Warning

.

This video may contain images depicting the reality and horror of war/violence and should only be viewed by a mature audience.

linktv

Mosaic needs your help! Donate here: http://linktv.org/contribute

"Ethnic Clashes in Israel," Al Jazeera TV, Qatar
"No Room for Failure for Hamas and Fateh," Abu Dhabi TV, UAE
"Who Controls Ein el Hilweh?," New TV, Lebanon
"Who Invented Tabouleh?," Future TV, Lebanon
"US Financial Crash affects Jordanian Economy," Jordan TV, Jordan
"Al Sahwa Faces an Uncertain Future in Iraq," Al Arabiya TV, UAE
"Losing Ground to the Taliban," Al Jazeera English, Qatar
"Meltdown in the Desert," Link TV, USA
Produced for Link TV by Jamal Dajani

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.1655753&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

The advertisement is for New TV, an independently owned channel that I would say follows a party line of "afflicting the comfortable" rather than taking sides with either of the major political alignments.

Here it is:

The image is of a New TV check, with an Arabic text violator super-imposed over it. It reads: Freedom of the press is priceless.

New TV and its owner, Tahsin Khayyat, have been the subject of lawsuits and court cases over the past few years, brought about by various public figures who consider themselves injured parties. The channel has one of the ugliest microphones in Lebanese television, and its production values are not always the highest. But most of the injured are men of power who could stand to be taken down a peg or two for their failings (nepotism, corruption, pandering ... the usual political temptations). Their attacks on the channel remind me of the various Arab governments that have thrown Al Jazeera reporters out of their countries for offending the powers-that-be.

Keep on broadcasting, New TV. And keep on reminding the Lebanese public that a free press requires investigative work, and not just the "reportage" of replaying one politician's press conference after another.

Pull The Hair Plug On This Guy

by Ann Coulter 

If Sarah Palin had made just one of the wildly inaccurate statements smugly uttered by Sen. Joe Biden in last week's vice presidential debate, there would have been 3-inch headlines in newspapers across America. (I can almost hear Katie Couric asking me, "Which newspapers?")

These weren't insignificant errors, such as when Biden said, "Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington or go to Katie's restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me where I spend a lot of time, and you ask anybody in there whether or not the economic and foreign policy of this administration has made them better off in the last eight years." 

It turns out that Katie's restaurant, where Biden gets his feel for the average American, closed 20 years ago. The only evidence that he spends any time in Home Depot is that it appears that a pipe wrench fell on his head one too many times. 

Palin would surely have been forced to withdraw from the ticket had she said something like that, but most of Biden's errors were not trifling mistakes like these. They were lengthy Lyndon LaRouche-like disquisitions that were pure fantasy from beginning to end. 

For example, Biden said about Hezbollah: "When we kicked -- along with France -- we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon." Hezbollah was never kicked out of Lebanon.

He continued: "I said and Barack said, 'Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't, Hezbollah will control it.'" This is madness -- Lebanon is not a NATO country, nor had any NATO country been attacked by Lebanon.

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of foreign policy.

Biden also stoutly denied that Obama ever said he would sit down with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Liberals find it hilarious that McCain can't use a computer keyboard on account of his war injuries, but Biden is apparently unaware of the Internet, because there are clips all over the Internet of Obama saying exactly that during the CNN/YouTube debate last year.

Biden might have remembered that debate since: (1) He was there, and (2) he later attacked Obama's answer, telling the National Press Club in August 2007: "Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected president? Absolutely, positively, no."

And that's still not all! Obama's own Web site says: "Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iranwithout preconditions."

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to remember well-known facts.

Biden also gave a long speech at the debate on vice president Dick Cheney's "dangerous" belief that "he's part of the legislative branch." The great constitutional scholar Biden cited Article I of the Constitution as proof that Cheney "works in the executive branch" and has "no authority relative to the Congress." Biden huffily added: "He should understand that. Everyone should understand that." 

Palin would have had to deny that Alaska is a state in the union in order to say something comparably stupid. 

Article II, not I, describes the executive branch. Someone tell Biden, who is supposed to be a lawyer. Apart from getting the Articles of the Constitution mixed up, what on earth does Biden mean when he says that the vice president "has no authority relative to Congress," apart from breaking ties?

The Constitution makes him president of the senate every day of the week. I realize that Biden may not be able to count to two, but Article I says the vice president is president of one of the two houses of Congress -- the one Biden is in, for crying out loud -- which is what you might call "authority relative to Congress."

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of the Constitution.

In one especially hallucinatory answer, Biden authoritatively stated: "With Afghanistan, facts matter, Gwen. ... We spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country."

According to the Congressional Research Service, since 9/11, we've spent $172 billion in Afghanistan and $653 billion in Iraq. The most money spent in Iraq came in 2008, when we have been spending less than $3 billion a week. So by Biden's calculations, we've spent only about $9 billion "on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country." There isn't even a "9" in $172 billion.

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of math.

In the same answer, Biden went on to claim that "John McCain voted against a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty that every Republican has supported."

The last nuclear test ban treaty the Senate voted on was the one Clinton signed in the '90s. As The New York Times editorialized on the Senate vote a few years later: "Last week, Senate Republicans thundered 'no' to the nuclear test ban treaty, handing the White House its biggest defeat since health care in 1994." Forty-nine Republicans voted against the treaty; only four liberal Republicans voted for it. That's the treaty Biden says "every Republican has supported."

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to function as vice president. 

-----------
Read more articles like this at HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE!
http://www.humanevents.com/

For Sarah Palin merchandise:

"Sarah Palin is a Babe" merchandise:
http://www.cafepress.com/palinisababe

"Sarah Palin, A Real American Beauty" merchandise:
http://www.cafepress.com/sarahbeauty

"So it aint so Joe" merchandise:
http://www.cafepress.com/aintsojoe

here.

...2008 is the year in which "fact checking" of political ads and statements became a full-blown journalistic fad. May it soon go the way of streaking and Mexican jumping beans. The "fact check" is opinion journalism or criticism, masquerading as straight news. The object is not merely to report facts but to pass a judgment. The Washington Post's Fact Checker blog ends each assessment with between one and four "Pinocchios," just like movie reviewers giving out stars.

Mr. Taranto is absolutely correct that many of the quick "Fact Checks" published and aired by so many news agencies these days are really thinly disguised editorials and, as such, are entirely subjective. So much for sticking to the facts.

Continuing on the same theme, Mr. Taranto pointed out in his October 9th column contradictory "fact check" conclusions reached by CNN and ABC, respectively, about the very same claim made by John McCain in Tuesday's presidential debate. McCain had iterated this claim in other ways in the past, but here are the words he used Tuesday:

In Lebanon, I stood up to President Reagan, my hero, and said, if we send Marines in there, how can we possibly beneficially affect this situation? And said we shouldn't. Unfortunately, almost 300 brave young Marines were killed.

Referring to exactly the same statement, ABC reported it to be false, and CNN reported it to be true. They both elaborated on their findings, of course, each attempting to summarize in just a few inches of writing the real story that actually took place, and each leaving out relevant (or potentially relevant) chunks of information that might have shed a different light on the candidate's claim.

Although the problem here is obvious, it's not likely to change any time soon.  As long as there are such things as reporters tasked with capsulizing large quantities of information in not much time, news agencies dependant on drama for audience retention, and such emotionally-charged subject matter, the news, as we know it, will be delivered to us through an imperfect -- sometimes grossly skewed -- lens.

Such is life, and such is politics.  But as a citizen and voter, I still feel motivated to at least attempt to sort through some of the facts myself in the hope that maybe a glimmer of actual truth might come through here and there.  To that end, the next few posts I make will be my own "fact checks" of certain election claims made by Senators McCain, Obama, and Biden, and Governor Palin.  Will this be the blind leading the blind?  Very possibly.  Will it be helpful to anyone?  I don't know, but I hope so.

If all else fails, there's always Saturday Night Live.

"[O]n Thursday June 5th, 2008, between 1:30 and 2:00 a.m., Salwa Salah and Sara Siureh (both 16 years old) were arrested by the ISA [Israeli Security Agency] at their respective homes in Bethlehem. In both cases, Israeli forces used excessive force when they arrested the girls by handcuffing and blindfolding Salwa and by storming Sara’s house and shouting at her. Both girls are relatives (cousins) and one of the girls is still at school. The ISA claimed that the girls were involved in militant activities. However, no charge has ever been issued against them."

The girls were issued administrative detention orders for four and five months respectively (Sara's was subsequently reduced to four months on appeal). According to the Israeli human rights organisation B'Tselem, Israel's use of administrative detention - that is, "detention without charge or trial, authorized by administrative order rather than by judicial decree" - "blatantly violates" international law, making "a charade out of the entire system of procedural safeguards in both domestic and international law regarding the right to liberty and due process." Last week, one day after the girls were due to be released, their detention orders were extended for another three months. "The military judge claimed the girls are still 'dangerous' despite the fact that the military prosecutor has provided no information since the girls were arrested." Addameer, a prisoners' rights NGO, describes their treatment thus far:

"Since their arrest, Salwa and Sara have been subjected to several violations of their human rights. In addition to the excessive use of force during the arrests, the girls also reported that during a transfer from Addamoun to al-Ramle prison on 15 July, they suffered extremely abusive behavior from the female police officer escorting them. In particular, the officer pushed them forcefully with her hands and shouted at them. When they arrived at Ramle prison, according to the existing procedure, Salwa and Sara were searched: they were asked to strip totally naked while a female officer searched their hair, body and mouth with gloves. They felt the search was humiliating. Moreover, from the date of their arrest to 21 July, none of the girls had been allowed any contact with their families. In the meantime they at least had the opportunity to meet and speak with their lawyer provided by Addameer...

"Neither Salwa nor Sara have been informed of any charges against them, nor the reason for their arrest and detention, thereby violating fundamental due process and rendering their detention illegal and arbitrary under international law.

Israeli law permits detention orders to be issued for up to six months, at which point the case is reviewed by a Military Commander who can then extend the order for another six months, subject to the approval of a military court. This process can be repeated indefinitely. Addameer reports that,

"[c]urrently, there are approximately 750 Palestinians now in administrative detention. Of these there are approximately 13 Palestinians under the age of 18 years old."

Recall that, using Cpl. Shalit's capture as a pretext, the Israeli government has trapped, bombed and starved the residents of Gaza for over two years, killing hundreds of people, driving an already desperate population to "abject destitution" and creating an "unprecedented humanitarian crisis" (.pdf). Recall also that, purportedly in response to the capture by Hizbullah of two soldiers in July 2006, Israel invaded Lebanon, killing over 1,100 civilians, demolishing tens of thousands of homes, systematically destroying civilian infrastructure and saturating villages and fields with over a million cluster bombs.

If these are acceptable responses to the capture of a soldier or a couple of soldiers, and many mainstream American and British commentators are indeed sympathetic, what, one wonders, are Palestinians permitted to do in order to secure the release of Salwa Salah, Sara Siureh and the hundreds of other Palestinian civilians held hostage by Israel? More to the point, what are we to make of those for whom the capture of Shalit, Goldwasser and Regev were acts of unspeakable barbarity, but whose reaction to Israel's kidnapping of Palestinian civilians is, at best, indifferent silence?

This is to announce that by next week the Ayam Beirut Al Cinema'iya will be commencing with a very large number of films to be screened in Beirut, Lebanon. With 10 feature films, 15 Shorts, 18 Documentaries and more.

Ayam Beirut Al Cinema’iya is a non-competitive biennial film festival for independent cinema and video productions from the Arab world, organized by Beirut DC. The festival's details are as follows:

• When:
  
  Friday 17 October 2008 8:00 PM
• Until:
  
  26 October 2008
• Where:
  
  Beirut DC
  
  Furn El-Chebback, Selim El-Khoury Street
  
  Beirut - Lebanon
• Contact:
  
  ayam[at]beirutdc[dot]org
• Visit:
  • Ayyam Beirut Film Festival Website
  • Beirut DC
  • Ayyam Beirut Al Cinema'iya's Facebook Group

Nevertheless, over the last few years I have begun to notice a common theme that binds them all together: every calamity creates inordinate amounts of trash. I first really noticed this in 2006, after Israel attacked Beirut and laid large parts of the city in ruins.  A familiar story, unfortunately. But then the New York Times ran a report in the aftermath of the attacks that contained an amazing image. A traffic jam of  trucks carrying rubble curve off into the distance, on their way to a landfill stuck out into an otherwise picture-perfect Mediterranean sea, on a perfectly brilliant day. A billboard on the beach advertises some kind of tourist attraction---picturesque rocks rearing up out of a deep-blue sea--a tourguide's version of the Mediterranean incongruously stuck into an a much more painful and intractable reality. Then again, that little point being pounded into terra firma by those earth movers and grabbers in the far distance may just be the foundation for an upscale hotel meant to deliver on the promise contained in the billboard. The French call this kind of thing mise en abime, or "putting into the abyss." It's never been clear to me what the abyss has to do with such a playful device, but in this particular context I think I am staring straight into it.

Hurricane Katrina created an estimated 22 million tons of garbage, which comes to 3.5 million truckloads. It sat around for weeks and weeks on people's front lawns before local collection services figured out how to separate it--more or less, I am sure--into construction and demolition debris, household waste, and hazardous waste, all of which have different destinations. Construction and demolition debris, normally inert, went into Chef Menteur landfill, right next-door to an immigrant community, and into Bayou Sauvage and Chantilly.  Eventually the community managed to persuade local authorities that they deserved better than to live virtually on top of the disgusting stew people all over New Orleans wanted out of their yards as soon as possible. I wouldn't have believed it was inert either.

Most recently, Hurricane Ike created another mountain range of debris. My friend Barbara, who went to help in Red Cross shelters in the aftermath of the storm, spent time on Galveston. Her pictures of the trash created by the storm are mind-boggling.

Airplanes have broken through the walls of their hangars, noses hanging by a thread. Oddly crumpled monsters sit in the street, giving no hint of what they once might have been. Yards are carpeted with broken possessions. A pickup truck has straw sticking out of the cab, which must have started, pre-wind, in the pickup's bed.

What were once gardens now are strangely reminiscent of graveyards. Brick walls lie in piles outside the wood frames of houses still standing, while other houses have just buckled to earth, neatly depositing an intact roof at a graceful angle in the driveway. One desperate homeowner tried to sell his wreck without benefit of realtor, leaning a handpainted sign against the wreckage with the plea, "Make Offer."

All the devastation--$11 billion worth of trash--is going to go into local landfill in the next couple of weeks and will be covered up and over  by Waste Management, the nation's largest garbage collector headquartered just up the road in Houston, ready to receive the windfall.

As the British say, it's an ill wind that blows no one any good. But someone is bound to live within reach of the leachate plume that will eventually form downstream of wherever it goes.

The LA Times story I linked to above states that Americans can't get visas at the border, but that's not true. Americans can get visas at the Syrian borders with Lebanon and Jordan, but it usually takes 2-3 hours, or sometimes much longer.

It's hard to say if they heard that they couldn't get visas or just didn't want to wait at the border, but the whole story is pretty stupid, because once they got into Syria, they'd also have to exit illegally. And even if they managed to cross into Jordan illegally to go home, they wouldn't have an entrance stamp on their passports, so there's a good chance that they'd run into problems with the Jordanian authorities the next time they tried to leave the country.

Many people in Beirut were worried about them, fearing that they'd been kidnapped by salafist thugs in the north. Now it seems that the whole situation is entirely their fault. In addition to that, their obviously suspicious (and illegal) behavior will probably make it even more difficult for American journalists to work in Syria and for American travelers to get into Syria without a visa from the embassy in Washington. All for what? Bragging rights that they crossed illegally into Syria?

RISHON LEZION, Israel – I was mugged twice in the nine years that I lived in Boston. After seeing the reactions of nearby Bostonians at the time and Israelis to whom I have told the stories now, I can understand why Israel is more secure than people realize.

---
Copley Square and East Boston

Boston is usually safe – as long as one is not alone in parts of the Dorchester and Roxbury neighborhoods at night – because it is a college town. Roughly one-fourth of the city is comprised of people between the ages of 18 and 22. People walk around at night, even alone, and everyone normally feels safe.

While I was working at my first journalism job out of college in 2002 as a staff reporter for The Boston Courant, a weekly neighborhood newspaper, I was on my way to the Copley Square subway station to cover a Boston Public Health Commission meeting in the Fenway neighborhood. On the way, I stopped to have a cigarette before walking down the stairs to the station. (Yes, it was a bad habit. Kids, don't ever start.)

Two young men walked up to me, and I can only describe them as stereotypical ghetto thugs. (I hate to describe them in this manner, but it is necessary to set the scene accurately.) One was a small-but-built guy who wore baggy clothes, and the other was a large, fat guy who needed to lean against a post next to me because he had obviously smoked too much marijuana.

The first guy stood right in front of my and stared into my eyes. "What do you have in your pockets?" he demanded in a rough, menacing voice. I froze, partly out of surprise and partly out of fear. I reached into my pocket and pulled out the pack of cigarettes. "That's all," I said with a shrug. He grabbed it out of my hands, and the two thugs walked away. I was glad that I had intentionally not mentioned my wallet and mobile phone.

The thing I remember most about this experience is that it happened at rush hour. There were dozens of people within a few hundred feet, and no one said or did anything. After the two guys walked away, I looked around because people were looking in my direction. Everyone nearby lowered his head and turned away when we made eye contact.

Two years later, I found myself alone on the Fourth of July because I had just flown back from visiting my family in Illinois. My friends were out of town, so I went to a neighborhood pub in East Boston to celebrate. I was walking home when two men, seemingly out of the blue, grabbed me from behind, held me by the shoulders, and placed a knife across the front of my neck. I offered my wallet and cell phone, which they took and then ran away. As I stumbled home (my legs felt half-paralyzed out of shock), I saw that a small group of people were lounging on their front porch not very far away. They had done nothing to help. In addition, I was obviously shaken and possibly stumbling, but they did not even ask whether I was all right.

---
A Single Community

In several of my prior letters, I described the strong civil society that has developed in Israel as a result of Jewish tradition and tribal identification, along with the history of the communal farms named kibbutzim and the desire to unify in the face of numerous, perceived threats. I fully realized this while telling the two prior stories to my Israeli friends.

Israelis are shocked and horrified to hear that no one helped me while I was being mugged (or possibly something worse). They told me that, in Israel, if someone were being attacked on the street, every single
person nearby would run over to help – and most likely, to be blunt, kick the crap out of the bad guy. Everyone looks out for everyone else. (It also helps that nearly all Israelis have some degree of army training as a result of the mandatory military service after high school here. As I heard it put once somewhere, an Israeli has more courage in his finger than most people have in their entire bodies.)

In addition, violent crime is also extremely rare in Israel. In the eight months that I have lived here, I have yet to see a news report on a random mugging, murder, or rape. Despite what people in the West see on the news, Israel is extremely safe. Terrorism has been extremely rare for years, and more people die in traffic accidents each year than the number who have been killed in all wars and terrorist attacks combined. Most violence is either related to the Russian mafia, traffic accidents, or drunken brawls in bars. No one, for example, ever breaks into a random house and kills or rapes the person inside. Everyone walks around at night, even alone. On some level, everyone looks out for everyone. Statistically, Israel is safer than most major American cities – the chance of being killed in a suicide bombing might be one in ten thousand while the chance of being murdered in many parts of the United States might be one in five thousand.

In major American cities, a person can feel alone even though he lives among millions of people. This never happens in Israel. People are care about everyone (unless they work in customer service). It is hard to describe the level of open affection in interpersonal relations in Israel to someone who has never been here, but I will try.

People are warm and friendly to a degree that I have never seen anywhere else. During conversations, people touch and hug each other all the time. Everyone (even men) embraces and kisses on the cheek when they meet someone – sometimes even if it is for the first time. Just the other night, a good male friend of mine gave me a hug from behind and a kiss on the shoulder when he saw me sitting at a local pub. Whenever someone is eating at a restaurant or somewhere in public, nearly everyone who passes by – whether he is a friend or stranger – will tell him, "Behteyahvon!" This is the Hebrew phrase that roughly translates to "Bon appetite!"

At first these differences are uncomfortable to people who, like me, grew up in the United States, where people have larger amounts of private, personal space between each other and people, especially men, are less affectionate in public (or at all). But after one becomes used to the cultural differences, it becomes very heartwarming and endearing.

While I wrote about some discouraging trends in modern Israeli society in my prior letter, it is still true that people here are generally friendly and warm (most of the time). After all, Israelis tend to believe, to varying degrees, that they only have each other in the entire world.

The primary reason that I am optimistic about Israel's future is that I have seen and understood the Israeli mindset. The close, civil society here brought Israel through threats of extermination in the wars of 1948, 1967, and 1973, as well as through two intifadas and sixty years of a turbulent existence. Israelis can get through anything – even the political, social, and religious differences described in my prior letters – because they know that they will always have each other.

Still, many of the specific problems I have mentioned seem to be improving, especially when one compares Israel today to decades ago.

---
Brighter than it Seems

-- Israel is much more secure. Although Israeli and American conservatives always claim that Israel is constantly facing threats to its very existence, this is no longer true. If Israel had lost any of the wars of 1948, 1967, and 1973, the country would likely have been invaded and destroyed by the surrounding Arab countries. (Many Israelis began digging their own graves in 1967, and rabbis started reciting Psalms in the Israeli legislature.)

However, everything has changed with most of countries that border Israel. The Jewish state is at peace with Egypt and Jordan. Iraq is no longer a threat since the United States toppled Saddam Hussein. Saudi Arabia is pursuing a peace plan to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Lebanon is occupied with its own internal battle with Hizbollah. Despite Syria's connection to Iran, the country is having peace talks with Israel. Syria's military alone is no match for the Jewish state.

Israel does face threats from Hamas in the Gaza Strip and Hizbollah in southern Lebanon. However, these terrorist groups do not threaten Israel's existence. Rockets fired into southwestern and northern Israel do kill a few people and cause minor damage in those places, but they cannot destroy the country. Since Israel built the controversial separation barrier between Israel proper and the West Bank, the number of suicide bombings has fallen to practically zero. (Suicide bombings, although horrific, cannot destroy a country either.)

-- Iran will not nuke Israel. The Jewish state would face an existential threat from Iranian nuclear weapons in the hands of Islamic extremists in the country's government. But Israel will never let that become a possibility. The Jewish state destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981 and (allegedly) Syria's in 2007. Israel, with or without U.S. assistance, will do the same to Iran. This country does not -- and cannot -- take threats lightly.

-- Everyone knows how to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Except for Israeli and Palestinian extremists, nearly all people agree that a peace plan will have the following: an Israeli withdrawal from all or most of the West Bank, a division of Jerusalem, and a cessation of terrorist attacks. The problem is with implementation: Minor, ultra-Orthodox political parties in Israeli governing coalitions veto any of these withdrawals, and the Palestinians have been fighting a low-grade civil war amongst themselves between the Fatah and Hamas political parties.

However, the fact that the vast majority of Israelis now recognize what a peace plan must entail is a good start. As the conflict continues year after year, more and more Israelis and Palestinians will start to move towards the center. No one, no matter how much of an ideologue, wants to live in a pressure-cooker forever. In the end, practical reality usually trumps impractical idealism.

-- Israeli society is becoming less fractured. As I wrote in a prior letter, there has been much social strife and division between Ashkenazi Jews (people with a European-Jewish culture), Mizrahi Jews (people with a Middle East-Jewish culture), and non-Jewish Israelis like Russians and Arabs. But this is slowly dissipating.

Israel is a small country, so everyone interacts with everyone all of the time. So people from these different communities frequently fall in love and have children. Now, for example, I have friends here who are half-Polish and half-Moroccan, half-Indian and half-American, and half-Iraqi and half-Romanian. The terms "Ashkenazi" and "Mizrahi" are increasingly obsolete.

When non-Jewish Russians moved to Israel following the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s through a loophole in immigration law, they faced much discrimination. But their children, now in their teens and early twenties, are as Israeli as Jewish Israelis. The first language of these non-Jews is Hebrew, not Russian. Their personalities are very Israeli, not Russian. As a result, they are just as Israeli as secular, Israeli Jews, and they fit into society very easily.

Although it will always be difficult for Arab Israelis to feel at home in a Jewish state, I think they are slowly moving in that direction. For example, I once saw a group of Arabs sitting in a hospital while I was visiting a friend's family member there. Surprisingly enough, they were speaking Hebrew amongst themselves. This can only be a good sign.

-- The influence of the ultra-Orthodox might be decreasing. As I wrote in a prior letter, religion in Israel is extremely polarized. Everyone is either completely secular or wholly Orthodox, and even the Orthodox world is divided:

    • Modern Orthodox (also called National Orthodox in Israel) Jews live in the modern world while remaining completely observant. They are also the primary inspiration behind the settlement movement in the West Bank.
    • Charedi (also called Ultra-Orthodox) Jews live in isolated neighborhoods and block out the outside world while rejecting any modernization of Judaism. While they do not recognize the State of Israel, they still rely on government subsidies instead of working to pay for their children, and they control most of the official religious establishment. (I discussed them in my first letter.)
    • Hasidic Jews who are very mystical and believe that their founding rabbi is the Messiah, even though he happens to be dead.

The ultra-Orthodox movement has been very harmful to Israel. They receive little secular education, they do not serve in the military, they work very little, they have numerous children (sometimes ten or more), and they survive on taxpayer dollars (er, shekels). Their rabbis in government positions are increasingly discriminatory against all other forms of Judaism, even other types of Orthodox Judaism. In charedi neighborhoods, people will throw stones at you if you drive through there on Shabbat or do anything else that violates Orthodox Jewish law.

But the pendulum might be starting to swing in the other direction. Incoming Prime Minister Tzipi Livni might be able to form a governing coalition that does not, for once, include Shas, the most powerful ultra-Orthodox political party. The finance minister passed a budget over charedi objections this year that did not increase the amount of money ultra-Orthodox families receive each month to pay for their children. Moreover, the charedi communities are not self-sustaining. Many of them have relied on wealthy parents and grandparents, but those funds are disappearing as the older generation passes away and the money is spent. Once the ultra-Orthodox community starts to lose influence, then Israel can start to move towards the center religiously.

-- The economy is gaining strength. Israel is largely a desert that is devoid of natural resources, so the country has had to rely mainly on one asset: Israeli brains. As a result, the country has become a worldwide leader in fields like high-tech and biotechnology that is on the same level as Silicon Valley and Bangalore, India. Israel is a country that is succeeding in a globalized world.

As New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman once theorized, no two countries that have a McDonald's have ever gone to war with each other.* The reasoning is that countries need to have a large middle class to have fast food establishments, and a place with a stable middle class wages war less often. (When people have more stuff, they are less willing to risk losing it through conflict. People are more willing to fight if they have nothing to lose.)

Well, Israel has many McDonald's and Burger Kings. As a result of Israel's growing economy, the country is generally becoming richer (although the gap between the rich and poor is also rising). Since the middle class is growing in Israel, it is likely that the public will generally be more willing to make necessary sacrifices for peace. This is also why it is important for the international community – and Israel – to help improve the Palestinian economy in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as well. If there were many McDonald's in Gaza, perhaps the Palestinians there would be less likely to support Hamas.

---
Signing Off, For Now

Well, this seems like an appropriate place to end my series, at least for now. I will be flying to the United States soon for a few weeks, and I'll be back in Israel in November. It will be interesting to see what will happen over the next several months.

* The recent war between Russia and Georgia may be an exception.

Prior letter: No Way Out (or, Stuck in the 1970s)

In the meantime, I am still greatly enjoying the amount of coverage the major Arab world news channels are giving to the election. Can you imagine Lebanese politicians agreeing to a town hall debate, in which they might face actual electoral competition, not to mention actual constituents? Can you imagine Mubarak allowing himself to be questioned by a news anchor? Can you imagine any major Arab minister putting himself in a position in which someone can tell him: your time for speaking is up?

I don't think that every country in the world should have a government that is a cookie-cutter version of the United States', but I do hope that seeing these debates gives people food for thought about what it means to have a national election that involves more than rubber-stamping the life-time tenure of the current office-holder.

Here are a few photos I took during Tuesday's debate, with apologies for the grainy quality of our "vintage" television screen.

Obama on Al-Jazeera, echoing McCain's suggestion that Warren Buffet would be a "good choice" for US Treasury Secretary:

McCain on Arabiya, with an explanatory bar stating that this is a televised debate between Obama and McCain four weeks before the election (Arabiya refers to them by name here; Jazeera refers to the "candidates' debate"):

Obama on Arabiya, saying that "America is in [the] worst economic crisis since 1929":

McCain on Arabiya, talking about the Senate and the bailout plan:

One thing that does not come through in these photographs was just how often the channels' text bars reported what Obama was saying. Many of the photos I took (which I am not posting here because they were either blurry or caught one of the candidates in an awkward post) showed McCain speaking, but with a text bar that focused on what Obama had said. It could have been a simple mis-coordination between the video crew and the text crew, but I have no photos of Obama with "McCain:" on the text bar.

So: if you are wondering which candidate these channels support - or at least which candidate's positions they believe viewers are more interested in - I would say that the answer is fairly clear.

The Original Maverick

The chattering class have burned up electrons and killed trees debating whether latent racism caused John McCain to hurl the dismissive and supremely rude "that one" at Barack Obama during their second debate. Much has been made about the campaign context of this remark -- the attacks on Obama's character, the use of Lee Atwater-style smear tactics on the stump, particularly by Sarah Palin, who seems determined to hang William Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright around Obama's neck like latter-day Willie Hortons.

But the race card didn't flip to the top of The Mule's mental deck while watching McCain so forcefully try to turn Obama into an inanimate object instead of the worthy opponent sitting just a few feet away. The image that leapt to mind was that of a grumpy Irish charwoman, muttering darkly about the endless perfidies of "Himself" -- husband or employer. Or, Maureen O'Hara, flying into furious high dudgeon, hurling invective at John Wayne, spitting a "that one" in reference to someone whose offensive conduct she was pinning on The Duke. Maybe that saloon harlot in "McLintock," maybe Chill Wills for drinking up the house bourbon again.

Instead of O'Hara's classic Celtic fire, McCain showed a curmudgeonly streak that revealed how deeply annoying and galling he finds Obama's surging popularity and cool, presidential demeanor. More to the point, McCain, who has made Maverick his middle name and has trumpeted his record as a reformer riding the Straight Talk Express, finds himself overtrumped by Obama's rocket-like rise as an agent of change.

A brief aside about the presidential term du jour, rapidly becoming so overused as to lose all meaning. The Mule was chagrined enough to blush bright crimson that it took a piece from CNN's droll Jeannie Moos to remind him that the origin of maverick comes from Sam Maverick, politician, lawyer, signer of the Texas Declaration of Independence and lackadaisical cattle baron. Ol' Sam refused to brand his free range cattle, declaring he didn't wish to cause them pain; his competitors thought this an underhanded way for Sam to claim any unbranded cattle as his own.

Sam's grandson was Maury Maverick, a famously liberal Congressman who was such a staunch New Dealer he offended conservative Texas Democrats like John Nance Garner, who helped chase him from office. And as Moos' hilarious piece on maverickdom points out, the descendents of Ol' Sam and Maury are none too pleased at McCain and Palin's use of the family name.

So endeth the history lesson. Back to the present.

The global market meltdown has the flow of fearful voters running straight toward Obama, making for a curious cross-current of the desire for change that the New Kid in Town personifies better than the Old Maverick and the far older political reflex of Americans trusting Democrats to take care of kitchen-table issues more than they trust Republicans.

Obama is deftly and relentless playing to this older reflex by emphasizing campaign promises to the middle class, leaving the message of change and his embodiment of something new and different largely unspoken. After all, a man of mixed racial heritage standing on the biggest stage in American politics is a pretty powerful image. But the threshold Obama needed to cross was showing himself to be of presidential stature and temperament during a face-to-face comparison with McCain -- he's done so twice.

Americans riveted on the greatest economic calamity since the Great Depression are on the scout for such reassurance, particularly the independents and fence-sitters that seem to be leaning Obama's way. But they are also intensely angry at Wall Street and looking for somebody to hang from the highest tree for the economic pain they're suffering. Obama hammering the middle-class gong was the smart play during the debate.

McCain finds himself double screwed. The economy isn't his strong suit; foreign policy and his courageous support of the troop surge in Iraq are his strengths. He was way late recognizing the peril of the meltdown and came off erratic and opportunistic when he bulled his way into the bailout negotiations. Once a champion of deregulation, he's now calling for a government buy-up of bad mortgages that sounds suspiciously like Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Depression-era Home Owners' Loan Corporation (see The Mule's earlier entry, FDR Redux). That has his conservative base, never much in love with Maverick Jack, gnashing their teeth and longing for Mitt Romney. It also has Maury Maverick, the staunch New Dealer, spinning in his grave.

But history shows the Home Owners' Loan Corporation was a successful, if largely unsung program. And Obama would be smart to ditch ads attacking this idea. The Mule says: steal it, claim it as your own and add it to your arsenal aimed at rescuing the middle class. Inherit the mantle of FDR. Make Ol' Maury smile.

The second screw from Tuesday's debate: Obama owns the title of game-changer. That's left McCain -- war hero, cocky jet pilot, tortured prisoner of war, son and grandson of great Naval warriors, straight-talking braveheart willing to buck his own party -- sputtering in frustration, forced to remind voters that he's been a maverick time and again. For The Mule, the mark of futility came in the first debate, when McCain reached way back in history to remind folks that he stood up to Ronald Reagan and opposed Dutch's 1983 decision to send Marines into Lebanon, an intervention that ended shortly after the barracks bombing that killed 241 servicemen. It was a reference to a tragic event few remember instead of the ringing reminder of maverickdom McCain meant for it to be.

Bile and frustration bubbled to the surface Tuesday night, causing McCain to spit out his "that one." And in that moment, he looked and sounded old and bitter, an Old Maverick whose time has passed.

The latest story, showing up in "Oddly Enough" news feeds around the globe, concerns a lawsuit being filed against Israel by Fadi Abboud, president of the Lebanese Industrialists Association. The official charge is something along the lines of copyright infringement or intellectual property theft, and the products in question are falafel, hummus, tabbouleh, etc.

"The Israelis are marketing our main food dishes as if they were Israeli dishes," he charged.

"We are working on registering all the foods and ingredients which will be submitted to the Lebanese government so it can appeal to the international courts against Israel," Abboud said.

This lawsuit promises to be an endless source of amusement. Lebanon's lawyers will likely point to several recent cases of successful copyright protection of important national brands, like feta (Greece), halloumi (Cyprus), and champagne (France). Meanwhile Israel will no doubt try to make hay of the fact that Beirut's most popular falafel joint is called Falafel Sahyoun. What hilarities lie ahead, I can only imagine.

But while we're at it, why not try copyrighting a few other things that were so cynically pilfered from our cultural heritage? Like, for starters, algebra? Or the alphabet, and maybe even Keanu Reeves. Hummus, tabbouleh, and falafel are small potatoes compared to the gazillions of dollars we are losing by not copyrighting the color indigo, for Baal's sake.

The only thing that worries me about our chances in this lawsuit is the potential knife in the back from our brotherly neighbors to the east. A reader of As`ad Abu Khalil's blog named "Joseph" recently emailed the Angry Arab this very dangerous protest:

"As'ad, you must say something about the audacity of the Lebanese to claim Hummus and tabouleh and fattoush and all of these pan-Syrian dishes, which came from Damascus and Aleppo, as Lebanese. The attempt by the Lebanese (and this is initially a Christian Lebanese project) to appropriate Syrian food is quite horrific even if it is not as horrific as the Israeli attempt. All the Lebanese can claim is to have a restaurant industry but not a cuisine or a kitchen which they have never had. Nonetheless, you cannot pretend as you did in your post that Hummus is indeed a Lebanese dish (since you did not question the Lebanese claim of possession of it). There are no such thing as Lebanese dishes except in the lexicon and ideology of Lebanese chauvinists."

The damage done by this Joseph fellow, while serious, is not too severe... yet. But I'd be lying if I told you that I wasn't worried about the disastrous possibility of Israel's lawyers finding out about this horrific "Christian Lebanese project" before too long. And if that happens, you better believe this case will be over faster than you can say "wa7ad falafel 'extra' 3a zou2ak".

In that event, there will be nothing to halt the complete appropriation of hummus by Israel's marketing geniuses.

Or should I say "khummus"?

Hezbollah and Syria have blamed Israel for assassinating him and Hezbollah has repeatedly vowed dire revenge for the killing.

Imad Mughniyeh Street will replace 'Baharan Street' which means, spring. The naming of the street follows a stamp issued by Iran in March to commemorate Mughniyeh (photo), described as an 'ambassador of the culture of martyrdom' by former Iranian commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, Gen. Rahim Safavi.

With an outbreak of hostilities, the Quds forces will need to act immediately, decisively, and with force that is disproportionate to the enemy's actions and the threat it poses. Such a response aims at inflicting damage and meting out punishment to an extent that will demand long and expensive reconstruction processes.

One leading Iranian academic stated that devastating "economic interests", "centres of civilian powers", and "state infrastructure" will "create a lasting memory among the Zionists" and thus increase "Iranian deterrence" and tie up "enemy" resources in reconstruction. In 2003, Ahmadinejad said that a war waged by the "Zionist entity" would bring "the enemy" a fatal blow and "sear deep into the consciousness of Jews that they are a defeated people".

How can the world stand silent when threats like these are being made? And we want to sit down and talk to these wackos? The civilized world must take urgent action to stop this madness

There's only one catch: it wasn't Ahmadinejad or the Iranians saying all this; rather, these are threats Israel is and has been making against Arabs in Lebanon and Palestine.

If you are local to the Mt. Juliet area, we are having a kick-off meeting on Tuesday night at 6:30 pm, on October 21st. This will be the first monthly meeting and will continue on the 3rd Tuesday night of each month thereafter.

The purpose of this group is to be an outlet of support for each other, and to share struggles and concerns while our loved ones are serving. We will pray together and lift up our hurts and fears, as well as our joys and praises to the Lord. We will assure that our troops know their sacrifice is appreciated through letters, cards, e-mails and needed supplies.

You are invited to join us in person:

Each month on the 3rd Tuesday night at 6:30 pm

(you may come a little early for coffee and a light snack)

Gladeville Baptist Church Room #112, 9000 Stewarts Ferry

Gladeville, TN 37071

For questions please call 615-293-8734 or 615-604-7831

NOTE: You do not have to be a member of this church or any other to join this group, so if you know of others in the communities of Mt. Juliet, Lebanon, Gladeville or Hermitage, please invite them to join us.

Iraq War Pollution Equals 25 Million Cars

Photo: Burning oil fields in Iraq by Shawn Baldwin

The greenhouse gases released by the Iraq war thus far equals the pollution from adding 25 million cars to the road for one year says a study released by Oil Change International, an anti petroleum watchdog.  The group’s main concerns are the environmental and human rights impacts of a petroleum based economy.

The study, released last March on the fifth anniversary of the Iraq War, states that total US spending on the war so far equals the global investment needed through 2030 to halt global warming.

Of course skeptics and oil companies will be right to ask how these numbers were calculated.  The group claims Iraq war emissions estimates come from combat, oil well fires, increaesd gas flaring, increased cement manufacturing for reconstruction, and explosives.

The Report: A Climate of War

Source

“Warfare is inherently destructive of sustainable development. States shall therefore respect international law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict and cooperate in its further development, as necessary.” – 1992 Rio Declaration

The application of weapons, the destruction of structures and oil fields, fires, military transport movements and chemical spraying are all examples of the destroying impact war may have on the environment. Air, water and soil are polluted, man and animal are killed, and numerous health affects occur among those still living. This page is about the environmental effects of wars and incidents leading to war that have occurred in the 20th and 21st century.

Timeline of wars

Africa

“My hands are tied
The billions shift from side to side
And the wars go on with brainwashed pride
For the love of God and our human rights
And all these things are swept aside
By bloody hands time can't deny
And are washed away by your genocide
And history hides the lies of our civil wars” – Guns ‘n Roses (Civil War)

In Africa many civil wars and wars between countries occurred in the past century, some of which are still continuing. Most wars are a result of the liberation of countries after decades of colonialization. Countries fight over artificial borders drawn by former colonial rulers. Wars mainly occur in densely populated regions, over the division of scarce resources such as fertile farmland. It is very hard to estimate the exact environmental impact of each of these wars. Here, a summary of some of the most striking environmental effects, including biodiversity loss, famine, sanitation problems at refugee camps and over fishing is given for different countries.

Congo war (II) – Since August 1998 a civil war is fought in former Zaire, now known as the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The war eventually ended in 2003 when a Transitional Government took power. A number of reasons are given for the conflict, including access and control of water resources and rich minerals and political agendas. Currently over 3 million people have died in the war, mostly from disease and starvation. More than 2 million people have become refugees. Only 45% of the people had access to safe drinking water. Many women were raped as a tool of intimidation, resulting in a rapid spread of sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV-AIDS. The war has a devastating effect on the environment. National parks housing endangered species are often affected for exploitation of minerals and other resources. Refugees hunt wildlife for bush meat, either to consume or sell it. Elephant populations in Africa have seriously declined as a result of ivory poaching. Farmers burn parts of the forest to apply as farmland, and corporate logging contributes to the access of poachers to bush meat. A survey by the WWF showed that the hippopotamus population in one national park decreased from 29,000 thirty years previously, to only 900 in 2005. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) listed all five parks as ‘world heritage in danger’.

Ethiopia & Eritrea – Before 1952, Eritrea was a colony of Italy. When it was liberated, Ethiopia annexed the country. Thirty years of war over the liberation of Eritrea followed, starting in 1961 and eventually ending with the independence of Eritrea in 1993. However, war commenced a year after the country introduced its own currency in 1997. Over a minor border dispute, differences in ethnicity and economic progress, Ethiopia again attacked Eritrea. The war lasted until June 2000 and resulted in the death of over 150,000 Eritrean, and of hundreds of thousands of Ethiopians. During the war severe drought resulted in famine, particularly because most government funds were spend on weapons and other war instrumentation. The government estimated that after the war only 60% of the country received adequate food supplies. The war resulted in over 750,000 refugees. It basically destroyed the entire infrastructure. Efforts to disrupt agricultural production in Eritrea resulted in changes in habitat. The placing of landmines has caused farming or herding to be very dangerous in most parts of the country. If floods occur landmines may be washed into cities. This has occurred earlier in Mozambique.

Rwanda civil war - Between April and July 1994 extremist military Hutu groups murdered about 80,000-1,000,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus in Rwanda. Over 2,000,000 people lost their homes and became refugees. Rwanda has a very rich environment, however, it has a particularly limited resource base. About 95% of the population lives on the countryside and relies on agriculture. Some scientists believe that competition for scarce land and resources led to violence prior to and particularly after the 1994 genocide. It is however stated that resource scarcity only contributed limitedly to the conflict under discussion. The main cause of the genocide was the death of the president from a plane-crash caused by missiles fires from a camp.

The many refugees from the 1994 combat caused a biodiversity problem. When they returned to the already overpopulated country after the war, they inhabited forest reserves in the mountains where endangered gorillas lived. Conservation of gorilla populations was no longer effective, and refuges destroyed part of the habitat. Despite the difficulties still present in Rwanda particularly concerning security and resource provision, an international gorilla protection group is now working on better conditions for the gorillas in Rwanda.

Somalia civil war – A civil war was fought in Somalia 1991. One of the most striking effects of the war was over fishing. The International Red Cross was encouraging the consumption of seawater fish to improve diets of civilians. For self-sufficiency they provided training and fishing equipment. However, as a consequence of war Somali people ignored international fishing protocols, thereby seriously harming ecology in the region. Fishing soon became an unsustainable practise, and fishermen are hard to stop because they started carrying arms. They perceive over fishing as a property right and can therefore hardly be stopped.

Sudan (Darfur & Chad) – In Sudan civil war and extreme droughts caused a widespread famine, beginning in 1983. Productive farmland in the southern region was abandoned during the war. Thousands of people became refugees that left behind their land, possibly never to return. Attempts of remaining farmers to cultivate new land to grow crops despite the drought led to desertification and soil erosion. The government failed to act for fear of losing its administrative image abroad, causing the famine to kill an estimated 95,000 of the total 3,1 million residents of the province Darfur. As farmers started claiming more and more land, routes applied by herders were closed off. This resulted in conflicts between farmers and rebels groups. In 2003, a conflict was fought in Darfur between Arab Sudanese farmers and non-Arab Muslims. The Muslim group is called Janjaweed, a tribe mainly consisting of nomadic sheep and cattle herders. Originally the Janjaweed were part of the Sudanese and Darfurian militia, and were armed by the Sudanese government to counter rebellion. However, they started utilizing the weapons against non-Muslim civilians. The tribe became notorious for massacre in 2003-2004. In December 2005 the conflict continued across the border, now involving governmental army troops from Chad, and the rebel groups Janjaweed and United Front for Democratic Change from Sudan. In February 2006 the governments of Chad and Sudan signed a peace treaty called the Tripoli Agreement. Unfortunately a new rebel assault of the capital of Chad in April made Chad break all ties with Sudan. The Darfur Conflict so far caused the death of between 50,000 and 450,000 civilians. It caused over 45,000 people to flea the countries of Sudan and Central Africa, into north and east Chad. Most refugees claim they fled civilian attacks from rebel forces, looting food and recruiting young men to join their troops.

America

Pearl Harbor (WWII) – When World War II began, Japan signed the Tripartite Pact with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. Consequentially, the United States closed the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping, and initiated a complete oil embargo. Japan, being dependent on US oil, responded to the embargo violently. On December 1941, Japanese troops carried out a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, aimed at the US Navy stationed there. Despite the awareness that Japan might attack, the US was surprisingly unprepared for the Japanese aggression. There were no aircraft patrols, and anti-aircraft weapons were not manned.

For the attack five Japanese submarines were present in the harbor to launch torpedos. One was discovered immediately, and attacked by the USS Ward. All five submarines sank, and at least three of them have not been located since. As Japanese bombers arrived they began firing at US marine airbases across Hawaii, and subsequently battle ships in Pearl Harbor. Eighteen ships sank, including five battleships, and a total of more than 2,000 Americans were killed in action. The explosion of the USS Arizona caused half of the casualties. The ship was hit by a bomb, burned for two days in a row, and subsequently sank to the bottom. The cloud of black smoke over the boat was mainly caused by burning black powder from the magazine for aircraft catapults aboard the ship.

Leaking fuel from the Arizona and other ships caught fire, and caused more ships to catch fire. Of the 350 Japanese planes taking part in the attack, 29 were lost. Over sixty Japanese were killed in actions, most of them airmen.

Today, three battle ships are still at the bottom of the harbor. Four others were raised and reused. The USS Arizona, being the most heavily damaged ship during the attack, continues to leak oil from the hulk into the harbor. However, the wreck is maintained, because it now serves as part of a war memorial.

World Trade Centre explosion - The so-called ‘War on Terrorism’ the United States are fighting in Asia currently all started with the event we recall so well from the shocking images projected on news bulletins. On September 11, 2001, terrorists flew airplanes into the buildings of the World Trade Centre. It is now claimed that the attack and simultaneous collapse of the Twin Towers caused a serious and acute environmental disaster.

"We will live in the death smog for a while,
breathing the dust of the dead,
the 3 thousand or so who turn to smoke,
as the giant ashtray in Lower Manhattan
continues to give up ghosts.
The dead are in us now,
locked in our chests,
staining our lungs,
polluting our bloodstreams.
And though we cover our faces with flags
and other pieces of cloth to filter the air,
the spirits of the dead aren’t fooled
by our masks." Lawrence Swan, 05-10-2001

As the planes hit the Twin Towers more than 90.000 litres of jet fuel burned at temperatures above 1000oC. An atmospheric plume formed, consisting of toxic materials such as metals, furans, asbestos, dioxins, PAH, PCB and hydrochloric acid. Most of the materials were fibres from the structure of the building. Asbestos levels ranged from 0.8-3.0% of the total mass. PAH comprised more than 0.1% of the total mass, and PCBs less than 0.001% of total mass. At the site now called Ground Zero, a large pile of smoking rubble burned intermittently for more than 3 months. Gaseous and particulate particles kept forming long after the towers had collapsed.

Aerial photograph of the plume

The day of the attacks dust particles of various sizes spread over lower Manhattan and Brooklyn, for many miles. Fire fighters and medics working at the WTC were exposed, but also men and women on the streets and in nearby buildings, and children in nearby schools. In vivo inhalation studies and epidemiological studies pointed out the impact of the dust cloud. Health effects from inhaling dust included bronchial hyper reactivity, because of the high alkalinity of dust particles. Other possible health effects include coughs, an increased risk of asthma and a two-fold increase in the number of small-for-gestational-age baby’s among pregnant women present in or nearby the Twin Towers at the time of the attack. After September, airborne pollutant concentrations in nearby communities declined.

Many people present at the WTC at the time of the attacks are still checked regularly, because long-term effects may eventually show. It is thought there may be an increased risk of development of mesothelioma, consequential to exposure to asbestos. This is a disease where malignant cells develop in the protective cover of the body’s organs. Airborne dioxins in the days and weeks after the attack may increase the risk of cancer and diabetes. Infants of women that were pregnant on September 11 and had been in the vicinity of the WTC at the time of the attack are also checked for growth or developmental problems.

Asia

Afghanistan war – In October 2001, the United States attacked Afghanistan as a starting chapter of the ‘War on terrorism’, which still continues today. The ultimate goal was to replace the Taliban government, and to find apparent 9/11 mastermind and Al-Qaeda member Osama Bin Laden. Many European countries assisted the US in what was called ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’.

During the war, extensive damage was done to the environment, and many people suffered health effects from weapons applied to destroy enemy targets. It is estimated that ten thousand villages, and their surrounding environments were destroyed. Safe drinking water declined, because of a destruction of water infrastructure and resulting leaks, bacterial contamination and water theft. Rivers and groundwater were contaminated by poorly constructed landfills located near the sources.

Afghanistan once consisted of major forests watered by monsoons. During the war, Taliban members illegally trading timber in Pakistan destroyed much of the forest cover. US bombings and refugees in need of firewood destroyed much of what remained. Less than 2% of the country still contains a forest cover today.

Bombs threaten much of the country’s wildlife. One the world’s important migratory thoroughfare leads through Afghanistan. The number of birds now flying this route has dropped by 85%. In the mountains many large animals such as leopards found refuge, but much of the habitat is applied as refuge for military forces now. Additionally, refugees capture leopards and other large animals are and trade them for safe passage across the border.

Pollution from application of explosives entered air, soil and water. One example is cyclonite, a toxic substance that may cause cancer. Rocket propellants deposited perchlorates, which damage the thyroid gland. Numerous landmines left behind in Afghan soils still cause the deaths of men, women and children today.

Cambodia civil war – In 1966 the Prince of Cambodia began to lose the faith of many for failure to come to grips with the deteriorating economic situation. In 1967 rebellion started in a wealthy province where many large landowners lives. Villagers began attacking the tax collection brigade, because taxes were invested in building large factories, causing land to be taken. This led to a bloody civil war. Before the conflict could be repressed 10,000 people had died.

The rebellion caused the up rise of the Khmer Rouge, a Maoist-extremist organization that wanted to introduce communism in the country. In 1975 the organization, led by Pol Pot, officially seized power in Cambodia. The Khmer considered farmers (proletarians) to be the working class, as did Mao in China earlier. Schools, hospitals and banks were closed, the country was isolated from all foreign influence, and people were moved to the countryside for forced labor. People were obligated to work up to 12 hours a day, growing three times as many crops, as was usually the case. Many people died there from exhaustion, illness and starvation, or where shot by the Khmer on what was known as ‘The Killing Fields’.

The Khmer Rouge regime resulted in deforestation, caused by extensive timber logging to finance war efforts, agricultural clearance, construction, logging concessions and collection of wood fuels. A total 35% of the Cambodian forest cover was lost under the Maoist regime. Deforestation resulted in severe floods, damaging rice crops and causing food shortages. In 1993, a ban on logging exports was introduced to prevent further flooding damage.

In 1979 the Khmer Rouge regime ended with an invasion by Vietnam, and the installation of a pro-Vietnamese puppet government. Subsequently, Thai and Chinese forces attempted to liberate the country from Vietnamese dominance. Many landmines were placed in the 1980’s, and are still present in the countryside. They deny agricultural use of the land where they are placed. In 1992 free elections were introduced, but the Khmer Rouge resumed fighting. Eventually, half of the Khmer soldiers left in 1996, and many officials were captured. Under the Khmer regime, a total of 1.7 million people died, and the Khmer was directly responsible for about 750,000 of those casualties.

Hiroshima & Nagasaki nuclear explosions – Atomic bombs are based on the principle of nuclear fission, which was discovered in Nazi Germany in 1938 by two radio chemists. During the process, atoms are split and energy is released in the form of heat. Controlled reactions are applied in nuclear power plants for production of electricity, whereas unchecked reactions occur during nuclear bombings. The invention in Germany alarmed people in the United States, because the Nazi’s in possession of atomics bombs would be much more dangerous than they already where. When America became involved in WWII, the development of atomic bombs started there in what was called the ‘Manhattan Project’. In July 1945 an atomic bomb was tested in the New Mexico desert. The tests were considered a success, and America was now in possession of one of the world’s deadliest weapons.

In 1945, at the end of World War II and the beginning of the Cold War, nuclear weapons were applied to kill for the first time in Japan. On August 6, a uranium bomb by the name of Little Boy was dropped on Hiroshima, followed by a plutonium bomb by the name of Fat Man on Nagasaki on August 9. The reason Hiroshima was picked was that it was a major military centre. The bomb detonated at 8.15 p.m. over a Japanese Army parade field, where soldiers were already present. Nagasaki was picked because it was an industrial centre. The bomb, which was much larger than that used on Hiroshima, exploded at 11.02 a.m. at an industrial site. However, the hills on and the geographical location of the bombing site caused the eventual impact to be smaller than days earlier in Hiroshima.

The first impact of the atomic bombings was a blinding light, accompanied by a giant wave of heat. Dry flammable materials caught fire, and all men and animals within half a mile from the explosion sites died instantly. Many structures collapsed, in Nagasaki even the structures designed to survive earthquakes were blasted away. Many water lines broke. Fires could not be extinguished because of the water shortage, and six weeks after the blast the city still suffered from a lack of water. In Hiroshima a number of small fires combined with wind formed a firestorm, killing those who did not die before but were left immobile for some reason. Within days after the blasts, radiation sickness started rearing its ugly head, and many more people would die from it within the next 5 years.

The total estimated death toll:
In Hiroshima 100,000 were killed instantly, and between 100,000 and 200,000 died eventually.
In Nagasaki about 40,000 were killed instantly, and between 70,000 and 150,000 died eventually.

The events of August 6 and August 9 can be translated into environmental effects more literally. The blasts caused air pollution from dust particles and radioactive debris flying around, and from the fires burning everywhere. Many plants and animals were killed in the blast, or died moments to months later from radioactive precipitation. Radioactive sand clogged wells used for drinking water winning, thereby causing a drinking water problem that could not easily be solved. Surface water sources were polluted, particularly by radioactive waste. Agricultural production was damaged; dead stalks of rice could be found up to seven miles from ground zero. In Hiroshima the impact of the bombing was noticeable within a 10 km radius around the city, and in Nagasaki within a 1 km radius.

Iraq & Kuwait – The Gulf War was fought between Iraq, Kuwait and a number of western countries in 1991. Kuwait had been part of Iraq in the past, but was liberated by British imperialism, as the Iraqi government described it. In August 1990, Iraqi forces claimed that the country was illegally extracting oil from Iraqi territory, and attacked. The United Nations attempted to liberate Kuwait. Starting January 1991, Operation Desert Storm began, with the purpose of destroying Iraqi air force and anti-aircraft facilities, and command and control facilities. The battle was fought in Iraq, Kuwait and the Saudi-Arabian border region. Both aerial and ground artillery was applied. Late January, Iraqi aircraft were flown to Iran, and Iraqi forces began to flee.

The Gulf War was one of the most environmentally devastating wars ever fought. Iraq dumped approximately one million tons of crude oil into the Persian Gulf, thereby causing the largest oil spill in history (see environmental disasters). Approximately 25,000 migratory birds were killed. The impact on marine life was not as severe as expected, because warm water sped up the natural breakdown of oil. Local prawn fisheries did experience problems after the war. Crude oil was also spilled into the desert, forming oil lakes covering 50 square kilometres. In due time the oil percolated into groundwater aquifers.

Fleeing Iraqi troops ignited Kuwaiti oil sources, releasing half a ton of air pollutants into the atmosphere. Environmental problems caused by the oil fires include smog formation and acid rain. Toxic fumes originating from the burning oil wells compromised human health, and threatened wildlife. A soot layer was deposited on the desert, covering plants, and thereby preventing them from breathing. Seawater was applied to extinguish the oil fires, resulting in increased salinity in areas close to oil wells. It took about nine months to extinguish the fires.

During the war, many dams and sewage water treatment plants were targeted and destroyed. A lack of possibilities for water treatment resulting from the attacks caused sewage to flow directly into the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Additionally, pollutants seeped from bombed chemical plants into the rivers. Drinking water extracted from the river was polluted, resulting in widespread disease. For example, cases of typhoid fever have increased tenfold since 1991.

Movement of heavy machinery such as tanks through the desert damaged the brittle surface, causing soil erosion. Sand was uncovered that formed gradually moving sand dunes. These dunes may one day cause problems for Kuwait City. Tanks fired Depleted Uranium (DU) missiles, which can puncture heavy artillery structures. DU is a heavy metal that causes kidney damage and is suspected to be teratogenic and carcinogenic. Post-Gulf War reports state an increase in birth defects for children born to veterans. The impact of Depleted Uranium could not be thoroughly investigated after the Gulf War, because Saddam Hussein refused to cooperate. Its true properties were revealed after the Kosovo War in 2001 (description below). DU has now been identified as a neurotoxin, and birth defects and cancers are attributed to other chemical and nerve agents. However, it is stated that DU oxides deposited in the lungs of veterans have not been thoroughly researched yet. It was later found that this may cause kidney and lung infections for highly exposed persons.

After the Gulf War many veterans suffered from a condition now known as the Gulf War Syndrome. The causes of the illness are subject to widespread speculation. Examples of possible causes are exposure to DU (see above), chemical weapons (nerve gas and mustard gas), an anthrax vaccine given to 41% of US soldiers and 60-75% of UK soldiers, smoke from burning oil wells and parasites. Symptoms of the GWS included chronic fatigue, muscle problems, diarrhoea, migraine, memory loss, skin problems and shortness of breath. Many Gulf War veterans have died of illnesses such as brain cancer, now acknowledged as potentially connected to service during the war.

Iraq & the United States – The war in Iraq started by the United States in 2003 as part of the War on Terrorism causes poverty, resulting in environmental problems. Long-term environmental effects of the war remain unclear, but short-term problems have been identified for every environmental compartment. For example, some weapons are applied that may be extremely damaging to the environment, such as white phosphorus ammunition. People around the world protest the application of such armoury.

Water
Damage to sanitation structures by frequent bombing, and damage to sewage treatment systems by power blackouts cause pollution of the River Tigris. Two hundred blue plastic containers containing uranium were stolen from a nuclear power plant located south of Baghdad. The radioactive content of the barrels was dumped in rivers and the barrels were rinsed out. Poor people applied the containers as storage facility for water, oil and tomatoes, or sold them to others. Milk was transported to other regions in the barrels, making it almost impossible to relocate them.

Air
Oil trenches are burning, as was the case in the Gulf War of 1991, resulting in air pollution. In Northern Iraq, a sulphur plant burned for one month, contributing to air pollution. As fires continue burning, groundwater applied as a drinking water source may be polluted.

Soil
Military movements and weapon application result in land degradation. The destruction of military and industrial machinery releases heavy metals and other harmful substances.

Read more on restoring water systems in Iraq

Israel & Lebanon – In July 2006, Hezbollah initiated a rocket attack on Israeli borders. A ground patrol killed and captured Israeli soldiers. This resulted in open war between Israel and Lebanon.

The war caused environmental problems as Israelis bombed a power station south of Beirut. Damaged storage tanks leaked an estimated 20,000 tons of oil into the Mediterranean Sea. The oil spill spread rapidly, covering over 90 km of the coastline, killing fish and affecting the habitat of the endangered green sea turtle. A sludge layer covers Beaches across Lebanon, and the same problem may occur in Syria as the spill continues to spread. Part of the oil spill burned, causing widespread air pollution. Smog affects the health of people living in the city of Beirut. So far problems limiting the clean-up operation of oil spills have occurred, because of ongoing violence in the region.

Another major problem were forest fires in Northern Israel caused by Hezbollah bombings. A total of 9,000 acres of forest burned to the ground, and fires threaten tree reserves and bird sanctuaries.

Russia & Chechnya – In 1994 the First Chechen War of independence started, between Russian troops, Chechen guerrilla fighters and civilians. Chechnya has been a province of Russia for a very long time and now desires independence. The First War ended in 1996, but in 1999 Russia again attacked Chechnya for purposes of oil distribution.

The war between the country and its province continues today. It has devastating effects on the region of Chechnya. An estimated 30% of Chechen territory is contaminated, and 40% of the territory does not meet environmental standards for life. Major environmental problems include radioactive waste and radiation, oil leaks into the ground from bombarded plants and refineries, and pollution of soil and surface water. Russia has buried radioactive waste in Chechnya. Radiation at some sites is ten times its normal level. Radiation risks increase as Russia bombs the locations, particularly because after 1999 the severeness of weaponry increased. A major part of agricultural land is polluted to the extent that it can no longer meet food supplies. This was mainly caused by unprofessional mini-refineries of oil poachers in their backyards, not meeting official standards and causing over 50% of the product to be lost as waste. Groundwater pollution flows into the rivers Sunzha and Terek on a daily basis. On some locations the rivers are totally devoid of fish. Flora and fauna are destroyed by oil leaks and bombings.

Vietnam war – The Vietnam War started in 1945 and ended in 1975. It is now entitled a proxy war, fought during the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union to prevent the necessity for the nations to fight each other directly. North Vietnam fought side by side with the Soviet Union and China, and South Vietnam with the United States, New Zealand and South Korea. It must be noted that the United States only started to be actively involved in the battle after 1963. Between 1965 and 1968 North Vietnam was bombed under Operation Rolling Thunder, in order to force the enemy to negotiate. Bombs destroyed over two million acres of land. North Vietnam forces began to strike back, and the Soviet Union delivered anti-aircraft missiles to North Vietnam. The ground war of US troops against the Viet Cong began. The United States would not retreat from Vietnam until 1973, and during those years extremely environmentally damaging weapons and war tactics were applied.

A massive herbicidal programme was carried out, in order to break the forest cover sheltering Viet Cong guerrillas, and deprive Vietnamese peasants of food. The spraying destroyed 14% of Vietnam’s forests, diminished agricultural yield, and made seeds unfit for replanting. If agricultural yield was not damaged by herbicides, it was often lost because military on the ground set fire to haystacks, and soaked land with aviation fuel en burned it. A total of 15,000 square kilometres of land were eventually destroyed. Livestock was often shot, to deprive peasant of their entire food supply. A total of 13,000 livestock were killed during the war.

The application of 72 million litres of chemical spray resulted in the death of many animals, and caused health effects with humans. One chemical that was applied between 1962 and 1971, called Agent Orange, was particularly harmful. Its main constituent is dioxin, which was present in soil, water and vegetation during and after the war. Dioxin is carcinogenic and teratogenic, and has resulted in spontaneous abortions, chloracne, skin and lung cancers, lower intelligence and emotional problems among children. Children fathered by men exposed to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War often have congenital abnormalities. An estimated half a million children were born with dioxin-related abnormalities. Agent Orange continues to threaten the health of the Vietnamese today.

"Drafted to go to Vietnam
To fight communism in a foreign land.
To preserve democracy is my plight
Which is a God...Given...Right.
Greenery so thick with hidden enemies
Agent Orange is sprayed on the trees.
Covering me from head to toe
Irate my eyes, burns through my clothes.
Returned home when my tour was done
To be told "You have cancer, son".
Agent Orange is to blame
Government caused your suffering and pain.
Fight for compensation is frustrating and slow
Brass cover-up, not wanting anyone to know.
From cancer many comrades have died
Medical Insurance have been denied.
Compensation I now receive
My health I hope to retrieve.
In Vietnam , I was spared my life
Just to be stabbed with an Agent Orange knife" Yvonne Legge, 2001

Today, agriculture in Vietnam continues to suffer problems from six million unexploded bombs still present. Several organisations are attempting to remove these bombs. Landmines left in Vietnam are not removed, because the Vietnamese government refuses to accept responsibility.

Europe

Kosovo war – The Kosovo war can be divided up in two separate parts: a conflict between Serbia and Kosovo, and a conflict between Kosovo and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). The first conflict originated in 1996 from the statement of Slobodan Milocevic that Kosovo was to remain a part of Serbia, and from the resulting violent response of Albanian residents. When Serbian troops slaughtered 45 Albanians in the village of Racak in Kosovo in 1999, the NATO intervened. NATO launched a 4-month bombing campaign upon Serbia as a reply to the massacre at Racak.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) investigated the environmental impact of the Kosovo war. It was concluded that the war did not result in an environmental disaster affecting the entire Balkan region. Nevertheless, some environmental hot spots were identified, namely Belgrade, Pancevo, Kragujevac, Novi Sad and Bor.

Bombings carried out by the United States resulted in leakages in oil refineries and oil storage depots. Industrial sites containing other industries were also targeted. EDC (1,2-dichloroethane), PCBs en mercury escaped to the environment. Burning of Vinyl Chloride Monomer (VCM) resulted in the formation of dioxin, hydrochloric acid, carbon monoxide and PAHs, and oil burning released sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, lead and PAHs into the air. Heavy clouds of black smoke forming over burning industrial targets caused black rain to fall on the area around Pancevo. Some damage was done to National Parks in Serbia by bombings, and therefore to biodiversity. EDC, mercury and petroleum products (e.g. PCBs) polluted the Danube River. These are present in the sediments and may resurface in due time. EDC is toxic to both terrestrial and aquatic life. Mercury may be converted into methyl mercury, which is very toxic and bio accumulates. As a measure to prevent the consequences of bombing, a fertilizer plant in Pancevo released liquid ammonia into the Danube River. This caused fish kills up to 30 kilometres downstream.

In 1999 when NATO bombed Belgrade, the capital of Serbia, the resulting environmental damage was enormous. Petrochemical plants in suburbs started leaking all kinds of hazardous chemicals into air, water and soil. Factories producing ammonia and plastics released chlorine, hydrochloric acid, vinyl chloride and other chlorine substances, resulting in local air pollution and health problems. Water sources were polluted by oil leaking from refineries. The Danube River was polluted by oil more severely, but this time hydrochloric acid and mercury compounds also ended up there. These remained in the water for a considering period of time and consequently ended up in neighbouring countries Rumania and Bulgaria.

Clean drinking water supplies and waste treatment plants were damaged by NATO bombings. Many people fled their houses and were moved to refugee camps, where the number of people grew rapidly. A lack of clean drinking water and sanitation problems occurred.

Like in the Gulf War, Depleted Uranium (DU) was applied in the Kosovo War to puncture tanks and other artillery. After the war, the United Kingdom assisted in the removal of DU residues from the environment. Veterans complained of health effects. It was acknowledged by the UK and the US that dusts from DU can be dangerous if inhaled. Inhalation of dust most likely results in chemical poisoning.

World War I: Trench Warfare – In 1914, the assassination of archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary resulted in the First World War, otherwise known as The Great War, or WWI. It started with Austria-Hungary invading Serbia, where the assassin came from, and Germany invading Belgium. The war was mostly in Europe, between the Allies and the Central Powers.

Allies: France, United Kingdom, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg, Russia, Poland, Serbia, Montenegro, Rumania, Albania, Greece, Portugal, Finland, United States, Canada, Brazil, Armenia, Australia, India, New Zealand, South Africa, Liberia, China, Japan, Thailand, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama
Central Powers: Austria-Hungary, Germany, Turkish Empire, and Bulgaria

The war was fought from trenches, dug from the North Sea to the border of Switzerland. In 1918 when the war was over, empires disintegrated into smaller countries, marking the division of Europe today. Over 9 million people had died, most of which perished from influenza after the outbreak of the Spanish Flu (see environmental disasters). The war did not directly cause the influenza outbreak, but it was amplified. Mass movement of troops and close quarters caused the Spanish Flu to spread quickly. Furthermore, stresses of war may have increased the susceptibility of soldiers to the disease.

In terms of environmental impact, World War I was most damaging, because of landscape changes caused by trench warfare. Digging trenches caused trampling of grassland, crushing of plants and animals, and churning of soil. Erosion resulted from forest logging to expand the network of trenches. Soil structures were altered severely, and if the war was never fought, in all likelihood the landscape would have looked very differently today.

Another damaging impact was the application of poison gas. Gases were spread throughout the trenches to kill soldiers of the opposite front. Examples of gases applied during WWI are tear gas (aerosols causing eye irritation), mustard gas (cell toxic gas causing blistering and bleeding), and carbonyl chloride (carcinogenic gas). The gases caused a total of 100,000 deaths, most caused by carbonyl chloride (phosgene). Battlefields were polluted, and most of the gas evaporates into the atmosphere. After the war, unexploded ammunition caused major problems in former battle areas. Environmental legislation prohibits detonation or dumping chemical weapons at sea, therefore the cleanup was and still remains a costly operation. In 1925, most WWI participants signed a treaty banning the application of gaseous chemical weapons. Chemical disarmament plants are planned in France and Belgium.

World War II: Gas Chambers – World War II was a worldwide conflict, fought between the Allies (Britain, France and the United States as its core countries) and the Axis Powers (Germany, Italy and Japan as its core countries). It started with the German invasion of Poland and Czechoslovakia in 1939, and ended with the liberation of Western Europe by the allies in 1945.

Between 1941 and 1945, over 1 million people were killed in the gas chambers of the extermination camp Auschwitz-Birkenau in Nazi Germany. Over 90% of the victims were Jews, and the other 10% consisted of Poles, Soviet prisoners of war and gypsies. The substance applied was Zyklon-B, a cyanide-based insecticide that is lethal to humans in large doses. It was stored as crystals in closed containers, but when exposed to air it released the lethal hydrogen cyanide gas (HCN). As Zyklon-B was poured into the gas chambers through small openings, it took only 10-15 minutes to kill all people inside.

The insecticide was supplied to Nazi Germany by two firms, Tesch-Stabenow and Degesh. After the war the firms claimed they were unaware of the application of the product to kill people in large numbers. However, it was later stated that the company had to have known, because they supplied enough substance to kill 2 million people, and additionally gave some advise on how to use the ventilating and heating equipment.

World War II: Hunger winter – In late 1944, the allied troops attempted to liberate Western Europe. As they reached The Netherlands, German resistance caused the liberation to be halted in Arnhem, as allied troops failed to occupy a bridge over the River Rhine. As the Dutch government in exile in Britain called for railway strikes, the Germans responded by putting embargo on food transport to the west. This resulted in what is now known as the Hunger Winter, causing an estimated 20,000-25,000 Dutch to starve to death. A number of factors caused the starvation: a harsh winter, fuel shortages, the ruin of agricultural land by bombings, floods, and the food transport embargo. Most people in the west lived off tulip bulbs and sugar beet. Official food rations were below 1000 cal per person per day. In May 1945 the Hunger Winter ended with the official liberation of the west of The Netherlands.

Source

The there is this.  So what do they do with weapons of mass destruction?  Coming to an Ocean Near YOU! The cost in dollars for the pollution caused by war is staggering. The cost to human life is horrendous. The price of war to the Environment is deadly.  This is of course a Global problem.  What you don't see can hurt you.  If you don't know it is only because they don't want you too. They will never tell you the true unless we as a Global community force them to. This will affect our children for many years to come. War is probably one of the worst polluters on the planet.  Stopping the WAR MACHINE is in everyone's best interest.

THE DEADLINESS BELOW