Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Where Did The Israeli Locksmith Scammer Send His $ To?

So who did Eli Barhanum who was arrested for his involvement in the Dependable Locksmith scam bust by the Feds send his money orders to? El Ad Group. And who is El-Ad Group? Read the Wiki HERE. It is a subsidiary of Delek Group, owned by Yitzak Tshuva.

Affidavit for Complaint of Eli Barhanun

BEST LINK FOR ALL INFORMATION WITH COURT LINK CASES AND MUCH MORE

Blackwater's Secret War in Pakistan: Jeremy Scahill

At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, "snatch and grabs" of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan, an investigation by The Nation has found. The Blackwater operatives also assist in gathering intelligence and help direct a secret US military drone bombing campaign that runs parallel to the well-documented CIA predator strikes, according to a well-placed source within the US military intelligence apparatus.

Read further>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

SCAM Israeli Owned Locksmiths BUSTED!!!!!

Refresh your memories, I posted about this February 15, 2008

HERE is that post.

Now WATCH and READ

10 Connects Helps Bust National Locksmith Scam - WTSP-TV, Channel 10, Tampa Bay, FL (11/04/2009)
http://www.wtsp.com/video/default.aspx?aid=93212

"One of
Overland Park Locksmith Charged With Deceiving Customers - WDAF-TV, Channel 4, Kansas City, MO (11/04/2009)
http://www.fox4kc.com/news/wdaf-locksmith-customers-op-110409,0,10447.story

Dependable Locks workers charged in scam – St. Louis Business Journal, St. Louis, MO (11/04/2009)
http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2009/11/02/daily45.html

Oh WOW, YNET has an article

US: 3 Israelis arrested for mail fraud

For ALOA's LONG list of articles on this go HERE

http://www.therolladailynews.com/state_news/x255178727/Locksmith-tech-among-those-facing-federal-charges

Eliyahu Barhanun, a.k.a. Eli Barhanun, a.k.a. Eli Barhanin, 29, Creve Coeur, MO, is charged in with a felony violation of structuring financial transactions to avoid federal reporting requirements, in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 5324; and conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343, and 1956, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.

David Peer, 31; and Moshe Aharoni, 28, both of the Clearwater, Florida area, are each charged with conspiracy to recruit and employ aliens who are not authorized to work in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324 and 1324a; mail and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343;and engaging in financial transactions to promote unlawful activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C

.

BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU GAVE DEPENDABLE LOCKSMITHS AN F

**********************************************
SO, let me walk you through this to show you how they work. Let's start HERE

Israel News United States of America News for Israeli Top News חדשות

israel blog news, online news edition, Newspaper from Israel, offers real-time breaking news, breaking News, opinions, analysis, funny news, commentary relating to events, Israel News United States of America News for Israeli Top News חדשות Israel, Middle East from Los Angeles New York Miami News United States of America
**************************************************

NOW, let's take some of the phone numbers they have there, let's start with this one and then Google it 877-364-5264. What do you come up with? Page after page of "locksmiths". "carpet cleaners", "water damage restoration", "moving companies", "roadside assistance". Go ahead, link to them, ALL the same 1-877 number, ALL different webpages that look official, right? OH MY GOD, you can even have your CHRISTMAS LIGHTS put up! Hey, what a deal!

I just called for Christmas lights. Ring.............................

Him: Hello

Me: Hi, I'm calling for Christmas lights, do you do that?

Him: UH HUH

Me: Well I'm wondering why you share a phone number with so many other companies

Him: What do you mean?

Me: Welllllllllllllllllll, I can get my carpet cleaned, my furniture moved, my locks fixed, roadside assistance, AND my Christmas lights put up, it's ONE STOP SHOPPING to call you! Why is that?

Him: Because they are all our companies.

Me: UH, and you are also from Israel doing business here ILLEGALLY and the Feds are closing in on you, MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!!!

OK now it is REALLY getting ridiculous! Take that link for the Christmas lights and go to the bottom and link to where it says Christmas lighting installation. It goes HERE I just dialed the phone number on that link and the guy answered, "Locksmith" I said, "I think I have the wrong number, aren't you a Christmas light company?" "No, we're a locksmith"!

These guys are REALLY confused!

AFFIDAVIT

BEST LINK FOR ALL INFORMATION: LOCKSMITH WIKI

Friday, November 20, 2009

Scam Israeli Owned Locksmiths in the US BUSTED!!!!!

US: 3 Israelis arrested for mail fraud

For ALOA's LONG list of articles on this go HERE

http://www.therolladailynews.com/state_news/x255178727/Locksmith-tech-among-those-facing-federal-charges

Eliyahu Barhanun, a.k.a. Eli Barhanun, a.k.a. Eli Barhanin, 29, Creve Coeur, MO, is charged in with a felony violation of structuring financial transactions to avoid federal reporting requirements, in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 5324; and conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343, and 1956, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.

David Peer, 31; and Moshe Aharoni, 28, both of the Clearwater, Florida area, are each charged with conspiracy to recruit and employ aliens who are not authorized to work in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324 and 1324a; mail and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343;and engaging in financial transactions to promote unlawful activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C

.

BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU GAVE DEPENDABLE LOCKSMITHS AN F

**********************************************
SO, let me walk you through this to show you how they work. Let's start HERE

Israel News United States of America News for Israeli Top News חדשות

These guys are REALLY confused!

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Dispatches: Inside Britain's Israel Lobby (VIDEO)

Watch HERE

Saturday, November 14, 2009

My Thoughts on the Fort Hood Massacre

It's been nine days. It has taken me that long to feel I could even begin to formulate my first clear thoughts on what took place at Fort Hood Novemember 11. We know now that fourteen died. Several are still hospitalized, some in critical condition. Some have been released. The assailant, Dr. Nidal Hasan, major, psychiatrist, U.S. army, Muslim, was shot four times and is currently hospitalized. His family has retained an attorney for him, retired Col. John Gilligan. He has been charged with fourteen counts of murder. The military prosecutor is seeking the death penalty. Currently
army officials have stated, " investigators believe that he acted without the knowledge or guidance of any terror groups." It is also known that Dr. Hasan had email communications with a radical imam in Yemen who had been at the same Virginia mosque where Dr. Hasan's mother's funeral service was held and two of the 9/11 hijackers attended. We have also been told that authorities knew of this communication but have stated that it was within the realm of Dr. Hasan's research.

We have also been told that Dr. Hasan gave a power-point presentation while attending a masters degree program in 2007 (HERE is the presentation) Slides #49 and 50, the most ominous, "Muslim soldiers should not serve in any capacity that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly>>>will vary! Recommendation: Department of Defense should allow Muslim soldiers the option of being released as "consciencious objectors" to increase troop moral and decrease adverse events". The Washington Post has more to say HERE.

We also know that approximately 3500 declared Muslims are currently serving in the military, with estimates as high as 20,000 because the military does not demand an enlistee to state their religious affiliation. Although the Association of Patriotic Arab Americans is made up of Muslims and Christians, it was founded shortly after 911 by Jamal S. Baadani, a Muslim American. We know that the armed services depend heavily on Arabic speaking service men and women to aid in transalation and cultural awareness. The same holds true in Afghanistan, where Muslims are serving. We know that Muslims are serving honorably in both arenas. (This is a well known fact, why am I even writing this other than to remind anyone reading here who may be looking for the reason to cast doubt on all Muslims?)

Caveat, these are not my thoughts on Dr. Hasan's proclivity to commit a horrendous act because he is Muslim. Nothing could be further from the truth. My former husband from whom I am amicably divorced is Muslim, my eldest daughter is Muslim, many of my closest friends and loved ones are Muslim. I do not in any way shape or form believe that Islam had anything to do with Dr. Hasan's murderous rampage. I do however believe that he was an extremely conflicted man who was being forced to do something he simply was not willing to do, this however, let me make this most clear, does not in any way absolve him from what he chose to do. Read, "chose", because as human beings we are born with the power of choice in all we do. Life is not always so simple though. Often times outside influences bear upon our choices. In the case of Dr. Hasan's choice to open fire upon his fellow soldiers, I do believe there were circumstances, had they been different, Dr. Hasan's actions also could have been different.

My thoughts concerning this crystalized when Richard Silverstein posted a question,
"Could Army Have Offered Hasan a Way Out Short of Deployment". In his post he refers to a report from NPR that it is possible that Dr. Hasan made a call last year to the Center on Conscience and War. The caller had asked if there was a way out of the military as a Muslim who objected to fighting a war against Muslims. The NPR report states:

What McNeil said that day, however, no doubt would have offered little
encouragement to Hasan, who was charged Thursday with 13 counts of premeditated murder for allegedly gunning down a dozen fellow service members and a civilian last week at Fort Hood in Texas.

"An aversion to fighting a particular kind of war can't be grounds for
conscientious objector status," McNeil says. "The military regulation says it has to be a sincerely held belief about participation in any war."

And the burden is on the soldier to prove the genesis and sincerity of
those beliefs.

What about others who have sought consciencious objector release from the military? How easy has it been for them to pass the hurdle of the "burden of proof of the genesis and sincerity of those beliefs"? Have there been problems there as well?

The answer is yes. One such case is Agustin Aguayo who went AWOL for 24 days rather than be deployed to Iraq for another tour of duty, turned himself in, was flown back to Germany to be held at Manheim prison awaiting court martial, eventually was court martialed and denied his firmly held consciencious objectors plea, was sentenced to eight months in prison, then recieved a bad conduct discharge from the army which will stay with him for life. Read his petition HERE which was denied.

We know now that Dr. Hasan at the very least in 2007 was of the firmly held belief that Muslims should be granted consciencious objector's release from the military should they request this from his power point presentation. We also know that he very possibly called the Center on Conscience and War. We know from early reports after the Fort Hood shooting also that Dr. Hassan approached the imam at his mosque in Killeen asking him how he should counsel those who may have changed their minds about their commitment and willingness to deploy. In the conversation Dr. Hassan had with his imam the imam states that he told Dr. Hassan “There is something wrong with you”. Granted, the imam is stating Dr. Hassan seemed “disjointed” but was the question pertaining to how he should counsel those whose minds had changed a “wrong question” to ask? Absolutely not, because there are hundreds if not thousands of enlisted military grappling with this same question who have actually taken action themselves without going off the deep end and killing. But many of these men have sought support from the right sources, ie IVAW or Courage to Resist.

Read further what the NPR report states:

“But Hasan’s stated desire to have the military carve out a special
conscientious objector exemption for Muslims, and his pursuit of one for
himself, likely would have ended before it started.

Why? Because Hasan’s singular focus was on an aversion to fighting Muslims, experts say, and not a proven, deeply held abhorrence to all war — no matter the circumstances or the enemy.”

Now, with these narrow defintions which the military has put in place it is virtually impossible to get out of the military on CO status once you have enlisted, so it truly is a case of buyer beware. Having said that, the only course open to those wishing to get out of the military after enlistment due to whatever moral/consciencious/religious reason, just about the only options are fleeing (hundreds of resisters in Canada) or face court martial, imprisonment, dishonorable discharge. In the case of Dr. Hassan, what IF he had been pointed in the right direction where he could have had support? What IF he had been listened to and not told, nope, your CO thoughts won’t work, “there is something wrong with you”.

So, Dr. Hassan sought to carve out a space where Muslims in particular could receive a CO exemption in the case of fighting other Muslims. This was seen as something that couldn’t be done. I ask “why not?” If the person is stating their religious beliefs preclude them from deploying, doesn’t anyone think this should hold water whatever their beliefs are?

Liz Diamond writes a very interesting point in her commentary, "Which wolf do you choose to feed?",

One recurrent theme in the reporting of the Fort Hood shootings is that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan wanted out of a military that was fighting his co-religionists in Afghanistan and Iraq. If, in some upside-down world, the United States were ever to go to war with Israel, many of us would find it easier to understand if Jewish soldiers had difficulty fulfilling their duties, and would likely make some accommodation for those who conscientiously objected.

Interesting point Ms. Diamond. Very interesting point indeed.

Can anyone reading here possibly imagine Dr. Hasan hearing things said by his patients of what they had witnessed in Iraq and Afghanistan? Heck, he more than likely heard stories similar to those told by Winter Soldier. Session after session with patients suffering from PTSD. It is even possible that he had patients who commited suicide as we know the suicide rate for returning military. Can anyone possibly put themselves in his place, the stress he was under, having turned to people for counsel and reaching a dead end? Does this excuse his actions? Absolutely not. However, with the reports coming out of how troubled this man was for a long time, it is also clear that the path he was on was also shared by the military-no way out he thought. Forced to deploy.

My point is that no where thus far have we seen reports that he turned to the organizations who may have been able to support him-again-I am not suggesting that it would have worked-but fact is-thus far we haven’t seen that he did. Under military guidelines he would not have been able to avoid court martial had he refused to deploy, but he would have at least had the support he had been seeking and never received. That is if he had the COURAGE to resist. Death by cop while perpetrating the greatest damage against your percieved enemy, the US military, simply is not an option.

Dr, Hasan had a project-to carve out an exemption for Muslims who seek consciencious objector's status when asked to fight other Muslims. I personally find this honorable that he was seeking to help others who were in the same boat as himself. Again, read what Liz Diamond wrote in her commentary, "Which wolf do you choose to feed?"Unfortunately, no, that isn’t a strong enough word, there are now 14 people dead because the military has their “policies”. And, Dr. Hasan, cracked.

Fact is, the military once you are in makes it virtually impossible to get out. The military needs to RE-EXAMINE this policy, human beings are not robots who can be wiped clean of their own convictions in order to service a machine.

Again, please do not try to say I am making excuses for his actions, because I am NOT. This event I see as having far more nuance and factors which attributed to this disaster than what is being reported or commented on.

To close, Janis Whitlock writes in her article for Psychology Today titled, "Who is to blame when healer turns killer?"

Nidal Malik Hasan will stand trial and be punished. What remains to be
answered is whether we collectively question why there were no off-ramps for Nidal Malik Hasan before he hit his wall..... Nidal Malik Hasan is a man who lived and tragically expressed the contradictions inherent in the collective American psyche - contradictions brought to him over and over through his contact with a countless number of soldiers asked to use violence to create peace, asked to think of and treat as "other" a people Nidal Malik Hasan knew as "us."

Yes Mr. Silverstein, the army could have offered Dr. Hasan, a very troubled man, a way out.

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Amampour Interview with Saeb Erekat

FYI: This is who is the chief negotiator for the Palestinians who the US government is working with, so in light of that, the following is what he said in an interview with Cristiane Amampour: (If anyone reading here has the link for a video I would appreciate if you left it in a comment--Thanks!)SOURCE

Nov 4, 2009 (Al-Bawaba via COMTEX) -- ZZFNV | Quote | Chart | News | PowerRating -- Amanpour's interview with Chief Palestinian Negotiator Saeb Erakat; Helene Pelosse, Director-General of the International Renewable Energy Agency; and Majid Jafar, Executive Director of Crescent Petroleum. See more of Amanpour. at HYPERLINK "https://atlwebaccess.turner.com/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.cnn.com/amanpour" o "https://atlwebaccess.turner.com/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.cnn.com/amanpour" t "_blank" www.cnn.com/amanpour. ***ANY USE OF THIS MATERIAL MUST CREDIT CNN'S 'AMANPOUR' Full Transcript CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, HOST OF CNN'S

AMANPOUR: Tonight, fading hopes for peace in the Middle East and the challenge of moving past petroleum. In our special program from the capital of the United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi, we look at two vital signs shaping the future. Good evening. I'm Christiane Amanpour, and welcome to the program in Abu Dhabi, where we're helping to launch a new CNN center here and for a close-up look at the Middle East in flux. It's another week further away from achieving peace in the Middle East, but here in the Persian Gulf, it's another week closer to figuring out what to do when the oil runs out. We'll ask two people how to reduce the UAE's massive carbon footprint. But first, we turn to a man who spent two decades at the negotiating table. Saeb Erakat has been the chief Palestinian negotiator in talks with a succession of Israeli governments, and we welcome him back to this program. Things seem to be all in flux yet again. Prime Minister Netanyahu has said, "I urge the Palestinians to come to the negotiating table." Are you going to do that?

SAEB ERAKAT, CHIEF PALESTINIAN NEGOTIATOR: I urge him not to miss an opportunity. I urge Netanyahu to choose between settlements or peace. I hope that he chooses peace. He cannot condition us with 3,000 housing units...

AMANPOUR: Well, hold on a second. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said that he's made, quote, "unprecedented concessions." What offer has he made on this settlement issue?

ERAKAT: Well, I think what we heard from Mr. Netanyahu is he wants to continue building 3,000 housing units, he wants to exclude Jerusalem where 59 percent of the construction takes place, and he wants to exclude public buildings and infrastructure. If this happens, it means, Christiane, that in 2010-2011, he will build more settlements that were built in 2008-2009. So I -- I think Madam Clinton should know these figures, because they're...

AMANPOUR: Did she bring this Netanyahu position to Abu Mazen, Mahmoud Abbas?

ERAKAT: No. She said that the United States considers settlements as illegitimate and the United States rejects and doesn't accept the annexation of East Jerusalem by Israel.

AMANPOUR: Except for the fact that, even though President Obama made a complete halt on freeze -- a complete freeze on settlement activity, a hallmark of his policy, they're now softening their tone on that, to the point that Hillary Clinton today has said what Prime Minister Netanyahu's done is unprecedented, and that means more settlements.

ERAKAT: Well, what I think we -- we all have choices, Christiane. Now it's 19 years later. We have accepted and recognized Israel on 78 percent of historic Palestine (ph) and accepted to have our state on the remaining 22 percent of the land. Now, it seems to me that Mr. Netanyahu wants to partition this 22 percent. If this is the case, this is a non-starter.

AMANPOUR: I'm going to play you what Prime Minister Netanyahu said.

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: This is a new demand. It's a change of policy, of Palestinian policy. And it's -- it's -- it doesn't do much for peace. It doesn't work to advance negotiations. It actually is used as a pretext or at least as something, as an obstacle that prevents the re-establishment of negotiations. ERAKAT: That tells me something, that Mr. Netanyahu did not read the roadmap of the Americans, which he claims to have accepted, because in that roadmap, Israel has an obligation to stop settlement activities, including natural growth. So it's not a Palestinian demand, even. It's not a Palestinian precondition. Now the issues of Jerusalem, border, settlements, we're supposed to negotiate. Now he's dictating the outcome of these issues by settlements, by -- by fait accompli policies.

AMANPOUR: OK. Where does this go now? Is there any likelihood in the next few weeks, before Palestinian elections, of -- of -- of the Palestinian president sitting down with the Israeli prime minister, direct negotiations?

ERAKAT: I think -- I think we all have...

AMANPOUR: No, but is there any prospect of that happening?

ERAKAT: With this, the continuation of 3,000 housing units that Netanyahu intends to continue, and to exclude Jerusalem, I think this is going to be a non-starter.

AMANPOUR: A non-starter?

ERAKAT: And I think, further than that, 19 years later, I think President Abbas must ask himself the question, if the Israeli government insists in continuing with settlement activities and dictation and fait accompli policies, is the two states possible anymore? Because the land that I'm supposed to have my state on, the West Bank and Gaza and East Jerusalem, is being eaten up by settlements and wars. And maybe -- and maybe it's time to -- Mr. Netanyahu, he made the choice. He had the choice between peace and settlements, and he chose settlements. And Abu Mazen must make the choice.

AMANPOUR: Between?

ERAKAT: Between continuing following in order his dream and our dreams and our ambitions to achieve a state and the fact on the ground that Israel is undermining the two-state solution. And maybe we should go to see other options. Maybe the one-state solution is the option now.

AMANPOUR: Well, as you know for Israel, that won't be -- that's also a non-starter, a one-state. But let me ask you about Abu Mazen, the president of the Palestinian Authority. He's basically floating the notion that he will not context the next round of elections. He's said that he doesn't want to see -- he might not seek the presidency, nor, indeed, run in the elections. Is that right?

ERAKAT: Yes. And I don't blame him. To be honest with you, I don't -- I don't blame him at all. Not to...

AMANPOUR: Is this a ploy, or do you believe this will happen?

ERAKAT: No, no. Abu Mazen -- Abu Mazen is one of the most decent persons you could encounter in your life. He's not one of us. He's not a bargainer. He's not asking (inaudible) now he had committed all his obligations. He stood all his life for the two-state solution. He had recognized Israel's right to exist in peace and security. And in return, what he sees is more settlements, more of his land being eaten up, more dictation. What he sees is an Israeli government that wants to condition Jerusalem and borders and settlements without negotiations and then blaming him, assigning blame that he doesn't want negotiations.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you about, obviously, a major complicating issue in terms of what the Israelis say and, in fact, now what the Palestinians are saying. The Goldstone report, from what I gather, Abu Mazen was asked, pressured by various people, including the United States, not to move this along from the Human Rights Council and that he got a considerable amount of support from other Arab countries and other -- other -- other nations not to. And now everybody's saying, no, you're wrong, you should have brought it to the Security Council.

ERAKAT: Well, it was really a very special cast in Arab and regional and Israeli and American politics. Goldstone report was there. There were 57 nations discussing this thing. There were a Palestinian-Arab-Muslim proposal. There was an American proposal. Abu Mazen thought we did not have the votes, so it was the motion of postponing the issue...

AMANPOUR: To postpone bringing it to the Security Council.

ERAKAT: Bringing it to the Security Council for three months or six months was brought up. Everybody agreed, and then everybody said we do not agree. So Abu Mazen was extremely under attack in the Arab world, in Palestinian circles, and he...

AMANPOUR: But are you saying they had supported him?

ERAKAT: Well, nobody objected to the notion, and all those present in the Muslim bloc, the Arab bloc, the (inaudible) bloc, nobody objected to the notion of postponement when the Pakistani ambassador read the motion. But once the public opinion was an uprising against the postponement, everybody said, "It's Abu Mazen who did it, not us."

AMANPOUR: So does he feel betrayed by his own fellow Arab leaders?

ERAKAT: He has this feeling, yes. Yes, he feels betrayed by Arabs, Israelis, some Palestinians, and to a certain extent by Americans.

AMANPOUR: And to a certain extent by the Americans?

ERAKAT: Yes.

AMANPOUR: In terms of the -- the -- I mean, I just want to ask you point blank. I heard you say this week something about a third intifada, and I want to know whether you really mean that and that this very, very crucial and difficult moment right now is going to be calmed down, or do you think that there will be violence erupting?

ERAKAT: I don't (inaudible) erupt. I don't want violence to erupt. I have spent my life in building a Palestinian peace camp, Christiane. This is not a job that I do. This is a life commitment. I don't want my son to be a suicide bomber. I don't want my son to be killed in conflict. I want peace. I want a two-state solution. What I said was, the Israeli provocations in East Jerusalem, you remember 2000? This is like pouring fuel to the fire, and we urge them to end it, because we don't want -- because, you know, desperation will lead to desperate acts. (Bill Clinton voiced this same opinion in Abu Dhabi today, read HERE)

AMANPOUR: Abu Mazen said that there was -- he was close to making an agreement with Prime Minister Olmert. Is that true?

ERAKAT: That's true. We never came so close.

AMANPOUR: And yet he didn't go forward.

ERAKAT: No, that's not what happened. What happened was, Olmert gave a map. Abu Mazen gave a map. And for the first time, we had a very close map. We're talking about the high 90s, in terms of percentages of the West Bank and the swaps of land. We agreed to go to Ashant (ph) and on January 3, 2009, to lock in this agreement with Secretary Rice at that time. What happened, Olmert decided to go to Gaza, attack Gaza, and then he had the scandal at home. But I think -- this is why what we're saying to Mr. Netanyahu today, why do you want to eat the apple (ph) from the start? Why do you want to reinvent the wheel? Why can't you have a public statement saying, "I will resume negotiations where we left them on December 2008"?

AMANPOUR: OK, now let me ask you right now, given the unlikely nature of direct negotiations, do you think there will be sort of a go-between activity, indirect negotiations between the Palestinians and -- and the Israelis, perhaps leaving settlements aside, talking about territory, maps?

ERAKAT: Well, look, I think, at the end of the day, the required decisions are not required from Americans or Europeans or Arabs. Decisions must be made by Palestinians and Israelis. What we want Mr. Netanyahu to stand up, to stand tall and tell his people, what they -- what they need to hear, we tell him there was an Israeli government and we came so close with it. Mr. Netanyahu, do you accept to resume negotiations where we left them in December 2008? Because we cannot go back to point blank zero.

AMANPOUR: You say you came very close during the Bush administration.

ERAKAT: Absolutely.
AMANPOUR: So who have been better negotiators or facilitators, the Bush administration or the Obama administration?

ERAKAT: Well, I -- I think Obama did not get his chance yet. It's really unfair to speak of President Obama and to jump to premature conclusions. President Obama has made it very clear that establishing a Palestinian state is a national American interest, and we want him to stay the course. We have no quarrel with Mr. Obama. We have a real quarrel with Mr. Netanyahu. Will you accept to resume negotiations on all core issues where we leave them in December 2008? Question, yes or no, Mr. Netanyahu?

AMANPOUR: So far he's saying no.

ERAKAT: If he says no, then he can do (inaudible) stance saying that he wants to negotiate and, you know, he wants to discuss things and we're saying no. If this is what he wants to achieve, this will not save lives of Israelis and Palestinians.

AMANPOUR: On that note, Mr. Erakat, thank you very much, indeed. Next, the beginnings of an eco-city in the heart of the Persian Gulf. How the region is planning the transition from oil to renewable energies. Stay with us

Monday, November 2, 2009

No Justice for Maher Arar

I cannot write here, not the words that are sticking in my throat choking. This is a DARK omen. President Obama, what are you going to do? Nothing? Are you going to say nothing?

Free: Full Circuit Denies Claim Over Rendition

By Mark Fass

November 03, 2009

A Canadian engineer who claims he was sent by the United States to Syria to be tortured in 2002 cannot sue U.S. officials in federal court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said yesterday in an in banc ruling.

The 7-4 majority held that the Canadian, Maher Arar, failed to state a claim under the Torture Victim Protection Act and that his remaining claims did not satisfy the test for "implied" constitutional causes of action under the 1971 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388.

"Applying our understanding of Supreme Court precedent, we decline to create, on our own, a new cause of action against officers and employees of the federal government," Chief Judge Dennis G. Jacobs wrote in his 59-page majority opinion.

"Rather, we conclude that, when a case presents the intractable 'special factors' apparent here. . . it is for the Executive in the first instance to decide how to implement extraordinary rendition, and for the elected members of Congress—and not for us as judges—to decide whether an individual may seek compensation from government officers and employees directly, or from the government, for a constitutional violation."

In a statement yesterday, David Cole, the Georgetown University Law Center professor who argued Mr. Arar's appeal in cooperation with the Center for Constitutional Rights, said the ruling "effectively places executive officials above the law."

"This decision says that U.S. officials can intentionally send a man to be tortured abroad, bar him from any access to the courts while doing so, and then avoid any legal accountability thereafter," he said. "It effectively places executive officials above the law, even when accused of a conscious conspiracy to torture."

Read the full article>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In contrast, from the Canadians:

Prime Minister releases letter of apology to Maher Arar and his family and announces completion of mediation process
26 January 2007
Ottawa, Ontario

Prime Minister Stephen Harper today released the letter of apology he has sent to Maher Arar and his family for any role Canadian officials may have played in what happened to Mr. Arar, Monia Mazigh and their family in 2002 and 2003.

“Although the events leading up to this terrible ordeal happened under the previous government, our Government will do everything in its power to ensure that the issues raised by Commissioner O’Connor are addressed,” said the Prime Minister. “I sincerely hope that these actions will help Mr. Arar and his family begin a new and hopeful chapter in their lives.”

Canada’s New Government has accepted all 23 recommendations made in Commissioner O’Connor’s first report, and has already begun acting upon them. The Government has sent letters to both the Syrian and the U.S. governments formally objecting to the treatment of Mr. Arar. Ministers Day and MacKay have also expressed Canada’s concerns on this important issue to their American counterparts. Finally, Canada has removed Mr. Arar from Canadian lookout lists, and requested that the United States amend its own records accordingly.

The Prime Minister also announced that Canada’s New Government has successfully completed the mediation process with Mr. Arar, fulfilling another one of Commissioner O’Connor’s recommendations. This settlement, mutually agreed upon by all parties, ensures that Mr. Arar and his family will obtain fair compensation, in the amount of $10.5 million, plus legal costs, for the ordeal they have suffered.

The text of the Prime Minister’s letter to Maher Arar is attached.

* * * *

Dear Mr. Arar:

On behalf of the Government of Canada, I wish to apologize to you, Monia Mazigh and your family for any role Canadian officials may have played in the terrible ordeal that all of you experienced in 2002 and 2003.

Although these events occurred under the last government, please rest assured that this government will do everything in its power to ensure that the issues raised by Commissioner O’Connor are addressed.

I trust that, having arrived at a negotiated settlement, we have ensured that fair compensation will be paid to you and your family. I sincerely hope that these words and actions will assist you and your family in your efforts to begin a new and hopeful chapter in your lives.

Yours sincerely,

Fault Lines - Maher Arar full interview