Response to DCCC

April 16, 2009

Hon. Speaker of the House

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee

430 South Capitol Street, SE

Washington DC 20003

April 4, 2009

Dear Madam Speaker,

It is an honor to receive your invitation to continue volunteering for the various issues highlighted in your letter.

Since I’m currently engaged in reviving my career, and attending to family interests placed on hold the entire past year due to my extensive involvement in the Presidential campaign 2008, there is an urgency to fulfill personal and financial commitments towards my young dependent family.

However, I will continue to serve humanity to the extent possible for the people at home and around the world.

I take this opportunity to wish you the best in your endeavors.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, Politics | Leave a Comment

Keeping Democracy Alive

March 8, 2009

The new administration is still in the process of filling positions and since the beginning, there has been problems with some major cabinet appointments as the nominees had withdrawn from considerations to avoid political challenges during the hearing process.

Lately, it appears to be the nominee CNN medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta.

It is evidenced in the following article;

Gupta won’t be next surgeon general

Neurosurgeon and TV Correspondent withdraws from Consideration

By Richard Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press – Thank you.

CNN medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta won’t be the next surgeon general, the Obama administration confirmed Thursday.

Gupta 39, a neurosurgeon with star appeal, was seen as President Barack Obama’s first pick for the job. He would have brought instant recognition to the office of surgeon general, a post that has lacked visibility since the days of C. Everett Koop during Ronald Reagan’s presidency.

An administration official said that Gupta had been under “serious consideration” but took himself out of the running because he wants to focus on his medical career and spend more time with his family.

“We know he will continue to serve and educate the public through his work with media and in the medical arena,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of nominations.

The official said there were no problems that would have disqualified Gupta, and it was his decision to withdraw.

The surgeon general is the nation’s doctor, and while the job doesn’t involve much policymaking responsibility, it’s a bully pulpit for promoting public health. Gupta could have helped Obama pitch his health care reform plan.

Initial reports in early January that Obama had approached Gupta about the job created a stir. The new president had not yet taken office. The chairman of the American Medical Association’s board said at the time it would be a boon to the government if Gupta accepted.

But Gupta would have had to give up a lucrative career. He hosts “House Call” on CNN, contributes reports to CBS News and writes a column for Time magazine. He also practices surgery at Atlanta’s Grady Memorial Hospital, which sees more than its share of trauma cases.

Political opposition had started to form.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., called Gupta inexperienced and circulated a letter urging Obama not to appoint him. Conyers is a leading supporter of health care reform that would create a government system similar to Canada’s and is particularly influential among liberals.

Gupta does have some Washington experience. During the Clinton administration, he served as a White House fellow and a special adviser to then-first lady Hillary Clinton.”

———————————————————————————————————————

Washington Hypocrisy:

Strangely enough, with recent appointees for high profile cabinet positions involving decision-making on International crisis affecting billions of lives around the globe “experience” didn’t seem to matter to the members of the hearing committee.

Some were sworn in with a mere formality hearing and they were aptly called by the media a shoe-in appointment.

Also, there was swift approval of nominees considered “controversial” with tax issues, conflict of interest notwithstanding the nation’s critical cabinet post supposedly being “unconstitutional.”

However, an administrative post with none or minimal policymaking responsibility as cited in the above article, aroused skepticism in the minds of certain members prompting them to an all out campaign against the adequately qualified and nationally as well as internationally prominent candidate with White House experience, reveals the true colors of Washington Politics.

Last fall, history was made for a reason. People of the human race overwhelmingly came together to convey a loud and clear message…

It is no longer the “red states” or the “blue states”, but it is the United States of America.

Apparently, like everything else it is being regarded a catchy campaign slogan rather than embracing and most importantly practicing to keep democracy alive.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under United States | Leave a Comment

Conflict of Interest

January 28, 2009

Secretary of State

By Padmini Arhant

Secretary of State position has been filled and the appointee, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has assumed office.

Did the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the full Senate pay any attention to the substantial facts and evidences provided by citizens and news editorials on this matter as well as other cabinet post appointments?

Apparently not and that appears to be the interesting focus for concerned electorate.

—————————————————————————————————-

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources

By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writer – 35 mins ago 01/27/09

WASHINGTON – Former President Bill Clinton earned nearly $6 million in speaking fees last year, almost all of it from foreign companies, according to financial documents filed by his wife, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton .

The documents obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press show that $4.6 million of the former president’s reported $5.7 million in 2008 honoraria came from foreign sources, including Kuwait’s national bank , other firms and groups in Canada, Germany, India, Malaysia , Mexico and Portugal and a Hong Kong-based company that spent $100,000 on federal lobbying last year.

Executives at many of the firms that paid honoraria to Bill Clinton have also donated large amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation , according to documents it released last year as part of an agreement with Congress on Hillary Clinton’s nomination as secretary of state.

That agreement was aimed at preventing the appearance of any conflict of interest between the ex-president’s charitable organization and his wife’s new job as the United States’ top diplomat.

In addition to Bill Clinton’s income from speaking fees, Hillary Clinton reported joint holdings of between $6.1 million and $30.3 million in a blind trust as well as cash, insurance and retirement accounts worth between $1 million and $5.2 million.
Hillary Clinton made between $50,000 and $100,000 in royalties from her 2003 memoir "Living History."

Bill Clinton earned between $100,000 and $1 million in royalties for his 2004 autobiography "My Life," the documents show. The Clintons reported no liabilities.

All senior officials in the Obama administration are required to complete a detailed disclosure of their personal finances, including spouse and children, which is updated yearly.

The two men selected to serve as Hillary Clinton’s deputy secretaries of state, Jacob Lew and James Steinberg , also filed financial disclosure forms.

Lew, a former Clinton administration official who recently headed Citigroup’s Alternative Investments unit, reported 2008 salary income of just over $1 million along with numerous investments, including between $50,000 and $100,000 in State of Israel bonds .
Steinberg, another former Clinton administration official who recently was a professor at the University of Texas, reported receiving $35,000 in 2008 for foreign speaking engagements, including three before Japanese media firms and one before the Confederation of Indian Industries in New Delhi.

The most Bill Clinton got from a foreign source was $1.25 million for appearing at five events sponsored by the Toronto-based Power Within Inc., a company that puts on motivational and training programs around North America , according to Hillary Clinton’s submission.

For one Power Within speech alone, delivered in Edmonton in June 2008, Clinton was paid $525,000, the most for any single event that year. For one event, he got $200,000 and for three others he received $175,000 each, the documents show.

The Hong Kong firm, Hybrid Kinetic Automotive Holdings, paid Clinton a $300,000 honorarium on Dec. 4, 2008. Twenty five days later, on Dec. 29, a man listed as the company’s chief financial officer, Jack Xi Deng, made a $25,000 cash donation to the Virginia gubernatorial campaign of Clinton confidant Terry McAuliffe , according to the Virginia Public Access Project.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the Hong Kong firm paid at least $100,000 in 2008 to lobbyists on immigration issues.

The other foreign honoraria Bill Clinton received in 2008 are:
$450,000 from AWD Holding AG , a German-based international financial services company.

$350,000 from the state-owned National Bank of Kuwait . The Kuwaiti government donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation , according to the foundation’s disclosure.

$300,000 from Value Grupo Financiero SA de CV, a Mexico -based financial holding company , whose chief executive officer , Carlos Bremer Gutierrez, is one of the Clinton Foundation’s leading donors. Gutierrez donated between $250,001 to $500,000 to the foundation, according to foundation’s documents.

$250,000 from Germany’s Media Control Gmbh, which bills itself as the world’s leading provider of entertainment data and was founded by Karlheinz Koegel, who contributed $100,001 to $250,000 to the Clinton foundation.

$200,000 from Malaysia’s Petra Equities Management on behalf of the Sekhar Foundation run by Malaysian multimillionaire Vinod Sekhar who donated between $25,001 and $50,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to its documents.

In addition to the foreign earnings,

Bill Clinton made just over $1 million from domestic speaking engagements, including $250,000 from MSG Entertainment , $225,000 from the National Association of Home Care and Hospice, $200,000 from the United Nations Association , $175,000 from the ING North America Insurance Corp., $125,000 from the Rodman and Renshaw Capital Group and $100,000 from the Hollywood Radio and Television Society.

————————————————————————————————————-

Voice of Concern: By Padmini Arhant

I suppose, now it must be clear to America why despite the impressive combined earnings by the then Senator and now newly appointed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s request for personal donation was not met .

The impression might be what could possibly a small, diminutive, frail and fragile individual’s support or the lack thereof do to powerful nominations and subsequent confirmation.

It was already proven during the election when several requests and demands were placed for endorsement of the Presidential candidates.

Otherwise, would any ordinary citizen be sought after relentlessly by the candidates for endorsement in a high profile and vigorously contested political battle?

Further, Supreme force representative’s subservient manner should not be translated as an inferior or a weak personality in any shape due to intimacy with natural phenomenon.

Regardless, the stark contrast between the powerful on earth and those representing the power of the universe is,

The latter are courageous in speaking the truth and standing up for justice and peace wherever and whenever it applies.

History is testimony that Prophets and messengers were subject to incredible endurance tests including death for some as in the case of Lord Jesus Christ.

In the ancient era, Prophets and Messiahs had to prove their identity and worthiness by performing wonders or miracles.

It ranged from bearing the cross and resurrection to life and possessing witnesses for the ability to walk on water.

Now, in the new millennium the expectation of the virtuous could still be to exhibit magic moments by spitting fire, moving mountains and relevantly excavation of economy from deep recession heading towards Great Depression.

Such expectations by those considering themselves extraordinary are not surprising.

In fact, up until recently the utterance of God and any discussions related to the highest grace was argued as undemocratic by calling for elimination of such discourse in public square.

Anyone challenging the might of the mortals is frequently dismissed as a questionable character and their concerns for humanity invalidated through defiance per recent demonstration of Cabinet posts confirmation.

All those bound by ethics and compliance of common law in a democracy rejecting the plea with presentation of facts and evidences against Hillary Clinton’s confirmation as well as other appointees are in denial of the highest authority.

Hence, the comment during the Radio talk show on “Free Palestine” about public displays of prayers and worships as meaningless because of selective embracing of God by political figures.

Thus, forcing one to arrive at a conclusion that even “Almighty God” is a fair game in politics.

It goes to prove that Cabinet posts in any administration could be picked and chosen by the privileged members of a political party and some outsiders through virtue of their association with previous administrations leaving no opportunities for the deserving aspirants outside the circle in the so-called democracy.

Then why bother wasting taxpayers’ dollars with senate hearing and confirmation process if the purpose is meant to be a mere formality?

With foreign governments and sources donating to Clinton foundation and honorarium for his speeches, should American electorate consider such generosity by these entities an act of pure benevolence for humanity and not have Clintons reciprocate in return?

Alternatively, are these donors so magnanimous that they are involved in a great humanitarian effort whilst ignoring the plight of the population in their own backyard?
Washington was to be changed and shaken up to give way to new political system.

Is shuffling the cabinet posts among the group consisting of those demanding party favors a fair selection process?

Does democracy really have a chance when Power is still the dominant force crushing the will of the republic?

The lawmakers awestruck by candidates despite controversial background moved forward to fill positions in fulfillment of their obligations and responsibilities with no regard for due process.

New administration was sworn in with the pledge to America to change Washington corroded with corruption, cronyism and power politics into new era guided by the constitution and democratic values.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Promising "a new era of openness in our country," President Obama signed executive orders Wednesday relating to ethics guidelines for staff members of his administration.

"Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," Obama said.

Has there been a breach of constitutional law in the Cabinet post appointments?

It is worth examining, as it appears to be the case according to some concerned citizens who are also legal experts in the constitutional law.

————————————————————————————————————-

Source: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/11/25/is-hillary-clinton-unconstitutional/ –

Thank you.

Is Hillary Clinton Unconstitutional?

Posted by Ilya Shapiro, Previous: There’s No Change Here
It appears that there may be genuine constitutional problems with her expected nomination. To wit, Article I, section 6, clause 2 reads:

Via http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a1_6_2.html

Article 1, Section 6, Clause 2

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

That is, under this “Emoluments Clause,” members of Congress are expressly forbidden to take any appointed position within the government which was created or whose pay has been increased during their current term in office.

Now, a January 2008 executive order, promulgated in accordance with a statute from the 1990s that addressed cost of living adjustments for certain federal officials, raised the Secretary of State’s salary, thus constitutionally prohibiting any then-serving senator who remains in office from taking charge of Foggy Bottom. (Sen. Clinton’s current term began in January 2007 and expires in January 2013.)

—————————————————————————————————————————————

Source: http://volokh.com/posts/1227548910.shtml

Hillary Clinton and the Emoluments Clause:

There’s been talk about whether Sen. Hillary Clinton is disqualified from a position as Secretary of State by the Emoluments Clause:

Adam Bonin’s Daily Kos blog has a bit more on this, but the short version is that a Jan. 2008 executive order, promulgated pursuant to a 1990s cost of living adjustment statute, raised the salary of the Secretary of State, so the Emoluments Clause question is in play.

I very recently read an article by John O’Connor on the subject, The Emoluments Clause: An Anti-Federalist Intruder in a Federalist Constitution, 24 Hofstra L. Rev. 89 (1995), so I asked him what he thought.
Here’s his answer (some paragraph breaks added); please note that I have some comments at the end of this post that express a somewhat different view:

It seems to me that there are two questions regarding whether the Emoluments Clause to the U.S. Constitution (Art. I, § 6, cl. 2) renders Senator Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligible for appointment as Secretary of State:

(1) whether Senator Clinton is now ineligible for appointment; and

(2) if Senator Clinton is ineligible for appointment, whether that ineligibility may be cured by the so-called “Saxbe Fix,” whereby the Secretary of State’s salary is reduced to the salary in effect before Senator Clinton’s current Senate term began.

I think it is beyond dispute that Senator Clinton is currently ineligible for appointment as secretary of State. I also believe that the better construction of the Emoluments Clause is that the “Saxbe Fix” does not remove this ineligibility.

The Saxbe Fix got its name because the Nixon administration sought to eliminate Senator William Saxbe’s ineligibility for appointment as Attorney General by reducing the salary of that office to the level that existed before Senator Saxbe’s appointment.

The Emoluments Clause provides that “[n]o Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time.”

As I understand it, 5 U.S.C. § 5303 provides for an automatic annual increase in certain federal salaries, including the salary of the Secretary of State, unless the President certifies that an increase in salaries is inappropriate.

The salary of the Secretary of State has increased during Senator Clinton’s current Senate term, which does not end until 2012.

Therefore, under a straightforward application of the Emoluments Clause, Senator Clinton is ineligible for appointment as Secretary of State because the emoluments of that office “have been encreased” during Senator Clinton’s current Senate term, and this disability continues until the end of “the time for which [she] was elected, or until January 2013.

I do not believe it affects the analysis that the salary increase occurred as a result of an Executive Order or that the statute creating these quasi-automatic salary increases was enacted prior to Senator Clinton’s current term.

By its plain language, the Emoluments Clause applies when the office’s salary “shall have been encreased,” without regard to exactly how it was increased.

Indeed, an early proposed draft of the clause included language limiting it to an increase of emoluments “by the legislature of the U[nited] States,” and was later revised to encompass any increase in emoluments.

It is worth noting that several Framers thought, without much explication, that the clause was too lax as initially drafted. The clause also does not require that a Senator or Representative have voted for the increase.

This focus [on] a past act of increasing emoluments, rather than on the emoluments existing at the time of appointment suggests to me that the clause’s best reading is that an act of increasing emoluments renders members of Congress ineligible for appointment [to] the office until their respective congressional terms end.

In addition, one of the central theses of my law review article on the subject is that the purpose of the Emoluments Clause is disserved by the Saxbe Fix.

The records of the federal constitutional convention indicate two purposes underlying the Emoluments Clause:

(1) general anti-corruption, whereby Congress might conspire with the President to create offices, or to give existing offices exorbitant salaries, with the understanding that a Member of Congress would be appointed to the office; and

(2) limiting the size, importance, and reach of the federal bureaucracy.

————————————————————————————————————————————–

Republic Action: By Padmini Arhant

It is important for the people of the Republic to awaken and ensure that elected representatives honor commitments towards their constituents and the nation by respecting the constitutional law and abide by the common rules and regulations meant for all regardless of societal hierarchy.

Indeed, it is a huge disappointment that electorate is relevant only during the electoral process.

Once the ballots are cast and power entrusted to the lawmakers as the people representatives, the abuse of power is a reflex action with a tendency to discount and dismiss the will of democracy particularly during federal appointments and other legislative matters.

Any functional democracy requires that apart from transparency and accountability, the office of Presidency and Congress act with entire integrity in recruitments by not violating the trust of the people and the constitution governing the nation.

Additionally, rather than personal choices for various cabinet posts contributing to ethical issues, the real change in Washington would be depicted if the cabinet posts were advertised for direct public appointments reflecting the acknowledgement of talent and caliber among the eligible electorate.

Is it too late to review the appointments that have already taken place?

Action is anytime better than inaction to confirm the power of democracy.

Shouldn’t we all know now from the past eight years’ legacy?

The voice of America is the only legitimate force that can bring about any Positive Change in every citizen’s life.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

P.S. Please review the insightful presentation “Secretary of State Nomination” on www.padminiarhant.com for complete comprehension.

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under United States | Leave a Comment

Conflict of Interest

January 28, 2009

Secretary of State

By Padmini Arhant

Secretary of State position has been filled and the appointee, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has assumed office.

Apparently not and that appears to be the interesting focus for concerned electorate.

——————————————————–

Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources

By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writer – 35 mins ago

That agreement was aimed at preventing the appearance of any conflict of interest between the ex-president’s charitable organization and his wife’s new job as the United States’ top diplomat.

Bill Clinton earned between $100,000 and $1 million in royalties for his 2004 autobiography "My Life," the documents show. The Clintons reported no liabilities.

All senior officials in the Obama administration are required to complete a detailed disclosure of their personal finances, including spouse and children, which is updated yearly.

The two men selected to serve as Hillary Clinton’s deputy secretaries of state, Jacob Lew and James Steinberg , also filed financial disclosure forms.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the Hong Kong firm paid at least $100,000 in 2008 to lobbyists on immigration issues.

The other foreign honoraria Bill Clinton received in 2008 are:
$450,000 from AWD Holding AG , a German-based international financial services company.

$350,000 from the state-owned National Bank of Kuwait . The Kuwaiti government donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation , according to the foundation’s disclosure.

In addition to the foreign earnings,

———————————————————————————————————————

Voice of Concern: By Padmini Arhant

The impression might be what could possibly a small, diminutive, frail and fragile individual’s support or the lack thereof do to powerful nominations and subsequent confirmation.

It was already proven during the election when several requests and demands were placed for endorsement of the Presidential candidates.

Otherwise, would any ordinary citizen be sought after relentlessly for endorsement in a high profile and vigorously contested political battle by the contestants?

Further, Supreme force representative’s subservient manner should not be translated as an inferior or a weak personality in any shape due to intimacy with natural phenomenon.

Regardless, the stark contrast between the powerful on earth and those representing the power of the universe is,

The latter are courageous in speaking the truth and standing up for justice and peace wherever and whenever it applies.

History is testimony that Prophets and messengers were subject to incredible endurance tests including death for some as in the case of Lord Jesus Christ.

In the ancient era, Prophets and Messiahs had to prove their identity and worthiness by performing wonders or miracles.

It ranged from bearing the cross and resurrection to life and possessing witnesses for the ability to walk on water.

Such expectations by those considering themselves extraordinary are not surprising.

In fact, up until recently the utterance of God and any discussions related to the highest grace was argued as undemocratic by calling for elimination of such discourse in public square.

Hence, the comment during the Radio talk show on “Free Palestine” about public displays of prayers and worships as meaningless because of selective embracing of God by political figures.

Thus, forcing one to arrive at a conclusion that even “Almighty God” is a fair game in politics.

Then why bother wasting taxpayers’ dollars with senate hearing and confirmation process if the purpose is meant to be a mere formality?

Alternatively, are these donors so magnanimous that they are involved in a great humanitarian effort whilst ignoring the plight of the population in their own backyard?

Washington was to be changed and shaken up to give way to new political system.

Is shuffling the cabinet posts among the group consisting of those demanding party favors a fair selection process?

Does democracy really have a chance when Power is still the dominant force crushing the will of the republic?

The lawmakers awestruck by candidates despite controversial background moved forward to fill positions in fulfillment of their obligations and responsibilities with no regard for due process.

New administration was sworn in with the pledge to America to change Washington corroded with corruption, cronyism and power politics into new era guided by the constitution and democratic values.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Promising "a new era of openness in our country," President Obama signed executive orders Wednesday relating to ethics guidelines for staff members of his administration.

"Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," Obama said.

Has there been a breach of constitutional law in the Cabinet post appointments?

It is worth examining, as it appears to be the case according to some concerned citizens who are also legal experts in the constitutional law.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Source: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/11/25/is-hillary-clinton-unconstitutional/ – Thank you.

Is Hillary Clinton Unconstitutional?

Posted by Ilya Shapiro , Previous: There’s No Change Here

It appears that there may be genuine constitutional problems with her expected nomination. To wit, Article I, section 6, clause 2 reads:

Via http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a1_6_2.html

Article 1, Section 6, Clause 2

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

——————————————————————————————————————————————

Source: http://volokh.com/posts/1227548910.shtml – Thank you.

Hillary Clinton and the Emoluments Clause:

There’s been talk about whether Sen. Hillary Clinton is disqualified from a position as Secretary of State by the Emoluments Clause:

Adam Bonin’s Daily Kos blog has a bit more on this, but the short version is that a Jan. 2008 executive order , promulgated pursuant to a 1990s cost of living adjustment statute, raised the salary of the Secretary of State, so the Emoluments Clause question is in play.

I very recently read an article by John O’Connor on the subject, The Emoluments Clause: An Anti-Federalist Intruder in a Federalist Constitution , 24 Hofstra L. Rev. 89 (1995) , so I asked him what he thought.

Here’s his answer (some paragraph breaks added); please note that I have some comments at the end of this post that express a somewhat different view:

(1) whether Senator Clinton is now ineligible for appointment; and

The salary of the Secretary of State has increased during Senator Clinton’s current Senate term, which does not end until 2012.

By its plain language, the Emoluments Clause applies when the office’s salary “shall have been encreased,” without regard to exactly how it was increased.

In addition, one of the central theses of my law review article on the subject is that the purpose of the Emoluments Clause is disserved by the Saxbe Fix.

The records of the federal constitutional convention indicate two purposes underlying the Emoluments Clause:

(2) limiting the size, importance, and reach of the federal bureaucracy.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Republic Action: By Padmini Arhant

Indeed, it is a huge disappointment that electorate is relevant only during the electoral process.

Additionally, rather than personal choices for various cabinet posts contributing to ethical issues, the real change in Washington would be depicted if the cabinet posts were advertised for direct public appointments reflecting the acknowledgement of talent and caliber among the eligible electorate.

Is it too late to review the appointments that have already taken place?

Action is anytime better than inaction to confirm the power of democracy.

Shouldn’t we all know now from the past eight years’ legacy?

The voice of America is the only legitimate force that can bring about any Positive Change in every citizen’s life.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

P.S. Please review the insightful presentation “Secretary of State Nomination” on www.padminiarhant.com for complete comprehension.

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Politics, United States | Leave a Comment

Radio Show

January 20, 2009

I will be doing a live radio show for 60 minutes from 9.00P.M to 10.00P.M. (PST) TODAY JANUARY 20, 2009

Podcast live : http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Padmini-A

Guest Call-in-number: (646) 727 -3778

Topic: Presidential Inauguration of the 44th President of the United States.

Your comments and thoughts are welcome in the political discourse.

Look forward to the session.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

P.S. A convenient time will be scheduled to accommodate listeners from the other time zones particularly EST starting tomorrow January 21, 2009.

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment

Presidential Inaugural Invitation

January 20, 2009

To: President-elect Barack Obama

Vice President-elect Joe Biden

With great humility and honor, I accept and acknowledge your personal invitation as well as the formal invitation from the Presidential Inaugural Committee to attend the historic 56th Presidential Inauguration currently held in the nation’s capitol, Washington D.C.

I apologize for not being able to participate in the historic event even though I had every desire to be present with millions of citizens excited to share their overwhelming joy and happiness on this important day.

Please trust me; I am with you right from the moment of swearing in to the last event of the day.

I take this opportunity and convey my heartfelt congratulations on your extraordinary feat as the 44th President of the United States on this day January 20, 2009.

Wishing you phenomenal success in all your endeavors.

Best Wishes

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under United States | Leave a Comment

Secretary of State Nomination

January 15, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for a job interview as the nominee for one of the most important Cabinet positions in the White House Administration.

The hearing as such did not appear to be a formal environment for the hiring and approval of the crucial Cabinet post representing the U.S. Foreign policy requiring reparation and image restoration.

Ironically, Senate committee with members on both sides of the aisle euphoric with the designate, conducted the session in a manner of formality rather than a serious protocol in assessing the eligibility, experience or the lack thereof and particularly the conflict of interest arising from the nominee’s personal and political background.

In the absence of any hard hitting, nail biting moments given the present highly volatile world environment, the hearing as described by the media a love fest … delivered an overwhelming majority of 16-1 vote in favor of the nomination.

Often, when a democratic process subsidized with lack of objectivity poses an imminent threat to the credibility of such hearings. Notwithstanding, the irrelevance of the job criteria involving national and international interests revealed in similar hasty decisions.

Senate performance of this nature legitimately leads to frustration and disappointment of the voters expecting rigorous interrogation of the candidates vying for major representation in matters like foreign policy.

HTTP://WWW.DEMOCRATANDCHRONICLE.COM/ARTICLE/20090115/OPINION04/901150346/1041/OPINION

JANUARY 15, 2009

U.S. SENATE SHOULD BE TOUGHER DURING CABINET CONFIRMATION PROCESS

“Senators must ask hard questions of these nominees and demand that they create an environment of scrupulousness and openness in their departments.

As for Clinton, it’s legitimate to worry that foreign governments will try to use support for former president Bill Clinton’s foundations to curry favor with her.

There are safeguards in place. But are they sufficient? Is accountability what it should be for all the Cabinet posts? The Senate must be tough overseers during these important hearings.”
——————————————————————————————————————————————————-

It is important to examine the genuine concerns across the globe, as Secretary of State is the initial representative and emissary of U.S. foreign policy currently under siege in the devastating crime against humanity with Israel’s determination to wipe Gaza of the map.

Contradictory to Senate Committee view of Senator Clinton’s entitlement to the high profile yet delicate ambassadorial position, the world has a different perspective of Senator Clinton’s nomination that deserves attention.

Prior to proceeding with the thoughts and presentations by various groups both nationally and internationally, it is vital to define the Secretary of State position.

UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF STATE

FROM WIKIPEDIA, THE FREE ENCYCLOPEDIA – THANK YOU.

The United States Secretary of State is the head of the United States Department of State, concerned with foreign affairs.

The Secretary is a member of the President’s Cabinet and the highest-ranking cabinet secretary both in line of succession and order of precedence.

HISTORY –

Particularly in the early years of the republic, the post was regarded as a natural stepping-stone to the Presidency.

Secretaries of State who later occupied the White House included Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren and James Buchanan.

FUNCTIONS

The Secretary also serves as a principal adviser to the President in the determination of U.S. foreign policy and,

In recent decades, has become responsible for overall direction, coordination, and supervision of interdepartmental activities of the U.S. Government overseas, excepting certain military activities.

As the highest-ranking member of the cabinet,

The Secretary of State is fourth in line to succeed the Presidency.

Federal law (3 U.S.C. § 20) provides that a presidential resignation must be accomplished by written communication from the President to the Secretary of State. This has occurred once, when President Richard Nixon resigned in August 1974 via a letter to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

——————————————————————————————————————————————-
National and International Radar Image of Senator Hillary Clinton:

Conflict of Interest:

1. “Clinton urged to reveal more on husband’s donors

By SHARON THEIMER, Associated Press Writer Sharon Theimer, Associated Press Writer – 47 mins ago – January 13, 2009 – Thank you.

Extract of the article:

WASHINGTON – Hillary Rodham Clinton, President-elect Barack Obama’s choice for secretary of state, rejected calls Tuesday for more details about donors to her husband’s foundation, saying she has revealed enough to avoid even the hint of conflicts.

An Associated Press review found that Clinton stepped in at least a half-dozen times on issues involving businesses and others who later gave to the charity.

The AP reported Tuesday that Hillary Clinton intervened at least six times in government issues directly affecting companies and others that later contributed to her husband’s foundation. The AP obtained three pieces of the correspondence under the Freedom of Information Act.

The letters and donations involve pharmaceutical companies and telecommunications and energy interests; all said their donations to the Clinton foundation had nothing to do with Hillary Clinton’s previous work on their issues.

Hillary Clinton wrote to the Federal Communications Commission in February 2004 expressing concern that changes to competitive local exchange carrier access rates could hurt carriers such as New York-based PAETEC Communications.

PAETEC’s chief executive is Arunas Chesonis, whose family and charity later contributed to the Clinton foundation.

Sarah Wood, executive director of the Chesonis Family Foundation, was invited by a part of the Clinton Foundation — the Clinton Global Initiative — to join the initiative after it was established in 2005, Wood said Monday.

The Chesonis family personally paid $15,000 for Wood’s membership in CGI in September 2007, and when membership fees rose to $20,000 in 2008, the Chesonis foundation paid them in March, Wood said.

PAETEC spokesman Christopher Muller said PAETEC had no involvement in the Chesonis donations.

PAETEC asked Clinton to intervene with the FCC, he said.”

——————————————————————————————————————————————————
2. Source: Washington Post Editorials

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/18/AR2008111802791.html

Wednesday, November 19, 2008; Page A20

If Mr. Obama chooses Ms. Clinton, he’ll get Mr. Clinton — two for the price of one, you might say.

And this is where critics of the Clintons, and even their supporters, have legitimate concerns.

Some of these are backward-looking, regarding the hundreds of millions of dollars that Mr. Clinton has raised for his presidential library and foundation, including from foreign governments, foreign individuals and others with an interest in foreign affairs.

We have long argued that presidents, sitting or retired, should not be permitted to collect this sort of secret cash for their libraries.

The imperative for disclosure is even greater in the case of the Clintons because of Ms. Clinton’s continuing involvement in public life.

Among those reported to have given $1 million or more are Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei, Taiwan and the United Arab Emirates; the Saudi royal family gave $10 million.

If Ms. Clinton is to serve as the nation’s chief diplomat, the nation is entitled to know what foreign interests have donated generously to help her husband.

Even more complicated is how the Clintons could pursue their parallel careers if she were to become secretary of state.

Mr. Clinton would have to give up his lucrative foreign speechmaking and deal-brokering.

It is difficult to see how Mr. Clinton’s work with a nongovernmental organization could continue alongside Ms. Clinton’s work for the U.S. government.

When Mr. Clinton exhorted a foreign government to provide funding or cooperation, would he be carrying the implicit support of the U.S. government?

Consider Mr. Clinton’s September 2005 trip to Kazakhstan with Canadian mining tycoon Frank Giustra, who has given $130 million to the Clinton foundation.

The two men attended a banquet with Kazakh strongman Nursultan Nazarbayev; within a few days, Mr. Giustra had obtained preliminary agreements for his company to buy into uranium projects controlled by the state-owned uranium agency.

Neither President Obama nor, if it comes to that, Secretary of State Clinton needs headaches like these.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Defiance In Complying With National Interests:

SENATE PANEL BACKS CLINTON AS SECRETARY OF STATE

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer Anne Flaherty, Associated Press Writer – Thu Jan 15, 12:37 pm ET

“Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, the Foreign Relations Committee’s top Republican, has proposed that Bill Clinton’s foundation reject any overseas contributions and take other steps to improve transparency.

Clinton rejected Lugar’s ideas, contending that her agreement to publish an annual list of the foundation’s donors and alert ethics officials to potential conflicts of interest already goes above and beyond any ethics regulations.

Bill Clinton’s charity, which financed his presidential library in Little Rock, Ark., and efforts in dozens of countries to reduce poverty and treat AIDS, has relied on sizable donations from foreign governments, including Saudi Arabia.”
——————————————————————————–

OBJECTIVITY:

REASONS WHY HILLARY CLINTON SHOULD NOT BE BARACK OBAMA’S SECRETARY OF STATE

POSTED BY: TOBY HARNDEN, US EDITOR ,TELEGRAPH, CO. U.K.

Posted in: Foreign Correspondents

Here’s why:

1. A central appeal of Obama’s candidacy was that his election would mark the end of the Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush-Bush years. Hillary Clinton in such a senior position, along with all the other Clinton retreads, blows that out of the water.

2. Bill Clinton would move, once again, to centre stage. Do you think Obama could control him?

3. Specifically, Bill Clinton’s past and future business dealings abroad and donors to his Foundation could be a huge problem and potential source of scandal.

4. Hillary Clinton proved herself a poor manager during her campaign.

Managing the huge foreign policy bureaucracy is a much bigger task.

5. Would she be a team player? She campaigned extensively for Obama and cannot be criticised for not doing her duty in the general election. But it was her duty as a Democrat and it was in her own interests to do so.

It doesn’t mean she’s suddenly lost all her doubts about Obama.

6. It would create a significant alterative focus of power within the administration but outside the White House – a dangerous combination.

7. No recent Secretary of State has been a realistic prospect for president.Clinton clearly (and understandably) still harbours presidential ambitions.
Everything she does will be calculated on her part with that possibility in mind.

8. There will be many former Clinton aides in senior positions in the Obama administration.
The danger of dual loyalties is obvious.

9. Clinton herself made the argument – accepted by many primary voters – that Obama was not ready to be commander-in-chief but that she was prepared to answer that 3am phone call.
Is there any evidence she’s changed her mind? If she believes she knows best then the chances of her freelancing as Secretary of State become very real.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
SOURCE: HTTP://2PARSE.COM/?P=1433

WHY HILLARY CLINTON SHOULD NOT BE SECRETARY OF STATE

Hillary Clinton is not the best candidate for Barack Obama to choose as his Secretary of State.

There are a few obvious obstacles to placing Hillary in this position:

• She made a big issue of her disagreements with Obama on foreign policy during the primary campaign, going so far as to call his policies “naive” and “irresponsible.”
•
• Now she would be expected to carry out these policies and not undermine them.
•
• She has her own foreign policy team which she could easily fill the State Department with, starting with Richard Holbrooke;
•
• It would be a fight for Obama to get a significant number of his own foreign policy team at State;
•
• In addition, there is bad blood between the Hillary camp and a number of Obama’s advisors – especially those who worked initially for the Clintons – complicating who could be appointed where and possibly the working relationships.
•
• Given these two above factors, there is a considerable chance that Obama could face a struggle in enacting his foreign policy agenda – and
•
• Clinton and her team of insiders could plausibly mount a bureacratic struggle undermining Obama’s agenda – much as Dick Cheney and his team were able to undermine Colin Powell.
•
• She and her husband have always been surrounded by drama – from Arkansas to the White House to her primary campaign – in stark contrast to the No-Drama-Obama team.
•
• She caused a serious international incident during the primary season causing both our strong allies to criticize her and our enemies to complain to the United Nations;
•
• everyone makes mistakes, but in this instance she seemed to choose to cause this incident to gain political capital – not the best attitude for a potential rival who would be acting as your Secretary of State.
•
• Her husband and his Clinton Foundation make for a huge amount of potential conflicts.
•
• She has often seemed physically uncomfortable with Obama and Obama has often seemed less certain of himself around her.
————————————————————————————————————-

IMPACT ON FOREIGN POLICY:

WHY THE OBAMA/CLINTON PATH TO MIDEAST PEACE WILL FAIL

Michael Lerner, Thursday, January 15, 2009

Rabbi Michael Lerner is editor of Tikkun Magazine: a bimonthly Jewish and Interfaith Journal of Politics, Culture and Society. He is chair of the interfaith Network of Spiritual Progressives ( www.spiritualprogressives.org), author of 11 books and rabbi of Beyt Tikkun synagogue in San Francisco.

There is little chance peace can be brought to the Middle East unless it is imposed on both Israel and Palestine by the international community.

Calling for an international peace conference and an immediate cease-fire ought to be the first foreign policy priority for the Obama administration.

Instead, Secretary of State-designate Hillary Rodham Clinton’s remarks to the Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday committed the Obama administration to a path that is certain to fail as it has throughout the past several decades.

She stressed three elements of her position:

— The United States remains committed in its support of Israel, which guarantees that it cannot play the role of "honest, neutral broker of peace."

— The United States restates that it will not negotiate with Hamas until it recognizes Israel (which Hamas has already said it would not do, though it has been willing to negotiate a cease-fire agreement with Israel and announced that it is prepared to negotiate a new agreement that could last for 20 or 30 years).

— The Obama administration will work to bring the two parties together for peace negotiations.

This position is at odds with the views that Obama articulated when he was seeking the Democratic nomination.

At that point, he made clear that we should negotiate with Iran and Syria, which both pose more serious threats to American interests than Hamas.

The difference, of course, is the Israel lobby to which Obama and Clinton have repeatedly paid obeisance.

That lobby, representing the most hard-line elements in the Jewish world but also tens of millions of Christian Zionists who support the militarist perspective in dealing with Arabs and Palestinians, has insisted as a matter of faith that American politicians promise not to deal with Hamas.

In the 1980s and 1990s, the lobby insisted that the United States not negotiate with the Palestine Liberation Organization.”

————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Perspective Analysis:

By Padmini Arhant

It is evident from the diverse national and international opinion that Senator Hillary Clinton’s nomination hearing for Secretary of State position carried out with little significance on major issues such as –

Conspicuous conflict of interest,

Nominee’s defiance to recognize the fact,

Projecting autonomy on foreign policy matters proven counterproductive while undermining the stated policy of the incoming administration.

Pursuit of militaristic agenda via smart power dominating peace and diplomacy creates opportunity to question motive.

Senator Hillary Clinton successfully evaded controversial issues with a complimentary response to the committee members and failed to provide solutions or strategies for any on-going crisis, thus proving her lack of experience.

The preliminary victory is predominantly due to excessive lobbying within the Senate by members emphasizing more on material than substance per national telecast of the hearing.

United States is dealing with many crises at home generating a leadership void for international conflicts. The American electorate invested energy, hope and trust in the new administration to avert further catastrophes.

The bipartisanship displayed in the hearing is appreciative though it would serve better during legislation of economic stimulus package or health, energy, education and environment issues.

Anything to benefit the people is always welcome and worth the time and effort.

However, in matters concerning millions of lives and their future around the globe the representative of the United States new government must reflect and possess a track record as the champion of peace, an advocate of non-violence and a trustworthy partner for all nations during international crisis.

Failing that, any attempt to restore and recapture the image it once had is a farfetched dream with remote possibilities of that turning into reality.

Senator Hillary Clinton is impressive in other ways in performing her legislative tasks for her constituents in the great state of New York. The Senator’s career as an attorney is praiseworthy.

Nevertheless, in the appointment of the Secretary of State, Senator Clinton’s existing background associated with,

The Clinton foundation and Clinton Global Initiative,

Recent rhetoric yielding her the reputation as a polarizing figure during the unsuccessful Presidential bid in 2008 as well as.

Being an enthusiastic supporter of military action including nuclear weapons raises serious credibility issue and further jeopardizes the prospects for United States to be a major player in resolving complex international crises.

The future of humanity is best under the guidance and leadership of those seeking peaceful solutions against war and terror.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under United States | Leave a Comment

Communication

January 15, 2009

From: Jill Biden

To: Padmini Arhant

Sent: Friday, January 9, 2009 10:24:25 AM

Subject: Our partner for change

Padmini —

We’re just 11 days away from the start of an important journey that will move our country in a new direction.

But as we all prepare for that journey, we can’t forget our commitment to help Hillary Clinton retire her campaign debt.

I got to know Hillary on the campaign trail, and I saw firsthand what a vital role she played in Barack’s election. And as our soon-to-be Secretary of State, Senator Clinton is working hard now to help Barack implement policies that will help us meet the global challenges we face.

Will you help us honor our promise and support our friend Hillary Clinton by making a donation of $100 or more today?

During the general election, Hillary was a tireless advocate for Barack, traveling across the country and uniting people in our movement for change.

As a wife and a mother, I know the kind of sacrifice she made as a candidate, an advocate for Barack and Joe, and now as a member of the cabinet. She made those sacrifices because she believed in the change that we all worked so hard for.

Now, we need to help Hillary focus on the challenges that she will face as Secretary of State. You can show your support and make sure the hard-working individuals and small businesses who were a part of Hillary’s campaign effort are paid for their hard work.

Make a donation of $100 or more now to help one of our vital partners for change:

http://donate.barackobama.com/hillary

Thank you for everything,

Jill
—————————————————————————————————
From: Padmini Arhant
To: Jill Biden info@barackobama.com
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 3:10:13 AM
Subject: Re: Our partner for change
Dear Jill,

Thank you for your email.

Due to unfortunate circumstances and bad economic situation, it is difficult to make any commitment towards such cause.

Hope you understand the predicament.

Please accept my apologies for the delay in my response and inability to comply with your request.

Best Regards

Padmini

________________________________________

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Politics, United States | Leave a Comment

Armageddon – Israel Attack against Gaza

January 8, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The on-going conflict between Israel and Palestine is not necessarily the news of the day for some mainstream media preoccupied with the discussion of mundane topics to fill the airtime.

Why should it be important?

Even, if the casualties from the bloodbath in Gaza happened to be children.

Ironically, sensitivity to atrocities is limited and varies among individuals.

Some react only when tragedy hits home, while others choose to remain silent and oblivious regardless of the horrific nature of events particularly the political figures with authority.

One has to wonder about the reason behind such conduct.

Does politics impact individuals to be complacent to violence?

Or, is it characteristic of individuals running for public office?

Often, moderate voices suppressed by the amplified endorsements of war producing death and destruction are the general trend in the Western democracies.

Fortunately, sanity and reasoning power still exists in the world as exhibited in the articles by various caring, compassionate and knowledgeable authors, who are aptly qualified to be the heads of the government or counsel on foreign relations in challenging the tradition.
————————————————————————————————–

Courtesy: http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4192.shtml – Thank you.

Israel and the Palestinian Territories

By Howard Lisnoff

Online Journal Contributing Writer

Jan 5, 2009, 00:32 Email this article

As a Jew, I am shocked by Israel’s attack against the Gaza Strip! As of this writing over 430 Palestinians have died in the massive military operation, while four Israelis perished as a result of rocket fire by Hamas.

Well over 90 percent of Palestinians killed have been civilians, a number in keeping with the death toll of contemporary warfare and its lethal effects on innocent civilian populations. Among the over 430 Palestinians killed by Israeli bombs were five sisters in one bombing and two sisters in another.

It can be assumed that the unleashing of this massive military power was accomplished with a wink and a nod from the Bush administration that has sought to remake the Middle East in its own image.

The incoming Obama administration, on vacation, was conveniently absent and issuing platitudes about Hamas, as did the national media.

This is how Gideon Levy of the Israeli newspaper Haaretz related the attacks and counterattacks on Democracy Now (December 29): “Yes, I think that Israel had this legitimacy to protect its citizens in the southern part of Israel, and it had legitimacy to do something, as the Israelis all expect the government to do, but this doing something does not mean this brutal and violent operation.

The diplomatic efforts were just in the beginning, and I believe we could have got to a new truce without this bloodshed.”

Israel’s attack against a militarily weak Gaza Strip violated the Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Principles, the Charter of the United Nations, and the moral imperative against attacks on civilian populations, or what were called the rules of war in a saner time. Its actions prior to this past weekend’s attack violated international law that bans collective retribution against a civilian population (specifically article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention).

The hostilities of this past week ended the truce between Hamas and Israel that had been in effect for several months, and was marked by the firing of rockets into southern Israel by Hamas and the economic blockade of Israel against Gaza. At the onset of current hostilities, huge bunker-buster bombs supplied by the U.S. were used on the Gaza Strip, and the Islamic University was among the targets of the Israeli Defense Forces.

So, where is the indignation? The Talmud, the quintessential commentary on the Old Testament states unequivocally: “What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man. This is the law: all the rest is commentary.” (Shabbat 31a).

“What is hateful to you” has been universally ignored when planning military actions against others by the sole superpower and its proxies across the globe.

War against civilian populations has been turned into the norm. The world cannot remake or take back the horrors such as the Holocaust and past conduct in military matters.

But, what can be done is adherence to the rule of international law in dealing with violent conflicts and the use of diplomacy that seeks to redress the horrors that have been foisted on civilian populations.

Religious fundamentalists support all of Israel’s incursions against Palestinians.

They believe thatArmageddon will begin in the Middle East and lead to their (fundamentalists’) collective salvation. They have ‘enjoyed” nearly 30 years of support from successive administrations in Washington, D.C.

Howard Lisnoff is a freelance writer.

——————————————————————————————————————–
Another massacre in the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict

By Rodrigue Tremblay

Online Journal Guest Writer

Jan 1, 2009, 01:18 Email this article

“The liberty we prize is not America’s gift to the world, it is God’s gift to humanity.” –George W. Bush, State of the Union speech, January 28, 2003 (N.B.: Bush’s primary speechwriter at the time was a theologian: Michael Gerson.)

“When it comes to the Israeli-Arab conflict, the terms of debate are so influenced by organized Jewish groups like AIPAC that to be critical of Israel is to deny oneself the ability to succeed in American politics.” –Henry Siegman, former head of the American Jewish Congress

“I don’t think there is such a thing as an independent Israel doing anything, because I think no matter what they do it’s our [American] money, it’s our weapons, and they’re not going to do it without us approving it and if they get into trouble we’re going to bail them out, so there is no separation between the two.” –Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), Dec. 28, 2008

“The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.” –Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Physicist and Professor, Nobel Prize 1921

The year 2008 was not a very good year by any account, either financially or politically. Chaos and immorality have prevailed.

The Israeli attacks that began on Saturday December 27, 2008, are most reminiscent of what the government of Israel did to Lebanon during the summer of 2006. Both are examples of disproportionate retaliation to thoughtless provocations.

Indeed, the use by the government of Israel of sophisticated American-made F-16 jets, AH-64 Apache helicopters and devastating US-supplied GBU-39 smart bombs to target numerous dwellings in Gaza Strip cites — with civilians making up an overwhelming majority of the more than 300 victims — is an immoral act. Bombing a city can only create a humanitarian catastrophe and it should not be allowed in any circumstance.

With these planned-in-advance Christmas-New Year period attacks, when the world’s political attention is the weakest, Israel is punishing the entire population of the Gaza Strip (1.5 million people) for the irresponsible behavior of a small group of Hamas leaders.

But, no matter how this is phrased, nothing justifies collective punishment, an illegal doctrine used by the Israeli government time and again against the Palestinians while the world stands still.

We understand the rationale: Such attacks are designed to coerce the Hamas government, (which seized power in Gaza less than two years ago, replacing the Fatah government of the Palestinian Authority), to stop firing rockets in the direction of Israeli border cities and refrain from launching suicide attacks inside Israel.

Since Hamas doesn’t have one percent of the military capability that Israel has, its attacks on Israeli cities would appear to be most foolish and irresponsible.

Indeed, there is no doubt that bombing Israeli cities is a terrorist act. But sadly, in this action-reaction drama, one has to keep in mind that Hamas’ attacks on Israeli cities came after an Israeli military cross-border raid in Gaza in early November and after years of an illegal blockade of Gaza by Israel. That is the reason why both sides pretend they are attacking the other side in self-defense in this ongoing drama.

Nevertheless, even though the Hamas government seems to be run by defiant leaders who have launched rocket attacks against Israeli cities and targeted Israeli civilians, this does not excuse the Israeli government’s disproportionate reaction in indiscriminately bombing a heavily populated territory with warplanes and attack helicopters.

All this demonstrates how the world is lacking a moral compass and institutions capable of implementing rules of law and justice. Meanwhile, the law of the jungle continues to reign.

The neocon-controlled U.S. government of George W. Bush, contrary to most other governments, has refused to ask for an immediate stop to the Israeli attacks. It is therefore an active accomplice in the carnage and it cannot escape its responsibility and involvement.

As a matter of fact, anybody who remains silent while these barbarian acts are being committed becomes ipso facto an accomplice. This applies to most everyone at different degrees, the most responsible being those in authority.

Rodrigue Tremblay lives in Montreal and can be reached at rodrigue.tremblay@yahoo.com. He is the author of the book “‘The New American Empire.” His new book, “The Code for Global Ethics,” will be published in 2008. Visit his blog site at thenewamericanempire.com/blog.

———————————————————————–

The American puppet state

By Paul Craig Roberts

Online Journal Contributing Writer

Jan 6, 2009, 00:26 Email this article

President George W. Bush was in his stand-up comedian role when he declared that he wanted to be remembered as a fighter for human rights.

Seldom has a fighter for human rights amassed Bush’s death toll. According to Information Clearing House,

Bush’s invasion and occupation of Iraq has resulted in 1,297,997 dead Iraqis. Millions more have been wounded, and millions are displaced. Bush’s legions have taken out weddings, funerals, kids’ soccer games, hospitals, and mosques.

And that’s before we come to Afghanistan.

In Afghanistan “we don’t do body counts,“ declared a commander of Bush’s imperial legions.

But the thousands of dead civilians and schoolchildren have rallied Afghans to the Taliban, whose lightly armed fighters have retaken most of the country from the Unipower.

Bush’s January 2, 2009, radio address is one grand lie that would win the World’s Biggest Liar contest in Cumbria. Israel is turning Gaza into Auschwitz, and the idiot puppet in the White House is blaming the Gazans.

The president of the United States is a sick joke. He has falsified history.

Americans should be ashamed that their president is a puppet of a small, but ruthless, state in the Middle East that lives off American largess.

Nothing has changed with the election of Obama, whose first act was to put Israel in charge of the White House. For the first time in its history, the Americans have a dual citizen, an Israeli who served in the Israeli military, as chief of staff of the White House.

My friends in the Israeli peace movement are despondent that America, “the light of the world,” is overcome by evil and serves wickedness.

America has entered its decline. America has exported its manufacturing so that CEOs and Wall Street crooks could claim large bonuses while the working class declined.

The American financial industry is discredited and in chaos, having resorted to stealing one trillion dollars from American taxpayers, while putting the rest of the world into financial crisis, including the destruction of Iceland’s currency.

Most of the world now has reasons to hate and to distrust the United States.

American unemployment is high and rising despite the massive printing of money and budget deficits that are too large to be financed, except by the printing of more money.

The damage done to the American people in the first decade of the 21st century by their own government is comparable in some ways to the damage American hubris and self-righteousness have inflicted on the civilian populations of Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Gaza, and South Ossetia.

Instead of losing their homes to bombs, more than one million Americans have lost their homes to the subprime mortgage fraud. We are spied upon without warrants or cause. Our civil liberties are endangered.

Does anyone believe that George Bush, who assaulted his own country’s civil liberty, will be remembered as a “fighter for human rights”?

Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider’s Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.
———————————————————————————————————————————
Also transcripts from http://www.democracynow.org – Thank you..

January 05, 2009

Israeli Professor Under Hamas Rocket Fire, Neve Gordon Condemns Israeli Invasion of Gaza

Earlier this morning, three Qassam rockets exploded in open areas in the western Negev in Israel. We go to the region to speak with Neve Gordon, chair of the Department of Politics and Government, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, and the author of Israel’s Occupation. [includes rush transcript]
Guest:

Neve Gordon, chair of the Department of Politics and Government, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, and the author of Israel’s Occupation. His latest article for The Guardian newspaper is titled ‘The Dire Cost of Domestic Rivalries’

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go to Beersheba right now in Israel to Neve Gordon, chair of the Department of Politics and Government at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel. He’s author of the book Israel’s Occupation.

We just heard a description of the rockets going as far as the Negev. Can you talk about the effects of what is happening right now in Israel proper and what your thoughts are on this movement that Phyllis Bennis is describing around boycott, around divestment?

NEVE GORDON: Well, we just had a rocket about an hour ago not far from our house. My two children have been sleeping in a bomb shelter for the past week. And yet, I think what Israel is doing is outrageous, as opposed to what Meagan said before. We have here a situation where actually Israel did leave the Gaza Strip three years ago, but it maintains sovereignty in any political science sense of the term. We’ve controlled all the borders. We’ve basically had an economic boycott on the Gaza Strip. And the people there have been living in what one should probably call as a prison. And they’ve been reacting with rockets, because probably that’s the only way that they can react.

And I think what Israel has been doing now has little to do with stopping the rockets, but actually it’s an election move inside Israel. It’s a move to build the reputation of the Israeli military after its humiliation in 2006. And what they’re actually doing is bombing from the air and massacring people, and we have to say no to this from here.

I’m not sure an international boycott on Israel is currently the way to go, because I think what we need is pressure from below, pressure from within Israel. As an Israeli citizen, I still believe in the importance of democracy and in the importance of the Israeli people also making a decision. This should be done through pressure. I agree with Phyllis on that. I think international pressure has to come. I think a divestment of the Occupied Territories and everything made in the Occupied Territories should be the first stage.

I think that Obama has a major role to play. He has been silent. And I think he can pressure the Israeli government into reaching agreement with the Palestinian people. I think today and for the past years,

Israel has been the obstacle to peace in the Middle East, because it’s not willing to compromise on the three major issues, which is a return to the 1967 borders, it’s the division of Jerusalem, and it’s a recognition of the right of return of the Palestinians with a stipulation that only a small amount can return back to Israel.

AMY GOODMAN: And do you see the Obama administration, as he’s now constituted it, going in this direction? Do you see any signs of this, Professor Gordon?

NEVE GORDON: I see—I hear silence. Now, I think I’ve written that Obama has an opportunity, because what it needs to bring peace in the Middle East is—or between Israel and the Palestinians is now known. We’ve had the Geneva Accords. We’ve had the Sari Nuseibeh and Ayalon. We’ve had the Arab Initiative. What needs to be done is clear. What is also clear is that regardless of the elections in Israel, the government that will be chosen will not go in the direction of peace.

Now, the third facet is that a majority of Israelis will probably vote for a two-state solution. My suggestion to Obama is to take—to write up an Obama plan, which I say I think is clear what needs to be done, and to go over the Israeli government and to bring it to a referendum to the Israeli people, and ask them, “Do you want a two-state solution?” We have a constellation, a configuration in the Israeli government, that a large minority will control any government and not allow it to make peace, regardless of what happens in the elections. And so, what we need is some kind of intervention from outside to go directly to the people. I think the people of Israel, if the American president will come and say, “Listen, you take it, and if not, you’ll be penalized, too. You take the two-state solution, and if not, you’ll be penalized.” And I think that is probably the way to go for Obama. I don’t know whether he’ll do it or not.

AMY GOODMAN: Neve Gordon, as you said, your kids are in a bomb shelter now. You’re in the Negev. We have seen many images of the rockets, the effect of the rockets hitting Sderot. But we’ve heard little voice from Israelis like you. And I’m wondering, is that an effect of the US media or the Israeli media? Or are those voices not that loud? In Sderot, for example, there is an alternative group that is called Alternative Voices, who actually, despite the rockets there, are calling for an end to the blockade and are calling for a ceasefire, calling for an end to the attack on Gaza. And this is over 1,800 people of Sderot.

NEVE GORDON: There is an alternative movement. This past Saturday—you mentioned protests around the world—I participated in a protest with my children in Tel Aviv. There were about between 5,000 and 10,000 people, which, proportional to the population, is not a small protest. The vast majority—let us not delude ourselves, because the vast majority of the people in Israel do support.

There are plenty of voices against. If you read Ha’aretz, the Israeli newspaper, people like Gideon Levy and Amira Hass, you’ll see that there are voices that are against.

The problem is that most Israelis say what Meagan said before.

They say, “Israel left the Gaza Strip three years ago, and Hamas is still shooting rockets at us.”

They forget the details. The details is that Israel maintains sovereignty. The details is that the Palestinians live in a cage.

The details is that they don’t get basic foodstuff, that they don’t get electricity, that they don’t get water, and so forth.

And when you forget those kinds of details, and all you say is, “Here, we left them. Why are they still shooting at us?” and that’s what the media here has been pumping them with, then you think this war is rational.

If you look at what’s been going on in the Gaza Strip in the past three years and you see what Israel has been doing to the Palestinians, you would think that the Palestinian resistance is rational.

And that’s what’s missing in the mainstream media here. And so, although there are voices of resistance in Israel and although there was a quite big protest on—actually, two big protests on Saturday, one in Sakhnin and one in Tel Aviv, it is still a really small minority.

AMY GOODMAN: Neve Gordon, I want to thank you for being with us, chair of the Department of Politics and Government, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, speaking to us from Beersheba. His book is called Israel’s Occupation. Phyllis Bennis, thank you for being with us, fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C. When we come back, we go back to Gaza.”

——————————————————————————————————–

Summary: Armageddon

It is evident from the concerned voices that the ongoing reign of terror by Israel particularly against innocent civilians in Gaza through invasion, occupation , blockade and now direct confrontation is a heinous crime against humanity.

As indicated by Israeli citizen, Professor Neve Gordon, ideal candidate to be the head of the state of Israel,

The murder and massacre is carried out for political reasons by the incumbent Israeli administration and the eternally belligerent counsel Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu with a commanding support by U.S. administration and Congress members.

On the other hand, the hideous Hamas masquerading as the benefactors of the Palestinian population in Gaza has in fact led the situation to deteriorate from survival to peril by forcing Palestinian children obliterated through suicide bombing and Israeli shelling as well as Israeli children sleeping in bomb shelters for days and nights.

As suggested earlier in the blog post titled Israeli Palestinian Conflict on December 30,2008,

It is a rude awakening for both Israeli and Palestinian civilians being the real victims and casualties of the ongoing conflict orchestrated by war mongering authorities and aggressors in the United States, Israel and provocative Hamas.

Hence, fundamental political transformation in Israel and Palestine is the only saving grace for the people of these two states.

————————————————————————–

Peace Proposal:

Israel and Hamas must ceasefire or deal with the wrath of natural phenomenon.

Now is the time for Israeli citizens to reflect upon the pros and cons of peace over war .

It is unequivocally important for Israeli government to make unconditional withdrawal of troops and settlements from all Palestinian territories backtracking to 1967 i.e. Gaza, West Bank and Golan Heights.

In addition, recognize the truth that peace rests in their hands by letting their Palestinian neighbors live with respect and dignity required for complete status as a sovereign nation, which means no blockades and check posts barring Palestinians from normal existence.

Israel cannot and must not hold any Palestinian area for settlement or occupation along the borders under the pretext of their national security.

With four weeks, left for the general election Israelis must elect a government represented by views like Professor Neve Gordon for long lasting peace and security of Israel and the entire Middle East region.

Palestinians, all those remaining after the barrage of Israeli missile attacks and bombings combined with Hamas’ tactics to use Gaza as launching pads for rocket attacks, must come in terms with reality…

That electing an ideological group like Hamas, committed towards their own agenda of terror has yielded carnage and chaos costing tens and thousands of lives and their future.

Therefore, Palestinians must make a concerted coalition of moderate and peace loving visionaries pledging support for the people and their future to represent the independent Palestinian state.

Palestinians must vow to themselves and their children not to seek the path of revenge paved with hatred, rage and terror against Israel.

Palestine and all other Arab nations must recognize Israel as a sovereign nation and acknowledge its democratic system.
———————————————————————————————-

Myth clarification:

The hegemony in the United States and Israel responsible for fueling this inhumane onslaught in Gaza with inevitable cyclical violence in Middle East and around the world is due for clarification on Armageddon.

Reference also applicable to Hamas and all other terrorists groups imposing death penalty as jihad on citizens through suicide bombings and rocket attacks.

Armageddon is not for the salvation of demagogs engaged in the exhaustion of weaponry and deadly arsenal through unjustified wars to replenish new stock.

Armageddon is for deliverance of the oppressed, persecuted , tortured and tormented population on earth.

Non-acceptance of the stated peace proposal will lead to dire consequences for perpetrators on both sides.

Finally, leadership lacking in courage to defend truth, justice and innocent lives is doomed for failure.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics | Leave a Comment

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

December 30, 2008

Cause and Effect:

The half a century old battle between two neighbors has evolved into an eternal volcano erupting periodically with sparks flying across the Middle East and in all Islamic nations around the world.

Israeli-Palestinian crisis also created a new war in the twentieth century and that is terrorism.

Unfortunately, it is now the epidemic around the world.

Amazingly, in the wake of unresolved intolerance between the two neighbors,

Peace and Diplomacy never had a chance instead,

Both sides relegated to techniques like suicide bombing, aerial bombardment through rockets and missiles with children and women as the so-called collateral damage in this senseless violence.

Negotiations between both parties rejected due to incessant obsession to deprive one another of peaceful existence.

Ironically, neither of them is a winner confirming the fact –

Nobody ever wins a war. Every one is a loser.

As stated earlier, there is cause and effect behind every event.

All this bloodshed is because of the Israeli controlled and illegal occupation of Palestinian territories for nearly five decades and the bitter truth of the matter is,

In the twenty first century, the people of Palestine are still suffering and struggling, as they do not have a place they could call home.

Israel might claim that it endured numerous suicide bombings and constantly threatened by the neighbors instigated by Iran.

Therefore, it reserves the right to defend itself by any means.

While this is true, Israel must ask itself, who is responsible for the unnecessary unmitigated violence that has emboldened terrorists, proliferated widespread fundamentalism and relevantly encouraged nations like Iran to seek nuclear weapons for wiping Israel of the map?

Undeniably, radicalism exists around the world particularly in the Middle East region.

Again, reiterating the fact nothing happens without a cause.

—————————————————————–

Fact Check:

The criticism against Israel as the coveted ally of the United States is an absolute truth predominantly from the active lobbying and representation of Israeli interests in Washington.

Every Presidential candidate treads over a fine line not to jeopardize the Jewish votes and actively vows to protect Israeli welfare by religiously attending the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference during the Presidential campaign.

—————————————————————————————

AIPAC according to http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=235

Author – Br Nathanael Kapner

What’s Behind The AIPAC Curtain?

“CONTROL” IS WHAT THE AIPAC ZIONIST JEWS are all about. Is it then any surprise that the June 2-4 2008 AIPAC Policy Conference with 7,000 attendees including 300 from Congress was a media blackout ?

How could it be that with Condoleezza Rice, all 3 Presidential hopefuls, and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in attendance, the media coverage was nill? Well – since Jews stick together, (I grew up as a Jew), the Jewish owned mainstream media apparently agreed to “stonewall it.”

The business of wielding influence is what American Jewry is all about. And American Jewry prefers not to have this made public. This was brought home to the American Conservative Magazine journalist, Phillip Weiss. At his very first AIPAC Conference this year, Weiss was demanded by AIPAC officials while writing down his report to show his credentials.

Weiss, who made the observation regarding the Conference that AIPAC was serving their tribal interests , reported: “At the outset AIPAC performed a ‘roll call.’ The names of all the politicians in attendance were read off by three barkers in auctioneer fashion. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi won the day before her peers by shedding tears when mentioning the Israeli soldiers captured by Hezbollah.”

Indeed – all with political ambitions to remain in power came to the Conference to be accounted for before the influence-wielding Jews of AIPAC.

——————————————————————

AIPAC’S CONTROL OF AMERICA’S POLITICAL SYSTEM

In his Rense.com article, AIPAC Vs America , Rense political analyst Ted Lang observes that AIPAC controls American foreign policy in the Middle East. Lang also says that attempts to terminate the slaughter of innocent Iraqi citizens and to stop the AIPAC-ordered invasion of Iran will invoke the smear of ‘Anti-Semitism.’

And with the mass murders of Iraqi civilians and women with their children in Palestine, Ted Lang asks the most important question of our day: —

“Are the world’s greatest atrocities now attributable to Jews?” — Here .

If this question is not answered soon, groups like AIPAC will make our entire political system one great Zionist atrocity!

———————————————————————–

Analysis:

First and Foremost, Palestinians are not responsible for the horrific holocaust in the twentieth century.

Illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel since 1967 is the root cause of all evil that followed the trail of violence up until now.

Despite being the holocaust victims, it is fathomless that Israeli oppression of Palestinian population is upheld as the national defense and security act.

Israel always is in the forefront to rescue Jewish citizens in crisis around the world whether it is Ethiopian Jews or the five Jewish victims in the recent Mumbai terror attacks.

In fact, Israel volunteered to send its own commandos to rescue the five Jewish captives held hostage at Nariman Center in Mumbai, India.

Why can’t Israel expand its obligation towards humanity rather than being selective in the safeguard and rescue of Jewish people alone?

Isn’t this planet inhabited by humans of other faith and denomination as well?

Shouldn’t their life matter?

Why is Israel not forthcoming with its possession of Nuclear arsenal and Washington including United States media and news organizations relentlessly defend Israel of every offensive act against Palestinian population?

If only Washington played an unbiased role in the mediation of peace process between Israel and Palestinian people, by demanding Israel to an unconditional withdrawal of troops and settlements from Gaza, West Bank and Golan Heights and,

Granting Independence to Palestinians by allowing them to call these territories provinces of Palestine, there can be an eternal peace in the entire region including the security of Israel and United States.

Further, the Palestinian population need not rely on radical elements like Hamas and it would negate the reasons available to threaten Israel by Hezbollah and their mastermind Iran.

——————————————————————————————————————–

Recent Assault:

The escalated violence in the past three days from December 27, 2008 through up until now resulting in major civilian casualties on the Palestinian side estimated over 360 victims with children being the majority is a callous demonstration of Israeli might against weak and fragile Palestinian population.

Israel’s sophisticated airstrikes and missile attacks (Thanks to United States supply of weaponry and multibillion dollars aid) on civilian targets in retaliation to Hamas’s outdated rockets is a crime against humanity worthy of condemnation.

There is no justification whatsoever in the mass murder of civilians carried out in the pretext of national security.

It is not to glorify Hamas’ terrorist action proclaimed as “jihad” towards Israeli population either.

An eye for an eye will make the world go blind.

In the quagmire, the civilians on both sides are the targets and the action by the political factions representing the people of Gaza and Israel is belligerent and must be halted instantaneously.

————————————————————————–

Ceasefire:

Israel must refrain from further attacks for the safety and security of its own existence now and in the future.

Hamas on the other hand must realize that their reign of terror against Palestinians through exploitation and abuse of Power by encouraging young, vulnerable citizens as suicide bombers against Israeli civilians is not the kind of representation the Palestinians deserve at present and beyond.

In light of the current carnage and destruction brought upon particularly the innocent civilians in Gaza and those hurt in Israel it is evident that fundamental transformation is required in the political process on both sides.

———————————————————————–

Face the Truth:

Time’s up for conservative politics in Israel and Washington lobbying responsible for the plight of Palestinians through unlawful settlements and occupation of their homeland.

It is incumbent on Israel effective immediately to start preparing for the unconditional withdrawal from territories backtracking to 1967 i.e. Gaza, West Bank and Golan Heights to enable Palestinians their entitlement to a homeland.

Hamas in turn will wind up all of its insidious activities and ploy at the behest of Iran against Israeli population or else deal with regrettable consequences.

Similar destiny will be shared by all those elements whether it is Hezbollah or any Islamic anarchists, theocracy like Iran involved in systematic destabilization of peace and progress in the Middle East region particularly Palestine, Israel and Iraq.

————————————————————————————————-

Message Alert:

Information is being delivered according to the earlier warning of an imminent Armageddon through divine intervention to end sufferings of all human beings on this planet and restore peace, progress and prosperity for all.

Solutions on confrontations between nuclear neighbors India and Pakistan, Oppression of Tibet by emerging economic power China, Persecution of Burmese population by the Burmese Junta and ultimatum to Military regimes in Africa and the Americas with a promise to liberate the people of all these regions is in order.

Failure to adhere to suggested strategies and proposals will lead to unrequested and unprecedented disaster.
————————————————————————————————————-
Special Request:

The readers of the blog posts and visitors to the website www.padminiarhant.com are advised that any delay in response to national and international events are not to be treated as lack of interest or concern by the entity.

While being mindful of the adverse impact such as loss of lives from conflicts like war, every article is presented after meticulous research and fact check for authenticity of the information.

Therefore, your understanding and patience is appreciated at all times.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics | Leave a Comment

« Previous Page — Next Page »