Appearing on Inside Washington, Washington Post columnist, Colby King, let it rip:

MR. PETERSON: The news on the economy is more dreary every day, Colby. Are President Obama’s plans for dealing with it comprehensive enough?

MR. KING: I think it falls short and it falls short on the financial side. They haven’t faced up to the truth about the problems facing the financial industry. And the bailouts that they’re coming up with and the new infusion of cash is only going to keep a sick system afloat. What they are going to have to do is some tough stuff, and tough stuff means valuing those assets in those banks where they belong, and let me – if they do that, they’re going to wipe out a lot of shareholders. They’re going to wipe out a lot of banks and we’re going to have to have a major restructuring of the financial sector. This is the time to do it.

Whether Timothy Geithner, who is the architect of this program, is up to it is a big question. Whether he’s up to be secretary of the treasury, quite frankly, is a big question because that tax problem he had is not the minor blip in the road that they’re suggesting it is. I worked at the World Bank under the same payment system that he had at the IMF. I helped negotiate this thing. Those institutions do not pay – employees do not have to pay taxes at those institutions. Americans do.

What the World Bank does, what the IMF does also, is they gross up the salaries of the employees – of the American employees so that they can pay their taxes, Geithner had to deliberately agree to that arrangement. How he could not recognize that he had had a tax liability is beyond me.

I say that because he is going to be the person who is going to run this financial rescue program. He’s the architect of this program that hasn’t worked. And at some point, reality is going to have to set in there with the administration too and say, what do we do about this guy, Geithner?

Does the man make the office or the office the man? If this inaugural address expresses the true believes of our 44th president, then, indeed, we have reason to hope. My favorite words were those he adressed to the world:

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint. . . .

We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

If when tested, as he is sure to be tested, he acts in line with these words, he will, indeed, win the support of this often defined as such neocon.

Update: Jon Stewart asks: Does he mean it? Three days later it seems the answer is no.

THOUSANDS OF ACADEMICS WORLDWIDE SIGN PETITION TO PROTEST CUPE ONTARIO'S PROPOSED BOYCOTT OF ISRAELI UNIVERSITIES Here we go again. Please read and sign.

Remember the Danish cartoon fiasco. Here we go again. The Dutch court of appeals ordered the minister of Justice to put on trial the justifyably controversial Geert Wilders for incitement to racist hate. While I am no fan of anachronistic criticism of thousands of year old holy books, I do not believe boycotts and trials are the proper response to such transgressions. You can read more about the case in Death to Free Speech in the Netherlands and find a petition on his behalf addressed to the Dutch government here. Do consider signing. If you wish to help him defray his legal cost click here

In a"white paper" of almost 100 pages, prepared by the government and released yesterday, Beijing admits that"China's security situation has improved steadily," but adds that"China is encountering many new circumstances and new issues in maintaining social stability."

In the white paper, China emphasizes its intention to use military power solely in a defensive manner, and in order to maintain its"territorial integrity." But it adds that it intends to employ significant resources in order to make its army increasingly modern and technologically advanced, according to a plan of development that is not expect to be completed before the"middle of the century." This is in part in order to confront"the superiority of developed countries economically, scientifically and technologically, as well as militarily."

It should be noted that when China refers to its"territorial integrity," it is not referring only to Taiwan but also to Tibet which is tied to it's border with India (see, China: Rising Pitch for a War with India to Recover Arunachal Pradesh. with which it fought a war in 1962.

Experts observe that Beijing, after the bloody repression of the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989, has increased its military spending every year. China is afraid of mass protests, like the one that took place last March in Tibet, forcibly suppressed by the army. There is explicit reference to the"disruption and sabotage by separatist and hostile forces from the inside," like the Tibetans or the Uyghurs of Xinjiang.

For 2008, declared military spending was 417.769 billion yuan (about 41 billion euros), 17.6% more than in 2007. But experts estimate that actual spending was much higher.

Clearly, spending for 2009 and 2010 is sure to set new records. The same hold true for India. It should also not be forgotten that Pakistan is allied to China and India to Russia:

India defense minister, A.K. Antony, is calling for the country's military to be modernized, arguing it is operating at less than 30 per cent of the capability the nation requires.

Antony says this needs to be done as quickly as possible because India is surrounded by"inimical elements."

In this context India conducted yet another test of its advanced cruise missile systems. Unfortunately, for India, despite two previous success, it failed to achieve the expected precision parameters. The reason seems to be the reconfiguration of its guidance system to carry nuclear instead of conventional warhead.

The Army today (January 20) tested the land-attack version of the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile from a firing range near Pokhran in Rajasthan, in a move to fine-tune its use as a precision-strike weapon in future battles. This comes shortly after the air-breathing missile, with a strike range of 290-km, was tested for the first time from a vertical launcher fitted on a moving warship in the Bay of Bengal on December 18.

The missile, capable of touching a speed of 2.8 times that of sound, was launched during the trial in its vertical mode, DRDO officials informed. Currently, the army has one regiment armed with the BrahMos missile which is different from the version that was test-fired today.

The test comes in the midst of heightened tension between India and Pakistan following the Mumbai terror attacks. Defence Minister A K Antony told reporters in New Delhi that the test was pre-planned and not influenced by the ongoing stand-off with Pakistan in the wake of Mumbai carnage.

The missile, jointly developed by India and Russia, was scheduled to be test-fired on Sunday from the Pokran firing range. Sources said a delay in missile's transportation to the test site also led to the postponement.

Incidentally, the Army has begun the progressive induction of its BrahMos LACM (land-attack cruise missile) version, with the first battery being handed over to it in June 2007.

Significantly, Asia Times reports that China can't stop India's missile system:

India considers its emerging anti-missile system an absolute necessity. As each day passes, the signs of instability in Pakistan become more troubling and the drum beat grows louder from Pakistan's Swat Valley, where a militant culture is taking root which is neither tolerant nor passive in nature.

Beijing cannot be happy about India's anti-missile plans and what this might mean for China's long-term strategic interests in the region. More than anything else, it is the uncertainty of the outcome that is causing it such discomfort. The US seems determined to surround China with US-built anti-missile systems. Using North Korea as a valid excuse at first, the US anti-missile footprint could soon extend from Japan - including Japanese cruisers stationed offshore - and South Korea to Taiwan and India. . . .

Writing in World Politics Review in late November in the article"Chinese Perspectives on a Rising India", Yuan said,"Beijing is also wary of New Delhi's eastward strategy of developing greater economic and military ties with Japan and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations countries. Indeed, the increasingly warm ties between New Delhi and Tokyo have been carefully watched by strategic analysts in Beijing."

All I can add is that our new president is fully briefed about this pre World War I (see, cartoon above) reminiscent witches brew which the economic downturn is bound to make increasingly more and more explosive especially as Barack Obama wishes to get the US directly involved with a tar baby called Kashmir and risk damaging the strategically important US/Indian relations.

Three massive gas reservoirs have been discovered 80 kilometers off the Haifa coast, at the Tamar prospect, Noble Energy Inc. announced on Sunday.

Three massive offshore oil reserves discovered off Israel's coast. . . .

Speaking on Army Radio Sunday morning, an exhilarated Yitzhak Tshuva, owner of the Delek Group Ltd, one of the owners of the well, called the discovery"one of the biggest in the world," promising that the find would present a historic land mark in the economic independence of Israel.

"I have no doubt that this is a holiday for the State of Israel. We will no longer be dependent [on foreign sources] for our gas, and will even export. We are dealing with inconceivably huge quantities; Israel now has a solution for the future generations," Tshuva added.

An ecstatic Infrastructures Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer said before the weekly cabinet meeting that the discovery was a"historic" one and could" change the face of Israeli industry." . . .

Following the announcement of the discover, shares of Delek Drilling jumped up 80%, while shares of Isramco Negev 2 skyrocketed by an unprecedented 120 percent. The rest of the Tel Aviv stock market also saw huge gains, with the TA-Index 100 climbing nearly 4 percent.

Mazal Tov!

FT:On Israel’s energy boost:

An old joke in Israel says that Moses turned left when he should have turned right during his desert wanderings. After all, he had the rotten luck of finding almost the only country in the Middle East virtually bereft of oil and gas.

In a piece of news this weekend overshadowed by the ceasefire agreement in Gaza but with perhaps equally important security implications, a major natural gas find was announced 90km off the coast of northern Israel. Noble Energy of the US, which owns a 36 per cent interest, called it the biggest in the company’s history and said the lower bound of the reserve may be three trillion cubic feet.

And once again, the Palestinians did not miss an opportunity to mess an opportunity.

Even after Hamas conquered the territory in the summer of 2007, BG’s negotiations to sell gas from Gaza to Israel, which seeks to plug a looming supply gap, continued. Hamas opposed the deal as an “act of theft” both because Israel was the buyer and because proceeds would have gone to the Palestinian Authority. Negotiations broke down over price late in 2007.

Along with its disastrous December rocket barrage, this is another Palestinian own-goal. Noble’s discovery could supply Israel for decades. BG, meanwhile, is left supplying gas-rich Egypt, a much less lucrative prospect. Perhaps Moses had not only a sense of direction but also a sense of humour.

I waited until the very last minute to express my profound wonder at the incredible ability of this women to live at the heart of one of the most contentious presidencies and not only escape unscathed but emerge as a voice to be reckoned with. She is going to be a hard act to follow.

My best wishes to you, too, Ms. Bush, and thank you.

It may no longer be surprising to read references to Ayn Rand in the Anglo-American press, but to find an article about the much dismissed author in the primary leftist French foreign policy outlet is rather astounding. It means that as far as the left is concerned, Rand can no longer be ignored. Indeed, as far as the left is concerned this is the perfect time to confront her. After all, doesn't the recent market collapse demonstrate that her belief in Capitalism is plain wrong? Moreover, don't Madoff and company illustrate that her trust in the morality of businessmen is similarly fallacious? Even her protege, Alan Greenspan, admitted as much.

The article begins with an anecdote from the latter's autobiography:

Alan Greenspan recounts in his memoir The Age of Turbulence (1) how “mind-boggling” he found it to be approached after an International Monetary Fund meeting in 2004 by Andrei Illarionov, Vladimir Putin’s economic adviser, with the question: “Next time you are in Moscow, would you be willing to meet with me and some of my friends to discuss Ayn Rand?”

Perhaps, it is this incident that led François Flahault to include her in his book Le crépuscule de Prométhée : Contribution à une histoire de la démesure humaine from which this article is extracted. English speakers can be dismissed but when their ideas are taken up by Putin and company, they must be confronted. It should not be forgotten that Ayn Rand was Russian, that Russians are most familiar with the reality of post revolutionary Russia Ayn first experienced then described in "We the Living" (in which she does deal with familial relations Flahault argues she avoids) and that their shared experience forms the basis of her virulent rejection of any state interference in economic affairs.

Flahault ignores"We the Living" focusing, instead, on the better known The Fountainhead (1943) and Atlas Shrugged (1957). He writes:"Like Nietzsche, Rand thought it is great men who justify humanity’s existence. The artist is the master of his work; his refusal to conform to society’s demands gives society its greatest benefit."

Actually, Rand does not argue that great men justify Humanity's existence. She does not feel any need to justify humanity's existence any more than there is a need to justify any other kind of existence. She does argue that the artist is the sole owner of his work but so is every other person. She does not believe that one human being has a right to appropriate the fruit of the labor of another human being regardless of the use the appropriator (she aptly calls looter) intends to make of it. In other words, she objects to the taking of private property in the name of the greater good, be the property intellectual or material. She accurately predicted, what Communist regimes eventually proved, that general poverty, not prosperity is the outcome of the confiscation of private property. Hence, her opposition to the income tax.

She does argue that the fruits of creative/inventive individuals working for self expression often end up benefiting a large number of people. But benefiting people is not their primary motivation merely a side effect. Hence, people need not feel beholden to them. Each person according to his/her ability. Of course, it is only a truth universally known that the ability of some is far greater than that of others. Flahaul quotes Rand hero, Howard Roark:

The creator served nothing and no one. He had lived for himself. And only by living for himself was he able to achieve the things which are the glory of mankind. Such is the nature of achievement. … The work of the creator has eliminated one form of disease after another, in man’s body and spirit, and brought more relief from suffering than any altruist could ever conceive. … The man who attempts to live for others is a dependent. He is a parasite in motive and makes parasites of those he serves. … The creator’s concern is the conquest of nature. The parasite’s concern is the conquest of men. The creator lives for his work. He needs no other men. His primary goal is within himself. The parasite lives second-hand. He needs others.

Flahaul sees the advocacy of such proud individualism as naive because it does not take into account the realities of power:

Ayn Rand defends an ethic which is remarkable for its absence of any obligation towards others, only towards oneself. As if by magic, this spirits away multiple forms of interdependence, power relations, and abuses of power, and the violence and injustices which poison human existence and against which in real life the appeal to reason is ineffective.

But is it really? The Financial channels were all a buzz with news that Steve Jobs is once again leaving Apple. Last time he did the company went down hill. They are those who argue that this time is going to be different. This time Apple will do just as well without him. Investors know better. He is a typical Ayn Rand hero, a man who works for his own sake. Does that mean he does not benefit others?

Moreover, as Nicholas Kristof dares to point out people who work in development know that those much maligned sweat shop owners provide the poorest of the poor with the greatest opportunity for a better life. The same cannot be said about foreign aid or international agencies such as the IMF, the World Bank or UNRWA. Those merely coddle dictators and enable terrorists ( U.N. Agency That Runs School Hit in Gaza Employed Hamas and Islamic Jihad Members ). After all, they are the best producers of the commodity altruists seek most, misery. You wish to see the results of the toil of greedy sweatshop factory owners? Go to China where hundreds of millions have been lifted from poverty. You wish to see the result of the toil of NGOs and International institutions? Go to Gaza where over 80% of the people depend on foreign aid.

Why? Because, as Ayn Rand understood, to do good they need to be needed. The greater the misery, the more important they are. One of the most touching scenes in Atlas Shrugged is the one in which a social worker realizes the parasitic logic of her relationship with her clients. For clear sighted honest observers the post Rwanda holocaust refugee crisis provided a similar moment of truth:

From the point of view of aid workers trying to cope with the needs of refugees, the journalists were in many ways a nuisance. They added to the chaos of clogged roads. They inflated the cost of hiring a car or an interpreter. Nurses resuscitating children with cholera found themselves tripping over tripods and cameramen looking for a better angle.

But aid agency press officers – ever mindful of the hot competition for funds back home – pursued journalists, proffering not only updates and interviews, but free transport and accommodation in return for covering their agency's programme. The aid agencies needed the journalists, and the journalists needed the aid agencies.

I can almost hear Rand say: told you so. Rand rejects the notion that individuals have obligations towards others. Yet, her characters are inherently generous. How come? They act out of compassion and empathy instead of guilt. Nor are they power hungry. Rand's heroes are man like Vincent Van Gogh, Albert Einstein or Bill Gates, not Genghis Han, Napoleon or Lenin. She is well aware of abuses of power but, she argues, creative individualists are not the ones guilty of it. Power hungry looters, who have nothing to contribute and therefore seek to control those who have, are. In other words, her enemy is not the worker but the dictator. Therefore, as Flahaul quotes Rand, she is in favor of overthrowing them before they succeed in extinguishing freedom eveywhere:

The role of a free country such as the US is thus to make sure that things go in the right direction: that of an alliance between democracy and radical capitalism. “Any free nation had the right to invade Nazi Germany and, today, has the right to invade Soviet Russia, Cuba or any other slave pen” (6). “The invasion of an enslaved country,” Rand maintains “is morally justified only when and if the conquerors establish a free social system” (7).

Yes, Rand would have agreed with Ruth Wisse that George W. Bush was superior to Bill Clinton because Bush Destroyed a Dictator. Clinton Installed One. She would have agreed that Israel is acting morally in fighting Hamas in Gaza, Sri Lanka in fighting the Tamil Tigers in Jaffna and Colombia in fighting FARC. She would merely wish them to do so more consistently and energetically.

No, I am not using these terms lightly. PBS' long reigning"saint" (may his name be erased) deserves every adjective I used. He had the gall to say that since Biblical times God-soaked violence became genetically coded into Jews.

After all, for thousands of years, everybody has known when you see a Jews, you immediately cross the street.

I do not mean to be flippant. The accusation, like all race based Nazilike charges that particular religious groups posses unique genetic characteristics is beyond lunacy. But, then, where else can insistence that it is illegitimate for the Democratic state of Israel to defend itself from terrorists seeking to annihilate it for over sixty years lead?

Arabs, including Palestinians, are beginning to break with the notion that the most radical is the also the most authentic representative of the Muslim/Arab/Palestinian world. They are beginning to have enough of Islamism and they are taking on Hamas. The head of Syria's reform party, Farid Ghadry argues that Arabs must decide - to stop Hamas:

We Arabs must be the ones to stop Hamas and Hizbullah, rather than support their demonic and twisted logic of resisting development, enlightenment, and progress of the region. Even when development and enlightenment stare them in the face, their instinct is to destroy them pretending to safeguard their honor, the mechanics of which supersede all else including a happy life of fulfillment and accomplishments.

So while we abhor violence of all kind, Israel's campaign against Hamas must continue to the bitter end not only for the sake of peace but also to help Arabs realize they have a choice: Destroy like Gaza or develop like Dubai. Will this happen soon? Maybe not, but if a wake-up call and a nudge, once in a while, to pierce through the fog of deceit perpetrated by Syria and Iran is what it takes to see the light, then we stand by the West and Israel in the only hope that an Arab Renaissance in the Levant may actually have a chance of resurrection.

In the video below made by a man identifying himself as an Arab argues that Hamas is shooting Palestinians for singing at a wedding and"are doing worse to Palestinians than Israelis" therefore Muslims should be chanting"Death to Hamas:" Watch -

A politically active Palestinian American sent out to her listserv the following response to the ADC call to fight, believe it or not, pro Israeli Arab media. I would like to add that she met with Hamas leaders in Europe shortly after they were elected and at that time not only gave them the benefit of the doubt but tried to help them trusting their promises to do their best for Gaza's Palestinian citizens. As you can see, reality has since disabused her of such hopes.

This is . . . , that Egyptian idiot's handy work...he's the media something or another for this organization and won't resign so that anyone with sanity left, can you believe he can tick off even Arabs??? Yeah, I'm tired for the biased media but we all know it is not biased and never has been biased towards Israel...Maybe if Israel stoops so low as to claim (with no verification) that 900 people died and show repeated pictures of the same child, man, woman die in several places before taking a picture again to report their deaths...yeah, as bold as that sounds, they have exploited sympathy and Anti-Semitism to that low point and don't care who knows it simply because the oil bosses won't be happy if someone speaks so no one will and no one cares...

The worst part is that no one has from all these cheap useless alphabet soups or will even stand up for the Palestinians against the Palestinians...Hamas, Arafat and all the other"saints" have killed and robbed more Palestinians up close and personal more than"The enemy" Israel is even able to come close to and yet, they never spoke up knowing all that... I for one, can't stand before G-d and tell him that I view a bunch that did that to Muslims what they did. It is exactly as if they forbade someone from fasting or praying and then I call them Muslims and heck...stand by them??

Sorry, Hamas will not provide me with a ticket to eternal peace and I have to think about what I say and do before I let them con me into saying what the rest of the herd are without looking...Israel or no Israel, they are not a representative of Palestinians, Muslims or even humans and shouldn't be supported or entertained...if anyone else would've done what they did they entire Muslim world would've been screaming and burning somethings...so where are they now? It's selective? The Quran makes it clear...do not choose part of the script and reject the other or you will suffer...where is that voice...

I'm going to follow the links with my children and some friends and I will voice my Palestinian, Arab, Muslim opinion but these people who sent this email are not going to like it...the truth hurts

Weapons inside Gaza mosque