Adnan Al-Daini

“If the Euro fails, then Europe fails”- so said Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor.  This is what we have been hearing from pundits and experts for weeks now.  Predictions of economic Armageddon if the eurozone breaks up have been aired ad nauseam by politicians and experts.  Commentators and journalists hardly ever ask the two most important questions. Why? How? 

The Euro as the currency of seventeen diverse countries with their different cultures, lifestyles, traditions, tax and spend regimes is dead.  The sooner we realise that, the better it will be for everyone.  Research by the Centre for Economic and Business Research (CEBR) predicts a rosier future after a short sharp shock of eurozone collapse. In an article in the Telegraph, headlined “Collapse of the Euro will help Britain”, the conclusions of the research are presented as:

“Britain will be better off in five years’ time if the eurozone breaks up than if the single currency survives the debt crisis, research suggests today.  The disorderly break-up of the euro would mean a short, sharp economic shock and probably a recession, but would be followed by a quicker return to strong economic growth, according to the Centre for Economics and Business Research.  The economists also predict that break-up would free many eurozone members from the deficit-cutting austerity policies that threaten to subdue their growth for years.”

The article quotes the research thus:

“If it [the eurozone] breaks up the immediate pain is much more intense, but then there is a more stable basis and we would expect that within about 30 months growth will actually be faster than if the eurozone survives in its current form.”

I am no economist, but this analysis makes a lot of sense to me and probably to most people in Europe.  In the absence of cogent explanations to the contrary from politicians who have invested a lot of capital in the Euro, and are influenced by self serving institutions and lobbyists, I'd put my trust in the CEBR conclusions.

More »

Paul J. Balles

Here’s a story to think about:

A bouncer at a night club doesn’t like the looks of one of the customers. What makes matter worse is that the customer is loud-mouthed and vilifying night club bouncers, saying that they are the ones who should be kicked out of the club.

The bouncer takes a night stick that he has for just such an occasion, walks over to the table where the noisy customer is ranting and raving.

Then, without further warning, the bouncer bashes the noisy customer’s head with the night stick. The customer falls to the floor, dead.

People who see what had happened ask the bouncer why he beat the customer to death.

“Shut up,” shouts the bouncer, “He was armed, and I had to stop him before he destroyed us.”

“Why didn’t you stop him at the door if you thought he was a danger?” asks one of the club’s patrons?

“I did,” argues the bouncer. “When I accused him of having a weapon, he denied it.”

The patron is flummoxed. “Why didn’t you search him?”

The bouncer, becoming impatient with the sceptical crowd, proclaims, “I told him to prove he didn’t have a weapon.”

“Eh?” questions another patron, “You asked him to prove that he didn’t have what he didn’t have?”

More »

Stephen Lendman

America, key NATO partners, and Israel target both countries.

Israel wants regional rivals removed. Washington and key NATO partners want independent regimes ousted, replaced with subservient ones.

At issue is establishing regional dominance. New targets can then confronted politically, economically, and/or belligerently.

Fabricated IAEA Iranian documents escalated tensions. Rhetorical saber rattling followed. Stiffer sanctions are threatened and perhaps war.

Syria's been targeted for months. Libya's insurgency was replicated. Street battles rage daily. Violence engulfs the country. Assad's government is unfairly blamed. Washington's dirty hands are at fault. So are Israel's and other conspiratorial allies.

The Arab League's decision to suspend Syria makes Western intervention more likely. The League's constitution requires unanimity. Lebanon, Yemen and Syria voted "no." Iraq abstained.

Suspension's thus illegitimate. Syria's Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem condemned it. America was blamed for demanding it. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman attended the League session to assure things went Washington's way.

More »

Stephen Lendman

In early November, the Gisha Legal Center for Freedom of Movement published a report titled, "Scale of Control: Israel's Continued Responsibility in the Gaza Strip."

It explained little changed after its alleged 2005 "disengagement."

A 2007 Gisha report titled, "Disengaged Occupiers: The Legal Status of Gaza" argued that as an occupying power, Israel's obligations continue.

Its new publication updates it. Despite Israel claiming no further responsibility, it exercises full control of Gaza's airspace, waters, borders, territory, infrastructure, power, and more. It collects customs and value added taxes for imported goods, conducts regular incursions, excludes most exports, and maintains a physical presence.

As a result, "it is impossible to say that (its) occupation of Gaza has ended and therefore, the international law of occupation continues to apply to Israel in the spheres in which it continues to exercise control over the lives of Palestinian residents."

Israel's thus obligated to fulfill its mandated responsibilities, including providing protection for people it controls.

More »