents. He campaigned with the support of the state’s two top Republican elected officials, Gov. Charlie Crist and Sen. Mel Martinez.
Popularity: 22% [?]
VIDEO: Why is Florida so important in the Election process?
January 29, 2008
Some pretty good insight on why the state of Florida is so important in the election process.
Popularity: 21% [?]
Walid Phares - top anti jihadist - endorses Romney
January 29, 2008
Thanks to HotAir for the tip.
Dr. Walid Phares, a top anti-jihadist has endorsed Mitt Romney for President. He is very well-known and very respected for his views on the Jihadists. We have several video segments with him on libnot.com as well.
Here is his endorsement sent out via email:
My recommendations for the US Primaries:
Republican Primaries: Gov. Mitt Romney
Democratic Primaries: No preference between Sen(s) Clinton and ObamaDear friend
I have seldom issued analysis and recommendations on Presidential candidates in national elections and never done so in primaries. But as a researcher on the conflict with Jihadism, I project that the next US President will have to be fully informed on the nature of the conflict and a determined leader with a focus to win the war on Terror, to educate Americans about the threat and also spread freedoms to the oppressed and persecuted in the Greater Middle East. This note is not part of a formal activity nor any campaign. It is an opinion I am expressing as the nation has engaged in the process leading to the selection of the next President. My opinion is based on my knowledge of the agendas and of the information available to the public. It will be affected if and when these agendas would change.
The next President must be fully educated on the threat of Jihadism and on the necessity of defending democracy, promoting human rights and granting minorities in the region all their rights, including self determination. He or she should be able to possess the knowledge, the intellectual capacity and the strategic vision to confront the Salafist Jihadism of al Qaeda and of Wahabi ideologies, and to confront the threat of Khomeinism embodied by the Iranian regime and Hezbollah.The next President must be fully aware of the penetration by the Jihadists of the United States at all levels of decision making and educational structure. He or she should engage in a national campaign to awaken and mobilize the US public in general and the American youth in particular to win the War on Terror.
The President who will occupy the White House as of January 2009 will either lead the nation and the free world to a series of victories in the global conflict with Jihadism or will oversee the greater debacle in the modern history of the United States and the international community. The stakes are the highest since the end of the Cold War and so should be the choice of the next leader.
It is true that Presidential candidates are also selected based on their views and skills in the fields of economy, immigration, social and religious issues, as well as a vast array of important subjects. I will leave these grounds to their experts and limit my analysis and recommendations to the fields of national security and war on terror. For if America loses the War or if its national security crumbles, all other areas will be less relevant. But I do understand that voters can and will make their decisions on all these grounds combined with a focus on one or more areas. This is the voter’s sacred domain.I have sent my books to most candidates and I have had the opportunity to discuss these crucial matters with some candidates and campaigns. From my findings, and based solely on the grounds of national security, the war on terror and the war of ideas here are my recommendations for the primaries:
1) Democrats: Until this moment I don’t have a specific striking preference -in terms of national security and the War on Terror- for one of the two leading candidates, Senator Clinton and Senator Obama, over the other. They both espouse an agenda which firmly commit to pursuing the war on al Qaeda but which doesn’t define yet the global foe as Jihadism. Senator Edwards’ agenda calls for the unconditional withdrawal from Iraq and a cessation of the War on Terror. Hence I wouldn’t recommend him over the senior candidates Clinton and Obama. However as I reviewed the agenda of Congressman Dennis Kucinich (before he withdrew) I found that it is fully aligned with the international agendas of the Jihadists and the Iranian and Syrian regimes and their allies; hence I strongly recommended not to vote for him so that a message is sent by the Democratic Voters against this agenda. I recommend Democrats voters to analyze the national security components of the candidates’ agendas and vote accordingly. I recommend Democrats voters to look for the following policy guidelines in their candidates platforms:
a. Support the campaign in Iraq against the Iranian-Syrian “axis” forces and al Qaeda
b. Commit to support democracy and minorities in the Greater Middle East
c. Confront the threat of Jihadism in the US.
If the candidate support these principles, he or she would have fulfilled the minimal requirements in national security to be selected by the Democrats voters at this stage.2) Republicans: In the Republican primaries here are the following findings
a. The most visible problem is the full alignment of Congressman Ron Paul’s agenda against the War on Terror and against supporting democracy and human rights in the region. It is important that Republican voters send a message to the other candidates and to the nation by rejecting the isolationist and defeatist policy adopted by Congressman Paul. On these grounds, I recommend not to vote for him.
b. All other candidates have received my books and address the War on Terror with an understanding of the threat. They are equal in being capable of leading the US in the direction needed to confront the threat on national security grounds. Senator McCain, Governor Huckabee, Mayor Giuliani and Governor Romney are all very sensitive to the rising threat of Jihadism and they often express their concerns about its current and future menace. Republican voters who have decided to select one of them are in line with the national security agenda.
c. However I have studied in particular the agenda and national security language of Governor Mitt Romney and I do personally believe that at this stage he has best understood the parameters I am concerned about: that is the threat of Jihadism, the human rights crisis in the Greater Middle East and the need for a confrontation of Jihadism within the US Homeland. Governor Romney, by my academic and analytical parameters has been able to draw a counter-Jihadism doctrine which can best determine the danger, identify the threat and direct national resources into the confrontation.In addition I have had the chance to learn that the Mitt Romney policy on the Middle East will particularly focus on containing the Iranian and Syrian regimes, standing by and defending democracies in Israel, Lebanon and Iraq and promoting human rights in the region.
This is why at this stage I would recommend to the Republicans to vote for Mitt Romney in the primaries as first among equal colleagues.
This analysis and recommendation represent my personal views and do not represent the views and opinions of the NGOs and institutions I belong to.At this stage may aim is not to engage in a debate about primaries but only to inform all those on my lists of my views regarding the national security and war on terror agendas of the candidates from both parties.
Best regards
Dr Walid Phares
Popularity: 31% [?]
Video: Mexican Lawmakers protest new law - in Arizona!
January 29, 2008
This would only be funny if it weren’t true.
Arizona has finally stepped up to the plate and made a new law punishing businesses that hire illegal immigrants. That’s the first step in admitting that you have a problem. The law punishes businesses by either suspending their business license, or by revoking the business license outright. Great.
Well, this is where it gets nuts. A delegation of MEXICAN lawmakers went to Tuscan, Arizona to protest the new law. Let that sink in. The reason why they are protesting? Their state, Sonora, won’t be able to handle the influx of people coming BACK to their state! They don’t have enough housing, schools and medical care. I know you’re laughing right now, because I just laughed that incredible statement! It’s just amazing that this is actually going on.
A delegation of nine state legislators from Sonora traveled to Tucson to make the case against Arizona’s new employer sanctions law,
The lawmakers say it will have a devastating affect on the Mexican state.
At a news conference Tuesday, they said Sonora cannot handle the demand for housing, jobs and schools it will face as illegal Mexican workers in Arizona return to their hometowns without jobs or money.
The law, which took effect Jan.1, punishes employers who knowingly hire individuals who don’t have valid legal documents to work in the United States.
Businesses found violating the law face suspension or loss of a business license.
The lawmakers were to travel to Phoenix Wednesday for a breakfast meeting with Hispanic legislators.
They’re expected to tell them how the law will affect Mexican families on both sides of the border.
“How can they pass a law like this?” asked Mexican Rep. Leticia Amparano Gamez, who represents Nogales. “There is not one person living in Sonora who does not have a friend or relative working in Arizona,” Amparano said in Spanish.
Amparano said the Sonoran legislators are already asking the federal government of Mexico for help.
Rep. Florencio Diaz Armenta, coordinator of the delegation, represents the agricultural rich San Luis, Rio Colorado, area south of Yuma which employs some 28,000 legal Mexican workers.
“What do we do with the repatriated?” he asked. “As Mexicans, we are worried. They are Mexicans but they are also people’s fathers and mothers and young people with jobs who won’t have work in Sonora.”
I’m sorry. But, I could give a rat’s ass about their “repatriated” citizens. The United States cannot handle the amount of illegal immigrants that have been streaming into this country unabated for years. WE do not have enough schools, housing and medical care for our OWN people!
Please watch Glenn Beck on this issue. As usual, he hits it right on the head.
Popularity: 31% [?]
So, now President Bush cares about earmarks? Too little too late.
January 29, 2008
He’s so out of touch with reality with spending that he actually thinks the American people will applaud his new Executive Order ignoring any future earmarks that weren’t voted on by Congress. I say too little too late Mr. President. Earmarks are the scourge of Washington. These politicians slide in these earmarks at the last minute for their districts without even being voted and debated on the floor of Congress.
President Bush was set to act Tuesday on his State of the Union promise to sign an executive order directing federal agencies to ignore any future earmarks not voted on by Congress.
Bush warned lawmakers he would flourish his veto pen if Congress does not rein in the number of congressional earmarks — money set aside for pet projects — that make it into law without a vote.
As many as 95 percent of earmarks are inserted after Congress has voted on appropriations measures, and the pork is never seen by most lawmakers. Bush called on Congress during last year’s State of the Union to cut the number of earmarks in half, but Monday night he chided lawmakers for failing to do so.
“So this time, if you send me an appropriations bill that does not cut the number and cost of earmarks in half, I will send it back to you with my veto,” Bush promised. “If these items are truly worth funding, the Congress should debate them in the open and hold a public vote.”
To that end, Bush was scheduled in the afternoon to sign an executive order called “Protecting American Taxpayers From Government Spending on Wasteful Earmarks.”
As Stop the ACLU points out: Where was this executive order years ago?
So where was this Executive Order threat in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007? Too little, too late. Earmarks, which two-thirds of Americans oppose and are an absolute betrayal of the American people, should have been OUTLAWED long ago, but under Bush the number of earmarks grew to 11,900 in 2007. In 1996, there were 3055. There were 499 in 1992. Seven…7…in 1980.
I say too little too late Mr. President. You have let Congress go wild with spending over your entire administration. We have a war going on. During a time of war, we’re supposed to be tightening the purse strings…not writing blank checks for $45,000 hammers!
And people wonder why the economy is in the state that it is in. It all starts at the top. Poor leadership on spending for so many years.
Popularity: 32% [?]
Getting testy in Florida: McCain and Romney exchanging punches
January 28, 2008
Like 2 boxers in a ring, John McCain and Mitt Romney are exchanging punches and counter punching as the race for the Florida GOP delegates heat up.
Mitt Romney and John McCain accused each other Monday of harboring liberal tendencies, a charge bordering on blasphemy in the increasingly caustic campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.
Romney struck first on the day before the winner-take-all Florida primary, criticizing the Arizona senator for his legislation reducing the role of money in politics, for his position on immigration and for his support of an energy bill that he said would have driven up consumer costs.
“If you ask people, ‘Look at the three things Senator McCain has done as a senator,’ if you want that kind of a liberal Democrat course as president, then you can vote for him,” Romney told campaign workers. “But those three pieces of legislation, those aren’t conservative, those aren’t Republican, those are not the kind of leadership that we need as we go forward.”
McCain answered swiftly in a statement to The Associated Press. He accused the former Massachusetts governor of “wholesale deception of voters. On every one of the issues he has attacked us on, Mitt Romney was for it before he was against it.”
He added, “The truth is, Mitt Romney was a liberal governor of Massachusetts who raised taxes, imposed with Ted Kennedy a big government mandate health care plan that is now a quarter of a billion dollars in the red, and managed his state’s economy incompetently, leaving Massachusetts with less job growth than 46 other states.”
The exchange reflected the stakes in Tuesday’s contest, a prelude to a virtual nationwide primary on Feb. 5.
The polls show McCain and Romney in a state race that is too close to call.
McCain collected endorsements in recent days from Florida’s top two Republican elected officials, Sen. Mel Martinez and Gov. Charlie Crist, as well as the endorsements of a slew of Florida newspapers. The former Vietnam prisoner of war also has universal name recognition, as well as ownership of an issue important to the large number of veterans and active military in the state, national security.
This is a big race for John McCain as this is a Republican only state, which means that only registered Republicans can vote in this primary. McCain has done well in the other states because of getting a large Independent vote. He has not gotten the Republican/Conservative vote, or support for that matter, in those states.
Florida should give us a good idea on how this McCain/Romney race will go when being decided by Republican voters.
Popularity: 22% [?]
Unknown Author: ‘Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen.’
January 28, 2008
The article below was sent to me via email this morning by my friend RonD, who has contributed many times to this site. This email has been around the Internet for around a year and was first attributed to Jay Leno, but according to snopes.com - that is false. After reading the email, I realized that it didn’t matter who authored this common sense composition, because it makes you think and it is true on so many fronts that libNOT.com has decided to post it hoping that you’ll agree that it’s content is right on the money…including the title I chose, above.
“The other day I was reading Newsweek magazine and came across some poll data I found rather hard to believe. It must be true, given the source, right?
The Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed, and 69 percent of the country is unhappy with the performance of the President. In essence, 2/3’s of the citizenry just ain’t happy and want a change.
So being the knuckle dragger I am, I started thinking, What are we so unhappy about?
Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?
Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the sum mer and heating in the winter?
Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy folks have a job?
Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time, and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?
Maybe it is the ability to drive from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state?
Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter?
I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough.
Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all, and even send a helicopter to take you to the hospital?
Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home. You may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames, thus saving you, your family and your belongings.
Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes, an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss.
This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90 percent of teenagers own cell phones and computers.
How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world?
Maybe that is what has 67 percent of you folks unhappy.
Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S. , yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are - the most blessed people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don’t have, and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here.
I know, I know. What about the President who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The President who has a measly 31 percent approval rating. Is this the same President who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The President that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled ungrateful brats safe from terrorist attacks?
The Commander-In Chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me? Did you hear how bad the President is on the news or talk show? Did this news affect you so much, make you so unhappy you couldn’t take a look around for yourself and see all the good things and be glad?
Think about it…are you upset at the President because he actually caused you personal pain OR is it because the “Media” told you he was failing to kiss your sorry ungrateful behind every day.
Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases may have died for your freedom. There is currently no draft in this country. They didn’t have to go.
They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a “general” discharge, an “other than honorable” discharge or, worst case scenario, a “dishonorable” discharge after a few days in the brig.
So why then the flat-out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of Americans? Say what you want, but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds, it leads; and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner? The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations. They offer what sells, and when criticized, they try to defend their actions by “justifying” them in one way or another. Just ask why they tried to allow a murderer like O.J.Simpson to write a book about “how he didn’t kill his wife, but if he did he would have done it this way”…Insane!
Stop buying the negativism you are fed everyday by the media. Shut off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your bird cage. Then start being grateful for all we have as a country. There is exponentially more good than bad.
We are among the most blessed people on Earth, and should thank God several times a day, or at least be thankful and appreciative.
“With hurricanes, tornadoes, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another, and with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks, are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?
Popularity: 24% [?]
Afghanistan: We were told by the Taliban that you were worse than the Russians!
January 28, 2008
Paktika Province Rocked By “Operation Winter Stand”
Written by CJTF-82 Operations
Sunday, 27 January 2008
Afghan led Operation Winter Stand has been rocking Paktika province since early December. Not with fighter jets and explosions but with knowledge and leadership. The operation started with Naka District. A team comprised of the District Sub-Governor, Mohammed Aslam, Afghan National Army and Coalition Troops executed multiple patrols through the district taking the Sub-Governor to villages he had never previously visited. Mr. Aslam held shuras, or “consultations,” in each of the villages, strengthening his local government by discussing the things the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan can bring to the villagers. Security was ably demonstrated, there were no attacks in the district during the operation. Development was likewise demonstrated with two fresh water wells and solar street lights for 5 of the villages. Training in agricultural techniques and basic construction is also planned, at the elders’ request. The residents of Naka provided their own demonstrations of their commitment to their nation, agreeing to and beginning to use the District Center to mitigate disputes and govern their district. One of the village elders, with the complete support of his peers, told the Coalition Soldiers, “We agree to grant ‘Pashtunwali’ to your forces, you will not be attacked.”
The Provincial Chief of Police, Nadine Ahmanhel, led the next phase of the operation into Charboran District, 6 Mosques were refurbished, 4 villages provided with solar street lights and two more wells were begun as the Chief of Police visited 12 villages leading up to a final “mega” shura attended by over 200 people. The elders of the district chose a new Sub-Governor and told the Coalition Forces, “We extend ahmi shalah (neighbor status) to your forces.”
Many of these Afghans had very little contact with Coalition Forces prior to this operation. Many of their perceptions were altered upon seeing Coalition Soldiers working so closely with the ANA Soldiers and Afghan leaders. One villager told Coalition Forces “We were told (by the Taliban) that you were worse than the Russians!” Another villager noted, “I cannot believe you allow your interpreters to pray! We thought you would punish them severely if they were found studying Islam.”
Checks on the effectiveness of the operation were conducted using a random poll of citizens in the districts with promising results.
-93% say security has improved over the last 6 months.
-98% believe the Afghan National Army is trustworthy.
-100% of the Afghans polled say the new Charboran Sub-Governor is trustworthy.
-72% say they use the District Center as a means of solving disputes.
-72% receive most of the goods they require from the local bazaar.
-78% say the local roads are improving.
Across Afghanistan, perceptions are changing as Afghans begin to take charge of their own development and political processes; Coalition Forces are there to help but it is the Afghan people who are discovering their own strength and helping themselves.
Popularity: 42% [?]
