If you want some information on individuals prosecuted or detained by U.S. authorities for alleged terrorist actions, here's a handy-dandy fact sheet from the Department of Justice. It starts with the prosecutions arising from the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and includes the four individuals just detained for attempting to bomb a synagogue in the Bronx and to shoot down military plans. (Thanks to Jeff.)
For more information, visit the website of the the Investigative Project on Terrorism. It contains a mother lode of trial documents and other relevant material.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Morocco - 1
Last week I went to Morocco as an international election observer for the communal elections. They took place on June 12, the same day as the Iranian elections. The trip was extremely interesting, so I thought I'd post some entries describing my chief impressions.
I had always thought of Morocco as being exotic, remote and not necessarily friendly to Europeans or Americans. Nothing prepared me for the warmth and friendliness of the people - it's a much nicer atmosphere than in Madrid or Malaga, two Spanish cities which I've visited in the past 10 years. It's odd; I speak Spanish but no Arabic, yet felt more at ease in Morocco than in Spain.
The second surprise was the discovery that Morocco is one big construction site. I had expected a financially struggling government buffeted by the economic downturn, and abandoned cranes by rusting skeletons of buildings. Wrong again. The government's long-term debt is significantly lower than its annual budget expenditures or its foreign exchange reserves. It ran a budget surplus until two years ago, so it has some cushion for subsidies for construction (lower interest rates and tax breaks) and basic commodities. In fact, the U.S. government might do well to ask the Moroccans for advice...
I saw apartment buildings, commercial space, and luxury villas going up in Casablanca, Rabat, Marrakesh and the towns in between. It turns out that most of Morocco's urban areas are in similar shape. I also saw slums, but not as many as I had expected. In talking to people, it's clear that jobs are not easy to find and that most incomes remain low, but the atmosphere is not downbeat.
I had always thought of Morocco as being exotic, remote and not necessarily friendly to Europeans or Americans. Nothing prepared me for the warmth and friendliness of the people - it's a much nicer atmosphere than in Madrid or Malaga, two Spanish cities which I've visited in the past 10 years. It's odd; I speak Spanish but no Arabic, yet felt more at ease in Morocco than in Spain.
The second surprise was the discovery that Morocco is one big construction site. I had expected a financially struggling government buffeted by the economic downturn, and abandoned cranes by rusting skeletons of buildings. Wrong again. The government's long-term debt is significantly lower than its annual budget expenditures or its foreign exchange reserves. It ran a budget surplus until two years ago, so it has some cushion for subsidies for construction (lower interest rates and tax breaks) and basic commodities. In fact, the U.S. government might do well to ask the Moroccans for advice...
I saw apartment buildings, commercial space, and luxury villas going up in Casablanca, Rabat, Marrakesh and the towns in between. It turns out that most of Morocco's urban areas are in similar shape. I also saw slums, but not as many as I had expected. In talking to people, it's clear that jobs are not easy to find and that most incomes remain low, but the atmosphere is not downbeat.
Deja vu all over again
An intriguing quote, provided by Jihad Watch, which gives a little perspective on President Obama's efforts to set a new course in U.S. policy in the Mideast:
“There is reason to believe that [the president] cherished the illusion that presumably he, and he alone, as head of the United States, could bring about a settlement –if not a reconciliation—between Arabs and Jews. I remember muttering to myself as I left the White House after hearing the President discourse in rambling fashion about Middle Eastern Affairs, ‘I‘ve read of men who thought they might be King of the Jews and other men who thought they might be King of the Arabs, but this is the first time I ‘ve listened to a man who dreamt of being King of both the Jews and Arabs.’” Herbert Feis, a State Department economic advisor, did not say this about President Obama’s address in Cairo in June 2009, but after Franklin D. Roosevelt met with Ibn Saud, King of Saudi Arabia, in February 1945. Roosevelt wanted the Arabs to allow thousands of Jews from Europe to immigrate to Palestine to which Ibn Saud responded, “Arabs would choose to die rather than yield their land to Jews.”
After all, why make a mistake only once, when in fact you can repeat it any number of times?
“There is reason to believe that [the president] cherished the illusion that presumably he, and he alone, as head of the United States, could bring about a settlement –if not a reconciliation—between Arabs and Jews. I remember muttering to myself as I left the White House after hearing the President discourse in rambling fashion about Middle Eastern Affairs, ‘I‘ve read of men who thought they might be King of the Jews and other men who thought they might be King of the Arabs, but this is the first time I ‘ve listened to a man who dreamt of being King of both the Jews and Arabs.’” Herbert Feis, a State Department economic advisor, did not say this about President Obama’s address in Cairo in June 2009, but after Franklin D. Roosevelt met with Ibn Saud, King of Saudi Arabia, in February 1945. Roosevelt wanted the Arabs to allow thousands of Jews from Europe to immigrate to Palestine to which Ibn Saud responded, “Arabs would choose to die rather than yield their land to Jews.”
After all, why make a mistake only once, when in fact you can repeat it any number of times?
Monday, June 8, 2009
False analogies
President Obama gave a big boost, during his trip to the Middle East and Europe, to two ideas that are coming into vogue:
-- that the suffering of the Palestinians today is equivalent to that of the Jews during the Holocaust. This Obama did by linking the two rhetorically with "on the one hand" and "on the other hand."
-- that the firebombing of Dresden was the equivalent of the Holocaust. This, John Rosenthal argues, was accomplished by visiting first Buchenwald, then Dresden, including the recently-restored Frauenkirche which for many Germans has become, not a symbol of reconciliation, but of German suffering at the hands of the Allies.
Neither of these ideas is true, but each seeks to appropriate the moral outrage usually associated with the Holocaust for other ends. In the first case, the idea is to promote the Palestinian cause while implicitly (and increasingly, explicitly) equating Israelis with Nazis. In the second case, the suffering of those firebombed in Dresden is no longer compared with the suffering of those in the European cities bombed by Germany during the war, but to that of innocent people in concentration and death camps. Indeed, the intent is to classify the firebombing of Dresden as a war crime equivalent to that of the Holocaust.
I can understand why some Palestinians and Germans would support and promote these ideas. What I can't understand is why a U.S. president would.
-- that the suffering of the Palestinians today is equivalent to that of the Jews during the Holocaust. This Obama did by linking the two rhetorically with "on the one hand" and "on the other hand."
-- that the firebombing of Dresden was the equivalent of the Holocaust. This, John Rosenthal argues, was accomplished by visiting first Buchenwald, then Dresden, including the recently-restored Frauenkirche which for many Germans has become, not a symbol of reconciliation, but of German suffering at the hands of the Allies.
Neither of these ideas is true, but each seeks to appropriate the moral outrage usually associated with the Holocaust for other ends. In the first case, the idea is to promote the Palestinian cause while implicitly (and increasingly, explicitly) equating Israelis with Nazis. In the second case, the suffering of those firebombed in Dresden is no longer compared with the suffering of those in the European cities bombed by Germany during the war, but to that of innocent people in concentration and death camps. Indeed, the intent is to classify the firebombing of Dresden as a war crime equivalent to that of the Holocaust.
I can understand why some Palestinians and Germans would support and promote these ideas. What I can't understand is why a U.S. president would.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
A bit of history
For those interested in the history of the interwar period, here's an interesting analysis by Williamson Murray of the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He argues that achieving peace after World War I was extremely difficult, given the fear and hatred engendered by German war atrocities, and the Germans' conviction that they had not truly been defeated. It's a short and useful summary of the key elements at play during that period - plus some great suggested readings in interwar literature that make his point.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Follow this case
A judge in eastern Michigan has ruled to continue the case, reported earlier, brought against the U.S. Treasury for continuing and developing the sharia financing programs of insurance giant AIG, which has by now received more than $150 billion from the government. As Frank Gaffney and David Jerushalmi argue:
"The problem with all of this public largesse is that AIG sponsors, pays for, and aggressively markets sharia-compliant insurance products. The practice of sharia finance has created lucrative advisory positions for often radical imams, who get paid to guarantee the religious 'purity' of sharia-compliant products. Such vehicles typically follow the Muslim principle of zakat and donate a slice of their profits to charity. Unfortunately, many of the charities receiving these funds have links to terrorism. Mr. Murray objects to his funds’ being used to legitimate and promote sharia law, when that is the same law that calls for jihad. For that matter, sharia allows Saudis, Iranians, Sudanese, Somalis, Afghans, Taliban members, and other adherents to justify the following: the execution of apostates who decide to abandon the faith; the criminalizing of “Islamophobic blasphemy”; the punishment of petty crimes with amputations, floggings and stonings; and the repression of “non-believers” from practicing their respective religions freely and openly."
The government had moved to dismiss the case; the judge replied that he would not, on these grounds:
"In this case, the United States government has a majority interest in AIG. AIG utilizes consolidated financing whereby all funds flow through a single port to support all of its activities, including Sharia-compliant financing. Pursuant to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, the government has injected AIG with tens of billions of dollars, without restricting or tracking how this considerable sum of money is spent. At least two of AIG’s subsidiary companies practice Sharia-compliant financing, one of which was unveiled after the influx of government cash. After using the $40 billion from the government to pay down the $85 billion credit facility, the credit facility retained $60 billion in available credit, suggesting that AIG did not use all $40 billion consistent with its press release. Finally, after the government acquired a majority interest in AIG and contributed substantial funds to AIG for operational purposes, the government co-sponsored a forum entitled 'Islamic Finance 101.'"
This will be a case to watch. (Thanks to Jihad Watch.)
"The problem with all of this public largesse is that AIG sponsors, pays for, and aggressively markets sharia-compliant insurance products. The practice of sharia finance has created lucrative advisory positions for often radical imams, who get paid to guarantee the religious 'purity' of sharia-compliant products. Such vehicles typically follow the Muslim principle of zakat and donate a slice of their profits to charity. Unfortunately, many of the charities receiving these funds have links to terrorism. Mr. Murray objects to his funds’ being used to legitimate and promote sharia law, when that is the same law that calls for jihad. For that matter, sharia allows Saudis, Iranians, Sudanese, Somalis, Afghans, Taliban members, and other adherents to justify the following: the execution of apostates who decide to abandon the faith; the criminalizing of “Islamophobic blasphemy”; the punishment of petty crimes with amputations, floggings and stonings; and the repression of “non-believers” from practicing their respective religions freely and openly."
The government had moved to dismiss the case; the judge replied that he would not, on these grounds:
"In this case, the United States government has a majority interest in AIG. AIG utilizes consolidated financing whereby all funds flow through a single port to support all of its activities, including Sharia-compliant financing. Pursuant to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, the government has injected AIG with tens of billions of dollars, without restricting or tracking how this considerable sum of money is spent. At least two of AIG’s subsidiary companies practice Sharia-compliant financing, one of which was unveiled after the influx of government cash. After using the $40 billion from the government to pay down the $85 billion credit facility, the credit facility retained $60 billion in available credit, suggesting that AIG did not use all $40 billion consistent with its press release. Finally, after the government acquired a majority interest in AIG and contributed substantial funds to AIG for operational purposes, the government co-sponsored a forum entitled 'Islamic Finance 101.'"
This will be a case to watch. (Thanks to Jihad Watch.)
Monday, June 1, 2009
A very brave man
This article in the Middle East Quarterly describes how liberal Iraqi parliamentarian Mithal al-Alusi has persisted, in spite of political troubles and the assassination of his two sons, to argue that Iraq should make peace with Israel - as indeed it should with all the states in the region. He is also a prominent defender of the free market, press freedom, and human rights, including women's rights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
