Polly on Biblical Sources

The Razing of Falluja

This page will be updated as information is available - check back...

http://www.missouri.edu/~quinnl/news/fallujaposts.html

NOT IN MY NAME

http://www.thepowerhour.com/news/petition_%20falluja.htm

PETITION
SUBMITTED TO THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES, BY THE ASSOCIATION OF HUMANTARIAN LAWYERS, ON BEHALF OF UNNAMED, UNNUMBERED PATIENTS AND MEDICAL STAFF BOTH LIVING AND DEAD,OF THE FALLUJA GENERAL HOSPITAL AND A TRAUMA CLINIC, AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

This is linked on the website Rossiann linked to above. I've been reading about Falluja recently and have been horrified by what I have been reading. Some is outlined at the above website and here; but there is worse. No wonder so many of our soldiers are having attacks of conscience. Thank goodness they are.

An "American Socialist"? Does that exist?

All the European Socialist parties fit into the Democratic party as well as what we call the Right wing parties... They are both Dems with different sensiblities. That's all.
The best/worse example : Tony Blair. He is a socialist, as Shroeder: socialist democrat. I don't know what's the difference you can tell, because Shroeder best ally is Chirac (who is quoted right wing ?) and they love Zapatero the new socialist Spanish PM. In fact they are all in the same bag, sharing the same values. I mean chirac/Shroeder/Zapatero, not Blair.
The only parties we have, looking like the GOP are the fascist ones. And when Le Penn was about to threaten democracy we ALL got upon the streets, and slammed him upon the face.
Socialists and UMP called against him, and Chirac won with a Banana Republic score of 85% against fascism.
But we went down upon the steets.

Want to learn mora about Fallujah?

http://crisispictures.org/

Now, I'm desperatly looking after the link I posted about the doctor, who was inside Fallujah, during the attack, and reporting about it.

It was Stalingrad.

Posted by: Andrée - France at March 26, 2005 04:40 PM

There's no question that the political scene in the US is hard to figure out if you don't live here. For myself, coming here to live three years ago, I finally made sense of it by going back 50 years to the modernist era when there were only two possibilities - the correct one which is pure capitalism without any socialist institutions, and the wrong one which is communism and anything else the capitalists either don't understand or fear. (I had to read up on this to get it.)

So here, a socialist is a slightly less strident version of a communist, and communism is bad, very, very bad. I can't tell you how many times I got called a "pinko communist" when I was campaigning for an ultra moderate Democratic senator. I actually had to ask someone what that meant.

Understand, there are lots of in betweens and people who can think in a more complex manner than this model allows. But it seems that anyone to the right of moderation, and certainly the media, want to keep this simple, outdated dichotomy alive. Divide and conquer, I suppose.

Rossian, Amy -

more on Fallujah (just received)
http://www.asticles.com/asticles/nofalluja.htm

Re American Socialists -

Here in Seattle we have Freedom Socialist Party & Radical Women, who are affiliated. They support the international revolutionary worker struggle and they face an uphill battle with globalization.

In college I attended the meetings of those groups because they had really fantastic potluck dinners and cheap booze and I was poor. My friend Emily and I call them "the usual suspects." Other groups are included, such as Greens, anarchists and so on - they are those who are to the left of the Democrats but will possibly vote Democrat when push comes to shove, or they championn single-issue causes.

They are sort of the canaries in the coal mine, so to speak, so the first into the streets. They are soon followed by organized labor, neighborhood peace groups, and the regular rank and file disenfranchised and disenchanted.

Personally I fit into my own overlap niche between "the usual suspects" and what my son calls a "highly partisan Democrat." It's because I am a long-time antinuclear, antiwar activist but I will vote for and campaign for someone many would consider to moderate, IF I think the end goal is worth it and achievable.

Emily and I are pragmatic idealists - a rare breed. Some may think we have "sold out" or "moved to the middle" but they don't really know our politics. That's why last year we were ideal to "sell" the Democratic platform to those who may otherwise have voted for third parties. That's why we spent hours and hours at places like Gay Pride, Hempfest, Folklife etc. I do think it paid off - we managed to neutralize soem of the religious fundamentalist vote on the other side of the state & for Governor's race we came down to 129 votes! The Republicans say those were felons or dead people, but considering all the "missionary" work we did, I think they were probably Socialists!

Here is an example of usage of "usual suspects":

DiAnne: "Were there many people at the rally?"

Emily: "Not really - the usual suspects."

DiAnne,

And the "usual suspects" sometimes even get raises. Congratulations on yours!

I wouldn't be surprised if you got all of those 129 critical votes for Gregoire all by yourself.

Bob Evans
Thanks - you make me feel good, even if you're joking! Actually, I just got the sweetest letter from Teresa Heinz Kerry today (with real not Rumsfeld-style-machine-signature) & I sent her some photos from "the journey." I have gotten so I can look at them again! I think my depression, weight gain etc. since Nov. 3 are starting to lift a little & I'm trying to boost my immunity against negativity.

This is belated, but I want to thank everyone for everything they did & express that I have hope we can make change in the future! I am taking next Thursday off for a luncheon in honor of Senator Maria Cantwell. I'm hoping that most of the female US Senators will be there.

I know people who are moving to Canada and believe me I researched it, but want to stay here and fight.

This thread I just posted on LUTD seems to be somewhat on topic here...

"We Need to Tell Them There is a God''
26 March 2005

An Illinois man erected “nine wooden crosses outside Red Lake High School” on Thursday night.

Greg Zanis, of Aurora, Ill., has traveled the country placing crosses he's made to honor people who have died in car accidents and school shootings. He calls his group Crosses for Losses.

Zanis said he puts up the crosses at the scenes of school shootings because he believes they happen because God is excluded from schools, so kids don't learn the difference between right and wrong.

"We need to tell them there is a God,'' he said.

However, in Red Lake, perhaps not everyone believes in the same God as Zanis. On Friday morning, two of the crosses were missing.

http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=629

Posted by: Pamela at March 26, 2005 06:37 PM

As Andree says, they've taken the private out of spiritual belief. When, instead of remaining intimate with our beliefs, we turn them into a public spectacle, we lose the meaning.

I'm looking for a link to an article about Iraq's move to the euro and away from the US dollar for oil. Apparently this happened a year before the invasion, and the US oil companies thought Saddam would be in worse shape than ever after this move. To their surprise, Iraq began to prosper. The article suggests that the US invaded Iraq because Saddam was succeeding in moving the oil economy from dollar-based to euro-based, a move that would break the US economy.

Has anyone seen this article recently? Thanks in advance.

Amy

I can find you info on that but I'm not at my own computer. As far as I know, there is support for what you are saying. Someone also posted an article on here during the past week about Iran wanting to switch to the Euro dollar - I have that somewhere too. Anything having to do with geopolitics and the petrodollar bears watching, especially with all the loopy variable added - Condi Rice for Secy of State, China "owning" alot of our debt, the arming of #4 OPEC member Venezuela (not by the US), & the arming of Pakistan (by the US). It's really creepy.

I think we should also watch the British election closely - that should be a circus & it's in May - then the Italians. I don't think the Sgrena story has died in the rest of the world, especially if there is any connection with Tariq Aziz, who is Catholic.

There have been all too many coverups and the timing of the medical ethics controversy that's been with us for pre-Easter has been all too convenient. I wonder what is going on behind the scenes.

The silver lining is Bush's poll dropping(s) but I'll only be happy when he goes lower than Nixon when he bottomed out.

Amy

Here is one of them:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_dollar_vs_euro.html

Pamela,

Speaking of crosses for the dead, Vets for Peace but one up for every Christian soldier killed in Iraq or Afghanistan, & symbols for those who were Jewish & Muslim too - they fanned out across a field. There is also a travelling exhibit with combat boots of the dead.

For that guy to put crosses up near schools and places where people have been killed - he is misusing the cross. If he meant to honor them, it would be different (as when people - in many countries - put crosses by the roadside where an accident has happened). He is using it as a symbol that they are somehow being punished. He is misusing the cross as his type also misuses the flag and every other symbol they touch.

They do not truly understand anything.
I'm fed up with Time, Newsweek and US News and World Report having Christian covers - yes it was Christmas and now it's Easter but they are supposed to be news magazines, not religious magazines. I can't stand any of them any more.

If you read the article (or others) on the euro and petrol and the situation of developing nations re oil and currency, you will see why it is advantageous for the US to have a neocon with the IMF (Wolfowitz). Greg Palast has a great section on this in his book, 'The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.'

More stuff to make us proud to be Americans .. sigh. Not looking forward to gassing up the car either.

DiAnne, if I were a member of Labor in GB, I'd be screaming for a leadership convention.

Along with the Sgrena story, there is also the Canadian, Maher Arar, who was tortured in Syria at the request of the US.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0123-03.htm

A number of other Canadians were sent to Syria for "debriefing" even though they weren't born there. They were also tortured. There's a list floating around somewhere.

Amy,

I think it's a matter of word framing depending where you live.

A socialist in Europe puts social reforms first, so he automatically is democrat. As an American socialist we would rather call you an independant, because you enter in no built up party.

I had the same problem with "pariot", which overseas means ultra nationalist, we just say "citizen". The one who participates in the life of the city/country.

From the UK: (from the student who came here to see how US politics works last summer)

Hi DiAnne

I saw this and thought of you.

http://www.democracymeansyou.com/brown/

All the best

Kit

YOU WILL LOVE THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh god "pariot", why not parrot, I wanted to write "patriot" though the word frightens me.

Andree

My son told me the continuum runs from Stalin to Hitler, left to right. Those are the extremes.

It's so extreme here in the US to be a Communist - because of the paranoia of the McCarthy era & our former animosity with the former Soviet Union and China. It seems like Socialists here are more like Communists in Europe. Then the people I know in Paris who are Socialists (they are teachers) would fit in perfectly well here as very liberal Democrats. Our Democratic party has to be very broad.

The Republicans consider "Socialist" "Liberal" "Humanist" "Feminist" "Gay" words that they can use to insult and scare people. They like to say Democrats are "traitors" to their country, "unAmerican" or "unpatriotic," and this they do to suggest that they set the terms. That's why when you see someone who is not a Republican refer to themself as a "Patriot" here, they are probably trying to reclaim the ability to define what America could ideally be.

I do dislike the term myself ("patriot") as I agree that it seems too much like "nationalism" and I like to be a "global citizen" first - which dates to childhood. I'm not conventionally religious either but consider myself way more moral and spiritual than that ass who, for example, put the crosses up in front of that school on the Indian reservation. That kind of person will go to hell, if there is one, and if there isn't, he creates his own right here on earth.

Andree

You have coined a good new term - a "pariot" is one who "parrots" (repeats without understanding, like a trained bird) "patriotic" things that he is told to say.

W is an example of a "pariot."

There was a new blogger word, posted some days ago, that fit perfectly to those right wing nuts people, it was "hatriotism".
Call them "hatriots", it's good for me! And it corresponds so well to what they are...

DiAnne,

So, how do we call Amy now?
A democialist?

Posted by: Andrée - France at March 26, 2005 07:35 PM

Well, a big chunk of this country thinks that all Democrats are socialists/communists. They lump together anyone who wants any kind of social reform, such as universal health care, or even just health care for all children. These sorts of things are seen as communist/socialist ideas by half the country. And they're portrayed as steps that might lead to a USSR like state. They are also things that the Democratic party might fight for, were there not bigger issues right now.

I've been called a communist for having a peace sign on my car. I found it amusing that people associate peace with communism, but there you have it. The eternal enemy is the communist, it seems.

Things I always took for granted, like parental leave, subsidized day care for low income earners, etc, are all considered radical socialist ideas here by half the population. They don't like the idea of pooling resources for the common good.

Anyway, my point was that it serves the right wing well to identify everyone who is not a Republican as one huge left-wing communist plot to take their hard earned money and spend it on a huge government bureaucracy. That's why Bush got so much mileage from the label "Massachusetts Liberal" that he put on Kerry. It's all about the fear.

The Kerry blog used to have a great blogger calling himself Concerned in Canada. He explained to me that my confusion was due to the fact that Americans have no concept of a "Social Democracy" which is what Canada is.

Well Andree, right now I'm a yellow dog Democrat! Yes, I'm way left of most Dems, but until democracy returns and insanity recedes, I'm a Democrat, which is to say, "I'm anti-Neocon!"

Americans have no concept of a "Social Democracy" which is what Canada is.

Amy,

That's the only think we know. Those right wing people are mentally atarded and live upon cold war cliches.
Who's reponsible for that? School, ideology, church, leaders, all? But someone didn't make the job properly.
This is just as if I said that the Andrew Sisters are still a hit in the States and Rita Hayworth the Hollywood number one! You would be right to tell me that times have changed and that I am a total dumbass.
Why can't they stick to old cracks?

stick "from" old cracks

Andree, Amy

I'm one of those too - I would vote for a Yellow Dog if he ran as a Democrat and was running against a Neocon (and also to the left of alot of Dems)

I too am to the left of alot of Dems but I come from five generations of them & have converted my uncle & Mom.
I have never to my knowledge voted for a Republican and doubt that I ever will.

Even if they weren't too bad, I would wonder why they hung with that party at all, so I would not consider voting for them. I would expect them to switch. I don't mind some of the NE R's like Olympia Snowe but I still don't know why they don't switch.
I was happy when Jeffords changed from a Repug to an Indie.
Wish more would at least do that.

I'm glad we got rid of Zell Miller. When I voted for Gore I didn't appreciate Lieberman being part of the package. He's too conservative. Some of them live in conservative places (like Mary Landrieu in Louisiana or when Daeschle was in - SD). I don't like how they vote for I would still vote for them anytime it meant defeating a Neocon or even less dangerous Republican.

Take John McCain (please!) - he's worked on projects with Kerry, he's against global warming - but he still helps Bush, kisses him on the cheek, travels with him, holds babies with him, eats hot dogs with him etc. so he's totally untrustworthy & useless in my book. I was expecially disgusted when Dems suggested he might have some role. Barf.

Why can't they stick to old cracks?

Posted by: Andrée - France at March 26, 2005 08:15 PM

The corporate elite are afraid to lose their stranglehold on Americans, so they keep everyone afraid and in the dark, through lobbying, media control, infiltration of government institutions and even through the churches. I'm telling you, you have to see it to believe it!!

I'm telling you, you have to see it to believe it!!

Posted by: Amy at March 26, 2005 08:28 PM

I see it daily and STILL don't believe it!

... as expected...

Protesters stand vigil
Outside the hospice, about 60 protesters maintained a subdued vigil and, like her parents, hoped for a miracle. Some said they believed it was not a coincidence that the woman would lay dying during the Easter weekend.

“Things are all done in God’s timing,” said David Vogel, a 47-year-old Steubenville, Ohio, musician who was arrested for trespassing last week when he tried to enter the hospice to take water to Terri Schiavo. “Does he have his hand upon this? Oh, yeah. The parallels are there with what happened to Jesus Christ. He was condemned to death, an innocent man. She’s an innocent woman.”

A group of 22 protesters bearing wooden crosses arrived by bus from a Christian community in Augusta, Ga., to join the fray.

“It’s the most significant weekend for Christians, and God wants us to be aware of the preciousness of life,” said one of the coordinators, Louis Hymel, 52. “God calls us always to the cross, and this is an example of us taking up our cross.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7293186/page/2/

Marc Trager

Boy that's goofy. I'm celebrating by eating marshmallow Peeps.

I read just now in the Seattle PI that Russell Stovers candy company now is making chocolate crosses - some theologians believe it's bad to bite into the cross. Others argue that it's better for children to have chocolate crosses in their Easter baskets than the more pagan breeder rabbits.

This theocracy stuff is going to really be fun to make fun of!

Looking at the views of left vs right which above posts touch on, I think we are in the midst of a realignment here.

Left vs. Right never was an exact descriptor here, but there are trends. In the past, the divisions were more along economic lines. Democrats had labor, and extended towards socialists on the extreme. Republicans were more business, and capitalistic.

Socialism is dying out, with a some advocates still on the fringe here. With socialism dying out, and religious/social issues becoming more important, the realignment is more along religous lines. The biggest predictor of voting patterns is on church attendence with those who go mutiple times per week much more likely to be Republicans. Those who go infrequently or not at all are more likely to vote Democratic, and those who go weekly are split. Those who are more capitalistic are somewhat more likely to be Republican, but there are many business owners who supported Kerry over Bush.

Found this on another blog...

Bush Speaks Out and Stays Silent
His responses to the Schiavo case and the school rampage track with the preferences of two core constituencies.
By Ronald Brownstein

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-life24mar24,1,320009,print.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

[snip]
"The bottom line is the gun lobby is too important a constituency to the Republican Party for them to do anything," said Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, a group that advocates gun control. "The sad reality is if Terri Schiavo had been shot, the administration would not have lifted a finger to help her."

Ron,

As Casey is fond of saying, it's not about right and left; it's about right and wrong...

Karen,

I might go along with defing my views in terms of "right" and those who disagree as "wrong" but realistically when we want to label the views of political parties, right and left are a bit more useful than right and wrong, provided we can make some sense out of what left and right mean. (I was attempting to make some sense of them by distinguishing between the old division based upon ecomomics and more recent division based more on social/religious differences.)

Of course that doesn't change the fact that my views fall under right, and those who disagree fall under wrong :)

Re: "Protesters stand vigil"
I've been saying for days that I hope Terri doesn't pass during Easter Week,especially Good Friday or Easter Sunday. This crowd needs no additional motivation.

As for DeLay, Frist and Shrub dropping this issue like a hot potato after taking a severe spanking in the polls....If the true nature of this corrupt gang isn't now revealed to a majority of Americans, then we are forever doomed.

WSDD? (What Should Dems Do?)
Because Dems understandably chose not to jump in and argue the other side of the Schiavo debate more prominently, Dem poll numbers aren't looking good either. I guess Dems are not necessarily seen as a stirring alternative either. I understand why Dems did not jump in the fray which would have politicized this tragic case even more, because in reality this case is not about politics but medical science and ethics. Look at the polls, even most Republicans and conservatives think this recent power move lead by DeLay and Frist was out of control. There are some folks I know,one an Independent, who would have liked more rancor from the Dem side, but they do understand that Dem leadership chose to stand back and let the Repubs hang themselves on this one.

I read interesting an post on another blog that kind of questioned why, of all the more substantive issues out there that should be tanking Shrub's approval ratings,why is this case the one to do it. My answer is that I guess it's always the issue that pops out of thin air that does the job. The same thing kinda happened during the Clinton years. Repubs spent years and millions of dollars on Whitewater and Paula Jones to run him out of office, but it was the surprise Monica scandal that dropped into their laps that gave them what they needed for impeachment. Of course in lucky Bill's case his numbers went up. :) (Boy, they hated that didn't they...Awwwh, the good ol' days.)

Another reason why is the Schiavo case is much easier for most folks to process and grasp. The question of medical ethics isn't easy but most folks quickly came away from this with two things: 1- The decision that they did not want to "live" like Ms. Schiavo and 2- they don't want government in their private medical decisions. ShrubCo's decision to enter the Schiavo debate and his tired SS tour that's apparently convincing no one except the already affirmed devout, are clear failures. Frankly, Shrub's domestic policy is stinking up the room. Can Dems capitalize on this? I hope so. If out of all of this, we can just continue the momentum to drum DeLay out, I'd be happy. So far this case has created a fissure between the wingnuts and everyone else in the RNC. If this leads to the disenchanted anti-choicers forming a third party and running a wingnut candidate (ala Ross Perot or Pat Buchanan) to siphon off Repub votes in the next presidential election, I would be perfectly fine with that. As things stand today and looking forward to who is in contention for the RNC presidential nom, I see the RNC going more moderate in their next candidate choice to try and siphon off Dems and Indies anyway which will efefctively turn off the wingnuts. Just a theory.

The Brownstein article mentioned above was a good one. I quoted from it on Light Up the Darkness. It led to quite a heated discussion when I copied my post to Democratic Underground. The discussion started out with some of the more "pro-gun" people disagreeing, but as the discussion went on it turned out that our views really weren't very far apart. It turned out to be more a problem of intentional polarization by groups like the NRA as opposed to disagreements between more reasonable people.

I was watching alot of old political ads & I don't think the political spectrum is changing that much. Democrats are characterized as "tax and spend liberals," as always, and Republicans are the party of the "military industrial complex." I think that more educated people support the Democrats now but it is still mostly corporate money that buys the Republicans their power and influence. If this weren't true, unions wouldn't be having a hard time. Republicans also benefit from globalization (cheap labor etc).

As for the religious conservatives, they have more clout because it's been discovered that poor ones can be corraled to vote Republican but they don't really have to be given in to as far as their agenda. I think the religion issue is being used much as civil rights was - there are those who want to protect their niche and are afraid others will take it (minorities in the days when civil rights was the big issue, gays and decadent urban people now that religion is the big issue).

I also think that the "end times" crap is fed by Millenium fever like we see at the end of every century, & also by the terrorist attacks escalating & culminating in the big on on 9/11/01. Since this brought a higher profile to Islam, fundamentalist Christianity became more paranoid.

Conservatives have been trying to undermine FDR programs since their inception. Newt Gingrich really got the ball rolling. The social conservative thing is nothing new - for those who remember the silent majority, Christian Coalition, Operation Rescue, Fallwell and on & on. Bush II catered to them more than Bush I because he learned he could get a few percentage points more that way & he was especially desperate because he knew had so little innate potential as a candidate. & 9/11/01 played right into Rove's hands.

Also consider that as the religious right gets more extreme, they can expect backlash. The dominant public position on this latest bioethics case is just the beginning. Everything goes in cycles and these people have got to have peaked already. Consider that they couldn't even win without manipulation and propaganda.

Right wingers are so 2004.

DiAnne -
I agree with both of your posts above. When Millenium fever dies down so will the religious fervor. These guys have been at bat long enough.

Karen, Ron, DiAnne,

Sooooo, members of the opposition would be . . . Wrong Wingers!

Casey would like that . . . and Marc, and . . . well, that would be a loooong post.

I think Ron makes a good point about the shift from economic argument in the public domain to ethical/religious argument in the public domain. In my view, this was orchestrated by the corporate/republican block over the last decade.

All over the world, successful industrialized countries have incorporated a lot of "socialist" institutions and ideas into a capitalist economy. These countries have prospered and enjoyed peace for the most part.

The corporate/republican block fears the loss of power which this kind of integration represents for them. They can't allow Americans to see how successfully the two ideologies can be meshed. They no longer want to talk about economics, for fear that Americans might find out the truth. So instead, they talk about "values" and "ethics" and "Christianity" and "religion" and label everything from the other side as a breach of one of the above.

Veeeerrry tricky. Good catch, Ron!

This is not to say that the pro-business ties of Republicans haven't changed.

At Light Up the Darkness I cited two articles from the Washington Post ant the NY Times. The Washington Post articles goes back to the economic differences, however instead of seeing a free market party, we see corporate welfare. The Washington Post shows the influcence of the religious right in Ohio--but the establishment Republicans are not thrilled.

At the moment they are the top two posts at LUTD:
http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/

I'm looking for a link to an article about Iraq's move to the euro and away from the US dollar for oil. Apparently this happened a year before the invasion, and the US oil companies thought Saddam would be in worse shape than ever after this move. To their surprise, Iraq began to prosper. The article suggests that the US invaded Iraq because Saddam was succeeding in moving the oil economy from dollar-based to euro-based, a move that would break the US economy.

Has anyone seen this article recently? Thanks in advance.

Posted by: Amy at March 26, 2005 06:48 PM

The Iranian Threat: The Bomb or the Euro?

By Dr. Elias Akleh

03/24/05 "AMIN" - - Iran does not pose a threat to the United State because of its nuclear projects, its WMD, or its support to "terrorists organizations" as the American administration is claiming, but in its attempt to re-shape the global economical system by converting it from a petrodollar to a petroeuro system. Such conversion is looked upon as a flagrant declaration of economical war against the US that would flatten the revenues of the American corporations and eventually might cause an economic collapse.

In June of 2004 Iran declared its intention of setting up an international oil exchange (a bourse) denominated in the Euro currency. Many oil-producing as well as oil-consuming countries had expressed their welcome to such petroeuro bourse. The Iranian reports had stated that this bourse may start its trade with the beginning of 2006. Naturally such an oil bourse would compete against London’s International Petroleum Exchange (IPE), as well as against the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX), both owned by American corporations.

Oil consuming countries have no choice but use the American Dollar to purchase their oil, since the Dollar has been so far the global standard monetary fund for oil exchange. This necessitates these countries to keep the Dollar in their central banks as their reserve fund, thus strengthening the American economy. But if Iran — followed by the other oil-producing countries — offered to accept the Euro as another choice for oil exchange the American economy would suffer a real crisis. We could witness this crisis at the end of 2005 and beginning of 2006 when oil investors would have the choice to pay $57 a barrel of oil at the American (NYMEX) and at London’s (IPE), or pay 37 Euros a barrel at the Iranian oil bourse. Such choice would reduce trade volumes at both the Dollar-dependent (NYMEX) and the (IPE).

Many countries had studied the conversion from the ever weakening petrodollar to the gradually strengthening petroeuro system. The de-valuation of the Dollar was caused by the American economy shying away from manufacturing local products — except those of the military -, by outsourcing the American jobs to the cheaper third world countries and depending only on the general service sector, and by the huge cost of two major wars that are still going on. Foreign investors started withdrawing their money from the shaky American market causing further devaluation of the Dollar.

The keen observer of the money market could have noticed that the devaluation of the American Dollar had started since November 2002, while the purchasing power of European Euro had crept upward to reach nowadays to $1.34. Compared to the Japanese Yen the Dollar had dropped from 104.45 to 103.90 yen. The British pound climbed another notch from $1.9122 to $1.9272.

Economic reports published at the beginning of this month (March) had pointed towards the deep dive of the American economy and to the quick rise of the deficit up to $665.90 billion at the end of 2004. The worst is still to come. These numbers worried the international banks, who had sent some warnings to the Bush administration.

In its economical war Iran is treading the same path Saddam Hussein had started when he, in 2000, converted all his reserve from the Dollar to the Euro, and demanded payments in Euro for Iraqi oil. Many economists then mocked Saddam because he had lost a lot of money in this conversion. Yet they were very surprised when he recuperated his losses within less than a year period due to the valuation of the Euro. The American administration became aware of the threat when central banks of many countries started keeping Euros along side of Dollars as their monetary reserve and as an exchange fund for oil (Russian and Chinese central banks in 2003). To avoid economical collapse the Bush administration hastened to invade and to destroy Iraq under false excuses to make it an example to any country who may contemplate dropping the Dollar, and to manipulate OPEC’s decisions by controlling the second largest oil resource. Iraqi oil sale was reverted back to the petrodollar standard.

There is only one technical obstacle concerning the use of a euro-based oil exchange system, which is the lack of a euro-denominated oil pricing standard, or oil ‘marker’ as it is referred to in the industry. The three current oil markers are U.S. dollar denominated, which include the West Texas Intermediate crude (WTI), Norway Brent crude, and the UAE Dubai crude. Yet this did not stop Iran from requiring payments in the euro currency for its European and Asian oil exports since spring 2003.

Iran’s determination in using the petroeuro is inviting in other countries such as Russia and Latin American countries, and even some Saudi investors especially after the Saudi/American relations have weakened lately. This determination had also invited an aggressive American political campaign using the same excuses used against Iraq: WMD in the form of nuclear bomb, support to "terrorist" Lebanese Hezbollah organization, and threat to the peace process in the Middle East.

The question now is what would the American administration do? Would it invade Iran as it did Iraq? The American troops are knee-deep in the Iraqi swamp. The global community — except for Britain and Italy- is not offering any military relief to the US. Thus an American strike against Iran is very unlikely. Iran is not Iraq; it has a more robust military power. Iran has anti-ship missiles based in "Abu Mousa" island that controls the strait of Hermuz at the entrance of the Persian Gulf. Iran could easily close the strait thus blocking all naval traffic carrying gulf oil to the rest of the world causing a global oil crisis. The price of an oil barrel could reach up to $100. The US could not topple the regime by spreading chaos the same way it did to Mussadaq’s regime in 1953 since Iranians are aware of such a trick. Besides Iranians have a patriotic pride of what they call "their bomb".

America has resorted to instigate and encourage its military bastard, Israel, to strike Iranian nuclear reactors the way it did to Iraq. Leaked reports had revealed that Israeli forces are training for such an attack expected to take place next June. Israel is afraid of an Iranian bomb. Such an "Islamic" bomb would threaten Israel’s military hegemony in the Middle East. The bomb would extract some Israeli concessions and would create an arm race that would gobble a lot of Israeli defense expenditure. Further more the bomb would force the US to enter into negotiations with nuclear Iran that may limit Israeli expanding ambitions.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8354.htm

NOW THIS I CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND, WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED IF HE IS NOT ABSOLUTELY CORRECT

[Edited: removed the repeats for you rossi]

OOOOOPPPPPPPPPS sorry guys dont know how that happened, I apoligise wish I could delete for you all except the one for Amy , well Amy you sure got it in spades Rossi, sorry again all

Off Topic, but the height of hypocrisy: Tom Delay!

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-delay27mar27,0,5710023.story?coll=la-home-headlines

When confronted with his own father in a Terri Schiavo situation, what did Tom Delay decide? A dignified death, not a never-ending legal struggle to continue a brain dead existence.

And, then, what did he do about the product liability? He sued.

Thank you Thank you Thank You That would drive me crazy Let alone anyone else reading the site

When confronted with his own father in a Terri Schiavo situation, what did Tom Delay decide? A dignified death, not a never-ending legal struggle to continue a brain dead existence.

And, then, what did he do about the product liability? He sued.

Posted by: Ray S at March 27, 2005 09:50 AM

Well we all know exactly what Delay is dont we but I dont want ot getn into trouble saying it, I wonder where Fox Cnn and most of the media where, in telling us thatA******* sorry guys couldnt help myself

This article seems to do a pretty good job of sizing up the economic situation...

Collision Course
By Stirling Newberry t r u t h o u t

Europe is in the process of trying to pass a new constitution, and it is going to be a delicate business. Le Figaro reported that, for the first time, more than half of French surveyed were against the new constitution, and the opposition asked Chirac to put his own political weight behind its passage.

Why should this be of interest to the US, and even more so to the opposition to Bush? Because Europe and the Bush are on a collision course, over a deep issue: what kind of world we will live in. It is a global game of chicken over wages and prices.

What is this division? George Bush and Alan Greenspan are pushing a world where materials prices are higher, wages are lower, and the profits of large corporations are higher. They are doing this by running very high budget deficits, having very low interest rates, and using China as a vast engine of deflation to keep wages, and thus consumer inflation in line. This leads to what Professor David Hackett Fischer called a "money drought" in his book The Great Wave. We can see the results: oil has gone from a rock bottom $11 a barrel, to hovering over $55 dollars a barrel. Real wages in the US have barely moved, and yet Wall Street banks are showing record profits. Bush wants everywhere to look just like here: high profits, low wages, and a rush for mining and drilling.

This catches Europe in a bind, because it imports energy, and manufactures goods. The higher material prices go in real terms, the more they have to manufacture to buy energy. The European Central Bank warned about the dangers of increased material prices, and painted a picture of high European unemployment combined with sluggish growth - and said that they were committed to staying the course of fighting inflation. This hard stance has meant that the dollar has fallen dramatically against the Euro, the Swiss Franc, and the British Pound Sterling.

This discipline from Europe is not an issue of left or right: center-right, center-left and left governments have all backed strong currencies. It is not only the Eurozone, as Great Britain and Switzerland show. Instead, it is about holding the line on falling real wages, and being willing to withstand the pressure from the Federal Reserve and United States. Europe has decided to maintain real wages, and not buckle. Either the US Federal Reserve wins, and Europe devalues, or the US runs out of money to borrow, and must dramatically cut expenditures.

Many have commented that the current budget and trade deficits cannot be maintained or sustained; what is not as widely written about is whether Europe can withstand the political pressure of having Germany with 12.5% unemployment, and 8.9% unemployment across the E25 nations. The pressure is for Europe to throw in the towel, lower interest rates dramatically, and accept dramatically lower wages in real terms.

Through most of 2002-2003, it seemed that Europe was alone: most of the other economies in the world devalued to match the dollar, and the Asian central banks bought US debt, allowing the US to finance its borrowing binge. However in 2004 Korea and Japan began "limiting their dollar exposure," which is central bank speak for buying more Euros. Even the Chinese, pinched by higher steel prices and facing a hard slowdown that threatens their internal security, has started to be more assertive.

If Asia swings away from the Bush-Greenspan inflation policy, then the United States will have to come to terms quickly. If it backs that policy, Europe will face increasing internal pressure. Already "blaming Europe" has become something of a pastime in France, and without the European Union, no single nation in Europe is strong enough to fight the Fed by itself.

In 1987, when the US and Europe last disagreed so vehemently about monetary policy, there was a stock market crash that rocketed around the world. Cooler heads prevailed, and agreements were reached. This time, however, Bush has promoted the same gaggle of unilateralists that pushed this policy in the first place. Bolton, Rice and Wolfowitz are his way of telling Europe that he won't back down, and instead is willing to have a replay of the collapse of Bretton-Woods under Richard Nixon.

So if you want to know why Europe is increasingly estranged from the US, the reason is simple: by printing too many dollars, Bush is trying to tax the Europeans to pay for his borrow and squander policies. By appointing Bolton, Rice, Wolfowitz and other neocons to high positions, he sends the signal that he expects Europe to capitulate.

It is a global game of chicken, and it is the working people of the world who are going to get plucked should reason not prevail. And reason could, still, prevail. The amount of growth in our "black gold" world economy is based on two factors: how much more oil we can extract, and how much more we can make with that oil. These two numbers together are the pie to be split. Currently, the United States, by having an inflationary monetary policy, can force more of that growth to go here rather than elsewhere. Not because the US is doing better, but because oil is priced in dollars and protected by US carriers. A new Bretton-Woods system could divide this global growth equitably, rather than by Federal Reserve fiat. There would be
restructuring: more use of technology, changes in land use, changes in government regulations, but the stress would be distributed around the globe, forcing all of the developed and developing nations to make painful choices.

But right now the house of Saud and the house of Bush see no reason to do this, and they have enough allies in countries eager to keep resource extraction economies to try to force the issue. However, increasingly, the rest of the developed world is turning against this system. And that means, as markets are wont to do, there will be a correction, and it will be short, sharp, sudden and surprising. The question is: will Europe run out of political capital before Bush runs out of capital to borrow against.

Outrageous!

Blair clashes with Cabinet over Wolfowitz nomination

Nick Mathiason
Sunday March 27, 2005
The Observer

Tony Blair has clashed with Cabinet members in a bitter row over the nomination of the neo-conservative US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, as president of the World Bank.

International Development Secretary Hilary Benn is said to be furious that Blair kept him in the dark over the nomination, which was announced by President George Bush two weeks ago.

Benn has written to the Prime Minister outlining his frustrations. Sources close to Gordon Brown describe the Chancellor as 'incandescent' over the nomination. Blair was aware of Bush's plans for a month before they became public, and declined to tell either the Chancellor, who is a key IMF figure, or Benn, a World Bank board member.

http://www.guardian.co.uk - today

A Blend of Risks Makes the Dollars Outlook Grim

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/03/27/business/dollar.html