Biden and Israel

Joe Biden's bewildering defense of the Butchers of Gaza are perplexing. His unconditional support of their war crimes, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, and the much debated genocide may very well cost him the election and America its democracy.

What is going on here?

Is Biden the first Jewish president? What does his familiar relationships, where three of his children were/are married to Jews, and inner circle filled with Jews/Zionists have to do with his decision making?

 Read in the Substack post: "Biden and Israel" by Maximilien Guerrero's blog "The World Engine".

Quote of the Day: Chomsky on Resistance

Actually, during this entire crisis, I thought one of the most astute comments was a two-sentence comment by Marwan Muasher. He’s a former high Jordanian official who’s head of Middle East research for the Carnegie Endowment. He said, "There’s an operative principle in the Middle East." He said, "The principle is, as long as people are quiet and passive, we’ll do whatever we like." That’s a general principle of statesmanship that applies here, too. As long as people are quiet and passive, we’ll do whatever we like. Now, of course, if they stop being quiet and passive, we’ll have to adjust somehow. Maybe they’ll even throw us out, but we’ll try to hang on as much as we can. And that’s what we see going on in the Middle East. That’s what we saw going on in Latin America. It’s what we see right here.

- Professor Noam Chomsky, speaking to Amy Goodman at DemocracyNow on the Middle East revolutions earlier in 2011.

Fighting for the liberation of mankind: Egypt 2011

Brazil recognizes Palestine as an independent nation

Brazil is Latin America's superpower.  For the past decade it has been part of the BRIC group of emerging markets that has grown at an impressive rate compared to the nearly stagnant and tepid grown witnessed respectively in Europe and the USA during the same period.  Today, Brazil is the 8th largest economy in the world, with a GDP $1.57 Trillion (USD).  It has a large and diversified economy with agriculture, mining, manufacturing, and service sectors.

Today, according to the Washington Post (via the Associated Press), Brazil is formally recognizing Palestine as an independent and autonomous nation state based on 1967 borders.

President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva... sent a letter to Abbas on Dec. 1, saying Brazil recognizes Palestine and hopes that the recognition will help lead to states of Israel and Palestine "that will coexist peacefully and in security."

With the so-called peace process continuously undermined by Israel's gimmickry and bad-faith negotiations on the part of the USA for much of the past decade, there is little reason to believe that there will ever be an independent Palestine under the current settings.  Brazil's recognition therefore is an interesting and potentially thorny issue for Israel.  The PLO formally declared Palestine as independent state in 1988 and at least 102 other nations also recognize it as such.  There are another 44 states, that have some form of informal recognition of the PLO or the PNA in governing the Israeli controlled occupied territories.

If the rest of the world realizes that Israel has no intention of ever surrendering the occupied territories over to an independent Palestinian government, then it is likely more Western countries will follow Brazil's stance.

Natural Born Killers, Afghan War Vets

Newspapers across the globe are starting to elaborate on the outrageous criminal actions of the newest batch of natural born killers that the US military has produced.  Gruesome details of drug induced homicide, random killings, and the dismembering of Afghan civilians are coming to light.

The Boston Globe has a short summary in its editorial commentary:

SIX YEARS after the Abu Ghraib scandal in Iraq, the Army has another heinous atrocity on its hands in Afghanistan. It has charged five soldiers from the 5th Stryker Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division with killing three innocent Afghan civilians earlier this year. Moreover, the Army has to answer for the fact that a member of the soldiers’ platoon contacted his father in the United States about his concerns after the first killing and the father did all he could to alert the Army to what had happened — to no avail. The Army must proceed with court hearings, but it should also investigate why the father’s initial warning did not set off an inquiry that could have kept the second and third killings from occurring.

I have already discussed this matter in two previous blog entries (here and here), in which I made comparisons to similar conduct by the Americans in Iraq and Vietnam, as well as previous atrocities committed by the Soviets during their occupation of Afghanistan.

The NY Times has an excerpt of a conversation, from a military interview of one of the main defendant's in the case, Specialist Jeremy N. Morlock:

“[Sgt. Calvin Gibbs] kind of placed me and Winfield off over here so we had a clean line of sight for this guy and, you know, he pulled out one of his grenades, an American grenade, popped it, throws the grenade, and tells me and Winfield: ‘All right, wax this guy. Kill this guy, kill this guy,’ ” Specialist Morlock said in the video.

Referring to the Afghan, the investigator asked: “Did you see him present any weapons? Was he aggressive toward you at all?”

Specialist Morlock replied: “No, not at all. Nothing. He wasn’t a threat.”

It's pretty obvious why only a few outlets within America have sought to present this story until this point.  The recklessness and complete lack of ethics in which these soldiers have acted is not an aberration; rather, it is a symptom of the rot and moral degeneracy that the Af-Pak/Iraq wars have instilled in America's newest recruits to active combat.  Does anyone actually believe that this whole war is somehow ever going to end well for either the people in Afghanistan or America?  Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, said today that "America was never going to leave Afghanistan."  If that is true, the intentional and unintentional murder of Afghan civilians by US troops will never end either.

Interesting People: Joumana Haddad

The title of the Guardian newspaper's (UK) article is Joumana Haddad: 'I live in a country that hates me.'

Ms. Joumana Haddad is a citizen of Lebanon, where she is an author, poet, editor of a local newspaper, and according to the article, a subversive element.   Assailants have taunted her with the threat of having acid being thrown in her face and murder, all for publishing and openly discussing matters of sexuality.  She edits the the cultural section of a newspaper that "contains serious reportage about polygamy, virginity and forced marriage, but also erotic stories and personal testimony."  Her most recent work, a book called I Killed Scheherazade: Confessions of An Angry Arab Woman, contains in her words, a "vivid assertion of individuality, free speech, free choice and dignity against religious bigotry, prejudice and the herd instinct both within and outside the Arab world, and within and outside Islam."

The article expands on her upbringing, beliefs, and personal philosophy.  She describes the Islamists as:

"These backward-looking obscurantists" – Arab defenders of chastity – "are thieves. They are desecrators. They are murderers. And, on top of everything, they are stupid. And this is perhaps the cruelest blow."

It also describes her state of being:

She also knows, however, that she is damaged, rudderless in a profound way, and that one of the results is that she is attracted to transgression for transgression's sake. Her achievement is to tether that instinct to her cause and to enact her beliefs; her recklessness in doing so is brave and immensely admirable, but also makes one slightly worried for her. Behind the laughter and defiance lurks a sense of what her unconventional path might have cost.

Unlike the typical puffery that is found in most biographical articles, this one is introspective and multi-dimensional.  Ms. Haddad's experiences, life struggles, and philosophy provide insights into the difficulties faced in challenging established cultural norms in modern Middle East countries.

The First Ground Zero Mosque - The Original World Trade Towers!

An article in Slate illustrates the profound conceptual disconnect most people have between what the actual World Trade Towers were and its relation to Bin Laden and the 9-11 attacks.  Given the ignominious and bigoted diatribe offered by both the right and left on the subject of the Cordoba House Project in New York City near ground zero (discussed here, here, and here), this is a welcome anodyne.

The original towers were designed by Minoru Yamasaki, a Japanese American, who gained popularity with the House of Saud (The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) in the early 1950's.  Many of his designs, including the entire World Trade Tower complex as constructed in the 1970's, used Islamic themes and architectural conceits.  The article outlines a few of these elements in the overall WTC design:

• At the base of the towers, Yamasaki used implied pointed arches—derived from the characteristically pointed arches of Islam—as a transition between the wide column spacing below and the dense structural mesh above.
• Yamasaki replicated the plan of Mecca's courtyard by creating a vast delineated square, isolated from the city's bustle by low colonnaded structures and capped by two enormous, perfectly square towers—minarets, really. Yamasaki's courtyard mimicked Mecca's assemblage of holy sites—the Qa'ba (a cube) containing the sacred stone, what some believe is the burial site of Hagar and Ishmael, and the holy spring—by including several sculptural features, including a fountain, and he anchored the composition in a radial circular pattern, similar to Mecca's.
• The dense filigree of complex geometries alludes to a higher spiritual reality in Islam, and the shimmering quality of Islamic patterning relates to the veil that wraps the Qa'ba at Mecca.

The author of the Slate article infers that the Bin Laden family's construction company were intimately associated with many of the projects that occurred in Saudi Arabia and Osama Bin Laden, himself, would have been well aware of Yamaski's utilization of Islamic themes.  She then postulates that one of the rationals, although not necessarily the primary reason, for Bin Laden to attack the WTC towers, was that the buildings represented an intermixing of the Islam, modernity, and international capitalism. 

To Bin Laden, the World Trade Center was probably not only an international landmark but also a false idol.

It should also be understood, that the attack on 9-11, contrary to the facile arguments posited by the MSM and the Bush Administration, were not merely an attack on America.  Michael Scheuer, former CIA counter-terrorism expert on Bin Laden, explained in his book Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, that the attacks were meant to provoke the US to expand their presence in the Middle East and engage in a clash of the civilizations battle with Islam that would destabilize apostate and pro-American regimes, eventually forcing the Americans and their lackeys into permanent retreat; like that of the Soviet Union during their Afghan conflict.  Bin Laden, in 2007, stated that if people wanted to understand the conflict, that they should, "read the book of Michael Scheuer in this regard."

Quote of the Day: MSM you're useless

If there's a lower form of life on the planet earth than a "reputable" journalist protecting his territory, I haven't seen it.

- Matt Taibbi on Lara Logan's riposte to Rolling Stone's McChrystal article

Fanatics and the Undermining of Israel

Much ink has been spilt in the last several weeks over Israel's embargo over the Gaza Strip and dueling arguments regarding the influence Jewish-American political action groups have over Washington's foreign policy.  Very little however, has been said in what may actually be the greatest threat to Israel in the long term.  That threat is the growing power of the ultra-orthodox Jews, who currently reside within Israel, and their determination to engage in their fundamentalist beliefs exclusively.

Over the past several years, tensions between ultra-orthodox Jews and secular and moderate Jews have increased to the point where Israel's future as an inclusive state for all Jewish persons is now in question.  The Haredi Jews, in particular, pose a substantial economic strain on the finances of the state, as many men choose years of subsidized religious study over paid employment.  With their third-world like birth rates, the ultra-orthodox sects are predicted to form a majority of Jerusalem's half million population by the end of the decade.  Their religio-political views are anathema to that of any liberal democracy.  For example, Haredi leaders have denounced reform and conservative synagogues as “reeking of hell” and have repeatedly said that democracy has no place in Judaism.  One leader was imprisoned for 10-months after a plot to attack the Knesset (Israeli parliament) was uncovered.  Violence in Haredi communities against all entities not belonging to their sect has become so widespread that police won't enter these areas out of fear of retaliation.  Their growing influence has pulled the political center of the country to the far-right.  Kadima, the party formed by Ariel Sharon and which is by all definitions a center-right party, now occupies the left wing in the Knesset.

On Thursday the latest installment of this culture-war was made apparent in the streets of Jerusalem.  According to the Independent UK newspaper, more than 100,000 ultra-Orthodox Jews took to the streets of central Jerusalem to protest the country's Supreme court decision on school integration policies.  Parents of Ashkenazi ultra-orthodox sects were demanding that their daughters be educated in different classrooms from schoolgirls of Middle Eastern and North African descent, or Sephardim.  They claim that the ultra-orthodox Sephardim are not as religious.  The Guardian newspaper elaborates:

Underlying the case is the rejection of what the ultra-Orthodox community's sees as state interference in their religious practice and life. "We don't give our girls all the knowledge that there is in the world," said Esther Bark, 50, a mother of seven daughters watching the male-only demonstration today. "We shelter them, and that's why they need a sheltered school. We can't mix a whole assortment of girls in one school."

The NY Times outlines the court's decision which equates the segregation policies employed by the Ashkenazi Haredi as racist and discriminatory.  Other Israelis have far sharper words about the Haredi.  The Independent article quotes a Haaretz editorial that states, "Such groups... demand state funds to strengthen the independent education system that serves their children, but are unwilling to give in on even a single convention that governs their lifestyle."   Secular Jews are enraged by the willingness of the ultra-orthodox sects to dismiss laws.

"The ultra-Orthodox community is getting stronger and stronger," said Yitzhak Brudny, a political scientist at Jerusalem's Hebrew University. "The tensions between the religious and secular communities have become especially pronounced. It's both a class war and a cultural war. The ultra-Orthodox are dirt poor. Among secular Israelis and moderate Orthodox Jews, they are seen basically as parasites. And they have no desire to integrate with other communities." (Guardian UK)

Other religious persons in the country have also condemned the actions and misbehavior of the Haredi. Rabbi Yuval Sherlo, stated that "I cannot take part in the racism and discrimination that is taking place, which is just the tip of the iceberg... It's impossible to claim that this is Jewish law or that it is sanctifying the name of God."

Many others are describing the actions of the Haredi as nothing less than a struggle for the very existence of Israel.

Yossi Sarid, a former member of the Knesset, wrote in the Ha'aretz newspaper. "Now it is happening; the war has erupted. The great Haredi [ultra-Orthodox] rebellion has begun and is raging on several fronts … It will destroy basic values, without which a democratic, developed state cannot exist. It will be lost unless it fights back." (Guardian UK)

Noam Chomsky Prevented from Entering Israel

According to news sources, this past Sunday Professor Noam Chomsky, MIT linguist and America's leading political dissident, was barred entry to the state of Israel.  The rational for his visit to Israel was to present a series of lectures at Bir Zeit University, a Palestinian university located in the occupied West Bank. 

The situation has brought strong criticisms of the state by Israeli legal experts and equal condemnation of Prof. Chomsky from right-wing politicians within Israel.  Boaz Okun, a commentator in the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot, describes it as, "a foolish act...[that] may mark the end of Israel as a law-abiding and freedom-loving state, or at least place a large question mark over this notion.” Carlos Strenger said in today's Haaretz newspaper,

Nobody in his right mind can claim that Chomsky represents a security threat to Israel. He’s 81 years old. He is not a specialist on armed insurrection, and he has never called for violence against Israel...

If anything, barring Chomsky gives ammunition to those who say that Israel is infringing on academic freedom in the Palestinian Authority, and that a boycott against its universities is therefore justified.

If Israel feels it can defend its actions morally and politically, it should not fear thinkers who criticize it. But Israel is beginning to tamper with free speech, and this is a truly worrying development.

If Israel feels it cannot survive free speech, then it is one step closer to flirting with totalitarianism. In fact, during his questioning, when Chomsky was asked whether he was ever denied entry into a country he said, yes: into Czechoslovakia in 1968, after the Russian invasion, when he wanted to visit his friend Dubcek. This puts Israel into very poor company indeed.

Given that Professor Chomsky is of Jewish heritage and had previously lived in an Israeli Kibbutz, during the 1950's, the entire event leaves an impression usually associated with ham-fisted authoritarian regimes. Due to Prof. Chomsky's international notoriety and known criticisms of Israel, which have not changed since his last visit to Israel in 1997, the office of Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu is backtracking and claiming the whole incident was a mistake by an over-zealous customs officer and all are free to visit Israel.  However, the facts seem to dispute this statement.  According to today's NY Times and other international dailies, the following persons who have at one time or another been vocal of Israeli policies, have been barred:

• Richard Falk, an American Jew and United Nations investigator of human rights in the Palestinian areas
• Norman Finkelstein, a Jewish American scholar who is a critic of Israel and its policies
• Irish Foreign Minister Michael Martin, who is known as a critic of the Israeli-led blockade of Gaza
• Singer Yusef Islam (formerly Cat Stevens) was banned from a Peace Concert to be held in Israel
• Numerous non-violent peace activist groups and Palestinian Relief Agencies

Dubai Inc. Scuttled

There were plenty of indicators that things weren’t right at Dubai Inc. even before the fiasco emerged on Wednesday about Dubai World, the emirate’s sovereign wealth holding company. For example, in February 2009 it was reported in the Times UK that expatriates were “abandoning their cars at the airport and fleeing home rather than risk jail for defaulting on loans.” The same forces that were making their way through the capitals of high finance and choking credit were emptying out the professional classes of Dubai Inc’s most notable businesses.

Throughout the past decade, Westerners invested in Dubai’s ever more grandiose aspirations by saddling themselves with overpriced homes, that in many cases were never built, in the hope that they could prosper through perpetual ‘flipping.’ However, as the great recession spread across the globe, property values in Dubai plummeted and construction work was either delayed or outright cancelled. Businesses went unpaid, many lost substantial amounts in real estate speculation, and the economy contracted. The heady days of unrestrained double-digit growth had come to an end, and while Westerners could scurry to safer ports, the Arab rulers of this city-state could not as easily pass the bill onto others. The great de-leveraging that had begun a year earlier and had forced economic re-alignments everywhere, was upon the emirates.

With Wednesday's announcement, Dubai World effectively declared itself insolvent. “People are panicking: this whole process counters everything that the rulers [of Dubai] have been saying and the way it has been communicated before the holidays is confusing,” said one hedge fund manager. International investors across the globe reacted with equal outrage at Dubai World's announcement. Markets declined sharply, with commodities such as gold and oil falling and investors moving to safer investments.

Overall, Dubai World and its real estate arm Nakheel, is shouldering some $60bn (£36.5bn) in debt and was due to repay around $4bn next month. Abu Dhabi, with its oil-rich cash reserves had been touted by both the ruling family of Dubai and investors alike as the most obvious source of assistance. However, it is also widely understood that Abu Dhabi has grown annoyed and frustrated at Dubai's profligacy and was not willing to simply hand over money carte-blanc. Business Week states,

It's been obvious for some time that the emirate owes more money than it can repay. But what remained unclear was the overall extent of the debt load and what officials were doing to avert a panic at a time when the world was in the nascent stages of emerging from its worst recession in over six decades.

Although the amount is not significant in global terms, it presents the undesirable possibility that many other countries (i.e. Greece, Latvia, Hungary…etc) and issues that have been hidden, such as in the case of China, may likewise follow. Arnab Das, of Roubini Global Economics, provides a moderate's assessment of the current circumstances in Bloomberg,

The Dubai situation signifies that although the major central banks around the world have stabilized the financial system, they can’t make all the excesses simply disappear. We still have to work out those balance sheet stresses. The recovery is proceeding, but significant challenges still lie ahead.