Translate

Feb 6, 2011

The Foreclosure "Industry"

 

From: Manuel Sotil <msotil@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 3:40 PM
Subject: The Foreclosure "Industry"
To: ReporterNotebook <RePorterNoteBook@gmail.com>


 It is said that Gerald Ford, upon learning that President Nixon kept a list of his enemies, remarked: "Any man who has to keep a list of his enemies has too many enemies."

 

 It strikes me that the term "enemies list" is something of an oxymoron, for if someone needs a list to be reminded of who his enemies are, maybe has no enemies, but merely hallucinations or mirages.


Similarly, when I read the term "foreclosure industry", it also strikes me as another oxymoron, for the word industry carries a connotation for creation, construction or building of something positive and the word foreclosure strikes me as a proposition for loss to both borrower and lender. 

 

 So far, I have never seen the term "prostitution industry", but now I have seen the term "foreclosure industry".


Perhaps the term "industry" only refers to the benefits accrued to the procurers or facilitators of either activity, regardless of the techniques applied or even of how it is accomplished, for even the demolition industry serves to undo unsafe or dangerous structures, or razes obsolete ones to clear the site for something better and more productive. 

 

 Perhaps the activities associated with the foreclosure process are as necessary as is prostitution. I hope no one who reads this has ever had any dealings with the firm of David Stern, one of the representatives of this "industry" as described in the following news article:

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110206/ap_on_bi_ge/us_the_foreclosure_king;_ylt=AkQJ1t9kxiEzPnD7A5z87Gtn.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTNscXJ0bDE0BGFzc2V0Ay9zL2FwLzIwMTEwMjA2L2FwX29uX2JpX2dlL3VzX3RoZV9mb3JlY2xvc3VyZV9raW5nBGNjb2RlA3B6YnVyBGNwb3MDNQRwb3MDNQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3JpZXMEc2xrA3RoZXJpc2VhbmRmYQ--

 

 But the application of the term "industry" to property foreclosure is just perhaps another manifestation of the Brave New World the neo cons have wrought and that we should start getting used to.

 

Manuel Sotil





--


Thank you and remember: 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Find useful articles and helpful tips on living with Fibromyalgia. Visit the Fibromyalgia Zone today!


Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

Is this the New Jewish-American Mindset?

 

She regularly writes about her faith in Judaism and is also known for her generally pro-Israel views. 


FEBRUARY 4, 2011 12:00 A.M.

Does Jimmy Carter Deserve To Be Sued?
 
The JEWISH-AMERICAN mindset of MONA CHAREN SAYS:

"He doesn't deserve censorship. But he does deserve the hassle."

More:



+++

Peace.

Michael Santomauro
ReporterNotebook@gmail.com

What sort of TRUTH is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth?
__._,_.___






--


Thank you and remember: 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Is this the New Jewish-American Mindset?

 

FEBRUARY 4, 2011 12:00 A.M.

Does Jimmy Carter Deserve To Be Sued?
 
The JEWISH-AMERICAN mindset of MONA CHAREN SAYS:

"He doesn't deserve censorship. But he does deserve the hassle."

More:



+++

Peace.

Michael Santomauro
ReporterNotebook@gmail.com

What sort of TRUTH is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth?
__._,_.___





--


Thank you and remember: 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Feb 5, 2011

Alan Hart: Israel's Right To Exist?

 

  Israel's Right To Exist?

By Alan Hart

November 03, 2009 "Information Clearing House" -- -- On Monday 12 October, Prime Minister Netanyahu opened the Knesset's winter session by blasting the Goldstone Report that accuses Israel of committing war crimes and vowing that he would never allow Israelis be tried for them. But that was not his main message. It was an appeal, delivered I thought with a measure of desperation, to the "Palestinian leadership", presumably the leadership of "President" Abbas and his Fatah cronies, leaders who are regarded by very many if not most Palestinians as American-and-Israeli stooges at best and traitors at worst.

Netanyahu again called on this leadership to agree to recognise Israel as a Jewish state, saying this was, and remains, the key to peace. And he went on and on and on about it.

"For 62 years the Palestinians have been saying 'No' to the Jewish state. I am once again calling upon our Palestinian neighbours – say 'Yes' to the Jewish state. Without recognition of the Israel as the state of the Jews we shall not be able to attain peace… Such recognition is a step which requires courage and the Palestinian leadership should tell its people the truth – that without this recognition there can be no peace… There is no alternative to Palestinian leaders showing courage by recognising the Jewish state. This has been and remains the true key to peace."

As Ha'aretz noted in its report, Netanyahu's demand for Palestinian acceptance of Israel as a Jewish state is for him "a way on ensuring recognition of Israel's right to exist as opposed to merely recognising Israel" (my emphasis). This, as Ha'aretz added, is the recognition which Netanyahu and many other Israelis see as the real core of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In the name of pragmatism, willingness to "merely to recognise" Israel – meaning to accept and live in peace with an Israel inside its pre-June '67 borders – has long been the formal Palestinian and all-Arab position. Why does it stop short of recognising Israel's "right to exist", and why, really, does it matter so much to Zionism that Palestinians recognise this right?

The answer is in the following.

According to history as written by the winner, Zionism, Israel was given its birth certificate and thus legitimacy by the UN Partition Resolution of 29 November 1947. This is propaganda nonsense.

  • In the first place the UN without the consent of the majority of the people of Palestine did not have the right to decide to partition Palestine or assign any part of its territory to a minority of alien immigrants in order for them to establish a state of their own.
  • Despite that, by the narrowest of margins, and only after a rigged vote, the UN General Assembly did pass a resolution to partition Palestine and create two states, one Arab, one Jewish, with Jerusalem not part of either. But the General Assembly resolution was only a proposal – meaning that it could have no effect, would not become policy, unless approved by the Security Council.
  • The truth is that the General Assembly's partition proposal never went to the Security Council for consideration. Why not? Because the U.S. knew that, if approved, it could only be implemented by force given the extent of Arab and other Muslim opposition to it; and President Truman was not prepared to use force to partition Palestine.
  • So the partition plan was vitiated (became invalid) and the question of what the hell to do about Palestine – after Britain had made a mess of it and walked away, effectively surrendering to Zionist terrorism – was taken back to the General Assembly for more discussion. The option favoured and proposed by the U.S. was temporary UN Trusteeship. It was while the General Assembly was debating what do that Israel unilaterally declared itself to be in existence – actually in defiance of the will of the organised international community, including the Truman administration.

The truth of the time was that the Zionist state, which came into being mainly as a consequence of pre-planned ethnic cleansing, had no right to exist and, more to the point, could have no right to exist UNLESS … Unless it was recognised and legitimized by those who were dispossessed of their land and their rights during the creation of the Zionist state. In international law only the Palestinians could give Israel the legitimacy it craved.

And that legitimacy was the only thing the Zionists could not and cannot take from the Palestinians by force.

No wonder Prime Minister Netanyahu is more than a little concerned on this account.

Israel's leaders have always known the truth summarised above. It's time for the rest of the world to know it.

Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East. Author of Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews: The False Messiah (Zionism, the Real Enemy of the Jews). He blogs on www.alanhart.net
 

 

Click on "comments" below to read or post comments

 Comments (175)


--


Thank you and remember: 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Find useful articles and helpful tips on living with Fibromyalgia. Visit the Fibromyalgia Zone today!


Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

Zionist Mindset: Carter doesn’t deserve censorship. But he does deserve the "hassle."

 

Does Jimmy Carter Deserve To Be Sued? 
MONA CHAREN says:
He doesn't deserve censorship. But he does deserve the hassle.





Peace.
Michael Santomauro 
@ 917-974-6367 

What sort of TRUTH is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth?

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

ALISON WEIR: Egypt, the US and the Israel Lobby

 


http://www.israel-palestinenews.org/2011/02/critical-connections-egypt-us-and.html

In CounterPunch and Antiwar.com

Critical Connections

Egypt, the US and the Israel Lobby

By ALISON WEIR

Minimally explored in all the coverage of the momentous Egyptian uprising taking place over the last 10 days are the Israeli connections.

A central and critical reality is that it is US tax money that has propped up Hosni Mubarak's despotic regime over the past 30 years, and that this money has flowed, from the beginning, largely on behalf of Israel.

Israel is generally a significant factor in events in the Middle East, and to understand ongoing happenings it is important to understand the historic and current Israeli connections.

The violent creation, perpetuation, and expansion of a state based on ethnic expulsion of the majority inhabitants has been central to Middle East dynamics ever since Israel was created by European and American Zionists in 1948 as a self-identified "Jewish State."

Israeli leaders and outside observers realized from the very beginning that the only way to maintain such a violently imposed, ethnically based nation-state was through military dominance of the region. For Israel to achieve this military dominance required two things:

(1) The creation of a military more powerful than all the others in the region combined. Israel has achieved this through a uniquely massive influx of US tax dollars and technology, occasionally purloined but largely procured through the machinations of its lobby. (Among other things, Israel has several hundred nuclear weapons, a fact almost never mentioned by American media or the American government.)

(2) The prevention of any other nation in the region from becoming a threat. Israel has attained this goal through several strategies: divide and conquer techniques, direct invasions and attacks (or pushing the U.S. to carry out attacks), and the propping up of despots who would openly or tacitly agree (sometimes in return for similarly large influxes of American tax money) not to support the rights of those oppressed and ethnically cleansed by Israel.

For the past 30-plus years, Egypt has been among those despotic regimes supported by the U.S. and Israel in return for turning its back on Palestinians.

The Egypt-Israeli peace treaty of 1979 has occasionally been mentioned in news reports on the current uprising. That treaty was an arrangement in which the Egyptian leader of the time, Anwar Sadat, stopped opposing Israel's previous ethnic cleansing of close to a million indigenous Palestinian Muslims and Christians (at least 750,000 in 1947-49 and an additional 200,000 in 1967). This removed the most populous and politically significant country from the Arab front opposing Israel's illegal actions and led the way for other nations to "normalize" relations with the abnormal situation in Palestine.

In return, Israel gave back to Egypt the Sinai, Egyptian land it had illegally annexed in its 1967 war of aggression. (Egypt had almost managed to re-conquer this land and more in 1973, but the most massive airlift in American history, engineered by Henry Kissinger under pressure from the Israeli lobby, was sent to Israel, preventing this outcome.)

Also in return, the United States agreed to give Egypt more US tax money than any other nation, with the exception of Israel. Since 1979, Egypt has received an annual average of close to $2 billion in economic and political aid /a/ from American taxpayers (most of whom have known nothing about this use of our money). /3/ The arrangement has allowed Mubarak to stay in power for decades despite periodic attempts by Egyptians to free themselves from his ruthless rule.

At the same time, it's important to note that the U.S., as broker of the peace treaty, gave Israel even greater rewards: guaranteeing Israel's oil supplies for the next fifteen years; assuring Israel of American support in the event of violations; committing to be 'responsive' to Israel's military and economic requirements; and promising a variety of major transfers of technology and aid, including $3 billion to relocate two Israeli air bases out of the Sinai, where, as journalist Donald Neff noted, they had no right to be in the first place.

In fact, the American financial arrangement with Israel, which had begun years before Egypt's, has been far cozier than Egypt's: Israel gets considerably more money from the US, even though its population is one-tenth of Egypt's; there is little U.S. oversight of how it uses that money; and, unlike Egypt, which receives its allotment monthly, Israel receives its handout in a lump sum at the very beginning of the fiscal year (which means that Americans then pay interest for the rest of the year on money that the government has already given away, while Israel makes interest on it).

In the cases of both Israel and Egypt, the Israel lobby's role in procuring this U.S. tax money has been central. While this fact is largely missing from US media reports and many liberal/left analyses, it is frequently referred to in Israeli and Jewish media. For example, a current Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) report states: "The question of whether to stake a claim in the protests against 30 years of President Hosni Mubarak's autocracy is a key one for the pro-Israel lobby and pro-Israel lawmakers because of the role they have played in making Egypt one of the greatest beneficiaries of U.S. aid."

As conditions change in Egypt, U.S. lawmakers known for their allegiance to Israel are evaluating what to do about U.S aid. Many such Israel partisans have particularly powerful and relevant positions, such as Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), the ranking Democrat on the foreign operations subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee; Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee; Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.), the ranking Democrat on the House Middle East subcommittee; Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), ranking member on the Foreign Affairs committee and the author of last year's sweeping Iran sanctions law; and Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev), member of the subcommittee on the Middle East of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. A person close to the Israel lobby notes: "No matter what happens, clearly one of the top criteria Congress is likely to use is Egypt's approach to its peace treaty obligations with Israel."

Through the years a variety of Egyptian groups have opposed the Egyptian regime, some using violence (while the regime has used greater violence against them). This is virtually always reported without context and in extremely negative terms, without noting that it is routine for resistance movements to use violence; the American Revolutionary War was not known for its nonviolence. Yet, Israeli-centric U.S. media rarely discuss this.

In recent years, Mubarak has collaborated with Israel in closing off the Gaza Strip, largely imprisoning 1.5 million men, women, and children, resulting in a humanitarian disaster in which children suffer malnutrition, stunting, and trauma, and 300 Gazan patients have died through lack of essential medical supplies or being denied exit passes for medical care. Egyptian citizens, furious at their nation's complicity in this cruelty, have been powerless to stop it.

Israel has long worked to create enmity between Egypt and the U.S. In the early 1950s the Israeli secret service, the Mossad, hatched a plan to firebomb areas in Egypt where Americans gathered -- and to make these attacks appear to be the work of Muslim extremists. The plot was discovered and caused a scandal in Israel known as the "Lavon Affair," but few Americans have ever heard of it. Some analysts suspect that other such plots succeeded and that the little-known Israeli attack on the U.S. Navy ship USS Liberty may have been a similar false-flag operation. (Certainly, there is little doubt that the U.S. would have attacked Egypt if Liberty crewmembers had not succeeded, against all odds, in getting a distress signal out before Israel succeeded in sinking the ship with all men aboard.)

Another little-discussed result of the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty was the creation of an international peacekeeping force in the Sinai, known as the Multinational Force and Observers (MFO), charged with mediating between Egypt and Israel.  It is telling that this force was not placed on Israeli land but instead occupies Egyptian territory.

Its current head is Ambassador David M. Satterfield, an American diplomat who served extensively in the Middle East, was Senior Advisor on Iraq for former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and held a number of other high positions in the state department, including Deputy Assistant Secretary of State.

In 2005 Satterfield was named as having provided classified information to an official of the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group, AIPAC. According to documents, Satterfield had discussed secret national security matters in at least two meetings with AIPAC official Steven J. Rosen, who was subsequently indicted by the U.S. Justice Department (later quashed over the objections of the FBI.)

In 2004 Satterfield presided at a State Department conference on the 1967 war. A Washington Report on Middle East Affairs report on this conference stated that Satterfield repeatedly referred to Palestinian terrorism while failing to mention Israel's brutal attacks on Palestinian civilians. The article reports "Satterfield's remarks dampened audience expectations for an even-handed U.S. approach to peacemaking."

Among those in the audience at the conference's panel on the USS Liberty, though not on the panel itself were USS Liberty survivors, trying to tell their story. State Department moderator Marc Susser quickly cut them off, and his treatment of the survivors reportedly "bordered on abusive."

Now, David Satterfield is heading up international forces occupying Egyptian land charged with being a "neutral" mediator between Egypt and Israel.

It is unknown whether his conversations with AIPAC continue.

#

Alison Weir is President of the Council for the National Interest and Executive Director of If Americans Knew. Citations for this article can be seen at Israel-Palestine: The Missing Headlines

Partial sources:
1. A good short history available online is "The Origin of the Palestine Israel Conflict"
2. 3. FALLEN PILLARS by Donald Neff, cited online in
Richard Curtiss book review of "Deliberate Deceptions: Facing the Facts About The U.S.-Israeli Relationship," by Paul Findley: http://wrmea.com/component/content/article/148-1993-june/7184-deliberate-deceptions-facing-the-facts-about-the-us-israeli-relationship.html

3. Congressional Research Service:
4. "Sadat's Jerusalem Trip Begins Difficult Path of Egyptian-Israeli Peace
Print E-mail," Donald Neff, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, October/November 1998, pages 83-85:
6. "Dilemma of pro-Israel groups: To talk Egypt or not," Ron Kampeas, JTA, February 1, 2011:
7. "Health Ministry in Gaza Warns of Medicine Shortage," IMEMC, Feb 3, 2011
8. "Israel Honors Egyptian Spies 50 Years After Fiasco," Reuters. Haaretz, March 30, 2005:
"The Lavon Affair: When Israel Firebombed U.S. Installations," Richard H. Curtiss,
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July 1992, pages 41-42, 86:
10. "U.S. Diplomat Is Named in Secrets Case," David Johnston and James Risen, New York Times, August 18, 2005 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/18/politics/18inquire.html

"Lawyers credit Obama team for dismissing AIPAC case," Ron Kampeas, JTA, May 1, 2009:
11. Those Not Invited to Speak Steal the Show at State Department Liberty Discussion," Delinda C. Hanley, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 2004:


--
Alison Weir
President, Council for the National Interest
Executive Director, If Americans Knew


"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"



--


Thank you and remember: 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Meet the New Boss, Same As the Old Boss

 




Is El Baradei An Insider?

Mohamed El Baradei

The following sounds like a plot to a movie and yet it really seems true. I hate to fan the flames of conspiracy within the opposition movement in Egypt and of course by doing so the rest of the Arab world, but I have been doing some mild research with exactly who Mohamed El Baradei is connected to.  It has not taken me long to discover a few things and dear readers this does not mean I am not in support of the Egyptian people's current protest movement and need for real substantive change, but I am warning that the people who claim to be leading are none other than Western plants.

If one looks at Mohamed El Baradei 's dossier he seems quite impressive.  He was chased out of Egypt by Mubarak and remained outside for 12 years until his return last week.  He was also the head of the IAEA.  OK so not much there right?  Well doing some deeper research it seems that Mohamed El Baradei has been connected to the CFR (Council On Foreign Relations).  In fact the whole notion that a united front of parties including both Western Liberals and the Muslim Brotherhood could somehow work together was already set into motion well before the current crisis.  In a book by Bruce Rutherford entitled After Mubarak, the author explain how the Muslim Brotherhood, the judiciary, and the business sector can work in parallel, if not exactly together, to influence Egypt's political future.  CFR associate Steven A. Cook in fact showcased this book in his April 2009 article on CFR's Foreign Affairs website. This is well before the current crisis.

In Comes El Baradei

Back to Mohamed El Baradei.  To connect the dots, the Western press has, since the protests in Egypt began, pushed Mohamed El Baradei as the uniting figure for all of the above mentioned groups.  One more dot should connect who this man really is working for: The International Crisis Group. This organization is heavily funded by George Soros, a man experienced in funding revolutions and placing leaders he wants and believes will push for globalization in that country. Well Mohamed El Baradei sits on the International Crisis Group's Board.

I am all for a new Egypt, but please Egyptians, be careful who you replace Mubarak with.  You may just find yourselves answering to to a whole new boss.



Peace.
Michael Santomauro 
@ 917-974-6367 

What sort of TRUTH is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth?

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___