"There are two sides in the Middle East conflict: Jews and Arabs who want compromise, and Jews and Arabs who want to demonize and eradicate their neighbors."
-Rob Eshman
Editor of the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles
Monday, March 30, 2009
Football Riot in Northern Ireland
For once the violence in Belfast wasn't caused by religious/sectarian parties. It was caused by football (soccer, if you will.) More specifically, in a recent World Cup 2010 qualifier between Poland and Northern Ireland, police say a group of hardcore hooligans from Poland started a riot outside the game at Windsor Park. Northern Ireland won the game 3-2, leaving it at the top of group 3 in the Euro zone qualifiers. But the riot is picking up more of the headlines.
Before you ask the question, "It's a football riot, who cares?" let me tell you a little more. Ireland is dealing with its own immigration troubles these days. No longer is it the young Irish lad in America trying to work his way up from the gutter. In Northern Ireland, Polish immigrants are struggling to live and work in relative peace ad prosperity with their neighbors. This can be said about most "Western" countries, but Northern Ireland is the case for the day.
The hooligans that threw bricks, bottles and fireworks at riot police, injuring 11, had traveled from Poland for the game. They were not the locals trying to make a better life for themselves. But who carried the blame? Locals.
Police Superintendent Chris Noble stated: “A number of homes were attacked and these are being treated as racially motivated incidents. We believe there was a hard core of Polish nationals who came to the game without tickets but with a clear intent to cause trouble to genuine supporters and residents. Unfortunately, their actions may well have put the safety of law-abiding and local Polish residents in jeopardy.”
This comes at a time when Northern Ireland is trying to keep a positive outlook on life. The state has already lost one officer and two soldiers this month due to civil strife. Combine this with the riot, and add in a little bit of horrible economic downturn and you are going to be left with a bit of social tension. And who will this tension be turned against? Polish immigrants. Just like in America, it's the immigrant that takes the fall. Questions like,"Why are the immigrants taking jobs from hard-working Americans/Irishmen?" or "How could we let so many immigrants in?" will begin to run rampant.
Mostly espoused by people that don't fully understand that a person is a person no matter where they hail from. And people have the right to work hard so that their family can prosper.
Either way, hopefully Northern Ireland can move past this debacle with good grace. It's been shown in the past. It's not too much to hope for. Besides, they won the game and they are doing pretty good in the Euro qualifiers. So that's something to celebrate.
Peace.
Before you ask the question, "It's a football riot, who cares?" let me tell you a little more. Ireland is dealing with its own immigration troubles these days. No longer is it the young Irish lad in America trying to work his way up from the gutter. In Northern Ireland, Polish immigrants are struggling to live and work in relative peace ad prosperity with their neighbors. This can be said about most "Western" countries, but Northern Ireland is the case for the day.
The hooligans that threw bricks, bottles and fireworks at riot police, injuring 11, had traveled from Poland for the game. They were not the locals trying to make a better life for themselves. But who carried the blame? Locals.
Police Superintendent Chris Noble stated: “A number of homes were attacked and these are being treated as racially motivated incidents. We believe there was a hard core of Polish nationals who came to the game without tickets but with a clear intent to cause trouble to genuine supporters and residents. Unfortunately, their actions may well have put the safety of law-abiding and local Polish residents in jeopardy.”
This comes at a time when Northern Ireland is trying to keep a positive outlook on life. The state has already lost one officer and two soldiers this month due to civil strife. Combine this with the riot, and add in a little bit of horrible economic downturn and you are going to be left with a bit of social tension. And who will this tension be turned against? Polish immigrants. Just like in America, it's the immigrant that takes the fall. Questions like,"Why are the immigrants taking jobs from hard-working Americans/Irishmen?" or "How could we let so many immigrants in?" will begin to run rampant.
Mostly espoused by people that don't fully understand that a person is a person no matter where they hail from. And people have the right to work hard so that their family can prosper.
Either way, hopefully Northern Ireland can move past this debacle with good grace. It's been shown in the past. It's not too much to hope for. Besides, they won the game and they are doing pretty good in the Euro qualifiers. So that's something to celebrate.
Peace.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Gul visits Talabani- First such trip in 30+ years
SE Times article - Gul makes landmark visit to Iraq
Turkish President Abdullah Gul embarked on an important visit to see Iraqi President Jalal Talabani on Monday. What makes it important? Other than the fact that it is the first visit from Ankara to Baghdad in over thirty years, the two leaders have some pretty daunting issues to deal with.
The first and foremost of these issues is the Kurdish Worker's Party (PKK.) Operating out of northern Iraq, this group launches attacks into Turkey's southeastern provinces. The goal of the PKK is to establish an independent socialist Kurdistan. Were it not for their Marxist-Leninist leanings, drug trafficking, kidnappings and bombings, this group could almost be considered freedom fighters. In fact, American politicians constantly use Saddam Hussein's mistreatment of Kurds in this region as a reason for the American-led invasion.
Gul wants Iraq to take a strong stance and eliminate the threat of the PKK to Turkish civilians. Iraq's constitution prohibits armed activities, but dealing with the Kurds is something very difficult because of the past atrocities committed against them. Also, it is important to note that Talabani is himself of Kurdish descent, which may or may not alter his perspective on the situation.
Also on the agenda for these two leaders are economic concerns. Trade between the two nations will be crucial to their success in the years to come. They will be dealing with water allocation from the Tigres and Euphrates as well.
Turkish President Abdullah Gul embarked on an important visit to see Iraqi President Jalal Talabani on Monday. What makes it important? Other than the fact that it is the first visit from Ankara to Baghdad in over thirty years, the two leaders have some pretty daunting issues to deal with.
The first and foremost of these issues is the Kurdish Worker's Party (PKK.) Operating out of northern Iraq, this group launches attacks into Turkey's southeastern provinces. The goal of the PKK is to establish an independent socialist Kurdistan. Were it not for their Marxist-Leninist leanings, drug trafficking, kidnappings and bombings, this group could almost be considered freedom fighters. In fact, American politicians constantly use Saddam Hussein's mistreatment of Kurds in this region as a reason for the American-led invasion.
Gul wants Iraq to take a strong stance and eliminate the threat of the PKK to Turkish civilians. Iraq's constitution prohibits armed activities, but dealing with the Kurds is something very difficult because of the past atrocities committed against them. Also, it is important to note that Talabani is himself of Kurdish descent, which may or may not alter his perspective on the situation.
Also on the agenda for these two leaders are economic concerns. Trade between the two nations will be crucial to their success in the years to come. They will be dealing with water allocation from the Tigres and Euphrates as well.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Move aside Bushisms, OBAMAnations are HERE!
With the remark about his bowling skills being akin to the Special Olympics, Obama has successfully made George W. Bush saying "nucular" a non-issue. But it's okay my liberal friends, he is the golden one after all, not some crazy "Texan." So, for a run-down, from Slate.com, I give you the complete list of Bushisms followed by a list of the top 25 Bushisms.
What did you find on those lovely links? Bushisms. Sometimes a poor understanding of grammar, or a bizarre, colloquial way of saying things. You know what you probably don't see? The President of the United States of America demeaning mentally handicapped people with an off the cuff remark that would land a third-grader in detention for a week. Bush flubbed his ability to properly pronounce things, use the correct pronoun, but never once did he blatantly snub an entire section of our populace. Before you get up in arms about Katrina, just don't.
It's apparently okay though, because Obama is in fact, OBAMA!!! He can do no wrong, no matter how grievous the slip of the tongue. He gave us HOPE and other such awesome catch phrases (which grab Gen-Xers by the cojones and never let go.) So, how can this man renowned for his eloquence fall so far from grace in so few seconds with an interviewer not widely regarded as a trickster? Obama was so widely regarded as an amazing speaker that he beat Billary, and he can't even make it through an interview with a big-chinned late-night host without insulting mentally handicapped people?
This man is the leader of the free world, and he needs to do something more than a simple apology. He needs to donate his entire salary to helping this underfunded and misunderstood community. But hey, he's got the economy to worry about. And finding secretaries that don't have undisclosed tax issues. And closing Gitmo so Osama can laugh at us. And talking to Iran. And finding his daughters a dog. And putting a basketball court in the White House.
So, I look forward to more of these slip-ups from our silver-tongued demigod. I'm sure they will come out in the future. Americans will forget Bush ever misspoke because when it comes to doing some serious damage to the office of POTUS, Obama shall be king.
Peace.
PS- Most of what he said other than the Special Olympics comment was intriguing, but it was primarily political rhetoric (which he excels at) and not worth even commenting on.
What did you find on those lovely links? Bushisms. Sometimes a poor understanding of grammar, or a bizarre, colloquial way of saying things. You know what you probably don't see? The President of the United States of America demeaning mentally handicapped people with an off the cuff remark that would land a third-grader in detention for a week. Bush flubbed his ability to properly pronounce things, use the correct pronoun, but never once did he blatantly snub an entire section of our populace. Before you get up in arms about Katrina, just don't.
It's apparently okay though, because Obama is in fact, OBAMA!!! He can do no wrong, no matter how grievous the slip of the tongue. He gave us HOPE and other such awesome catch phrases (which grab Gen-Xers by the cojones and never let go.) So, how can this man renowned for his eloquence fall so far from grace in so few seconds with an interviewer not widely regarded as a trickster? Obama was so widely regarded as an amazing speaker that he beat Billary, and he can't even make it through an interview with a big-chinned late-night host without insulting mentally handicapped people?
This man is the leader of the free world, and he needs to do something more than a simple apology. He needs to donate his entire salary to helping this underfunded and misunderstood community. But hey, he's got the economy to worry about. And finding secretaries that don't have undisclosed tax issues. And closing Gitmo so Osama can laugh at us. And talking to Iran. And finding his daughters a dog. And putting a basketball court in the White House.
So, I look forward to more of these slip-ups from our silver-tongued demigod. I'm sure they will come out in the future. Americans will forget Bush ever misspoke because when it comes to doing some serious damage to the office of POTUS, Obama shall be king.
Peace.
PS- Most of what he said other than the Special Olympics comment was intriguing, but it was primarily political rhetoric (which he excels at) and not worth even commenting on.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Ciudad Juarez Welcomes Troops, Atlanta Welcomes Cartels
The mayor of this desperate border town, Jose Reyes Ferriz, announced that killings were already down 90% since federal army troops had moved into the city. Which means that they are experiencing a homicide rate of around one or two a day, down from the ten plus they had been seeing. The soldiers haven't had much time to set up, but a respite such as this is one that has many residents breathing easier.
The city has put out a large public awareness campaign instructing its civilians on how to interact safely and efficiently with the new troop forces. These instructions include passing through checkpoints smoothly. The government wants everything to go well during the troops long stay. The mayor admitted that they were unsure as to the duration of the operation.
Most of the citizens of Juarez were accepting of the presence. The general feeling is that as long as killings go down, troops are very welcome. There were 6290 drug related killings in Mexico last year, with many of those falling in Juarez. The proximity to El Paso has not done much to bring this spate of killing to light here in the US. Even the story of the Daughters of Juarez, where over 400 women were raped, murdered and left in the desert outside the city, barely caused a stir far from the border.
So, the situation is dire and the mayor has called in the national army. Will this be effective? The army needs to be called in because the police force has failed. It has failed through corruption and it has failed in the face of stout opposition. The public has lost confidence in the police force. Even when a police officer is killed in the line of duty, there is no public outpouring of feeling as in the US. Why? People are never sure if the officer died doing his job, or died due to involvement with a cartel.
In the past, when the Mexican army has been called in to deal with this sort of situation, it has struggled with the same issues as the police. The Economist ran a story last year on this topic. So, I won't beat it to death here. The question I wish to raise is this.
What will it take for the US citizenry to recognize the problem our southern neighbors are struggling with, and how long will we wait before we admit that it's largely our addiction to illicit drugs that brought them to this point?
Well, maybe when the cartels start causing major issues stateside? Hello Atlanta. This wonderful town of Coca-Cola, UPS and... Ted... has had some pretty serious problems when it comes to the cartels operating within their city limits. Mexican drug cartels have decided that Atlanta is useful for distribution, just like a lot of other businesses. Except for they are using it to supply the entire east coast with illegal drugs, not delicious bubbly beverages. There was also a US citizen among others decapitated in Tijuana... The impact needs to be felt in America in places other than Atlanta and Texas. Despite what these regions may feel about themselves, most people do not pay a whole heckuva lot of attention to them (being from Iowa, I sympathize.)
So, how can we help? There are some out there that think that legalization of illegal drugs would help. As a matter of fact, I believe that was a major thrust in a recent Economist. As far as that all goes... I doubt it would be much help. The main argument used is that prohibition of alcohol led to crime, so, the illegality of our modern day drugs is what causes the current level of crime. The thing is, prohibition led to homebrewers doing what they do best. We weren't establishing long pack-trains to bring in beer from Latin America (rum yes, beer no.)
There are a lot of issues involved with the legalization campaign, and a great many factors are completely ignored by proponents. The simplest solution then, is to stop using drugs. Stop smoking pot and snorting blow. When a celebrity gets caught, hold them responsible to the fullest extent of the law. The reason the war on drugs has failed (in some respects) is the lack of effective enforcement. If I were caught with some marijuana, my punishment would probably be steeper than if Lindsay Lohan were caught with copious amounts of cocaine. So, stop using the drugs, drink some beer if you're feeling stressed, and don't pour money into the hands of criminals. That should help.
In the meantime, pay attention to what's happening south of the border. These are trying times for Mexico, and the role the US plays in the coming years could completely reshape our relationship with Central America. If we offer a stabling hand, no strings attached, we could be welcomed back into the hearts of our neighbors. If we use their instability to make controlling inroads, we will lose their faith yet again, and the turmoil will continue.
Also, go UNI. It hurts to say that, but Iowa's team is terrible, endemically, so go UNI. I wish you the best.
Peace.
The city has put out a large public awareness campaign instructing its civilians on how to interact safely and efficiently with the new troop forces. These instructions include passing through checkpoints smoothly. The government wants everything to go well during the troops long stay. The mayor admitted that they were unsure as to the duration of the operation.
Most of the citizens of Juarez were accepting of the presence. The general feeling is that as long as killings go down, troops are very welcome. There were 6290 drug related killings in Mexico last year, with many of those falling in Juarez. The proximity to El Paso has not done much to bring this spate of killing to light here in the US. Even the story of the Daughters of Juarez, where over 400 women were raped, murdered and left in the desert outside the city, barely caused a stir far from the border.
So, the situation is dire and the mayor has called in the national army. Will this be effective? The army needs to be called in because the police force has failed. It has failed through corruption and it has failed in the face of stout opposition. The public has lost confidence in the police force. Even when a police officer is killed in the line of duty, there is no public outpouring of feeling as in the US. Why? People are never sure if the officer died doing his job, or died due to involvement with a cartel.
In the past, when the Mexican army has been called in to deal with this sort of situation, it has struggled with the same issues as the police. The Economist ran a story last year on this topic. So, I won't beat it to death here. The question I wish to raise is this.
What will it take for the US citizenry to recognize the problem our southern neighbors are struggling with, and how long will we wait before we admit that it's largely our addiction to illicit drugs that brought them to this point?
Well, maybe when the cartels start causing major issues stateside? Hello Atlanta. This wonderful town of Coca-Cola, UPS and... Ted... has had some pretty serious problems when it comes to the cartels operating within their city limits. Mexican drug cartels have decided that Atlanta is useful for distribution, just like a lot of other businesses. Except for they are using it to supply the entire east coast with illegal drugs, not delicious bubbly beverages. There was also a US citizen among others decapitated in Tijuana... The impact needs to be felt in America in places other than Atlanta and Texas. Despite what these regions may feel about themselves, most people do not pay a whole heckuva lot of attention to them (being from Iowa, I sympathize.)
So, how can we help? There are some out there that think that legalization of illegal drugs would help. As a matter of fact, I believe that was a major thrust in a recent Economist. As far as that all goes... I doubt it would be much help. The main argument used is that prohibition of alcohol led to crime, so, the illegality of our modern day drugs is what causes the current level of crime. The thing is, prohibition led to homebrewers doing what they do best. We weren't establishing long pack-trains to bring in beer from Latin America (rum yes, beer no.)
There are a lot of issues involved with the legalization campaign, and a great many factors are completely ignored by proponents. The simplest solution then, is to stop using drugs. Stop smoking pot and snorting blow. When a celebrity gets caught, hold them responsible to the fullest extent of the law. The reason the war on drugs has failed (in some respects) is the lack of effective enforcement. If I were caught with some marijuana, my punishment would probably be steeper than if Lindsay Lohan were caught with copious amounts of cocaine. So, stop using the drugs, drink some beer if you're feeling stressed, and don't pour money into the hands of criminals. That should help.
In the meantime, pay attention to what's happening south of the border. These are trying times for Mexico, and the role the US plays in the coming years could completely reshape our relationship with Central America. If we offer a stabling hand, no strings attached, we could be welcomed back into the hearts of our neighbors. If we use their instability to make controlling inroads, we will lose their faith yet again, and the turmoil will continue.
Also, go UNI. It hurts to say that, but Iowa's team is terrible, endemically, so go UNI. I wish you the best.
Peace.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Milosevic-Era Serb Intelligence Chief Worked with CIA
Balkan Insight Article
LA Times article by Greg Miller
A brief synapsis of this story could go like this: Stanisic worked with the CIA in order to bring a quicker end to the troubled Balkan region during Milosevic's reign. He claims to have never taken money from the CIA. The reason all of this came up? The CIA is attempting to reduce his sentence at the Hague. They submitted a dossier that shows what "help" he was, and a list of all the "good" things he did. Never mind the death squads he established, he was helping the CIA. He is currently back in Belgrade for health reasons, strange how that works.
A brief excerpt from the LAT:
"For eight years, Stanisic was the CIA's main man in Belgrade. During secret meetings in boats and safe houses along the Sava River, he shared details on the inner workings of the Milosevic regime. He provided information on the locations of NATO hostages, aided CIA operatives in their search for grave sites and helped the agency set up a network of secret bases in Bosnia."
So the question is this I guess: Did he aide the CIA and NATO enough to warrant regard in his case? Or, will this be passed over?
If it is passed over and ignored by the Tribunal, what will that mean for future CIA operations? Will the CIA lose possible contacts in the future? What would have happened in Yugoslavia had Stanisic not been a crucial element in the CIAs plans?
How will the outcome of this case affect our sources in Afghanistan and other regions where intelligence will be crucial to victory?
I leave you with those questions to ponder. Especially considering the weak economic state of most of Eastern and Southeastern Europe, we need all the stability and intelligence we can get if something goes amiss. Like, if Serbia gets pissy enough to attack Kosovo, then Albania rides to the rescue or something like that.
Thanks for listening to the rant, and I hope you enjoyed the other articles more than you enjoyed this one.
Peace.
LA Times article by Greg Miller
A brief synapsis of this story could go like this: Stanisic worked with the CIA in order to bring a quicker end to the troubled Balkan region during Milosevic's reign. He claims to have never taken money from the CIA. The reason all of this came up? The CIA is attempting to reduce his sentence at the Hague. They submitted a dossier that shows what "help" he was, and a list of all the "good" things he did. Never mind the death squads he established, he was helping the CIA. He is currently back in Belgrade for health reasons, strange how that works.
A brief excerpt from the LAT:
"For eight years, Stanisic was the CIA's main man in Belgrade. During secret meetings in boats and safe houses along the Sava River, he shared details on the inner workings of the Milosevic regime. He provided information on the locations of NATO hostages, aided CIA operatives in their search for grave sites and helped the agency set up a network of secret bases in Bosnia."
So the question is this I guess: Did he aide the CIA and NATO enough to warrant regard in his case? Or, will this be passed over?
If it is passed over and ignored by the Tribunal, what will that mean for future CIA operations? Will the CIA lose possible contacts in the future? What would have happened in Yugoslavia had Stanisic not been a crucial element in the CIAs plans?
How will the outcome of this case affect our sources in Afghanistan and other regions where intelligence will be crucial to victory?
I leave you with those questions to ponder. Especially considering the weak economic state of most of Eastern and Southeastern Europe, we need all the stability and intelligence we can get if something goes amiss. Like, if Serbia gets pissy enough to attack Kosovo, then Albania rides to the rescue or something like that.
Thanks for listening to the rant, and I hope you enjoyed the other articles more than you enjoyed this one.
Peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
