Tag Archives: U.S. News

Your Tax Dollars At Work

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The U.K. Daily Mail reported the following:

Since the fall of Afghanistan, the U.S. has forked over funds to groups under the brutal Taliban regime to the tune of $2.35 billion. 

That’s according to a new report from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), released to the public on Tuesday. 

Another $1.7 billion ‘remained available for possible disbursement’ at the time of the report, dated July 30.

Why are we giving money to people who hate us? Can’t they hate us for free?

In May 2023, U.S. News reported:

The Taliban’s return to power has affected all citizens. In December 2022, for example, the government reinstituted public floggings and executions. But Afghan women, in particular, have seen decades of hard-earned rights stripped away during less than two years of Taliban rule. Though the Taliban initially promised to uphold women’s and minority rights, they have instead imposed strict restrictions. The most recent blow to women’s rights came in April, when women were banned from working for the United Nations, further limiting their participation in the workforce and day-to-day life.

The article at U.S. News includes a timeline of how the Taliban has taken away women’s rights since they took control. Why are we sending these people money (that we don’t have)?

The article at The U.K. Mail concludes:

UN experts say 20 years of progress for women and girls were undone with the takeover of the Taliban in 2021. Women have now largely been banned from attending high school and driving or working outside the home. 

Sopko [John Sopko, head of SIGAR (Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction)] noted in April that in addition to the $2.35 billion, another $3.5 billion is slated to come in to Afghanistan through an international fund.

‘I don’t trust the Taliban as far as you can throw them,’ Sopko told the committee. ‘The information we’re getting — again, not from the State Department who isn’t talking to us or USAID … is that the Taliban are already diverting funds.’ 

‘I haven’t seen a starving Taliban fighter on TV, they seem to be fat dumb and happy. I see starving Afghan children on TV.’

‘If the purpose is to help the Afghan people we have to have effective oversight,’ Sopko said, blaming an ‘over-reliance’ on international agencies he said have been ‘horrible’ about providing his agency with information.

It would be interesting to know who is responsible for the reconstruction of Afghanistan. It would also be interesting to know why we are giving the country that kind of money as they are eliminating the rights of women? Do we care about women’s rights overseas?

Rewriting Recent History

Posted on by

Yesterday The Washington Free Beacon posted an article about how Governor Cuomo handled the coronavirus in New York State.

The article reports:

New York governor Andrew Cuomo (D.) said Wednesday that the widely reported readmission of coronavirus patients to nursing homes at the height of the pandemic in the state “never happened.”

Cuomo said that despite a March 25 advisory issued by his administration barring nursing homes from denying admission to patients “solely based on a confirmed or suspected case of COVID-19,” readmissions never took place. He claimed that, because the state “never needed” those nursing home beds, readmitting COVID-positive patients “just never happened.”

Cuomo admitted his administration implemented the policy but said it was only an “anticipatory rule,” in case hospitals became overwhelmed with patients.

As a result of the rule, however, nursing homes readmitted over 6,000 patients who tested positive for coronavirus between late March and early May. 

I wonder if the mainstream media will actually confront him about this lie.

The article further reports:

Nearly 6,500 New York nursing home patients have died of COVID-19 as of Sept. 28, accounting for about 20 percent of the state’s total coronavirus deaths (32,768). Some experts say that number could be higher, as the state health department does not count those who contracted the virus in a nursing home. 

In the same call, Cuomo said his policies “saved lives.” 

Governor Cuomo has taken some very interesting positions as New York has fought the coronavirus.

On April 13, 2020, NBC New York reported:

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is never shy to point out that President Donald Trump attacks him more than any other governor in America.

But on Monday, Cuomo took to an unlikely venue — The Howard Stern Show — to offer genuine praise for the president’s response to the coronavirus in his home state.

“He has delivered for New York. He has,” Cuomo said of Trump, in response to a question from Stern about whether the president has really done anything of consequence to help.

“By and large it has worked,” Cuomo said of the relationship.

He cited, as he has before, the sending of the Navy ship USNS Comfort and the construction of a military field hospital at the Javits Center as examples of the president responding quickly to the state’s needs.

That’s very nice. However, on September 24, 2020, U.S. News reported:

Cuomo and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer are calling for congressional investigations into the Trump administration’s “politicization of [the] pandemic response.”

The Democratic governors singled out President Donald Trump, saying in a joint statement on Thursday that the “unprecedented and unacceptable scale of this tragedy is the direct result of President Trump and the federal government’s deceit, political self-dealing and incompetence.”

Note that September is part of the run-up to the Presidential election. Also note that calling for a congressional investigation into someone after saying that your relationship with them works seems a little odd. I don’t think the President is the one who politicized the coronavirus.

South Africa Moves Toward Taking Land Without Compensation

Posted on by

On Tuesday U.S. News posted an article about the move to take land from South Africans without paying them any compensation. The parliament recently approved a report endorsing a constitutional amendment that would allow expropriations without compensation.

The article reports:

Land is a hot-button issue in South Africa where racial inequality remains entrenched more than two decades after the end of apartheid when millions among the black majority were dispossessed of their land by a white minority.

A parliamentary team last month recommended a constitutional amendment to make it possible for the state to expropriate land without compensation in the public interest.

The article continues:

President Cyril Ramaphosa, who replaced Jacob Zuma in February, has prioritized land redistribution as he seeks to unite the fractured ruling African National Congress (ANC) and win public support ahead of an election next year.

But the main opposition Democratic Alliance (DA) and some rights groups are critical of the government’s plans, saying it will jeopardize property rights and scare off investors.

“We support expropriation of land without compensation or zero Rand compensation in the public interest,” the ANC’s Vincent Smith said during the parliamentary debate.

Ahead of Tuesday’s debate, John Steenhuisen, the main opposition’s chief whip, said “the DA will not hesitate to approach the courts” should the report backing the expropriation of land be adopted.

Following Tuesday’s vote, a new bill proposing the change to Section 25 of the constitution to allow for expropriation of land without compensation would need to be drafted.

It would also require the public’s contribution before a debate and vote in the assembly. To become law, it would need passed by both houses of parliament and then signed by Ramaphosa. It is unclear how long this process would take.

Last week the High Court rejected a legal challenge brought by AfriForum, a group representing mainly white Afrikaners who wanted to overturn a parliamentary committee report supporting changes to the constitution.

There are some things the South African government might want to consider if they decide to move forward with the idea of seizing land without compensation. Although that might seem like a solution to the misdeeds of the past, it is simply a misdeed in the present. Taking anything from someone without compensation is not a path toward harmony. Because the land distribution seems to be so uneven, wouldn’t it be better to require people who hold large portions of land to sell portions of it under government supervision at a reasonable price. Otherwise, you are infringing on private property rights. In December 2010, I posted an article about the relationship between private property rights, the rule of law, and prosperity. You cannot have prosperity without private property rights or without the rule of law. To seize property without compensation violates this principle. It is the way to poverty for South Africa.