America has slid back again into its own special brand of terrorism-derangement syndrome. Each time this condition recurs, it presents with more acute and puzzling symptoms. . . . Moreover, each time Republicans go to their terrorism crazy-place, they go just a little bit farther than they did the last time, so that things that made us feel safe last year make us feel vulnerable today. . . . In short, what was once tough on terror is now soft on terror. And each time the Republicans move their own crazy-place goal posts, the Obama administration moves right along with them. . . . We’re terrified when a terror attack happens, and we’re also terrified when it’s thwarted. We’re terrified when we give terrorists trials, and we’re terrified when we warehouse them at Guantanamo without trials. If a terrorist cooperates without being tortured we complain about how much more he would have cooperated if he hadn’t been read his rights. No matter how tough we’ve been on terror, we will never feel safe enough to ask for fewer safeguards. . . . But here’s the paradox: It’s not a terrorist’s time bomb that’s ticking. It’s us. Since 9/11, we have become ever more willing to suspend basic protections and more contemptuous of American traditions and institutions. The failed Christmas bombing and its political aftermath have revealed that the terrorists have changed very little in the eight-plus years since the World Trade Center fell. What’s changing — what’s slowly ticking its way down to zero — is our own certainty that we can never be safe enough and our own confidence in the rule of law.

Let’s see…about 45% of each tax dollar goes to the Military. Not bad. Good thing our wise President Obama has instituted a freeze on domestic discretionary spending (e.g., Education, National Parks, Air traffic Control, etc.) what a guy!

First locate copy of WinXP cd, then boot from cd and repair the installation. This will at least lead to a bootable PC which is still infected with the Trojan VUndo.

Usually files Rundll32.exe, iExplore.exe are infected. An infected dll (in my case named “nohiyizi.dll”) was present in \system32\. VUndo does not allow other processes to create directories; it will delete these right after creation. Thus installation of anti virus software fails as does any attempt to run the MS Malicious Software removal tool. Below is what worked for me:

0. Perform a free online scan (e.g., http://security.symantec.com/sscv6/DownloadInstructions.asp, use Internet-Explorer in this phase). Once you know the name of the infected dlls and executables do this

1. Copy known good version of RunDll.exe, iExplore.exe into c:\. Get these files from another PC.

2. Insert WinXP cd and boot from it.

3. Press “R” to enter the recovery console. cd to system32 and delete the offending dll using “del dllname”, then copy the known good version of rundll32.exe from c:\ to c:\windows\system32, overwriting the infected one.

4. reboot normally and verify that infection has been removed.

It took me 3 hours to come up with this, damn waste of precious time. ‘hope it helps some other poor soul.

Thanks!

In the same vein we have this column by Paul Krugman in the NYT, aptly titled “Disaster and Denial“. Well-written and worth the read.

Hilarious to see how President Obama was going to get though with those “fat cat bankers” during a meeting at the White House yesterday…only problem is that more than half of the “fat cat bankers” did not show up and none of the participants are under any obligation to change the way the industry is behaving. Here’s the thing: Those bankers earn any times more than President Obama which in their universe makes them that much more powerful than this current White House occupant who depends on their donations to finance his next re-election campaign. Given this fact, how though is Obama going to get with them?

“The truth is that our government is geared to expanded war while disdaining or utterly neglecting the opportunities through non-military approaches. Those are viewed as soft, naïve, and “for them,” while war is viewed as hardheaded and “for us.” The tragedy is that war is breaking our economy and society, while attention to economic development and poverty reduction might just help to solve some deeper crucial problems in the world, including US national security.”

Amen to that!

“Whatever the Obama administration does in Afghanistan and Pakistan, however, the American ability to mount a sustained operation of this size in one of the most difficult places on the planet, when it can’t even mount a reasonable jobs program at home, remains a strange wonder of the world. “

Amen to that!

Next up is the prediction that if  you send 30,000 U.S. troops and 7,000 NATO troops along with an equal amount of civilian contractors (bringing the total number of military and civilian personnel to about 200,000) into Afghanistan now, you can “stabilize” that country and begin withdrawing these troops in about 18 months from now. Again, all we have to do is wait 18 months and compare prediction to actual outcome. On this experiment I am siding with Ralph Nader who in this piece lays out why he thinks President Obama’s decision is not in the interest of the majority of the citizens of the U.S.

Unlike in most Sciences, the above experiments actually kill and maim plenty of innocent people. Also, there is usually no accountability of those who initiate the ‘experiment’. Neither do those whose predictions turn out to be crazy as batshit take the hint and modify their misguided World Views. That is why politics is not science and why even an otherwise enlightened human being like President Obama can proudly talk about how “high-ranking al Qaeda and Taliban leaders have been killed” along with scores of innocent bystanders by U.S. drones. As if killing is an acceptable way of conflict resolution. As a proud atheist/humanist the enthusiasm of Church-going Christian folks to kill other human beings never fails to surprise me. Does it not say somewhere in their Commandments that killing other humans is a no-no? That he who is the lowest is still God’s creature? I must have miss-understood these things when I read them…

…So, no, I do not make this decision lightly. I make this decision because I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan…President Obama, 1 December 2009 at West Point.

During his speech the President conflated Al Qaeda (of which there are less than 100 in Afghanistan at this time) with the Taliban, a type of violent reactionary political movement of which there are several flavors, such a the Afghan Taliban, the Pakistani Taliban and other splinter groups. So what motivates all these “enemies of the U.S.”? Why are willing to fight the U.S.? What’s in it for them?

As far as I can make out this:

1. Desperate poverty and hopelessness combined with illiteracy and lack of basic education. Under such conditions young men will be drawn to taking up arms and fight whoever. What do they have to loose? Nothing. Remember this: The poverty in Afghanistan is almost beyond imagining. Thirty Afghans die from TB every day; life expectancy is 43 years; per capita income is $426; only 13% have access to sanitary drinking water; fewer than one in four are literate; access to electricity is among the lowest in the world. Conditions for women are brutal.

2. Americans occupy their country and provide unquestioning support for the hated Zionists. Taken together with point 1 this provides a powerful motivation for Afghan young men to join the Taliban and fight “the invaders”. Let’s face it, if tables were turned, the U.S. a desperately poor backward nation, its youth uneducated and without any future, desperately poor and occupied by an advanced Muslim country that provides unquestioning support for another country that slaughters your Christian brothers and keeps them stateless, what would YOU do? You get my drift, I think…

3. A non-functioning extremely corrupt government that can not provide basic services: Afghans want stability and security and will turn to whoever can supply such. Most Afghans have contempt for the current Government and its U.S. supported head of state.

How does the addition of 30,000 U.S. troops change the motivational factors on the Al Qaeda/Taliban side? Is it more likely to make matters worse or better? I would predict that without SUBSTANTIALLY addressing points 1 thru 3 it will make matters worse. My prediction is that in 18 months from now the U.S. will not be able to withdraw any troops because if it does the Taliban will immediately return. Afghanistan is going to be an open-ended commitment for the U.S. if under the current strategy.

What to do?

Unlike the mainly military escalation that was just announced by President Obama what which he alone came up with during the course of the last three month, a real solution to the Afghan issue needs to bring several parties (Pakistan, India , Afghanistan’s current government and political opposition and the Taliban) together to the table to talk about how to best serve the people of Afghanistan. This would address issue 1 above, the main motivational force.What the U.S. and its allies may do is pursue a divide and conquer strategy: Instead of trying to control the entire Afghan country, establish smaller safe zones, secure them, let the people within these zones hold free local elections while ensuring that corruption is minimal and security and public services are working. This strategy does not offer quick returns and requires that the U.S. and its allies greatly increase economic assistance while also providing security for a transitional period. At the same time, the U.S. needs to be seen more as an honest broker in the Middle-East conflict, not just as a part of the Zionist Israeli government. It needs to make the Palestinian cause its own, push Israel towards a just and equitable solution to the problem of Palestinian statehood. Together with a decrease in U.S. combat forces these measures would address point 2 above. This would not be a military solution and would require a long-term economic involvement of the U.S. and its allies. Think Marshal Plan.

If the U.S. is not willing to make this effort, it should get out of Afghanistan NOW instead of prolonging the killing. President Obama is not a transformational leader. He buckled under pressure and took the politically most expedient course. The only problems he will have are with his conscience and, down the road, with trying to shift the blame back to those who applied the political pressure that made his chosen course of action the most opportune.

More on this