May 23 - Moslems who march, Covert terrorists, Mexican children

WAIS May 23

Moslems who marched throughout the streets of London (Vincent Littrell, Belgium) General Sullivan wrote, "it's hard to imagine interfaith harmony and dialogue as Vincent Littrell discusses with scenes such as these. Below I have enclosed pictures of Moslems who marched throughout the streets of London during their recent Religion of Peace Demonstration. These pictures have never been shown in any of our American newspapers or television news programs because we should never appear to offend anyone!"

From Belgium, Vincent Littrell comments:The pictures that General Sullivan posts were, to say the very least, somewhat disconcerting for me to observe when they first were broadcast. They were all over the media here in Europe. CNN International, Euro-News and other stations were quite out-front with this particular crowd, while not reflecting the views with the same amount of air time of British Muslims who viewed such Muslim reactions to the Danish Cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad as utterly anathema and working against their intense intellectual and spiritual efforts to mitigate Islamophobia (there were some Muslim leaders interviewed but their time on air was minuscule compared to the extremists in the images, I think I can make such a statement with some accuracy as in my work center, CNN International and Euro-News are pretty much on all the time).

For me, being one who studies Islam quite seriously, they were frustrating images because I absolutely do not view those ignorant people as being representative of spiritual Islam. The fact is (despite prominent politically conservative middle-east scholar Daniel Pipe's website statistics on British Muslim views which admittedly in some respects, if reflecting actual truth, paint a worrisome view and actually further my belief in the need for interfaith dialogue) there are British Muslim scholars and community leaders desirous of positive inter-faith relations and who do involve themselves in problem solving discussions designed to bring Britain's kaleidescope of religious diversity into greater spiritual and communal unity. There is a vibrant and growing inter-faith culture developing in England, some of it recently spurred by such images such as those posted by General Sullivan.

I am aware that writers in the realm of American politically conservative punditry do with 'tongue-in-cheek' refer to Islam as "the religion of peace" while implying that the morally defunct if not outright savage behavior of ignorant people who call themselves Muslim is representative of Islam as a whole. Being one who absolutely believes in the strategic imperative of advancing the message of spiritual Islam, vice that which is propagated by those Muslims adhering to rigid dogmatic conservatism or puritanism, I find it problematic when those Muslims who are genuinely altruistic and of spiritual mind, who deplore the ignorant behavior of those represented in the pictures posted by General Sullivan, are not listened to by many of intellect and stature in the West, even when after being criticized for not speaking out against the savagery of the 'Islamic puritans', do speak out (many of them have been speaking out all along but have been drowned out or ignored). I do believe that the message and reality of spiritual Islam must be advanced as part of the process of bringing about cultural reconciliation and to defeat fanaticism. There are signs that the message of "liberal" Muslims is getting out there and worrying the puritans. Osama bin Laden in his latest speech lashed out at liberal Muslims. From an analytical perspective such lashing out by bin Laden is very intriguing, implying that he is worried about their message and influence.

The following quotes from the March 2006 edition of the National Security Strategy of the United States I hope strengthens my point: "While the War on Terror is a battle of ideas, it is not a battle of religions. The transnational terrorists confronting us today exploit the proud religion of Islam to serve a violent political vision: the establishment, by terrorism and subversion, of a totalitarian empire that denies all political and religious freedom. These terrorists distort the idea of jihad into a call for murder against those they regard as apostates or unbelievers -including Christians, Jews, Hindus, other religious traditions, and all Muslims who disagree with them. Indeed, most of the terrorist attacks since September 11 have occurred in Muslim countries - and most of the victims have been Muslims." (p. 9)

"The strategy to counter the lies behind the terrorists' ideology is to empower the very people the terrorists most want to exploit: the faithful followers of Islam. We will continue to support political reforms that empower peaceful Muslims to practice and interpret their faith. The most vital work will be done within the Islamic world itself, and Jordan, Morocco, and Indonesia have begun to make important strides in this effort. Responsible Islamic leaders need to denounce an ideology that distorts and exploits Islam for destructive ends and defiles a proud religion." (p. 11)

"The struggle against militant Islamic radicalism is the great ideological conflict of the early years of the 21st century and finds the great powers all on the same side - opposing the terrorists." (p. 36)

It is in my view clear that the National Security Strategy of the United States supports the advancement of spiritual, peaceful Islam as a counter to the fanaticism we see infecting the Islamic world (fanaticism is a scourge that infects other religions as well, obviously, I just make that point to be fair). Belittling those Muslims whose deeply seated faith is one of peace, tolerance, and belief that the purpose of religion is to advance the human condition spiritually strikes me as working against US national strategy towards winning the ideological battle with Islamic radicalism. We must strengthen spiritual Islam, not undermine it. We need to support those responsible Islamic leaders who do denounce the perversion of their religion. Many do and are not listened to or supported.

Moslems who marched throughout the streets of London (Michael Sullivan, US) General Sullivan writes:, I wish Vincent Littrell and people like him trying to bring inter-faith harmony great success in their endeavor. I agree with the rationale stated in the National Security Stategy of the US put forth in the March, 2006 edition. There is no other alternative than to stop this Islamic fanaticism or face continued destruction and loss of life. Regards, Mike

US: Covert terrorists (Joe Listo, Brazil) From Brazil, Joe Listo writes:The recent rebellions in 72 correctional facilities in Brazil (95% of which in the State of Sao Paulo) were an isolated event, led by a powerful drug-lord who happens to be somewhat more educated than the average Brazilian criminal and is thus able to exert some leadership. The vast majority of persons killed during the riots were convicted (or wanted) criminals. Around 10 were innocent bystanders and or hostages to the inmates. However, I share Tor Guimaraes´ concern about the lack of control in all Latin America borders, as pointed out in previous postings. Great care is seen at American embassies in screening the average traveler applying for a tourist visa, but it seems fair to conclude that terrorists would hardly adopt the same method for gaining entry to the US. American authorities should focus on the Southern-cone countries tri-border area, and from there all the way through Mexico. The lack of adequate control in the region surely facilitates the transit of terrorists (and weapons) who intend to enter the US. Easier said than done, most may comment, but the problem is there.

Moslems who marched throughout the streets of London (Tor Guimaraes, US) Tor Guimaraes writes: Vincent Littrell said: “Belittling those Muslims whose deeply seated faith is one of peace, tolerance, and belief that the purpose of religion is to advance the human condition spiritually strikes me as working against US national strategy towards winning the ideological battle with Islamic radicalism. We must strengthen spiritual Islam, not undermine it. We need to support those responsible Islamic leaders who do denounce the perversion of their religion. Many do and are not listened to or supported.”

That is very good advice. It would be just as good for the other side to realize that belittling/hurting those Jews/Christians whose deeply seated faith is one of peace, tolerance, and belief that the purpose of religion is to advance the human condition spiritually works against their strategy towards winning the ideological battle with Zionist/Christian radicalism. They must strengthen spiritual Judaism/Christianity, not undermine/hurt them. They need to support those responsible Jewish/Christian leaders who do denounce the perversion of their religions. Some do and are not listened to or supported.

The status of the children of non-nationals (RAndy Black US) Randy Black writes: On the topic of immigration and citizenship, the Associated Press ran this story yesterday, May 21, 2006. It seems that Mexico expects the USA to provide citizenship rights to Mexican illegals that Mexico provides to no one.

From the AP: If Arnold Schwarzenegger had migrated to Mexico instead of the United States, he couldn't be a governor. If Argentina native Sergio Villanueva, firefighter hero of the Sept. 11 attacks, had moved to Tecate instead of New York, he wouldn't have been allowed on the force.Even as Mexico presses the United States to grant unrestricted citizenship to millions of undocumented Mexican migrants, its officials at times calling U.S. policies "xenophobic," Mexico places daunting limitations on anyone born outside its territory. In the United States, only two posts the presidency and vice presidency are reserved for the native born. In Mexico, non-natives are banned from those and thousands of other jobs, even if they are legal, naturalized citizens. Foreign-born Mexicans can't hold seats in either house of the congress. They're also banned from state legislatures, the Supreme Court and all governorships. Many states ban foreign-born Mexicans from spots on town councils. And Mexico's Constitution reserves almost all federal posts, and any position in the military and merchant marine, for "native-born Mexicans." Recently the Mexican government has gone even further. Since at least 2003, it has encouraged cities to ban non-natives from such local jobs as firefighters, police and judges. Mexico's Interior Department which recommended the bans as part of "model" city statutes it distributed to local officials could cite no basis for extending the bans to local posts.

After being contacted by The Associated Press about the issue, officials changed the wording in two statutes to delete the "native-born" requirements, although they said the modifications had nothing to do with AP's inquiries. "These statutes have been under review for some time, and they have, or are about to be, changed," said an Interior Department official, who was not authorized to be quoted by name. But because the "model" statues are fill-in-the-blanks guides for framing local legislation, many cities across Mexico have already enacted such bans. They have done so even though foreigners constitute a tiny percentage of the population and pose little threat to Mexico's job market.

The foreign-born make up just 0.5 percent of Mexico's 105 million people, compared with about 13 percent in the United States, which has a total population of 299 million. Mexico grants citizenship to about 3,000 people a year, compared to the U.S. average of almost a half million. "There is a need for a little more openness, both at the policy level and in business affairs," said David Kim, president of the Mexico-Korea Association, which represents the estimated 20,000 South Koreans in Mexico, many of them naturalized citizens. "The immigration laws are very difficult ... and they put obstacles in the way that make it more difficult to compete," Kim said, although most foreigners don't come to Mexico seeking government posts.

J. Michael Waller, of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, was more blunt. "If American policy-makers are looking for legal models on which to base new laws restricting immigration and expelling foreign lawbreakers, they have a handy guide: the Mexican constitution," he said in a recent article on immigration. Some Mexicans agree their country needs to change.

"This country needs to be more open," said Francisco Hidalgo, a 50-year-old video producer. "In part to modernize itself, and in part because of the contribution these (foreign-born) people could make."

Others express a more common view, a distrust of foreigners that academics say is rooted in Mexico's history of foreign invasions and the loss of territory in the 1847-48 Mexican-American War.

Speaking of the hundreds of thousands of Central Americans who enter Mexico each year, chauffeur Arnulfo Hernandez, 57, said: "The ones who want to reach the United States, we should send them up there. But the ones who want to stay here, it's usually for bad reasons, because they want to steal or do drugs."

Some say progress is being made. Mexico's president no longer is required to be at least a second-generation native-born. That law was changed in 1999 to clear the way for candidates who have one foreign-born parent, like President Vicente Fox, whose mother is from Spain.

But the pace of change is slow. The state of Baja California still requires candidates for the state legislature to prove both their parents were native born.

The status of the children of non-nationals (David Crow US) David Crow writes: There's no gainsaying that Mexican law is very restrictive on who can hold political office, but the AP article is wrong when it states, "Mexico places daunting limitations on anyone born outside its territory. . . . Foreign-born Mexicans can't hold seats in either house of the congress." Articles 55 and 58 spell out the requirements for deputies (the equivalent of a U.S. representative) and senators, respectively. One requirement is to be Mexican "by birth". However, this does not imply being born in Mexico.

Article 30 delineates the circumstances under which one is a Mexican citizen by birth. These circumstances are 1) being born in Mexico, regardless of the nationality of one's parents; 2) being born abroad and having at least one parent who is Mexican by virtue of having been born in Mexico; 3) being born abroad and having at least one parent who is Mexican by naturalization; and 4) being born on Mexican ships or flights.

Taken together, these constitutional provisions are quite clear that one may hold many political offices in Mexico, including those mentioned in the AP article, without being a "native-born" Mexican (defined as being born in Mexican territory). I will never defend Mexican xenophobia, reflected clearly in the prohibition on naturalized citizens from holding political office, but let's base on criticisms on the facts.

RH: David is right, but the AP story is essentially true.

US: Immigration (Robert Whealey, US) Robert Whealey writes: I've had my differences with Randy Black on Iraq and on the Republican Party. But I agree with him on Mexico. Native born US citizens have no obligation to commit suicide.

Both parties and the mass media are kidding the voters on this crisis. The exception is Lou Dobbs. What the voters think regarding immigrants of all ethnic backgrounds is 1. Annual limit of immigrants. 2. Legal immigrants from Europe standing in line should have first preferace at citizenship. 3. The fundamental problem is class and education, not race. 4. Congress is in paralysis. 5. The Republican leaders want cheap labor. 6. The Democratic leaders want more voters. 7. Second generation Mexican-Americans like Attorney General Gonzalez have a weak understanding of democracy and the American Constitution.

M3 measure (Jordi Molins, Spain) Jordi Molins sends this In relation to the discontinuation by the Fed of the M3 measure:

Global stock markets have gone into a coordinated swan dive in the past two weeks, with the biggest gainers (emerging markets) suffering the biggest losses (a 15 percent decline, according to the Morgan Stanley Emerging Markets Index). While each region or country can boast a unique reason for falling share prices -- a drop in metals prices and noise from China's central bank about slowing growth was poison for Asian bourses -- the fact that prices are slumping simultaneously suggests something else is afoot. On May 10, the Dow Jones Industrial Average came within 80 points of its all-time high of January 2000, only to see a 4.6 percent pullback. Where is the PPT?'' wonders Jim Bianco, president of Bianco Research in Chicago. ``Now that the Fed isn't publishing data on M3, it's a perfect opportunity to intervene.''For uninitiated readers, PPT stands for Plunge Protection Team, which is either a committee of government officials and individuals from private financial institutions created by President Ronald Reagan after the 1987 stock market crash; or a nefarious cabal of the same characters that intervenes surreptitiously to reverse a slide in the stock market. According to conspiracy theorists (CTs), the PPT has been sighted in currency and gold markets as well.

And as for M3, the broadest monetary aggregate, the Fed announced in November it was discontinuing publication as of March 23. Like all government statistics, M3 came up for its once-every-three-year review and flunked the cost/benefit analysis. M3 went the way of 100 other Fed-produced data series, including debt and liquidity.

Married to M3

For the CTs, the demise of M3 was a signal the central bank was gearing up to run the printing presses 'round the clock without leaving any footprints. While most of the M3 components are captured in other statistical releases, one component, repurchase agreement liabilities of depository institutions,''or repos, is not. And that, according to the CTs, is the key to PPT intervention. The PPT's ``main resource is the money the Fed prints,''writes PPT theorist Robert McHugh on Safehaven.com. ``The money is injected into markets via the New York Fed's repo desk, which easily showed up in the M-3 numbers, warning intervention was nigh.''No, the money injected via Fed repos shows up on the Fed's balance sheet, reported every Thursday. That's what tells us what the Fed is doing. The repos in M3 tell us what the banks are doing with the raw material the Fed provides.

PPT MIA

If McHugh is right, this is the PPT's big chance to intervene, to prop up stock prices anywhere and everywhere they may be falling, and to use the Treasury's untraceable slush fund at a time when no one will ever know. I was just about to check some conspiracy Web sites to find out why the PPT was MIA, allowing stock markets around the world to tumble, when a reader sent me a link to some deep, darkbackground stuff that made the PPT seem mundane.Written sometime in April, a posting on OSS.net by Sterling Seagrave, co-author of ``Gold Warriors,'' says that, according to ``sources in the U.S. Treasury, the White House has secretly ordered the Federal Reserve to print two trillion dollars immediately, and put into circulation!'' Because M3 data are no longer being reported, there is no way for the public, investors and bondholders to know how much currency exists -- and no way to gauge how much a `dollar' is truly worth,'' according to the posting.

No Black Helicopters?

Funny, the folks in Weimar Germany didn't need weekly publication of money numbers to break the news on hyperinflation. Somehow they knew. One week it took a wheelbarrow full of German marks to buy a loaf of bread. The next week, consumers had to enlist both a wheelbarrow and a baby carriage to haul enough worthless paper money to buy the same loaf. No data release required. For all his bluster, Mr. Seagrave seems to be living in a time warp. He says the dollar-flooding operation was the reason a Treasury secretary quit several months ago (Would that be Paul O'Neill, who was shown the door in December 2002?) and Alan Greenspan resigned several weeks ago.'' (Most CTs consider Greenspan the villain, not the hero.)

There's more: an imminent attack on Iran; compromising photos of President George W. Bush when he was a drunken teenager in Beijing with his father the Ambassador'' (the U.S. didn't have a full ambassador to China then, and W. was in his late 20s at the time); and something about certificates for Yamashita's gold being stashed away at Citibank. And, oh yes, the ``super-rich'' were probably`tipped in advance, just as many were before 9/11.'' It's enough to make me want to run out and stock the larder, put my finances in order and convert all my holdings into gold.Then again, if the PPT is going to push the gold price down, maybe I'll wait before jumping in.