new
Posted Sunday, June 24, 2007, 17:38 pm
Thanks
for your most remarkable article, "The 12 main failures of the Bush-Cheney
administration: A terrible legacy." The article expressed my feelings
exactly, and I thought I would share an article I wrote myself that you might
find interesting. Possibly even provocative because I speak the unspeakable. To
wit: Arabs in the Mideast are not worthy nor qualified for democracy.
___________________
Article:
When you
follow events on the world's stage like I do, one has three choices. One
could submit to the catatonic state of manic depression. One could develop
PTSD following a particularly dramatic event. Or one could write to relieve the
mental stress, in other words, vent. Obviously, I choose the latter, and then
I "dazzle" all my friends with the "profoundness" of
my remarks.
What
touched me off again was reading the remarks of Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., who
recently visited Iraq. He spoke with an American soldier who had been
working with an Iraqi officer training police cadets. The young soldier told
Sen. Smith that the cadets learned that the Iraqi officer was Catholic.
They
then proceeded to stone him ... to death. This revelation came about
the same time as Arab was fighting Arab in Lebanon, Arab was fighting Arab in
Gaza, while, at the same time, Arabs were slaughtering Arabs in Iraq as
fighting there has evolved into the War of the Mosques. In American vernacular,
mosques mean churches. It appears the latest tactic in the sectarian warfare in
Iraq is for the Shi'a and Sunni to target the other guy's churches, or mosques.
As a self-described historian, I have never heard of such a thing in
the centuries of warfare. Churches, or mosques, are supposed to be
sanctuaries from warfare, not targets. Of course, that's the Western mind at
work.
All of
this leads to two vital questions.
Are Arabs
living in the Middle East deserving of democracy with the attendant issues of
human rights, rights for all regardless of religion, sex, nationality, or
political persuasion?
The
second question is even more important. Are Arabs living in the Middle East
capable of democracy and human rights?
History
suggests that they are not. It may be a slight exaggeration or
over-simplification, if you like, but Arabs in the Middle East have been on
war-footing since the collapse of the Arab Empire.
It is
worth noting that our allies in the Mideast are far from being democracies.
Jordan, a nation that comes closest to democratic virtues in the Mideast,
is a monarchy. Egypt, for all intents and purposes, is a dictatorship, and
Saudi Arabia is a family-owned theocracy. All of this leads to a third question.
What the hell are we doing in Iraq promoting democracy? That, my dear
friends, is disingenuous.
What
makes matters worse, there is a profound side issue - Pakistan. Pakistan is a
US ally, so what's the problem, one might ask. The problem is the fall elections.
General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s US-backed military
strongman, is on shaky ground precisely because Musharraf declared soon
after 9/11 that Pakistan would ally itself with the US. Prior to that, Pakistan
was one of two nations that recognized the Taliban government in
Afghanistan.
That
nation is predominately Muslim, and many of its citizens are very
unhappy with Musharraf. Now, what if there was a Hamas-style election in
Pakistan, and Muslim extremists gained control of the government? That question
becomes all the more vital with the stark realization that Pakistan has nukes
and the means to deliver them. Should Islamic fundamentalists gain control of
the Pakistani government, that would provide a quandary for Cheney and his
neoconservative ilk. Cheney and his crowd want to keep the military option
viable for Iran, a nation that could develop a nuclear weapon in five
years. There is little reason to spell it out.
Lets take
a brief tour of the Mideast, shall we.
First
stop is Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a part of the Mideast? Well, in some
circles it is. In others, it is not. To put it more simply, the Mideast is so
confusing we in the West are not sure where it starts and where it ends because
there are no defined borders for the Mideast. But I digress, back to
Afghanistan where I will assume for my purposes that nation is a part of
the Mideast. It is here where Bush made the first of many supreme
blunders. It is here where Bush did exactly what Osama bin Laden and al Qa'ida
wanted him to do.
He
redirected our attention and our resources from Afghanistan to invade Iraq,
which made Bush a recruiting poster for al Qa'ida. Today, al Qa'ida is as
strong as ever, perhaps, even stronger with successful attacks on Bali, Lisbon,
London, and Iraq. Prior to Bush's invasion, al Qa'ida did not exist in Iraq. It
sure does now. I know this is nuts, but there appears to be a symbiotic
relationship between Bush and bin Laden. The Taliban, too, has regained its
strength and this war, which should have lasted a few months, has now lasted
over 5 1/2 years. Because the Taliban tend to mingle with the common folk,
there has been a lot of collateral damage of late, and our F-16's are killing
kids and their moms in recent offensives. That alone is enough to drive anyone
mad.
Our next
stop is Lebanon.
Lebanon
was once the jewel of the Arab world, laying on the beautiful eastern
shores of the Med. It had everything a person could want, a moderate
government, excellent hotels and resorts, a business climate that was par
excellence, outstanding dining, and so on. All of that was destroyed by a
fifteen year civil war, 1975 - 1990 - I repeat, fifteen years. Last
summer, Israel attacked Lebanon to get at Hezbollah. Today, a siege
that is taking place north of Tripoli is going into its 35th day. Lebanon is in
turmoil and has been for over thirty years. Lebanon asks very serious
questions about the qualifications of Arabs for democracy. It
certainly can be argued that here they had it, and here they destroyed it,
leaving only ruin in its place.
Bush just
loves it when Arabs have elections. So, our next stop is
the Palestinian-held territories of Gaza and the West Bank. Corresponding
to Bush's wishes, the Palestinians held a marvelous little election back in
January of this year. So, who did they elect to run their government? A
terrorist organization called Hamas, that's who, an organization whose main
plank in their platform is the destruction of the Israeli nation. Bringing us
up to the present, recently Arabs called, well, Hamas, fought Arabs called
Fatah in Gaza. Hamas Arabs defeated the Fatah Arabs in Gaza, and President
Mahmoud Abbas, a Fatah Arab, declared that the Hamas were a nonentity and
formed a new government on the West Bank. So, now we have two Palestinian states,
Hamas-controlled Gaza and Fatah-controlled West Bank. Does one get the
impression that Arabs in the modern world are regressing?
Saving
the worst for last, we now arrive in Iraq.
The grim
statistics tell it best; 3,550 dead American soldiers, 27,000 wounded
Americans, many seriously and many impaired for life, the war has
lasted for four years and three months and there is no end in
sight, the Iraqi society and governance has completely
been disintegrated, and there is between 72,000 and 700,000 dead Iraqi
civilians many women and children. Don't blame me for the wide disparity of
dead civilians. Blame it on the confusion of the Arab mentality, their quick
burial sentiments, and the fact that Iraqis are dying so fast, keeping
count becomes a logistical nightmare.
One other
grim fact: the American invasion of Iraq was based on lies and distortions, not
intelligence miscues. That last statement is not subject to debate because it
is not based on opinion or conjecture, but known historical fact. It is almost
as though the US is taking it out on the Iraqis for the heinous Saddam regime.
Although that is a bit unfair. For the past few years, it is Arabs who are
predominately killing Arabs in Iraq, not American soldiers. The latest update
on reduction of troops is maybe in the spring. The latest nutty idea I have
learned concerning Iraq is a scheme to arm certain Sunni insurgents - militants
who have been killing Americans for the past four years or so - to go out and
kill members of al Qa'ida of Iraq. Many will think that is outrageous. Well, it
is. SecDef Robert Gates is all for the idea within reasonable parameters of
command and control. General Ray Odierno, the commander on the ground in
Iraq, says it isn't going to happen anytime soon, implying it won't happen on
his watch. Make of that what you will.
Again, I
ask, what are America's best doing in the fiery cauldron known as Iraq? Why is
our best being shot up or blown to bits? If Arabs in the Mideast want to
kill each other, which is evidentiary, not supposition, then so be it. Why, in
the name of Heaven, involve our young men and women? Furthermore, those
involved in the act of attrition against our future generation, and, while
doing so, threatening our Constitution and international law, namely Bush and
Cheney, should be subjected to impeachment proceedings. Is the meek Democratic
congress capable of initiating such a process? Sadly, the answer is no.
In the
end, that is what is really driving me nuts. For all intents and purposes, the
invasion of Iraq and subsequent attacks on our freedoms and our laws are
allegedly criminal acts, and yet ... nothing, no attempts at
retribution. The Democratic Party does not want to curtail the powers of
the executive branch. They want to capture it. The sad fact remains that
there is no honor in the leadership of our government any more. America is
rudderless.
That
hurts. That really hurts.
Sandy
new
Posted Wednesday, June 6, 2007, 03:18 am
Lors de
votre entrevue de ce soir (le 5 juin 2007) à la radio dont je n'ai pu
ecouter que la fin seulement, vous avez commencé à introduire les
implications de la force du dollar canadien et les répercussions que
cette réalité fais surgir pour notre economie.
Toutefois,
je n'ai pu trouver sur votre blogue et à travers tous les articles
présents sur ce site toute l'information que
j'aurais désiré trouver à ce sujet. Je vous
félicite néanmoins pour le contenu très instructif de ce
blogue dont j'ai pu lire une portion du contenu avec grand
intérêt. Mais est-il possible d'avoir plus d'information à
ce sujet en quelque part?
Je suis
un étudiant aux HEC et je vous salue chaleureusement.
Pierre-Alain
_________________________________________
Réponse de RT:
Merci pour votre
lettre et pour les commentaires concernant mon blogue à l'adresse
http://www.TheNewAmericanEmpire.com/Blog..
Le dollar canadien
suit le grand cycle des prix des matières premières et du
pétrole d'environ 25 ans à la baisse et de 25 ans à la
hausse. En 2002, le dollar
canadien tomba quelque peu en bas de 63 cennes US. J'ai alors écrit une
chronique dans le Journal Les Affaires (6 juin 2002) et déclaré
que la chute du dollar canadien était terminée. Je reproduit
cette chronique ci-après.
Maintenant, je
m'attends à ce que le dollar canadien soit en hausse au cours des 20
prochaines années (probablement à cause de la demande pour les
ressources canadiennes due à des guerres à venir). Cela sera
très dur pour le secteur manufacturier canadien et
québécois. Je m'attends à voir le dollar canadien à
1,10 et 1,15 cennes américaines d'ici 10 ans.
Quand le dollar chutait,
j'ai écris un certain nombre d'articles expliquant pourquoi il chutait.
Maintenant, les mêmes facteurs se sont renversés. —J'ai
quelques chapitres dans deux livres qui traitent du sujet. Premièrement,
dans "Les Grands Enjeux Politiques et Économiques du
Québec" (pp 86-87 et 213-219) et dans "L'Heure Juste" (pp
299-304 et 305-319)
On peut trouver ces
deux livres sur Internet à l'adresse suivante:
http://classiques.uqac.ca/contemporains/tremblay_rodrigue/tremblay_rodrigue.html
R. Tremblay
Chronique dans le Journal Les Affaires
Date de publication: 8 juin 2002
FIN
DU SURAJUSTEMENT À LA BAISSE DU DOLLAR CANADIEN
par
Rodrigue Tremblay
Université de
Montréal
La descente aux enfers du dollar canadien par
rapport au dollar américain, à l'instar d'ailleurs des monnaies
de l'Australie et de la Nouvelle-Zélande qui subirent le même
sort, est probablement terminée. En effet, les spéculateurs qui
avaient vendu le dollar canadien à découvert ont commencé
à changer leurs anticipations quand il est devenu évident, au
printemps, que les taux d'intérêt allaient croître plus
rapidement au Canada qu'aux États-Unis. La Banque du Canada haussa son
taux directeur le 16 avril et en fit autant le 4 juin, tandis que la
Réserve fédérale américaine ne commencera
vraisemblablement qu'en août ou même plus tard à resserrer
le crédit.
C'est que la reprise économique est
plus forte au Canada qu'aux États-Unis, ce qui en soi annonce un
raffermissement de la demande pour le dollar canadien. En fait,
l'économie canadienne devrait dépasser les autres
économies du groupe des Sept à la fois cette année et l'an
prochain. Parce que le secteur malade de la haute technologie est plus
important aux États-Unis qu'au Canada, la croissance économique
canadienne devrait atteindre 3 pourcent cette année, contre 2,8 pourcent
aux États-Unis. L'an prochain, la croissance économique au Canada
devrait se rapprocher de 4 pourcent, tandis que celle des États-Unis ne
devrait pas dépasser 3,5 pourcent, alors même que l'inflation dans
les deux pays oscille autour de 2 pourcent.
Des différentiels de taux
d'intérêt favorables au Canada et une croissance économique
relative plus rapide sont donc deux des principaux facteurs qui jouent
présentement en faveur du dollar canadien. Mais il y a plus. En effet,
le rythme de croissance de l'endettement étranger des États-Unis
est en train de se renverser, de sorte que les entrées de capitaux aux
États-Unis ne seront pas aussi importants pour supporter le dollar
américain.
D'une part, le marché boursier
américain est vacillant et volatile, tandis que les scandales de
comptabilité chez de nombreuses firmes ont miné la confiance des
investisseurs, tant américains qu'étrangers. D'autre part, le
déficit de la balance courante des paiements extérieurs des
États-Unis approche le seuil fatidique de six pourcent du Produit
intérieur brut. À l'expérience, quand un pays emprunte de
l'étranger des sommes relatives aussi importantes par rapport à
son économie, il faut s'attendre à plus ou moins longue
échéance à un renversement de tendance et à un
reflux des capitaux. Les perspectives d'une guerre des USA contre l'Irak
viennent renforcer l'idée que les États-Unis éprouveront
des difficultés à contenir leurs déficits
extérieurs au moment même où le monde est moins
disposé à leur prêter.
Tout cela pour dire que l'offre de dollars
américains sur les marchés des changes risque de
s'accroître, au moment même où le dollar canadien
bénéficie quant à lui d'une hausse de la demande. Les deux
tendances se renforcent donc l'une l'autre et devrait pousser le dollar
américain à la baisse et le dollar canadien à la hausse.
Paradoxalement, quand une monnaie rebondit suite
à un fort surajustement à la baisse, comme ce fut le cas pour le
dollar canadien, ce renforcement s'accompagne pendant quelque temps d'une
hausse des prix et des taux d'intérêt. Cela ne fait que
refléter le fonctionnement de deux grands principes de la finance
internationale, soit le théorème de la parité des pouvoirs
d'achat et le théorème de la parité des taux
d'intérêt.
Présentement,
sur une base internationale de comparaison, le Canada est trop bon
marché, de sorte que les prix relatifs canadiens doivent rattraper les
prix américains. Au cours des prochaines années, le dollar
canadien s'appréciera tandis que les prix canadiens auront tendance
à croître plus rapidement que les prix américains. En
effet, on ne commencera à parler d'une parité des pouvoirs
d'achat de la devise canadienne et de la devise américaine que lorsque
le dollar canadien atteindra le niveau de 80 cents US.
Les prochaines années devraient donc
être intéressantes pour les Canadiens qui voyagent ou qui
importent des biens ou des valeurs de l'étranger. Les firmes
exportatrices, cependant, doivent se préparer à accroître
leur productivité. La subvention déguisée dont elles
bénéficiaient quand le dollar canadien était
indûment faible tire à sa fin.
adresse électronique: rodrigue.tremblay@umontreal.ca
new
Posted Tuesday, June 5, 2007, 00:54 am
Je viens
de terminer la lecture de "The Twelve Main Failures..."
Le texte
est précis et concis. Tout y est, ou presque. Les exemples et les
références sont très explicites. Ce texte est admirable.
On entend
au détour de ces phrases les cris des prisonniers torturés, les
râles des mourants, les hurlements de haine des manifestants
anti-américains, les pleurs des familles qui ont perdu des proches et le
rire stupide des millionnaires américains qui comptent les dollars
récoltés à la suite de ces politiques.
Jean-Marc
new
Posted Friday, June 1, 2007, 22:41 pm
I have
been watching the events unfold in the Bush-Cheney administration with great
horror and dismay these past few years, ever since the outrageous election of
2000.
I totally
agree with all of the twelve points that you enumerate and explicate in your
recent essay. Please continue to shed a spotlight on the illegality,
incompetence, arrogance, greed, corruption, and militarism.
I do
believe that more citizens have finally started to realize the travesty that is
the Bush-Cheney administration. There is a continued need for public outcry
against these failures, and I, for one, appreciate your efforts to voice the
truth.
Brenda
new
Posted Friday, June 1, 2007, 18:37 pm
You forgot to mention
Afghanistan/Unocal: carpet of gold/carpet of bombs--which of course leads back
to 9/11--which in turn leads back to Israel/Palestine—to central banks--
WWI/WWII—Bolshevik Revolution...back to Kazhars--to Moses--to the
Covenant. One World, one
government, one g_d, one
tribe.
Gary
(Home: TheNewAmericanEmpire.com)