http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=Learn Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:35:43 -0400 Liveleak http://edge.liveleak.com/80281E/u/u/ll2/logo.gif http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=Learn Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:44:14 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1b3_1371670143 Catalytic Former US ambassador to Israel says possible phasing out of security assistance 'may be healthy for Israel. Ex-Defense Minister Arens says 'we can get along without it' The Media Line Published: 06.19.13, 11:06 / Israel News A legislative caucus created to educate Israeli lawmakers to the basic realities of the American system of government was launched on Tuesday in the Knesset, Israel's parliament. Although a discussion of whether the United States should reduce its financial support for Israel seems like a strange subject for a group that seeks to foster bilateral relations, Israeli lawmakers representing seven political parties and a former American ambassador to Israel did just that as they celebrated the launch of the new Knesset Caucus on Israel-US Relations. "We may be reaching a point that after discussion of how to assure the security and intelligence cooperation (between the US and Israel), we can actually phase out the security assistance," former US Ambassador Dan Kurtzer told The Media Line. "It represents a very small part of Israel's GDP. Israel needs access to the technology and needs assurances that R-and-D and other join projects will continue, but standing on its own two feet may be healthy for Israel." Related stories: US to transfer $1.3B in military aid to Egypt Arens: Not every moron can be defense minister Israel may lose $500 million in US aid Support came from Moshe Arens, a former minister of defense, who also served as Israel's Ambassador to Washington. Arens reminded the assembled parliamentarians and representatives of American Jewish organizations present that there was a time when US aid to Israel made up more than 20% of Israel's GDP, while today it represents only 1.5% of the total budget. "We love to get it, and our finance minister would probably kill me if he heard me say this, but we could get along without it," Arens said. The United States is going through a financial crisis with debts in the trillions of dollars. We would be unhappy to find that aid is being cut but we could survive without it." By the same token, Knesset member Nachman Shai of the Labor party, who is the initiator of the caucus, disagreed. "We do need the three billion dollars a year for defense and military purposes because we are still in a terrible arms race," he told The Media Line. "If we want to maintain our qualitative edge over our enemies, the only way is to rely on America. At least in the next ten years I can see Israel totally dependent on America for this." In 1987, the US assistance package was created with an annual allocation of $1.8 billion in economic aid and $1.2 billion in military aid. In his first term in office in the late 1990s, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu agreed to gradually relinquish economic aid at a rate of $120 million per year over a 10-year period while military aid grew to its current level of $3 billion a year, almost three-quarters of which must be spent in the United States on the acquisition of American defense equipment, services and training. 'Only way is to rely on America.' MK Shai (Photo: Alex Kolomoisky) Despite the close alliance between the two nations, many on both sides believe that there are still fundamental misunderstandings about each other's governments. The caucus had actually been formed during the previous government headed by Ronit Tirosh, who represented a party no longer in the Knesset. Following her exit, Jay Ruderman, the president of the Ruderman Family Foundation, approached Nachman Shai. "I've been living in Israel for seven years and as I got to meet Knesset members and government ministers, I realized they didn't understand the American Jewish community," Ruderman told The Media Line. He also said that the generation of American Jews who remember Israel's early history as an embattled nation, is being replaced by a younger generation with a different perspective. "The connection of the younger generation with Israel is changing," Ruderman said. "They are more integrated into American society. If that relationship is changing, Israeli leaders have to be aware of those changes because they will impact the relationship." Nachman Shai, who has extensive experience with the American Jewish community, said many of his fellow lawmakers don't have a clue about the United States or its Jewish community. "I think there is a deep lack of information and understanding of America," Shai told The Media Line. "I think I can use my knowledge to deepen their understanding and knowledge of the political system there; the culture of the US; and the Jewish community there. The Ruderman Family Foundation has already sent two delegations of Knesset members to the United States to learn about the American Jewish community. However, some of those who participated with the foundation are no longer members of parliament following the January election which saw 48-new faces sweep into the 120-member legislative body. Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Office Ofir Akunis told The Media Line of his experience as a participant with the Ruderman Family Foundation delegation. "Such visits are, in my opinion, the best way to build and support the mutual understanding between our nations." Among the caucus's first time lawmakers is Rabbi Dov Lipman of the Yesh Atid party, an immigrant from the state of Maryland who had to give up his American citizenship in order to become a member of the Israeli parliament. "I've only been in the Knesset four and a half months," Lipman told The Media Line. "I can definitely say that in terms of the misinformation about Israel, there is a lack of education here in terms of what we need to do in order to better portray ourselves in the (American) national arena." Along with all of the positive sentiment, some of the tensions in the US-Israeli relationship were also on display. "What happens when there are differences of opinion between partners and allies?" former Defense Minister Arens asked. "If the subject at issue is of vital importance to one of the partners in the alliance, the other partner will defer. The issue of Judea and Samaria, of Israel's borders, is of vital importance to the State of Israel. It's not of vital importance to the US," Arens said using the Biblical names for land Israel acquired in the 1967 war and remain the primary bone of contention between Israel and the Arab nations. Kurtzer spoke to the American side of the issue, explaining how pressure to reduce spending, which makes foreign assistance a natural target for trimming the US budget, can arguably be expected to affect Israel. He suggested to The Media Line that while so far Israel has been immune from the cutbacks resulting when "the American population sees their lifestyle declining...It is part of our dialogue to focus on areas where Israel has significant requirements and give back something to the US in budgetary distress." In Shai's estimation, "We have three or four years for this. At the end of this Knesset term I can tell you whether it worked or didn't work. We have a lot of work to do." http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4394357,00.html http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1b3_1371670143 Catalytic Israel Ex-Defense Minister Arens: Israel can get by without US security aid Israel, US, taxpayer, aid, military, collapse, budget, cuts, Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:00:22 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9a5_1371664713 reviewing the situation Vladimir Putin may allow Assad to go if power vacuum in Syria is avoided British hopeful that peace talks to end civil war can go ahead, but divided Syrian opposition remains a big stumbling block The Russian president, Vladimir Putin , is willing to see the removal of the Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad , but only if it leads to a balanced government and not a dangerous power vacuum of the kind that followed Saddam Hussein's removal in Iraq, British officials believe after two days of intensive talks at the G8 summit.Putin blocked any reference in the subsequent communique to the removal of Assad, but British officials believe the talks have opened the way for a peace settlement if more can be done to organise the Syrian opposition forces politically and militarily.Talks over the terms of the communique lasted until 3am. The Russians accepted the need for UN weapons inspectors to visit Syria to check on western claims that Assad has used chemical weapons . But Putin flatly refused to have any reference in the communiqu'e to the nature of delegations that should be sent to the planned Geneva peace conference, insisting that this was a matter for both sides.British officials insisted that in private Putin had declared no personal allegiance to Assad, but needed assurances that Syria would not turn into an ungoverned space on Russia's borders if he were removed. David Cameron in his press conference at the end of the summit made repeated calls for Assad's allies to realise that a strong army and security state would be preserved during a transition, words designed to reassure them that they would have a future after Assad.British officials admitted that the Syrian opposition was still a work in progress. They had been unable to agree a negotiating mandate for a new peace conference.The G8 communique made no reference to Assad, but called for peace talks to be resumed as soon as possible. Cameron said the main breakthrough was an agreement that a transitional government with executive powers was needed, together with a deal to call for an investigation into chemical weapons use. "We remain committed to achieving a political solution to the crisis based on a vision for a united, inclusive and democratic Syria," the final communique read. "We strongly endorse the decision to hold as soon as possible the Geneva conference on Syria."Putin struck a defiant tone in public, telling the west that sending weapons to rebels could backfire one day, while he defended his own military contacts with the Syrian government."There are different types of supplies. We supply weapons based on legal contracts to a legal government ... And if we sign these contracts , we will supply ."In the final document, G8 leaders also called on the Syrian authorities and the opposition to commit to destroying all organisations affiliated with al-Qaida , a reflection of growing concern in the west that Islamist militants are playing a more dominant role in the rebel ranks.Cameron, who chaired the summit, said separately after the talks that the west believed strongly that there was no place for Assad in a future Syria. "It is unthinkable that President Assad can play any part in the future of his country. He has blood on his hands. You can't imagine a Syria where this man continues to rule having done such awful things to his people."He appealed to Assad's acolytes to abandon the president, insisting the need for the retention of a strong security force showed they would have a future role in Syria. He said the aim was "to learn the lessons of Iraq by ensuring the key institutions of the state are maintained through the transition and there is no vacuum. To those who have been loyal to Assad but who know he has to go and who want stability in their country, they should take note of this point."In the house of Commons, John Bercow, the speaker, said it would be "undemocratic and inappropriate" if the government declined to hold a full parliamentary vote if ministers decide to arm the Syrian opposition. The speaker issued his warning after William Hague told MPs that the government would consult parliament but declined to explain the nature of the vote.Bercow told the former Labour minister Peter Hain, who raised the matter on a point of order: "I have the sense that the government are hinting that they would not dream of executing a policy decision of the kind that is being considered without first seeking a debate in the house and a vote on a substantive motion. That would obviously be the democratic course. I think it is the democratic course on a substantive motion that the government have in mind. I am not sure that there was any other idea ever in their mind, but I feel sure that if it was in their mind, it was speedily expunged as undemocratic and inappropriate."Russia's deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, speaking on the sidelines, said earlier that any debate about Assad's role in the resolution of the conflict was unthinkable, adding he would not tolerate an outcome that led to Assad's capitulation. "This would be not just unacceptable for the Russian side, but we are convinced that it would be utterly wrong, harmful and would completely upset the political balance," Ryabkov said.In a further development, the French president, Francois Hollande, opened the door to Iran attending a Syria peace conference, but reiterated that there was no future for Assad.Paris had previously ruled out Iran taking part in the proposed conference, saying Tehran had no desire for peace, but a new Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani , was elected on Friday."There will no future for Syria with Assad. The Russians are not yet ready to say or write it, but when we speak of transition ... it's difficult to see how he (Assad) could be responsible for it," Hollande said.British officials said they did not rule out Iran attending talks, but needed to know more about the new president and what he would do about the Iranian-backed Hezbollah forces in Syria. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9a5_1371664713 reviewing the situation Vladimir Putin may allow Assad to go if power vacuum in Syria is avoided syria/assad/fsa/middle east/russia/iran/iraq Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:42:15 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e05_1371659875 socialism-rocks Who was the first president of the United States? Ask any school child and they will readily tell you "George Washington." And of course, they would be wrong-at least technically. Washington was not inaugurated until April 30, 1789. And yet, the United States continually had functioning governments from as early as September 5, 1774 and operated as a confederated nation from as early as July 4, 1776. During that nearly fifteen year interval, Congress-first the Continental Congress and then later the Confederation Congress-was always moderated by a duly elected president. As the chief executive officer of the government of the United States, the president was recognized as the head of state. Washington was thus the fifteenth in a long line of distinguished presidents-and he led the seventeenth administration-he just happened to be the first under the current constitution. So who were the luminaries who preceded him? The following brief biographies profile these "forgotten presidents." Peyton Randolph of Virginia (1723-1775) When delegates gathered in Philadelphia for the first Continental Congress, they promptly elected the former King's Attorney of Virginia as the moderator and president of their convocation. He was a propitious choice. He was a legal prodigy-having studied at the Inner Temple in London, served as his native colony's Attorney General, and tutored many of the most able men of the South at William and Mary College-including the young Patrick Henry. His home in Williamsburg was the gathering place for Virginia's legal and political gentry-and it remains a popular attraction in the restored colonial capital. He had served as a delegate in the Virginia House of Burgesses, and had been a commander under William Byrd in the colonial militia. He was a scholar of some renown-having begun a self-guided reading of the classics when he was thirteen. Despite suffering poor health served the Continental Congress as president twice, in 1774 from September 5 to October 21, and then again for a few days in 1775 from May 10 to May 23. He never lived to see independence, yet was numbered among the nation's most revered founders. Henry Middleton (1717-1784) America's second elected president was one of the wealthiest planters in the South, the patriarch of the most powerful families anywhere in the nation. His public spirit was evident from an early age. He was a member of his state's Common House from 1744-1747. During the last two years he served as the Speaker. During 1755 he was the King's Commissioner of Indian Affairs. He was a member of the South Carolina Council from 1755-1770. His valor in the War with the Cherokees during 1760-1761 earned him wide recognition throughout the colonies-and demonstrated his cool leadership abilities while under pressure. He was elected as a delegate to the first session of the Continental Congress and when Peyton Randolph was forced to resign the presidency, his peers immediately turned to Middleton to complete the term. He served as the fledgling coalition's president from October 22, 1774 until Randolph was able to resume his duties briefly beginning on May 10, 1775. Afterward, he was a member of the Congressional Council of Safety and helped to establish the young nation's policy toward the encouragement and support of education. In February 1776 he resigned his political involvements in order to prepare his family and lands for what he believed was inevitable war-but he was replaced by his son Arthur who eventually became a signer of both the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation, served time as an English prisoner of war, and was twice elected Governor of his state. John Hancock (1737-1793) The third president was a patriot, rebel leader, merchant who signed his name into immortality in giant strokes on the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. The boldness of his signature has made it live in American minds as a perfect expression of the strength and freedom-and defiance-of the individual in the face of British tyranny. As President of the Continental Congress during two widely spaced terms-the first from May 24 1775 to October 30 1777 and the second from November 23 1885 to June 5, 1786-Hancock was the presiding officer when the members approved the Declaration of Independence. Because of his position, it was his official duty to sign the document first-but not necessarily as dramatically as he did. Hancock figured prominently in another historic event-the battle at Lexington: British troops who fought there April 10, 1775, had known Hancock and Samuel Adams were in Lexington and had come there to capture these rebel leaders. And the two would have been captured, if they had not been warned by Paul Revere. As early as 1768, Hancock defied the British by refusing to pay customs charges on the cargo of one of his ships. One of Boston's wealthiest merchants, he was recognized by the citizens, as well as by the British, as a rebel leader-and was elected President of the first Massachusetts Provincial Congress. After he was chosen President of the Continental Congress in 1775, Hancock became known beyond the borders of Massachusetts, and, having served as colonel of the Massachusetts Governor's Guards he hoped to be named commander of the American forces-until John Adams nominated George Washington. In 1778 Hancock was commissioned Major General and took part in an unsuccessful campaign in Rhode Island. But it was as a political leader that his real distinction was earned-as the first Governor of Massachusetts, as President of Congress, and as President of the Massachusetts constitutional ratification convention. He helped win ratification in Massachusetts, gaining enough popular recognition to make him a contender for the newly created Presidency of the United States, but again he saw Washington gain the prize. Like his rival, George Washington, Hancock was a wealthy man who risked much for the cause of independence. He was the wealthiest New Englander supporting the patriotic cause, and, although he lacked the brilliance of John Adams or the capacity to inspire of Samuel Adams, he became one of the foremost leaders of the new nation-perhaps, in part, because he was willing to commit so much at such risk to the cause of freedom. Henry Laurens (1724-1792) The only American president ever to be held as a prisoner of war by a foreign power, Laurens was heralded after he was released as "the father of our country," by no less a personage than George Washington. He was of Huguenot extraction, his ancestors having come to America from France after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes made the Reformed faith illegal. Raised and educated for a life of mercantilism at his home in Charleston, he also had the opportunity to spend more than a year in continental travel. It was while in Europe that he began to write revolutionary pamphlets-gaining him renown as a patriot. He served as vice-president of South Carolina in1776. He was then elected to the Continental Congress. He succeeded John Hancock as President of the newly independent but war beleaguered United States on November 1, 1777. He served until December 9, 1778 at which time he was appointed Ambassador to the Netherlands. Unfortunately for the cause of the young nation, he was captured by an English warship during his cross-Atlantic voyage and was confined to the Tower of London until the end of the war. After the Battle of Yorktown, the American government regained his freedom in a dramatic prisoner exchange-President Laurens for Lord Cornwallis. Ever the patriot, Laurens continued to serve his nation as one of the three representatives selected to negotiate terms at the Paris Peace Conference in 1782. John Jay (1745-1829) America's first Secretary of State, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, one of its first ambassadors, and author of some of the celebrated Federalist Papers, Jay was a Founding Father who, by a quirk of fate, missed signing the Declaration of Independence-at the time of the vote for independence and the signing, he had temporarily left the Continental Congress to serve in New York's revolutionary legislature. Nevertheless, he was chosen by his peers to succeed Henry Laurens as President of the United States-serving a term from December 10, 1778 to September 27, 1779. A conservative New York lawyer who was at first against the idea of independence for the colonies, the aristocratic Jay in 1776 turned into a patriot who was willing to give the next twenty-five years of his life to help establish the new nation. During those years, he won the regard of his peers as a dedicated and accomplished statesman and a man of unwavering principle. In the Continental Congress Jay prepared addresses to the people of Canada and Great Britain. In New York he drafted the State constitution and served as Chief Justice during the war. He was President of the Continental Congress before he undertook the difficult assignment, as ambassador, of trying to gain support and funds from Spain. After helping Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, and Laurens complete peace negotiations in Paris in 1783, Jay returned to become the first Secretary of State, called "Secretary of Foreign Affairs" under the Articles of Confederation. He negotiated valuable commercial treaties with Russia and Morocco, and dealt with the continuing controversy with Britain and Spain over the southern and western boundaries of the United States. He proposed that America and Britain establish a joint commission to arbitrate disputes that remained after the war-a proposal which, though not adopted, influenced the government's use of arbitration and diplomacy in settling later international problems. In this post Jay felt keenly the weakness of the Articles of Confederation and was one of the first to advocate a new governmental compact. He wrote five Federalist Papers supporting the Constitution, and he was a leader in the New York ratification convention. As first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Jay made the historic decision that a State could be sued by a citizen from another State, which led to the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution. On a special mission to London he concluded the "Jay Treaty," which helped avert a renewal of hostilities with Britain but won little popular favor at home-and it is probably for this treaty that this Founding Father is best remembered. Samuel Huntington (1732-1796) An industrious youth who mastered his studies of the law without the advantage of a school, a tutor, or a master-borrowing books and snatching opportunities to read and research between odd jobs-he was one of the greatest self-made men among the Founders. He was also one of the greatest legal minds of the age-all the more remarkable for his lack of advantage as a youth. In 1764, in recognition of his obvious abilities and initiative, he was elected to the General Assembly of Connecticut. The next year he was chosen to serve on the Executive Council. In 1774 he was appointed Associate Judge of the Superior Court and, as a delegate to the Continental Congress, was acknowledged to be a legal scholar of some respect. He served in Congress for five consecutive terms, during the last of which he was elected President. He served in that off ice from September 28, 1779 until ill health forced him to resign on July 9, 1781. He returned to his home in Connecticut-and as he recuperated, he accepted more Counciliar and Bench duties. He again took his seat in Congress in 1783, but left it to become Chief Justice of his state's Superior Court. He was elected Lieutenant Governor in 1785 and Governor in 1786. According to John Jay, he was "the most precisely trained Christian jurists ever to serve his country." Thomas McKean (1734-1817) During his astonishingly varied fifty-year career in public life he held almost every possible position-from deputy county attorney to President of the United States under the Confederation. Besides signing the Declaration of Independence, he contributed significantly to the development and establishment of constitutional government in both his home state of Delaware and the nation. At the Stamp Act Congress he proposed the voting procedure that Congress adopted: that each colony, regardless of size or population, have one vote-the practice adopted by the Continental Congress and the Congress of the Confederation, and the principle of state equality manifest in the composition of the Senate. And as county judge in 1765, he defied the British by ordering his court to work only with documents that did not bear the hated stamps. In June 1776, at the Continental Congress, McKean joined with Caesar Rodney to register Delaware's approval of the Declaration of Independence, over the negative vote of the third Delaware delegate, George Read-permitting it to be "The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States." And at a special Delaware convention, he drafted the constitution for that State. McKean also helped draft-and signed-the Articles of Confederation. It was during his tenure of service as President-from July 10, 1781 to November 4, 1782-when news arrived from General Washington in October 1781 that the British had surrendered following the Battle of Yorktown. As Chief Justice of the supreme court of Pennsylvania, he contributed to the establishment of the legal system in that State, and, in 1787, he strongly supported the Constitution at the Pennsylvania Ratification Convention, declaring it "the best the world has yet seen." At sixty-five, after over forty years of public service, McKean resigned from his post as Chief Justice. A candidate on the Democratic-Republican ticket in 1799, McKean was elected Governor of Pennsylvania. As Governor, he followed such a strict policy of appointing only fellow Republicans to office that he became the father of the spoils system in America. He served three tempestuous terms as Governor, completing one of the longest continuous careers of public service of any of the Founding Fathers. John Hanson (1715-1783) He was the heir of one of the greatest family traditions in the colonies and became the patriarch of a long line of American patriots-his great grandfather died at Lutzen beside the great King Gustavus Aldophus of Sweden; his grandfather was one of the founders of New Sweden along the Delaware River in Maryland; one of his nephews was the military secretary to George Washington; another was a signer of the Declaration; still another was a signer of the Constitution; yet another was Governor of Maryland during the Revolution; and still another was a member of the first Congress; two sons were killed in action with the Continental Army; a grandson served as a member of Congress under the new Constitution; and another grandson was a Maryland Senator. Thus, even if Hanson had not served as President himself, he would have greatly contributed to the life of the nation through his ancestry and progeny. As a youngster he began a self-guided reading of classics and rather quickly became an acknowledged expert in the juridicalism of Anselm and the practical philosophy of Seneca-both of which were influential in the development of the political philosophy of the great leaders of the Reformation. It was based upon these legal and theological studies that the young planter-his farm, Mulberry Grove was just across the Potomac from Mount Vernon-began to espouse the cause of the patriots. In 1775 he was elected to the Provincial Legislature of Maryland. Then in 1777, he became a member of Congress where he distinguished himself as a brilliant administrator. Thus, he was elected President in 1781. He served in that office from November 5, 1781 until November 3, 1782. He was the first President to serve a full term after the full ratification of the Articles of Confederation-and like so many of the Southern and New England Founders, he was strongly opposed to the Constitution when it was first discussed. He remained a confirmed anti-federalist until his untimely death. Elias Boudinot (1741-1802) He did not sign the Declaration, the Articles, or the Constitution. He did not serve in the Continental Army with distinction. He was not renowned for his legal mind or his political skills. He was instead a man who spent his entire career in foreign diplomacy. He earned the respect of his fellow patriots during the dangerous days following the traitorous action of Benedict Arnold. His deft handling of relations with Canada also earned him great praise. After being elected to the Congress from his home state of New Jersey, he served as the new nation's Secretary for Foreign Affairs-managing the influx of aid from France, Spain, and Holland. The in 1783 he was elected to the Presidency. He served in that office from November 4, 1782 until November 2, 1783. Like so many of the other early presidents, he was a classically trained scholar, of the Reformed faith, and an anti-federalist in political matters. He was the father and grandfather of frontiersmen-and one of his grandchildren and namesakes eventually became a leader of the Cherokee nation in its bid for independence from the sprawling expansion of the United States. Thomas Mifflin (1744-1800) By an ironic sort of providence, Thomas Mifflin served as George Washington's first aide-de-camp at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, and, when the war was over, he was the man, as President of the United States, who accepted Washington's resignation of his commission. In the years between, Mifflin greatly served the cause of freedom-and, apparently, his own cause-while serving as the first Quartermaster General of the Continental Army. He obtained desperately needed supplies for the new army-and was suspected of making excessive profit himself. Although experienced in business and successful in obtaining supplies for the war, Mifflin preferred the front lines, and he distinguished himself in military actions on Long Island and near Philadelphia. Born and reared a Quaker, he was excluded from their meetings for his military activities. A controversial figure, Mifflin lost favor with Washington and was part of the Conway Cabal-a rather notorious plan to replace Washington with General Horatio Gates. And Mifflin narrowly missed court-martial action over his handling of funds by resigning his commission in 1778. In spite of these problems-and of repeated charges that he was a drunkard-Mifflin continued to be elected to positions of responsibility-as President and Governor of Pennsylvania, delegate to the Constitutional Convention, as well as the highest office in the land-where he served from November 3, 1783 to November 29, 1784. Most of Mifflin's significant contributions occurred in his earlier years-in the First and Second Continental Congresses he was firm in his stand for independence and for fighting for it, and he helped obtain both men and supplies for Washington's army in the early critical period. In 1784, as President, he signed the treaty with Great Britain which ended the war. Although a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, he did not make a significant contribution-beyond signing the document. As Governor of Pennsylvania, although he was accused of negligence, he supported improvements of roads, and reformed the State penal and judicial systems. He had gradually become sympathetic to Jefferson's principles regarding State's rights, even so, he directed the Pennsylvania militia to support the Federal tax collectors in the Whiskey Rebellion. In spite of charges of corruption, the affable Mifflin remained a popular figure. A magnetic personality and an effective speaker, he managed to hold a variety of elective offices for almost thirty years of the critical Revolutionary period. Richard Henry Lee (1732-1794) His resolution "that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States," approved by the Continental Congress July 2, 1776, was the first official act of the United Colonies that set them irrevocably on the road to independence. It was not surprising that it came from Lee's pen-as early as 1768 he proposed the idea of committees of correspondence among the colonies, and in 1774 he proposed that the colonies meet in what became the Continental Congress. From the first, his eye was on independence. A wealthy Virginia planter whose ancestors had been granted extensive lands by King Charles II, Lee disdained the traditional aristocratic role and the aristocratic view. In the House of Burgesses he flatly denounced the practice of slavery. He saw independent America as "an asylum where the unhappy may find solace, and the persecuted repose." In 1764, when news of the proposed Stamp Act reached Virginia, Lee was a member of the committee of the House of Burgesses that drew up an address to the King, an official protest against such a tax. After the tax was established, Lee organized the citizens of his county into the Westmoreland Association, a group pledged to buy no British goods until the Stamp Act was repealed. At the First Continental Congress, Lee persuaded representatives from all the colonies to adopt this non-importation idea, leading to the formation of the Continental Association, which was one of the first steps toward union of the colonies. Lee also proposed to the First Continental Congress that a militia be organized and armed-the year before the first shots were fired at Lexington; but this and other proposals of his were considered too radical-at the time. Three days after Lee introduced his resolution, in June of 1776, he was appointed by Congress to the committee responsible for drafting a declaration of independence, but he was called home when his wife fell ill, and his place was taken by his young prot'eg'e, Thomas Jefferson. Thus Lee missed the chance to draft the document-though his influence greatly shaped it and he was able to return in time to sign it. He was elected President-serving from November 30, 1784 to November 22, 1785 when he was succeeded by the second administration of John Hancock. Elected to the Constitutional Convention, Lee refused to attend, but as a member of the Congress of the Confederation, he contributed to another great document, the Northwest Ordinance, which provided for the formation of new States from the Northwest Territory. When the completed Constitution was sent to the States for ratification, Lee opposed it as anti-democratic and anti-Christian. However, as one of Virginia's first Senators, he helped assure passage of the amendments that, he felt, corrected many of the document's gravest faults-the Bill of Rights. He was the great uncle of Robert E. Lee and the scion of a great family tradition. Nathaniel Gorham (1738-1796) Another self-made man, Gorham was one of the many successful Boston merchants who risked all he had for the cause of freedom. He was first elected to the Massachusetts General Court in 1771. His honesty and integrity won his acclaim and was thus among the first delegates chose to serve in the Continental Congress. He remained in public service throughout the war and into the Constitutional period, though his greatest contribution was his call for a stronger central government. But even though he was an avid federalist, he did not believe that the union could-or even should-be maintained peaceably for more than a hundred years. He was convinced that eventually, in order to avoid civil or cultural war, smaller regional interests should pursue an independent course. His support of a new constitution was rooted more in pragmatism than ideology. When John Hancock was unable to complete his second term as President, Gorham was elected to succeed him-serving from June 6, 1786 to February 1, 1787. It was during this time that the Congress actually entertained the idea of asking Prince Henry-the brother of Frederick II of Prussia-and Bonnie Prince Charlie-the leader of the ill-fated Scottish Jacobite Rising and heir of the Stuart royal line-to consider the possibility of establishing a constitutional monarch in America. It was a plan that had much to recommend it but eventually the advocates of republicanism held the day. During the final years of his life, Gorham was concerned with several speculative land deals which nearly cost him his entire fortune. Arthur St. Clair (1734-1818) Born and educated in Edinburgh, Scotland during the tumultuous days of the final Jacobite Rising and the Tartan Suppression, St. Clair was the only president of the United States born and bred on foreign soil. Though most of his family and friends abandoned their devastated homeland in the years following the Battle of Culloden-after which nearly a third of the land was depopulated through emigration to America-he stayed behind to learn the ways of the hated Hanoverian English in the Royal Navy. His plan was to learn of the enemy's military might in order to fight another day. During the global conflict of the Seven Years War-generally known as the French and Indian War-he was stationed in the American theater. Afterward, he decided to settle in Pennsylvania where many of his kin had established themselves. His civic-mindedness quickly became apparent: he helped to organize both the New Jersey and the Pennsylvania militias, led the Continental Army's Canadian expedition, and was elected Congress. His long years of training in the enemy camp was finally paying off. He was elected President in 1787-and he served from February 2 of that year until January 21 of the next. Following his term of duty in the highest office in the land, he became the first Governor of the Northwest Territory and the founder of Cincinnati. Though he briefly supported the idea of creating a constitutional monarchy under the Stuart's Bonnie Prince Charlie, he was a strident Anti-Federalist-believing that the proposed federal constitution would eventually allow for the intrusion of government into virtually every sphere and aspect of life. He even predicted that under the vastly expanded centralized power of the state the taxing powers of bureaucrats and other unelected officials would eventually confiscate as much as a quarter of the income of the citizens-a notion that seemed laughable at the time but that has proven to be ominously modest in light of our current governmental leviathan. St. Clair lived to see the hated English tyrants who destroyed his homeland defeated. But he despaired that his adopted home might actually create similar tyrannies and impose them upon themselves. Cyrus Griffin (1736-1796) Like Peyton Randolph, he was trained in London's Inner Temple to be a lawyer-and thus was counted among his nation's legal elite. Like so many other Virginians, he was an anti-federalist, though he eventually accepted the new Constitution with the promise of the Bill of Rights as a hedge against the establishment of an American monarchy-which still had a good deal of currency. The Articles of Confederation afforded such freedoms that he had become convinced that even with the incumbent loss of liberty, some new form of government would be required. A prot'eg'e of George Washington-having worked with him on several speculative land deals in the West-he was a reluctant supporter of the Constitutional ratifying process. It was during his term in the office of the Presidency-the last before the new national compact went into effect-that ratification was formalized and finalized. He served as the nation's chief executive from January 22, 1788 until George Washington's inauguration on April 30, 1789. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e05_1371659875 socialism-rocks The Forgotten Presidents (The presidents before George Washington) history Wed, 19 Jun 2013 03:53:03 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b8e_1371627822 Curious_George June 18, 2013 President Bashar al-Assad gave the following interview to the German Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper: Interviewer: Mr President, how do you view the situation in your country? The Syrian Army has lost control over large parts of Syria, in other words those areas are outside the control of central government. What's your take on the situation? President Assad: Your question requires us to put things into their proper context: this is not a conventional war with two armies fighting to control or liberate particular areas or parts of land. What we are in fact dealing with is a form of guerrilla warfare. As for the Syrian Army, there has not been any instance where our Armed Forces have planned to enter a particular location and have not succeeded. Having said this, the Army is not present - and should not be present - in every corner of Syria. What is more significant than controlling areas of land, is striking terrorists. We are confident that we can successfully fight terrorism in Syria, but the bigger issue is the ensuing damage and its cost. The crisis has already had a heavy toll but our biggest challenges will come once the crisis is over. Foreign element seeks politically and militarily to prolong crisis Interviewer: In your recent interview with Al-Manar it appeared as though you were preparing the Syrian public for a protracted struggle. Was that your intention? President Assad: No, this was not specific to Al-Manar. From the early days of the crisis, whenever I was asked, I have stated that this crisis is likely to be prolonged due to foreign interference. Any internal crisis can go in one of two ways: either it is resolved or it escalates into a civil war. Neither has been the case for Syria because of the foreign component, which seeks to extend the duration of the crisis both politically and militarily; I think its fair to say that my predictions were right. Genuine re-construction is reconstructing mentalities, ideologies and conceptions Interview: Mr President, how do you expect to overcome the large-scale destruction that has been inflicted in Syria? President Assad: In the same way you, in Germany, overcame the devastation after World War II, and in the same way many other nations have progressed and been rebuilt after their wars. I am confident Syria will follow the same path. As long as we have resilient people, we can rebuild the country. We have done this before and we can do it again, learning from all we have been through. In terms of funding, we have been a self-sufficient country for a very long time. Of course we will need to be more productive than before as a result of the situation. Friendly countries have helped us in the past and continue to offer their support, maybe in the form of loans in the future. It may take a long time, but with our determination, our strength and our solidarity, we can rebuild the country. However, the more arduous challenge lies in rebuilding, socially and psychologically, those who have been affected by the crisis. It will not be easy to eliminate the social effects of the crisis, especially extremist ideologies. Real reconstruction is about developing minds, ideologies and values. Infrastructure is valuable, but not as valuable as human beings; reconstruction is about perpetuating both. Interviewer: Mr President, during the crisis some areas of the country have become either more self-reliant or more reliant on external support. Do you think this could potentially lead to the re-drawing of borders? President Assad : Do you mean within Syria or the region in general? Interviewer: The region - one hundred years after the Sykes-Picot Agreement. President Assad: One hundred years after Sykes-Picot, when we talk about re-drawing the borders in our region, we can use an analogy from architecture. Syria is like the keystone in the old architectural arches; by removing or tampering with the keystone, the arch will collapse. If we apply this to the region, to the world, - any tampering with the borders of this region will result in re-drawing the maps of distant regions because this will have a domino effect which nobody can control. One of the superpowers may be able to initiate the process, but nobody - including that superpower, will be able to stop it; particularly since there are new social borders in the Middle East today that didn't exist during Sykes-Picot. These new sectarian, ethnic and political borders make the situation much more complicated. Nobody can know what the Middle East will look like should there be an attempt to re-draw the map of the region. However, most likely that map will be one of multiple wars, which would transcend the Middle East spanning the Atlantic to the Pacific, which nobody can stop. Interviewer: Mr President, in your opinion what will the region look like in the future? President Assad: If we rule out the destructive scenario of division in your last question, I can envisage a completely different and more positive future, but it will depend on how we act as nations and societies. This scenario involves a number of challenges, first of which is restoring security and stability; our second challenge is the rebuilding process. However, our biggest and most important challenge lies in facing extremism. It has become extremely clear that there has been a shift in the societies of our region away from moderation, especially religious moderation. The question is: can we restore these societies to their natural order? Can our diverse societies still coexist together as one natural whole? On this point allow me to clarify certain terms. The words tolerance and coexistence are often used to define our societies. However, the more precise and appropriate definition, of how our societies used to be - and how they should be, is harmonious. Contrary to perception, the issue is neither about tolerance - since there will come a day when you are not tolerant, nor is the issue about coexistence - since you co-exist with your adversaries, but rather it is about harmony. What used to characterize us in the region was our harmony. You cannot say that your hand will coexist with or tolerate your foot because one compliments the other and both are a part of a harmonious whole. Another challenge is political reform and the question of which political system would keep our society coherent: be it presidential, semi-presidential or parliamentary, as well as deciding the most appropriate legislation to govern political parties. In Germany, for example, you have the Christian Democratic Party. In Syria we could not have religious parties, neither Christian nor Muslim, because for us religion is for preaching and not for political practice. There are many other details, but the essence is in accepting others. If we cannot accept each other we cannot be democratic, even with the best constitution or the best legislation's. we are a secular state that essentially treats its citizens equally Interviewer: Mr President, where do you see secularism in the midst of the rising Islamic current in the region? President Assad: This is a very important question; many in the region do not understand this relationship. The Middle East is a hub of different ideologies. Arab society is primarily based on two pillars: Pan-Arabism and Islam. Other ideologies do exist, such as communism, liberalism, Syrian nationalism, but these are not nearly as popular. Many people understand secularism as synonymous with communism in the past, in that it is against religion. In fact it is the complete opposite; for us in Syria secularism is about the freedom of confession including Christianity, Islam and Judaism, and the multiple diverse sects within these religions. Secularism is crucial to our national unity and sense of belonging. Therefore we have no choice but to strengthen secularism because religion is already strong in our region, and I stress here that this is very healthy. What is not healthy is extremism because it ultimately leads to terrorism; not every extremist is a terrorist, but every terrorist is definitely an extremist. So in response to your question, we are a secular state that essentially treats its citizens equally, irrespective of religion, sect or ethnicity. All our citizens enjoy equal opportunities regardless of religious belief. Syria is passing through most difficult circumstances, definitely not a spring Interviewer: Mr President, how do you view the two-and-a-half years since the so-called 'Arab Spring?' President Assad: This is a misconception. Spring does not include bloodshed, killing, extremism, destroying schools or preventing children from going to their schools, or preventing women from choosing what to wear and what is appropriate for them. Spring is the most beautiful season whilst we are going through the direst circumstances; it is definitely not Spring. Is Spring compatible with what is happening in Syria - the killing, the slaughtering, the beheading, the cannibalism, I leave it to you to decide. Interviewer: What are the issues that the so-called "Arab Spring" is supposed to resolve? President Assad: The solution doesn't lie in the 'Spring' or in anything else, the solution lies in us. We are the ones who should provide the solutions, by being proactive instead of reactive. When we address our problems proactively we ensure that we get the right solutions. Solutions imposed re-actively by the 'Spring' will only lead to deformed results. Like many countries in the Middle East, we have numerous problems that we are aware of and view objectively. This is how these problems should be solved, in that the solutions are internally manufactured and not externally administered, as the latter would produce a distorted or stillborn solution. It is for this very reason that when we call for dialogue or solutions, they need to be home-grown in order to ensure that they lead to the Syria we aspire to. what is happening in Iraq now, and in Lebanon previously, are repercussions of the situation in Syria Interviewer: Mr President, you have rejected any form of foreign intervention and have warned that this would extend the battle to wider areas, have you reached this? President Assad: Let's be clear about this, there are two types of foreign intervention: indirect through proxies or agent s, and direct intervention through a conventional war. We are experiencing the former. At the beginning of the crisis I warned that intervention in Syria - even indirectly, is similar to tampering with a fault line, it would lead to shockwaves throughout the region. At the time, many people - especially in the media, understood this as President Assad threatening to extend the crisis beyond Syria's borders. Clearly they did not understand what I meant at the time, but this is exactly what is happening now. If we look at the reality in front of us, we can see clearly that what is happening in Iraq now, and in Lebanon previously, are repercussions of the situation in Syria, and this will only extend further and further. We are seeing these ramifications and the intervention is still indirect, so imagine the consequences of military intervention? The situation will, of course, be much worse and then we will witness the domino effect of widespread extremism, chaos and fragmentation. Relations with Russia and Iran are cooperation guaranteed by international law Interviewer : You criticize countries including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Britain for their interference in the Syria crisis, isn't it true that Russia and Iran are also involved? President Assad: There is a significant difference between the co-cooperation of states as opposed to the destabilization of a certain country and interference in its internal affairs. Cooperation between countries is conceived on the concept of mutual will, in a way that preserves their sovereignty, independence, stability and self-determination. Our relationship with Russia, Iran and other countries that support Syria are cooperative relations certified under international law. The countries you mentioned, have adopted policies that meddle in Syria's internal affairs, which is a flagrant violation of international law and our national sovereignty. The difference therefore, is that cooperation between countries is intended to preserve stability and perpetuate the prosperity of these nations, whilst foreign interference seeks to destabilize countries, spread chaos and perpetuate ignorance. Interviewer: Sir, you have discussed the repercussions of the Syrian crisis on Iraq and Lebanon whose societies are based on what one might call a sectarian system. Do you think that such a system with Sunni and Shiite pillars could be established in Syria? President Assad: Undoubtedly, sectarian systems in neighboring countries, sectarian unrest or civil wars - as in Lebanon 30 years ago, will inevitably affect Syria. That is why Syria intervened in Lebanon in 1976 - to protect itself and to safeguard Lebanon. It is for this reason that we are observing carefully the unfolding events in Iraq - they will affect us directly. This was also for this reason that we adamantly opposed the war on Iraq, despite a mixture of American temptations and threats at the time. We rejected losing our stability in return for appeasing the Americans. Sectarian systems are dangerous and that is why we insist on the secular model where all citizens are equal regardless of religion. Jabhat al-Nusra is a branch of al-Qaeda, they uphold same ideology Interviewer : Mr President, you are fighting Jabhat Al-Nusra." Can you tell us about it, what is this organization, who supports them, who supplies them with money and weapons? President Assad : Jabhat Al-Nusra is an Al-Qaeda affiliated group with an identical ideology whose members live in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan as well as other Arab and Muslim countries; they are very well financed and have plenty of arms. It is difficult to trace their sources due to the fact that their support resides in a covert manner through wealthy individuals and organisations that adopt the same ideology. Their primary aim is to establish an Islamic State in accordance to their interpretation of Islam. Central to their political thought is the Wahhabi doctrine - comparable to Al-Qaeda's in Afghanistan. This ideology is administered wherever they are present, especially on women. They claim to be applying Sharia Law and the Islamic Religion; however, in reality their actions are a complete distortion of the real religion of Islam. We have seen examples of their brutality on our satellite channels taken from footage they publish on purpose on YouTube in order to spread their ideology; a recent example was the beheading of an innocent man, which was aired on Belgian TV. Interviewer: What is the motivation for Saudi Arabia and Qatar to assist and arm the terrorists against you, what do they seek to achieve? President Assad: Firstly, I believe that this is a question they should be answering. I will respond by raising a few questions. Do they support the armed gangs because of their vehement belief in freedom and democracy as they claim in their media outlets? Do they harbor any form of democracy in their own countries, in order to properly support democracy in Syria. Do they have elected parliaments or constitutions voted on by their people? Have their populations decided at any time during the previous decades on what type of governing system they want - be it monarchy, presidency, principality or any other form? So, things are clear: they should first pay attention to their own nations and then answer your question. France and Britain look for puppets to carry out their interests Interviewer: In this quagmire, why do Britain and France delegate leadership to Saudi Arabia and Qatar? What do they hope to achieve? President Assad: I also cannot answer on behalf of Britain or France, but I can give you the general impression here. I believe that France and Britain have an issue with the 'annoying' Syrian role in the region - as they see it. These countries, like the United States, are looking for puppets and dummies to do their bidding and serve their interests without question. We have consistently rejected this; we will always be independent and free. It seems as though France and Britain have not forgotten their colonial history and persist in attempting to manipulate the region albeit through proxies. Indeed, Britain and France can direct Saudi Arabia and Qatar on what they should do, but we must also not forget that the policies and economies of France and Britain are also dependent on petrodollars. What happened in Syria was an opportunity for all these countries to get rid of Syria - this insubordinate state, and replace the president with a "yes man." This will never happen neither now nor in the future. Interviewer: The European Union has not renewed the arms embargo imposed on Syria and yet it has not approved arming the opposition. What is your assessment of this step? President Assad: Clearly there is a split within the European Union on this issue. I cannot state that the EU is supportive of the Syrian government; there are countries, especially Britain and France, who are particularly hostile to Syria. On the other hand, there are countries - Germany in particular, which are raising logical questions about the future consequences of arming the terrorists. Well firstly, that would perpetuate the destruction in Syria, forcing the Syrian people to pay an even heavier price. Secondly, by supplying arms, they are effectively arming terrorists, and the Europeans are well informed that these are terrorists groups. Some are repeating the American rhetoric of "good fighters and bad fighters," exactly as they did a few years ago with the "good Taliban and bad Taliban, good Al-Qaeda and bad Al-Qaeda." Today there is a new term of "good terrorists and bad terrorists" being promoted. Is this logical? When terrorism prevails, it will spread towards Europe They are aware that weapons sent to the region will end up in the hands of terrorists, which will have two consequences. First, Europe's back garden will become a hub for terrorism and chaos, which leads to deprivation and poverty; Europe will pay the price and forfeit an important market. Second, terrorism will not stop here - it will spread to your countries. It will export itself through illegal immigration or through the same terrorists who returned to their original countries after being indoctrinated and trained more potently. These pressing issues in my opinion are creating a considerable split or disagreement within the European Union; they may not like it, but they have no other choice than to cooperate with the Syrian government, even if they disagree with it. Interviewer: Your Excellency has stated that if European countries were to send weapons to Syria, they would effectively be arming terrorists. Do you consider all armed militants as terrorists? President Assad: As a European or German citizen I will pose the following question: does your country allow you to carry arms, intimidate or kill innocent people, vandalize and loot? Any individual or group excluding the army and police who carries arms, kills people, threatens and intimidates public safety are by definition terrorists, this is a norm in every country. Regardless of their background, be it extremists, criminals or convicted felons, those who are carrying weapons in Syria are essentially committing these acts. Therefore, they are terrorists. We differentiate between terrorists and conventional opposition groups, since the latter is a political entity and has a political agenda. Killing and slaughtering is terrorism and plunges the country back years into regression. Interviewer: So Mr President, you see the future as being against terrorism? President Assad: This is the logical conclusion; however in Europe you have many illogical, unrealistic and irresponsible politicians who are applying their negative sentiments instead of their reason. Politics should not be fueled by love or hatred, but by interests. As a German citizen, you should ask yourself what do you stand to gain from what is happening in our region? Basically, what is happening now is against your national interests, your genuine interest lies in fighting terrorism. Interviewer: Some view Hezbollah as a terrorist organization; we know that it has fought alongside Syrian troops in al-Quseir. We have also heard that there are fighters from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard fighting with you. Do you really need these forces? President Assad: The media is trying to portray Hezbollah as the main fighting force on the ground and the Syrian Army as weak and unable to achieve victory. In reality, over the last months we have achieved significant victories on the ground in different parts of Syria; in all of these victories, some of which were more important than al-Quseir, the Syrian army fought alone. None of this is highlighted in the media. One of the reasons for these victories is the National Defence Forces - local citizens fighting alongside the army to defend their communities and regions. Al-Quseir received more international attention because of statements by western officials projecting it as a strategic town, to the extent that even some United Nation's officials claim to understand the situation in al-Quseir! There was a lot of exaggeration, but there were also a large number of arms and militants. These terrorists started attacking the bordering towns loyal to Hezbollah, which warranted their intervention alongside the Syrian army in order to restore stability. The Syrian Army is a large army capable of accomplishing its missions across Syria, with the support of the local communities. If we were in need of such assistance, why not use these forces in the rural parts of Damascus, close to the capital? Damascus is certainly more important than al-Quseir, as is Aleppo and all the other major cities; it doesn't make any sense. But as I said at the beginning, the aim of this frenzy is to reflect an image of Hezbollah as the main fighting force and to provoke Western and International public opinion against Hezbollah. Interviewer: How strong and large are the Hezbollah brigades currently in Syria? President Assad: There are no brigades. They have sent fighters who have aided the Syrian army in cleaning areas on the Lebanese borders that were infiltrated by terrorists. They did not deploy forces into Syria. As you are aware, Hezbollah forces are positioned towards Israel and cannot depart Southern Lebanon. Additionally, if Hezbollah wanted to send fighters into Syria, how many could they send? A few hundred? The Syrian Army has deployed hundreds of thousands of troops across the country. Several hundred would make a difference in one area, but it would not conceivably constitute enough to tip the balance across all of Syria. Interviewer: Mr President, Britain and France claim to have clear evidence that chemical weapons have bee n used. The White House has stated that it possess information to ascertain this claim, which consequently led to the death of 100 to 150 people in one year, in addition to that you have denied the UN investigators access to areas in Syria except for Aleppo. How do you explain the situation? President Assad: Let's begin with the statement from the White House regarding the 150 casualties. Militarily speaking, it is a well-understood notion that during wars, conventional weapons can cause these number of deaths, or even higher, in a single day, not in a year. Weapons of mass destruction generally kill thousands of people at one given time; this high death toll is a primary reason for its use. It is counter-intuitive to use chemical weapons to create a death toll that you could potentially reach by using conventional weapons. America, France, Britain and some European officials claimed that we have used chemical weapons in a number of areas. Regardless of whether such weapons exist or not, we have never confirmed or denied the possession of these weapons. Had they obtained a single strand of evidence that we had used chemical weapons, do you not think they would have made a song and dance about it to the whole world?, then where is the chain of custody that led them to a such result? These allegations are ludicrous. The terrorist groups used chemical weapons in Aleppo; subsequently we sent an official letter to the United Nations requesting a formal investigation into the incident. Britain and France blocked this investigation because it would have proven the chemical attacks were carried out by terrorist groups and hence provided conclusive evidence that they (Britain and France) were lying. We invited them to investigate the incident, but instead they wanted the inspectors to have unconditional access to locations across Syria, parallel to what inspectors did in Iraq and delved into other unrelated issues. We are a sovereign state; we have an army and all matters considered classified will never be accessible neither to the UN, nor Britain, nor France. They will only be allowed access to investigate the incident that occurred in Aleppo. Therefore, all the claims relating to the use of chemical weapons is an extension of the continuous American and Western fabrication of the actual situation in Syria. Its sole aim is to justify their policies to their public opinion and use the claim as a pretext for more military intervention and bloodshed in Syria. Interviewer: The protests started in Syria peacefully before they turned into an armed struggle. Your critics claim that you could have dealt with the protests through political reforms, which makes you partly responsible for the destruction in Syria . What is your take on this? President Assad : We started the reforms from the first days of the crisis and, perhaps even to your surprise, they were initiated years before the crisis. We issued a number of new legislation's, lifted the emergency law and even changed the constitution through a referendum. This is a well-known fact to the West; yet what the West refuses to see is that from the first weeks of the protests we had policemen killed, so how could such protests have been peaceful? How could those who claim that the protests were peaceful explain the death of these policemen in the first week? Could the chants of protesters actually kill a policeman? From the beginning of the crisis, we have always reiterated that there were armed militants infiltrating protesters and shooting at the police. On other occasions, these armed militants were in areas close to the protests and shot at both protesters and police forces to lead each side into-believing that they were shot at by the other. This was proven through investigations and confessions, which were publicized on a large scale in the media. Interviewer: Mr President, it is reported that the Syrian Army has bombarded certain areas. Was there no other option? President Assad : We are pursuing terrorists who repeatedly infiltrate populated areas. If we take Al-Qseir as an example, there was a western media frenzy claiming that there were 50,000 civilians, which is more than the town's original population. In fact, when the terrorists entered the area, the inhabitants consequently fled; when we entered we did not find civilians. Usually wherever the terrorists infiltrate, civilians flee and battles occur afterwards. The evidence clearly shows that most of the casualties in Syria are from the armed forces. Civilians mostly die in suicide bombings. They also die when terrorists enter an area, proceed to carry out executions and use them as human shields. The rest of the causalities are either foreign or Syrian terrorists. Interviewer: After the momentum you have achieved in Al-Qseir, do you feel it is now time to extend a hand to the opposition and consider reconciliation? President Assad: From day one we have extended a hand to all those who believe in dialogue; this position has not changed. At the start of the crisis, we held a national dialogue conference whilst simultaneously fighting terrorists. But when we talk about the opposition, we should not put them all into one basket; it is imperative to differentiate between terrorists and politicians. In Germany, you have an opposition but they are not armed. Opposition is a political act, and so when we refer to the opposition, we mean the politicians to whom we are always committed to dialogue, regardless of what happened in Al-Qseir. As to national reconciliation, I do not think that it can be accurately applied to Syria. It implies a scenario of civil war, as was the case in Lebanon, or the conflict between black and white in South Africa. In our case it is about a national dialogue to determine a way out of the crisis and for the terrorists to put down their weapons. In any case, we are awaiting the Geneva conference, which essentially aims at the same political solution. However there are external impediments; Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, France and Britain, continue to exert all their efforts at sabotaging dialogue in order to prolong the Syrian crisis and prevent a political resolution. Interviewer: How would you define the legitimate political opposition? President Assad: Essentially, any opposition party that does not support terrorism, does not carry weapons, and has a clear political agenda. But opposition groups are also linked to elections; their clout will depend on how well they fare in local administration elections and more importantly, in parliamentary elections. We are dealing with many groups who call themselves opposition, their success will be determined by two important questions: what is their popular base? And what is their political manifesto? We will then act accordingly. Interviewer: Segments of the opposition claim that you have not taken steps to form a united front with them against foreign intervention. Is this true Mr President? President Assad: On the contrary, in the national dialogue conference in 2011, there was an open invitation to all those who considered themselves in the opposition to come forward. Some chose to participate whilst others chose to boycott and blame us for not taking steps towards a solution. But we must ask ourselves, what do they mean by making advances towards them? What should we be offering? Ministerial positions in the government? The opposition in the current government has won hard-fought seats in parliament. When an opposition, made up of hundreds, does not have any seats in parliament how does one ascertain who deserves to be part of the government? We need clear criteria; it should not be haphazard. To put it another way, the government is not owned by the President for him to bestow gifts upon others in the form of ministries. It requires national dialogue and a political process through which the electorate can choose among other things their government an d the constitution. Interviewer: What are your set criteria for dialogue between you and the opposition, could this include foreign-based opposition? President Assad: We have no issues with autonomous opposition groups who serve a national agenda. With regards to the foreign-based opposition, we need to be very clear; its members live abroad and report to western foreign ministries and intelligence agencies. They are based outside their country and are in essence manipulated by the states that provide their flow of finance. They are best described as a "proxy opposition." As far was we are concerned, genuine Syrian opposition means representing the Syrian people - not foreign countries, it means being based in Syria and sharing the burdens and concerns of the Syrian people. Such an opposition would inevitably be pa rt of any political process. Interviewer: Fighting terrorism has become the priority now. In reference to your recent interview most probably on Al-Manar television, you stated that if you were to engage in a dialogue, you would rather do so with the master than the slave. To what extent are you prepared for dialogue with these entities in the future once you have effectively fought terrorism? President Assad: It is for this precise reason that we will attend the Geneva conference. I used the notion of the master and the slave to explain what we know will happen in reality. Negotiating with those who have no autonomy over their own decisions essentially means that you are in fact negotiating with the decision makers who dictate to them how to act, what to accept and what to reject. You will have seen on television recently footage o f the French Ambassador to Syria giving the external opposition orders and insulting them, or the American Ambassador to Syria shouting and insulting them. Therefore in reality, we are negotiating with the United States, Britain, France and their regional instruments, Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Those groups who call themselves external opposition are mere employees; hence the masters and the slaves. We hope Geneva conference will push forward the dialogue process in Syria Interviewer: What are your expectations from the conference? Will it be followed by progress or a continued stalemate? President Assad: We hope that the Geneva conference will push forward the dialogue process in Syria especially since, earlier this year we presented a vision for a political solution based on the Geneva I communiqu'e. However, even though we will attend the conference with this understanding, we should be clear on the facts. First, the same countries I mentioned earlier that are supporting the terrorists in Syria have a vested interest in the talks failing. The logical question is: what is the relationship between the Geneva conference and terrorism on the ground? Simply, if the Geneva conference is successful - as is our hope, in preventing the smuggling of weapons and terrorists - there are over 29 different nationalities documented to be in Syria, then this would be a catalyst for resolving the Syrian crisis. However if the smuggling of weapons and terrorists continues, there is no value for any political solution. We hope that the Geneva conference will make this its starting point; it is the single most important element in the Geneva talks, which would ultimately determine its success or failure. Interviewer: If Geneva II fails, what are the consequences? President Assad: The countries I mentioned previously would continue to support the terrorists. Failing to solve the Syrian crisis will make it spread to other countries and things will only get worse. Logically speaking therefore, all parties have a vested interest in its success. As to the external opposition, if Geneva succeeds they will lose their funding; if you don't have money and you don't have popular support, you end up with nothing. Interviewer: Could Geneva II propose a government from different political entities? President Assad: This is what we have suggested in our political initiative. We proposed the formation of an extended government from diverse political entities that would prepare for parliamentary elections; the winners of these elections would have a role in the future. This is an approach that we have been open to from the beginning. Interviewer: Mr President, some of your critics claim that much blood has been shed in Syria; they blame the leadership and see it as an obstacle standing in the way of Syria's future. Would you consider stepping down in order to bring about a new Syria? President Assad: The president has a mandate in accordance with the constitution; my current term ends in 2014. When the country is in a crisis, the president is expected to shoulder the burden of responsibility and resolve the situation, not abandon his duties and leave. I often use the analogy of a captain navigating a ship hit by a storm; just imagine the captain jumping ship and escaping in the lifeboat! If I decide to leave now, I would be committing treason. If on the other hand, the public decided I should step down, that would be another issue. And this can only be determined through elections or a referendum. As an example, in the previous referendum on the constitution, there was a 58% turnout - which is pretty good in the circumstances, and the constitution was approved by 89.4%. The issue was never about the president, however they tried to project it as such in order to force the president to sell out to those countries backing the opposition, in order to install a puppet president. Interviewer: Mr President, you live with your family in Damascus. How much public support do you and your family enjoy? President Assad: When numerous neighboring and regional countries as well as the West are all opposing you, you couldn't possibly continue without popular public support. The Syrian people are highly aware of what is happening and have understood the dynamics of the crisis early on; hence their support for their government and their army. Interviewer: Next year there will be presidential elections, how do you see these elections playing out? President Assad: They will follow the new constitution, in other words multi-candidate elections. It will be a new experience, which we cannot predict at this point. Interviewer: Mr President, what is your vision for Syria in the next five years? President Assad: I reiterate that our biggest challenge is extremism. If we can fight it, with better education, new ideas and culture, then we can move towards a healthy democratic state. Democracy, as we see it in Syria, is not an objective in itself, but rather a means to an end - to stability and to prosperity. Legislations and constitutions are also only tools, necessary tools to develop and advance societies. However, for democracy to thrive, it needs to become a way of life - a part of our culture, and this cannot happen when so many social taboos are imposed by extremist ideologies. In addition to this, there is of course the reconstruction process, reinvigorating our national industries and restoring and opening up our economy. We will continue to be open in Syria, continue to learn and benefit from the lessons of this crisis. One of these lessons is that ignorance is the worst enemy of societies and forms the basis for extremism; we hope that Europe has also learned from these lessons. Interviewer: Mr President, thank you very much. I have been greatly influenced by your personality and your vision; I hope Europe and the West will benefit from this interview and look at you and your country differently. President Assad: Thank you very much and welcome again to Syria. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b8e_1371627822 Curious_George President Assad Interview 18 June 2013, long read Assad, Interview, June 2013, Germany, Terrorists, Regional Conflict Wed, 19 Jun 2013 03:00:42 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=814_1371615436 Omar-knows Do you ever look at a ufo video and wonder if it is a hoax? UFO videos are fake. We all know that. Lots of people make fake pictures and videos using software like photo shop, ect. More power to you, have fun. I just don't like it when they try to say their fake pictures are real and not a hoax. We all hear stories of ufo abduction or a ufo crash, or area 51 or whatever. We grow up hearing about Roswell, Men in Black , and secret government cover up conspiricy theories. I have two things to say about all that. Number one, some of those stories are true. I have first hand knowledge that ufos are real. Take that to the bank. Number two, some of the stories are fake...a hoax. We all know that. There have always been fake pictures and fake ufo video footage. Sometimes a hoax is so good, you can't tell it's fake. That makes it difficult to ferret out the truth. People have managed to blur the line between the truth and the lie. That makes it difficult for genuine truth seekers. One thing I hope to accomplish with this video is to give people a sense of healthy scepticism. I want people to be open minded, while at the same time... not believe everything they see and hear. Find a balance. You need to learn to not be so closed minded, but then again, you don't need to be a sucker either. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=814_1371615436 Omar-knows How To Make Realistic UFO Sightings..Trick Of The Trade how to, ufo, sighting, create, fake, video, trick, tips, exposed, realistic, Thu, 13 Jun 2013 04:54:31 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=83b_1371111422 Vulpine Dogs, especially Pitbulls, need to be tightly controlled in public especially with all the nasty attacks taking place these days.People who cant control them shouldn't be allowed to own one.My pal Crazy Ricky for example,needs to learn how to control his Pitbull dog better and hold onto that leash at all times.Rick's dog, Chucky, is a lovely Pitty with a predictable gentle sweet friendly nature, just as well, but imagine if he was aggressive and unpredictable. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=83b_1371111422 Vulpine Pitbull dog control Yoursay,my friend Crazy Ricky for example,needs to <span class="highlight">learn</span> how to control his dog better, Pitbull terriers, dog control, people need to control their dogs in public,dog attacks, dogs getting run over on the road,keep dogs on a leash in public, hold onto the leash, Fri, 14 Jun 2013 02:10:04 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=03e_1371189709 aydeo First class in joint emergency medical program at Ben Gurion University graduates; officials hope it will increase Israel, Arab cooperation in natural disasters, other regional emergencies - Ben Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) graduated its first class of Jordanian and Israeli students who completed a special joint-emergency medicine BA program earlier this year. The first graduating class at the Israel-Jordan Academic Emergency Medicine Collaboration included 54 graduates who spent three years studying emergency medicine and medical response. One part of the curriculum included a Joint Disaster Management Project which had Jordanian and Israeli students training with officials from Israel's national emergency service, the Magen David Adom and the Jordanian Red Crescent to respond to emergency situations such as earthquakes. There are only three countries that provide emergency medical response qualifications at the BA degree level, according to Dr. Mohammed Al-Hadid, one of the founders of the Ben Gurionprogram. If Jordanians want to earn a bachelor's in emergency medical response, they can either go to the United States, Australia or Israel's BGU which provides the only university-based academic degree for paramedics in the Middle East. "We choose to go next door to our neighbors," said Dr. Al-Hadid in article about the program on the website of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Dr. Al-Hadid, who is the president of the Jordanian Red Crescent, said that he and his colleagues were impressed with Israel's emergency medical services. "We were very impressed with the level of expertise demonstrated in Israel - and when you see something is working for others, you want to have the best for your own people," he said. Israel's emergency medical teams are internationally recognized for their emergency response to disasters and tragedies, as they travel across the world to assist nations in natural disasters. In order to make the unique Israeli-Jordanian collaboration possible, Dr. Al-Hadid worked together with Prof. Jimmy Weinblatt, a former rector at BGU and Prof. James Torczyner, director of the McGill Middle East Program in Civil Society and Peace Building to establish the program. One of the primary goals behind the BGU program was to enable neighboring Arab countries and Israel to work together when a natural disaster or medical emergency strikes. Fault lines along the Syrian-African rift have been worrying regional seismologists, who warn that they could cause an earthquake in Jordanian and Israeli cities in the future. The program received its funding from the Israeli Ministry for Regional Cooperation, MASHAV (Israel's Agency for International Development Cooperation), the European Union Partnership for Peace Program and private donors. Tuition costs and living expenses in Beersheba were completely covered for the Jordanian students, who took part in campus life and social gatherings with their Israeli counterparts. Courses were taught in both Arabic and English. In his congratulatory address to the first graduating class, Dr. Al-Hadid expressed thanks for this opportunity. "I thank you for all giving our students the opportunity to get their education and training them to become lifesavers, unlike those lifetakers who do so in the name of their fanatic beliefs. However, our belief will always be through humanity to peace," he said. "Experience has shown us that it is possible to bring Arabs and Israelis together to achieve common goals." "Medicine is the bridge to working together. We're all people and there's absolutely no difference between us," added Bruria Adini, the director of the BGU program. "We need a joint and collaborative response that can save lives." http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4391907,00.html http://web.bgu.ac.il/fohs/ForStudents/Schools/emergencyMed/International+cooperation.htm http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=03e_1371189709 aydeo Jordanian, Israeli students <span class="highlight">learn</span> to save lives together ordanian, Israeli students,Emergency medical program,Ben Gurion University Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:40:50 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cbe_1371595031 Ahmad Shah Durrani Take a look at this picture. Do you know who it is? Most people haven't heard of him. But you should have. When you see his face or hear his name you should get as sick in your stomach as when you read about Mussolini or Hitler or see one of their pictures. You see, he killed over 10 million people in the Congo.His name is King Leopold II of Belgium. He "owned" the Congo during his reign as the constitutional monarch of Belgium. After several failed colonial attempts in Asia and Africa, he settled on the Congo. He "bought" it and enslaved its people, turning the entire country into his own personal slave plantation. He disguised his "business transactions" as philanthropic and scientific efforts under the banner of the "International African Society". He used their enslaved labor to extract Congolese resources and services. His reign was enforced through work camps, body mutilations, executions, torture, and his private army. Most of us - I don't yet know an approximate percentage but I fear its extremely high - aren't taught about him in school. We don't hear about him in the media. He's not part of the widely repeated narrative of oppression (which includes things like the Holocaust during World War II). He's part of a long history of colonialism, imperialism, slavery and genocide in Africa that would clash with the social construction of the white supremacist narrative in our schools. It doesn't fit neatly into a capitalist curriculum. Its bad to "say racist things" (sometimes), but quite fine not to talk about genocides in Africa perpetrated by European capitalist monarchs. Mark Twain wrote a satire about Leopold called " King Leopold's soliloquy; a defense of his Congo rule ", where he mocked the King's defense of his reign of terror, largely through Leopold's own words. Its 49 pages long. Mark Twain is a popular author for American public schools. But like most political authors, we will often read some of their least political writings or read them without learning why the author wrote them (Orwell's Animal Farm for example serves to re-inforce American anti-Socialist propaganda, but Orwell was an anti-capitalist revolutionary of a different kind - this is never pointed out). We can read about Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer, but King Leopold's Soliloquy isn't on the reading list. This isn't by accident. Reading lists are created by boards of education in order to prepare students to follow orders and endure boredom well. From the point of view of the Education Department, Africans have no history. When we learn about Africa, we learn about a caricaturized Egypt, about the HIV epidemic (but never its causes), about the surface level effects of the slave trade, and maybe about South African Apartheid (which of course now is long, long over). We also see lots of pictures of starving children on Christian Ministry commercials, we see safaris on animal shows, and we see pictures of deserts in films and movies. But we don't learn about the Great African War or Leopold's Reign of Terror during the Congolese Genocide. Nor do we learn about what the United States has done in Iraq and Afghanistan, potentially killing in upwards of 5-7 million people from bombs, sanctions, disease and starvation. Body counts are important. And we don't count Afghans, Iraqis, or Congolese. There's a Wikipedia page called "Genocides in History". The Congolese Genocide isn't included. The Congo is mentioned though. What's now called the Democratic Republic of the Congo is listed in reference to the Second Congo War (also called Africa's World War and the Great War of Africa), where both sides of the multinational conflict hunted down Bambenga and ate them. Cannibalism and slavery are horrendous evils which must be entered into history and talked about for sure, but I couldn't help thinking whose interests were served when the only mention of the Congo on the page was in reference to multi-national incidents where a tiny minority of people were eating each other (completely devoid of the conditions which created the conflict no less). Stories which support the white supremacist narrative about the subhumanness of people in Africa are allowed to be entered into the records of history. The white guy who turned the Congo into his own personal part-plantation, part-concentration camp, part-Christian ministry and killed 10 to 15 million Conglese people in the process doesn't make the cut. You see, when you kill ten million Africans, you aren't called 'Hitler'. That is, your name doesn't come to symbolize the living incarnation of evil. Your name and your picture doesn't produce fear, hatred, and sorrow. Your victims aren't talked about and your name isn't remembered. Leopold was just one part of thousands of things that helped construct white supremacy as both an ideological narrative and material reality. Of course I don't want to pretend that in the Congo he was the source of all evil. He had generals, and foot soldiers, and managers who did his bidding and enforced his laws. It was a system. But this doesn't negate the need to talk about the individuals who are symbolic of the system. But we don't even get that. And since it isn't talked about, what capitalism did to Africa, all the privileges that rich white people gained from the Congolese genocide are hidden. The victims of imperialism are made, like they usually are, invisible. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cbe_1371595031 Ahmad Shah Durrani When You Kill Ten Million Africans You Aren't Called 'Hitler' When You Kill Ten Million Africans You Aren't Called 'Hitler' Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:07:59 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b51_1371575025 Arabi Souri In case you still wonder why Al Qaeda never carried out a single attack against Israel, watch this and you'll learn more: . . . . Wahhabism is an offshoot of Zionism. .Israel Rushes to rescue Al Qaeda in Syria: http://www.syrianews.cc/israel-rushes-rescue-qaeda-terrorists-syria/ . Arabi Souri : http://www.syrianews.cc http://www.youtube.com/user/3arabiSouri https://twitter.com/3arabiSouri http://www.facebook.com/Amazing.Syria http://www.liveleak.com/c/Arabi_Souri http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b51_1371575025 Arabi Souri FSA Works for Zionist Entity Syria, Israel, Wahhabism, Al Qaeda, FSA, Nusra Front Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:46:12 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f09_1371570198 DieKurden By Ayub Nuri The 65th anniversary of Israel's creation this month is, I think, an appropriate occasion for the people and leaders of Kurdistan to reflect for a moment on the future of their own country. What can we learn from the experience of another small country, which has managed to exist and grow powerful against all the odds and in a hostile environment? Can democracy or freedom alone guarantee the survival of Kurdistan? Are modern airports or the presence of foreign oil companies the best safeguards for this land? No doubt these are important. But are they the key underpinnings that have guaranteed Israel's survival for more than six decades? Israel is a democracy. It believes in human rights, and enjoys advanced technology and trade relations with the world. But these are all achievements. They were built in the secure shadow of a strong army, a powerful air force and an efficient intelligence service. Without powerful armed forces and secure borders, civil rights or economic developments are not achievable, or easy to preserve. Since 1948, the main task of all Israeli leaders has been to ensure that Arab armed forces do not cross their borders or air space, and hostile organizations do not fire rockets into the Jewish state. Only after securing these prerequisites have Israeli leaders focused on advancing democracy and freedoms. In Kurdistan, by talking so much about combating corruption and upholding human rights or civil society -- without first securing our borders and the safety of citizens -- are we leaving ourselves open to destruction? Israel has not survived so long in a hostile environment just by issuing mottos of justice and civil rights. Like Israel, which has enemies at its doorstep, we have to peek no further than our own gates to spot the most immediate threat to our own existence: Our neighbor Iraq. From the day the state of Iraq was created and forever, Baghdad has and will consider Kurdistan as its own. Shiite and Sunni leaders alike are unhappy with Kurdish autonomy. They see the region as stolen land, and would be only too pleased to take it back by force. Iraq itself is under no threat of invasion. Yet, Baghdad buys tanks from America and warplanes from Russia. Its neighbors consider Iraq an Arab and Islamic brother, but every day Iraqi leaders are enlarging the army and strengthening the security forces. This is why Kurdistan needs a strong army and advanced weapons. Israel and Kurdistan are both very small, and prey to the same bitter realities of small nations. The swift Nazi occupation of Belgium during the Second World War, Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1991 and Russian tanks rolling into Georgia in 2008 speak of the tragic fate of small countries when hostile neighbors decide to invade. The Kurdistan Region is so small that an army can reach its most populous cities within minutes. It would take a fighter jet just a few seconds to reach its most remote village. So, what has Israel done to compensate for size? The most important step has been perpetual military readiness. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) are on alert round the clock, pilots always a few meters from their planes and troops guarding every span of the border like hawks. Last year, radical Islamists killed a number of Egyptian border guards, hijacked their vehicles and tried to infiltrate Israel. But an IDF helicopter, seemingly waiting for just such an eventuality for 65 years, was in the air in an instant, stopping the infiltrators with a deadly rocket. Twice in the past year, unmanned drones were sent from Lebanon to Israel. In both cases, they were shot down while still over Lebanese territory. Also this month, Israel struck and destroyed an arms research center in Damascus and a convoy that was thought to be transporting Iranian weapons to Hezbollah. Meanwhile, since its foundation, Mossad has remorselessly assassinated people in different world capitals who were believed to have killed Israeli citizens, training against Israel, building weapons for Israel's enemies or buying arms on behalf of Israel's neighbors. Israel has been forced to take these steps because it is a very small country, and its neighbors have vowed to one day wipe it off the map. Israel is the only place that the Jewish people consider their true home. It is the only place where they don't stand out for being Jews. It is a place where their hearts are. Theodore Herzl, David Ben-Gurion, Moshe Dayan, Golda Meir and Menachem Begin all wanted the same thing: a homeland for the Jews, to save them from perpetual persecution in foreign lands. Can't the same argument be made about the Kurds? Aren't they only happy in their own land? Isn't Kurdistan the only place where the Kurds can live with dignity and without having to conceal their identity? In its wars with the Arabs Israel has always tried to destroy enemy aircraft on the runways, and to annihilate enemy tanks before they could cross the Sinai desert or the Golan Heights. Israeli leaders know very well that once the enemy has crossed the border it is too late. Learning from Israel, the Kurds should monitor the Iraqi army day and night, study its weaponry, get into the minds of its army generals and analyze every move. Because the Kurds are mountain fighters and have very little experience of fighting on open ground, it is important that they learn new tactics. Otherwise, the open planes south of Kirkuk, north of Diyala and outside Mosul, could very well become the cause of Kurdish defeat. This article does not beat the drums of war. It wants only to say that the survival of this tiny Kurdish homeland relies on an army, advanced weapons and well-fed soldiers. For every Iraqi tank the Kurds must possess a weapon, for every Iraqi soldier there must be two Peshmargas and for every one of Baghdad's plans the Kurds must have a counter strategy. Source: Rudaw http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f09_1371570198 DieKurden Israel and Kurdistan: Two Nations, One Geography Israel, Kurdistan, Northern Iraq, Kurdistan Region Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:17:49 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=da4_1371564540 euronymus The final telecommand - shutting down ESA's hugely successful Herschel mission - was sent at 14:25 CEST, 17 June 2013, by Martin Kessler, the Herschel mission manager. The Helium cooling fluid had already run out on 29 April. The liquid helium coolant that enabled instruments on board the Herschel space observatory to collect extraordinary images and spectra has finally run out. Launched in 2009, the ESA mission collected unprecedented data of the cool as well as of the distant Universe. Herschel's observations have exceeded expectations, enabling scientists to learn more about how stars form, about the rates of star formation in galaxies across the cosmos, and about the origin and presence of water in different celestial bodies. While observations have come to an end and the spacecraft is to be propelled to a stable parking orbit around the Sun, where it will remain indefinitely, the science mission will continue for several years with many discoveries still to be made in the treasure trove of images and spectra collected by the observatory. Observations on ESA's Herschel space observatory ceased on 29 April 2013, as the supply of liquid helium coolant on board the spacecraft had completely evaporated. The most powerful infrared telescope ever flown in space, Herschel operated at far-infrared and sub-millimetre wavelengths, being sensitive to a wide range of low temperatures from a few hundred to less than ten degrees above absolute zero. "To observe very cold regions with high sensitivity, Herschel's instruments needed to be at even lower temperatures - only a few degrees above absolute zero," explains Thomas Passvogel, Head of the Projects Department in ESA's Directorate of Science and Robotic Exploration, and former Herschel and Planck Programme Manager. "This was achieved through the use of 2300 litres of superfluid helium, which granted us over three and a half years of observations of the cool and distant Universe," he adds. "Herschel's observations have revealed the cosmos in unprecedented detail at these wavelengths," comments G"oran Pilbratt, Herschel Project Scientist at ESA. "We have very exciting results from the observatory's first few years and we are looking forward to many more exciting discoveries," he adds. More about Herschel: http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object/index.cfm?fobjectid=51550 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=da4_1371564540 euronymus Last Telecommand Sent to Herschel Herschel, space, observatory, esa, telescope, shut, down Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:26:23 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=92f_1371550573 Holy Mountains The Super-Skank Pornstar &amp; Bringer-of-Shame to the proud Armenian people, bathes in blood in a futile attempt to stay young. Illuminati Puppet and Satanic Whore. Looked up to by todays brainwashed youth who digest mainstream media and music. It makes me sick. People who know Armenians and more specifically Armenian women, know that Armenian women are very reserved, classy, intelligent, self-respecting, and to be quite frank, very choosey and perfectionists. Armenian women rarely date outside of their own race, and when they do its usually Russians or Greek, etc. Anything else is basically taboo in our culture (were not racist were tolerant we have other minorities living in Armenia) We just prefer to marry in our own race because we are already so little in numbers in the world (I would say Armenians make about 0.1% of the worlds population) My point is, it angers and somewhat brings shame to me that; people who have never heard of Armenians and Armenia, first learn about us through this porn-star and wannabe Armenian, Kim karTRASHian. Who half Armenian, was NOT raised in normal/cultural/heritage of Armenian style and Christian religion. She is an Illuminati Satanist Puppet Porn Star WHORE and I wish that her slutty name was not associated with my proud Armenian people, because Armenians &amp; Armenian women are NOTHING.. and I mean absolutely NOTHING like this TRASH karTRASHian. I just wanted everyone to know how REAL Armenian people feel about Kim Kardashian, and to those who have never met an Armenian person/woman or know nothing about us, please do not judge us based on the actions of this SLUT Kardashian, we are nothing like her. . http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=92f_1371550573 Holy Mountains Kim Kardashian Bathes in Human Blood Trying to Stay Young! Kim Kardashian, Kardashian, Kanye, Kanye west, illuminati, satan, satanic, satanist, ritual