for other posts, please view:
PoliticiansTV
blogging:
Everybody had a camera. Everybody. No where did you go and not see hands stuck in the air recording everything and anything. Smile! Can I take your picture? Where are you from? Does this diminish the value of any prints out there or make the best ones more valuable? We will never see them all.
This #inaug09 was a full frontal New Media outing (again!). Caveat: It's level of interactivity was minimal - 20% citizen / candidate immersion at best. We witnessed very little contact (organization) with attending citizens on the ground (Citizen interaction was in small defined groups - no large demonstrations or gatherings were visible or audible.) Events appeared to be very much about pomp and the moment.
There was very little intrusion from law enforcement although obvious around an entire perimeter. Witnessed 1 military defensive action. People were cut off from food, water, security and on foot. Metro's were jammed and shut down (Metro Station) with little or no way to figure out what was true or which stations would be affected. People trusted "hearsay," "rumor", and good will. Their seemed to be much hearding going on as people would stand in lines for long amounts of time only to realize the line went no where. This is true everywhere we went. There were no Information booths for people to help you get around or understand what events were happening or when. No vendors of anything visible. No people on loudspeakers to lead. Nothing. Very minimal police / gov / "visible" presence.
update:
Cell phones must have been jammed on a "haphazard basis" as they would go up and down in terms of signal. It could not have just been capacity - their appeared to be no reason why a citizen would call at the same time unless you base it on speaker impact possibilities / potential. Some of the speakers would generate very little interest to begin with. As well, since there was "no" information available to people walking around, nobody knew anything unless they had a “connection” to the outside. The White House and surrounding Mall is on physical / technical lock down.
%%%%%%%%
ATT signal dropped for a full hour period (1:00pm) and txt messaging went down fully.
Update: ATT Service works again (- 2:22pm) and I was able to "phone" out of state.
---
txt msg not working.
%%%%
Web access and in turn IM had been disrupted. It seemed blocked and sudden.
%%%%%%
Walking for hours to the farthest MEtro stop to exit Mall area.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Barack Hussein Obama Inauguration 2009 ... blogging
The drive from Philadelphia, PA USA was 2:40 minutes. We saw very little traffic on I95. We continued to Northern Virginia via the Chain bridge and saw large trucks with snow plows positioned off the roads and no traffic. We have been told that bridges would be blocked at 4AM. We arrived by 3:45 and and met up with our host, Washington Bureau Chief Alan Rosnenblatt who has briefed us.
Washington DC is on lock-down, cold, and very quite.
Expected attendance is 2 million and they will spill into the city all at once starting now via public transportation that will be no doubt very slow.
Ongoing.
Washington DC is on lock-down, cold, and very quite.
Expected attendance is 2 million and they will spill into the city all at once starting now via public transportation that will be no doubt very slow.
Ongoing.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Hamas rethinks its position. Israel blinks. The world thinks.
blogging:
Has the state of Israel experienced a positive reaction in world opinion on the matter of their right to exist during the war in Gaza? The expected immediate and violent backlash has not happened from the Arab world. Israel seems to have convinced world opinion that it is acting in self defense. This global reaction Scenerio seems familiar to how the United States was perceived after the World Trade Center attacks. This manifestation of world opinion of events has happened swiftly and will last for just a few days. It has happened in the past. Can Israel negotiate swiftly its way out of the conflict with world opinion intact? Will they get what they came for - The complete cessation of rocket and mortar fire into Israel with International assurance that it will not occur?
Has Israel finally taken on the task of engaging with the world community as a debater of its right to exist by taking on the enormous task of speaking to the world in real time - across all platforms, media’s, and possibilities? We think so.
There's no turning back.
Has the state of Israel experienced a positive reaction in world opinion on the matter of their right to exist during the war in Gaza? The expected immediate and violent backlash has not happened from the Arab world. Israel seems to have convinced world opinion that it is acting in self defense. This global reaction Scenerio seems familiar to how the United States was perceived after the World Trade Center attacks. This manifestation of world opinion of events has happened swiftly and will last for just a few days. It has happened in the past. Can Israel negotiate swiftly its way out of the conflict with world opinion intact? Will they get what they came for - The complete cessation of rocket and mortar fire into Israel with International assurance that it will not occur?
Has Israel finally taken on the task of engaging with the world community as a debater of its right to exist by taking on the enormous task of speaking to the world in real time - across all platforms, media’s, and possibilities? We think so.
There's no turning back.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Middle East Links - The Israel Project (TIP)
Post:
The following links are organized to help you learn more about Israel and the Middle East. Click on the headings below to jump to a specific group of links.
end.
The following links are organized to help you learn more about Israel and the Middle East. Click on the headings below to jump to a specific group of links.
end.
Why Hamas can cease fire ...
The Palestinian Israeli conflict reaches a crucial cross-road. Israel is demonstating to its enemies and the world that it will act capably on the ground and thoughtfully in the media by exposing how the untruths of Arab propaganda victimize Arabs first.
Israel has been in a state of war since May 1948. Wars are fought to be won. The scope of anti-Israel militancy has expanded to "Jews" anywhere, any time -- and with disproportionate cruelty to the victims. It was not always like this. This probably did not go unnoticed to Israel's politicians and military of the savagery taking place under the guise of resistance.
Whatever illusions came from Israel's retreat at the hands of Hizbollah, the Israelis are now showing that if Hamas remains incapable of accepting peace and two sates, Israel can destroy them.
Hamas has an opportunity to act and take charge of the bully pulpit they currently claim. They have Hezbollah as an example in Lebanon. Hamas has proven itself as fierce fighters. Standing on the dead bodies of your comrades with everything destroyed around you and rattling your Saber is no way to claim victory. Put down your arms and pick up ploughs and partnerships from whom you choose. Remember the people you are trying to save.
Notes: Jewish refugees fleeing the fighting:
Move to New Palestine and attempt tp take their plight to the heart of the matter.
Israel has been in a state of war since May 1948. Wars are fought to be won. The scope of anti-Israel militancy has expanded to "Jews" anywhere, any time -- and with disproportionate cruelty to the victims. It was not always like this. This probably did not go unnoticed to Israel's politicians and military of the savagery taking place under the guise of resistance.
Whatever illusions came from Israel's retreat at the hands of Hizbollah, the Israelis are now showing that if Hamas remains incapable of accepting peace and two sates, Israel can destroy them.
Hamas has an opportunity to act and take charge of the bully pulpit they currently claim. They have Hezbollah as an example in Lebanon. Hamas has proven itself as fierce fighters. Standing on the dead bodies of your comrades with everything destroyed around you and rattling your Saber is no way to claim victory. Put down your arms and pick up ploughs and partnerships from whom you choose. Remember the people you are trying to save.
Notes: Jewish refugees fleeing the fighting:
Move to New Palestine and attempt tp take their plight to the heart of the matter.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Why Israel had to attack ...
Opinion.
Israel has never won the propaganda war of world opinion. With recent operations in the Gaza Strip, they will continue to be looked down upon as aggressors despite the obvious truce violations by their sworn enemy, Hamas. We think it has never actually tried and has walked the line alone. It has done so in the name of defending its people, culture and basic right to exist (even at 1967 borders). In recent years (perhaps since Oslo) it has attempted to approach peace with a gun and stick. It offers compromise while standing ready to fight back attempts to exterminate it. In the slug fest of Middle East politics, it seems that both sides can see no other way. Israel has no choice. It’s very existence is on the line.
Israel has never been given the green light from world opinion to defend itself. The lack of any Security Council resolutions (against Palastinians etc)alone shows this to be true. Israel feels they are alone and now, it shows again, with action in Gaza that this is true. Despite pulling out from Gaza and leaving the land entirely, it has received neither praise nor compromise. They were only met with scorn as Hamas took over from an inept PA and moved rocket installations to the new frontlines.
Hamas ended the truce. They instigated the war. Now as they are being pounded into the ground they long for, they cry foul. Why? To claim victory? Will they stand on he bodies of their dead people and destroyed buildings like Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah and claim victory? They certainly will, while their people starve.
History’s wars show victory for those that concede defeat and pick up the plough. In the eyes of Hamas, only the extermination of the Jews will do, yet they throw their women and children into the fire with no mercy in the name of Jihad. We hope they see through the violence and plague that has fallen upon them. The violence is an eye for an eye. The plague is their failed leadership. Israel has no moral obligation to restrain from defending its people despite the ferocity of their attacks.
Where are the Arab peacemakers? Ziontocracy must rise.
ref:
http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=378&PID=0&IID=2808&TTL=Did_Israel_Use_%E2%80%9CDisproportionate_Force%E2%80%9D_in_Gaza?
http://www.mesi.org.uk/ViewBlog.aspx?ArticleId=41
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/opinion/30morris.html?ref=opinion
Israel has never won the propaganda war of world opinion. With recent operations in the Gaza Strip, they will continue to be looked down upon as aggressors despite the obvious truce violations by their sworn enemy, Hamas. We think it has never actually tried and has walked the line alone. It has done so in the name of defending its people, culture and basic right to exist (even at 1967 borders). In recent years (perhaps since Oslo) it has attempted to approach peace with a gun and stick. It offers compromise while standing ready to fight back attempts to exterminate it. In the slug fest of Middle East politics, it seems that both sides can see no other way. Israel has no choice. It’s very existence is on the line.
Israel has never been given the green light from world opinion to defend itself. The lack of any Security Council resolutions (against Palastinians etc)alone shows this to be true. Israel feels they are alone and now, it shows again, with action in Gaza that this is true. Despite pulling out from Gaza and leaving the land entirely, it has received neither praise nor compromise. They were only met with scorn as Hamas took over from an inept PA and moved rocket installations to the new frontlines.
Hamas ended the truce. They instigated the war. Now as they are being pounded into the ground they long for, they cry foul. Why? To claim victory? Will they stand on he bodies of their dead people and destroyed buildings like Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah and claim victory? They certainly will, while their people starve.
History’s wars show victory for those that concede defeat and pick up the plough. In the eyes of Hamas, only the extermination of the Jews will do, yet they throw their women and children into the fire with no mercy in the name of Jihad. We hope they see through the violence and plague that has fallen upon them. The violence is an eye for an eye. The plague is their failed leadership. Israel has no moral obligation to restrain from defending its people despite the ferocity of their attacks.
Where are the Arab peacemakers? Ziontocracy must rise.
ref:
http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=378&PID=0&IID=2808&TTL=Did_Israel_Use_%E2%80%9CDisproportionate_Force%E2%80%9D_in_Gaza?
http://www.mesi.org.uk/ViewBlog.aspx?ArticleId=41
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/opinion/30morris.html?ref=opinion
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Hamas and Israel at the brink...
Ongoing:
As the second day of what HAMAS has called the third Intifadah begins, what is the next step in the Arab world? The Arab league is meeting in an emergency session in Egypt, Hezbollah has stated that they will show restraint (restraint in the face of the worst aggression between the two sides in 60 years?!), and Iran has called for the "Arab street" to rise up. As of this post, nothing has happened ...
**** The U.N. Security Council ended a four-hour emergency meeting early Sunday with a call for an immediate halt of hostilities and a re-opening of border crossings to allow humanitarian supplies to reach Palestinians in Gaza.
***The Palestinian envoy said if Israel does not cease attacks within 48 hours, Arab delegations will demand stronger action from the Security Council.
*** Day 2 Syria breaks off "indirect talks" with Israel. (UPDATE)
Confusing? Yes. Why such a tepid response? 48 hours? Sounds like Israel has been given an out ... Does the world believe that Israel is justified in their assault after endless rocke bombardments? Looks like it to us. Confusing? Yes.
Will Hamas fall? The PA hopes so as they are a clear loser in this battle.
ongoing.
ref:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050405.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/28/gaza.israel.strikes/index.html
As the second day of what HAMAS has called the third Intifadah begins, what is the next step in the Arab world? The Arab league is meeting in an emergency session in Egypt, Hezbollah has stated that they will show restraint (restraint in the face of the worst aggression between the two sides in 60 years?!), and Iran has called for the "Arab street" to rise up. As of this post, nothing has happened ...
**** The U.N. Security Council ended a four-hour emergency meeting early Sunday with a call for an immediate halt of hostilities and a re-opening of border crossings to allow humanitarian supplies to reach Palestinians in Gaza.
***The Palestinian envoy said if Israel does not cease attacks within 48 hours, Arab delegations will demand stronger action from the Security Council.
*** Day 2 Syria breaks off "indirect talks" with Israel. (UPDATE)
Confusing? Yes. Why such a tepid response? 48 hours? Sounds like Israel has been given an out ... Does the world believe that Israel is justified in their assault after endless rocke bombardments? Looks like it to us. Confusing? Yes.
Will Hamas fall? The PA hopes so as they are a clear loser in this battle.
ongoing.
ref:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050405.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/28/gaza.israel.strikes/index.html
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Hamas jihadists launch salvos of rockets and morters at Israel
Ongoing:
It's hard to say with certainty who is responsible for the truce breaking down (started on June 19, 2008) but if daily rocket fire since October is any indication, Hamas never thought it would work. The quick disintigration of the truce shows that Hamas has made a tactical decision to escalate violence to bring Israel to the table. Olmert has not bowed during the truce time frame as had been supposed by Arab negotiators based on his indictment and continues to run the government with confidence (for better or worse).
The Izzedine Al Qassam brigades have stated "that they have fired in retaliation" for an assassination of their operatives. (http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/24/israel.rockets/index.html). This might be true but since the rocket fire has been going on for some time now, the question is "Is this just propaganda?” Almost 100 rockets have fallen on Israel. Seems like it.
At its start, Hamas had won international claim by brokering the truce and the PA (and Israel) had to acknowledge that a government existed in Gaza (sort of). But the fact is Hamas never reigned in other militant groups (Islamic Jihad & Al Aqsa Martyers Brigades) as it had to by preventing cross-border attacks on Israel. Do they have control? Did they try or just make an arangement with the small factions by saying and not doing? Now they claim (threaten) "thousands of Israelis" are within their rocket range. So it is clear they have been rearming and preparing their forces as had been stated by Israel.
We think the beginning of the end is at hand. The world awaits an Obama administration that promises to make Middle East peace a priority. But at what price is peace worth it? Who will take the side of peace? An Arab leader of stature needs to step forward with a bold proposal. A Hudna (temporary peace) proposed by Hamas (in the guise of a 10 year truce) is a farce. Nobody in Israel believes that they will not attack after it is over in 10 years. Yes, that is a possibility and a done deal to many.
What the Palestinians need is a leader that can rally the people behind a 2 state solution, Mahmoud Abbas is not that person nor is Ismail Haniyeh. War is looming and Israel appears to be at the end of their line. Should they attack / invade Gaza? We think not. But they probably will. Martyrs on Arab television across the world is exactly what Hamas wants.
Will the Lion be the new US President Barack Obama?
Ongoing.
ref:
http://www.speedsignal.com/news/gaza-rocket-fire-follows-shooting/?referer=sphere_related_content
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/
It's hard to say with certainty who is responsible for the truce breaking down (started on June 19, 2008) but if daily rocket fire since October is any indication, Hamas never thought it would work. The quick disintigration of the truce shows that Hamas has made a tactical decision to escalate violence to bring Israel to the table. Olmert has not bowed during the truce time frame as had been supposed by Arab negotiators based on his indictment and continues to run the government with confidence (for better or worse).
The Izzedine Al Qassam brigades have stated "that they have fired in retaliation" for an assassination of their operatives. (http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/24/israel.rockets/index.html). This might be true but since the rocket fire has been going on for some time now, the question is "Is this just propaganda?” Almost 100 rockets have fallen on Israel. Seems like it.
At its start, Hamas had won international claim by brokering the truce and the PA (and Israel) had to acknowledge that a government existed in Gaza (sort of). But the fact is Hamas never reigned in other militant groups (Islamic Jihad & Al Aqsa Martyers Brigades) as it had to by preventing cross-border attacks on Israel. Do they have control? Did they try or just make an arangement with the small factions by saying and not doing? Now they claim (threaten) "thousands of Israelis" are within their rocket range. So it is clear they have been rearming and preparing their forces as had been stated by Israel.
We think the beginning of the end is at hand. The world awaits an Obama administration that promises to make Middle East peace a priority. But at what price is peace worth it? Who will take the side of peace? An Arab leader of stature needs to step forward with a bold proposal. A Hudna (temporary peace) proposed by Hamas (in the guise of a 10 year truce) is a farce. Nobody in Israel believes that they will not attack after it is over in 10 years. Yes, that is a possibility and a done deal to many.
What the Palestinians need is a leader that can rally the people behind a 2 state solution, Mahmoud Abbas is not that person nor is Ismail Haniyeh. War is looming and Israel appears to be at the end of their line. Should they attack / invade Gaza? We think not. But they probably will. Martyrs on Arab television across the world is exactly what Hamas wants.
Will the Lion be the new US President Barack Obama?
Ongoing.
ref:
http://www.speedsignal.com/news/gaza-rocket-fire-follows-shooting/?referer=sphere_related_content
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
War and Peace? What is a Hudna and why it is thought to be the beginning of the end?
***(This is an ongoing post. We have no illusion that we can speak to this term anymore than anybody else. We are discussing this possibility in context of what it means to the Arabs and what they plan to "actually" do in the event Israel agrees to such a truce.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do the Arabs want peace? Have they switched from a people that want Islam as a global religion with tolerance as its central meaning or have they embraced such Nazi ideology as extermination (genocide)and only plan to regroup and strike with 10 years of resources and training?
Is the 2 state solution really being discussed in context of a Hudna (temporary truce)? Or wil this be the end of the line in (or beginning) preparing for final battle? Let's discuss history of such actions. Can you make peace with enemies that are sworn to your destruction or do you just hold a truce and wait for your destiny?
Denis MacEoin of the Middle East Quarterly puts it like this ...
"However, this acquired anti-Semitism creates numerous problems for Arab anti-Zionists. Western anti-Semitism is racist; not even a Jew who had abandoned his faith or converted to Christianity was spared by Hitler's racist doctrine of the Jew as üntermensch. Whereas a Jew under Islam had the options of conversion or life as a dhimmi, a Jew in German-occupied Europe had no choice at all. Once Israel was established, Arabs became anti-Semites and called not only for the extermination of Israel but also for the annihilation of all Jews living there. This has made the possibility of a truce even more remote since it has an all-or-nothing quality similar to Hitler's "Final Solution."
and this ...
" ... Should a Muslim victory seem remote, the caliph could declare a truce in the interests of the umma. Rudolph Peters, Islamic law professor at the University of Amsterdam states, "According to some schools of law, a truce must be concluded for a specified period of time, no longer than ten years."[11] Hanafi law, however, permits the Muslims to terminate a truce arbitrarily: The "imam may denounce the armistice whenever the continuation of warfare is more favorable for the Moslems than the continuation of peace," he continues.[12] Such a truce is necessary when the Muslims are weak relative to their enemies. It can also occur when there is fitna within an Islamic state.[13] These truces serve as protection against further violence to enable Muslims to regroup and gather their strength, whereupon they can issue a fresh declaration of jihad. Such a treaty is a hudna, distinct from sulh where the non-Muslim state pays tribute to a more powerful Muslim one, or an ‘ahd, a covenant of security, in which protection for Muslims is reciprocated.[14] ..."
[11] Rudolph Peters, in Esposito, ed., The Oxford Encyclopaedia of the Modern Islamic World, vol. 2, p. 371, s.v. "Jihad."
[12] Peters, Islam and Colonialism, p. 35.
[13] Ibid., p. 33.
[14] See Daniel Pipes, "British ‘Covenant of Security' with Islamists Ends," The New York Sun, July 8, 2005.
Ref:
http://www.mefta.org/page1.htm
http://conflictblotter.com/
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1042960.html
ongoing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do the Arabs want peace? Have they switched from a people that want Islam as a global religion with tolerance as its central meaning or have they embraced such Nazi ideology as extermination (genocide)and only plan to regroup and strike with 10 years of resources and training?
Is the 2 state solution really being discussed in context of a Hudna (temporary truce)? Or wil this be the end of the line in (or beginning) preparing for final battle? Let's discuss history of such actions. Can you make peace with enemies that are sworn to your destruction or do you just hold a truce and wait for your destiny?
Denis MacEoin of the Middle East Quarterly puts it like this ...
"However, this acquired anti-Semitism creates numerous problems for Arab anti-Zionists. Western anti-Semitism is racist; not even a Jew who had abandoned his faith or converted to Christianity was spared by Hitler's racist doctrine of the Jew as üntermensch. Whereas a Jew under Islam had the options of conversion or life as a dhimmi, a Jew in German-occupied Europe had no choice at all. Once Israel was established, Arabs became anti-Semites and called not only for the extermination of Israel but also for the annihilation of all Jews living there. This has made the possibility of a truce even more remote since it has an all-or-nothing quality similar to Hitler's "Final Solution."
and this ...
" ... Should a Muslim victory seem remote, the caliph could declare a truce in the interests of the umma. Rudolph Peters, Islamic law professor at the University of Amsterdam states, "According to some schools of law, a truce must be concluded for a specified period of time, no longer than ten years."[11] Hanafi law, however, permits the Muslims to terminate a truce arbitrarily: The "imam may denounce the armistice whenever the continuation of warfare is more favorable for the Moslems than the continuation of peace," he continues.[12] Such a truce is necessary when the Muslims are weak relative to their enemies. It can also occur when there is fitna within an Islamic state.[13] These truces serve as protection against further violence to enable Muslims to regroup and gather their strength, whereupon they can issue a fresh declaration of jihad. Such a treaty is a hudna, distinct from sulh where the non-Muslim state pays tribute to a more powerful Muslim one, or an ‘ahd, a covenant of security, in which protection for Muslims is reciprocated.[14] ..."
[11] Rudolph Peters, in Esposito, ed., The Oxford Encyclopaedia of the Modern Islamic World, vol. 2, p. 371, s.v. "Jihad."
[12] Peters, Islam and Colonialism, p. 35.
[13] Ibid., p. 33.
[14] See Daniel Pipes, "British ‘Covenant of Security' with Islamists Ends," The New York Sun, July 8, 2005.
Ref:
http://www.mefta.org/page1.htm
http://conflictblotter.com/
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1042960.html
ongoing.
Monday, December 1, 2008
What if the US wins the Iraq war?
Post:
This is a lingering question that recently was spoken about by US President George Bush. That the Iraq government has all but agreed on a tactical pullout of US and Coaliion forces by 2012(!) what does this say to all of the war naysayers? What does the expanded US / NATO efforts in Afghanistan say to Russia? Success? Failure? It's a known fact that nobody wanted us to be there in the first place, but what happens when the US pulls out and Iraq staves off the inevitable Iran hyper influence? Did the US win the war and would the Left agree as such?
As soon as the new front in Afghanistan is expanded, we might be seeing the end of one chaos packed war morph into another...with far worse consequences here and abroad.
ref:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZDg4M2NlZjdkMWY0M2EyMzUwZDE3OTc1YmQwYTgxNjY=
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8996577
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1440646120080317?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22&sp=true
end
This is a lingering question that recently was spoken about by US President George Bush. That the Iraq government has all but agreed on a tactical pullout of US and Coaliion forces by 2012(!) what does this say to all of the war naysayers? What does the expanded US / NATO efforts in Afghanistan say to Russia? Success? Failure? It's a known fact that nobody wanted us to be there in the first place, but what happens when the US pulls out and Iraq staves off the inevitable Iran hyper influence? Did the US win the war and would the Left agree as such?
As soon as the new front in Afghanistan is expanded, we might be seeing the end of one chaos packed war morph into another...with far worse consequences here and abroad.
ref:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZDg4M2NlZjdkMWY0M2EyMzUwZDE3OTc1YmQwYTgxNjY=
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8996577
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1440646120080317?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22&sp=true
end
Senator Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y appointed Secretary of State
opinion...
Appointing Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State is a shrewed political move by President elect Obama. His transition team certainly vetted the scenerio that has Clinton being out of power and unable to coalition build with Democrats / Republicans / Business during the next 2- 4 years. She will also be barred as a cabinet member to try and pay off her camapign debt. That forces her to think twice about future campaigns if she were to leave her Sec. post.
The White House situation room should be interesting that's for sure.
reference:
To make it possible for his wife to become secretary of state, [Democrat] party officials said, former President Bill Clinton agreed to:
- Disclose the names of every contributor to his foundation since its inception in 1997 and all contributors going forward.
- Refuse donations from foreign governments to the Clinton Global Initiative, his annual charitable conference.
- Cease holding CGI meetings overseas.
- Volunteer to step away from day-to-day management of the foundation while his wife is secretary of state.
- Submit his speaking schedule to review by the State Department and White House counsel.
- Submit any new sources of income to a similar ethical review.
source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27983003/
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2008/12/the-note-the-st.html
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jswUSG3lhoCouFWBk4Romw7jSv_g
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/29/hillary-gets-sec-of-state-nod-on-monday-bill-will-cough-up-secret-donor-names/
Appointing Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State is a shrewed political move by President elect Obama. His transition team certainly vetted the scenerio that has Clinton being out of power and unable to coalition build with Democrats / Republicans / Business during the next 2- 4 years. She will also be barred as a cabinet member to try and pay off her camapign debt. That forces her to think twice about future campaigns if she were to leave her Sec. post.
The White House situation room should be interesting that's for sure.
reference:
To make it possible for his wife to become secretary of state, [Democrat] party officials said, former President Bill Clinton agreed to:
- Disclose the names of every contributor to his foundation since its inception in 1997 and all contributors going forward.
- Refuse donations from foreign governments to the Clinton Global Initiative, his annual charitable conference.
- Cease holding CGI meetings overseas.
- Volunteer to step away from day-to-day management of the foundation while his wife is secretary of state.
- Submit his speaking schedule to review by the State Department and White House counsel.
- Submit any new sources of income to a similar ethical review.
source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27983003/
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2008/12/the-note-the-st.html
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jswUSG3lhoCouFWBk4Romw7jSv_g
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/29/hillary-gets-sec-of-state-nod-on-monday-bill-will-cough-up-secret-donor-names/
Monday, November 24, 2008
Syria's options ...
What is on Syria's mind these days? What does team Obama think of the Sunni President Basher Assad? Will Syria be held accountable for the assassination of Rafik Hariri by the Obama administration or will former US President Jimmy Carter and colleagues (ZBIGNIEW BREZINSKI)"move on" and push for "peace"?
Will Syria actually move beyond their outwardly committed aggressive relationship with Iran? Iran is on the run, no matter what they say, as they had played Tiger with the belief that they could ride out sanctions with fiery rhetoric and shrewd nationalism. Oil prices are falling and the Laws of Supply and demand have trumped (for the moment) Nationalism. They must now lean more on their nationalist proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas.
Will president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fold or cease public rhetoric? Will the Ayatollahs remove him? Will students and reformers take over as Obama ascends to the US Presidency and shows that US diplomacy, through negotiations, may work?
ref:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=1688
pending
Will Syria actually move beyond their outwardly committed aggressive relationship with Iran? Iran is on the run, no matter what they say, as they had played Tiger with the belief that they could ride out sanctions with fiery rhetoric and shrewd nationalism. Oil prices are falling and the Laws of Supply and demand have trumped (for the moment) Nationalism. They must now lean more on their nationalist proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas.
Will president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fold or cease public rhetoric? Will the Ayatollahs remove him? Will students and reformers take over as Obama ascends to the US Presidency and shows that US diplomacy, through negotiations, may work?
ref:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=1688
pending
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
