A congressman says he's alarmed that President Obama's science "czar," John Holdren, apparently has been collaborating with the Chinese even though Congress specifically prohibited that activity in a bill signed into law by president Obama.
The accusations from U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf. R-Va., came this week in a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
The law, in Section 1340 of the Fiscal Year 2011 Continuing Resolution prevents NASA and OSTP from using federal funds 'to develop, design, plan, promulgate, implement or execute a bilateral policy, program, order, or contract of any kind to participate, collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company.
But Dr. John Holdren, head of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), had spent 21 days in China on three separate trips in one year -- more than any other country. Very little information about these cooperative agreements with China were being provided to Congress.
Holdren's viewpoints have been far afield from traditional American perspectives, with his suggestion that America should surrender to a "planetary regime" and his petitioning for a deliberate reduction in the stocks of U.S. weapons-grade plutonium. He has also advocated forced abortion and mass sterilization (with 'infertility drugs introduced into food or water' ('as long as it doesn't harm livestock')) to reduce the world's population, as well as forced sterilization of undesirables, government taking the babies from single and teen mothers to give away for adoption to couples, and government dictating the number of children permitted to particular families. He's an elite, remember, so he's allowed to say nonsense like this. Betcha Herman Cain couldn't get away with it...
The Government Accountability Office to investigate, and that office determined the "plain meaning of Section 1340 is clear. OSTP may not use its appropriations to participate, collaborate or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned companies."
Further, the GAO said, "As a consequence of using its appropriations in violation of Section 1340, OSTP violated the Antideficiency Act. Accordingly, OSTP should report the violation as required by the act."
Attorney General Holdren has released a prepared statement saying that, "OSTP's activities in bilateral diplomacy with China on... issues fall under the president's exclusive constitutional authority to conduct foreign diplomacy and thus cannot be precluded by Section 1340(a). In reliance on this advice, OSTP continued to engage in these activities."
#1
"Attorney General Holdren has released a prepared statement.."
That is Eric 'the Red' HOLDER saying the Exec Branch is above the law. Another reason to impeach the leftard.
Wolf explained in a statement to constituents that he authored the ban "after the NASA administrator and the president's science adviser attempted to enter into new technology-sharing agreements with the Chinese government, including human spaceflight."
"I take the GAO findings very seriously," he told the committee in his statement. "Following the law is not voluntary for administration officials. That is why Dr. Holdren should commit today to full compliance with Section 1340 and publicly acknowledge his error in participating in the bilateral conference with the Chinese government."
He said the U.S. has been a leader in space technology for decades, and it should be wary of any agreements through which others would have access to its technology.
"I want to be clear: The United States has no business cooperating with the People's Liberation Army (PLA) to help develop its space program," he said.
It's just Obama soliciting for campaign contributions from our enemies. It's not as if the Democrats haven't done it before.....
#5
Maybe if we were actually as antisemitic as you imply, the way the Assad dynasty is, you'd actually respect us the way you respect them, and give us the benefit of the doubt.
Has America become irrational? Not since the 1930s have politics been so polarized, from the Tea Party movement on one side of the spectrum to the Occupy Wall Street protesters on the other. Why does the right object so vehemently to government spending? And why does the left attack private capital with parallel passion? The answer lies not in the American psyche, but in the statistics.
America is engaged in class war, but not of the sort one reads about in the mainstream press. The truly indigent - young African-American men, for example, most of whom are now unemployed - have little to do in this war. Large corporations for the most part are bystanders as well; they will make their peace with the victor. This is a war of survival between the productive middle class on one hand, and the dependents of the state on the other.
The crisis has called into being a political movement of the exasperated middle class, namely the Tea Party. It has erased the image of the government unions as champions of progressive causes, and exposed them as an "aristocracy of labor" (in Marx's phrase) parasitizing the public revenue.
The outcome inherently favors the Republicans. Debt - the catchall name for the crushing tax burden - has become a hot button issue even for many Democrats. But this election will be fought more desperately, and nastily, than any other that comes to mind during the past century. This is an existential struggle, a political war of survival for the American middle class. If the government unions go down in the fight, the Democratic Party of Barack Obama will cease to exist in its present form - and that would be a beneficial outcome for the United States.
As usual in his Asia Times columns, in the middle section of the column Spengler presents a number of useful graphs and discussion around them.
Spengler is channeled by David P Goldman. His book How Civilizations Die (and why Islam is Dying, Too) was published by Regnery Press in September 2011. A volume of his essays on culture, religion and economics, It's Not the End of the World - It's Just the End of You, also appeared this fall, from Van Praag Press.
[Dawn] SO far, so predictable. The fire-bombing of the offices of a French satirical weekly after it printed a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad (PTUI!) has, once again, led to dire warnings that European Moslems are determined to destroy western civilisation, curb the fundamental right to free speech and impose the Sharia across the continent. Could have something to do with their propensity as a group to act uncivilized, to use gangster methods to suppress free speech, and to demand Sharia everywhere they go.
French politicians have been unanimous in defending freedom of speech and said perpetrators of the crime will be punished. French Moslems have been equally vocal in denouncing the attack -- but also clearly angry at what they view as yet another attempt to insult Islam and Moslems. So they, as usual, "condemn the attack but understand the reaction of the Mooselimb in the rue." To understand all is to forgive all, as they say, so how can they be blamed for condoning acts of violence? After all, it's for their religion.
The head of the Gay Paree Mosque, Dalil Boubakeur, told a news conference on Thursday: "I am extremely attached to freedom of the press, even if the press is not always tender with Moslems, Islam or the Gay Paree Mosque. French Moslems have nothing to do with political Islam." "Really. Trust me on that." The weekly Charlie Hebdo has defended "the freedom to poke fun" and despite the attack, The very concept of "fun" is un-Islamic. I'm not convinced any publication in Pakistain has ever carried a picture of a person laughing. If they have it's doubtful that person was wearing a turban. Ponder the significance of that.
its four-page supplement has gone on sale, wrapped around copies of the left-wing French daily, Libération. The incident has unpleasant echoes of the controversy triggered by the publication of caricatures of the Prophet in a Danish newspaper in 2005. Unpleasantly predictable, y'might say.
Will Rage Boy go back on the protest march payroll? He used to be able to support a wife and children doing that, but pickings appear to have been slimmer lately, in these difficult times. It looks like it was only a few volunteers for that thing protesting the CIA Predators.
Despite the eurozone crisis, expect the Charlie Hebdo incident to remain on the French landscape for some months to come. There's no doubt the turban and automatic weapons set will be out there struttin' their stuff.
No doubt.
With French elections set to be held next summer, politicians, especially from the increasingly popular far-right parties, will probably keep stoking the fires of xenophobic sentiment.
And there will be plenty of xenophobic Muslims stoking right back at them, except when they get their responses in preemptively. The humiliation sellers will be busy as we head into the Christmas season.
Mainstream politicians, seeking to win over votes from the bad boys, are likely to follow on the heels of French President Nicolas Sarkozy ...23rd and current President of the French Republic and ex officio Co-Prince of Andorra. Sarkozy is married to singer-songwriter Carla Bruni, who has a really nice birthday suit... by maintaining a steady flow of criticism of multiculturalism. You'd think the way to combat that would be to make a few cogent and convincing arguments in favor of multiculturalism, but if you can't come up with any then it's more likely you'll just riot. It doesn't take as much brain power.
And La Belle France's six to seven million Moslems -- the largest number of Moslems in a European country -- will have to deal with a constant barrage of accusations that they are inherently 'un-European and un-French' and will never become trusted and true French citizens. That'll likely touch off another spate of carbecues...
Honestly, it's not that hard to demonstrate Frenchness. Learn to speak the language well enough to demonstrate that you're trying. Wear the local clothing when you are out and about, and keep those comfortable things from home for when you're at home. Encourage your womenfolk to dress in a modest version of French styles -- for instance a longish skirt with boots, a turtleneck and a boxy blazer or a long cardigan, with a pretty scarf tied round the head, et voila'! And the multiple wives on welfare -- Frenchmen support their mistresses out of pocket, or they don't have them. Mohammed supported all his wives, too, so stop slacking.
Yeah, but there's a problem there, and maybe nowhere quite as pronounced as in La Belle France. Moslems are ashamed of their women. It's a man's religion, a man's culture, and women are to be hidden away -- they're necessary for breeding, and they can cook and clean, but otherwise they're useless. The Frenchies, on the other hand, are convinced -- sometimes with justification -- that their women are gorgeous, perhaps the most gorgeous in the world. They like to show them off and French women like to show off. Gotta admit it's pretty hard to integrate the Moslem square peg into that round hole. On the other hand, the Moslem colonists did know how the Frenchies were before they left Olde Algiers, didn't they?
Is it possible to break this predictable, toxic and tedious cycle of recrimination and counter-recrimination, accusation and counter-accusation? You could try not rioting sometime, but that'd just give the infidels the mistaken impression they can do as they please in what used to be their own country.
At first glance, the answer appears to be negative. The riots are too deeply ingrained in the colonists' culture.
After all, Moslems are already in the dock in La Belle France and many other European countries for their apparent failure to integrate. Late last month, a French court nullified the construction permit for a mosque in the southern city of Marseille,
Something about refusing to provide any architectural plans as I recall...
home to the largest Moslem community in La Belle France. By the way, what's the permitting procedure to get a new church built in Algiers? We know what it is to get one built in Mecca.
The Administrative Tribunal of Marseille ruled on Oct 27 that the mosque project would have to be cancelled because of failures to meet urban planning requirements. La Belle France, along with Belgium, has banned the burka although the garment is worn by a very small minority of Moslem women. Now the minority will be even smaller, won't it?
French -- and European -- concerns about Moslems in their midst have been aggravated by the success of the Islamist party in the recent Tunisian elections, the rising popularity of the Moslem Brüderbund in Egypt and Islamic trends within the new Libyan government. The Voice of Sweet Reason hasn't exactly been drowning out the babble of savagery, has it?
Charlie Hebdo, known for its irreverent, harsh satire and mocking treatment of establishment and religious figures, ... whatcha might call a fairly equal-opportunity offender...
published the special edition in the wake of the victory of the Islamists in Tunisia. "For many French Moslems, religion has become a cultural identity, a refuge in a troubled society where they don't feel accepted," French journalist Pierre Haski wrote in the Guardian. ... the lack of acceptance having something to do with the religion...
"And when a satirical magazine makes fun of Islam the way it would make fun of any other issue, French Moslems don't laugh. They never laugh, do they? I think I pointed that out earlier, didn't I?
Most of them are silently angry or indifferent, but a minority feels empowered to resort to violence. A disturbing reminder of the underground tensions in society," Haski said. I don't follow the logic there. Why would they "feel empowered" to resort to violence? Where's the power come from? In civilized countries the citizen doesn't get "empowered" to firebomb anybody. So if it doesn't come from the law, and it doesn't come from culture, then it has to come from religion and from the foreign culture that the religion's anchored in. It is important to note, however, that so far, no one has grabbed credit for the Charlie Hebdo attack. Luz, the cartoonist who drew the cover cartoon at the centre of the controversy, has said it is still unclear just who was behind the fire-bombing. Oh, well then. It could just as likely be Huguenots, still seething over the way they were treated. Or maybe it was itinerant Moriscos. Could even be Amish, assuming trans-Atlantic buggy travel. They've been shown to be a vicious bunch, cutting each other's beards off and such. It's a small step from that to firebombing French publications.
"Let's be cautious. There's every reason to believe it's the work of fundamentalists but it could just as well be the work of two drunks," he warned. Miss Piggy once pointed out that all the evidence wasn't in yet as to whether a pound of cabbage was more fattening than a pound of chocolate mousse, so she was going to continue eating the mousse, thank you.
Are European Moslems condemned to live their lives on the defensive, their loyalty and citizenship in constant doubt because of the criminal acts of a small minority who dominate the national conversation about Islam? If they're a small minority then somebody should slap them down. But since they're a small, violent minority nobody does.
Or can Europe and its Moslems develop a fresh narrative of acceptance, integration and inclusion? I doubt it. Based on empirical observation, as the Moslem population grows, so also grows the level of violence directed at non-Moslems. At some point the Moslems decide to kill as many of the infidels as they can and treat the remainder like they were garbage. There effectively aren't any non-Moslems on the Arabian peninsula. In Egypt the Egyptian-speaking non-Moslem 10 percent of the population is systematically oppressed and excluded from public life, their women kidnapped, raped, and forcibly converted to the Master Religion. They can see that from Europe, you know.
In fact, the true story of Europe's Moslems is much more heartening and upbeat than either side in the debate is ready to admit. Tell us about the true story in Egypt, too. I'm sure that's more heartening than anybody's ready to admit. And tell us about the Assyrian and Chaldean Christians in Iraq. How've they been doing? And what's the schedule for mass at Hagia Sophia? Is the early service still at 6 a.m. every Sunday?
Attacks such as the one on Charlie Hebdo may make the headlines, stirring trouble for the silent and law-abiding majority of Moslems who are happy to call Europe home. But fortunately such incidents are not the norm.
They are, actually. Just not a daily occurrence, but even in Egypt and Pakistan such things are not a daily occurrence, merely a fact of life. How many European and British politicians now need bodyguards because of Muslim threats?
European Moslems are making headway in politics, business and culture. They are breaking stereotypes and clichés -- and emerging as full-fledged European citizens, ready to demand their rights but also fulfil their duties and obligations. The ghost of Merwig is nodding contentedly. He can remember when he and his Franks were emerging as full-fledged Roman citizens, ready to demand their rights, but also ready to fulfill their duties and obligations.
It is true that efforts to ensure a better integration of European Moslems are complicated by Europe's own uncertainty about what it means to be 'European', the struggle between religion and secular beliefs and Europe's unease about its economic future, including fears about the impact of globalisation on European jobs. In such an environment, there is suspicion and unease about 'foreigners' -- Moslems, yes, but also Chinese, Indians and Russians. Europe needs the talent and abilities of all its citizens and of immigrants to climb out of the current economic downturn. And ordinary European Moslems just want to get on with their daily lives without being held to account for the lunatic and criminal acts of a small minority -- or perhaps of just one man.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/06/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
ordinary European Moslems just want to get on with their daily lives without being held to account for the lunatic and criminal acts of a small minority -- or perhaps of just one man
#8
Muslims CANNOT integrate. They are in the West for the purpose of seeking converts or sending money back to their homeland cess pool, if not for jihad.
Posted by: Jack Phuting9685 ||
11/06/2011 19:39 Comments ||
Top||
This goes with TW's story on page 2...
[Dawn] AMERICAN media reports stating that the CIA has agreed to give Pakistain advance notice of drone strikes carried out in its territory indicate that a major irritant in US-Pakistain ties may be removed. That the Wall Street Journal story has not been contradicted by American officials lends credence to it and is a sign of greater awareness in the B.O. regime of the negative consequences of such strikes which have been continuing in Pakistain since 2004. Apart from the question of legality of foreign planes entering a sovereign country and taking hostile action, the drone strikes have killed hundreds of innocent people -- they have often missed their target or hit the wrong one. While the government has maintained a duplicitous policy -- publicly criticising America for the strikes but tacitly accepting the latter -- popular reaction in Pakistain has been one of intense anger. Some drones have indeed served their purpose, killing wanted terrorists; but many victims of the Hellfire missiles fired by US drones were `suspected bully boys`, and, in many cases, turned out to be civilian casualties. Under the new arrangement reportedly worked out between the CIA and the State Department, the latter will have a greater say in such strikes, Pakistain will receive advance warnings of such attacks, and the strikes will remain suspended when Pak officials visit America, though common sense suggests it should be the other way around.
Some six months after US-Pakistain relations hit a new low following the Abbottabad raid in May, matters seem to be on the mend. At the last high-level talks, when Hillary Clinton ... sometimes described as America's Blond Eminence and at other times as Mrs. Bill, never as Another Daniel Webster ... visited Islamabad last month, Pakistain`s point of view on a number of issues, including the issue of the Haqqani network, was made explicitly clear to US officials. The B.O. regime has also gradually distanced itself from the now retired US military chief Mike Mullen`s irresponsible allegations, linking the ISI to the attack on the US embassy in Kabul. While irresponsible voices in Congress still demand an aid cut-off, the administration has shown no proclivity for such a rash act. On the other hand, in her message to Congress on Friday, Ms Clinton defended the continuation of aid to Pakistain and warned that disengaging at this stage could hurt US security interests.
The decade-old war has cost Pakistain 40,000 lives, led to political discord and caused colossal economic dislocation. Given its geographical location, demographic realities and geopolitical constraints Pakistain has its own perspective. The latter may not be fully in sync with America`s, but it must be understood. Fortunately, there is evidence that America is showing an understanding of Pakistain`s position.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/06/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
So then, the only Victims are going to be "Unarmed Peace Loving Citizens",
You're a moron, CIA.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
11/06/2011 1:19 Comments ||
Top||
[Dawn] WHEN Imran Khan ... aka Taliban Khan, who isn't your heaviest-duty thinker, maybe not even among the top five... launched the Pakistain Tehrik-i-Insaf in 1996, then prime minister Benazir Bhutto rhetorically asked, "Can Imran win 51 per cent seats in parliament to form a government?"
A decade and a half later, the same question haunts Mr Khan even when he has gathered together the largest public assembly of his entire political life. His supporters, critics and opponents are asking if he will ever get the parliamentary strength he needs to realise his aspirations of becoming prime minister.
There are, indeed, genuine reasons for scepticism. First, the nature of his politics and the political character of his supporters are such that transforming his public support into electoral success will be a challenging task. Second, the quality of his prospective, and previous, election candidates leaves much to be desired, and lastly, his political agenda is so briefly simplistic that it runs the risk of having a limited appeal for most voters in the country.
Mr Khan's inaugural political plank in 1996 was that all politics and all politicians are bad, and so it remains today. This leaves him very little room for the alliance-making and deal-cutting that bring people to power in Pakistain and help them throw their opponents out of it. His is, in fact, anti-politics -- an ideology that discredits what he calls "professional politics" in order to replace it with, you guessed it, politics.
For many years before he took part in the 1997 general election as the head of his nascent PTI, he was confused about whether he wanted to launch a movement for social reform, create a pressure group for weeding the bad stuff out of politics or launch a political party.
What he came up with in the end was a cross between a social movement, a think tank and a loosely organised collection of highly educated technocrats and avowed Islamists.
Having propagated an anti-politics credo, Mr Khan ensured from the start that he repelled more voters than he attracted.
Those who voted for a party or a candidate because they needed help in bending, bypassing or even violating the complex, corrupt and ineffective administrative and legal structures of the state would always hesitate to vote for him or his candidates.
And such 'bad' voters have been in the majority -- at least until now.
The political appeal of his anti-politics therefore remained limited to educated and young professionals who would defeat the average elected politician hands down in a battle of IQ, knowledge, understanding or articulation. To his advantage, this section of society has increased phenomenally in numbers over the last 15 years.
This is Pakistain's emerging middle class comprising professionals -- bankers, doctors, engineers, techies, media persons, managers, advertisers, accountants, et al. -- that has benefited enormously from the privatisation of education and the economy in the 1990s and the expansion of private enterprise and the service sector in the 2000s.
That the parties and professional groups representing the political ideology of this class boycotted the 2008 election meant that the beneficiaries of its maiden political activism were the same politicians that it abhorred. With Mr Khan's Oct 30 rally, this middle class is only coalescing on one platform and coming out against politics and politicians to conclude the unfinished revolution that started in 2007.
Biggest unknown But even when it came out in the thousands to listen to Mr Khan speak at the Minar-i-Pakistain, its next step remains uncertain. With its well-recorded hatred for elections and the ballot box, will it take the trouble to cast a vote -- something it has done only sparingly in the past? That is perhaps the biggest unknown in Pak politics today, and it is the answer to this question that will determine the extent of Mr Khan's success, or failure, at the polls.
Two factors will be vital to the answer: his decision about making alliances or becoming part of a rightwing conglomerate reportedly already in the making, and the quality of his candidates. Having discredited every political party in the country, Mr Khan has left himself almost no space to backtrack on what he never tires of brandishing as the core principle of his politics -- no compromises for electoral success. The moment he utters the word 'alliance' he will start losing support.
On the second count, Mr Khan may already be faltering. Many of his previous and prospective candidates offer a stark contrast to his and his supporters' antipathy towards family-based politics. Some also represent the antithesis of his anti-politics ideology -- they are professional politicians who have changed loyalties in the past and have unenviable political track records.
Two of his main people in KP are Iftikhar Jhagra and Khwaja Khan Hoti. Both are the scions of political dynasties in their areas and both carry political baggage, including shifting political allegiances, that may not measure up to the great expectations Mr Khan's core supporters harbour.
In Punjab, his choice of candidates is even more suspect. In a by-election in Lahore last year, for example, he gave his party's ticket to one Mian Hamid Meraj, whose influential local family is in the business of politics mainly because they have biradri vote banks in some parts of the city.
A recent entrant in the PTI from Lahore is Mian Azhar, governor of Punjab when Nawaz Sharif ... served two non-consecutive terms as prime minister, heads the Pakistain Moslem League (Nawaz). Noted for his spectacular corruption, the 1998 Pak nuclear test, border war with India, and for being tossed by General Musharraf... was prime minister in the 1990s before the two had a falling-out. After Gen (retd) Pervez Perv Musharraf ... former dictator of Pakistain, who was less dictatorial and corrupt than any Pak civilian government to date ... took over, Mr Azhar was the head of the Pakistain Moslem League-Likeminded -- the first batch of League people who opted to side with the military ruler. And Mian Mehmoodur Rashid, Mr Khan's most ardent supporter in Lahore, was one of the few Islami Jamhoori Ittehad candidates in Lahore who survived a PPP onslaught in the 1988 election.
In 1990, he again won a seat from the city for the Punjab Assembly from Jamaat's quota in the Sharif-led alliance. Others, including Zaheer Abbas Khokhar, Rasheed Bhatti, and Farooq Amjad Mir, have moved from party to party before settling on PTI as their current home.
So here is the question: Will supporters of the PTI vote for such political weathercocks in their search for a change in the political culture of the country? If they will, the party's promised revolution will be suffocated under the burden of its own candidates and the winners' ambition for power. That some earlier passengers on the PTI bandwagon soon left in disillusionment may well mean that some current supporters are headed in the same direction when they find out that the quality of the candidates from their 'pro-change', 'clean' party is as low as it can get in Pak politics.
The last critical factor of Mr Khan's politics is his agenda. When he started off in 1996, his catchphrases were brown sahib, VIP culture, political corruption, accountability before election, fatal dependence on foreign loans and subservience to the United States. His proposed remedies were supposed to be elaborate and prepared by eight committees of technocrats with vast expertise and experience in various fields.
Many years later, he remains high on rhetoric and low on reality. His hobbyhorses continue to be the same, but his solutions have become more basic and irrelevant than ever before: politicians declaring their 'real' assets; court reform; thorough accountability without fear or favour; local government with, surprise, surprise, elected sheriffs at the local level; an end to patwaris and the digitisation of land records (something already underway in some districts in Punjab with rather mixed results); the declaration of an education emergency; bringing Balochistan ...the Pak province bordering Kandahar and Uruzgun provinces in Afghanistan and Sistan Baluchistan in Iran. Its native Baloch propulation is being displaced by Pashtuns and Punjabis and they aren't happy about it... into the national mainstream -- it's simple, isn't it?
-- by holding meetings with disgruntled Baloch politicians; and the much-talked-about end to thaana culture.
If some people find disconcerting similarities between these solutions and Gen Musharraf's agenda after he overthrew Mr Sharif's government, they only need to understand that both play to the same gallery of middle class professionals in the anti-politics brigade.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
11/06/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
The headlines are stark indeed. "Israel Readies a Pre-Emptive Strike." Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is said to be working to persuade reluctant members of his coalition cabinet to go along with such a military option against Islamist Iran. The Huffington Post's British edition first reports Netanyahu saying this:
"One of those regional powers is Iran, which is continuing its efforts to obtain nuclear weapons. A nuclear Iran would constitute a grave threat to the Middle East and the entire world, and of course it is a direct and grave threat on us."
The report goes on:
One day later, defence minister Ehud Barak, struck a similar tone. "A situation could be created in the Middle East in which Israel must defend its vital interests in an independent fashion, without necessarily having to reply on other forces, regional or otherwise," he said.
Ehud Barak's comments are most interesting. He was the Labor Party Prime Minister in 2000 who offered the Palestinians 97 percent of the territory they claimed as theirs, reserving only those limited regions thought absolutely essential to Israeli security. The Palestinians balked and commenced yet another "intifada" uprising. The leaders of the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) preferred to send stone-throwing teenagers to confront armed Israeli soldiers and tanks rather than engage in serious negotiations for peace.
Ehud Barak could qualify as an Israeli "dove," but he is first and foremost a soldier and an Israeli patriot. It's not so surprising that the hawkish Benjamin Netanyahu should be talking of a military strike against Iran. When Ehud Barak joins this conversation, you know it's serious.
Israel's dovish Defense Minister Ehud Barak is giving fair warning to the Obama administration: Israel will act to defend itself whether other powers take part or not.
The right of self-defense is an inalienable right. The reason Israel was created was so that Jews would have a national home and would not have to rely on the kindness of strangers. If Israel strikes Iran's nuclear weapons program, we cannot say we have not been warned. Not much this administration has done in the Middle East should give Israelis confidence that they can rely on their feckless friends in Washington to support them when push comes to shove.
Ken Blackwell, a board member of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, is a former US. ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission and a senior fellow at the Family Research Council.
Not to mention former Ohio secretary of state (R), a job he could have done better.
At first glance, an alliance of anarchists and government might appear to be somewhat paradoxical. But the formal convergence in Oakland makes explicit the movements aims: Theyre anarchists for statism, wild free-spirited youth demanding more and more total government control of every aspect of life just so long as it respects the fundamental human right to sloth. Whats happening in Oakland is a logical exercise in class solidarity: The government class enthusiastically backing the breakdown of civil order is making common cause with the leisured varsity class, the thuggish union class, and the criminal class in order to stick it to whats left of the beleaguered productive class. Its a grand alliance of all those societal interests that wish to enjoy in perpetuity a lifestyle they are not willing to earn. Only the criminal class is reasonably upfront about this. The rest the lifetime legislators, the unions defending lavish and unsustainable benefits, the scholars whiling away a somnolent half decade at Complacency U are obliged to dress it up a little with some hooey about social justice
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Dawn] SO far, so predictable. The fire-bombing of the offices of a French satirical weekly after it printed a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad (
The weekly Charlie Hebdo has defended "the freedom to poke fun" and despite the attack, 
It is important to note, however, that so far, no one has 
Hillary Clinton
[Dawn] WHEN 
