December 2007

It should come as no big surprise that nK will miss the nuclear disclosure deadline it agreed to in February. As I predeicted, here, here, here and here , Pyongyang has identified U.S offenses necessitating the delay. Specifically, nK is decrying the U.S. military activity in South Korea (otherwise known as routine training) as “flexing…military muscle.” Per the Yonhap news agency:

“Dialogue and clamor for war cannot stand together” … “The U.S. should abandon its hostile policy toward the North.”

It appears the reason for the delay in the declaration is a difference of opinion over the the country’s uranium enrichment program and the amount of plutonium produced. The U.S. feels its greater than nK is admitting to.

The real crux for the delay, suggest South Korean analysts, is nK’s perception that the U.S. is dragging its feet in removing the country from a list of terror-sponsoring states. This is likely to result in a lull in the denuclearization program for a few months.

The truth is that nK is will move forward only when promised more concessions and aid.

(as always)

Sleazy mortgage lenders lobbied their way out of increasing legal restrictions on high-risk subprime home loans. The biggest sleazes were Ameriquest Mortgage and their subsidiaries, who just settled a class action lawsuit in New York to the tune of over $325 million. The agreement requires Ameriquest to pay $295 million restitution to states divided into two separate funds: a $175 million fund to be distributed under a nationwide formula to most consumers who received an Ameriquest loan between Jan. 1, 1999 and April 1, 2003; and a $120 million fund to be divided among the states based on the volume of Ameriquest loans made in each state, to be distributed, at each state’­s discretion, to consumers who received an Ameriquest loan between Jan. 1, 1999 and Dec. 31, 2005.

The attorneys general from Iowa, California, Illinois, and Washington joined the New York Attorney General’s office in the investigation of Ameriquest. This multistate effort revealed that Ameriquest used predatory and illegal lending practices to entice home owners into refinancing. Ameriquest’s activities included misrepresenting and failing to disclose loan terms, charging excessive loan origination fees, and inflating appraisals to qualify borrowers for loans. As a result, many of these home owners were facing foreclosure.

New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, said

“As homeowners throughout the state and the country grapple with the fallout from subprime mortgages we must do all we can to soften the blow, the Ameriquest settlement demonstrates why strong state enforcement to combat predatory lending practices is crucial to protecting consumers. The financial relief provided through this settlement will help borrowers defray the price of these costly loans.”

This sentiment was echoed by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo:

“Through their aggressive use of deceptive and predatory lending practices, Ameriquest both exploited borrowers and contributed to today’­s staggering crisis in the mortgage industry…” “These funds will help undo the damage that Ameriquest caused to thousands of New Yorkers.

I couldn’t agree more, but let’s not forget that state lawmakers foresaw this crisis and not only failed to prevent it, but in my opinion were culpable in its outcome. State legislators fueled this mess by selling-out to lobbyists instead of protecting their constituency. I hope voters will remember this at the polls.

The principle professor of surgery at Rawalpindi General Hospital, Dr. Muhammad Mussadiq Khan, said on the night of her death that Bhutto had died of a bullet wound. This, according to hospital board member Athar Minallah, who released the medical report written by Khan and six other doctors together with an open letter supporting the doctors in their call for an autopsy.

Minallah’s open letter was distributed to the Pakistani news media and to The New York Times. In the letter he suggested the doctors felt they were being pressured by the government to back the theory that Ms Bhutto had died by hitting her head on the car’s sunroof lever. The doctors argued that “without an autopsy it is not at all possible to determine as to what had caused the injury.” Still, Aziz Saud, Rawalpini Chief of Police, “did not agree” to the doctor’s autopsy request.

The absence of a gunshot wound was crucial for the government’s vindication, because had there been one, it meant the security they provided Ms Bhutto was grossly inadequate. Bruce Riedel, an expert on Pakistan at the Brookings Institution in Washington, explained, “If there is a gunshot wound the security was abysmal,” and the government didn’t want to be exposed to this level of carelessness.

Makes sense, but I don’t think it’s that simple. Analysts are suggesting the use of a handgun in addition to explosives is a departure for militant groups in Pakistan. Security analyst Nasim Zehra explains, “This is not by any means a signature killing by Al Qaeda” … “A targeted shooting, even in combination with a familiar suicide bombing, makes it look more like a political killing than one by some militant group.”

If it looks like a duck…

President Bush vetoed the defense-spending bill due to a provision that would subject Iraq to massive liability related to crimes perpetrated against Americans by Saddam Hussein. The President feels this provision would undermine current progress in Iraq. Specifically, Bush claims the provision

“would imperil billions of dollars of Iraqi assets at a crucial juncture in that nation’s reconstruction efforts and…would undermine the foreign policy and commercial interests of the United States.”

Basically, the provision would change how foreign countries may be sued under U.S. law, allowing lawyers to freeze assets in the amount of damages claimed in lawsuits related to acts of terrorism. For Iraq, this puts more than a billion dollars at risk, and could tie-up assets for years.

Of course, Senator Reid and Representative Pelosi are outraged, and made this joint statement:

“We understand that the president is bowing to the demands of the Iraqi government, which is threatening to withdraw billions of dollars invested in U.S. banks if this bill is signed.”

I’m sure many would agree that the President is making a mistake and should go ahead and sign the bill. I disagree. The problem with this bill, as with many others, are the riders that legislators attach to it. The provision in question has absolutely nothing to do with the defense-spending bill and should not even be included. I disagree with the line-item veto, but can understand its necessity when faced with something like this. However, a line-item veto wouldn’t be necessary if Congress acted more responsibly and quit attaching unrelated riders to important legislation!

In a curious turn-of-events, pro al Qaeda militant leader, Baitullah Mehsud, denied involvement in the assassination of former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. However, Pakistan is still insisting the terrorist organization is responsible for Bhutto’s murder, citing “irrefutable evidence that al-Qaida [sic], its networks, and cohorts are trying to destabilize Pakistan…” But, the government has yet to actually present this evidence and the citizens aren’t buying it:

The government’s “official” report of the incident has a gunman firing three shots at Bhutto and missing, then blowing himself up. Ms Bhutto died when the force of the blast caused her to hit her head against the lever of the sunroof of her car.

But that doesn’t jive with eyewitness accounts…

According to Shery Rehman, Ms. Bhutto’s close aide and secretary of information for her Pakistan People’s Party, the government’s claim is “ridiculous”:

“What the government is saying is completely ridiculous, in fact it’s dangerous nonsense that she knocked her head against the lever of the sunroof or some such thing, as if that would attack her. But frankly, it’s very clear, it’s running on all the Pakistan TV channels, the footage of an assassin who took clear aim at her with his gun and fired the shot that went through the back of her head and came out the other. I have seen the bullet wound myself, I was part of the bathing ritual party and she bled to death from that wound.”

Now, al Qaeda denies any involvement in the crime (after initially taking credit?). Why? The Pakistan government says al Qaeda killed Ms Bhutto to destabilize the country because Pakistan is “in the forefront of the war against terrorism.” Perhaps al Qaeda did have something to do with it and are taking advantage of the tumultuous situation to blacken the eye of Musharraf’s administration.

Still, Musharraf was, at least, an al Qaeda enabler, giving them a sanctuary in the mountains of Pakistan. Perhaps al Qaeda is unhappy with Musharraf and are attempting to set the stage for a new leader, one whose even more sympathetic to their cause…like the new Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

The WSJ is reporting that “The [Pakistan] government blamed al Qaeda and the Taliban for the assassination of the opposition leader, [Benazir Bhutto]…” She was buried alongside her father.

Yesterday, Musharraf blamed unnamed Islamic militants, but according to Pakistan Interior Minister, Hamid Nawaz, they now possess “evidence that al Qaeda and the Taliban were behind the suicide attack…” Interestingly enough, they’ve resolved the “whole mystery” behind the opposition leader’s killing and plan to provide details at a press conference later today.

(wow. I can’t wait to hear this!)

As violence erupts all over Pakistan, Musharraf insists the January elections will take place as planned. With Bhutto’s party in disarray and rival party leader, Nawaz Sharif, planning to boycott the elections, things certainly seem to be falling into place for President Musharraf (who probably isn’t really interested in any “power-sharing” agreement).

UPDATE 12/28/07: Pakistan’s Interior Ministry spokesman, Javed Iqbal Cheema, cited a communication intercept implicating al Qaeda in the Bhutto murder: “We have intelligence intercepts indicating that al Qaeda leader Baitullah Mehsud is behind her assassination.” Supposedly, according to the communique, Mehsud had congratulated his people for the attack on Ms Bhutto. However, no solid evidence was presented.

It’s no surprise that the government’s “official” explanation was quickly dismissed by Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) who believe President Musharraf’s embattled administration was only trying to cover up its failure to protect her. A spokesman for the PPP said, “The government is nervous,” and “They are trying to cover up their failure” to provide adequate security.

(I agree)

Cheema also claimed that Bhutto had not been shot, as doctors and eyewitnesses had previously reported, but had died from a skull fracture: “No bullets…were found in her body.”

Of course, Bhutto aides balked at the notion.

(cover-up!)

UPDATE 1/1/08: Interior Minister Hamid Nawaz apologized for the report that the sunroof lever killed Bhutto and said it was a “mistake”. Conducting damage control, Interior Minister Hamid Nawaz Khan, asked the media and people to “forgive and ignore” comments previously made by his ministry’s spokesman Javed Iqbal Cheema.

(Indeed!)

Former Pakistan Prime Minister and opposition leader, Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated today in what appears to be a suicide attack in the town of Rawalpindi, just outside Islamabad. She was killed along with at least 20 others after addressing a campaign rally in the small military garrison town. Her party security adviser said she had been shot before climbing into her vehicle, and then the bomber blew up.

The primary suspects in the assassination are “Islamic militants,” whom Bhutto openly criticized during her election campaign, pledging to “root” them out.

Of course the Islamists are the likely suspects, but there are others who stand to benefit from a Bhutto assassination: President Musharraf and supporters from within the military intelligence service, for one. After all, Rawalpindi, where Bhutto was killed, is the power base of the Pakistani army. Curious that Ms Bhutto was assassinated in the same town that her father, former Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was hanged in 1979 after being deposed by a military coup.

And considering many previous assassinations of Pakistani politicians remain unsolved, it’s a distinct possibility (and I believe highly probable) Bhutto’s killers will never be identified.

Many are concerned Bhutto’s assassination will delay the January 8th elections. I think it will and expect President Musharraf to once again impose a state of emergency. I believe it’s inevitable–he wants this state of emergency and the authority he derives from it. Bhutto’s killing provides a convenient excuse…

MORE: Michelle Malkin; Wake up America; Hot Air; TPMCafe; Red State; LGF; The American Pundit; ComingAnarchy.com; Webloggin; Power Line

Democratic Presidential hopeful John Edwards, on the campaign trail in New Hampshire, touted his qualifications for office. Evidently, among those qualifications is a southern accent:

“The last two Democratic presidents, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, both talk like me.”

Have you ever heard anything more asinine?

The State Department and the Pentagon have differing opinions on Iran and its current role in stabilizing Iraq. Basically, the State Department believes Iran is curbing weapons flow into Iraq; while the DoD believes it’s too early to assume Tehran has changed its behavior.

According to the WSJ:

The differences between the Pentagon and the State Department over Iran have come into clear view in recent days.

On Friday, Mr. Gates told reporters that he had “not yet” seen any persuasive evidence that Iran was trying to reduce the flow of weaponry into Iraq. A new Pentagon report about Iraq similarly concluded that there “was no identified decrease in Iranian training and funding of illegal Shia militias in Iraq.”

State Department officials have taken a very different tack. U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker told reporters in Baghdad on Sunday that there were “some indicators that the Iranians are using some influence to bring down violence from extremist Shia militias.” That echoed similar comments by David Satterfield, the top State Department official on Iraq.

emphasis mine

The problem the president faces is how much credit to give Iran with respect to diplomatic talks. Previously, Iran’s suspension of its nuclear program was a prerequisite for any diplomatic engagement. However, in light of November’s lukewarm National Security Estimate, many analysts believe this requirement should no longer apply. In fact, signs are pointing to the State Department ultimately agreeing to talks without the nuclear suspension.

I believe this is a serious mistake and sincerely hope our government officials aren’t duped into going forward with any diplomatic discussions with Iran without the suspension of Iran’s nuclear program. Although the NIE appeared to paint a favorable picture of Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, the truth is there was much that needed to be read between the lines. Specifically, the first sentence of the NIE states, “We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.” However, a footnote to this statement reveals, that the definition of a “nuclear weapons program” does “not mean Iran’s declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment.”

What does this mean?

How does one make a distinction between what is “civilian” and what is “military”? For a country like the United States, civilian and military distinctions are easily made because they’re written into our laws. But how can such a distinction be made within a terrorist state like Iran? I don’t think it can be done because it doesn’t exist. The NIE tells us that Iran lied about its secret military efforts until it was discovered on 2003. Furthermore, Iran has 3,000 centrifuges and continues to enrich uranium on an industrial scale in defiance of binding U.N. resolutions. Since Iran has access to all the fuel it needs for civilian nuclear power from the Russian plant in Bushehr, there is no civilian purpose for such enrichment.

Though buried within its pages, the NIE contains all the information necessary to answer the question of easing diplomatic restrictions with Iran: The answer is unequivocally, NO!

And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us. And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger. And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child. And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds. But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them. (Luke 2:15-20)

The Apple rumor site, ThinkSecret.com, has settled its nearly 3-year long lawsuit with Apple and will shut-down as a condition of the confidential settlement. Although it may seem that Apple has bullied this blogger into submission, I believe this is actually a victory for ThinkSecret publisher, Nick Ciarelli, specifically, and all bloggers collectively.

In early 2005, Apple sued Ciarelli for posting Apple trade secrets and for encouraging and inducing employees to provide product information in breach of nondisclosure agreements. To Apple’s chagrin, Ciarelli filled a counter suit and ignored the mountains of “cease and desist” letters that followed.

The intent of Apple’s lawsuit was to pressure Ciarelli into revealing his sources and when he balked, he essentially called Apple’s bluff. Why else was there a settlement? If Apple had the legal high-ground, they certainly could’ve induced Ciarelli to reveal the sources of the leaked information or the court would’ve likely held him in contempt. It didn’t go that far because after the counter suit was filed, Apple stopped litigating, and Ciarelli never revealed the sources of his stories. Ciarelli leaves with his integrity intact and this is a boon for online journalists’ First Amendment rights.

Many are speculating over the terms of the settlement and think Ciarelli received a large sum of money to close the ThinkSecret doors, but that’s immaterial. The key to the issue of victory or defeat is the impetus to shut-down the website.

Indeed, Mr. Ciarelli, now a senior at Harvard, told the WSJ that he is shutting down the site because he has other career interests. He’s a senior at Harvard and suggests he was ready to quit anyway. If this is the case, he may have simply agreed to something he was planning on doing anyway. He leaves a winner.

Incidentally, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak urged Apple to call off the dogs, arguing that it hurt the company’s reputation. Apple has never sued a professional news organization for publishing similar stories containing purported “trade secrets.” So why go after “little guy” Ciarelli and ThinkSecret? Because the “little guy” doesn’t have a legal department.

I was recently vacationing in Europe and caught this image on al-Jazeera while flipping through the channels. Regardless of what the news report is about, I thought the image itself to be an interesting commentary on the ACLU and their (unwitting?) support of Islamic-extremist causes.

Recently the United States caved-in to a climate-change pact at the U.N. climate conference in Bali, Indonesia. Although the agreement only establishes the initial “road map” to setting timetables and other negotiation guidance parameters, the U.S. submission moves the nation closer to global accountability. Fortunately, the accord stopped short of requiring the developing (or developed) world to make binding cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

The heart of U.S. concerns were the requirements for industrialized nations to finance clean-up efforts of developing nations and to help them acquire technology to reduce their dependence on heavily polluting energy sources, like coal. Under the Kyoto Treaty (that this new accord is supposed to replace), developing nations aren’t required to cut emissions at all, which is why the U.S. and China never signed it.

The climate conference was convened due to the U.N.’s “consensus” that global-warming is a man-made phenomenon is an illusion. However, according to the U.S. Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works:

In August 2007, a comprehensive survey of peer-reviewed scientific literature from 2004-2007 revealed “Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory.”

“Of 539 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers ‘implicit’ endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no ‘consensus,’” according to an August 29, 2007 article in Daily Tech.

Some consensus, eh? If that’s not enough, more than 100 prominent scientists from around the world signed their name to a letter to the UN climate conference in Bali, stating that “attempting to control the Earth’s climate was ‘ultimately futile’.”

The letter explained,

“It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables.”

Furthermore,

“In stark contrast to the often repeated assertion that the science of climate change is ’settled,’ significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming.”

Finally,

“The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC’s conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions.”

The scientists debunked U.N. assertions by simply stating,

“The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the most widely read IPCC reports amongst politicians and non-scientists and are the basis for most climate change policy formulation. Yet these Summaries are prepared by a relatively small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by ­government ­representatives. The great ­majority of IPCC contributors and ­reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other scientists who are qualified to comment on these matters, are not involved in the preparation of these documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented as a consensus view among experts.”

This is what happens when you mix politics and science. The facts don’t matter, only the bottom line. In this case, the bottom line is control. The U.N. can exert an enormous amount of control over the industrialized nations through environmental accountability. They accomplish this by manipulating science. Ayn Rand warned of scientific capitulation to political expediency stating,

Men are not open to the truth or reason. … If [scientists] want to accomplish anything, we have to deceive [politicians] into letting us accomplish it. Or force them. They understand nothing else. We cannot expect their support for any endeavor of the intellect, for any goal of the spirit. They are nothing but vicious animals. They are greedy, self-indulgent, predatory dollar chasers…”

The U.N.’s thirst for power and global leadership is paved with environmental accords, pacts and treaties. In this, they are the wolf in sheep’s clothing and we should be weary. Any granting of authority to the U.N. threatens our sovereignty and places the U.S. at risk.

The United States caved-in by even attending the U.N. climate conference.

MORE: Wake up America has some excellent commentary on global warming misconceptions.

Yesterday we left Zlí­n and returned to Prague. We stayed in the Courtyard Marriott right across the street from the Praha (Prague) Airport. The hotel was very nice, and quite comfortable. We had dinner in the hotel restaurant, we both had filet of beef and I had a couple of beers, while Cindy drank water. We watched the movie “Fracture” on the laptop before going to bed.

This morning we awoke early and had a light breakfast in the hotel restaurant. The coffee was good and we always enjoy the fresh bread and cheeses in Europe. After breakfast, we called for a porter to collect our bags and to our surprise, he carried them all the way to the airport for us (earning a very nice tip!).

We’re now sitting in the first-class cabin waiting to taxi. Cindy snapped a picture of the airport terminal using my iPhone camera. Now we’re settling in for the 10-hour ride to Atlanta.

We’ve had a wonderful time visiting the Czech Republic, but are looking forward to returning home and sleeping once again in our own bed.

We spent the day shopping at the Tesco Mall. Tesco is one of the largest retailers in the world and operates more than 2,300 supermarkets and convenience stores and employing 326,000 people. Their core business is in the U.K., but they operate throughout Europe and Asia. You’ll find Tesco stores in Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Ireland, Slovakia, Turkey, Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. They’re the world’s “Wal-Mart”.

We browsed the stores in this Tesco Mall and we (or rather, “I”) marveled at the tremendous selection of beer they had. Bottles, cans, kegs, cases and singles in countless quantities and of sufficient variety that one could easily drink a different beer every day and have something different each day for a good three months. Ah, to have the time to do that…

We had a light snack at a small café in the center of the mall. Well, Cindy had a snack, a small sandwich and a Fanta, and I had fermented hops and barley.

This evening we had dinner with friends and are now enjoying the cool night air and clear sky.

Yesterday Cindy and I visited the Christmas Market in Vienna. We awoke early, had breakfast (fresh bread and cheese, pastries and coffee) and caught a cab to the train station. Our tickets from Zlí­n to Wein (Vienna) cost Kc945 (about $55). We changed trains in Otrokovice (just outside Zlí­n) and again in Breclav (just north of the Austrian border). Although a little confusing, we made the changes without incident. Our passports were stamped, going and coming, by the customs officials from both the Czech Republic and Austria.

Once in Vienna, I visited the ATM for some euros, while Cindy got the scoop on the Christmas Market from the lady at the information desk. Cindy was told the best Christmas Market is at the Rathaus, so we climbed aboard Tram “D” for the ride through Vienna.

The “Christkindlmarkt” on the square in front of the City Hall is Vienna’s classic Christmas Market. We had a blast strolling among the elaborately decorated trees in the park, the brisk air and snow falling added to the wonderful Christmas atmosphere. We enjoyed Gluhwein (heated sweetened wine) and Jaegertee (black tea laced with rum), which also helped to keep us warm. The wooden huts were bigger than those we encountered in Prague and the offerings of the vendors were amazing. We found the most wonderful Christmas ornaments and bought several for ourselves and gifts. The Vienna Town Hall building (the Rathaus) made an amazing backdrop to the Christmas Market.

The Rathaus serves as the seat of both the mayor and city council of the city of Vienna which also serve, in personal union, as Governor and Assembly (Landtag) of the State of Vienna. The Rathaus was designed by Friedrich von Schimdt in the Gothic style, and built between 1872 and 1883. On the top of the tower is the Rathausmann, one of the symbols of Vienna. The park facing the Rathaus is is called the Rathauspark, and every year hosts the Christkindlmarkt. We spent about four hours at the park before catching the tram back into the city.

On the way back to the train station we visited the Wiener Staatsoper (Vienna State Opera). It’s the first opera house constructed in Vienna and until 1920 was called the Vienna Court Opera. This is one of the most important opera companies in Europe and throughout the world. I was a little disappointed because la Traviata is playing this evening and would have loved to have had the opportunity to see it! (sigh) Still, just visiting the opera house was satisfying in and of itself. We walked around the opera house and just admired the intricate detail; I was snapping pictures left and right. My favorite is a photo of one of the two representations of riders over the main façade of the loggia that were erected in 1876. They were created by Ernst Julius Handel and represent two flying horses, illustrating Harmony and the muse of poetry (Erato). The snow was falling and the lights from the street below made the snowflakes glow and sparkle.

After visiting the opera house we did some shopping. Cindy loves Swarovski crystal and has quite a collection. In the store we found prices cheaper than those for identical items in the U.S. (despite the sagging dollar). We purchased a crystal Christmas tree to commemorate or visit to the Christmas Market and Vienna. We also picked up some Pashminas for Cindy, a beer stein for me and a few other odds-and-ends. Then boarded the tram back to the train station. Famished, we had a nice dinner and a beer in the restaurant before we headed back to Zlí­n.

The view from our balcony at the Penzion Uno…

Zlí­n is a quaint little town and is ideal for a “quiet getaway” vacation. The town is located in the East-central region of the Czech Republic, in Moravia, on the D?evnice River. From 1949 to 1993 it was called Gottwaldov in honor of Klement Gottwald, Czechoslovakia’s first Communist president. It was founded by Thomas Bata, a shoe-maker, in 1913 and is now one of the world’s largest shoe-manufacturing cities. In fact, it’s the center of the Czech shoe industry. Under the Bata family, the city grew into an almost self-sufficient factory community.

This evening we’re walking down to a little pizza place to have dinner with some American friends we’ve met at the Penzion. Tomorrow, we’re heading to Vienna, Austria, and the Christmas Market!

Yesterday we came to Zlín, a small town near the Austrian border. We’re staying in a little bed-and-breakfast called the Penzion Uno. The hotel owner is a very nice Czech lady named Hana and she makes the most wonderful breakfast. This morning we had fresh bread with cheese and butter, granola and milk, and scrambled eggs. We also were served what Hana referred to as a “pancake,” but was really more like a crepe, with butter and jam. We had orange juice and coffee to drink. Incidentally, Hana makes each cup of coffee individually. Delicious!

We’re staying in what Hana refers to as the “Romantic Room.” This room is right off the main floor and has a balcony overlooking the rolling hills of Zlín. The air is clean and brisk. There’s a small grocery store at the bottom of the hill, with a bakery and a food stand. The pastries smell great. We picked up some essentials, like water, bread, cheese…and beer! I love the beer in this country! Every restaurant or pub is serviced by a single distributor, so you simply go in and order “a beer”. I’m also collecting the different beer coasters from each restaurant. Tonight we had dinner in the “Sunflower” Restaurant (I’m not sure if that’s actually the name of the restaurant, but it does have sunflowers in the window). We each had schnitzel, potatoes and, of course, beer…Pilsner Urquell (my favorite!).

We’re going to be in Zlín for most of our stay. We’re planning a side-trip to Vienna for a couple of days and maybe take in an opera at the Wiener Staatsoper.

Prague National Theater

This evening we attended Dvorák’s opera “Rusalka” at the Prague National Theater. The performance began at 7 p.m. and we were chauffeured to the performance in one of the hotel’s Mercedes limos about 30-minutes before show-time. We had orchestra row seats with a semi-private box, just behind the orchestra pit. There were three seats across and one behind. We had seats “1″ and “2″ (in front) and shared the box with another couple. It was quite pleasant and we had an unobstructed view of the stage (we also had a fabulous view of the conductor and the orchestra musicians). The theater projected the opera’s text (”titles”) in English on a small screen just above the stage, which added to the enjoyment of the performance. There was a 15-minute intermission after both the first and second act with champagne, beer, water and light snacks in the lobby. This opera actually premiered in this very theater in 1901.

The opera was conducted by Oliver Dohnányl and starred Helena Kaupová as Rusalka, Tomáš Cerneý as the Prince, Miloslav Podskalský as Vodnik (the Water Goblin), Yvona Škvárová as Ježibaba (the Witch) and Anda-Louise Bogza as Cizí knežna (the Foreign Princess)

Kaupová was wonderful singing “Mesícku na nebi hlubokém” (Oh, moon high up in the sky) and it made quite a difference hearing the aria performed by a Czech. I noticed a difference in her diction versus Renée Fleming. However, Kaupová’s voice wasn’t as strong as it needed to be, as she was overpowered by the orchestra a time or two. The best performance of the night came from Podskalský as he sang “Kvetiny bile po ceste” (White blossoms all along the road) to a huge round of applause from the audience.

There are many interpretations of this opera and I suppose this is necessary to keep the story interesting and “current.” However, Rusalka is a fairy tale and I believe should be performed as one. This performance was and it didn’t disappoint. Cindy and I truly enjoyed this opera.

After the performance the hotel limo was waiting to take us back to the hotel.

This morning we slept in and didn’t venture out until after 10 a.m.; it was raining (a drizzle) and chilly. We had breakfast and coffee at Café Boulevard, right on the corner of Wenceslas Square. After breakfast we moved north through the city and discovered a little Holiday Market consisting of little wooden buildings decorated with garland and lights. There were also many food vendors, too many, because we ate…and ate. For the most part we “window” shopped, remembering what we’d seen and where, so we could come back and buy it later. The next stop was the Old Town Square.

In the Old Town Square we found another Holiday Market. It had the same vendors, but was much bigger than the the one we’d just left. Right in the middle of the square is the famous Town Hall Astrological Clock. The clock was built in 1490 by a master clockmaker named Jan Z. Ruže. As legend has it, after he completed his work to ensure the clock wouldn’t be reproduced elsewhere, the city council blinded the clockmaker. The next item on our list was Charles Bridge.

We knew that if we headed east, we’d eventually hit the Vltava (the river that runs through the city) and the Prague bridges. As it turns out, it didn’t take that long. We exited the city in front of the Rudolfinium (also known as Dvorák Hall), which is the home of the Czech Philharmonic Orchestra. The structure was built in 1884 and in addition to a concert hall is also an art museum. In front of the museum is a statue of the famous Czech composer Antonin Dvorák (we have tickets to one of his operas tomorrow night). I was a little disappointed to see the statue in disrepair and missing some letters. From this location, we could see Charles Bridge in the distance and instead of walking down the street to the entrance to the bridge, we decided to take the long way through the city (across the Ivánes?v bridge standing right before us).

As we crossed the bridge, we admired the Prague Castle stretched across the hillside. It was an impressive sight. We were going to detour from our trek to the Charles Bridge to visit the castle, but got sidetracked along the way and never got up there. On the other side of the bridge there was a wall with playbills from various performances, including one from the Met: Anna Netrebko in Gounod’s Roméo et Juillete. Incidentally, this particular opera will be broadcast in HD to theaters around the world on December 15. Anyway, our next discovery on the way to Charles Bridge was the Church of St. Nicholas. WOW!

This church was absolutely beautiful. The church was built in 1703, with some final touches put on the frescoed nave in 1761. It was designed by father and son architects and is the premier example of the European Baroque period. The dome fresco features in immaculate detail, the Celebration of the Holy Trinity, and towers 230 feet high. We spent a considerable amount of time in the church, simply in awe of the artistry. Cindy lit a candle and sat in the pews and prayed. We thoroughly enjoyed our visit to the church. Next, we finally cross Charles Bridge.

Charles Bridge is Prague’s most familiar monument and connects the Old Town with the Little Quarter. Although today the bridge is designed for pedestrian crossing, at one time it could take four carriages across. The bridge is lined with statues of various saints, on statue of the Madonna, St Dominic and St Thomas, shows the Madonna with the dominican emblem, a dog. Many people rub the bronze images on the status and they absolutely sparkle. The bridge was filled with street vendors, displaying original artwork and crafts. There were also a couple of performers, including a puppeteer and a “bridge band.” Exiting the bridge, we passed under the Old Town Bridge Tower. This is a magnificent tower built in the late 14th century. It was originally an integral part of the town’s fortifications and contains several sculptures, including St. Vitus, the bridges patron saint.

By this time it’s getting dark and we needed to get back to the Old Town Square to buy tickets for a Carol Concert in one of the churches. First, we stopped in a local pub for a beer and to take the chill off. After the rest, we walked back to the Old Town Square and purchased tickets for the concert. We had about an hour to kill before the show, so we walked around the Christmas Market, which by this time was all lit up. There was also a beautiful tree in the corner near a stage where children were singing carols in Czech. The Church of Our Lady before Týn made a wonderful backdrop. We window shopped and snacked on foods from the vendors in the market until it was time for the concert.

The “Advent’s Gala Organ Concert” at the Salvátor Church was very nice. It was good to get out of the cold. The pews in the church were wooden and were designed to make one sit straight. Still, it wasn’t too uncomfortable. The concert featured the music of Schubert, Gounod, Mozart, Mascagni, Bach, Vivaldi, Dvorák (of course) and Händel. The music was played on the organ, harp and violin, and a local soprano sang the carols. We really enjoyed the performances. After the concert we had a late supper in St. Wenceslas Square and returned to the hotel, tired and happy.

Cindy and I arrived in Prague, Czech Republic, earlier today. We flew first class out of Atlanta on a direct flight. The trip was took about nine hours, including almost an hour on the tarmac waiting in line to take off. The roomy seats and other accommodations in the first class cabin made the trip a very pleasant experience. The air was a bit choppy here and there, but overall the flight was smooth and (reasonably) quiet. We landed about 9 a.m.

On the ground in Prague, our trek through the airport was quick and easy. Customs was a piece of cake and consisted of simply getting our passports stamped, no other paperwork, no declarations, nothing. We exited the airport and hailed a cab. The cabby spoke English and knew exactly where our hotel was located; the drive took about 30-minutes. We’re staying in a very comfortable room at the Radisson, complete with a king-size bed (though a little hard), mini bar and free Wi-Fi in the room. The porter carried our bags to the room and explained the workings of the various switches and dials. He also picked up a couple tourist maps on the way upstairs and gave us a quick lowdown of the places we’d probably like to visit. After unpacking, Cindy and I took a jetlag induced nap.

We woke up from a longer-than-expected nap and headed outside to see some of the city. We’re about 500 feet from Wenceslas Square According to my Eyewitness Travel book on Prague,

“The square has witnessed many key events in recent Czech history. It was here that student Jan Palach burnt himself to death in 1969, and in November 1989 a protest rally in the square against police brutality led to the Velvet Revolution and the overthrow of Communism.”

At the top of the square and overlooking it, is a huge bronze statue of St. Wenceslas atop a horse. Behind him is the National Museum. The square is lined with stores–some pretty fine shopping at that–Marks & Spencer, C&A and Sephora to name a few. There’re a lot of restaurants as well and each one featuring a specific kind of beer–Pilsner Urquell, Budweiser, etc.) We didn’t do much more than window shop because all the smells emanating from the restaurants that lined the square reminded us how hungry we were.

We found an authentic Czech restaurant just down the street from our hotel. This particular restaurant served Pilsner Urquell and it was wonderful to taste this beer fresh from the tap. We shared a shot of Becherovka, a bitter-sweet herbal drink that tastes a lot like Jaegermeister. For dinner, I ordered Schweinbraten and Cindy ordered Beef Goulash. Our dinners were prepared to order and delicious. The bread dumplings were great and the meat was very tender. After dinner, we had some coffee and returned to the hotel. The bill came to less than Kc500 (about $33). We enjoyed a couple drinks in the hotel bar before retiring.

President Bush will soon announce a plan to help homeowners amid this sub-prime mortgage debacle. Once again our government demonstrates that individual responsibility isn’t important by rewarding people who make bad (or risky) decisions. The plan will likely involve temporarily freezing low, introductory mortgage rates, that would otherwise jump higher in the next few years. This intervention is expected to stave the rising number of foreclosures and save the economy from recession (in an election year).

$362 billion in U.S. subprime home mortgages with adjustable interest rates are due to reset at potentially higher rates in the coming year

Part of the reason for the mortgage crisis is the way homes are financed. Long gone are the days of bank and borrower, today’s home loans are bundled together and sold to investors as securities. This ties the hands of lenders who might like to help borrowers in need because they no longer control the loan.

According to Bank of America Securities, as much as $362 billion in U.S. subprime home mortgages with adjustable interest rates are due to reset at potentially higher rates in 2008, risking a wave of defaults by borrowers unable to afford the new monthly payments. That in turn could lead to a wave of write-offs by investors who now own those mortgages. The losses tied to bad mortgages have already reached the tens of billions of dollars and has had a tumultuous effect on the world’s financial markets.

Furthermore, to help one segment of the population, ultimately hurts another. Bush’s plan may help homeowners, but what of the investors? Freezing interest rates for homeowners is, in essence, cheating investors out of their money. Why is this okay?

So what’s the problem? The problem is that no one is held accountable for the decisions they make. I believe the government should not intervene and let the markets correct themselves. Yes, many may find themselves in financial straits for a time, but their situation is a result of a decision freely made. The President’s plan amounts to charity and is not the responsibility of government.

The National Intelligence Estimate on Iran was released Dec 3 and it brings to light that Iran probably stopped its covert nuclear weapons work sometime in 2003. More than likely this was due to international pressures and increased scrutiny of their activities. Now everyone is behaving as though Iran is no longer a threat. Most notably the “Dhimmi”-cratic presidential candidates! They’re pointing fingers at the administration (and Hillary Clinton, no less) for their positions on Iran.

Yes, the NIE says Iran likely stopped working toward the development of nuclear weapons. However, they were in the process of developing them. Evidently, they stopped “in response to international pressure;” which begs the question, “why let-up on the pressure now?” It’s obviously working!

The NIE goes on to say that Iran is technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium (HEU) to make weapons as early as 2009, although this is unlikely. However,

“We judge with moderate confidence Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough HEU for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame.”

Furthermore, the NIE expresses with “moderate confidence” that if Iran began producing HEU for a weapon, it would use covert facilities (really??), instead of its declared nuclear sites.

The NIE certainly doesn’t paint a very pretty picture of Iran and its nuclear ambitions. The fact that they stopped (or more appropriately, postponed) production of nuclear weapons, doesn’t mean they’re no longer a threat! Iran remains the biggest Middle Eastern threat to peace and the United States must not relent…no matter how the appeasers spin it!