ICT Database Staff
In June of 2008 the United States government accused two Venezuelan men, both of Lebanese decent, of maintaining ties with the terrorist organization Hezbollah[1]. This is not the first time government officials and citizens of Venezuela have been found to engage in business with militants, nor is it likely to be the last. . The Lebanese population has been a part of the Venezuelan community for almost three decades; and, accordingly, Hezbollah cells have become embedded within the society as well[2]. But, according to documents produced by the United States' government and statements issued by former Venezuelan officials, it has been under the government of President Hugo Chavez that the terrorist organization has truly thrived, and it is under his authority that Hezbollah has begun to pose an even larger threat to the Western world[3].
The Lebanese population had become a large part of Venezuelan society by the time Chavez came to power in 1999[4]. According to a 2002 report released by the U.S. Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress, in conjunction with the U.S. Department of State, radical Islam has become prominent throughout the Latin American region, and Venezuela, specifically Margarita Island, has become a focal point for the Arab population[5]. Evidence shows that the Venezuelan president and his government actively aid militants, specifically in the acquisition of illegal documents; these documents make it possible, and especially easy, for terrorists and terror organizations to thrive in the region[6]. Chavez's maintains a strong relationship with several state sponsors of terror, or countries that support terror organizations[7]. Consequently, Hezbollah cells and members have been located on the peninsula which Colombia and Venezuela both share, Guajira[8].
The Arab Population and Terrorist Activity on the Guajira Peninsula
Easy access to false identification makes this region highly attractive to militants. In Colombia, Hezbollah has not been found to be one of the main actors especially when compared to the activity of cells which exist in the tri-border region. However, according to data provided by the U.S. Library of Congress, Hezbollah is prominent in the small village Maicao. Maicao is located on the border with Venezuela in the Guajira peninsula. There, Islamics control 70 percent of commerce; the orthodox Islamic community numbers 4,670 out of 58,000 total residents; but 8,000 people are of Arab decent; of the Sunni and Shi’ite members of the community the Shi’ite most regularly aligns itself with radical Islamic thought. Studies by U.S. officials show that Maicao is also a popular tourist spot for other orthodox Islamics. Many residents donate 10 percent, sometimes even 30 percent of their incomes to Hezbollah. Similar to the findings of the INSIGHT report, money is then sent through banks in Maracaibo, Venezuela and Panama; personal deliveries by emissaries also exist, a U.S. source reported to O Globo according to the Library of Congress report. Maracaibo is a city in the Venezuelan piece of the peninsula.[9]
The Arab population in Maicao has the capacity fuel its own education system, businesses and cultural institutions. Maicao is also the free trade capital of the La Guajira Department. And, regardless of the fact that the city is infamously known for its black market and money laundering, it has little interference from lawmakers and law enforcers. One of the few incidences came when a radio broadcaster was accused of issuing Hezbollah propaganda on 15 August 1997. Since the community straddles the border, the heavy involvement in the black market and money laundering inevitably flows over the border into the Zulia State of Venezuela. U.S. Government studies have shown that money laundering, which originates with the narcotrafficking in the region, is used to hide funds used to fund terrorist activity across the globe.[10]
Similar to the border-city of Maicao, Venezuela’s Margarita Island is a popular tourist spot for orthodox Islamics. Eighty percent of businesses on Margarita Island are owned by the Arab population on the Island.[11] In that past several years, many of these businesses and business owners have been found to have ties to illicit activities, money laundering, and the BMPE.[12] In 2003, an analyst visiting the island described it as a “‘fortress’ with armed guards outside.”[13] Margarita Island seems to be the center of a "terrorist financial network stretching throughout the Caribbean to Panama and the Cayman Islands” the INSIGHT article reported. In August 2001, three Afghanis were caught upon their arrival in the Cayman Islands for traveling on fake Pakistani passports; they carried $200,000 in cash. According to British officials Arabs were behind money laundering efforts through Cayman banks, as well.[14]
The BMPE is a process used by drug smugglers in Venezuela and Colombia as well as other Latin American states to clean drug money. Profits, in the form of U.S. dollars, from sales in the United States are difficult to bring over the border; dollars are heavier than the drugs and once over the border extremely difficult to convert pesos once in the Latin American countries. Instead, peso brokers sell the dollars to Colombian businessmen, who purchase products from legitimate American companies and then sell the products for pesos. The pesos returned to the peso Broker are funneled back to the traffickers after a percentage is taken out by the broker.[15]
The report released by the U.S. Library of Congress maintains that profits received in this region are sent to fund acts of terrorism run by Hezbollah cells and other organizations such as al-Qai’da. For example, the U.S. government studies found that funds from the 26 February 1993 terror attack came from terrorist cells that moved money through Colombia. One of the men believed to be a large financier, Mohamed Ali Farhad of Syrian-Lebanese decent, was a part of a cigarette trade which included his clan, which he allegedly heads, and another worth $650 million. Farhad, a shareholder of a casino on Margarita Island and the owner of an American textiles store there, has sent many large checks to fund terrorist organizations, namely Hezbollah. Farhad has also been tied to the Mansur Free Zone Trading Company N.V., which is based in Netherlands Antilles. According to the U.S. authorities, the Mansur clan came into the forefront of the illicit drug trade when it inherited the narcotrafficking territories run by the Cosa Nostra's Cuntrera-Caruana clan, when it began to work in with the Cali Cartel in Venezuela. Another man accused of terrorist activity, “‘Sinforoso Caballero,’” ran the Border Business Group and Cabadi Investments from March to October 1993, the report stated. The business was allegedly used to move the funds of the two Arab clans that are based in Maicao.[16] A strategy report released by the U.S. Department of State International Narcotics Control (INCSR) in March 1997 cited “‘Sinforoso Caballero’” as a money laundering organization of which 35 members were arrested in October of 1993. Due to judicial corruption, the INCSR stated, the case got “bounced” around to several courts, was dismissed by the Tachira judge it finally resided with in May 1994 and was reopened the following December; by the close of 1996 the case remained undecided.[17] “Caballero,” himself, was arrested in 1997 the Library of Congress reported.[18]
Nasser Mohammed al-Din, a close friend of Chavez and "powerful entrepreneur," is another member of the Arab population on Margarita Island. He was listed in the report withheld from the U.S. and given to INSIGHT by intelligence sources. Chavez has been found to pay frequent visits and often stays at Mohammad al-Din's on the Island. According to presidential pilot Major Juan Diaz Castillo, his home was the site of the bi- and tri-weekly visits with Cuban President Fidel Castro as recently as 2003.[19]
Combating Terrorist Activity
At the turn of the century, the Library of Congress report cited, the Venezuelan intelligence made attempts to put a stop to the terrorist activity. In 1996, an operation run by the DISIP discovered a 15-person cell living in the tourist center of Margarita Island was identified; one, Yousset Farhat, was believed to be a local clan member. In 1997, suspected Hezbollah members, Wahid Mugnie and Ali Makke, were arrested by DISIP. In October 2001, bank accounts in Zulia State were investigated by the Judicial Technical Police of Venezuela (PTJ) and the International Police (Interpol). Large sums of money and equally large transfers were found in the accounts believed to be held by terrorist organization members and supporters. After the attacks on 11 September 2001, three men of Lebanese decent, with reported residences in Maicao, but believed to be living elsewhere in the La Guajira Department, were placed on the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorists.[20]
As the businesses on Margarita Island and in Maicao exemplify, legitimate companies are often used as a disguise to funnel money to illegal organizations, particularly Hezbollah[21]. When a DISIP agent acted undercover with a Lebanese group he found the organization funded Hezbollah through local businesses in areas like Margarita and on Baralt Avenue in Caracas, an October 2006 El Nacional reported.[22] The two travel agencies owned and operated by Fawzi Kan’an which were named in the U.S. Department of Treasury’s (DOT) press release on 18 June 2008 are both found on Baralt Avenue. Biblos Travel Agency and Hilal Travel Agency, according to the U.S. government are both used to “courier funds to Lebanon.”[23]
The Biblos Travel Agency also known as Biblios Travel, Biblos Travel CA, Biblos Travel, C.A., is located at Avenida Baralt, Esquina Madero Edifico Santa Isabel II, PB, Loc. 1 Caracas, Venezuela.[24] The AP reported the Venezuela-based agency was owned and operated by Kan’an until a year ago, 2007, when Kan’an shut it down.[25] The press release from the DOT did not state that the agency had been closed; it reported that the travel agency was actively used as a front to send money to Lebanon.[26]
The Hilal Travel Agency, which opened in April 2001, is also based in Venezuela. It is also known as Hilal Travel C.A. and located at Avenida Baralt, Esquina Madero, Edifico Santa Isabel, Caracas, Venezuela, business identification number, 80074366.[27] According to the AP report on 19 June 2008, Kan’an was in the process of closing this agency, too, when they interviewed him.[28] In an earlier AP article on 18 June 2008, Kan’an, whom reporters reached at a number listed for Biblos Travel Agency, was said to have stated in the phone interview that both agencies had been closed for one year.[29] Kan’an plans to open a new travel agency and claims that the closing of Biblos and Hilal is in no way related to U.S. allegations.[30]
In addition to the businesses, the United States Department of Treasury named two Venezuelans accused of having ties with Hezbollah.[31] Ghazi Nasr al Din and Fawzi Kan'an were found to have been involved with terrorist training, conspiracies and fundraising within Venezuela, Lebanon and Iran.[32] The men are allegedly links between the Venezuelan government and Hezbollah in Lebanon.[33]
Ghazi Nasr Al Din is a Venezuelan Diplomat and President of the Shi'a Islamic Center in Caracas. He was born 13 December 1962 in Lebanon. His Venezuelan Identification number is 18.190.527; his Venezuelan passport number is B-047256.[34]
Nasr al Din has, according to the DOT, used these positions to provide financing to Hezbollah leaders and operatives.[35] Mohamad Mtayrek, a Lebanese immigrant to Venezuela and one of the managers of the Imam al Hadi Venezuelan Islamic Center, the largest Shiite Muslim center in Caracas, stated the Center had no ties to Hezbollah. Though he knows him, Mtayrek would not comment on Nasr al Din specifically.[36]
Before Nasr al Din became a Venezuelan Diplomat to Lebanon he was Charge d' Affaires at the Venezuelan Embassy in Damascus, Syria. In the Venezuelan Embassy in Lebanon he serves as the Director of Political Aspects.[37] The Associated Press reported that there was some confusion as to whether Nasr al Din’s was currently stationed in Syria or Lebanon, though the DOT document lists, clearly, that he is currently stationed in Lebanon.[38]
Nasr al Din's interactions with and activities on behalf of Hezbollah largely includes soliciting finances from Hezbollah supporters, specifically within Venezuela. According to the DOT report Nasr al Din has provided donors with information on effective fundraising methods and the proper bank accounts established for depositing the fundraised and donated money directly into the hands of Hezbollah. In January 2006, Nasr al Din brought two Hezbollah lawmakers from the Lebanese Parliament to Caracas to enhance fundraising efforts and, also, to publicize the establishment of a Hezbollah-funded community center and office within Venezuela.[39]
U.S. authorities reported that Nasr al Din also aided in the travel preparations to send Hezbollah operatives to participate in a training camp in Iran.[40] According to the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), in 2005, Nasr al Din organized a trip of Hezbollah members to Iran, where he supposedly organized a group.[41]
His aliases include: Haj Ghazi Nasseredine, Ghazi Nassereddine, Gazi Nasseridine, Gazi Nasser El-Din, Ghazil Nasser Al-Din, Haj Ghazzi Nassereddine, Ghassan Attef Salame Nasserddine, Ghassan Nasr El Din Ghassan, Ghazi Nasserddine, Ghazi `Atef Nasraldine, Atef Salameh Nasserdine Ghasan, and Hajj Ghazi `Atif Nasr al-Din.[42]
Fawzi Kan’an, born in Lebanon, is a naturalized Venezuelan citizen as of 16 December 1977; the AP reported that he moved to Venezuela in 1986 in an attempt to escape the fighting.[43] His naturalization number is 2108, his passport number is 0877677 and his identification number is V-6.919.272. The documentation provided by the U.S. Department of Treasury lists three birthplaces: Lebanon, Baalbeck, Lebanon and Betechelida, Lebanon. The document listed three birthdates as well; 7 June 1943, February 1943 and 1 June 1943, respectively. According to the DOT, Kan’an is the owner of two residences in Caracas, Venezuela: Calle 2, Residencias Cosmos, Fifth Floor, Apartment 5D, La Urbina Caracas, Venezuela and Esquina Bucare, Building 703, Second Floor, Apartment 20, Caracas, Venezuela.[44]
The DOT cited Kan’an as a major financier of Hezbollah. He sent large sums of money to Hezbollah in Lebanon from his fundraising efforts and donations received in Venezuela. Kan’an also frequently aided in the travel of Hezbollah members, and has traveled, himself, to Lebanon to meet with ranking Hezbollah members to “discuss operational issues” and to train in Iran with other Hezbollah operatives.[45]
Kan’an has denied all allegations and ties to Hezbollah.[46] In an interview with the Associated Press, he stated he did not “know the group, [did not] know anyone.”[47] He stated that he did not have any assets within U.S. jurisdiction, nor had he ever traveled to Iran. During the interview he answered phone calls in Arabic.[48] He also told the AP that he does not work anymore.[49]
He is also known as: Fazi Canaan, Faouzi Can'an, Fouzi Kanan, Fauzi Kanaan, Fauzi Ganan and Maustaf Fawzi (Faouzi) Kanaan.[50]
U.S.-Venezuelan Relations
Strained relations which have existed between the United States and Venezuela were exacerbated by the accusations put forth by the U.S. government on 18 June 2008. The Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) at the DOT, Adam J. Szubin, criticized the Venezuelan government for “providing safe harbor” to Hezbollah operatives.[51] Officials from both the DOT and Department of Justice (DOJ) stated that an in-depth inter-agency process, involving the State Department as well, occurred before any actions against the Venezuelan men were taken. The DOJ failed to comment on whether a criminal investigation has begun or would begin.[52]
On Thursday, 19 June 2001, Venezuelan officials denied U.S. allegations. Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro stated that there were no terrorists in Venezuela; “‘if they want to search for terrorists, look for them in the White House,’ he said.”[53] Venezuelan Minister of Communication Andrés Izarra stated that none of the U.S. government's accusations warranted investigation.[54] Particularly, since no formal complaint came from Lebanon; and, since Hezbollah currently holds the majority in the Lebanese legislature none have been expected to follow.[55]
On Friday, 20 June 2008 President Chavez accused the U.S. of bringing the allegations against the Venezuelan men in an attempt to bring himself before the international court; the U.S. made the accusations to “‘see if the world will make a move,’” the AP quoted.[56] According to statements issued by Izzara, the Venezuelan government finds Hezbollah to be a legitimate party in Lebanon. This, in return, has given the American government more reason to make accusations that Venezuela provides Hezbollah members refuge an El Universal article stated.[57]
The Venezuelan government's definition of terrorism states that terrorism is an act against innocent civilians; it does not include accidental casualties. According to the Venezuelan media, the attacks from Hezbollah in the past 80 years against the American and French military headquarters in Beirut have been "asymmetric" acts of war.[58] The article published on 19 June 2008 in El Universal complained of the "stupid" manner in which the American government treats other nationalities, including diplomats it specified. The article added that Hezbollah intended to speak out on the matter, but no date was given.[59] Roy Daza, the president of the Commission of the Political Exterior of the National Assembly in Venezuela, stated that the accusation against the two Venezuelans was a vain attempt to destabilize the government of President Chávez and isolate the Venezuelan state. He accused the United States government of attacking that of Venezuela, customarily, from time to time.[60]
Venezuelan Government Officials Have Ties to Terrorism
In addition to the illegal operations of many Venezuelan government agencies and offices, such as the falsification of documents, Nasr al Din's alleged ties to Hezbollah are not the first to be uncovered and declared by the United States. Tarek William Saab Halabi, a member of MVR and formerly the National Assembly deputy, currently serves as the governor of the Venezuelan state Anzoátegui; he won 57% of the vote in 2004. His election, according to MVR party members, was corrupt; the nominated candidates were “handpicked” and “‘protected by (MVR leaders) Tarek William Saab and Freddy Bernal’” they claimed.[61] Two years earlier Saab was refused entry into the United States for suspected ties to international terror groups.[62] “Terror Threat from Venezuela: Al Qaeda Involved,” published 27 December 2002 cited that Bernal had been caught by U.N. forces in an attempt to smuggle weapons from Iraq to Saudi Arabia.[63] Also, Saab and Abdel Elsabayar, both of Arab decent, were accused of aiding in the release of three men suspected to be behind the 1994 bombings in Argentina. The study conducted by Tel Aviv University found that three men arrived in Venezuela, on Margarita Island, from Colombia in November 1999; they were released following their arrest on 7 July 2002.[64] A letter from Chavez to the terrorist trainer, El Chacal (the jackal), provides evidence of his personal ties to terrorists an 24 June 2008 El Universal article reported. The letter discovered was addressed to his fellow countryman or "'distinguido compatriota'" and concluded with "con profunda fe en la causa y en la misión, ¡por ahora y para siempre!," meaning "with profound faith in the cause and in the mission, for now and forever!"[65]
Venezuela's Ties to State Sponsors of Terror
Ties between Venezuela and Lebanon and states that sponsor terror such as Syria and Iran have only increased since the summer of 2006 U.S. officials have reported.[66] Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has strengthened his country’s ties to Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua as well. Venezuela remains his closest and most important ally in the region; they have formed the “Axis of Unity” against the United States.[67] A report released by the Nine/Eleven Finding Answers (NEFA) organization on 1 April 2008 found that as the leader of a state sponsor of terrorism and because of his direct link to Hezbollah, Ahmadinejad’s relationship with Chavez poses a direct threat to the United States.[68] The DOT cites that the Iranian government has provided weaponry, monetary resources and training facilities for Hezbollah operatives in Lebanon; the same is occurring in Venezuela.[69]
Similar to the sentiment in Lebanon, Chavez is extremely popular in Iran, too, studies have shown. An article published 17 March 2008 by the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) stated that the American government does not focus enough on the threat that has been developing in Latin America as a result of the relationships between these states. Though Hezbollah has been present in Latin America for over a decade, AEI reported, only under the leadership of Ahmadinejad has there been a “sustained effort” to establish relations in Latin America; specifically an anti-American bloc. Funding for his efforts has been plentiful; millions of dollars have been spent.[70]
Beyond meetings, public forums and rallies, such as frequent television appearances of Iranian officials in Venezuela, Ahmadinejad and Chavez have cemented the relationship between their two countries with direct flights, economic relations and a banking system.[71] As of 12 July 2007, when Global Research announced that Venezuela and Iran were to invest $4 billion in a new oil project, 33 bilateral energy accords had already been signed between the two governments.[72] Two Iranian factories opened in Caracas in June 2007.[73] In March of 2007 the first plane on the airline between Tehran and Caracas landed at its stopover, Damascus, Syria.[74] The state controlled airlines, Conviasa of Venezuela and Iran Air of Iran planned to run weekly flights between the two nations with Damascus stopover.[75] The Iranian ambassador to Venezuela stated that the flights would serve to strengthen the relations between the countries’ governments and citizens; according to the statement issued there are many families scattered between Iran, Syria and Venezuela.[76] Chavez “‘is much loved in our country and our people want to come here to get to know this land’” the Ambassador Abdullah Zifan reported when the flight plans were announced in February 2007.[77]
Most recently, Fars News Agency released an article on 23 June 2008 which announced the Venezuelan and Iranian governments' plans to establish a joint bank. This announcement came in conjunction with a claim by the Venezuelan Planning and Development Minister Haiman El Troudi that the two countries will have 30 industrial projects running by the close of 2008. According to the plans, the bank, based in Tehran, will have $1.2 million to begin with used to finance projects in “infrastructure, housing and technology.” The Fars News Agency reported that some political observers found it “much interesting that just as Tehran and Caracas announced the new deal, the US has started making new charges about Hezbollah activity in Venezuela.”[78]
Conclusion
The charges made most recently are not without evidence. President Chavez has proven time and again that he actively supports terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah.[79] The activities in places such as Margarita Island and the false identification papers found on militants attempting to cross the U.S. border only serve to substantiate these claims[80]. And, as he strengthens the ties between Venezuela and state sponsors of terror, he continues to reinforce these suspicions; all this is reason for great concern among citizens of the Western world[81].
Work Cited
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), “Iran's Global Ambition”, 17 March 2008.
AP via The Seattle Times, “Anger and fear mix with empathy as world remembers Sept. 11”, 12 September 2006.
AP via KansasCity.com, "Chavez refutes US Hezbollah charges", 21 June 2008.
AP via IHT “Lebanese Born businessman living in Venezuela denies helping finance Hezbollah”, 19 June 2008.
Associated Press (AP) via Israel Insider, “Lebanese in Venezuela back Chavez's threat, Jewish groups express concern”, 10 August 2006.
Associated Press (AP) via Miami Herald, “US targets Hezbollah links in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008.
Associated Press (AP) via Atlanta-Journal Constitution, “Venezuela rebuffs US on Hezbollah aid”, 19 June 2008.
Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State, “Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State”, March 1997.
CNN, “U.S.: Two Venezuelans are supporting terrorism” 18 June 2008
Fars News Agency (FNA), “Iran, Venezuela To Establish Joint Bank”, 23 June 2008.
Fars News Agency (FNA), “Iran, Venezuela to Start Direct Flights”, 10 February 2007.
Federal Observer, “MAKING THE CASE: For War Against Iraq”, 2003.
Global Researcher, “Venezuela, Iran to Invest $4 billion in Joint Oil Project in Orinoco
Belt”, 12 July 2007.
GlobalSecurity.org, “US Says Latin American Terrorism Backed by Iran", 25 September 1995.
The Guardian, “Profile: Imad Mughniyeh”, 13 February 2008.
INSIGHT, “About Insight: About Insight Cutting-edge political intelligence from Washington”, 2008.
INSIGHT, “Chavez plans for terrorist regime: Venezuelan security officials say that President Hugo Chavez is plugging terrorist networks into the country's infrastructure, embracing jihadists and Castroites" 7 January 2003.
Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), “First Tehran-Caracas plane lands in Damascus,” 2 March 2007.
Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002
Long War Journal, “US designates two Hezbollah operatives in Venezuela as terrorists”, 19 June 2008.
El Nacional, "Hezbolá niega que los venezolanos acusados por EE UU sean sus miembros," 19 June 2008.
El Nacional, “To Annihilate Criminals and the Corrupt,” 27 October 2006.
National Review Online (NRO),”Operation Syria”, 2 May 2003.
New York Times (NYT), “Venezuela and Iran Strengthen Ties With Caracas-to-Tehran Flight”, 3 March 2007.
Nine/Eleven Finding Answers, “What the FARC Papers Show Us about Latin American Terrorism”, 1 April 2008.
OSC Report, “Highlights: Venezuela Crime and Narcotics Issues 17-21 Nov 06”, 22 November 2006.
People’s Daily Online, “Latin American countries condemn Israeli brutal attack on Lebanon”, 31 July 2006.
Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), “The Black Market Peso Exchange" 19 April 2002.
Quinto Dia, “Lo que dijo US News que tanto indignó a Chávez What U.S. News said that both indignant Chavez” 10 October 2003.
Tel Aviv University, “Venezuela 2002-3”, 2003.
U.S. Department of State, “Country Reports on Terrorism”, 28 April 2006.
U.S. Department of the Treasury (DOT), “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela” 18 June 2008.
El Universal, "Hezbolá niega que los dos venezolanos acusados por EEUU sean sus miembros," 19 June 2008.
El Universal, "EEUU acusa a diplomático venezolano de trabajar para hizbula", 18 June 2008.
El Universal, “In party election to designate candidates to local polls Chávez' MVR members report electoral fraud”, 12 April 2005.
El Universal, "Líbano no ha protestado al diplomático señalado," 20 June 2008.
El Universal, "Roy Daza: Acusaciones que vinculan a venezolanos con el Hezbolá pretenden aislar al país", 22 June 2008.
El Universal, “Tarek Saab solicitará reunión a embajador de Estados Unidos”, 3 October 2002.
El Universal, "Venezuela y Hezbolá," 24 June 2008.
Venezuelanalysis.com, “Popular Participation Forum Holds Caracas 9-11 Peace March”, 12 September 2006.
Venezuelanalysis.com, “Venezuela Launches New Social Program for Poor Children”, 17 June 2008.
Venezuelanalysis.com, “Voices of Lebanese Refugees in Venezuela’s Embassy”, 17 August 2006.
Washington Post, “Hezbollah Chief Defiant at Huge Rally”, 23 September 2006.
Washington Post, “U.S. ties Caracas to Hezbollah aid,” 7 July 2008.
World Net Daily, “Venezuelan IDs help terrorist enter U.S.”, 26 October 2006.
World-Check, “If you finance the Taliban, Al-Qaida, Hezbollah and the FARC, expect a designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism”, 30 March 2008.
Notes:
[1] U.S. Department of the Treasury (DOT), “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008.
[2] Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002.
[3] Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002 and INSIGHT, “Chavez plans for terrorist regime: Venezuelan security officials say that President Hugo Chavez is plugging terrorist networks into the country's infrastructure, embracing jihadists and Castroites", 7 January 2003.
[4] AP via IHT “Lebanese Born businessman living in Venezuela denies helping finance Hezbollah”, 19 June 2008.
[5] Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002.
[6] World Net Daily, “Venezuelan IDs help terrorist enter U.S.”, 26 October 2006.
[7] Nine/Eleven Finding Answers, “What the FARC Papers Show Us about Latin American Terrorism”, 1 April 2008 and American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), “Iran's Global Ambition”, 17 March 2008
[8] Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002.
[9] Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Quinto Dia, “Lo que dijo US News que tanto indignó a Chávez What U.S. News said that both indignant Chavez”, 10 October 2003.
[14] INSIGHT, “Chavez plans for terrorist regime: Venezuelan security officials say that President Hugo Chavez is plugging terrorist networks into the country's infrastructure, embracing jihadists and Castroites", 7 January 2003.
[15] Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), “The Black Market Peso Exchange", 19 April 2002.
[16] Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002.
[17] Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State, “Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State”, March 1997.
[18] Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002.
[19] INSIGHT, “Chavez plans for terrorist regime: Venezuelan security officials say that President Hugo Chavez is plugging terrorist networks into the country's infrastructure, embracing jihadists and Castroites", 7 January 2003.
[20] Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002.
[21] Ibid.
[22] El Nacional, “To Annihilate Criminals and the Corrupt,” 27 October 2006.
[23] U.S. Department of the Treasury (DOT), “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Associated Press (AP) via International Herald Tribune (IHT) “Lebanese-born businessman living in Venezuela denies helping finance Hezbollah”, 19 June 2008.
[26] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela” 18 June 2008.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Associated Press (AP) via International Herald Tribune (IHT) “Lebanese-born businessman living in Venezuela denies helping finance Hezbollah”, 19 June 2008.
[29] Associated Press (AP) via Atlanta-Journal Constitution, “Venezuela rebuffs US on Hezbollah aid”,19 June 2008.
[30] Associated Press (AP) via International Herald Tribune (IHT) “Lebanese-born businessman living in Venezuela denies helping finance Hezbollah”, 19 June 2008.
[31] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008.
[32] Ibid and El Universal, "Hezbolá niega que los dos venezolanos acusados por EEUU sean sus miembros," 19 June 2008.
[33] Washington Post, “U.S. ties Caracas to Hezbollah aid”, 7 July 2008.
[34] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008.
[35] Ibid.
[36] Associated Press (AP) via Atlanta-Journal Constitution, “Venezuela rebuffs US on Hezbollah aid”, 19 June 2008.
[37] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008 and El Nacional, "Hezbolá niega que los venezolanos acusados por EE UU sean sus miembros", 19 June 2008.
[38] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008 and Associated Press (AP) via Atlanta-Journal Constitution, “Venezuela rebuffs US on Hezbollah aid”, 19 June 2008.
[39] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008 and El Universal, "Venezuela y Hezbolá," 24 June 2008.
[40] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008
[41] El Universal, "Venezuela y Hezbolá", 24 June 2008.
[42] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008
[43] Ibid and Associated Press (AP) via International Herald Tribune (IHT) “Lebanese-born businessman living in Venezuela denies helping finance Hezbollah”, 19 June 2008.
[44] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008
[45] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”,18 June 2008 and El Universal, "Venezuela y Hezbolá", 24 June 2008.
[46] Associated Press (AP) via Atlanta-Journal Constitution, “Venezuela rebuffs US on Hezbollah aid”, 19 June 2008.
[47] Associated Press (AP) via International Herald Tribune (IHT), “Lebanese-born businessman living in Venezuela denies helping finance Hezbollah”, 19 June 2008.
[48] Ibid.
[49] Associated Press (AP) via Miami Herald, “US targets Hezbollah links in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008.
[50] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela”, 18 June 2008 and El Nacional, "Hezbolá niega que los venezolanos acusados por EE UU sean sus miembros", 19 June 2008.
[51] DOT, “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela” 18 June 2008
[52] CNN, “U.S.: Two Venezuelans are supporting terrorism”, 18 June 2008
[53] Associated Press (AP) via Atlanta-Journal Constitution, “Venezuela rebuffs US on Hezbollah aid”, 19 June 2008 and El Universal, "Líbano no ha protestado al diplomático señalado", 20 June 2008.
[54] El Nacional, "Hezbolá niega que los venezolanos acusados por EE UU sean sus miembros", 19 June 2008.
[55] El Nacional, "Hezbolá niega que los venezolanos acusados por EE UU sean sus miembros", 19 June 2008 and El Universal, "Venezuela y Hezbolá", 24 June 2008.
[56] AP via KansasCity.com, "Chavez refutes US Hezbollah charges", 21 June 2008 and El Universal, "Roy Daza: Acusaciones que vinculan a venezolanos con el Hezbolá pretenden aislar al país", 22 June 2008.
[57] El Universal, "EEUU acusa a diplomático venezolano de trabajar para hizbula", 18 June 2008.
[58] El Universal, "Venezuela y Hezbolá", 24 June 2008.
[59] El Universal, "Hezbolá niega que los dos venezolanos acusados por EEUU sean sus miembros", 19 June 2008.
[60] El Universal, "Roy Daza: Acusaciones que vinculan a venezolanos con el Hezbolá pretenden aislar al país", 22 June 2008.
[61] El Universal, “In party election to designate candidates to local polls Chávez' MVR members report electoral fraud”, 12 April 2005.
[62] El Universal, “Tarek Saab solicitará reunión a embajador de Estados Unidos”, 3 October 2002.
[63] Federal Observer, “MAKING THE CASE: For War Against Iraq”, 2003.
[64] Tel Aviv University, “Venezuela 2002-3”, 2003.
[65] El Universal, "Venezuela y Hezbolá", 24 June 2008.
[66] U.S. Department of State, “Country Reports on Terrorism”, 28 April 2006.
[67] Nine/Eleven Finding Answers, “What the FARC Papers Show Us about Latin American Terrorism”, 1 April 2008 and American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), “Iran's Global Ambition”, 17 March 2008
[68] Nine/Eleven Finding Answers, “What the FARC Papers Show Us about Latin American Terrorism”, 1 April 2008
[69] U.S. Department of the Treasury (DOT), “Treasury Targets Hezbollah in Venezuela” 18 June 2008.
[70] American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), “Iran's Global Ambition”, 17 March 2008.
[71] New York Times (NYT), “Venezuela and Iran Strengthen Ties With Caracas-to-Tehran Flight”, 3 March 2007.
[72] Global Researcher, “Venezuela, Iran to Invest $4 billion in Joint Oil Project in Orinoco Belt”, 12 July 2007.
[73] American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), “Iran's Global Ambition”, 17 March 2008.
[74] Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), “First Tehran-Caracas plane lands in Damascus,” 2 March 2007.
[75] New York Times (NYT), “Venezuela and Iran Strengthen Ties With Caracas-to-Tehran Flight”, 3 March 2007.
[76] Fars News Agency (FNA), “Iran, Venezuela to Start Direct Flights”, 10 February 2007.
[77] New York Times (NYT), “Venezuela and Iran Strengthen Ties With Caracas-to-Tehran Flight”, 3 March 2007.
[78] Fars News Agency (FNA), “Iran, Venezuela To Establish Joint Bank”, 23 June 2008.
[79] NSIGHT, “Chavez plans for terrorist regime: Venezuelan security officials say that President Hugo Chavez is plugging terrorist networks into the country's infrastructure, embracing jihadists and Castroites", 7 January 2003.
[80] Library of Congress, “A Global Overview of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups”, May 2002 and World Net Daily, “Venezuelan IDs help terrorist enter U.S.”, 26 October 2006.
[81] American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), “Iran's Global Ambition”, 17 March 2008.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
"Caught Between"
Arlene Kushner
Never mind that Israel isn't flexing her muscles to the maximum that she might, she is, in no regard a superpower. And when the dynamics between the superpowers shifts, and tensions ignite, it ultimately has an effect -- or several effects -- on us here. It is still too soon to know how it will all play out, but this is some of what we're seeing:
Israel had been selling weapons to Georgia, but stopped with the current crisis, afraid that we would incur unnecessary wrath from Russia (which subsequently played down concerns). At the same time the government invited domestic criticism for abandoning a victim of Russian aggression.
~~~~~~~~~~
In moves reminiscent of the cold war, the US this week signed a defensive pact with Poland that will place 10 US interceptor missiles in that country just 115 miles from the Russian border. A retaliatory response from an infuriated Russia -- possibly in the Middle East -- was seen as a possibility, and the following scenario then enfolded:
Syrian President Bashar Assad went to Russia Thursday and met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. Assad, who had been taking a totally pro-Russian line during the Russian-Georgian hostilities, invited the Russians to place the sophisticated Iskander missile system -- with a range that could reach all of Israel -- on Syrian soil. He suggested that both because of the US deal with Poland and Israel's relationship with Georgia, this might appeal to Medvedev.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Russia was thinking of responding to Assad's invitation, but qualified this by saying only defensive weapons would be supplied, which would "not harm the region's strategic balance." But even defensive weapons -- presumably anti-aircraft missiles -- would have an effect if Israel found it necessary to fly over or attack sites in Syria, as was the case when we took out the reactor.
Amidst a flurry of protests, acting Russian ambassador to lsrael Anatoly Yurkov told Ynet, "Why in the world would we need to deploy our missiles here? Against whom? We have no enemies in the region." And Medvedev placed a "business as usual" call directly to Olmert.
Finally Assad, likely thinking better of it, denied he had made such an offer. But withdrawal of an offer to place the Iskander system in Syria does not necessarily mean that Assad will walk away empty-handed; he went hoping to buy Russian military equipment.
~~~~~~~~~~
Incomprehensibly, in the face of all of this, the government is continuing to pursue indirect negotiations with Syria via Turkey.
MK Gideon Sa'ar (head, Likud faction) criticized this, saying that it gave Syria increased international legitimacy.
~~~~~~~~~~
Another rejection: According to Channel 10 news, the US has refused a request by Barak to buy the Boeing 767 aircraft, which can be used for refueling mid-air, reportedly because this would appear to give assistance to Israeli plans to hit Iran.
Israel already has plans that have a mid-air refueling capacity, as well as jets that can reach Iran without refueling.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to a Palestinian news agency, Ahmed Qurei, head of the PA negotiating team, speaking at a Fatah gathering in Ramallah, said that he didn't believe a final agreement with Israel would be possible in 2008.
"We [will not] accept less than a Palestinian state with the 1967 borders (sic) with East Jerusalem as its capital. [And including] a just solution of the issue of the refugees based on the international resolutions and the right of return."
Saying that eastern Jerusalem must be the spiritual, economic, and geographical center of the Palestinian state, Qurei stressed that there would be no partial deal -- that everything had to be agreed upon "in one package."
This is good news for us. If the PA will not consent to signing on to a partial deal (with Jerusalem still unresolved) it becomes considerably less likely that Olmert will commit to paper formally what Israel is willing to concede.
~~~~~~~~~~
Hamas also agrees that Jerusalem is critical to Palestinian interests, but it, of course, is not promoting a final "one package" deal. Said Ismail Haniyeh:
"...no one can cede Jerusalem, the city from which the Prophet Muhammad ascended to the heavens. [Note: this is not from the Koran, which never mentions Jerusalem by name, but from later legend.]
"Jerusalem will be retrieved to the Palestinians not through negotiations or by hugging and kissing the enemy, but by way of jihad, blood, shahids and resistance. With Allah's help, Jerusalem will be returned."
~~~~~~~~~~
Haniyeh, it must be noted, added this:
"...the Israeli-Arabs are safeguarding the Al-Aksa Mosque; it is as if they are inside the belly of a whale. They represent the Islamic nation. We send them our regards, especially to Sheikh Raed Salah.
Sheikh Salad is founder of the Islamic Movement in Israel, a radical Islamist group of Arabs with Israeli citizenship working against the wellbeing of Israel.
~~~~~~~~~~
As happens on a regular basis, fallacious and inflammatory claims by Arabs regarding Israel's intent to destroy the Al Aksa Mosque on the Temple Mount have again been circulating. These charges serve at one and the same time to incite against Israel and rally various Arab factions together in a common cause.
Mohammad Al-Saqer, who is the parliamentary president of Kuwait, has just called upon the Arab League and other Arab groups to combat an Israeli scheme to divide the Al Aksa Mosque, so that it is half for Jews, half for Muslims.
He said that the Israeli digging under the Mosque has reached a dangerous stage. This charge about digging is ludicrous. For the remains of the Temple lie under the Mount and all digging is strictly forbidden by the Israeli Antiquities Authority and all rabbis. But let's not get confused by facts.
Much is being made, as well, of the anniversary of a fire set at the Al Aksa Mosque in 1969, which caused damage to one wing. And here, too, reality is obscured, for the fire was set by an Australian tourist, Michael Dennis Rohan, of the Worldwide Church of God, who told the police he hoped this would hasten the second coming of Jesus. That the fire was quickly put out by the Israelis is forgotten as the libel spreads that Israel paid Rohan to do it.
~~~~~~~~~~
And in the face of all of this, what does foreign minister and candidate for Kadima leadership Tzipi Livni have to say?
Given the increasing power of extremists, time is of the essence to reach an agreement with the Palestinians. The only possibility for reaching an agreement is with the leadership that exists now in the Palestinian Authority.
This is the stuff of nightmares. Rather than rushing, we should be pulling back and reassessing.
Can it truly be that she doesn't understand? The increasing power of extremists has already infected the Fatah party, which is moving towards a more radical (and Islamist) line. It renders the so-called moderates impotent, so that they would not be able to honor any agreement with us.
~~~~~~~~~~
Contrary to recent reports that she might go to elections if she secured victory in the Kadima primary, she is now calling for a unity government.
Interestingly, even though she continues to lead in Kadima polls, her lead weakens -- Mofaz gets stronger -- if the question is asked who would be preferred in time of national crisis. Apparently those responding with a move toward Mofaz, given this hypothetical situation, don't understand that we are in crisis now.
~~~~~~~~~~
Investigators are questioning Olmert for the sixth time today.
An attempt is being made by Israeli law enforcement officials to secure US immunity for Talansky for testimony he might still give here. He is in trouble with the FBI for what he has already revealed, and thus is afraid to come back and say more.
~~~~~~~~~~
We have been on guard for some time -- and Israel has warned Israelis traveling abroad to be watch for kidnapping attempts -- but now a warning has come from a sheikh in Hezbollah that they are coming close to time to exact revenge for the assassination of Imad Mugniyah in February.
"The revenge will be shocking and huge surprises are in store," he said. He spoke about all-out war, as Israel would respond to this attack.
Even though all precautions without reservation must be taken, I cannot help wonder how much of this is bombast. Why would they warn of an attack rather than using the element of surprise?
~~~~~~~~~~
Khaled Abu Rakaiek of the Tel Sheva local Bedouin Council in the Negev has been indicted in Beersheva court for attempting to make contact with an agent of Al Qaida and Global Jihad, with the intent of starting a cell to carry out terrorist attacks in Israel.
Abu Rakaiek was formerly a student at the Technological College of Beersheva, where he acquired computer knowledge that allowed him to surf the Internet, make contact with radical groups, and download information on preparing belts.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to a new Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs report by Lt. Col. (res.) Jonathan Dahoah Halevi, off-shoots of Al Qaida -- Jaish al-Islam (army of Islam), Army of the Umma, and Fatah al-Islam -- have freedom of movement in the Hamas-ruled Gaza. In fact, Jaish al-Islam has been officially recognized by Hamas as a legitimate armed movement in Gaza.
http://www.jcpa.org/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442&PID=0&IID=2408&TTL=Al-Qaeda_Affiliate_-_Jaish_al-Islam_-_Receives_Formal_Sanctuary_in_Hamas-Ruled_Gaz
And here we sit?
Never mind that Israel isn't flexing her muscles to the maximum that she might, she is, in no regard a superpower. And when the dynamics between the superpowers shifts, and tensions ignite, it ultimately has an effect -- or several effects -- on us here. It is still too soon to know how it will all play out, but this is some of what we're seeing:
Israel had been selling weapons to Georgia, but stopped with the current crisis, afraid that we would incur unnecessary wrath from Russia (which subsequently played down concerns). At the same time the government invited domestic criticism for abandoning a victim of Russian aggression.
~~~~~~~~~~
In moves reminiscent of the cold war, the US this week signed a defensive pact with Poland that will place 10 US interceptor missiles in that country just 115 miles from the Russian border. A retaliatory response from an infuriated Russia -- possibly in the Middle East -- was seen as a possibility, and the following scenario then enfolded:
Syrian President Bashar Assad went to Russia Thursday and met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. Assad, who had been taking a totally pro-Russian line during the Russian-Georgian hostilities, invited the Russians to place the sophisticated Iskander missile system -- with a range that could reach all of Israel -- on Syrian soil. He suggested that both because of the US deal with Poland and Israel's relationship with Georgia, this might appeal to Medvedev.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Russia was thinking of responding to Assad's invitation, but qualified this by saying only defensive weapons would be supplied, which would "not harm the region's strategic balance." But even defensive weapons -- presumably anti-aircraft missiles -- would have an effect if Israel found it necessary to fly over or attack sites in Syria, as was the case when we took out the reactor.
Amidst a flurry of protests, acting Russian ambassador to lsrael Anatoly Yurkov told Ynet, "Why in the world would we need to deploy our missiles here? Against whom? We have no enemies in the region." And Medvedev placed a "business as usual" call directly to Olmert.
Finally Assad, likely thinking better of it, denied he had made such an offer. But withdrawal of an offer to place the Iskander system in Syria does not necessarily mean that Assad will walk away empty-handed; he went hoping to buy Russian military equipment.
~~~~~~~~~~
Incomprehensibly, in the face of all of this, the government is continuing to pursue indirect negotiations with Syria via Turkey.
MK Gideon Sa'ar (head, Likud faction) criticized this, saying that it gave Syria increased international legitimacy.
~~~~~~~~~~
Another rejection: According to Channel 10 news, the US has refused a request by Barak to buy the Boeing 767 aircraft, which can be used for refueling mid-air, reportedly because this would appear to give assistance to Israeli plans to hit Iran.
Israel already has plans that have a mid-air refueling capacity, as well as jets that can reach Iran without refueling.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to a Palestinian news agency, Ahmed Qurei, head of the PA negotiating team, speaking at a Fatah gathering in Ramallah, said that he didn't believe a final agreement with Israel would be possible in 2008.
"We [will not] accept less than a Palestinian state with the 1967 borders (sic) with East Jerusalem as its capital. [And including] a just solution of the issue of the refugees based on the international resolutions and the right of return."
Saying that eastern Jerusalem must be the spiritual, economic, and geographical center of the Palestinian state, Qurei stressed that there would be no partial deal -- that everything had to be agreed upon "in one package."
This is good news for us. If the PA will not consent to signing on to a partial deal (with Jerusalem still unresolved) it becomes considerably less likely that Olmert will commit to paper formally what Israel is willing to concede.
~~~~~~~~~~
Hamas also agrees that Jerusalem is critical to Palestinian interests, but it, of course, is not promoting a final "one package" deal. Said Ismail Haniyeh:
"...no one can cede Jerusalem, the city from which the Prophet Muhammad ascended to the heavens. [Note: this is not from the Koran, which never mentions Jerusalem by name, but from later legend.]
"Jerusalem will be retrieved to the Palestinians not through negotiations or by hugging and kissing the enemy, but by way of jihad, blood, shahids and resistance. With Allah's help, Jerusalem will be returned."
~~~~~~~~~~
Haniyeh, it must be noted, added this:
"...the Israeli-Arabs are safeguarding the Al-Aksa Mosque; it is as if they are inside the belly of a whale. They represent the Islamic nation. We send them our regards, especially to Sheikh Raed Salah.
Sheikh Salad is founder of the Islamic Movement in Israel, a radical Islamist group of Arabs with Israeli citizenship working against the wellbeing of Israel.
~~~~~~~~~~
As happens on a regular basis, fallacious and inflammatory claims by Arabs regarding Israel's intent to destroy the Al Aksa Mosque on the Temple Mount have again been circulating. These charges serve at one and the same time to incite against Israel and rally various Arab factions together in a common cause.
Mohammad Al-Saqer, who is the parliamentary president of Kuwait, has just called upon the Arab League and other Arab groups to combat an Israeli scheme to divide the Al Aksa Mosque, so that it is half for Jews, half for Muslims.
He said that the Israeli digging under the Mosque has reached a dangerous stage. This charge about digging is ludicrous. For the remains of the Temple lie under the Mount and all digging is strictly forbidden by the Israeli Antiquities Authority and all rabbis. But let's not get confused by facts.
Much is being made, as well, of the anniversary of a fire set at the Al Aksa Mosque in 1969, which caused damage to one wing. And here, too, reality is obscured, for the fire was set by an Australian tourist, Michael Dennis Rohan, of the Worldwide Church of God, who told the police he hoped this would hasten the second coming of Jesus. That the fire was quickly put out by the Israelis is forgotten as the libel spreads that Israel paid Rohan to do it.
~~~~~~~~~~
And in the face of all of this, what does foreign minister and candidate for Kadima leadership Tzipi Livni have to say?
Given the increasing power of extremists, time is of the essence to reach an agreement with the Palestinians. The only possibility for reaching an agreement is with the leadership that exists now in the Palestinian Authority.
This is the stuff of nightmares. Rather than rushing, we should be pulling back and reassessing.
Can it truly be that she doesn't understand? The increasing power of extremists has already infected the Fatah party, which is moving towards a more radical (and Islamist) line. It renders the so-called moderates impotent, so that they would not be able to honor any agreement with us.
~~~~~~~~~~
Contrary to recent reports that she might go to elections if she secured victory in the Kadima primary, she is now calling for a unity government.
Interestingly, even though she continues to lead in Kadima polls, her lead weakens -- Mofaz gets stronger -- if the question is asked who would be preferred in time of national crisis. Apparently those responding with a move toward Mofaz, given this hypothetical situation, don't understand that we are in crisis now.
~~~~~~~~~~
Investigators are questioning Olmert for the sixth time today.
An attempt is being made by Israeli law enforcement officials to secure US immunity for Talansky for testimony he might still give here. He is in trouble with the FBI for what he has already revealed, and thus is afraid to come back and say more.
~~~~~~~~~~
We have been on guard for some time -- and Israel has warned Israelis traveling abroad to be watch for kidnapping attempts -- but now a warning has come from a sheikh in Hezbollah that they are coming close to time to exact revenge for the assassination of Imad Mugniyah in February.
"The revenge will be shocking and huge surprises are in store," he said. He spoke about all-out war, as Israel would respond to this attack.
Even though all precautions without reservation must be taken, I cannot help wonder how much of this is bombast. Why would they warn of an attack rather than using the element of surprise?
~~~~~~~~~~
Khaled Abu Rakaiek of the Tel Sheva local Bedouin Council in the Negev has been indicted in Beersheva court for attempting to make contact with an agent of Al Qaida and Global Jihad, with the intent of starting a cell to carry out terrorist attacks in Israel.
Abu Rakaiek was formerly a student at the Technological College of Beersheva, where he acquired computer knowledge that allowed him to surf the Internet, make contact with radical groups, and download information on preparing belts.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to a new Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs report by Lt. Col. (res.) Jonathan Dahoah Halevi, off-shoots of Al Qaida -- Jaish al-Islam (army of Islam), Army of the Umma, and Fatah al-Islam -- have freedom of movement in the Hamas-ruled Gaza. In fact, Jaish al-Islam has been officially recognized by Hamas as a legitimate armed movement in Gaza.
http://www.jcpa.org/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442&PID=0&IID=2408&TTL=Al-Qaeda_Affiliate_-_Jaish_al-Islam_-_Receives_Formal_Sanctuary_in_Hamas-Ruled_Gaz
And here we sit?
woman fired for refusing to work on Shabbat
Holmes Place gym demands that employee work on Jewish day of rest despite observing tradition
Nissan Shtrauchler
Israel Jewish Scene
“I can’t understand how people are made to work on Shabbat in a Jewish country,” says Shimrit Tzuberi, 25, who was recently fired from her job at the Holmes Place gym franchise after refusing to work on the Jewish day of rest. Shimrit’s father died a few months after she began working at the Holmes Place branch in Tel Aviv's Azrieli Towers. In light of his death, Shimrit decided that she would like to begin abiding by tradition and stop working on Shabbat.
The branch she worked at permitted her to refrain from working on Saturdays during the customary year of mourning.
However, a short time after the year’s termination, the branch’s management called the worker in for a meeting and gave her a letter clarifying that she is obligated to work the Saturday shift and that if she doesn’t do so, she won’t be able to continue working there.
During the following three weeks, Tzuberi was asked to work on Shabbat a couple of times, and after refusing, she received a letter of dismissal.
The Holmes Place franchise claimed on Thursday that “Tzuberi was not fired for not working on Shabbat and holidays but because of our dissatisfaction with her work, and this was clearly explained to her in the conversation we had about her dismissal.
“Throughout her employment in the club, the management received complaints regarding her service and her attitude. The management conducted a few meetings in which Shimrit was warned, and it was clarified to her that her behavior is unacceptable and warning letters were also sent to her on this issue.”
'Shimrit trying to obtain more money'
Tzuberi's lawyer, Attorney Yonit Shlain-Ben Or from the Israel Religious Action Center, claimed that Holmes Place’s version was inconsistent with the facts.
According to Ben Or, “Shimrit did indeed receive a warning about her work. If the problems continued afterwards, why did Tzuberi remain in her position for another year and a half in which she also instructed new girls on the position?”
Ben Or added that “instead of finding unjustified claims regarding the reasons for her dismissal, it is worthwhile for the company to come and thoroughly examine the reasons Tzuberi was fired.
“The struggle for the freedom of religion in Israel has to include defending a person’s right to refrain from working on the day of rest and to note the Sabbath in accordance with their world view and faith. The fact that Shimrit turned to an organization that works within a framework of Reform Judaism proves that the struggle for religious freedom serves all sectors of Israeli society; seculars and religious alike.”
The Holmes Place franchise responded by saying that “the reasons for Shimrit’s dismissal were practical even though she is pretending that they are religiously-connected. Shimrit received everything she was entitled to receive upon her dismissal and is trying to unacceptably receive additional money from the company.
“In general, it is important to emphasize that the Holmes Place franchise employs religious people and claims have never been made about the company treating these workers unacceptably or rudely or dismissing them over their religiousness.”
Israel Paying the Price for U.S.-Russia Rivalry
Ron Ben-Yishai (Ynet News)
* The Russians are trying to signal to the West: You're undermining our interests through our rivals in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus? We'll get back at you, and not only in the Caucasus, but also in your soft underbelly - by boosting your rivals in the Middle East. Syria was selected as the first to be wooed because recently it appeared that it has been trying to move closer to the West and restore its ties with the U.S. And here is the rest of it.
* However, Israel may end up paying the direct and heaviest price as a result of these warmer ties. The Syrian procurement list is topped by an advanced anti-aircraft system that provides aerial defense and can intercept missiles. In addition, Syria has been trying to purchase medium-range ground-to-ground missiles that are more accurate than anything it possesses today. Such missiles would enable Damascus to accurately target military installations in northern and central Israel. Syria is also seeking to purchase other anti-aircraft systems as well as optical warning systems; the combination of all of the above could significantly erode Israel's ability to protect itself against the thousands of ballistic missiles and rockets accumulated by Syria and used to threaten the Israeli home front.
* The deployment of Russian experts in Syria, in addition to the hundreds who are there already, would also greatly undermine Israel's ability to "punish" Syria should it attack us, while upgrading the Syrian military's intelligence and electronic warfare capabilities.
* By threatening to upgrade Syria's military capabilities vis-a-vis Israel, Russia is trying to threaten the U.S. Israel has become the target through which the Russians are trying to hurt America.
* By threatening to upgrade military ties with Syria, Moscow is hinting that should the West not step back and rescind the countermeasures adopted in relation to the Georgia war, the next in line for wooing would be Iran. Russia is already selling advanced arms to Iran while preventing harsher sanctions on Tehran in relation to its nuclear plan. Should Russia decide to act unrestrainedly, the damage to the West and Israel could be much graver.
* For the time being it appears that Russia is merely threatening, in a bid to deter the West. Officials in Moscow don't want to embark on a genuine cold war. This is why President Medvedev spoke with Prime Minister Olmert and attempted to allay his fears.
* The Russians are trying to signal to the West: You're undermining our interests through our rivals in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus? We'll get back at you, and not only in the Caucasus, but also in your soft underbelly - by boosting your rivals in the Middle East. Syria was selected as the first to be wooed because recently it appeared that it has been trying to move closer to the West and restore its ties with the U.S. And here is the rest of it.
* However, Israel may end up paying the direct and heaviest price as a result of these warmer ties. The Syrian procurement list is topped by an advanced anti-aircraft system that provides aerial defense and can intercept missiles. In addition, Syria has been trying to purchase medium-range ground-to-ground missiles that are more accurate than anything it possesses today. Such missiles would enable Damascus to accurately target military installations in northern and central Israel. Syria is also seeking to purchase other anti-aircraft systems as well as optical warning systems; the combination of all of the above could significantly erode Israel's ability to protect itself against the thousands of ballistic missiles and rockets accumulated by Syria and used to threaten the Israeli home front.
* The deployment of Russian experts in Syria, in addition to the hundreds who are there already, would also greatly undermine Israel's ability to "punish" Syria should it attack us, while upgrading the Syrian military's intelligence and electronic warfare capabilities.
* By threatening to upgrade Syria's military capabilities vis-a-vis Israel, Russia is trying to threaten the U.S. Israel has become the target through which the Russians are trying to hurt America.
* By threatening to upgrade military ties with Syria, Moscow is hinting that should the West not step back and rescind the countermeasures adopted in relation to the Georgia war, the next in line for wooing would be Iran. Russia is already selling advanced arms to Iran while preventing harsher sanctions on Tehran in relation to its nuclear plan. Should Russia decide to act unrestrainedly, the damage to the West and Israel could be much graver.
* For the time being it appears that Russia is merely threatening, in a bid to deter the West. Officials in Moscow don't want to embark on a genuine cold war. This is why President Medvedev spoke with Prime Minister Olmert and attempted to allay his fears.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Projection Which Does Not Fulfill Itself
“Globes”, interview with Yoram Ettinger, August 21, 2008
“…This is still the state of Israel, home of the Jewish People… Many experts projected a different reality. However, their projections have not been realized, which is very pleasant to remember, in advance of future projections… This is not demography, this is Demographobia. Expert projections are powerful. They influence national security, economic and social policy decisions. Yoram Ettinger, a member of the American-Israel Demographic Research Group (AIDRG), says that a set of projections almost delayed Israel’s declaration of independence. ‘The founder of Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics (ICBS), Professor Roberto Bacchi, attempted to convince Ben Gurion to postpone the establishment of the Jewish State.’ According to Ettinger, ‘Bacchi projected [e.g. in October 1944] that Israel’s Jews were doomed to become a minority. He determined that in 2001 Israel’s Jewish population would total 560,000 between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean [or 1.6 million Jews according to the optimist scenario of 1 million Olim]. Obviously, it was a mistake, and since then ICBS demographic projections have crashed against the rocks of reality.’
In 2008, the demographic threat is alive and kicking, exacerbating Israel’s existential anxiety. Ettinger claims that although ICBS documentation of current numbers is carved in stone, ICBS’ projections are problematic.’
According to ICBS projections, the share of Israel’s Arab population will grow by 2030. Ettinger maintains that ‘these projections are baseless. Such projections feed Demographobia [illogical fear of demography]. ICBS’ fundamental assumptions have been erroneous. In 1948, Professor Bacchi assumed that the Arab population will sustain [at least until 2001] high fertility rates of 6-7 births per woman, in contrast with 2 births per Jewish woman [2.1 is required to retain population level]. Professor Bacchi was devastatingly wrong. In 2008, Arab fertility rate is trending downward at 3.5, while Jews trend upward at 2.8 births per woman.’”
“…This is still the state of Israel, home of the Jewish People… Many experts projected a different reality. However, their projections have not been realized, which is very pleasant to remember, in advance of future projections… This is not demography, this is Demographobia. Expert projections are powerful. They influence national security, economic and social policy decisions. Yoram Ettinger, a member of the American-Israel Demographic Research Group (AIDRG), says that a set of projections almost delayed Israel’s declaration of independence. ‘The founder of Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics (ICBS), Professor Roberto Bacchi, attempted to convince Ben Gurion to postpone the establishment of the Jewish State.’ According to Ettinger, ‘Bacchi projected [e.g. in October 1944] that Israel’s Jews were doomed to become a minority. He determined that in 2001 Israel’s Jewish population would total 560,000 between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean [or 1.6 million Jews according to the optimist scenario of 1 million Olim]. Obviously, it was a mistake, and since then ICBS demographic projections have crashed against the rocks of reality.’
In 2008, the demographic threat is alive and kicking, exacerbating Israel’s existential anxiety. Ettinger claims that although ICBS documentation of current numbers is carved in stone, ICBS’ projections are problematic.’
According to ICBS projections, the share of Israel’s Arab population will grow by 2030. Ettinger maintains that ‘these projections are baseless. Such projections feed Demographobia [illogical fear of demography]. ICBS’ fundamental assumptions have been erroneous. In 1948, Professor Bacchi assumed that the Arab population will sustain [at least until 2001] high fertility rates of 6-7 births per woman, in contrast with 2 births per Jewish woman [2.1 is required to retain population level]. Professor Bacchi was devastatingly wrong. In 2008, Arab fertility rate is trending downward at 3.5, while Jews trend upward at 2.8 births per woman.’”
Israel’s Strategic Straits
P. David Hornik
FrontPageMagazine.com | 8/22/2008
With increasingly belligerent Russia accusing Israel this week of providing military aid to Georgia, Syrian president Bashar Assad is in Moscow for talks on possible strategic arms deals. It’s no coincidence; Russia, which has at least kept up a pretense of weighing Israeli concerns about the strengthening of its foes, is now signaling a tougher line. As for Assad, the sudden status as peace partner that Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert bestowed on him a few months ago already seems to be evaporating in the Hobbesian scramble.
On Tuesday Russia’s deputy chief of staff Col.-Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsy told a Moscow press conference that “In 2007, Israeli experts trained Georgian commandos in Georgia and there were plans to supply heavy weaponry, electronic weapons, tanks and other arms at a later date, but the deal didn't work out.”
Indeed, the “deal may not have worked out” because in the months leading up to the Russian-Georgian hostilities Israel had been rejecting new arms sales requests from Georgia. Russia is much bigger than Israel and, based on an assessment that a Russian-Georgian collision was imminent, Israel decided not to risk further piquing the bear.
A bear, though, that wants to be piqued—in other words, to fill the gap left by U.S. and Western strategic weakness—is a different matter. A state-certified Russian “analyst” told Syrian television that “The …military assistance provided by Israel to Georgia in its war against Russia will affect…Russia’s attitude toward Arab states. Russia will reexamine its ties with Israel, and it is not unlikely that Moscow will now decide to increase its military assistance to Arab countries in conflict with Israel, including Syria.”
The “assistance” could reportedly run from installing highly accurate Iskandar missiles in Syria to building Russian military, naval, and air bases there. Russia is also expected to deploy its S-300 anti-aircraft missiles in Iran by early next year, and Syria is also said to be bidding for S-300s.
Further darkening the clouds in Israel’s security environment is Hezbollah’s growing consolidation of its dominant role in Lebanon, with the new national unity cabinet having asserted “the right of Lebanon, its people, its army and the resistance [Hezbollah] to liberate its land”—code for attacking Israel. Hezbollah has also been pushing an accord with Lebanese Salafist groups in a bid to ease Shiite-Sunni strife and further unite the country behind Hezbollah’s aims.
The events led Olmert to send a clear warning to Beirut this week. During a visit to the headquarters of Israel’s Home Front Command, he remarked that “In the Second Lebanon War we had much greater means and capabilities, which we avoided using since [during that war] we fought against a terror organization and not a country. In this context, if Lebanon turns into a Hezbollah state, we won't restrain our response.”
Much depends on who’s going to be leading Israel in the near future. In the primaries for Olmert’s Kadima Party scheduled for next month, precipitated by Olmert’s legal troubles, the frontrunners are current foreign minister Tzipi Livni and current transportation minister Shaul Mofaz. A victory—and success in forming a new coalition—by Livni, who has no background in security matters and has been a lackluster chief diplomat bending to U.S. and Western demands, wouldn’t augur well. A government led by former chief of staff and defense minister, relatively hawkish Mofaz would offer more hope for functioning effectively in the Middle Eastern jungle.
A failure by either Livni or Mofaz to form a new government would mean new general elections—a test of whether the Israeli public has learned anything since the disastrous March 2006 vote that ushered in Olmert’s government, particularly the fact that only leaders who understand where Israel is situated—a backward, volatile region where military achievements substitute for the lack of achievements in any other sphere—are fit to be at Israel’s helm.
Israel’s public and leaders also need to grasp that in the waning days of the Bush administration and with his successor still unknown, U.S. understanding for Israel’s strategic concerns can hardly be taken for granted, and that the survivors in a jungle are those carrying the biggest sticks.
P. David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator living in Tel Aviv. He blogs at http://pdavidhornik.typepad.com/. He can be reached at pdavidh2001@yahoo.com.
FrontPageMagazine.com | 8/22/2008
With increasingly belligerent Russia accusing Israel this week of providing military aid to Georgia, Syrian president Bashar Assad is in Moscow for talks on possible strategic arms deals. It’s no coincidence; Russia, which has at least kept up a pretense of weighing Israeli concerns about the strengthening of its foes, is now signaling a tougher line. As for Assad, the sudden status as peace partner that Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert bestowed on him a few months ago already seems to be evaporating in the Hobbesian scramble.
On Tuesday Russia’s deputy chief of staff Col.-Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsy told a Moscow press conference that “In 2007, Israeli experts trained Georgian commandos in Georgia and there were plans to supply heavy weaponry, electronic weapons, tanks and other arms at a later date, but the deal didn't work out.”
Indeed, the “deal may not have worked out” because in the months leading up to the Russian-Georgian hostilities Israel had been rejecting new arms sales requests from Georgia. Russia is much bigger than Israel and, based on an assessment that a Russian-Georgian collision was imminent, Israel decided not to risk further piquing the bear.
A bear, though, that wants to be piqued—in other words, to fill the gap left by U.S. and Western strategic weakness—is a different matter. A state-certified Russian “analyst” told Syrian television that “The …military assistance provided by Israel to Georgia in its war against Russia will affect…Russia’s attitude toward Arab states. Russia will reexamine its ties with Israel, and it is not unlikely that Moscow will now decide to increase its military assistance to Arab countries in conflict with Israel, including Syria.”
The “assistance” could reportedly run from installing highly accurate Iskandar missiles in Syria to building Russian military, naval, and air bases there. Russia is also expected to deploy its S-300 anti-aircraft missiles in Iran by early next year, and Syria is also said to be bidding for S-300s.
Further darkening the clouds in Israel’s security environment is Hezbollah’s growing consolidation of its dominant role in Lebanon, with the new national unity cabinet having asserted “the right of Lebanon, its people, its army and the resistance [Hezbollah] to liberate its land”—code for attacking Israel. Hezbollah has also been pushing an accord with Lebanese Salafist groups in a bid to ease Shiite-Sunni strife and further unite the country behind Hezbollah’s aims.
The events led Olmert to send a clear warning to Beirut this week. During a visit to the headquarters of Israel’s Home Front Command, he remarked that “In the Second Lebanon War we had much greater means and capabilities, which we avoided using since [during that war] we fought against a terror organization and not a country. In this context, if Lebanon turns into a Hezbollah state, we won't restrain our response.”
Much depends on who’s going to be leading Israel in the near future. In the primaries for Olmert’s Kadima Party scheduled for next month, precipitated by Olmert’s legal troubles, the frontrunners are current foreign minister Tzipi Livni and current transportation minister Shaul Mofaz. A victory—and success in forming a new coalition—by Livni, who has no background in security matters and has been a lackluster chief diplomat bending to U.S. and Western demands, wouldn’t augur well. A government led by former chief of staff and defense minister, relatively hawkish Mofaz would offer more hope for functioning effectively in the Middle Eastern jungle.
A failure by either Livni or Mofaz to form a new government would mean new general elections—a test of whether the Israeli public has learned anything since the disastrous March 2006 vote that ushered in Olmert’s government, particularly the fact that only leaders who understand where Israel is situated—a backward, volatile region where military achievements substitute for the lack of achievements in any other sphere—are fit to be at Israel’s helm.
Israel’s public and leaders also need to grasp that in the waning days of the Bush administration and with his successor still unknown, U.S. understanding for Israel’s strategic concerns can hardly be taken for granted, and that the survivors in a jungle are those carrying the biggest sticks.
P. David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator living in Tel Aviv. He blogs at http://pdavidhornik.typepad.com/. He can be reached at pdavidh2001@yahoo.com.
THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE THAT HASN'T YET STARTED
DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
August 22, 2008
In following a presidential race, the most important way to understand what is happening is to follow voter responses to open ended questions. Those are questions which ask "What do you like the most about Barack Obama?" and "What do you like the least about Barack Obama." These questions, which let voters tell pollsters what they think in their own words offer the best way to figure out what is really going on.Fortunately, the Fox News tracking polling for the election has now included these questions and the results offer an excellent insight into the current state of the race.
Oddly for a race that has been going on for two years and holds the nation rapt in attention, the contest is still in a very, very primitive phase. Voters' level of awareness of the issues or of the candidates is quite limited. Neither campaign has done much to project its issues or its message and the attacks on one another, which increasingly dominate the dialogue, show little resonance among most voters.
Overwhelmingly, the thing voters like the most about Obama is that he is new, a fresh face, for change, intelligent, inspiring, a good speaker, outspoken, and charismatic. 57% of all voters use one of these phrases to describe him, including 48% of Republicans and 55% of Independents. But only 13% of all voters cite any specific position of Obama's including his signature opposition to the war in Iraq. Only 2% mentioned the war in citing what they liked about Obama and only 1% cited the economy and jobs. So Obama is still a personality running for office and the voters have yet to identify him with any policy or proposal. And the one identification he used to have -- opposition to the war -- has faded. But Obama has vast potential appeal. Even though the Fox News poll gave him only a three point lead over McCain, four voters in five cite something they like about Obama in open ended questions (including 66% of Republicans and 78% of Independents).
Order a personally signed, first edition copy of FLEECED from Barnes&Noble.com. Click here now! Opposition to Obama is also centered on fears of his youth, inexperience, and lack of qualifications. 31% of all voters, 33% of Independents, and 29% of Democrats cited this concern in open ended questions. But just as Obama's positive ratings do not include much in the way of specific mentions of his issue positions, so his negatives don't either. Only 19% of all voters said they disliked his liberalism, connection with Rev Wright, radicalism, religious views, elitism or even said they disagreed with him about anything. Another 8% disliked his flip flops on issues. =2 0But the potential for Obama to fall apart is also enormous. 78% of all voters, including two-thirds of all Democrats and four-fifths of all independents cited something about Obama that they did not like.
So everybody basically agrees that Obama is a new fresh face who advocates change but is too inexperienced and lacks some or all of the qualifications needed for the job. The question of which part of this statement outweighs the other is the issue on which the election hinges.
But just as Obama has not succeeded in identifying himself with any specific issue, idea, or proposal (and voters might be asking, as they did of Gary Hart, "where's the beef?) so McCain and the Republicans have failed to link him to extreme liberalism, radicalism, Rev Wright or any of the identifications they have been trying to pin on the Democrat. Both campaigns have almost totally failed to move past square one on Obama.
For McCain, it's pretty much the same story. 33% of all voters see him as experienced and qualified (including 26% of Democrats and 34% of Independents). 10% like his military record. 7% praise his honesty. And 9% say they approve of how he would handle foreign policy.
But McCain's negatives are the flip side of his positives. 24% of all voters and 26% of Republicans and 20% of independents say he is too old. And another 23% feel he is too conservative, too close to Bush, or too supportive of the war. 4% criticize his flip flops.
So Americans of all parties have reached a consensus that Obama is young, charismatic, intelligent, articulate, and in favor of change but also that he is too inexperienced, possibly too liberal, and less qualified than they would like
And they also have come to a common agreement, also cutting across party lines, that McCain is experienced, able, an heroic veteran, and honest but also that he is too old, possibly too conservative, and perhaps too pro-war.
Just as 80% of all voters find something to praise in Obama and 78% find something to criticize, so 80% have something good to say about McCain and 82% have some criticism to make.
This broad agreement on the pros and cons of each candidate and the willingness of even their partisans to consider their negatives and of their enemies to concede their positives is highly unusual and underscores why the race is so close.
But it also suggests that it is very volatile. Either campaign can paint the other with issue negatives if they start going about it effectively.
It is a glaring omission that only 1% cite Obama's tax positions as a negative and that nobody mentioned his opposition to offshore oil drilling.
Likewise, how odd that only 15% cited specifically McCain's support for the war and his connection with Bush as a negative.
On the other hand, neither Obama's health care nor McCain's energy proposals have registered with the voters and few can name any specific issue position for either man of which they approve.
For a campaign that has been going on for two years, how odd that voter opinions of the candidates are still so unformed and general.
August 22, 2008
In following a presidential race, the most important way to understand what is happening is to follow voter responses to open ended questions. Those are questions which ask "What do you like the most about Barack Obama?" and "What do you like the least about Barack Obama." These questions, which let voters tell pollsters what they think in their own words offer the best way to figure out what is really going on.Fortunately, the Fox News tracking polling for the election has now included these questions and the results offer an excellent insight into the current state of the race.
Oddly for a race that has been going on for two years and holds the nation rapt in attention, the contest is still in a very, very primitive phase. Voters' level of awareness of the issues or of the candidates is quite limited. Neither campaign has done much to project its issues or its message and the attacks on one another, which increasingly dominate the dialogue, show little resonance among most voters.
Overwhelmingly, the thing voters like the most about Obama is that he is new, a fresh face, for change, intelligent, inspiring, a good speaker, outspoken, and charismatic. 57% of all voters use one of these phrases to describe him, including 48% of Republicans and 55% of Independents. But only 13% of all voters cite any specific position of Obama's including his signature opposition to the war in Iraq. Only 2% mentioned the war in citing what they liked about Obama and only 1% cited the economy and jobs. So Obama is still a personality running for office and the voters have yet to identify him with any policy or proposal. And the one identification he used to have -- opposition to the war -- has faded. But Obama has vast potential appeal. Even though the Fox News poll gave him only a three point lead over McCain, four voters in five cite something they like about Obama in open ended questions (including 66% of Republicans and 78% of Independents).
Order a personally signed, first edition copy of FLEECED from Barnes&Noble.com. Click here now! Opposition to Obama is also centered on fears of his youth, inexperience, and lack of qualifications. 31% of all voters, 33% of Independents, and 29% of Democrats cited this concern in open ended questions. But just as Obama's positive ratings do not include much in the way of specific mentions of his issue positions, so his negatives don't either. Only 19% of all voters said they disliked his liberalism, connection with Rev Wright, radicalism, religious views, elitism or even said they disagreed with him about anything. Another 8% disliked his flip flops on issues. =2 0But the potential for Obama to fall apart is also enormous. 78% of all voters, including two-thirds of all Democrats and four-fifths of all independents cited something about Obama that they did not like.
So everybody basically agrees that Obama is a new fresh face who advocates change but is too inexperienced and lacks some or all of the qualifications needed for the job. The question of which part of this statement outweighs the other is the issue on which the election hinges.
But just as Obama has not succeeded in identifying himself with any specific issue, idea, or proposal (and voters might be asking, as they did of Gary Hart, "where's the beef?) so McCain and the Republicans have failed to link him to extreme liberalism, radicalism, Rev Wright or any of the identifications they have been trying to pin on the Democrat. Both campaigns have almost totally failed to move past square one on Obama.
For McCain, it's pretty much the same story. 33% of all voters see him as experienced and qualified (including 26% of Democrats and 34% of Independents). 10% like his military record. 7% praise his honesty. And 9% say they approve of how he would handle foreign policy.
But McCain's negatives are the flip side of his positives. 24% of all voters and 26% of Republicans and 20% of independents say he is too old. And another 23% feel he is too conservative, too close to Bush, or too supportive of the war. 4% criticize his flip flops.
So Americans of all parties have reached a consensus that Obama is young, charismatic, intelligent, articulate, and in favor of change but also that he is too inexperienced, possibly too liberal, and less qualified than they would like
And they also have come to a common agreement, also cutting across party lines, that McCain is experienced, able, an heroic veteran, and honest but also that he is too old, possibly too conservative, and perhaps too pro-war.
Just as 80% of all voters find something to praise in Obama and 78% find something to criticize, so 80% have something good to say about McCain and 82% have some criticism to make.
This broad agreement on the pros and cons of each candidate and the willingness of even their partisans to consider their negatives and of their enemies to concede their positives is highly unusual and underscores why the race is so close.
But it also suggests that it is very volatile. Either campaign can paint the other with issue negatives if they start going about it effectively.
It is a glaring omission that only 1% cite Obama's tax positions as a negative and that nobody mentioned his opposition to offshore oil drilling.
Likewise, how odd that only 15% cited specifically McCain's support for the war and his connection with Bush as a negative.
On the other hand, neither Obama's health care nor McCain's energy proposals have registered with the voters and few can name any specific issue position for either man of which they approve.
For a campaign that has been going on for two years, how odd that voter opinions of the candidates are still so unformed and general.
Obama Slammed Over Clarence Thomas Remark
By: Rick Pedraza
Critics are harshly attacking Sen. Barack Obama’s condescending remarks about U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, saying they were not only demeaning to Thomas, but also ludicrous Appearing at a weekend forum at Pastor Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., Obama and Republican presidential rival John McCain were both asked which Supreme Court Justices they would not have nominated.
Obama declared that he would not have nominated Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court because he was not a “strong enough jurist” for the job.
"I don't think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation, setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the Constitution," Obama answered.
Rachel Brand, former assistant attorney general under President George W. Bush, told Cybercast News Service the remarks were “condescending.” She noted that Thomas’ jurisprudence background lead to him being confirmed by the Senate to three positions, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which Brand called the “second-most prestigious court in the land.”
Wendy Long, who worked as a law clerk for Thomas, agreed with Brand by saying Obama’s statement was “ludicrous.”
“They reveal that Obama is ignorant of facts and history, misunderstands the Constitution, and contradicts himself in his own alleged criteria for Supreme Court nominees,” she told CNS.
Even Douglas Kmiec, an Obama supporter and constitutional law scholar at Pepperdine University, said he was “disappointed” Obama mentioned Thomas.
“First of all, I think Justice Clarence Thomas is one of the best appointments that have been made by Republican presidents — or any presidents, for that matter — in recent times,” Kmiec told CNS.
Kmiec noted that Thomas is the only Supreme Court Justice who prior to his appointment “recognized the relationship between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution — that the Constitution is a means of indicating the inalienable rights that are traceable to our Creator.”
Obama added that he also wouldn't have nominated Antonin Scalia, and perhaps not John Roberts, “though he assured the audience that at least they were smart enough for the job,” The Wall Street Journal noted.
In an editorial Monday, The Journal observed that Obama “isn't yet four years out of the Illinois state Senate, has never held a hearing of note [with] his U.S. Senate subcommittee, and had an unremarkable record as both a ‘community organizer’ and law school lecturer.”
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Critics are harshly attacking Sen. Barack Obama’s condescending remarks about U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, saying they were not only demeaning to Thomas, but also ludicrous Appearing at a weekend forum at Pastor Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., Obama and Republican presidential rival John McCain were both asked which Supreme Court Justices they would not have nominated.
Obama declared that he would not have nominated Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court because he was not a “strong enough jurist” for the job.
"I don't think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation, setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the Constitution," Obama answered.
Rachel Brand, former assistant attorney general under President George W. Bush, told Cybercast News Service the remarks were “condescending.” She noted that Thomas’ jurisprudence background lead to him being confirmed by the Senate to three positions, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which Brand called the “second-most prestigious court in the land.”
Wendy Long, who worked as a law clerk for Thomas, agreed with Brand by saying Obama’s statement was “ludicrous.”
“They reveal that Obama is ignorant of facts and history, misunderstands the Constitution, and contradicts himself in his own alleged criteria for Supreme Court nominees,” she told CNS.
Even Douglas Kmiec, an Obama supporter and constitutional law scholar at Pepperdine University, said he was “disappointed” Obama mentioned Thomas.
“First of all, I think Justice Clarence Thomas is one of the best appointments that have been made by Republican presidents — or any presidents, for that matter — in recent times,” Kmiec told CNS.
Kmiec noted that Thomas is the only Supreme Court Justice who prior to his appointment “recognized the relationship between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution — that the Constitution is a means of indicating the inalienable rights that are traceable to our Creator.”
Obama added that he also wouldn't have nominated Antonin Scalia, and perhaps not John Roberts, “though he assured the audience that at least they were smart enough for the job,” The Wall Street Journal noted.
In an editorial Monday, The Journal observed that Obama “isn't yet four years out of the Illinois state Senate, has never held a hearing of note [with] his U.S. Senate subcommittee, and had an unremarkable record as both a ‘community organizer’ and law school lecturer.”
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Bank of China Sued in Los Angeles Court for Aiding Terror Attacks in Israel
Suit by victims of rocket attacks and suicide bombings in the Jewish state details how Bank of China transferred millions of dollars to Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorist groups, and rebuffed demand by Israeli counterterrorism officials to halt payments Over 100 victims of terrorist attacks carried out by the Hamas and Palestine Islamic Jihad (“PIJ”) terror organizations in Israel between 2004 and 2007 have filed an historic civil action in Los Angeles Superior Court against China’s largest bank, the Bank of China Ltd. (“BOC”). The suit, Zahavi v. Bank of China, seeks both compensatory and punitive damages.
The plaintiffs allege in their civil complaint that starting in 2003, BOC executed dozens of wire transfers for the Hamas and PIJ totaling several million dollars. These dollar transfers were initiated by the PIJ and Hamas leadership in Iran and Syria, were processed through BOC’s branches in the United States and were sent on to a BOC account in China operated by a senior operative of the Hamas and PIJ. From there, the funds were transferred to Hamas and PIJ leaders in the Gaza Strip and West Bank and used to carry out terrorist attacks.
In April 2005, Israeli counterterrorism officers met with officials from the Chinese Ministry of Public Security and China’s Central Bank regarding these Hamas and PIJ wire transfers. The Israelis demanded that the Chinese officials take action to prevent BOC from making any further such transfers. Despite the Israeli warnings, the BOC – with the Chinese government’s approval – continued to wire terrorist funds for the Hamas and PIJ.
The plaintiffs, who are represented by attorneys Federico C. Sayre of Los Angeles, Robert J. Tolchin of New York and Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of Israel, include the family of Afik Zahavi, a four year-old boy who was murdered on June 28, 2004 in a Hamas missile attack in the town of Sderot. The toddler was on his way to nursery school when he was killed. For more details see www.israel-mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Memorial/2004/Afik+Zahavi.htm
Other plaintiffs include the families of Emi Elmaliah, and Michael Saadon, who were murdered on January 27, 2007 in a suicide bombing in a bakery in Eilat. The attack was carried out by a PIJ bomber from Gaza. See: www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Suicide+bombing+in+Eilat+bakery+29-Jan-2007.htm
Attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner stated that: “BOC knowingly assisted Hamas and the Islamic Jihad to carry out terrorist attacks with the full approval of the Chinese government, and rejected requests by the Israeli government to cease and desist. BOC even had the chutzpah to make these funds transfers through its U.S. branches right under the nose of the Justice Department, despite the fact that Hamas and the PIJ are designated terrorist organizations and that such wire transfers are a crime under American law. We expect BOC to now pay very heavily for its support for terrorism.”
A copy of the complaint is available here:
http://www.snapdrive.net/qs/65ea3b0a532f
For more information please contact: Nitsana Darshan-Leitner
(US) 212-591-0073
Email: info@israellawcenter.org
The plaintiffs allege in their civil complaint that starting in 2003, BOC executed dozens of wire transfers for the Hamas and PIJ totaling several million dollars. These dollar transfers were initiated by the PIJ and Hamas leadership in Iran and Syria, were processed through BOC’s branches in the United States and were sent on to a BOC account in China operated by a senior operative of the Hamas and PIJ. From there, the funds were transferred to Hamas and PIJ leaders in the Gaza Strip and West Bank and used to carry out terrorist attacks.
In April 2005, Israeli counterterrorism officers met with officials from the Chinese Ministry of Public Security and China’s Central Bank regarding these Hamas and PIJ wire transfers. The Israelis demanded that the Chinese officials take action to prevent BOC from making any further such transfers. Despite the Israeli warnings, the BOC – with the Chinese government’s approval – continued to wire terrorist funds for the Hamas and PIJ.
The plaintiffs, who are represented by attorneys Federico C. Sayre of Los Angeles, Robert J. Tolchin of New York and Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of Israel, include the family of Afik Zahavi, a four year-old boy who was murdered on June 28, 2004 in a Hamas missile attack in the town of Sderot. The toddler was on his way to nursery school when he was killed. For more details see www.israel-mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Memorial/2004/Afik+Zahavi.htm
Other plaintiffs include the families of Emi Elmaliah, and Michael Saadon, who were murdered on January 27, 2007 in a suicide bombing in a bakery in Eilat. The attack was carried out by a PIJ bomber from Gaza. See: www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Suicide+bombing+in+Eilat+bakery+29-Jan-2007.htm
Attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner stated that: “BOC knowingly assisted Hamas and the Islamic Jihad to carry out terrorist attacks with the full approval of the Chinese government, and rejected requests by the Israeli government to cease and desist. BOC even had the chutzpah to make these funds transfers through its U.S. branches right under the nose of the Justice Department, despite the fact that Hamas and the PIJ are designated terrorist organizations and that such wire transfers are a crime under American law. We expect BOC to now pay very heavily for its support for terrorism.”
A copy of the complaint is available here:
http://www.snapdrive.net/qs/65ea3b0a532f
For more information please contact: Nitsana Darshan-Leitner
(US) 212-591-0073
Email: info@israellawcenter.org
The Case Against Obama - In His Own Words
Lorie Byrd
Friday, August 22, 2008
It would be hard to make a better case against a Barack Obama presidency than the one Obama has made in his own words. The most memorable thing about Obama’s speeches is not generally what he says, but rather how large and enthusiastic the audiences are. If voters pay attention only to the symbolism and get caught up in the excitement of the Obamessiah and his throngs of fainting disciples, he stands a good chance of winning in November. If voters pay attention instead to the things Obama is saying, the case against an Obama presidency will be clear. Obama’s youthful appearance is often cited as one of his biggest assets, but when he opens his mouth he doesn’t always come off as presidential or even particularly intelligent. The political figure who perhaps has received the most ridicule in the past twenty years is Dan Quayle (due largely to a misspelled word on a flashcard he read during an appearance at a school). I wonder how much more grief would have been heaped on Vice President Quayle if he had made any of the following gaffes committed by Barack Obama (from Michelle Malkin):
· Last May, he claimed that Kansas tornadoes killed a whopping 10,000 people: “In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed.” The actual death toll: 12.
· Earlier this month in Oregon, he redrew the map of the United States: “Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.”
· Last March, on the anniversary of the Bloody Sunday march in Selma, Alabama, he claimed his parents united as a direct result of the civil rights movement: “There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born.” Obama was born in 1961. The Selma march took place in 1965.
Some of Obama’s gaffes go beyond simple slips of the tongue and confusion over numbers though and display a lack of knowledge on important issues as was the case when he commented on the war in Afghanistan and the lack of translators: “We only have a certain number of them and if they are all in Iraq, then it’s harder for us to use them in Afghanistan.” As Malkin pointed out, the real reason it’s “harder for us to use them” in Afghanistan is because Iraqis speak Arabic or Kurdish, while Afghanis speak Pashto, Farsi, or other non-Arabic languages. Worse than the lack of knowledge of the languages spoken in other nations is that he lacks an understanding of the threat posed by some of them. Or maybe he doesn’t. It is really a bit confusing. In Portland, Oregon, Obama said of Iran, “They don't pose a serious threat to us.” The following day in Billings, Montana he said: “I’ve made it clear for years that the threat from Iran is grave.” Maybe it depends what the definitions of “grave” and “serious” are. As I said, it is all bit confusing. Maybe that is why so many focus on the crowds at Obama’s events, rather than to what Obama is actually saying to them.
If voters are paying attention to what Barack Obama says they will see not only a lack of knowledge of important issues, but on some of the issues where he is informed, an attempt to hide his true position and past votes.
In the Saddleback Church forum last week, in response to Rev. Rick Warren’s question, “At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?” Obama responded: “Well, uh, you know, I think that whether you're looking at it from a theological perspective or, uh, a scientific perspective, uh, answering that question with specificity, uh, you know, is, is, uh, above my pay grade.” As blogger Cassy Fiano points out, the idea that someone running for President would dodge such an important question in that way is “beyond ridiculous” and obviously an attempt to be as ambiguous as possible so that he does not offend those who disagree with the very radical positions he has taken on the issue of abortion during his political career. Obama’s past comments and votes on abortion legislation definitely say more about him than anything he is saying on the subject now.
Another example of actions speaking louder than words can be found when we listen to Obama’s money talk. According to Obama’s tax returns from 2000-2006, the Obamas have given far less to charity than John McCain has. In all but the two most recent years reported, the Obamas gave around 1% or less of their income to charity. Their contributions increased in 2005 and 2006 to 4.7% and 6.1% respectively, but still are far short of those of McCain who gave 28.6% in 2006 and 27.3% in 2007. But if you listen to Obama’s words you will hear that he is very concerned about the least among us.
According to the following statement from an Obama speech earlier this summer, it appears pretty much everyone who isn’t Obama is a lesser being: “...I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth. This was the moment -- this was the time -- when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves and our highest ideals.” If Obama is able to slow the rise of the oceans then ending poverty and securing peace should be a cakewalk. I suppose he will only be able to accomplish such feats if elected President though.
This week John McCain pulled ahead of Obama in many polls and projections. Maybe voters have finally started listening to what Obama has been saying now that the thrill of his oratory is wearing thin.
Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
Saudis: Jews give you cancer!
Our Friends and Allies the Saudis Update: "Saudis warn: Israeli products cancerous," by Rachelle Kliger for the Media Line News Agency, August 21 (thanks to Writer Mom): Saudi trade officials are warning against what they claim to be cancerous products made in Israel and other countries that are allegedly being smuggled into the kingdom.
The Riyadh Chamber of Commerce and Industry said smugglers are bringing in the products through Djibouti, Yemen and Somalia. The chamber was urging importers and traders to be watchful regarding this merchandise.
The products, said to be manufactured in Israel, China and Taiwan, include pesticides, agricultural fertilizers, children's toys, canned foods, perfumes, cigarettes, juices and candy.
Israel and Saudi Arabia have no diplomatic relations.
Last month the Saudi Interior Ministry said it had information that smugglers on the coastal areas of the Arabian Peninsula were bringing in illegal and fake products.
Saudi authorities were asking importers to take the necessary steps to stop Israeli products from entering the kingdom.
An unnamed official from the Israeli trade industry told The Media Line that the rumors of carcinogenic products being smuggled from Israel into Saudi Arabia were "improbable."
"Every so often we see reports of this kind in the Saudi media. I believe it's part of the Saudi demonization of relations with Israel," the source said....
Uh, yeah.
Thanks Dhimmi Watch
The Riyadh Chamber of Commerce and Industry said smugglers are bringing in the products through Djibouti, Yemen and Somalia. The chamber was urging importers and traders to be watchful regarding this merchandise.
The products, said to be manufactured in Israel, China and Taiwan, include pesticides, agricultural fertilizers, children's toys, canned foods, perfumes, cigarettes, juices and candy.
Israel and Saudi Arabia have no diplomatic relations.
Last month the Saudi Interior Ministry said it had information that smugglers on the coastal areas of the Arabian Peninsula were bringing in illegal and fake products.
Saudi authorities were asking importers to take the necessary steps to stop Israeli products from entering the kingdom.
An unnamed official from the Israeli trade industry told The Media Line that the rumors of carcinogenic products being smuggled from Israel into Saudi Arabia were "improbable."
"Every so often we see reports of this kind in the Saudi media. I believe it's part of the Saudi demonization of relations with Israel," the source said....
Uh, yeah.
Thanks Dhimmi Watch
Thursday, August 21, 2008
BARACK'S FAVORS FOR CORRUPT CRONY
DAVID FREDDOSO
August 21, 2008 --
Barack Obama has admitted it was "boneheaded" to get involved in a land deal with Tony Rezko, his friend and fund-raiser. But the media's focus on that deal has distracted from the bigger question: Why would Obama become involved in any deal with a man like Rezko, who made his living sponging off taxpayers and corrupting public officials? Because, by the time of the deal, the two already had a long relationship of mutual benefit. The deal's details are well-known: On June 15, 2005, Obama bought a gorgeous house in Hyde Park for $1.65 million - $300,000 below the list price. Rezko bought the empty but attractive lot next door from the same seller at the same time; Obama would later buy part of Rezko's lot, overpaying him.
The transaction was shady, but not obviously corrupt. The overall Obama-Rezko relationship looks worse.
After Rezko's 2006 indictment on unrelated federal corruption charges, Obama denied unequivocally that he'd ever helped the man: "I've never done any favors for him."
That's simply false. Rezko was a genius of corporate welfare who enriched himself at taxpayers' expense, both legally and illegally, via his multiple political connections. Yes, he went to others for the illegal deals that landed him in prison. But Rezko depended on Obama when he wanted legal access to the state treasury. The arrangement was a far cry from Obama's image of "change and hope."
It's impossible to know Obama's motives. But several of his official acts benefited Rezko, who in turn raised some $250,000 for Obama's campaigns.
In October 1998, Obama wrote city and state officials, urging them to give Rezko $14 million to build an apartment complex outside of Obama's state Senate district. The Chicago Sun-Times noted last year that Obama's request included $855,000 in "development fees" for Rezko and for another developer, Allison Davis, who happened to be Obama's old law-firm boss. Obama's spokesman said it was just a coincidence that the state senator wrote letters to obtain millions of dollars for his two longtime friends.
In fact, Obama was a dependable ally of subsidized developers in the Legislature, giving Rezko and others broader help as well. In "The Case Against Barack Obama," I identify and parse six housing bills with which Obama was closely involved. A few examples:
* In 2001, Obama cosponsored a bill allowing developers to sell state tax credits to others and pocket half of the proceeds.
* In 2002 and 2004, he was chief cosponsor of a bill to authorize a rent-subsidy fund giving "grants . . . directly to developers" of low-income housing. Seventy percent of the money was earmarked for the Chicago area.
* Obama cosponsored the Illinois Housing Initiative Act of 2003, which required the governor to develop a plan for more low-income housing and "provide[d] for funding for housing construction and rehabilitation and supportive services."
* In 2003, Obama voted for the Affordable Housing Planning and Appeal Act, which required Illinois municipalities to make 10 percent of their housing units "affordable" (by definition, this included subsidized housing). This forced 46 communities just outside of Chicago to create more than 7,000 new "affordable" units - a huge boost in demand for area developers. The bill also provided loopholes for developers to circumvent local ordinances and regulations.
After voting for this measure (it passed narrowly), Obama then cosponsored a new bill that moved up its implementation by more than a year.
These and the other Obama-backed bills helped make millionaires of Rezko and other slum developers at taxpayers' expense. The developers - including his former law boss and an adviser to his current campaign - reciprocated, together giving and raising hundreds of thousands of dollars for Obama's campaigns.
To sum up: Obama got them subsidies to build. He secured them a steady income of government rent subsidies. He arranged special tax credits and abatements for them. He backed measures that increased demand for their services, and helped them legally circumvent local laws.
Perhaps Obama acted with only the poor in mind. Yet some of his developer friends weren't so conscientious - especially Rezko.
Notably, Rezko's company claimed that it lacked the funds to heat one of its 11 buildings in Obama's state Senate district from December 1996 to February 1997. But Rezko still managed to write a $1,000 check to Obama's campaign fund on Jan. 14. That month, his tenants shivered as 19 inches of snow fell on northern Illinois.
With his early and large investments in Obama, Rezko helped the Democratic nominee get to where he is today. Obama, meanwhile, helped Rezko with his legislative work and his letter-writing. Given this close working relationship, the Obama-Rezko land deal is far less surprising.
David Freddoso, a political reporter for National Review, is the author of "The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate."
August 21, 2008 --
Barack Obama has admitted it was "boneheaded" to get involved in a land deal with Tony Rezko, his friend and fund-raiser. But the media's focus on that deal has distracted from the bigger question: Why would Obama become involved in any deal with a man like Rezko, who made his living sponging off taxpayers and corrupting public officials? Because, by the time of the deal, the two already had a long relationship of mutual benefit. The deal's details are well-known: On June 15, 2005, Obama bought a gorgeous house in Hyde Park for $1.65 million - $300,000 below the list price. Rezko bought the empty but attractive lot next door from the same seller at the same time; Obama would later buy part of Rezko's lot, overpaying him.
The transaction was shady, but not obviously corrupt. The overall Obama-Rezko relationship looks worse.
After Rezko's 2006 indictment on unrelated federal corruption charges, Obama denied unequivocally that he'd ever helped the man: "I've never done any favors for him."
That's simply false. Rezko was a genius of corporate welfare who enriched himself at taxpayers' expense, both legally and illegally, via his multiple political connections. Yes, he went to others for the illegal deals that landed him in prison. But Rezko depended on Obama when he wanted legal access to the state treasury. The arrangement was a far cry from Obama's image of "change and hope."
It's impossible to know Obama's motives. But several of his official acts benefited Rezko, who in turn raised some $250,000 for Obama's campaigns.
In October 1998, Obama wrote city and state officials, urging them to give Rezko $14 million to build an apartment complex outside of Obama's state Senate district. The Chicago Sun-Times noted last year that Obama's request included $855,000 in "development fees" for Rezko and for another developer, Allison Davis, who happened to be Obama's old law-firm boss. Obama's spokesman said it was just a coincidence that the state senator wrote letters to obtain millions of dollars for his two longtime friends.
In fact, Obama was a dependable ally of subsidized developers in the Legislature, giving Rezko and others broader help as well. In "The Case Against Barack Obama," I identify and parse six housing bills with which Obama was closely involved. A few examples:
* In 2001, Obama cosponsored a bill allowing developers to sell state tax credits to others and pocket half of the proceeds.
* In 2002 and 2004, he was chief cosponsor of a bill to authorize a rent-subsidy fund giving "grants . . . directly to developers" of low-income housing. Seventy percent of the money was earmarked for the Chicago area.
* Obama cosponsored the Illinois Housing Initiative Act of 2003, which required the governor to develop a plan for more low-income housing and "provide[d] for funding for housing construction and rehabilitation and supportive services."
* In 2003, Obama voted for the Affordable Housing Planning and Appeal Act, which required Illinois municipalities to make 10 percent of their housing units "affordable" (by definition, this included subsidized housing). This forced 46 communities just outside of Chicago to create more than 7,000 new "affordable" units - a huge boost in demand for area developers. The bill also provided loopholes for developers to circumvent local ordinances and regulations.
After voting for this measure (it passed narrowly), Obama then cosponsored a new bill that moved up its implementation by more than a year.
These and the other Obama-backed bills helped make millionaires of Rezko and other slum developers at taxpayers' expense. The developers - including his former law boss and an adviser to his current campaign - reciprocated, together giving and raising hundreds of thousands of dollars for Obama's campaigns.
To sum up: Obama got them subsidies to build. He secured them a steady income of government rent subsidies. He arranged special tax credits and abatements for them. He backed measures that increased demand for their services, and helped them legally circumvent local laws.
Perhaps Obama acted with only the poor in mind. Yet some of his developer friends weren't so conscientious - especially Rezko.
Notably, Rezko's company claimed that it lacked the funds to heat one of its 11 buildings in Obama's state Senate district from December 1996 to February 1997. But Rezko still managed to write a $1,000 check to Obama's campaign fund on Jan. 14. That month, his tenants shivered as 19 inches of snow fell on northern Illinois.
With his early and large investments in Obama, Rezko helped the Democratic nominee get to where he is today. Obama, meanwhile, helped Rezko with his legislative work and his letter-writing. Given this close working relationship, the Obama-Rezko land deal is far less surprising.
David Freddoso, a political reporter for National Review, is the author of "The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate."
Analysis: Assad's shopping list
JONATHAN SPYER , THE JERUSALEM POST
President Bashar Assad of Syria began a trip to Russia this week. Russian news agency RIA Novosti has quoted the Syrian Information Ministry as confirming that the trip will last two days.
According to the statement, the purpose of the trip is to discuss bilateral relations and the latest world and regional developments, particularly relating to the Middle East peace process and to Iraq. Assad's trip to Moscow comes at a particularly opportune time. Russia is in the process of completing what looks like a successful, contemptuous defiance of international will over its actions in Georgia. In the Caucasus, Moscow has thrown down a direct challenge to the US-dominated post Cold-war international order.
Syria, meanwhile, is part of an Iran-led regional bloc which seeks to issue a similar challenge in the Middle East, albeit on a smaller scale. But Assad is not in Moscow purely to compare notes with the Russians. Rather, his trip has a list of clear and practical objectives.
During the Cold War, the USSR was of course Syria's main arms supplier. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Damascus was left with an outstanding debt of $13.4 billion to Moscow for weapons purchased. Throughout the 1990s, with Syria stagnant and Russia plunged into economic and political chaos, this outstanding debt cast a chill over relations between the two countries. This chill has now thawed. In 2005, Moscow agreed to write off 73 percent of the debt. This reduced Syria's foreign debt to less than 10% of its GDP, allowing Damascus once more to focus on arms procurement. Large-scale purchases of arms from Russia began that same year.
Over the following two years, according to Israeli sources, Syria purchased 50 Pantsir SE-1 and Tor-M1 air-defense systems from Moscow. Sophisticated anti-tank guided weapons systems were also acquired. There are conflicting reports as to whether the Pantsir air defense systems had been fully deployed at the time of the successful IAF raid on a suspected Syrian plutonium reactor in September, 2007. The raid, in any case, undoubtedly represented a significant failure for the Syrians.
The Syrian response has been to accelerate the pace of arms purchases from willing Russia. In May, a senior Syrian delegation headed by air force commander General Akhmad al-Ratyb visited the Russian capital. The delegation secured the purchase of Mig-29 SMT fighter aircraft.
This time around, the leading item on Assad's shopping list is thought to be the sophisticated S-300 long range anti-aircraft missile system. This state-of-the-art system has already been purchased from Russia by Iran. Iran is expected to deploy it by March, 2009. The Iranian intention, clearly, is for this system to be used in defense of Teheran's nuclear program.
Assad, in his previous visit to Moscow in December, 2006, made unsuccessful attempts to purchase the S-300. Israeli diplomats have been working to try to prevent a successful Syrian acquisition this time around. The outcome is not yet clear. The S-300 is thought to be the leading item on Assad's list of planned purchases in Moscow. A series of public statements by Russian officials over the past days stressing (and exaggerating) Israel's defense relationship with Georgia could be interpreted as a negative sign, but nothing is yet certain.
What lies behind Russia's growing interest in arms supplies to the Middle East? This is part of a larger picture - Russia's return as a player on the global diplomatic stage. The Russians would like to leverage their supply of arms to Iran and Syria into influence, forming an alternative address for diplomatic mediation - or for help in challenging enemies. Either way, Russia intends not to have its voice ignored. The days when all other countries automatically accepted US predominance on issues of Middle East statecraft have passed.
Of course, Russia is still far too weak a state to be able to provide a real challenge to the western system of alliances in the Middle East. Syria, too, for all its rhetoric, possesses armed forces which still suffer from acute structural and educational problems, as well as the problem of norms which limit their ability to successfully absorb and operate ultra-modern systems. Still, something is changing.
The regional alliance of Iran and its allies is currently acting as a 'spoiler' in many flashpoints across the region - Iraq, Lebanon, the Israeli-Palestinian arena, Kuwait and the Israel-Syria-Hizbullah triangle. In all these linked arenas, influence is being built through the exacerbation of conflict, and the preventing of peaceful development. Iran and Syria have had the good fortune to meet a major power - Russia - whose interests happen to currently coincide with the strengthening of anti-status-quo powers in the Middle East. The result is a relationship based on mutual benefit. President Assad will be hoping to reap tangible gains from this as he makes his way through meetings with the power elite in Moscow over the next two weeks.
Jonathan Spyer is a senior research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Center, IDC, Herzliya.
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1219218602214&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Hamas to Harm Shalit If Olmert Doesn't Give In To Demands
Add Image""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5236958053975378562" />Zeev Ben Yechiel and Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
Hamas has threatened to harm kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit if Prime Minister Ehud Olmert does not free Gaza-based Hamas terrorists. The demand comes in the wake of plans to release 199 Palestinian Authority (PA) terrorists from Judea and Samaria on Friday. The Prime Minister agreed to free them as part of continuing series of "goodwill" measures to bolster the popularity of Fatah party leader and PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas. The PA is planning a hero's welcome in Ramallah for terrorist Sa'id Atba, followed by a large hometown welcoming in Shechem.
Atba has been in jail for 32 years for leading a cell of terrorists who attacked a Petach Tikva market, killing immigrant from the former Soviet Union Tzila Galil and wounding dozens of others. Galil’s son, violinist Zinovi Kaplan, said that the government should have killed the terrorist instead of jailing him. "Those who elected such a government shouldn't be surprised that terrorists are being freed," he added.
Hamas has demanded that Prime Minister Olmert offer it the same overture he is giving Abbas by freeing Fatah terrorists.
Galil’s son, violinist Zinovi Kaplan, said that the government should have killed the terrorist instead of jailing him.
"If the enemy continues with its stubborn attitude, Gilad Shalit will become a second Ron Arad," warned a spokesman for Hamas's armed wing Izzadin Kassam. The statements came after the group held a drill simulating their kidnapping another soldier. They used as staging ground for that drill the site of the ruins of the Jewish Gaza community of Netzarim, which was destroyed in the expulsion of Gaza’s Jews in 2005 in exchange for a hoped-for peace with Gaza's Arab terrorists.
Other groups have held similar abduction drills recently, following threats to kidnap more soldiers in order to secure the release of their terrorists from Israeli prisons.
Expecting an assault on Gaza, Islamic Jihad's Al Quds Brigades and the Sallah a-Din Brigades of the Popular Resistance Committees have held large-scale abduction exercises. On Saturday, 50 Sallah a-Din terrorists are reported to have participated in their own group’s drill at the Netzarim ruins.
Shalit was kidnapped in 2006 in a cross-border raid by Hamas in Gaza just prior to the Second Lebanon war, while Arad, an Israeli Air Force navigator who went missing after he was forced to eject from his plane over Lebanon in 1986, was subsequently kidnapped by a Shi’ite Lebanese terror group. Neither the fate of Shalit nor that of Arad is known for certain, although Arad is widely believed to be dead and Shalit still alive.
According to a report recently released to Israel by Hizbullah, Arad apparently was killed by his terrorist captors when he attempted to escape in 1988.
Abu Obeida, spokesman for Izzadin Kassam, has accused PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salaam Fayyad of hindering a deal to free Shalit. "Abbas and Fayyad do not want the Resistance to achieve a respectable deal as they do not believe in the way of resistance. They only believe in the way of negotiations and begging to the enemy and succeed only in releasing prisoners who were anyway approaching their release date," said Obeida.
The terrorist spokesman continued that his group would continue to kidnap IDF soldiers as long as Israel continued to hold PA terrorists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)