Monday, March 7, 2011

Why Obama Will Be Defeated in 2012


MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2011

01.20.13
THE END OF AN ERROR
By Alan Caruba
Warning Signs

To this observer, the likelihood of Barack Obama being reelected in 2012 is so remote that I can safely predict it will not happen. Of course, as is commonly said, two weeks, let alone two years, is a long time in politics and all manner of events could intervene, but if one follows the trends in place, he will be a one term president.

Recall that Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush were one term presidents for differing reasons. Despite a genuine victory when U.S. led forces drove Saddam Hussein’s army out of Kuwait, Bush 41 was savagely attacked by a hostile press throughout the campaign and his term in office. The former WWII hero was called a “wimp” and, when he did accede to raising taxes, he sealed his own fate. As to Carter, he was seen by all to have been a monumental failure.

Almost weekly the incompetence and sheer arrogance of President Obama has been manifest since he took the oath of office. I recall an interview in which he expressed the opinion that he might well be a one term president and I thought that odd at the time. 

In retrospect, it seems to me now that he always knew that his radical socialist agenda would likely ensure his defeat for a second term. Obama was and is the "Manchurian candidate", put into the Oval Office to achieve as quickly as possible the completion of a Socialist/Communist agenda. 

To put it another way, the destruction of the capitalist economic system that has been the foundation of America’s great wealth and power has always been the goal of the Left. To achieve this, Obama installed 32 “czars” in the White House, most of whom were not vetted by Congress, nor are answerable to it. They promulgate policies and regulations while by-passing congressional oversight. It's one thing to have advisors and quite another to have co-conspirators.

One has to reach back to the Clinton years to recall how soundly rebuffed “Hillarycare” was as the initial attempt to take over the health care industry in America. One needs to recall how Hillary Clinton fought through the primaries until her only opponent was Barack Obama and how, after he had secured the Democratic Party nomination, the plum assignment of Secretary of State was given to her; two peas from the same Alinsky pod.

On top of the financial crisis that too conveniently began as the 2008 campaigns were coming to an end was the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—Obamacare—that was taken off the shelf and, this time, forced through a Democrat controlled Congress, often with bribes, often with a lot of brutal political arm twisting. And the response, even before it became law a year ago was the sudden rise of the Tea Party movement.

The next response came in the 2010 elections that returned political power in the House to Republicans and narrowed the Democrat majority in the Senate. And that is why Barack Obama will be defeated in 2012.

Another factor that will contribute to his defeat has been his support for the gangster tactics of public service unions in Wisconsin and the runaway members of its legislature. Opposition to the public sector unions has been on the rise in the nation as more voters became aware of how they have bankrupted virtually every State with salaries, pensions and healthcare plans that exceed those of taxpayers who are expected to pay for them. 

Then there are the events in the Middle East and Obama’s uncertain response to them. The immediate impact will be a rise in the cost of gasoline at the pump and that is something that everyone can grasp. Add to that Obama’s attack on the nation’s energy industries, coal, oil, and natural gas, and you have the perfect storm for a president whose popularity is dropping.

In the past two years during which upwards of twenty million Americans lost their jobs, the unseemly and frequent vacations by the President or by his wife have not been well received by those less fortunate and, it should be said, less ostentatious. Dictating what Americans should eat while dining on spare ribs reminded many of the First Lady’s caloric hypocrisy. 

Mostly, though, it has been the accumulation of lies about virtually all aspects of his political agenda that now comprises a record that will be mined by whoever is chosen to run against him in 2012. 

There are still, however, two more years to go and Barack Hussein Obama and his “czars” can do a lot of damage if not thoroughly reined in by Republicans in Congress. Americans have little choice other than to survive Obama at this point in time. And we will.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

ElderToons for the Iranian mission megillah reading


Monday, March 07, 2011


ElderToons for the Iranian mission megillah reading

A brilliant idea: this Purim, people will read the Megillah outside the Iranian mission in New York. 

So in honor of this event, here's my poster for the occasion:

(For those who don't get this at all, a beginning of an explanation can be deduced here.)

The Difference between "Cauterize" and "Carterize"



MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2011

How Obama 'Carterized' the Country


"“Sen. Obama says that I’m running for Bush’s third term,” John McCain quipped in June 2008. “It seems to me he’s running for Jimmy Carter’s second.” Less than three years later, Sen. McCain’s bleak forecast is coming true." Read the rest here.

(Don't mix up "cauterize" with "Carterize". The former means to burn away and destroy unwanted tissue. Whereas the latter means to burn away and destroy unwanted Zionism. See how different that is?)

*Snicker* President Obama Signs Order Resuming Gitmo Tribunals





JOSHUAPUNDIT
March 07, 2011

Yes indeed. When Mr. Hope n' Change was on the campaign trail, he swore he was going to shut down our tropical resort for jihadis at Club Gitmo...and he really hoped he could. But he changed!

President Obama signed an order today to resume military trials at Club Gitmo. In a press release today, Obama said that this new policy will “broaden our ability to bring terrorists to justice, provide oversight for our actions, and ensure the humane treatment of detainees.”

Which of course is 180 degrees from what he was saying before, if you remember.

Back in 2009, Obama lectured us that “the existence of Guantanamo likely created more terrorists around the world than it ever detained.” And in a May 2009 speech, the president dismissed the opposition to closing the prison as partisan politics designed to create a “climate of fear”...you know, something those evil Republicans were getting all wee weed up about.

Now, after all that nonsense, President Obama has, umm, reconsidered. And it looks like former President Bush, Dick Cheney and John Yoo knew what they were talking about after all, while Obama was just blowing unicorn smoke rings. And now, finally has to admit he had no clue about what he was talking about.

Embarrassing, to say the least.



______________________________


VIDEO: Attracted to BDS?

FRESNO ZIONISM

March 07, 2011

Progressives: Are you tired of the never-ending stalemate surrounding the two-state solution?


Are you wondering if Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) is a non-violent way to solve the conflict?


Do you think that the clean-cut, attractive young BDS proponents that are everywhere on campuses lately  have a different goal than the terrorists that have been murdering Israelis since the founding of the state?


Watch this:






'Israel Apartheid Week': Language as Weapon

Anti-Semitism
AMERICAN THINKER
MARCH 07, 2011
By Arlene Kushner



"The pen is mightier than the sword," went the old maxim. We have the Internet now. And, where Israel is concerned, there are attacks by Katyusha rockets.  Yet the message stands: Words can deliver a greater blow than physical force.


Israel was barely a day old when the Arab League attacked in 1948; its goal was to  eradicate the nascent Jewish state.  Despite the odds, Israel prevailed.  Her enemies tried again in 1967, and yet again in 1973.  Weary of military defeats, Arab leaders decided  physical force was not going to destroy Israel, and began to consider other methods for achieving the same goal.


At this point, the PLO devised the "Strategy of Stages," which called for taking Israel down bit by bit.  One of the stratagems to have come out of this approach is the delegitimization of Israel via legal and verbal attacks.


When words are used in this fashion, there is no compunction about dishonesty.  Whatever causesdamage is fine, as long as the words appear to have legitimacy.  Two basic rules adhere: The message must be consistent, and the words -- frequently buzz words -- must be repeated over and over.


Here we might refer to yet another saying, this one attributed (without irony) to Nazi propagandist Goebbels: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, it becomes the truth."


The Arab world has refined this strategy to an art form, with none more skilled than Palestinian Authority leaders and their supporters.  As lies become "truth," there are people of sincere convictions who accept them, and respond to Israel accordingly.


Israel's recourse in these situations is, and must be, exposure of the lies via logic and facts.   


On March 7 the 7th "Israel Apartheid Week" will begin in some 50 cities internationally -- with primary focus on Western college campuses.


Israel as apartheid state. This is diabolically clever. Use of the buzz word "apartheid" links Israel to the old South African regime, which practiced apartheid and was seen as lacking moral legitimacy. Read out by the international community, it was brought down by a system of boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS). 


The goal is to bring Israel down in similar fashion.  Considerable work is being devoted to a BDS campaign against Israel, particularly in conjunction with Apartheid Week.


What we are looking at is a libelous fiction that has taken on a veneer of credibility.  When the facts are examined it becomes imminently clear that Israel is not an apartheid state:


Apartheid in South Africa was a legal system of discrimination based on race, with a minority white Afrikaner community imposing severe inequalities and patterns of separation upon the black majority within the borders of the South African nation.


The issue in Israel is political-national. At its heart are claims to the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. This is a vastly different scenario, for the concept of separation involves different (perceived) national groups. 


The Jewish people are not colonialists analogous to the Afrikaners, but actually have the superior claim. Established as a nation over 3,000 years ago, Jews maintained a presence on the land over the centuries, returning home in larger numbers in recent times.  The Jewish right to a national homeland between the river and the sea was fixed in international law in 1922 with the Mandate for Palestine.


The Arabs who identify as Palestinians today, by contrast, until very recently saw themselves simply as part of the greater Arab nation; they have never had a separate nation.  Now they claim the right, at a minimum, to all land beyond the1967 armistice line.


Israel has constructed a north-south fence in Judea and Samaria, which is criticized as an "apartheid wall."  But let's look at the facts here, too: it was constructed as a security measure, to block entry into Israel of Palestinian Arab terrorists.


We can perhaps best grasp the fact that Israel is not apartheid by looking inside the nation, which has no legal separation or discrimination based on race. Arabs -- mostly Muslims -- constitute 20% of the citizenry; they maintain political parties, are accorded full freedom of speech and protection within the courts, vote, and have representation in the Knesset (parliament).  Arabs walk the streets freely, and shop where they wish.


One need only visit an Israeli hospital to understand the true nature of Israeli society. For there are Arab patients and Arab medical personnel; Arab doctors sometimes treat Jews, and Jewish doctors sometimes treat Arabs.  This would be totally incomprehensible within a system of apartheid.


Even while these charges are made against Israel, black Africans -- Muslims, Christians, and animists -- are voting for Israel with their feet. Word has gone out, among those seeking political refugee and those seeking economic betterment -- that Israel is the place to get to. 


Their understanding transcends the myths being constructed to destroy Israel.


Arlene Kushner is an Israeli writer and author based in Jerusalem.  Her posts can be found at www.arlenefromisrael.info.
8 Comments on "'Israel Apartheid Week': Language as Weapon"



WaPo confirms Netanyahu's beef that Israel gets short end of the stick



AMERICAN THINKER
MARCH 07, 2011
Leo Rennert


The Washington Post, in its March 7 edition, runs an article under a headline that reads:  "Netanyahu says world is conditioned to back Palestinians" (page A6 "World Digest").

The story says the Israeli leader "accused the international community of automatically sidingwith the Palestinians" and he criticized the Palestinians for "refusing to make peace overtures, instead preferring to take advantage of the international community's Pavolvian reflex in their favor."

At this point, the Post moves from Netanyahu's general comments to give readers its own specific view of why peace negotiations are stalemated -- "Peace talks broke down in September," the Post reports.  "The Palestinians blame Israel for the stalemate, citing continued Israeli settlement building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem."

End of story.

Israel's reasons for why the talks are stalemated go unmentioned.  A balanced story would have included Netanyahu's long-standing offer to conduct direct negotiations without pre-conditions -- with Palestinians free to bring up all final-status issues, including settlements and Jerusalem.  And since the peace process involves an important third party -- the United States -- a balanced story also would have mentioned that Israel's push for direct talks is also the view of the White House.

By citing only the Palestinian view of why negotiations are stalemated, the Post -- inadvertently or not -- confirms Netanyahu's view that the world is conditioned to back the Palestinians.  A global pro-Palestinian Pavolvian reflex is also alive and well at the Washington Post.

And this isn't just a one-time tilt toward the Palestinian view.  It's become commonplace at the Post that any mention of stalemated negotiations automatically is followed by Palestinians blaming Israel -- without any countervailing Israeli view that the Palestinians are gumming up the peace works by boycotting negotiations..

The March 7 article also leaves a false impression that Israel is building more settlements in the WestBank. Under Netanyahu's premiership, there has been a strict ban on building new settlements or expanding old ones.  Complementing these moves, there also has been a ban on taking additional West Bank land for further settlement building.   Thus, there has been no "continued Israeli settlementbuilding," as the article states.  The only building that has occurred has been within existingsettlements.

By citing only Palestinian reasons for lack of progress on the peace front and by injecting anti-Israel spins like "continued Israeli settlement building," the Post ends up seconding Netanyahu's view that the deck indeed is stacked against Israel -- with the Post adding to this imbalance.

______________________




Arab Liberals Worry About an Islamist Egypt; Western Observers Claim There's No Threat


MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2011


THE RUBIN REPORT
By Barry Rubin

He jests at scars who never felt the wound, wrote Shakespeare, and it is an appropriate sentiment to point out that while Western observers ridicule the fear of an Islamist Egypt, a lot of Arab writers are very worried. In fact, here are three articles that display such concerns.

The first is from Dr. Hasan Abu Talib, "The Muslim Brotherhood and the Revolution of the Youths" in the Egyptian newspaper al-Ahram, February 23. Describing his own participation in the revolution, he points out that those who organized it had nothing to do with either the Muslim Brotherhood or Muhammad ElBaradei’s National Association for Change.

But now he is having doubts as he sees the revolutionbeing funneled by the Brotherhood in the direction that it wants and without regard to majority rule, hinting at “imposing matters by force of the fait accompli, and elimination of those who differ in opinion and inclination.”

Despite the Brotherhood’s promises—and unlike such irresponsible fools as Peter Beinart who are ready to take the Brotherhood at its (English-only, not Arabic) word, Abu Talib writes:

“These statements conflict with the established realities in the world of politics which never recognize verbal guarantees as they can never be taken to account later….The Brotherhood denials in turn raise doubts and are a source of major concern for all Egyptians. Perhaps the experience of Algeria where the [Islamic] Salvation group won in the elections at the end of 1990 and this was followed by a decade of violence, civil war and killing...is sufficient to raise worries among many Egyptians that their rising country should witness something similar. There is big fear that the coming parliamentary elections can be a prelude to a religious State, not a civil State, especially in the light of the weakness and fragility of the existing political parties. There are fears that these would be the first and last clean elections that revolutionary Egypt would witness.”

He also worries that alternative forces will not become properly organized, develop an ideology of their own, “and attract large numbers of members.” He urges them to work hard to create “a new Egypt that believes in freedom, dignity, and human rights--in a renewable democracy that is not open to retreat or to forcible disappearance.”

In Al-Hayah Online, published in London, February 20, by Dawud al-Sharayan, like Abu Talib, points out that the exclusion of Google executive and symbol of Facebook democratic youth Wa’il Ghunaym from the platform at Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s million-plus victory rally is a dangerous symbol. To my knowledge the American mass media has not even reported that this happened!

Sharayan writes:

“It seems that [the Brotherhood wants] to exclude the youths from the scene of the revolution, and to steal its decision making from them….Suspicions are aroused of the credibility of these claims [that the Brotherhood is now moderate and democratic], and of the future of this revolution. Moreover, granting Al-Qaradawi the role of absolute hero in the rostrum speech means that there are those who are trying to tamper with the…face of this revolution….

“The Islamists' interference in directing the youths' revolution will give rise to a power struggle….In Egypt, perhaps the people might accept a military rule if the alternative is the Muslim Brotherhood Group.”

Then there is the novelist Jamal al-Ghitani in the Egyptian newspaper al-Akhbar, February 20. He is more optimistic seeing the revolution as a mixture of patriotic and religious elements

“The revolution of youth, which has become a revolution of all Egyptians, provides a remarkable opportunity to turn Egypt into a great power like China, Malaysia or the European Union. This can only be achieved by building a full-fledged civil state in every sense of the word, where everyone has equal rights, duties, freedoms and transparency.”

But he also worries:

“It would be a risk, if some people tried to push it in a narrower and more limited path, or used distant cases as a reference for the revolution [I assume he means Iran--BR], or replaced the symbols who led it and sacrificed their lives for it with others coming from afar, regardless of who they might be.”

And what happens when it is clear that Egypt will not be the new Europe or even the new China or Malaysia? How strong will the support be for a civil and democratic state in those circumstances? Remember that the creation of a radical nationalist regime—which may include a large measure of Islamization precisely to undercut the Brotherhood’s appeal—is as dangerous to regional peace and Egyptian democracy as an Islamist regime.

For Westerners, Egypt's revolution is a victory for democracy. We hope that it is. But what do the enemies of America and the West say? Well, let Hasan Nasrallah, Hizballah's spiritual guideexplain it:

"The anniversary of the Iranian revolution coincided with the occasion of the Egyptian people's victory over the tyrant. And it's out of good fortune and fate for February 11 to become the day of the fall of the two biggest and most important allies of America in the region: the Shah's regime in Iran, and the Mubarak regime in Egypt."

Both sides can be right. Egypt will be a democracy and won't be an ally of America. That might mean we should be happy for the Egyptians and unhappy for U.S. interests.

Others, too, are starting to worry. Middle East Transparent has been the most important international Internet publication for Arab liberals. Now this publication, in an Arabic-language article, is really worried about events in Egypt, particularly the composition of the constitution-writing committee the military appointed.

Tariq al-Bishri is considered not only to be pro-Muslim Brotherhood but also hostile to Christians by Middle East Transparent. Another member is the openly Muslim Brotherhood Subhi Salih. The author wonders whether this indicates that the army is more Islamist-leaning than we think.
 
What’s being said by the most sophisticated analysts on and in Egypt behind the scenes is this: a nationalist government will be elected, will fail, and then the Brotherhood—which would have spent several years building its power and base—will make its big for power.

The fact is that many Egyptians, precisely those most supportive of a moderate democracy, are very worried that things will go in another direction. Yet much of the Western world is still in a cheerleading stage, certain that nothing can go wrong.

Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His books include Islamic Fundamentalists in Egyptian Politics and The Muslim Brotherhood (Palgrave-Macmillan); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East, a study of Arab reform movements (Wiley). GLORIA Center site: http://www.gloria-center.org His blog, Rubin Reports, http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com.

A Tribute to Writers: "If America Were a Castle"

Castle Hill - Ipswich, Massachusetts

If America were a Castle

If America were a Castle
shinning brightly from within,
She would feel safe and secure,
knowing she would endure,
as her Warriors stood every ready
with pen in hand,
for it is Truth that is pure.

Writers know that the pen is 
"mightier than a sword"
Voices that cannot be ignored -
Like lions, hear them roar,
No hate or propaganda can survive,
When Truth is revived
and great Warriors have arrived.

The liberal media stands aghast,
thinking their news is unsurpassed,
and the lights in the Castle
would surely grow dim,
if it were not for the Warriors -
Who writing, like a Hymn,
teach that Truth's tassels
are pure,
and we shall all say,
 Amen!

c. Bee Sting - 2011

Some would imagine the White House to be America's "castle", but I prefer to think that it is America, herself, that is the castle of freedom to all its citizens.  Unlike America's troops in the field, protecting the "Castle" in distant lands, writers are usually sitting at desks, or tables, with a computer starring back at them, and instead of a pen, most writers use a mouse and keyboard.

Their goals are to express a different point of view, to raise awareness, to present the truth and thus, many a Conservative blog is born and grows, with people around the world reading and asking questions (hopefully) that enable others to search for truth, which in turn assists each of us to make wiser decisions in our own life.

Writers are compassionate, usually for presenting what they feel is not being exposed to the general public and in a thousands years, no one will ever be able to read all that is in print.  Therefore, we attempt to find the best when doing a "search" to seek information in a world where we could drown with information being fed on the Internet.

I wanted to give a small tribute to the writer's I present on "Real Americans Defend Israel" and could not find anything appropriate to say what I think, which is a simple "Thank you" for all your hard work, compassion and wisdom, to present the truth to America, at a time when truth is needed to protect our "Castle".

If I began to list each individual, by name, I would surely forget someone unintentionally, but you all know who you are and your names are listed under "links" on this blog.  Consider me one of your largest fans - for without you, truth would be far more difficult to find in a day when it is lacking from even the rooms within the Castle's White House.


Bee Sting


PS - Thought I would add a little "castle" music, as it is entitled from "Me to You".



Frank Duval - Me To You



The New Middle East takes on an Iranian flavor

Sunday, March 6, 2011
ISRAEL MATZAV
By  Carl in Jerusalem

This is the video I was looking for - and it will be followed by a serious post.


Some of you go back with me to the days of my Matzav mailing list (2000-04). In those days, I used to keep the radio on in the background while I posted. I got out of the habit during 2005-06, when I was in mourning for my mother and could not listen to music the entire year. (There's no such thing as a truly "all news" station here - they all take music breaks - so I didn't turn the radio on for the entire year). Today, I find it much harder to concentrate with background noise.


This song by Yehuda Policker was frequently on the radio during the Oslo war. It has a haunting chorus: "Erev tov Yerush' v'layla tov tikva, Mi haba bator u'mi ba'tor haba." (Good evening Jerusalem and good night hope, who is next in line and who is in the next line). As the suicide bombs went off throughout the country, this song was played on the radio night after night after night.


Let's go to the videotape.



Caroline Glick reports that another 'new Middle East' (the phrase was originally used in this country to ridicule Shimon Peres' idyllic vision of the Arabs lying down beside us without trying to murder us) is being shaped around us. Thanks to the Obama administration's ineptitude it's being dominated by Iran.
Iran’s mullahs win no matter how the revolts pan out. If weakened regimes maintain power by appeasing Iran’s allies in the opposition – as they are trying to do in Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Algeria, Bahrain, Oman and Yemen – then Iranian influence over the weakened regimes will grow substantially. And if Iran’s allies topple the regimes, then Iran’s influence will increase even more steeply.

Moreover, Iran’s preference for proxy wars and asymmetric battles is served well by the current instability. Iran’s proxies – from Hezbollah to al- Qaida to Hamas – operate best in weak states.

From Hezbollah’s operations in South Lebanon in the 1980s and 1990s, to the Iranian-sponsored Iraqi insurgents in recent years and beyond, Iran has exploited weak central authorities to undermine pro-Western governments, weaken Israel and diminish US regional influence.

In the midst of Egypt’s revolutionary violence, Iran quickly deployed its Hamas proxies to Sinai.

Since Mubarak’s fall, Iran has worked intensively to expand its proxy forces’ capacity to operate freely in Sinai.

Recognition of Iran’s expanded power is fast altering the international community’s perception of the regional balance of forces. Russia’s announcement last Saturday that it will sell Syria the Yakhont supersonic anti-ship cruise missile was a testament to Iran’s rising regional power and the US’s loss of power.

Russia signed a deal to provide the missiles to Syria in 2007. But Moscow abstained from supplying them until now – just after Iran sailed its naval ships unmolested to Syria through the Suez Canal and signed a naval treaty with Syria effectively fusing the Iranian and Syrian navies.

So, too, Russia’s announcement that it sides with Iran’s ally Turkey in its support for reducing UN Security Council sanctions against Iran indicates that the US no longer has the regional posture necessary to contain Iran on the international stage.

Iran’s increased regional power and its concomitant expanded leverage in international oil markets will make it impossible for the US to win UN Security Council support for more stringent sanctions against Tehran. Obviously, UN Security Council-sanctioned military action against Iran’s nuclear installations is out of the question.

Unfortunately, the Obama administration has failed completely to understand what is happening.

Clinton told the House of Representatives and the Senate that Iran’s increased power means that the US should continue to arm and fund Iran’s allies and support the so-called democratic forces that are allied with Iran.

So it was that Clinton told the Senate that the Obama administration thinks it is essential to continue to supply the Hezbollah-controlled Lebanese military with US arms. Clinton claimed that she couldn’t say what Hezbollah control over the Lebanese government meant regarding the future of US ties to Lebanon.

So, too, while Palestinian Authority leaders burn President Barack Obama in effigy and seek to form a unity government with Iran’s Hamas proxy, Clinton gave an impassioned defense of US funding for the PA to the House Foreign Relations Committee this week.

Clinton’s behavior bespeaks a stunning failure to understand the basic realities she and the State Department she leads are supposed to shape. Her lack of comprehension is matched only by her colleague Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ lack of shame and nerve. In a press conference this week, Gates claimed that Iran is weakened by the populist waves in the Arab world because Iran’s leaders are violently oppressing their political opponents.

In light of the Obama administration’s refusal to use US military force for even the most minor missions – like evacuating US citizens from Libya – without UN approval, it is apparent that the US will not use armed force against Iran for as long as Obama is in power.

And given the administration’s refusal to expend any effort to protect US interests and allies in the region lest the US be accused of acting like a superpower, it is clear that US allies like the Saudis will not be able to depend on America to defend the regime. This is the case despite the fact that its overthrow would threaten the US’s core regional interests.
Erev tov Yerush' v'layla tov tikava. Mi haba ba'tor u'mi ba'tor haba. Are we heading for a 'new Middle East' in which Israel is surrounded by enemies and unable to defend itself?
Read the whole thing.





Must Read: Arab Communists Meet - Plan Major Changes for Middle East


MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2011
THE WEST, ISLAM AND SHARIA


Representatives of several Arab communist parties met in Beirut on the 18th and 19th of February in an Arab Left Forum meeting organized by the Lebanese Communist Party.

The urgent meeting was called to coordinate communist response to the wave of revolutions sweeping much of the Arab World.

If successfully implemented, the decisions laid out at this meeting, will affect not just the Middle East, but the entire planet.

Some excerpts from the statement issued by the Exceptional Meeting of the Arab Left Forum, with emphasis added.
These two revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt have formed a qualitative jump in the Arab political life, as they have demonstrated that progressive change is possible.

Indeed these two revolutions have shown that victory over despotic regimes characterized by oppression, exploitation, impoverishment of the people, complete subservience of national economies to the IMF and the World bank, and complete subservience of their policies to the Imperial - Zionist project in the region- is also possible. And so we witness the winds of change shaking the thrones of the rulers of Yemen, Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Algeria and Libya amongst other Arab Countries as well.


The mass movement and militancy that we are witnessing has opened up a new horizon for the Arab world.

A horizon created through the struggle of the youth and the workers of Tunisia and Egypt, and with significant and effective participation by Arab women. This raises the opportunity and the challenge for the forces of the Arab Left to unify themselves under a program for democratic and social change with two main and related tasks.
Firstly, such a program is necessary to confront reactionary internal forces attempting to exploit the mass popular awakening in Egypt and Tunisia in order to serve their own agendas which does not entail any radical change from the current status in the Arab world. On the contrary, these reactionary agendas would reproduce the same regimes albeit in a novel shape and form.
Secondly, such a program for the unification of the Arab left forces is also necessary to effectively confront the Imperialist American plots and Zionist occupation and assaults under a banner for real and effective change.

In the current revolutionary moment we are witnessing, the Arab leftist forces and parties gathered in Beirut decided to entitle their exceptional meeting The Martyrs of the Tunisian and Egyptian Revolution and the Other Arab Intifadas. Those present agreed on the following :


1. The Arab Left Forum in its exceptional meeting stressed its support and backing, and the backing of the Arab left parties, to the Revolutions of Tunisia and Egypt and reiterated that these revolutions were an inevitable conclusion to the accumulation of years of struggle beginning from the late seventies of the last century against these two regimes characterized by dictatorship corruption and subservience to USA.

Those gathered also extended their respectful salutes to the martyrs and the injured of the two revolutions- these youths who bravely and steadfastly stood up to confront and resist the blood-thirsty regimes and their tools for torture, oppression and domination.
Those gathered also saluted the martyrs of the other Arab popular intifadas against the oppressive regimes of Yemen, Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Libya, and Kuwait. Finally, the Forum also extended its salutes to the martyrs of the resistance in Palestine and Lebanon.
The forum decided to organize future activities to call for the liberation of all political prisoners in the Arab world and for the liberation of Palestinian, Syrian and other Arab prisoners in the Zionist Jails.


2. The first task of the Arab Left forces today is to strengthen and consolidate the revolutionary moment that our region is witnessing. This revolutionary moment should further be radicalized through an agreement on a program for change where methodological linkages will be made between the struggle for liberation and independence and the struggle for democratic and social change.

This programme is based on the stance and position of the left in effecting such an internal change, and in resisting occupation and imperialist aggression headed as usual by the USA and the Zionist movement.
This notion for national resistance movements imparts on these movements a liberation dimension which in turn lays the foundation for a new Arab ; liberation movement where the struggle for internal change against the despotic regimes is linked with the struggle against Occupation and Israeli –Imperialist plots.

This struggle then aims to achieve national, secular, democratic systems of governance which would also resist occupation and confront American and Zionist policies and plots. Such a system of governance would also resist and confront neo-liberal economic policies.
Within this context, the Forum reasserted its determination to hold another meeting devoted to discuss the developments of the international economic crisis and its consequences on the Arab countries in order to elaborate an alternative vision with a socialist dimension.


3. The Arab Left Forum reasserts the fundamental and paramount importance of the Palestinian causes which was and remains the central issue of the Arab-Zionist struggle. An effective confrontation of Zionist plots necessitates the
  • Reunification of the Palestinian forces,
  • Resuscitating the work of the PLO system along democratic lines,
  • Reaffirming the Palestinian rights including the right of the Palestinian people to having an independent country in their homeland with Jerusalem as its capital and the right of return of Palestinian refugees according to UN resolution 194. The Arab Left Forum also asserts that the path for the liberation of Palestine can only be achieved through resistance in all its forms.
The Forum also strongly condemned the American policies which are against the rights of the Palestinian people, the latest of which was the American Veto in the UN Security Council against the condemnation of the Israeli policies of settlements and Israeli policies of ethnic cleansing...


6. The forum stressed and recognized the fundamental role of the youth in the revolutions of Tunisia and Egypt and in the other Arab intifadas.

This necessitates on the forces of the left to present itself as the true supporters of the ambitions of the youth and their dreams. This can be achieved through the inclusion of the youth demands, concerns and ambitions for change within the programs of the left forces and parties.

In this manner, the left can reclaim its position and role amongst the Arab youth.


The Forum stressed the need to carry out an evaluation of previous programmes and to develop a programme for work amongst the youth and the students, the most important pillars of which must be :
  • The development of leftist youth and student cadres and to support and enrich their struggle experiences for democracy, public freedoms and social justice, and 
  • Give these youth cadres a bigger and more prominent role in the leadership committees of the left parties.This would help achieve the goal of launching and building a real alternative based on change and liberation that would be a real and effective change from the current regimes of oppression and subservience and based on resistance to the occupation and confrontation to the American Israeli Imperialist plots.
Along these lines, those gathered reiterated and reasserted the decision from the previous meeting, to hold a leftist Arab youth camp under the banner of The Role of the Youth in Social Revolutions and in Resisting Occupation.

It is planned to hold this meeting in Beirut between 14 and 20 September 2011 to coincide with the 29th anniversary of the launching of the Lebanese National Resistance Front with the aim of becoming a regular annual event.



7. The forum agreed to develop a common media plan with a maximum period of one month. Such a plan will take into account the ways to benefit from modern communication tools in the struggle being carried out by the forces of the left. It was also agreed to link the websites of the various parties and forces participating in the forum. In addition it was agreed to develop a plan for an Arab leftist media centre and develop a plan or a leftist leaning Arab TV station.


8. The forum agreed to consider the forthcoming date of Sunday 20th March as an Arab day for protesting against the brutal oppressive policies and the policies of widespread abject poverty, alienation and subservience – all of which are policies adopted and strictly followed by the Arab regimes.


9. The forum considered that the paper submitted by the Lebanese communist party and the final statement issued by the first meeting of the forum as working papers to be used as a starting point in the drafting of a programme for change.
Does this all sound like "democracy" is coming to the Middle East?

Change is coming alright - the kind of change that came to Russia in 1917, China in 1949, Cuba in 1959, Iran in 1979 and Venezuela in 1999.
As the Arab Left Forum statement admits ""these revolutions were an inevitable conclusion to the accumulation of years of struggle beginning from the late seventies of the last century... "

These are not spontaneous revolutions - they are the culmination of years, even decades of patient subversion.

In a few years, maybe even less, most of North Africa and the Middle East (including Saudi Arabia and Iraq) will, on current patterns, be controlled by Arab communists and their Muslim Brotherhood minions, working hand in glove with Russia, China, Cuba, Iran and Venezuela against Israel and the U.S.

If this allowed to play out, $10 or $20 a gallon gas won't be the big issue. National survival will be.


With many thanks to New Zeal Blog

H/T: MsR

__________________________________