RubinReports on Syria

RubinReports

There is no good alternative. The Christians, Druze, Alawites, and even some of the urban Sunni middle and upper classes want Assad to win because they are afraid of the Islamists. Yet in strategic terms the weakening of Tehran and Hizballah by Assad's fall is by a small margin better for U.S. interests. The official Free Syrian Army and the handpicked exile leadership--headed by a mild version of a Muslim Brotherhood supporter long resident in Texas--are of no real importance on the ground though their doings fill the Western news.

This is the mess now faced by the Obama Administration. It could have been avoided if the president had understood from the start that he should have supported moderate, not Islamist forces. using covert operations and even helping local warlords and pious Syrian traditionalist  forces.  Instead, before the civil war broke out he first backed the radical regime in Syria, America’s enemy and Iran's client state, and then only when the revolt made that stance impossible he switched to the rebels, empowering the opposition Islamists every step of the way.

But then he didn’t want to do what his predecessors would have done. Curiously, Obama believed that Islamist rule is good because it would moderate the radicals, deter terrorists from attacking America, and make enemies into friends. In Syria today there is no good choice. No matter which side wins—the Syrian regime as part of the Iranian bloc of Shia Islamists or the rebels as part of the Muslim Brotherhood bloc of Sunni Islamists—the winners will be radical Islamists. In fact, if Assad creates a fortress in the Alawite region of the northwest stretching down to Damascus, it will be both varieties of Islamists simultaneously.

It is a tragedy. I remember when I met a Syrian democratic dissident about three years ago and as he was leaving to return home he asked me, "Do you think there will ever be real democracy in Syria?" I choked up because I didn't want to lie to him. He saw my expression and said sadly, "Well, perhaps in my childrens' time." 

For a while, hope sprung up that the country might undergo a transformation. The conservative periphery rose up against the centers of power that had so long oppressed it. These people were pious Sunni Muslims angry at decades of a regime that was a combination of secularist dictatorship and Alawite (supposedly Shia Muslim) ethnic domination. They might have found a relatively moderate leadership, as happened in Iraq.

Yet that just didn't happen. The West failed to get behind potential leaders; the Islamists were better organized and more willing to sacrifice their lives. It could well be argued that if anyone has to win it should be the rebels since that would be a devastating defeat for Iran and Hizballah, because also the Sunni Islamist bloc lacks a patron to finance an aggressive anti-Western, anti-Israel program and to supply arms for it. But can one be enthusiastic about those who want to impose a new dictatorship, carry out ethnic massacres, include al-Qaida, and might even use nerve gas to make propaganda?

Sadly, the truth is that there are Islamists all the way down.

Rally to Save the New York Public Library

> PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY
>
> Dear friend -
>
> Take action to save the 42nd Street Library and stop the Central Library Plan! We have received multiple reports that the historic seven-story book stacks in the 42nd Street Research Library have now been emptied. Removing the books is a prelude to the planned demolition of the stacks later this year or early in 2014.
>
> There are two things you can do:
>
> RALLY MAY 8TH AT THE 42ND STREET LIBRARY
>
> Join us for a rally on Wednesday, May 8th, during the quarterly meeting of the New York Public Library Trustees. The rally will begin at 3:30 PM in front of the 42nd Street Library facing 5th Avenue. The rally will start promptly! We want to have a strong presence as the Trustees enter the building for their meeting. If you can't make it at 3:30, join us after work at 5 PM to greet the Trustees on their way out. The rally is being cosponsored by our friends at Citizens Defending Libraries.
>
> To promote the rally, we have been leafleting outside the 42nd Street Library daily. Join us from Noon to 1 PM this coming Monday (May 6) and Tuesday (May 7). We will have plenty of flyers, and also have signs to hold.
>
> HELP PROMOTE OUR NEW WEBSITE
>
> Second, please help spread the word about our new website:
> www.savenypl.org
> Publicize our site via social media, via twitter, via linking from your blog, via plain old-fashioned word-of-mouth. If you have friends who you think might be concerned about preserving the integrity of the 42nd Street Research Library, our website is an easy way to introduce them to the issue.
>
>
> TALKING POINTS
>
> The Central Library Plan, at enormous cost to New York City and its taxpayers, would irreparably damage the 42nd Street Research Library – one of the world’s great reference libraries and a historic landmark. The NYPL plans to demolish the Library’s historic seven-story book stacks, install a circulating library in their stead, and displace 1.5 million books to central New Jersey. The new circulating library would be a reduced-size replacement for the Mid-Manhattan Library (at 40th and 5th Avenue) and SIBL (Science, Industry and Business Library, at 34th and Madison), which would both be sold.
>
> • The plan will cost $350 million (probably more), of which $150 million will come from New York City taxpayers.
> • The plan will jam patrons of the circulating library into a space one-third the size of the existing Mid-Manhattan Library and SIBL.
> • The plan will threaten the 42nd Street Library’s role as one of the world’s great research libraries, and threaten the architectural integrity of the landmarked 42nd Street building.
> • The plan does not take into consideration more efficient and less destructive alternatives, such as combining SIBL and the Mid-Manhattan into a rehabilitated and expanded building on the Mid-Manhattan site.
>
> Underlying our concerns is the extraordinarily closed process through which the Library administration has made its decisions. Despite the fact that the 42nd Street building is owned by the City and is one of our most iconic structures, the plan was formulated with minimal public notification and no public input. The $150 million which the City has earmarked towards the project was awarded without any oversight by the City Council and with no public hearings. If alternatives have been seriously considered they have never been disclosed, and no cost-benefit analysis or detailed budget has ever been presented to the public.
>
> It has become increasingly apparent that the CLP is part of a larger effort by New York City’s public library systems to shrink their capacity and sell off valuable real estate, which started with the controversial sale in 2008 of the beloved Donnell Library to real estate developers.
>
> For more information or to join our low-volume email list, see www.savenypl.org
>
> Thank you!
>
> The Committee to Save the New York Public Library
> 232 East 11th Street
> New York, NY 10003
> www.savenypl.org
> info@savenypl.org

This message was sent by Committee to Save the New York Public Library using the Change.orgsystem. You received this email because you signed a petition started by Committee to Save the New York Public Library on Change.org: "Anthony W. Marx: Reconsider the $350 million plan to remake NYC's landmark central library." Change.org does not endorse contents of this message.
View the petition  |  Reply to this message via Change.org
Unsubscribe from updates about this petition

Eric Schmidt on the Importance of Teachers in the Digital Classroom

Thank you Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, for saying this about teachers in the Q&A for The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations and Business at the New America Foundation on May 3rd. Video link: http://youtu.be/kEmwIo6xNZQ.

 "The role of the teacher becomes more important when there's infinite information, not less. So, you would conclude from reading our book that we believe that teachers, and particularly human teachers, and judgement, are more important in the presence of all this information, and that we are delighted that all of these tools and techniques and so forth will get there. The best scenario by far is an empowered teacher, an excited student, and an infinite amount of information...(on YouTube clip at 54:10-54:55).

RubinReports on Israel's State of the Nation, 2013

RubinReports: Israel's economic and strategic situation is surprisingly bright right now. That’s partly due to the government’s own economic restraint and strategic balancing act, partly due to a shift in Obama Administration policy, and partly due to the conflicts among Israel’s adversaries.

Let’s start with the economy. During 2012, Israel’s economy grew by 3.1 percent. While some years ago this would not be all that impressive it is amazing given the international economic recession. The debt burden actually fell from 79.4 percent of Gross Domestic Product to only 73.8 percent. As the debt of the United States and other countries zooms upwards, that’s impressive, too.

Israel’s credit rating also rose at a time when America’s was declining. Standard and Poor lifted the rating from A to A+. Two other rating systems, Moody’s and Fitch, also increased Israel’s rating.

Now not only is gas from Israel's offshore fields starting to flow but a new estimate is that the fields are bigger than expected previously.

And that’s not all. Unemployment fell from 8.5 percent in 2009 to either 6.8 to 6.9 percent (according to Israel’s bureau of statistics) or 6.3 percent (according to the CIA)...

...Face it. The obsession with the “peace process” is misplaced and misleading. The big issue in the region is the struggle for power in the Arabic-speaking world, Turkey, and Iran between Islamists and non-Islamists. And, no, the Arab-Israeli conflict has very little to do with these issues. Those who don’t understand those points cannot possible comprehend the region. Secretary of State John Kerry may run around the region and talk about big plans for summit conferences. But nobody really expects anything to happen.

This is not, of course, to say that there aren’t problems. Yet what often seems to be the world’s most slandered and reviled country is doing quite well. Perhaps if Western states studied its policies rather than endlessly criticized them they might gain from the experience.

Daily Mail: Saudis Warned US on Tamerlane Tsarnaev

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2317493/Saudi-official-Kingdom-warned-United-States-IN-WRITING-Boston-Bomber-Tamerlan-Tsarnaev-2012-rejected-application-entry-visa-visit-Mecca-2011.html

Reports of the Obama Presidency's Death Are Exaggerated by Daren Jonescu

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/04/reports_of_the_obama_presidencys_death_are_exaggerated.html

If, during the 2008 campaign, Obama and his mouthpieces had stood up and said, without reserve or qualification, that the primary intentions and ultimate achievements of his presidency would be: (a) taking America's definitive step off the cliff into the world of socialized medicine; (b) creating vast new regulatory bureaucracies to curtail what was left of the free market; (c) moving through back channels and white papers towards the nationalization of local police; (d) creating new national academic standards and pre-school programs designed to make non-public school options virtually impossible, setting the stage for an eventual outright ban on private child-rearing, as is the norm in Europe; (e) crashing the U.S. economy with runaway federal debt and unrestrained money-printing; (f) reorienting U.S. foreign policy towards open support of the Muslim Brotherhood, and of Islamist government in general; and (g) the humdrum-ization of every wacky campus leftist agenda item (transgender rights, pot party rights, Gaia rights, consequence-free promiscuity rights) -- if these intentions and others like them had been stated directly during the 2008 campaign, would Obama have been embraced as the redeemer, or dismissed as a well-dressed kook? 

And yet all of these agenda items are well on their way to completion, often with bipartisan support, as in the case of the Common Core curriculum, which has suckered many so-called conservatives with its (provisional) inclusion of a few good titles for literature class.  In fact, this example perfectly illustrates the problem with fantasizing that the demythologizing of Obama the Man will precipitate the undoing of Obama the Agenda.  The premise that government, at whatever level, ought to be in the business of educating children, and even that such education ought to be compulsory, is so deeply embedded in the contemporary consciousness that anyone who questions it is regarded as some kind of nut by a large swath of mankind, including most self-described conservatives.  (Trust me.)  And yet it was not so long ago that universal compulsory government schooling was just a twinkle in the eye of a few progressive power-mongers who understood that controlling what goes in gives one control over what comes out.

Having achieved such absolute cultural submission on the ownership of your soul, it was only a matter of time before the progressives moved to complete the transfer of ownership by claiming sole proprietorship of your body.  ObamaCare will face numerous challenges on its details and internal mechanisms in the coming years, but its underlying principle -- that government ought to have central decision-making authority in what is euphemistically called "healthcare," but is more properly named "self-preservation" -- will be far more difficult to challenge.  A large bureaucratic apparatus and funding mechanisms are already in place, new rules are already insinuating themselves into the economy, and a major constitutional hurdle to the law's practical implementation has already been cleared, thanks to a Republican-appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. 

And this leads us to the Republican Party, which is daily bringing new meaning to the old parliamentary term, "the loyal opposition."  Immediately after Obama's re-election, Speaker Boehner conceded defeat on ObamaCare, declaring it "the law of the land."  Not that his declaration indicated a substantial change in the GOP's real position -- as opposed to base-baiting rhetoric -- on the subject.  After all, the GOP establishment took great pains to ensure that their presidential nominee would be the only candidate among the final eight primary contenders whose own position on government-run healthcare was so compromised that the entire party would be effectively muzzled during the presidential campaign regarding the single most winnable issue on the table. 

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/04/reports_of_the_obama_presidencys_death_are_exaggerated.html#ixzz2RsKecW6Q
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

RubinReports on AP Islamism Party Line

RubinReports

Chechens, Russia & the Boston Marathon Massacre

All I would add to this article excerpt from 2006 is that the same dynamic now seems to apply to the USA, where ABC television is apparently still supporting the Chechen cause...

The fear of terrorism was even stronger. My students said they were
afraid when they rode the Metro—there had been a bombing shortly before
our arrival in the Puskhin station. Still raw were memories of the September 3,
2004 Beslan school tragedy, in which 344 civilians were killed, 172 of them
children. Nor had anyone forgotten the Dubrovka (Nord-Ost) theater hostage
crisis of October 2002. Although many criticized Putin’s handling of Chechen
affairs, the phenomenon of Chechen terrorism was largely seen as part of an
international Islamist movement, rather than as a local protest against lack of
autonomy. Russians are well aware that Chechen Russians perceive that
America is supportive of the Chechen cause.

When ABC television broadcast an interview by a Radio Liberty correspondent
with the purported mastermind of Beslan, Shamil Basayev, in late July 2005,
Russia revoked ABC reporters’ credentials. Americans seem unable to quite
understand, even after 9/11, the impact of the Chechen conflict in Russia. That
conflict has turned Russians against liberal democracy, which for a variety of
reasons has become associated with defending Chechen terrorists at the
expense of security, both personal and national. While few Russians approved
of the war in Chechnya, and many would not mind if Chechnya became
independent, most had no sympathy for terrorists or their sympathizers. The
linkage of liberal democrats to the cause of Chechen terrorism and the
perceived support by Western NGOs of Chechen terrorists has been a handicap
to those wishing to further liberalize Russia.

(From Cultural Challenges to Democratization in Russia, by Laurence Jarvik, 
Orbis, Jan. 2006)

RubinReports on Boston Tzarnaev Suspects

RubinReports

Russian TV Report on Boston Marathon Massacre's Chechen Suspects

/http://rt.com/news/chechnya-suspect-boston-bombing-110/

RubinReports on Boston Marathon Massacre

RubinReports

The Party of Surrender

The Party of Surrender

Boston Marathon Massacre

3 Bostonians are dead. More wounded. Yet US government responds as Hillary Clinton did to the Benghazi massacre: "What difference does it make?"

How's that Benghazi investigation going these days? How's Maj. Hasan's Ft. Hood trial? And who carried out the 9/11 anthrax attacks?

If we knew, it might make a difference, after all...

We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People by Peter Van Buren

We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People by Peter Van Buren

Ann Coulter on Newtown & Mental Illness

Ann Coulter - Official Home Page

Brendan O'Neill on Gay Marriage

http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13518/

Daniel Pipes on Syria

http://www.danielpipes.org/12724/support-assad

The Obama administration is attempting an overly ambitiously and subtle policy of simultaneously helping the good rebels with clandestine lethal armsand $114 million in aid even as it prepares forpossible drone strikes on the bad rebels. Nice idea, but manipulating the rebel forces via remote control has little chance of success. Inevitably, aid will end up with the Islamists and air strikes will kill allies. Better to accept one's limitations and aspire to the feasible: propping up the side in retreat.

At the same time, Westerners must be true to their morals and help bring an end to the warfare against civilians, the millions of innocents gratuitously suffering the horrors of civil war. Western governments should find mechanisms to compel the hostile parties to abide by the rules of war, specifically those that isolate combatants from non-combatants. This could entail pressuring the rebels' suppliers (Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar) and the Syrian government's supporters (Russia, China) to condition aid on their abiding by the rules of war; it could even involve Western use of force against violators on either side. That would fulfill the responsibility to protect.

On the happy day when Assad & Tehran fight the rebels & Ankara to mutual exhaustion, Western support then can go to non-Baathist and non-Islamist elements in Syria, helping them offer a moderate alternative to today's wretched choices and lead to a better future.

Latest on DC's Corcoran Museum Scandal

DECLARATION FOR CAMPAIGN OF ACTION

To the Corcoran Board of Trustees,

We, The Students for Saving the Corcoran, begin our campaign of action today at the Corcoran College of Art + Design as we have been incredibly troubled by the constant problems the Corcoran has endured due to an irresponsible administration.  This action is in response to the lack of transparency and accountability that has plagued our college and museum for the past decade and now threatens the institution’s future stability and founding mission to encourage American Genius.

We have initiated this campaign because we believe you are leading the college down the wrong road.  Continuous poor decision-making by the Board of Trustees and leadership has contributed to a dire financial deficit for which no one has been held accountable.  The manner in which the Corcoran is being governed is deplorable and consequences must be faced for this blatant mismanagement.  Your actions have disrupted our creativity and environment for learning, as well as jeopardizing the futures and careers of hundreds of students.  You have left us with little choice than to bring your actions into public light.

We will continue our campaign until the following demands have been met:

1. The board of trustees must immediately implement structural changes with the goal of creating transparent and democratic decision-making process.

The administration’s gross mismanagement and cronyism warrants a new and different process than what has led the college into this crisis.  To end this pattern, we have outlined initiatives that the board must take:

- Record and document board meetings and make minutes publicly available;

- Appoint a student, a faculty member, a staff member and alumni as voting members of the Board of Trustees;

- Implement a board member removal process where board members may be removed by a majority vote from the Corcoran student body and Faculty Association.

2. Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Harry F. Hopper III and Director Fred Bollerer must resign immediately. 

- Under your tenure, the Corcoran has been set on a path to financial ruin.  Your lack of vision, accountability, credentials and integrity has shown you are no longer suitable for the positions you hold.    

3. Appoint Wayne Reynolds as Chairman of the Board of Trustees. 

- The appointment of Mr. Reynolds will allow the Corcoran to thrive once again without the aid of a partner.  It is our goal that the Corcoran remain independent until the institution is financially stable.  Mr. Reynolds’ vision will realign the institution with the original intentions of its founder, William Wilson Corcoran, as a place for creativity, world-class contemporary art and the encouragement of American genius.

RubinReports: None, A Poem

RubinReports

None (Satire)

By Barry Rubin

Ten little countries standing in a line,

Iran had a revolution, then there were nine.

Nine little entities dangled just like bait,

Hamas took over Gaza and then there were eight.

Eight little countries thinking about heaven,

Turkey elected Islamists and then there were seven.

Seven little countries, in the geopolitical mix,

Lebanon elected Hizballah and then there were six.

Six little countries trying to stay alive,

The Brotherhood took Tunisia and then there were five.

Five little countries leaning on the door,

There goes Egypt and now there are four.

Four little countries redefining what is free,

Syria had a civil war and soon there will be three.

Three little countries doing something they will rue,

Afghanistan when Americans go will probably make it two.

Who will be next? It’s not all that hard to say,

Some think Saudi Arabia already is that way.

Bahrain’s on the verge; Qatar’s on their team,

Things may be far evenworse than what they seem.

Obama, Brennan, Hagel, Kerry think this is good,

Do you really believe they should?

Why is an alleged child molester still the voice of Elmo on PBS?

http://www.clickorlando.com/entertainment/Suit-accuses-Elmo-puppeteer-of-meth-sex-party/-/1636654/19386510/-/igtwnyz/-/index.html

Megan McCardle on Horace Mann School's Pedophile Allegations

From The Daily Beast: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/26/sex-abuse-scandals-at-horace-mann-what-do-they-tell-us-about-private-school.html

When sex scandals erupted in the Catholic Church and Penn State's football programs, we heard a lot about how the sick culture and institutions of religion and football created a safe space for pedophiles. Why no similarly harsh words for private school?...

...This is troubling.  And what's troubling is that one imagines it wasn't limited to Horace Mann; pedophiles tend to go where they have access to children, and a school is one excellent place to gain that access.  The incentives to hush up such incidents are obvious, particularly in a private school, where it's easy to imagine all the parents pulling their children out, and the school actually collapsing.  

Here's what's really interesting about these two articles: we haven't heard any calls to re-examine the institution of private school in light of these revelations.  

When the Catholic Church scandals erupted, there was a lot of discussion of what factors specific to the church had allowed them to continue.  Priestly celibacy, obviously: you'll naturally attract people who can't act on their sexual desires in public.  Hierarchy and tradition clearly played a role; victims deferred to authority, and so did many of the people who tried to bring these crimes to Authority's attention.  The Catholic Church's repressed attitude towards sex was referenced, as were its retrograde views on the role of women.  Surely such a thing could not have happened anywhere except an all-male patriarchy?

Similarly, when Jerry Sandusky's crimes were exposed, the commentary focused on the flaws of Penn State as an institution--and also on the macho culture of football. Yet as the Horace Mann revelations continue, I haven't seen anyone question whether Horace Mann deserves to exist, much less suggest that private school presents an unusually ripe field for pedophiles--a field that should be sown with salt.  The authors of the two bombshell articles (both Horace Mann graduates) certainly don't make any such suggestion; they are plainly bewildered that this was allowed to continue as long as it did.

What explains the difference?  The obvious candidate is the demographics of columnists and academics who write about these things.  Few of them are football players.  Few of them are practicing Catholics (or social conservatives).  But a fair number of them went to private school, or send their children there.  Even if they are prone to question the institution as an institution, doing so would be awfully uncomfortable.  And it might not do much for little Emily's chances at Brearley.  

More US State Department "Smart Diplomacy" News from Peter Van Buren...

http://wemeantwell.com/blog/2013/03/28/deedy-done-it-different/

America’s favorite Diplomatic Security “special” agent Chris Deedy is engaged in what promises to be one of Hawaii’s longest trial processes.

For those just joining us, recap here. For those too multi-tasked to click on the link, the real short now version is that in November 2011 while in Hawaii protecting then-SecState Hillary Clinton from the APEC conference, Deedy shot and killed an unarmed man in a Waikiki McDonalds. Deedy was arrested by the Honolulu Police Department and charged with Murder in the Second Degree and Use of a Firearm in the Commission of a Separate Felony, punishable by a term of life in prison. Despite the whole thing being on both a surveillance videotape and on someone’s iPhone video, along with multiple eye witnesses, the case has not yet come to full trial. Deedy maintained that he acted legally in his capacity as a law enforcement official.

Until now.

On March 11 Deedy changed his story, with his lawyer withdrawing the request to dismiss the case on the basis that he was acting as a federal agent at the time of the incident. The new rationale for the killing is self-defense. Withdrawing the motion relieves Deedy of having to testify during a pretrial hearing. It also cancels his desire to have the case transferred to federal court. The change also, finally, clears the way for the actual trial to begin on/about April 2 in Honolulu unless some new delay is introduced.

There has been no clear explanation/reason as to why the case has taken so long to (almost) reach trial. Deedy has been out on bail since the shooting, working a desk job at the State Department on full salary.

Deedy also now has a “support” group on the web raising money for him (they’re up to $12k), as well as to providehis side of the story.

According to the local Honolulu newspaper, in pretrial documents, city prosecutors say Deedy appeared “intoxicated” after a night of drinking and bar hopping and became the aggressor who started an altercation. According to prosecutors, Deedy kicked the deceased Elderts and repeatedly told him he was going to shoot him “in the face.”

The defense’s position outlined in court documents contends it was Elderts who was the aggressor. Hart’s filings said an intoxicated Elderts called Deedy a “fucking haole” and challenged him to a fight. Hart said Deedy identified himself as a law enforcement officer, but Elderts attacked Deedy, who felt compelled to fire in self-defense.

Deedy’s self-defense argument will need to convince a local jury that as a trained law enforcement officer from the State Department temporarily in Hawaii for wholly unrelated reasons, after a night on the town with friends, he was required to fire multiple shots at near point-blank range into an unarmed inebriated local man inside a crowded McDonalds at 2:30 am.

The History of The Onion by Eliyho Matz

THUS ONION

(DAS ONION)

Dedicated to Eric Montalvo and the Workers at La Tasa de Oro Restaurant in Manhattan, Who Prepare for me Daily an Onion Sandwich So I Can Start My Daily Search on the Internet for Information on the Mighty Onion

            Ancient civilizations’ rise and fall have been the focus of research from Herodotus to modern historians whose names are not yet known.  During the last few months, I have been researching the mysteries of ancient civilizations.  In the past few years, I have focused my attention on the historical role of potatoes over the last 350 years, and I published an article on the Internet that encapsulates my thoughts on potatoes.  Now I am busy researching the role of onions in the history of civilizations.

            The onion played a wide role in ancient Egyptian civilization.  The pyramid-builders were paid for their labor in onions and radishes.  The onion’s origin is believed to be from the Far East, close to China.  The ancient Chinese have used onions for food and for medicine.  How the onion arrived in Egypt we do not know.  We can assume it came via ancient traders through Mesopotamia and its civilizations.  The ancient Greeks adopted onions for all sorts of ritualistic festivities, including those relating to wars.  The Romans brought the onion from the East and introduced it into their diet, as well as into their cultural activities.  The Russians adopted the onion as a church symbol.  In the United States, the “Onion” has become a symbol (representation/emblem) of humor and sometimes comic reporting. 

            In one way or another, people all over the world have succumbed to the belief that onions have in them real benefits, including properties that contribute to the well functioning of the brain, and cancer-preventing agents.  Thus, when Jews celebrate the coming holiday of Passover, we have to recall the Biblical story of the Hebrews leaving Egypt and wandering into the desert, or course missing the onions they had been used to eating in Pharoanic Egypt.  Nutritionally and otherwise, onions were ubiquitous in Egypt to support the Hebrews’ physical and mental strength.

            In East Europe’s poor Jewish communities, onions have been consumed for more than 1000 years.  These Jews were poor, but they ate onions with every dish, and their minds evolved.  Thus we cannot take lightly the onion concept they came up with: “You should grow like an onion, with your head in the ground and with your feet up.”  This philosophy represented sort of an early exercise for tranquility and body health. 

Dear Reader, if you have any thoughts to share on the role onions have played in civilization over the past 5000 years, please write back and let me know.  I would be grateful and pleased to acknowledge your input in my upcoming article.

Thank you,

Eliyho Matz

eliyho_matz@yahoo.com

Bernie Sanders on "Too Big to Jail"

From the Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-bernie-sanders/too-big-to-jail_b_2973641.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications

The attorney general's view seems to be that if you are just a regular person and you commit a crime, you go to jail. But if you are the head of a Wall Street company, your power is so great that a prosecution could have destabilizing consequences with national or even worldwide implications.

In other words, we have a situation now where Wall Street banks are not only too big to fail, they are too big to jail. That view is unacceptable.

The attorney general's troubling acknowledgement has revived interest in an idea that is drawing more and more support. It is time to break up too big to fail financial institutions.

The 10 largest banks in the United States are bigger today than they were before a taxpayer bailout following the 2008 financial crisis.

U.S. banks have become so big that the six largest financial institutions in this country (J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley) today have assets of nearly $9.6 trillion, a figure equal to about two-thirds of the nation's gross domestic product. These six financial institutions issue more than two-thirds of all credit cards, over half of all mortgages, control 95 percent of all derivatives held in financial institutions and hold more than 40 percent of all bank deposits in the United States.

I will soon introduce legislation that would give the Treasury secretary 90 days to compile a list of commercial banks, investment banks, hedge funds and insurance companies that the Treasury Department determines are too big to fail. The affected financial institutions would include "any entity that has grown so large that its failure would have a catastrophic effect on the stability of either the financial system or the United States economy without substantial government assistance." Within one year after the legislation becomes law, the Treasury Department would be required to break up those banks, insurance companies and other financial institutions identified by the secretary.

RubinReports on Obama in Israel

RubinReports

Also, Obama now faces the situation of previous American presidents, a dilemma that he has long ridiculed. The Saudis and Jordanians, along with some other countries, don't care but the Iranian, Turkish, and a number of Arab regimes (including the Palestinian Authority) are going to be outraged by what Obama did and said. The Islamists will see this as a declaration of war, though of course they already viewed themselves as in a state of war with America. The Cairo speech will be spit upon; all the efforts to distance himself from Israel and create a new orientation for U.S. policy have failed.

Obama is now--on matters directly regarding Israel--a typical American president. The idea that Obama made policy out of raw hatred against Israel should be put to rest.

Nevertheless, the incompetence and the deluded strategy toward Islamists still remain, as does the dangerous situation for U.S. interests that Obama has helped create. Fireworks will no doubt take place during Obama's second term.

PS:  Palestinian anti-Obama demonstrations showed the "gratitude" amassed for Obama's previous support by branding him as a Zionist, imperialist running dog. But one detail drew my close attention. The demonstrators sang a song called "America is the head of the snake." That's the song that then PLO leader Yasir Arafat led in singing at the Palestine National Council meeting almost 45 years ago. In other words, after 45 years of effort and especially the last 23 years in which America tried to help create a Palestinian Arab state, it has made zero progress toward winning Palestinian support or recognition of America's aid and efforts. The same story, of course, will be reproduced regarding Obama's efforts to show his respect for Islam and his empathy for Islamism.

Rafael Medoff on Obama, FDR & Israel

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/Obama-FDR-and-Zionism-306870

British officials claimed any wartime expression of support for Zionism by the Allies would drive the Arab world into the arms of the Nazis. Rabbi Wise countered that the Arabs already supported the Nazis anyway.

“The [pro-Nazi] rebellion in Iraq, the presence of the Mufti in Berlin and Rome, [and] the failure of Egypt to live up to her treaty of alliance [with England]” show that “the sacrifice of friends in the interest of appeasing the unfriendly has repeatedly been proven to be in vain,” Wise argued. Nonetheless, FDR sided with the British view, as another newly discovered document makes plain.

The second document, from October 1941, records Nahum Goldmann, co-chairman of the World Jewish Congress, briefing American Zionist leaders on worrisome rumors that the British were holding secret negotiations with the Arabs over the future of Palestine.

Goldmann said his request to the State Department for information about the talks had been ignored because State “is very much influenced by the British Colonial Office.”

To make matters worse (Goldmann continued), “There are reasons also to believe that even in higher quarters” – a reference to the Roosevelt White House – “there are certain prejudices that have to be overcome in order to get effective support from the administration for a Jewish Palestine.” (In a similar vein, Rabbi Wise wrote to a colleague that FDR was “hopelessly and completely under the domination of the English Foreign Office [and] the Colonial Office.”) By 1942, FDR was so averse to being seen as pro- Zionist that he rejected even a request to permit the Palestine (Jewish) Symphony Orchestra to name one of its theaters the “Roosevelt Amphitheatre.”

Jarvik v CIA cited in ACLU CIA FOIA Case Decision

Interestingly,the court said the decision in my case was unusual, yet it was a precedent for denial on appeal of an ACLU FOIA request for information on drone strikes by DC Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Merrick B. Garland. Stay tuned...

Story here:
http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/03/d-c-circuit-rejects-glomar-response-in-aclucia-drone-foia-suit/

Ruling here: http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/6471FF102FC611A685257B2F004DEA2A/$file/11-5320-1425559.pdf

In the New York litigation, the CIA said that it did not want to file a Vaughn index at all, but instead submit what it called a “no number, no list” response -- acknowledging that it had responsive documents, but declining to “further describe or even enumerate on the public record the number, types, dates, or other descriptive information about these responsive records.” Bennett Decl. ¶ 28. Although the CIA’s New York filings speak as if the notion of a “no number, no list” response is well- established, it has not previously been considered by this court. Indeed, at the time of those filings, there were only two previously reported instances of such a response: it was briefly mentioned in one district court case in this circuit, Jarvik v. CIA,741 F. Supp. 2d 106, 123 (D.D.C. 2010), and was litigated once before the Seventh Circuit, Bassiouni v. CIA, 392 F.3d 244, 246-47 (7th Cir. 2004). There are now two more reported instances: another brief mention by a district court in this circuit, Nat’l Sec. Counselors v. CIA, No. 11-443, 2012 WL 4903377, at *38(D.D.C. Oct. 17, 2012), and the district court’s recent grant of summary judgment in favor of the CIA in the New York litigation, New York Times Co. v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, No. 11-cv-9336, 2013 WL 50209 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 3, 2013). [Editor's note: This last ruling declares the importance of my case to FOIA law: "Neither Bassiouni nor Jarvik, the two cases upon which the Government principally relies..."]

Citing the Seventh Circuit’s view that a “no number, no list” response is “legally identical” to a Glomar response, Bassiouni, 392 F.3d at 247, the plaintiffs argue that, if the CIA is not entitled to make a Glomar response in this case, it is also not entitled to make a “no number, no list” response. Pls.- Appellants’ Opp’n to Remand Mot. 4-5. At least in a case like this, however, there is a material difference between a “no number, no list” response and a Glomar response. A Glomar response requires the agency to argue, and the court to accept, that the very fact of the existence or nonexistence of responsive records is protected from disclosure. That is conceptually different from conceding (or being compelled by the court to concede) that the agency has some documents, but nonetheless arguing that any description of those documents would effectively disclose validly exempt information. There may be cases where the agency cannot plausibly make the former (Glomar) argument with a straight face, but where it can legitimately make the latter. 

Indeed, a “no number, no list” response might be viewed as a kind of Vaughn index, albeit a radically minimalist one. Such a response would only be justified in unusual circumstances, and only by a particularly persuasive affidavit. Nor is there any reason to regard this approach as subject to an on/off switch. As we have just noted, once an agency acknowledges that it has some responsive documents, there are a variety of forms that subsequent filings in the district court may take. A pure “no number, no list” response is at one end of that continuum; a traditional Vaughn index is at the other. Not quite as minimalist as a pure “no number, no list” response might be a “no number, no list” response (or even a Glomar response) with respect to a limited category of documents, coupled with a Vaughn index for the remainder.

But we are getting ahead of ourselves. None of these issues has been litigated in this case, either in this court or in the district court, because summary judgment was granted in the face of an unqualified, across-the-board Glomar response.13 No government affidavit has yet been filed in this case that even attempts to justify a “no number, no list” response. And neither a traditional Vaughn index nor affidavits justifying an alternative submission have been filed. Accordingly, all such issues remain open for the district court’s determination upon remand.

V
For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
So ordered. 

RubinReports

RubinReports on Pres. Obama's Israel trip:

The idea that Israel needs to persuade its neighbors to accept its existence is a line we have heard almost daily since the 1980s or even 1970s. Yet curiously the Arab street pays no attention to the scores of such Israeli gestures and the West soon forgets each one. And indeed Obama has forgotten those that took place during his first term, for example the nine-month-long settlement construction freeze, just as before that were forgotten the Oslo agreement, Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, the 2000 Camp David offer (including the offer to redivide Jerusalem!) and many more. [See Footnote, below]

Guess what? If today Israel were to make a huge new concession, six months from now that would be forgotten in the West, which would also forget that there was no considerable Arab response. Israelis know this and so saying this kind of thing about Israel proving its decent intentions can only fall with a cynical thud. Such statements remind Israelis why they are NOT rushing to make new concessions or take new risks.

Note, too, that Western and European promises to give Israel a big reward if Israel takes a big risk or makes a big concession and the Arab side doesn't respond have also been repeatedly broken.

What Obama is in effect saying is “Mr. Netanyahu, tear down that [security, counterterrorist] wall.” When he should be saying to the other side: “Mr. Abbas, Mursi, et. al., tear down that wall of hatred against Israel!”

Of course, he won’t do so because that would make the Arab leaders and publics mad, not because they want Israel to move faster on peace or seek a better deal but because they don't want peace at all. And the Islamists coming into power have no intention of tearing down the wall. In fact, they are building it higher than ever. And there's nothing--absolutely nothing--Israel can do to change the course of events in that respect.

Moreover, in a context where the same point is not made loudly, clearly, and publicly to the Palestinian Authority, the idea that the burden is on Israel to prove its peace credentials is a veiled way of Obama saying--and signaling to his supporters--that Israel is responsible for the failure to achieve peace.

A friend from Vermont just shared this Gallup Poll...

American Sympathy For Israel at All-Time High: pxhttp://www.gallup.com/poll/161387/americans-sympathies-israel-match-time-high.aspx

Is Eric Holder Too Big To Jail?

From ZeroHedge: http://www.zerohedge.com/print/471518

Our justice department has been sold out. They are now the enemy of the people.

If any person is too big to prosecute then your justice system is a sham, a lie, a farce, a joke, a bastardization of all that America used to stand for. Ultimately, it becomes a tool to enforce the will of fascists.

My grandfather, W. H. Mantor was a sheriff, a lawyer, and a judge in Crow Wing County, MN.

My father worked in the City Attorney’s office and had a private practice in St. Paul. Several of my friends have worked in law enforcement. I used to have respect for an institution that existed to make certain that the rights of every citizen would be protected.

I can only describe what I am witnessing as personally heartbreaking. I had such respect for the institution of law and its ideals.

And all the while, the erosion of basic legal equity has been brought about by a lap dog media that hides the truth and takes its cut of the illegal profits.

Pat Caddell Say Corrupt GOP Criminals Like Romney & Rove Should BeProsecuted Under RICO

At CPAC, according to this story: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/03/15/pat-caddell-sets-off-firestorm-at-cpac-2013-accuses-consultants-of-racketeering-55715

Participating in a panel — “Should We Shoot All the Consultants Now?” — Caddell accused the GOP consulting class of being only “in the business of lining their pockets and preserving power.”
“When you have the Chief of Staff of the Republican National Committee and the political director of the Romney campaign, and their two companies get $150 million at the end of the campaign for the “fantastic” get-out-the-vote program… some of this borders on RICO [the 1970 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act] violations,” Caddell told attendees.
“The Republican Party is in the grips of what I call the CLEC — the consultant, lobbyist, and establishment complex,” Caddell said.
In what was described by Breitbart as a blistering attack on “racketeering” Republican consultants who play wealthy donors like “marks,” Caddell added:
“I blame the donors who allow themselves to be played for marks. I blame the people in the grassroots for allowing themselves to be played for suckers….It’s time to stop being marks. It’s time to stop being suckers. It’s time for you people to get real.”
In comparing Republicans unfavorably to Democrats, Caddell said: “In my party we play to win. We play for life and death. You people play for a different kind of agenda… Your party has no problem playing the Washington Generals to the Harlem Globetrotters.”

Daniel Pipes on US Denial

http://www.danielpipes.org/12604/islam-role-terror

The military leadership willfully ignores what stares them in the face, namely Hasan's clear and evident Islamist inspiration; Protecting the Force mentions "Muslim" and "jihad" not a single time, and "Islam" only once, in a footnote.[4] The massacre officially still remains unconnected to terrorism or Islam.

This example fits in a larger pattern: The establishment denies that Islamism—a form of Islam that seeks to make Muslims dominant through an extreme, totalistic, and rigid application of Islamic law, the Shari'a—represents the leading global cause of terrorism when it so clearly does. Islamism reverts to medieval norms in its aspiration to create a caliphate that rules humanity. "Islam is the solution" summarizes its doctrine. Islam's public law can be summarized as elevating Muslim over non-Muslim, male over female, and endorsing the use of force to spread Muslim rule. In recent decades, Islamists (the adherents of this vision of Islam) have established an unparalleled record of terrorism. To cite one tabulation: TheReligionOfPeace.com counts 20,000 assaults in the name of Islam since 9/11,[5] or about five a day. In the West, terrorist acts inspired by motives other than Islam hardly register.

It is important to document and explain this denial and explore its implications. The examples come predominantly from the United States, though they could come from virtually any Western country—except Israel.

The DiploMad 2.0: The New Pope

The DiploMad 2.0: The New Pope: Disclaimer: I am not Catholic. I comment with trepidation. The Cardinals have picked an Italian Pope without picking an Italian Pope. It...