<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Change And The Chosen Path</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=change-and-the-chosen-path</link>
	<description>Intrepid New Journalism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 23:20:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken anderson</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1820</link>
		<dc:creator>ken anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jan 2010 12:33:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1820</guid>
		<description>Huh.  Interesting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Huh.  Interesting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christian B</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1808</link>
		<dc:creator>Christian B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2010 13:14:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1808</guid>
		<description>Mr Anderson,

I was just informed that I was engaged in a comment-thread debate here. However, that&#039;s not me vanity-linking or replying above.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr Anderson,</p>
<p>I was just informed that I was engaged in a comment-thread debate here. However, that&#8217;s not me vanity-linking or replying above.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken anderson</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1803</link>
		<dc:creator>ken anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:10:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1803</guid>
		<description>Sharon,

Well, I suppose it is possible.  But given the policy trajectory Obama has demonstrated everywhere else regarding detainees, as with his own nomination of Dawn Craig, he just switched gears, dumping his reformers, sometime in May.  

If you have not read the lengthy Greg Craig article, The Fall of Greg Craig, (TIME), you might find it interesting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sharon,</p>
<p>Well, I suppose it is possible.  But given the policy trajectory Obama has demonstrated everywhere else regarding detainees, as with his own nomination of Dawn Craig, he just switched gears, dumping his reformers, sometime in May.  </p>
<p>If you have not read the lengthy Greg Craig article, The Fall of Greg Craig, (TIME), you might find it interesting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sharon</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1802</link>
		<dc:creator>sharon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:55:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1802</guid>
		<description>Is it possible that Carter and Craig were let go *because* they failed to close Gitmo? That&#039;s certainly how I read it -- these two guys, fine gentlemen both, took the fall for failing to succeed in their missions. That&#039;s not shabby, it&#039;s accountability -- it sucks for people on the receiving end, but that&#039;s they way it goes.

Not that I blame them for failing -- turned out to be harder than it sounded, no?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it possible that Carter and Craig were let go *because* they failed to close Gitmo? That&#8217;s certainly how I read it &#8212; these two guys, fine gentlemen both, took the fall for failing to succeed in their missions. That&#8217;s not shabby, it&#8217;s accountability &#8212; it sucks for people on the receiving end, but that&#8217;s they way it goes.</p>
<p>Not that I blame them for failing &#8212; turned out to be harder than it sounded, no?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken anderson</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1731</link>
		<dc:creator>ken anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1731</guid>
		<description>As follow-up, there almost no reason to doubt that the US military is operating in Uzbekistan.  In August of this year, the US military and the Karimov regime signed a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.zeenews.com/news557179.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;military &quot;cooperation&quot; agreement,&lt;/a&gt; replete with education and training.

&lt;i&gt;President of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov recently received General David Petraeus, the Commander of the US Central Command, at Oqsaroy residence in Tashkent. During Petraeus’ visit to the Central Asian republic, Uzbekistan and the US have inked an agreement to strengthen military cooperation between both the nations.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As follow-up, there almost no reason to doubt that the US military is operating in Uzbekistan.  In August of this year, the US military and the Karimov regime signed a <a href="http://www.zeenews.com/news557179.html" rel="nofollow">military &#8220;cooperation&#8221; agreement,</a> replete with education and training.</p>
<p><i>President of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov recently received General David Petraeus, the Commander of the US Central Command, at Oqsaroy residence in Tashkent. During Petraeus’ visit to the Central Asian republic, Uzbekistan and the US have inked an agreement to strengthen military cooperation between both the nations.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken anderson</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1721</link>
		<dc:creator>ken anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:49:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1721</guid>
		<description>Ryan, Katie,

Thank you both for your comments.  Indeed, there appears to be growing swath of people who have watched Obama&#039;s fall from &quot;grace&quot; and are none too pleased with the sight.  Obviously, I am one of them, as are you both.  

As far as Katie&#039;s comment:
&lt;i&gt;&quot;The Nobel Prize wasn’t meant to truly honor President Obama. It was a way for those on the Nobel Committee to do their best to embarrass and coerce him into behaving as they want on climate change and foreign policy.&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

That may be.  And if it was, it was an utter failure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ryan, Katie,</p>
<p>Thank you both for your comments.  Indeed, there appears to be growing swath of people who have watched Obama&#8217;s fall from &#8220;grace&#8221; and are none too pleased with the sight.  Obviously, I am one of them, as are you both.  </p>
<p>As far as Katie&#8217;s comment:<br />
<i>&#8220;The Nobel Prize wasn’t meant to truly honor President Obama. It was a way for those on the Nobel Committee to do their best to embarrass and coerce him into behaving as they want on climate change and foreign policy.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>That may be.  And if it was, it was an utter failure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken anderson</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1720</link>
		<dc:creator>ken anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1720</guid>
		<description>Mr. Bleuer,

Now, that is a comment I can appreciate.  I always think bringing personal and direct experience to the discussion is a plus.  But I am unconvinced that most citizens -- regardless the country -- would simply have no idea that anything untoward was happening vis-a-vis US covert operations.  And while have no doubt that Karimov&#039;s regime is plenty capable of &quot;taking care&quot; of itself, we recently received perhaps some indication as to the sort of &quot;missions&quot; JSOC and Blackwater might be involved in Uzbekistan, and elsewhere.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://itwasthecia.blogspot.com/2009/12/brotherly-love-on-down-low-blackwater.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&quot;Blackwater Guards Tied to Secret Raids by the CIA&quot;&lt;/a&gt;

&quot;The raids against suspects occurred on an almost nightly basis during the height of the Iraqi insurgency from 2004 to 2006, with Blackwater personnel playing central roles in what company insiders called “snatch and grab” operations ...&quot;

Of course, JSOC is not the CIA, but we know JSOC often performs parallel operations to that of the CIA, and the &quot;snatch and grabs,&quot; &quot;extraordinary renditions,&quot; or nominally &quot;kidnappings,&quot; and we know that Blackwater works with both the CIA and JSOC.

It becomes apparent that, if Scahill&#039;s sources are right, these JSOC/Blackwater missions in Uzbek territory could well lie along the &quot;snatch and grab&quot; operations scenario.  In this way, certainly, generalized mayhem is not created -- bombs do not go off -- and the ops remain quiet and out of sight at scopes outside the local villages, etc., where the snatch took place.

This is not hard to imagine.  I think we can all recognize that most Americans had no idea (and have no idea to this day) that Blackwater was deployed on American soil post-Katrina, and probably will continue to be deployed on an &quot;as needed&quot; basis.  And we will never hear a word about this, except possibly as an ex post facto exposition.

Thanks again for your comments, Mr. Bleuer.  I appreciate that you returned to offer a more reasonable and understandable point of view.  We all wish the Uzbeks the best, and my concern about Uzbekistan does not lie with the Uzbeks, but with what many of us fear is a deliberate escalation and widening of the war into the surrounding states of Afghanistan on the part of the US military.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. Bleuer,</p>
<p>Now, that is a comment I can appreciate.  I always think bringing personal and direct experience to the discussion is a plus.  But I am unconvinced that most citizens &#8212; regardless the country &#8212; would simply have no idea that anything untoward was happening vis-a-vis US covert operations.  And while have no doubt that Karimov&#8217;s regime is plenty capable of &#8220;taking care&#8221; of itself, we recently received perhaps some indication as to the sort of &#8220;missions&#8221; JSOC and Blackwater might be involved in Uzbekistan, and elsewhere.</p>
<p><a href="http://itwasthecia.blogspot.com/2009/12/brotherly-love-on-down-low-blackwater.html" rel="nofollow">&#8220;Blackwater Guards Tied to Secret Raids by the CIA&#8221;</a></p>
<p>&#8220;The raids against suspects occurred on an almost nightly basis during the height of the Iraqi insurgency from 2004 to 2006, with Blackwater personnel playing central roles in what company insiders called “snatch and grab” operations &#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>Of course, JSOC is not the CIA, but we know JSOC often performs parallel operations to that of the CIA, and the &#8220;snatch and grabs,&#8221; &#8220;extraordinary renditions,&#8221; or nominally &#8220;kidnappings,&#8221; and we know that Blackwater works with both the CIA and JSOC.</p>
<p>It becomes apparent that, if Scahill&#8217;s sources are right, these JSOC/Blackwater missions in Uzbek territory could well lie along the &#8220;snatch and grab&#8221; operations scenario.  In this way, certainly, generalized mayhem is not created &#8212; bombs do not go off &#8212; and the ops remain quiet and out of sight at scopes outside the local villages, etc., where the snatch took place.</p>
<p>This is not hard to imagine.  I think we can all recognize that most Americans had no idea (and have no idea to this day) that Blackwater was deployed on American soil post-Katrina, and probably will continue to be deployed on an &#8220;as needed&#8221; basis.  And we will never hear a word about this, except possibly as an ex post facto exposition.</p>
<p>Thanks again for your comments, Mr. Bleuer.  I appreciate that you returned to offer a more reasonable and understandable point of view.  We all wish the Uzbeks the best, and my concern about Uzbekistan does not lie with the Uzbeks, but with what many of us fear is a deliberate escalation and widening of the war into the surrounding states of Afghanistan on the part of the US military.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Katie Mason Stevens</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1715</link>
		<dc:creator>Katie Mason Stevens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:12:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1715</guid>
		<description>The Nobel Prize wasn&#039;t meant to truly honor President Obama.  It was a way for those on the Nobel Committee to do their best to embarrass and coerce him into behaving as they want on climate change and foreign policy.

He would have done best to reject it and them.  It would have gotten him more respect even if you don&#039;t agree with his decisions.  At least he&#039;d have shown some strength and stood up for what he really was planning to do.

I was for Health Care Reform during the campaign because he talked about no mandates.  Now we will have a mandate, one that will impose a burden upon some of the people this legislation claims to help.

Because of the Recession I&#039;m now self-employed which is good but in order to keep my client I&#039;m making a little above minimum wage.  I wouldn&#039;t have made much more if I&#039;d taken a temp assignment for an admin job.  But in my current position I have a real opportunity to grow my services.

I&#039;m also making 1/3 my pre-Recession salary.  To further the difficulty I&#039;m what you&#039;d call Rent Poor.  Rent is 1/2 my monthly salary and it&#039;s a very modest apartment at that.

I have a loan to pay off and also pay some bills for my Mother (phone, clothing, magazine subscriptions) who lives in a Residence.

At the end of the month I have no more than $50-100 left, and often that goes to cover my immediate needs or emergencies.  I recently had to get a new stove, for example.

Even with a subsidy I would not be able to afford $200-300 a month for the mandated coverage.  Please see the December 1st entry to Speaker Pelosi&#039;s blog, &quot;The Gavel&quot; for the latest CBO figures.

There is nothing I&#039;ve seen so far that transaltes into lower premiums.

I am amazed at the naivete shown by Washington.  We are being legislated to buy the products of a for profit, private company which will be subsidized by tax payer dollars.

Isn&#039;t this like a huge bailout to the health insurance industry?

I&#039;m quite sure Karen Ignagni of AHIP has had a very large hand in crafting the legislation as it evolved.  It tilts too much in favor of the insurance industry.

It seem to me like Big Pharma and the Health Insurance industry played nice, snickering behind the elected officials&#039; back.  There always was a plan to keep inflating the prices of their goods and services so that by the time legislation took effect an individual policy will cost $10000 and a family policy $20000 a year.

The industry is, after all, a profit driven one.  The ultimate purpose is to increase that profit and deliver a dividend check to the shareholder.  Why ever should it be any different.

Ignagni even says the penalties should be higher.

I am also appaled by the threats of jail time for failure to pay a penalty.

I&#039;ve also learned that in order to get a hardship waiver one must submit all one&#039;s financial papers, expenses and details about the past year in order for the government to determine whether or not one is really in difficulty.

I&#039;m no longer in favor of this non-Reform.  It&#039;s doing nothing but making me sick.  Not the &quot;peace of mind&quot; Speaker Pelosi says the legislationn will ensure all Americans.

Not at all the hope and change President Obama led me to believe he&#039;d usher in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Nobel Prize wasn&#8217;t meant to truly honor President Obama.  It was a way for those on the Nobel Committee to do their best to embarrass and coerce him into behaving as they want on climate change and foreign policy.</p>
<p>He would have done best to reject it and them.  It would have gotten him more respect even if you don&#8217;t agree with his decisions.  At least he&#8217;d have shown some strength and stood up for what he really was planning to do.</p>
<p>I was for Health Care Reform during the campaign because he talked about no mandates.  Now we will have a mandate, one that will impose a burden upon some of the people this legislation claims to help.</p>
<p>Because of the Recession I&#8217;m now self-employed which is good but in order to keep my client I&#8217;m making a little above minimum wage.  I wouldn&#8217;t have made much more if I&#8217;d taken a temp assignment for an admin job.  But in my current position I have a real opportunity to grow my services.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m also making 1/3 my pre-Recession salary.  To further the difficulty I&#8217;m what you&#8217;d call Rent Poor.  Rent is 1/2 my monthly salary and it&#8217;s a very modest apartment at that.</p>
<p>I have a loan to pay off and also pay some bills for my Mother (phone, clothing, magazine subscriptions) who lives in a Residence.</p>
<p>At the end of the month I have no more than $50-100 left, and often that goes to cover my immediate needs or emergencies.  I recently had to get a new stove, for example.</p>
<p>Even with a subsidy I would not be able to afford $200-300 a month for the mandated coverage.  Please see the December 1st entry to Speaker Pelosi&#8217;s blog, &#8220;The Gavel&#8221; for the latest CBO figures.</p>
<p>There is nothing I&#8217;ve seen so far that transaltes into lower premiums.</p>
<p>I am amazed at the naivete shown by Washington.  We are being legislated to buy the products of a for profit, private company which will be subsidized by tax payer dollars.</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t this like a huge bailout to the health insurance industry?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m quite sure Karen Ignagni of AHIP has had a very large hand in crafting the legislation as it evolved.  It tilts too much in favor of the insurance industry.</p>
<p>It seem to me like Big Pharma and the Health Insurance industry played nice, snickering behind the elected officials&#8217; back.  There always was a plan to keep inflating the prices of their goods and services so that by the time legislation took effect an individual policy will cost $10000 and a family policy $20000 a year.</p>
<p>The industry is, after all, a profit driven one.  The ultimate purpose is to increase that profit and deliver a dividend check to the shareholder.  Why ever should it be any different.</p>
<p>Ignagni even says the penalties should be higher.</p>
<p>I am also appaled by the threats of jail time for failure to pay a penalty.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve also learned that in order to get a hardship waiver one must submit all one&#8217;s financial papers, expenses and details about the past year in order for the government to determine whether or not one is really in difficulty.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m no longer in favor of this non-Reform.  It&#8217;s doing nothing but making me sick.  Not the &#8220;peace of mind&#8221; Speaker Pelosi says the legislationn will ensure all Americans.</p>
<p>Not at all the hope and change President Obama led me to believe he&#8217;d usher in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1699</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:17:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1699</guid>
		<description>I agree with this article almost entirely. I voted for Obama and while I was not naive enough to expect him to accomplish everything he talked about on the campaign I did expect the sentiment he displayed to be apparent in all of his policy decisions. That has turned out to be very far from the truth. With very few exceptions we appear to have elected a President that talks in public much like the man who campaigned last year, but then when it comes time to act reverts right back to the disturbing Bush/Cheney rationales that I absolutely hated. One need only look briefly at Obama&#039;s use of the State Secrets clause and his endorsement of a 3-tiered justice system to get just a taste of what he actually believes despite all the rosy speeches and interviews he gives.

He won the Nobel Peace Prize weeks before announcing he was sending more troops to Afghanistan. His second such escalation since taking office by the way. How does that promote peace?

I would be able to handle the surge in Afghanistan if he were sticking to his campaign promises in other areas. To be honest I was expecting him to send more troops to Afghanistan because he said he would on the campaign trail. It is the couple hundred other things he promised that he apparently has no interest in achieving that keep me from getting behind him on this surge.

I will not be voting for him again. Time to start looking at 3rd parties.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with this article almost entirely. I voted for Obama and while I was not naive enough to expect him to accomplish everything he talked about on the campaign I did expect the sentiment he displayed to be apparent in all of his policy decisions. That has turned out to be very far from the truth. With very few exceptions we appear to have elected a President that talks in public much like the man who campaigned last year, but then when it comes time to act reverts right back to the disturbing Bush/Cheney rationales that I absolutely hated. One need only look briefly at Obama&#8217;s use of the State Secrets clause and his endorsement of a 3-tiered justice system to get just a taste of what he actually believes despite all the rosy speeches and interviews he gives.</p>
<p>He won the Nobel Peace Prize weeks before announcing he was sending more troops to Afghanistan. His second such escalation since taking office by the way. How does that promote peace?</p>
<p>I would be able to handle the surge in Afghanistan if he were sticking to his campaign promises in other areas. To be honest I was expecting him to send more troops to Afghanistan because he said he would on the campaign trail. It is the couple hundred other things he promised that he apparently has no interest in achieving that keep me from getting behind him on this surge.</p>
<p>I will not be voting for him again. Time to start looking at 3rd parties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reader from Google</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/special-to-the-public-record/6194/change-and-the-chosen-path/comment-page-1/#comment-1687</link>
		<dc:creator>Reader from Google</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:50:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=6194#comment-1687</guid>
		<description>Ken, I did not mean to offend your personal sensibilities, but I am speaking from a point of view of someone who has lived in Uzbekistan and visited the other countries of the region.  All I can say is if you lived there, or even visited each one of those countries, you would agree with me.  You would agree that Uzbekistan would balk at having any kind of US activities inside it, because it is plenty capable of taking care of anything inside it.  Plus, inside it is so peaceful, so different than Afghanistan, it&#039;s like day and night.  And, I think this paragraph about Uzbekistan Scahil is reporting is baseless.  But I have no proof as he does not.  It would be wildly unbelievable if he can come up with a video.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ken, I did not mean to offend your personal sensibilities, but I am speaking from a point of view of someone who has lived in Uzbekistan and visited the other countries of the region.  All I can say is if you lived there, or even visited each one of those countries, you would agree with me.  You would agree that Uzbekistan would balk at having any kind of US activities inside it, because it is plenty capable of taking care of anything inside it.  Plus, inside it is so peaceful, so different than Afghanistan, it&#8217;s like day and night.  And, I think this paragraph about Uzbekistan Scahil is reporting is baseless.  But I have no proof as he does not.  It would be wildly unbelievable if he can come up with a video.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

