‘Arse-about’ Australia: inverted priorities and lost values - International Injustice/Law

‘Arse-about’ Australia: inverted priorities and lost values
by pidge Tuesday, Mar 10 2009, 9:47am
international / injustice/law / commentary

The latest example of cultural deterioration and the erosion of traditional Australian values relates to our military. It appears that the Oz military has murdered five children during an exchange with local freedom fighters in Afghanistan! I would emphasise that Aussie fighters, unlike the mass murdering Americans, have never engaged in the practice of killing children or other innocent non-combatants, UNTIL NOW! Must we adopt the criminal tactics of the yanks and ruin our reputation as a moderate, enlightened society? Must we blindly follow criminal America down the path to oblivion and pariah status? The obvious answer from patriots and those who share traditional values is an EMPHATIC, NO!

It may be acceptable for Americans to tolerate the carpet-bombing murder of four million innocent civilians in Indo-China and the slaughter of over one million civilians in Iraq but such actions have NEVER been condoned by the majority of Australians -- though at times our leaders have taken another view. [It is imperative that REAL REPRESENTATIVES of the people occupy BOTH HOUSES of PARLIAMENT in future! Since the Hawke-Keating governments commercial interests have steadily gained control of the political process in this country; the nation has been led by puppet leaders as a result; notwithstanding that situation is easily rectified!]

We truly do not wish to follow the U.S. down the path of reviled and universally detested nation, do we? The U.S. is detested by more people today than at any other time in history – for very good reason might I add. America’s record over the past decade has been written in the blood of innocents; the nation now ‘enjoys’ the social and political consequences of its belligerent, brutal and criminal actions. America has more than earned its status as pariah nation!

When the balance between advantage and disadvantage shifts so drastically to disadvantage, it is time for Australia to re-assess its relationship with America. It is clear today that Australia needs America like it needs bubonic plague!

To what depths must Australia sink before we collectively remedy the situation? Surely we should not follow the servile, spineless, example of our politicians, whose only skill seems to be ‘taking orders’ from inept American politicians and the FAILED corporate/financial sector.

Washington recently announced that the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable, a fact WITHHELD FROM THE PEOPLE but known to analysts and the military for some time! However, that announcement may disguise a possible assault on Iran or other nation that Zionists and Banksters feel disturbs their view of the world! Never forget that leopards do not change their spots; however, they may opportunistically seek other prey at times.

The U.S. is not about to change its core policies or ideology; the re-allocation of limited military resources in preparation for an attack on another nation may be occurring. No president in American history has acquiesced to Zionists like Baa’raack Obama; the nauseous, grovelling speech he delivered to AIPAC clearly indicates he is a ‘bought’ man (puppet).

But to return to Australia’s current social and political dilemma.

The appalling record of our military is only the latest example of a number of priority failures and policy misdirections. The police have also been making headlines for all the wrong reasons.

THREE armed police recently shot dead a troubled 15yo boy in Melbourne. Clearly, three COMPETENT adult police would not have resorted to the use of lethal force – the last option – in dealing with ONE troubled teenage youth armed with a knife!

In Queensland, police were recently videoed Tasering a 16yo girl because she insisted on accompanying her injured friend to hospital in an ambulance. The video CLEARLY depicts a burly Queensland policeman Tasering the girl in the leg AFTER she had been completely overpowered and restrained by security guards and other police. In that situation Tasering the unfortunate girl amounts to extreme brutality and dangerous criminal assault; a Taser is potentially a lethal weapon and should only be used on adults and only when circumstances warrant its use.

Another idiot, ‘trigger-happy’ policeman in Sydney recently Tasered himself after he attempted to use the weapon while in a tussle with an assailant!

The point here is not whether our police are clowns and incompetents -- that is widely known -- it is the morbid focus they place on ‘soft targets/options,’ at the expense of escalating white-collar crime – the type that destroyed the global economy for example! WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME AUSTRALIAN POLICE APPREHENDED A MAJOR WHITE-COLLAR CRIMINAL, we may well ask?

If we compare the increase and scale of white-collar crime committed today with the miniscule arrest rate of white-collar criminals it becomes immediately apparent that our police have been caught ‘flat-footed’ again. I suggest a little less time playing with Tasers and harassing our youth and a LOT MORE FOCUS ON MAJOR CRIME THAT IMPACTS NEGATIVELY ON THE ENTIRE GLOBAL COMMUNITY!

Another matter which would normally slip under the radar deserves bringing to the public’s attention for reason of the MASSIVE UNNECESSARY WASTE of PUBLIC (TAXPAYER) FUNDS involved. A case involving the NSW Food Authority and a local market vendor of herbs, foods and various alternative products, is currently underway at the Downing Centre, Sydney. This case highlights the massive inefficiencies and incompetence of NSW State Government Departments and regulatory authorities in general.

I need not remind NSW residents of the abysmal condition of the public transport ‘system’ and the neglect of public schools, hospitals and health care for the disadvantaged; we are all too familiar with the government’s woeful record in these areas!

We recall with shock the antics of former NSW Minister Costa, who publicly told opponents of his scheme to privatise the State’s electricity infrastructure to, “get fucked!”

We also recall the former NSW Minister for Housing, dressed only in his underpants, dancing on his office sofa while making inappropriate lewd gestures to a female politician during an office party!

It should therefore be no surprise to learn that the NSW Food ‘Authority’ is haemorrhaging public funds -- estimated in hundreds of thousands of OUR dollars -- prosecuting a case in the Industrial Court against a small community association! It appears the Food Authority is also pursuing a perceived ‘soft target' while allowing a large supermarket chain to sell product in gross violation of the labelling codes. Is anyone surprised?

The case against the association involves the alleged sale of unpasteurised dairy products and alleged breaches of product labelling codes. I cannot go into detail as it may be prejudicial to the case; however, I am able to cite an example of GROSS labelling violations committed by the ‘Coles’ supermarket chain that ‘somehow’ failed to be prosecuted by the Food ‘Authority!

The labelling breaches involve a popular breath freshener/mint manufactured by the Wrigley’s Company that trades under the name, “eclipse.” While the brand name, place of manufacture, and its ‘sugar free’ status are prominently advertised on the packaging there is absolutely no indication whatsoever of any ingredients, flavour and colour additive codes or any health warnings relating to the artificial sweetener utilised but not mentioned anywhere! The small metal package contains so many breaches of the labelling code it is difficult to understand how the product entered the country to be sold on supermarket shelves across the nation for an extended period!

I would add that the product has recently been labelled correctly, however, it traded illegally and unnoticed by the ‘regulators’ for many months. In any event Coles were not pursued in the courts for their violations. It seems the Food Authority prefers to prosecute citizen vendors at flea markets!

I urge the few remaining investigative journalists to follow this outrageous case; information and listings can be found at the Downing Centre. I am informed the case has been adjourned till June.

[In conclusion] I need hardly mention the need for wide-ranging REFORMS! The removal of cowardly, compliant politicians and incompetent bureaucrats from office would be a VERY GOOD START!

This nation has always had great promise, notwithstanding the many attempts by incompetent, lackey politicians to ruin or sell the country to the highest bidder.

Restore traditional Australian values and representative government across the entire nation. It’s been done before. In any event, the tide of real change is unstoppable.

While the United States was fighting for its economic life, Obama administration officials and the media issued a blizzard of contradictory claims over Iran’s alleged nuclear threat, leaving one wondering who is really in charge of US foreign policy?

Much of the uproar over Iran’s so-far non-existent nuclear weapons must be seen as part of efforts by the Israeli lobby to block President Barack Obama’s proposed opening to Teheran, and to keep pressing the US to attack Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.

Israel’s supporters and most Israeli military experts insist Iran has secret weapons programmes. Israel knows about covert nuclear programs, having run one of the world’s largest and most productive.

The hawkish Hillary Clinton’s naming of veteran Israel supporter Dennis Ross as her special adviser on Iran and the Gulf suggest she is more interested in building future domestic political support than securing balanced advice.

Meanwhile, confusion over Iran grew sharply. New CIA director, Leon Panetta, said ‘there is no question, they (Iran) are seeking that (nuclear weapons) capability.’

Pentagon chief Adm. Mike Mullen claimed Iran had ‘enough fissile material to build a bomb.’ Fox News claimed Iran already had 50 nuclear weapons. While the American Rome burns, here we go again with renewed hysteria over MWMD’s - Muslim Weapons of Mass Destruction. Wars drums are again beating over Iran.

The czar of all 16 US intelligence agencies, Adm. Dennis Blair, stated Iran could have enough enriched uranium for one atomic weapon by 2010-2015. But he reaffirmed the 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate that Iran does not have nuclear weapons and is not pursuing them. Defence Secretary William Gates backed up Blair. So does the  UN nuclear agency. Some of the confusion over Iran comes from misunderstanding nuclear enrichment, and lurid scare stories.

Iran is producing low-grade uranium-235 (LEU), enriched to only 2.5 per cent, to generate electricity. Teheran has this absolute right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Its centrifuge enrichment process at Natanz is under 24-hour international inspection. Iran’s soon to open nuclear plant at Bushehr cannot produce nuclear weapons fuel. Its spent fuel will be  returned to Russia.

Today, some 15 nations produce LEU U-235, including Brazil, Argentina, Germany, France, and Japan. Israel, India and Pakistan, all covert nuclear weapons powers, refused to sign the non-proliferation treaty. North Korea abrogated it. UN inspectors report Iran has produced 1,010 kg of 2-3 per cent enriched uranium for energy generation, insists Iran. Theoretically that is enough for one atomic bomb.

But to make a nuclear weapon, U-235 must be enriched to over 90 per cent in an elaborate, costly process. Iran is not doing so, say UN inspectors.

Highly enriched U-235 or plutonium must then be milled and shaped into a perfect ball or cylinder. Any surface imperfections will prevent achieving critical mass. Next, high explosive lenses must surround the core, and detonate at precisely the same millisecond. In the gun system, two cores must collide at very high speed. In some cases, a stream of neutrons are pumped into the device as it explodes.

This process is highly complex. Nuclear weapons cannot be deemed reliable unless they are tested. North Korea recently detonated a device  that fizzled. Iran has never built or  tested a nuclear weapon. Israel and South Africa jointly tested a nuclear weapon in 1979.

Even if Iran had the capability to fashion a complex nuclear weapon, it would be useless without delivery. Iran’s sole medium-range delivery system is its unreliable, inaccurate 1,500 km ranged Shahab-3. Miniaturizing and hardening nuclear warheads capable of flying atop a Shahab missile is another complex technological challenge.

It is inconceivable that Iran or anyone else would launch a single nuclear weapon. What if it didn’t go off? Imagine the embarrassment and the retaliation. Iran would need at least ten warheads and a reliable delivery system to be a credible nuclear power.

Israel, the primary target for any Iranian nuclear strike, has an indestructible triad of air, missile and sea-launched nuclear weapons pointed at Iran. An Israeli submarine with  nuclear cruise missiles is on station off Iran’s coast. Iran would be wiped off the map by even a few of Israel’s 200  nuclear weapons. Iran is no likelier to use a nuke against its Gulf neighbours. The explosion would blanket Iran with radioactive dust and sand.

Washington would do better to stop worrying about Iran and focus on its economic meltdown.

Copyright applies.

Last year had more than its share of vertigo-inducing headlines: major banks suddenly disappearing, the Dow plunging day after day, and billion-dollar bailouts failing to make a dent in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Already, the Wall Street way of life seems to have gone the way of the dodo. An entire country—are you reading this, Iceland?—went belly up overnight. And good luck if your last job title was “mortgage-backed securities trader.” But if there are some predictable economic hardships we can expect from the current crisis, there are also some trickle-down effects that aren’t so foreseeable. Here, 13 surprising consequences of the crash:

1. Your government will get smarter... In a global recession, governments around the globe will be able to recruit a better class of bureaucrats. Just a few years ago, the U.S. government had serious recruitment problems in the Foreign Service because no world-savvy 25-year-olds wanted to work for the civil service when they could make serious cash on Wall Street. In a severe downturn, however, the stability and security of a government job look far more appealing.

2 ... and more corrupt. Politicians’ palms are about to get greasier. A global downturn shrinks the demand for goods and services worldwide. That means the security of a government contract will look pretty sweet to any businessperson struggling to stay afloat. A January report from Transparency International warned that corruption is bound to increase worldwide during the current crisis, as businesses prioritize survival over corporate integrity.

3. Gray skies are gonna clear up (at least a little). The central factor in projections about global warming is long-term extrapolations of current economic growth. Thing is, I doubt the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change expected Wall Street to tank as spectacularly as it has. The longer the global economy stays in recession, the less greenhouse gases are emitted into the atmosphere. You still might not be able to breathe easy in Beijing, but your odds just got better.

4. The Internet is about to get a lot more #@%$ing annoying. Newspapers are looking to online advertising revenue to deliver them from bankruptcy court (and eventually, total eradication). So, expect more Web advertising on your news sources—pop-up ads, welcome screens, articles hacked into ever shorter segments to maximize clicks—that cannot be escaped easily. Or at least not without getting extremely frustrated.

5. Glory days for evangelicals. Bad times are boon times for evangelical churches. Economist David Beckworth of Texas State University has crunched U.S. church attendance numbers and found that congregation growth at evangelical churches jumped 50 percent during each recession between 1968 and 2004.

6. Your kids will be savers. Macroeconomic realities in your childhood have a profound effect on your financial choices later in life, regardless of how much money you make, according to a study by economists Ulrike Malmendier and Stefan Nagel of the University of California, Berkeley, and Stanford University, respectively. The generation that grew up during the Great Depression, for example, was more risk-averse than its parents and its children when it came to money. Your kids, in other words, won’t be addicted to E*Trade, but you’ll probably find their allowances stuffed under their mattresses.

7. Skirts will get longer. Here’s a piece of Wall Street folk wisdom: There is a rough correlation between bull markets and bare knees. During boom times, skirts get shorter. In these bearish times, prepare for hemlines to head south. Somewhat in relation, we’ll see something else go north: the age and weight of Playboy centerfolds. Evolutionary biology encourages people to seek “more mature” mates during times of economic insecurity, argue Terry F. Pettijohn and Brian J. Jungeberg in one of the more interesting studies published recently in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. To support their claim, the researchers showed that during recessions, centerfolds get older and, well, rounder. Similar studies have confirmed an identical trend in movie comedies—male and female leads get older during recessions.

8. Your military just got bigger. The age group that will be hit hardest by the current downturn? The world’s 18- to 24-year-olds. This group just so happens to be the prime recruiting age bracket for militaries, which can generally offer a steady paycheck and decent benefits. Indeed, the U.S. Army exceeded its recruitment goals in the last three months of 2008 for the first time in 5 years. And as the war in Iraq winds down, these new soldiers’ fears of being deployed in a hostile combat environment should wane. The few and the proud might grow into the many and the desperate.

9. State schools will be cool. A prolonged downturn will profoundly affect institutions of higher learning. For the past decade, private schools far outpaced state schools in terms of resources and expenditures as their endowments swelled from the long financial boom. Many elite universities followed Harvard’s lead and adopted need-blind admissions with generous financial-aid packages.

That’s all about to change. Endowments in the United States have declined 10 to 30 percent during the past year, which will make need-blind admissions a thing of the past and financial-aid offers far less generous. The credit crunch will also make it more difficult for young people to secure reasonable student loans.

10. Boomers will refuse to leave the building. A whole tier of older employees who planned on retiring now or in a few years simply can’t—their 401(k) retirement accounts look way too scary. In 2008 alone, U.S. workers aged 55 to 64 who have had 401(k)s for at least 20 years saw their retirement balances drop an average of 20 percent. This means those who expected promotions when the boomers cleared out are going to have to stew in their own juices and gripe around the water cooler. Office politics just got a lot nastier.

11. The world is no longer flat—and fewer people will care. Global downturns often breed protectionism and other barriers to foreigners. Cross-border tourism is likely to plummet. Study-abroad programs will also be affected—the New York Times recently reported a dramatic decline in South Koreans studying overseas. News outlets are also likely to further scale back their foreign news bureaus to cut costs.

12. Nouriel Roubini’s frequent flyer miles will go through the roof. One business will be big this year: conferences on the crisis of capitalism. The Dr. Dooms and Cassandras of the most recent bubble era—economists such as Nouriel Roubini, Robert Shiller, Stephen Roach, and Joseph Stiglitz—will be doling out advice and “I told you sos” in convention halls and conference rooms around the globe. Indeed, in the month of January alone, Roubini traveled to Istanbul, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, London, Riyadh, Zurich, Davos, and Moscow. The likely difference now? Seats in coach.

13. Great Depression lit will be chic. Eras like to mine the cultural tropes of analogous eras from the past. So, expect books about the Great Depression to dominate Amazon rankings. Already, Hodding Carter IV has received a big advance to write A Year of Living Within Our Means, a book about his family living strictly within its budget by using cost-cutting measures from the 1930s. And somewhere, you just know Ken Burns is making a 25-part documentary on the Tom Joads of this world.

© 2009 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC

On Tuesday morning, Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, employed the indicative mood in describing the high value that Chas Freeman, his appointee to head the National Intelligence Council (NIC), will bring to the job — “his long experience and inventive mind,” for example.

By five o’clock that afternoon, Freeman announced that he had asked that his selection “not proceed.”

Not one to mince words, Freeman, spelled out the strange set of affairs surrounding the flip-flop and the implications of what had just happened.

Borrowing from George Washington’s Farewell Address the pointed warning against developing a “passionate attachment” to the strategic goals of another nation, Freeman made it clear that he was withdrawing his “previous acceptance” of Blair’s invitation to chair the NIC because of the character assassination of him orchestrated by the Israel Lobby.

The implications? Freeman was clear:

“The outrageous agitation … will be seen by many to raise serious questions about whether the Obama administration will be able to make its own decisions about the Middle East and related issues. [It casts] doubt on its ability to consider, let alone decide what policies might best serve the United States rather than those of a Lobby intent on enforcing the will and interests of a foreign government…

“The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views … and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those it [the Lobby] favors.”

Foreign policy analyst Chris Nelson described the imbroglio as a reflection of the “deadly power game on what level of support for controversial Israeli government policies is a ‘requirement’ for U.S. public office.”

Before the flip-flop on Freeman was announced, Nelson warned, “If Obama surrenders to the critics and orders Blair to rescind the Freeman appointment, it is difficult to see how he can properly exercise leverage, when needed, in his conduct of policy in the Middle East. That, literally, is how the experts see the stakes in the fight now under way” — the fight that is now over.

Congressional Boasting

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, led Lobby boasting just minutes after the Freeman debacle was announced. Schumer was clear: “His [Freeman’s] statements against Israel were way over the top. … I repeatedly urged the White House to reject him, and I am glad they did the right thing.”

And, as Glen Greenwald has noted, “Lynch mob leader Jonathan Chait [of The New Republic and author of an influential op-ed for the Washington Post] who spent the last week denying that Israel was the driving force behind the attacks on Freeman,” now concedes the obvious.

Greenwald quotes Chait: “Of course I recognize that the Israel Lobby is powerful, and was a key element in the pushback against Freeman.”

Neoconservative Daniel Pipes offered an anatomy of the crime, blog-bragging about how it was conducted:

“What you may not know is that Steven J. Rosen of the Middle East forum was the person who first brought attention [on Feb. 19] to the problematic nature of Freeman’s appointment. … Within hours, the word was out and three weeks later Freeman has conceded defeat. Only someone with Steve’s stature and credibility could have made this happen.”

The same Steve Rosen who is currently on trial for violations of the Espionage Act involving the transmission of classified information intended for Israel? One and the same! This has to be the purest brand of gall that ever came down the Pipes.

This “morning after,” I find myself wondering when White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel – another staunch supporter of the Lobby who reportedly was Schumer’s go-to guy on the get-Freeman campaign – saw fit to let Admiral Blair in on the little secret that no way could he have Freeman. And why Blair tucked tail.

In a March 8 letter to Admiral Blair, we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) endorsed his appointment of Freeman and decried the campaign to derail it.

We seven signatories (with cumulative experience of 130 years) noted that the Freeman case was the first time we witnessed such a well-coordinated campaign to reverse the appointment of an official to an intelligence job not requiring Senate confirmation.

In other words the influence of the Israel Lobby is seeping ever deeper into the ranks of the intelligence community.

Military Mind-Set

It seems altogether possible that Admiral Blair, accustomed to military command authority, assumed he had the right to appoint his senior staff and did not think to check the naming of Freeman out with politicians sensitive to such pressures.

And this points up a host of other problems. One is that of having military officers, active or retired, running national intelligence. It appears to be beyond their ken to consider resigning on principle.

I imagine it never occurred to Blair that he should have quit on the spot as soon as he learned that Freeman was being jettisoned. Or at least Blair might have threatened to quit if the Obama administration let itself be bullied in this way.

Blair is no neophyte, but he clearly underestimated the power of the Lobby vis-à-vis his own. The White House seems to have told Blair to treat the Freeman appointment as though in the subjunctive mood — long enough to “run it up the flagpole and see who salutes,” as the saying goes.

Then, when the Lobby made sure there were no salutes, but rather the strongest and most scurrilous spitting, Freeman was hauled on down.

The Freeman flip-flop is merely the latest sign that Obama is afraid to take on the Lobby – and the world is watching. Most will interpret the new President’s acquiescence in this outcome as a sign of weakness — of his not being his own man.

This is a distinct liability as Obama prepares to meet next month with the likes of Vladimir Putin who will be taking his measure.

The encounter with Putin brings to mind another young President’s encounter with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev in Vienna in June 1961. Khrushchev had studied the fiasco of the Bay of Pigs in April 1961; he would have understood if Kennedy had left Castro alone or destroyed him.

When Kennedy was rash enough to approve a strike on Cuba but not bold enough to finish the job, in Khrushchev’s view, the latter decided he was dealing with an inexperienced young leader who could be intimidated and blackmailed — one who would shrink from hard decisions.

Kennedy later said of his encounter with Khrushchev in Vienna, "He beat the hell out of me." The meeting led Khrushchev to believe that Kennedy might well back down if the USSR put missiles in Cuba.

As for Israel, the Russians were better able to understand Washington’s “passionate attachment” to Israel in strategic terms, as the Cold War played out in the Middle East and Washington had a perceived need to have Israel as a permanent “battleship” there.

Now the Russians see the power of the Israel Lobby for what it is — who can miss it? The Obama administration is seen as caving under political pressure.

Although the Russians continue to be amazed at the Lobby’s strong influence over U.S. policy, the Russians are happy as clams to sit back and watch as the identification of the U.S. with Israeli policy inflicts incalculable damage to U.S. interests throughout the region and beyond.

Though a sportsman, Putin is best at chess. He is likely to shy away from playing basketball with our new President. Obama will have to beat Putin at his own game – and Obama now has shown himself easy to push around.

Israeli Adventurism

With Freeman’s withdrawal, there is surely much gloating among the politically aware in Israel. However, gloating is one thing; dangerous miscalculation is another.

That danger is particularly high as Benjamin Netanyahu takes over as Israeli prime minister. Netanyahu and his close “neoconservative” friends in the U.S. have made no bones about their preference for a Bush/Cheney-style preventive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

As Gareth Porter and I write in the Miami Herald, the specter of such a strike takes on more reality with Netanyahu as prime minister. He, too, is taking the measure of our young President and may draw very dangerous conclusions from Obama’s subservience to the Lobby.

The effect of the Freeman affair on the intelligence community is easy to predict.

Those who were looking forward to fearless integrity will be deeply disappointed. They may seek honest work elsewhere, if they perceive that Blair is only the titular head of intelligence and that pro-Lobby political operatives are calling the shots.

On the other hand, those intelligence managers and analysts who were pleased as punch to be sent over to brief the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), created by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), will be delighted with the news on Freeman.

This briefing practice, which was encouraged by the Bush/Cheney administration, was highly irregular for a non-partisan intelligence community to be engaged in. It can be expected to flourish now, with the abject object lesson of Freeman’s demise.

On Oct. 5, 2007, I published an article about Israel’s deliberate attempt on June 8, 1967, to sink the USS Liberty in international waters off the Sinai, killing 34 of the Liberty crew and wounding over 170 in the process.

The lead was:

“So Who’s Afraid of the Israel Lobby? Virtually everyone: Republican, Democrat — Conservative, Liberal. The fear factor is non-partisan, you might say, and palpable. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee brags that it is the most influential foreign policy lobbying organization on Capitol Hill, and has demonstrated that time and again, and not only on Capitol Hill.”

The point? In June 1967, the Israelis learned that they could get away, literally, with murder and still not endanger their influence in Washington.

Events of the past weeks demonstrate that they and their Lobby are equally good at character assassination. It is embarrassingly shameful to watch President Obama acquiesce in all this.

Author retains copyright.

The New South Wales Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell says there needs to be a debate about whether the community should be given the power to bring on an early election.

Barry O'Farrell says it is time the concept of recall elections was considered in New South Wales, which would end the practice of fixed four-year parliamentary terms.

A recall election was held in California in 2003 because of voter anger about the state's finances - which led to Arnold Schwarzenegger's entry into politics.

In a speech last night to the Sydney Institute, Mr O'Farrell said the idea was worthy of consideration.

"The public should have a say on whether they should have the power to bring on an early election in circumstances where Government is failing to fulfil its mandate or its purpose," he said.

"The spectre of being forced to an election by the community could, I believe, provide the stimulus needed for government, even a New South Wales Labor Government, to perform throughout its term, as well as provide the public with a safeguard against political abuses."

However, Associate Professor Anne Twomey, from Sydney University's Law Faculty, says the move could lead to governments becoming politically cautious.

"Any government that knows it can be removed at any time may not make the hard decisions, that may be the responsible decision you need to take," she said.

And the Premier, Nathan Rees, has question Mr O'Farrell's priorities.

"We're interested in getting on with the biggest infrastructure spend in Australian history as we create jobs and support employment in the face of a global financial crisis. Barry O'Farrell's response is a constitutional lawyers picnic," he said.

"Whilst we've been in the Parliament this week debating our stimulus package underpinning 180,000 jobs over two years in the biggest spend on infrastructure since the Olympics, bigger than the Olympics, his only response is to come out today with a plan for his own job, and that's a reelection of the priority that he places on jobs for NSW."

The Speaker of the New South Wales Parliament, Richard Torbay, says wider constitutional reform at all levels of government should be examined. [Emphasis added.]

"I think if we were asked again how we would set up our governmental arrangements, it wouldn't be the way they're set up today," he said.

"Should we have three levels of government? Should there be upper houses in our state parliaments? How can we bolster regional structures?"

Recall election provisions are in place a number of other US states, and in the Canadian province of British Columbia.

© 2009 ABC

Do you drink raw milk? Unless you milk your own cow, the answer is probably no since the sale of raw milk is illegal in about half of the United States.

Consumption of raw milk is legal in all 50 states, but current federal regulation prohibits interstate commerce of raw milk and raw milk products for human consumption.

The only legal milk to be sold across state lines is pasteurized. Pasteurization kills disease causing germs and prevents souring by keeping milk at a temperature of 145 degrees F for at least half an hour, then reducing the temperature to no more than 55 degrees F. According to “Raw Milk Vs. Pasteurized Milk” published in a British Medical Journal in 1938:

H.R. 778 has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. You can read the full text of the legislation that would allow the interstate commerce of raw milk. Personally, I would not want to buy raw dairy products from an out of state farmer because of transportation costs and concerns about freshness. Whether you believe raw milk is healthier or not, at the heart of the issue is US constitutional law that allows Congress to regulate interstate traffic (Art. I, section 8, Clause 1), but such commerce should not be impeded. Do we really need to regulate the sale of raw milk across state borders when consumers can seek it out locally?

Topics

Other Press

Cleaves on Disc/Stick