Islamic summit draft communique accuses Israel of 'war crimes'

Members of a delegation from the United Arab Emirates watching the closing ceremony of the Organization of the Islamic Conference summit in Dakar, Senegal on Friday. (AP)

15 March 2008
by News Agencies

The world's largest Muslim body will accuse Israel of committing war crimes against Palestinian civilians, according to a draft of the final communique of an Islamic summit in Senegal seen by Reuters on Friday.

"The conference denounces the current and increasing Israeli military campaign against the Palestinian people and the serious violation of human rights and war crimes including the killing and injuring of Palestinian civilians," the draft said.

It called Israel's "collective punishment of civilians" in Gaza a violation of international human rights law and said "the occupying forces must be held responsible for these war crimes".

The communique is due to be approved at the end of a two-day meeting in Dakar, Senegal, of the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the second largest inter-governmental bloc after the United Nations.

At the conference, Muslim nations also mulled taking legal measures for slights against Islam.

Concerned about what they see as a rise in the defamation of Islam, Muslim leaders at the summit are considering legal action against those who slight their religion or its sacred symbols.

The plan represents an attempt to demand redress from nations like Denmark, which allowed the publication of cartoons caricaturing the Prophet Muhammad, an incident that infuriated the Muslim world.

Though the type of legal action it could take is not fully spelled out, the threat pits the Muslim world against the principles of freedom of speech enshrined in the constitutions of numerous western governments.

"I don't think freedom of expression should mean freedom from blasphemy," said Senegal's President Abdoulaye Wade, the chairman of the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference on Friday. "There can be no freedom without limits."

At the summit, delegates were given a voluminous report recording anti-Islamic speech and action around the world. It cites the publication of the Danish cartoons, as well as the op-ed articles of a Somali-born Muslim woman who said women do not have rights under Islam. The report concludes that Islam is under attack and that a defense must be mounted.

"Muslims are being targeted by a campaign of defamation, denigration, stereotyping, intolerance and discrimination," said Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the secretary general of the group.

To protect the faith, Muslim nations have already created an 'observatory' that meets regularly to monitor "Islamophobia." It examines lectures and workshops taking place around the world and prints a monthly record of offensive content.

The report presented Friday urges the creation of a legal instrument to crack down on defamation of Islam, but it is unclear what kind of legal action could be taken. Some delegates point to laws in Europe criminalizing the denial of the Holocaust and other anti-Semitic rhetoric. They also point to articles within various UN charters that condemn discrimination based on religion and argue that these should be made stronger.

"In our relation with the western world, we are going through a difficult time," Ihsanoglu told the summit's general assembly. "Islamophobia cannot be dealt with only through cultural activities but [through] a robust political engagement," he said.

In reaction, the International Humanist and Ethical Union in Geneva issued a statement accusing the Islamic states of attempting to limit freedom of expression and of attempting to misuse the UN.

All U.S. Buildings in Palestine to be closed

A Statement from HRM Deborah of Palestine and the Messenger of Peace

15 March 2008

The United States government representatives on Palestine soil, including the former area known as Israel will forthwith leave all areas of Palestine.

All Consulate’s and Embassies are to be closed immediately; due to questionable practices within these institutions, as well as collaboration with a known terrorist organization; known as Fatah under Mahmoud Abbas.

This includes, that Jack Walles is to also leave Palestine and the former area known as Israel immediately.

Responsibilities toward Children

We have different responsibilities to our children than to other adults. We are financially responsible for our children; we are responsible for providing for their material and physical needs.

Our children need to be taught how to help themselves--from tying their shoes to making social plans. They need our love and guidance. They need consistent enforcement of boundaries, once we've established limits. They need a supportive, nurturing environment in which to grow. They need help learning values.

But we are not responsible for controlling our children. Contrary to popular belief, controlling doesn't work. Discipline and nurturing do -- if combined.

We need to respond to our children in a responsible way and hold them accountable for their actions at an age-appropriate level.

We need only do our best. Seek balance. Seek wisdom. Seek not to have control, but to own our power as people who are parents.

Jews vote in Iran election

14 March 2008

By Fredrik Dahl

TEHRAN (Reuters) - They live in an Islamic state whose president has questioned the Holocaust and is regularly predicting the demise of Israel.

Iran's ancient Jewish community has declined by two-thirds since the 1979 Islamic revolution and like many people in the country they can be reluctant to publicly criticize its ruling establishment.

Those Iranian Jews who spoke to Reuters after voting in Friday's parliamentary election, in which conservatives are expected to retain their grip, said they faced no problems in the Shi'ite Muslim country for their religion.

"We have been in this country for thousands of years and we will stay," said businessman Edmund Moalemi, 32, after casting his ballot at a synagogue in the capital Tehran.

The United States accuses Iran of discriminating against its religious and ethnic minorities, a charge Tehran rejects.

But Moalemi said: "We have no complaints. We can come here all week and say our prayers."

Such words are likely to please Iranian officials but are at odds with renewed accusations by Washington, Iran's arch-foe, about the Islamic Republic's treatment of minorities.

The U.S. State Department said in its 2007 human rights report this week: "All religious minorities suffered varying degrees of officially sanctioned discrimination, particularly in employment, education and housing."

The Iranian government's anti-Israel stance "created a threatening atmosphere for the community", it said in the section about Jews in Iran.

Judaism is one of three recognized minority religions in Iran. The community has a member in the 290-seat legislature and its own schools. Four other seats are reserved for Iran's Christians and Zoroastrianism, a pre-Islamic religion.

The number of Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians have fallen sharply over the last three decades but their official representatives say economic woes affecting all Iranians and other issues are to blame not any mistreatment of non-Muslims.

Iran denies any discrimination and often responds to such accusations by referring to what it sees as abuses in the West.

PRESIDENT'S "PERSONAL OPINION"

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been condemned internationally for describing the Holocaust, the annihilation of six million Jews by Nazi Germany, as a "myth" and calling for the Jewish state to be "wiped off the map".

Voters at the synagogue were reluctant to comment when asked about the president's statements. "That's his personal opinion," said Rahmatollah Shamsian, a 64-year-old textile shop owner, after voting for one of two Jewish candidates.

Teenager Yusef Suferi, standing outside the Jewish polling station in Tehran, said he had never personally encountered any difficulties because of his religious beliefs.

"I have mostly Jewish friends but also some Muslim friends," he said, sporting spiky dark hair and dressed all in black.

"Whenever I enter a mosque I'm received well." Suferi said he might be moving with his father to the United States to join relatives there: "He has no family members living here. Most have left."

Iran's Jewish population has slumped to about 25,000 from 85,000 at the time of the revolution, but is believed to be the biggest Jewish community in the Middle East outside Israel.

Late last year, a prominent Jewish group in Iran sought to distance itself from a secret exodus to Israel by 40 Jews. They rejected any suggestion they were involved in the group's departure and said Jews enjoy good living conditions in Iran.

An Israeli immigration official said the influx was the largest from Iran as a single group in recent years. The newcomers were offered $10,000 each by a Christian and Jewish fellowship to make the move, the official said in December.

Moalemi, the Jewish businessman, said most of those who left in December had later returned to Iran and he voiced confidence about the future for Jews in Iran: "Although people are leaving there are newborns taking their place."

(Editing by Samia Nakhoul)

U.S. Need a Vacation?

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (L) shakes hands with Israel's deputy premier Haim Ramon during their meeting in Jerusalem September 19, 2007, in this picture released by the U.S. Embassy. (Matty Stern/U.S. Embassy/Handout/Reuters)

15 March 2007

Israel's deputy premier said on Saturday the Jewish State's delay in dismantling settler outposts in the occupied West Bank is hurting bilateral relations with the United States.

While the United States no longer has jurisdiction towards Palestinian polices, this includes, Palestinians that are Jewish, Muslim or Christian.

Anything to do with any policy in Palestine is strictly by the Palestinian legitimate government.

Prisoner Release most Assuredly Prompt

JAAFAR ASHTIYEH/AFP/Getty Images)



Non-Criminal Prisoner Release:

Palestinians hold jailed relative's picture's during a protest calling for the release of prisoners from Israeli jails in the West Bank city of Nablus on March 15, 2008.

Message to the Senate of the United States

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 14, 2008

I transmit herewith, for Senate advice and consent to ratification, the Protocol Amending the Convention Between the United States of America and Canada with Respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital done at Washington on September 26, 1980, as Amended by the Protocols done on June 14, 1983, March 28, 1984, March 17, 1995, and July 29, 1997, signed on September 21, 2007, at Chelsea (the "proposed Protocol"). The proposed Protocol would amend the existing income tax Convention between the United States and Canada that was concluded in 1980, as amended by prior protocols (the "existing Treaty"). Also transmitted for the information of the Senate is the report of the Department of State with respect to the proposed Protocol.

The proposed Protocol would eliminate withholding taxes on cross-border interest payments. In addition, the proposed Protocol would coordinate the tax treatment of contributions to, and other benefits of, pension funds for cross-border workers. The proposed Protocol also includes provisions related to the taxation of permanent establishments, so-called dual-resident corporations, income derived through certain entities that are considered fiscally transparent, and former U.S. citizens and long-term residents. The proposed Protocol further strengthens the existing Treaty's provisions that prevent the Treaty's inappropriate use by third-country residents. The proposed Protocol also provides for mandatory resolution of certain cases before the competent authorities.

I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the proposed Protocol and give its advice and consent to ratification.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

March 13, 2008.

Sorry We Are Closed?

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 15, 2008

Audio

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. On Friday, I traveled to New York City to talk about the state of our economy. This is a topic that has been a source of concern for families across America. In the long run, we can be confident that our economy will continue to grow, but in the short run, it is clear that growth has slowed.

Fortunately, we recognized this slowdown early, and took action to give our economy a shot in the arm. My Administration worked with Congress to pass a bipartisan economic growth package that includes tax relief for families and incentives for business investment. I signed this package into law last month -- and its provisions are just starting to kick in. My economic team, along with many outside experts, expects this stimulus package to have a positive effect on our economy in the second quarter. And they expect it to have even a stronger effect in the third quarter, when the full effects of the $152 billion in tax cuts are felt.

A root cause of the economic slowdown has been the downturn in the housing market. I believe the government can take sensible, focused action to help responsible homeowners weather this rough patch. But we must do so with clear purpose and great care, because government actions often have far-reaching and unintended consequences. If we were to pursue some of the sweeping government solutions that we hear about in Washington, we would make a complicated problem even worse -- and end up hurting far more homeowners than we help.

For example, one proposal would give bankruptcy courts the authority to reduce mortgage debts by judicial decree. This would make it harder to afford a home in the future, because banks would charge higher interest rates to cover this risk.

Some in Washington say the government should take action to artificially prop up home prices. It's important to understand that this would hurt millions of Americans. For example, many young couples trying to buy their first home have been priced out of the market because of inflated prices. The market now is in the process of correcting itself, and delaying that correction would only prolong the problem.

My Administration opposes these proposals. Instead, we are focused on helping a targeted group of homeowners -- those who have made responsible buying decisions and could avoid foreclosure with a little help. We've taken three key steps to help these homeowners.

First, we launched a new program that gives the Federal Housing Administration greater flexibility to offer refinancing for struggling homeowners with otherwise good credit histories. Second, we helped bring together the Hope Now Alliance, which is streamlining the process for refinancing and modifying many mortgages. Third, the Federal Government is taking regulatory steps to make the housing market more transparent and fair in the long run.

And now Congress must build on these efforts. Members need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, modernize the Federal Housing Administration, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to help homeowners refinance their mortgages.

Congress also needs to take other steps to help our economy through this period of uncertainty. Members need to make the tax relief we passed permanent, reduce wasteful spending, and open new markets for American goods, services, and investment.

By taking these steps and avoiding bad policy decisions, we will see our economy strengthen as the year progresses. As we take decisive action, we will keep this in mind: When you are steering a car in a rough patch, one of the worst things you can do is overcorrect. That often results in losing control and can end up with the car in a ditch. Steering through a rough patch requires a steady hand on the wheel and your eyes up on the horizon. And that's exactly what we're going to do.

Thank you for listening.

END

Obama Denounces Pastor's inflammatory Remarks against the United States

Senator Obama reviews messages on his Blackberry during a morning briefing as his campaign bus travels through Iowa.

14 March 2008

by Nedra Pickler

WASHINGTON -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Friday denounced inflammatory remarks from his pastor, who has railed against the United States and accused its leaders of bringing on the Sept. 11 attacks by spreading terrorism.

As video of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has widely aired on television and the Internet, Obama responded by posting a blog about his relationship with Wright and his church, Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ, on the Huffington Post.

Obama wrote that he's looked to Wright for spiritual advice, not political guidance, and he's been pained and angered to learn of some of his pastor's comments for which he had not been present. Obama's statement did not say whether Wright would remain on his African American Religious Leadership Committee, and campaign officials wouldn't say either.

"I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies," Obama said. "I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Reverend Wright that are at issue."

In a sermon on the Sunday after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, Wright suggested the United States brought on the attacks.

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye," Wright said. "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."

In a 2003 sermon, he said blacks should condemn the United States.

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

He also gave a sermon in December comparing Obama to Jesus, promoting his candidacy and playing down Clinton.

Questions about Obama's religious beliefs have dogged him throughout his candidacy. He's had to fight against false Internet rumors suggesting he's really a Muslim intent on destroying the United States, and now his pastor's words uttered nearly seven years ago have become an issue.

Obama wrote on the Huffington Post that he never heard Wright say any of the statements that are "so contrary to my own life and beliefs," but they have raised legitimate questions about the nature of his relationship with the pastor and the church.

He explained that he joined Wright's church, Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, nearly 20 years ago. He said he knew Wright as a former Marine and respected biblical scholar who lectured at seminaries across the country.

"Reverend Wright preached the gospel of Jesus, a gospel on which I base my life," he wrote. "... And the sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor, and to seek justice at every turn."

He said Wright's controversial statements first came to his attention at the beginning of his presidential campaign last year, and he condemned them. Because of his ties to the 6,000-member congregation church -- he and his wife were married there and their daughters baptized -- Obama decided not to leave the church.

Obama also has credited Wright with delivering a sermon that he adopted as the title of his book, "The Audacity of Hope."

"With Reverend Wright's retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good," he wrote.

Also Friday, the United Church of Christ issued a 1,400-word statement defending Wright and his "flagship" congregation. John H. Thomas, United Church of Christ's president, lauded Wright's church for its community service and work to nurture youth. Other church leaders praised Wright for speaking out against homophobia and sexism in the black community.

"It's time for all of us to say no to these attacks and to declare that we will not allow anyone to undermine or destroy the ministries of any of our congregations in order to serve their own narrow political or ideological ends," Thomas said in the statement.

Associated Press Religion Writer Eric Gorski contributed to this report.

(Warning: Some people may find this video offensive.)

Link:
Obama's priest disparages America, Obama asked to explain

Note:

This is just a note to the person sending hateful messages under “Anonymous,” I do not publish racial discriminatory messages that is meant to harm and not better humanity as well as to defame a persons character, in this case Mr. Barack Obama and myself.

While “Anonymous,” may say pleasantries to Mr. Obama’s face, it is a shame they have to be so vulgar behind there back.

US immigrant couple detained in 'worst child abuse case ever seen'

14 March 2008

By REBECCA ANNA STOIL

Two preschool-aged brothers were lying in hospital beds on Thursday, one fighting for his life, as their parents pled innocence in what Jerusalem police called the worst child abuse case they have ever seen.

The suspected child abusers are escorted by police. Photo: AP

The estranged parents, recent haredi immigrants from the United States, have six other children.

The older of the two victims, aged four and a half, was hospitalized in good condition at Hadassah-University Medical Center, Ein Kerem, late on Tuesday after a family friend noticed he was behaving strangely and contacted social services. His mother joined him in the hospital.

Then, early Wednesday morning, Magen David Adom received a call from the family's home in the exclusive Wolfson apartment complex in the capital's Rehavia neighborhood, reporting that a three-and-a-half-year-old boy had been found unconscious and not breathing. An MDA team resuscitated the boy after a long struggle, and he was hospitalized, unconscious and in critical condition.

Only then was the connection made between the two cases. Police representatives described the abuse as "prolonged and severe," speaking in court on Thursday.

Both children had burns all over their bodies. The younger boy, who is still unconsciousness, also had marks indicating that his arms and legs had been bound and that he had been beaten with a blunt object and whipped on the back.

Police detained the mother, 38, and spent hours locating the boys' father, also a suspect in the abuse.

The father said that he and his wife had been separated for some time, and that as he had been living in a second Jerusalem property owned by the couple, he had no idea of the horrors that police believed occurred in his wife's residence.

The children were allegedly cared for by two Israeli men in their 20s; they are also suspects in the abuse.

Asst.-Cmdr. Bruno Stein, who is leading the police probe, said officers were trying to locate two more suspects.

The mother was questioned for almost 13 hours on Wednesday, but never asked about her two hospitalized sons, Stein said. Instead, he said, she read from a Book of Psalms. The mother did say, however, that the father had been responsible for bringing the two "caretakers" into the house.

At one point, she confessed to the allegations against her, but she later retracted her statement.

During the parents' remand hearing on Thursday afternoon, the mother's attorney said the confession had been made under pressure. The father also denied any connection to the boys' injuries.

But after being presented with a series of photographs of the injuries, Judge Hayim Li-Ran extended the parents' remands by six days and determined that until the children were questioned, only social services representatives would be allowed to visit them in the hospital.

The couple's other six children have been put in the care of the city's Social Services Department.

Israel putting spoke in wheels of 'Abbas army'

Members of the Fatah terrorist organization perform crowd-control tactics during training in Jordan that one critic calls "under funded, under equipped, under-everything." (By Ellen Knickmeyer -- The Washington Post)

Washington Post reports plan to train 1,000 Palestinian security officers in Jordan mired in delays, shortage of resources, different between Americans and Israelis

3 March 2008

by Ynet

What is delaying the training of Palestinian police officers in Jordan? A US-funded program to train and equip Palestinian security forces is mired in delays, a shortage of resources, and differences between Israel and the United States over what military capabilities those forces should have once deployed in the territories, The Washington Post reported Saturday.

The group of more than 1,000 Palestinian trainees is being trained in a desert camp one hour from Jordan's capital, Amman.

The courses are the first extended training of Palestinian recruits since June, when hundreds of Fatah graduates of a US-backed, 45-day crash course conducted in Egypt were deployed against Hamas fighters in Gaza.

But doubts in Israel and in the US Congress about the loyalties of Abbas's forces have slowed the arrival of the program's funding.

US contract workers and Jordanian security forces are training about 600 members of the Fatah-dominated National Security Forces, or NSF, in a 16-week course. About 425 members of the elite presidential guard, which answers to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, are undergoing eight weeks of training.

According to the report, although Israel insists that the Palestinians must have effective security in the West Bank and Gaza before its forces withdraw further, the Israeli government has placed significant restrictions on the US-coordinated training effort.

Weeks into the course, which began in late January, US and Jordanian instructors had yet to receive essential training equipment, including vehicles, two-way radios, dummy pistols, rifles and batons, and a US-designed curriculum, Americans with close knowledge of the program told The Washington Post.

Because of Israeli concerns, the group has not been outfitted with pledged body armor or light-armored personnel carriers. The shortages and delays have forced US and Jordanian trainers to improvise their way through the program, including purchasing pistol-shaped cigarette lighters for use in arrest drills and using their own cars for driver training.

One of the Americans told The Washington Post, "In short, we are faking it."

If you marry them, you have a better chance of keeping them

14 March 2008

By Shmuel Rosner

A new study on inter-faith couples finds intriguing 'correlation between Jewish wedding-officiating at ceremonies of intermarried couples and intermarried families raising their children as Jews.'

1. Study

A seasonal surge in studies about intermarriage provides for both interesting reading and a lot of work. After writing early this week about the new Boston study (Boston's intermarried 'as observant' as Reform Jews) I will write today about another such study - one from The National Center for Jewish Policy Studies at Hebrew College in Boston.

Prof. Arnold Dashefsky of Connecticut is the principal author of this study. One headline: queried about their parents' reaction to the prospect of intermarriage, most Jewish respondents in this study said that the parent was "not opposed, and was happy that I was happy" (39 percent of fathers and 45 percent of mothers).

With such attitude, it's no wonder that the community seems to have moved away from trying to convince young adults to marry within the faith, and is now thinking long and hard about ways with which to keep the intermarried within the community. "The Jewish community in the United States and other developed countries", Dashefsky writes in his postscript, "must face the challenges of residing in 'wall-less' contexts".

2. Marriage

This study is about people who both intermarried and have at least some interest in Judaism. It is interesting because the interviews include both the Jewish and the non-Jewish spouses. A significant indication of whether or not these couples' children will be brought up Jewish is if wedding ceremony was conducted by a rabbi. The study found "a significant correlation, with 87 percent (who experienced sole rabbinic officiating) raising Jewish children, compared to 63 percent doing so who had other forms of wedding-officiating." Meaning: If you marry them, you have a better chance of keeping them. And the opposite is also true: Christian husbands in this study have "demonstrated their negative attitude toward rabbis who would not perform a marriage ceremony between interfaith persons".

By the way, the Boston study reached similar conclusion: "The survey found a strong correlation between Jewish wedding-officiating of intermarried couples and intermarried families raising their children as Jews".

However, a word of caution comes both from the study, and from a conversation I had today with Prof. Dashefsky: "these relationships indicate associations. They are not proof of a causal path between rabbinic officiator at the marriage ceremony" and a Jewish outcome. Caution aside, it is already clear that these two studies will have an impact on the discussion of the topic in the upcoming annual convention of the Reform Central Conference of American Rabbis.

3. Acceptance

"A gap exists between" the "relatively normative Jewish connections" of the non-Jewish spouses, and "their perception of acceptance within the larger Jewish community" - concludes the study. That is one topic on which Dashefsky would like people to focus. Of those couples who do not belong to a synagogue, a majority (67%) told him that attracting them to join one will only happen "If I find a synagogue in which my spouse feels comfortable".

4. Observance

This is also something that both the Boston study and this one emphasize: "Jewish spouses of the interfaith couple resemble in many ways the typical patterns embodied by all American Jews and the respondents even exceeded the norms in formal and informal Jewish education attained as well as in the observance of rituals like lighting Hanukkah and Shabbat candles." It is "a group of adults, both Jewish and non-Jewish, evincing more 'Jewish' behaviors than the average pattern among all American Jews".

Like in the case with the Boston study, what this study describes here is the half-full glass. One should also note that "being Jewish" was not as important to these couples as it is to the general Jewish population and that "more than half of the Jewish respondents reported that they had a Christmas tree and three-quarters exchanged Christmas presents." Whether that makes these families less of a "Jewish home" is open for interpretation and debate (Prof. Steven Cohen would say it does).

5. Agreement

"Agreement and tensions between interfaith couples were primarily centered on three themes: values and spirituality, religious observances and holidays, and raising children." The result might be confusing: "there is a diversity of practices followed by interfaith couples and this fact will need to inform programmatic responses of the community and its constituent organizations".
6. Implications

This is where the study becomes practical. "Some Christian and Jewish respondents stated that they found the Jewish community accepting and warm." But, "many Christian husbands and wives stated that they felt rejection or a lack of acceptance from the community". The couples interviewed for the study offered advice: They want more "classes, discussion groups, and support services" for interfaith couples; they want more resources with which to better understand Judaism and how it can relate to their daily lives; they want services to be "easy for non-Jews to understand".

And here is one or two of the suggestions to the Jewish community that were made by the scholars: "convey an explicit message that it welcomes interfaith couples"; Avoid off-putting expressions; "Offer incentives for interfaith families to encourage participation in Jewish institutions." And what about the rabbis? Either marry couples, or make sure that "the couple does not view the rabbi's inability and unwillingness to officiate as a personal rejection."


More on intermarriage on Rosner's Domain:

Boston's intermarried 'as observant' as Reform Jews

Changing face of American Jewry: Reaching out to interfaith families

The in-married Jewish people, the intermarried Jewish people

Are intermarried couples hopeless?

A dialogue with Edmund Case of InterfaithFamily.com

A dialogue with Prof. Sylvia Barak Fishman on inter-marriages and conversion
---------------
Commentary

by HRM Deborah

In Judaism you are having similar to the same problem is what is occurring especially in America with the Islamic population, while the Jewish religion calls them Converts, in Islam it is Revert.

From what I read, I going to make several remarks, first I think you are having a problem in these marriages in question because some of your Converts are doing so not for G-d, but to get married. I have seen this way to many times and I do not agree that people should do this.

Judaism as is what is going on in Islam, is people are coming into these religions as if they are wearing a faith coat that they can take on and off when ever they feel like it. Which has caused numerous problems, like for instance the remark of celebrating Christmas which is contrary to Judaism or think that all that is in Judaism doesn‘t necessary apply to them, type of thinking.

As intermarried special activities or classes, I am sorry but I do not agree; you should keep to the teaching of Judaism in every manner, because if you do not, eventually Judaism would be gone and I do not wish to see this. As well as all who are Jewish should always a hear to what was set down by G-d.

If a Jewish man marries someone that is not Jewish or a convert, the education and religion of the children is always the same as the father. As well as a Jewish woman, should never marry anyone but another of her religion, as far as I know this has always been the law.

I am going to be perfectly honest here, there is a saying to marry only someone like your self, because it elevates many problems and will keep Judaism strong and focused on G-d. This is just a suggestion.

As for a Rabbi not marrying anyone because of the old laws, is actually commendable and if a couple does not agree they should not be married in the first place.

As for the less observant, they remind me of the ones that are in Islam and I call them Muslim in name only, I hope you understand my reference. I am sure G-d looks at these people in Judaism the same as He would in Islam with sadness. Because anyone who does not do all that G-d commands, He tends to turn his back on them.

Case in point, of an article I wrote last year, while it has to do with Muslims, the same adage applies here.

As for people being accepted, everyone in this life should always feel welcome and loved, as well as any kindness one can show to each other as much as possible. This may also slow down some of your current problems. One thing I notice these days is a lot of people have forgotten that love and kindness to others is always important, no matter who the person may be. However, it does not necessary mean to marry them.

I do hope this gives a few idea’s to the situation.

Note:
There are some people entering certain religions as converts, for the sole purpose to undermine and destroy said religion.

Abbas Get's the News

Mahmoud Abbas, 14 March 2008 on the last day of the 11th edition at the 57-nation Organization of Islamic Conference held in Dakar. While he had no authority to attend said conference.

What this picture actually curtails, is Abbas had just gotten the news, that the Armistice was signed and what his future may hold.

As for Abbas making any remarks towards anyone or policy in Palestine it is more enough time to be quite, because he has never had any legal standing and furthermore, for once he needs to do the right thing an surrender.

Nevertheless, he is not only wanted in Palestine, but also Interpol from my understanding, is very interested in him.

Iraq on Violence

President Bush Visits the Economic Club of New York

President George W. Bush delivers remarks on the economy to the Economic Club of New York Friday, March 14, 2008, in New York City, New York. White House photo by Chris Greenberg

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

March 14, 2008

Video
Audio
THE PRESIDENT: Glenn, thanks for the kind introduction. Thanks for giving me a chance to speak to the Economic Club of New York. It seems like I showed up in a interesting moment -- (laughter) -- during an interesting time. I appreciate the fact that you've assembled to give me a chance to share some ideas with you. I also appreciate the fact that as leaders of the business and financial community, you've helped make this city a great place, and you've helped make our country really, in many ways, the economic envy of the world.

First of all, in a free market, there's going to be good times and bad times. That's how markets work. There will be ups and downs. And after 52 consecutive months of job growth, which is a record, our economy obviously is going through a tough time. It's going through a tough time in the housing market, and it's going through a tough time in the financial markets.

And I want to spend a little time talking about that, but I want to remind you, this is not the first time since I've been the President that we have faced economic challenges. We inherited a recession. And then there was the attacks of September the 11th, 2001, which many of you saw firsthand, and you know full well how that affected our economy. And then we had corporate scandals. And I made the difficult decisions to confront the terrorists and extremists in two major fronts, Afghanistan and Iraq. And then we had devastating natural disasters. And the interesting thing, every time, this economy has bounced back better and stronger than before.

So I'm coming to you as an optimistic fellow. I've seen what happens when America deals with difficulty. I believe that we're a resilient economy, and I believe that the ingenuity and resolve of the American people is what helps us deal with these issues. And it's going to happen again.

Our job in Washington is to foster enterprise and ingenuity, so we can ensure our economy is flexible enough to adjust to adversity, and strong enough to attract capital. And the challenge is not to do anything foolish in the meantime. In the long run, I'm confident that our economy will continue to grow, because the foundation is solid.

Unemployment is low at 4.8 percent. Wages have risen, productivity has been strong. Exports are at an all-time high, and the federal deficit as a percentage of our total economy is well below the historic average. But as Glenn mentioned, these are tough times. Growth fell to 0.6 percent in the fourth quarter of last year. It's clearly slow. The economy shed more than 80,000 jobs in two months. Prices are up at the gas pump and in the supermarket. Housing values are down. Hardworking Americans are concerned -- they're concerned about their families, and they're concerned about making their bills.

Fortunately, we recognized the slowdown early and took action. And it was decisive action, in the form of policies that will spur growth. We worked with the Congress. I know that may sound incongruous to you, but I do congratulate the Speaker and Leader Reid, as well as Boehner and Mitch McConnell and Secretary Paulson, for anticipating a problem and passing a robust package quickly.

This package is temporary, and it has two key elements. First, the growth package provides incentives for businesses to make investments in new equipment this year. As more businesses take advantage, investment will pick up, and then job creation will follow. The purpose was to stimulate investment. And the signal is clear -- once I signed the bill, the signal to folks in businesses large and small know that there's some certainty in the tax code for the remainder of this year.

Secondly, the package will provide tax rebates to more than 130 million households. And the purpose is to boost consumer spending. The purpose is to try to offset the loss of wealth if the value of your home has gone down. The purpose is to buoy the consumer.

The rebates haven't been put in the mail yet. In other words, this aspect of the plan hasn't taken to effect. There's a lot of Americans who've heard about the plan; a lot of them are a little skeptical about this "check's in the mail" stuff that the federal government talks about. (Laughter.) But it's coming, and those checks, the Secretary assures me, will be mailed by the second week of May.

And so what are the folks, the experts, guys like Hubbard, anticipate to happen? I'm not so sure he is one now, but the people that have told me that they expect this consumer spending to have an effect in the second quarter, a greater effect in the third quarter. That's what the experts say.

The Federal Reserve has taken action to bolster the economy. I respect Ben Bernanke. I think he's doing a good job under tough circumstances. The Fed has cut interest rates several times. And this week the Fed -- and by the way, we also hold dear this notion of the Fed being independent from White House policy. They act independently from the politicians, and they should. It's good for our country to have that kind of independence.

This week the Fed also announced a major move to ease stress in the credit markets by adding liquidity. It was strong action by the Fed, and they did so because some financial institutions that borrowed money to buy securities in the housing industry must now repair their balance sheets before they can make further loans. The housing issue has dried up some of the sources of credit that businesses need in our economy to help it grow. That's why the Fed is reacting the way they are. We believe the actions by the Fed will help financial institutions continue to make more credit available.

This morning the Federal Reserve, with support of the Treasury Department, took additional actions to mitigate disruptions to our financial markets. Today's events are fast-moving, but the Chairman of the Federal Reserve and the Secretary of the Treasury are on top of them, and will take the appropriate steps to promote stability in our markets.

Now, a root cause of the economic slowdown has been the downtown in the housing market, and I want to talk a little bit about that today. After years of steady increases, home values in some parts of the country have declined. At the same time, many homeowners with adjustable rate mortgages have seen their monthly payments increase faster than their ability to pay. As a result, a growing number of people are facing the prospect of foreclosure.

Foreclosure places a terrible burden on our families. Foreclosure disrupts communities. And so the question is, what do you do about it in a way that allows the market to work, and at the same times helps people? Before I get to that, though, I do want to tell you that we fully understand that the mounting concern over housing has shaken the broader market, that it's spread uncertainty to global financial markets, and that it has tightened the credit, which makes it harder for people to get mortgages in the first place.

The temptation is for people, in their attempt to limit the number of foreclosures, is to put bad law in place. And so I want to talk about some of that. First of all, the temptation of Washington is to say that anything short of a massive government intervention in the housing market amounts to inaction. I strongly disagree with that sentiment. I believe there ought to be action, but I'm deeply concerned about law and regulation that will make it harder for the markets to recover -- and when they recover, make it harder for this economy to be robust. And so we got to be careful and mindful that any time the government intervenes in the market, it must do so with clear purpose and great care. Government actions are -- have far-reaching and unintended consequences.

I want to talk to you about a couple of ideas that I strongly reject. First, one bill in Congress would provide $4 billion for state and local governments to buy up abandoned and foreclosed homes. You know, I guess this sounds like a good idea to some, but if your goal is to help Americans keep their homes, it doesn't make any sense to spend billions of dollars buying up homes that are already empty. As a matter of fact, when you buy up empty homes you're only helping the lenders, or the speculators. The purpose of government ought to be to help the individuals, not those who, like -- who speculated in homes. This bill sends the wrong signal to the market.

Secondly, some have suggested we change the bankruptcy courts, the bankruptcy code, to give bankruptcy judges the authority to reduce mortgage debts by judicial decree. I think that sends the wrong message. It would be unfair to millions of homeowners who have made the hard spending choices necessary to pay their mortgages on time. It would further rattle credit markets. It would actually cause interest rates to go up. If banks think that judges might step in and write down the value of home loans, they're going to charge higher interest rates to cover that risk. This idea would make it harder for responsible first-time home buyers to be able to afford a home.

There are some in Washington who say we ought to artificially prop up home prices. You know, it sounds reasonable in a speech -- I guess -- but it's not going to help first-time home buyers, for example. A lot of people have been priced out of the market right now because of decisions made by others. The market is in the process of correcting itself; markets must have time to correct. Delaying that correction would only prolong the problem.

And so that's why we oppose those proposals, and I want to talk about what we're for. We're obviously for sending out over $150 billion into the marketplace in the form of checks that will be reaching the mailboxes by the second week of May. We're for that. We're also for helping a targeted group of homeowners, namely those who have made responsible buying decisions, avoid foreclosure with some help.

We've taken three key steps. First, we launched a new program at the Federal Housing Administration called FHA Secure. It's a program that's given FHA greater flexibility to offer refinancing for struggling homeowners with otherwise good credit. In other words, we're saying to people, we want to help you refinance your notes. Over the past six months this program has helped about 120,000 families stay in their homes by refinancing about $17 billion of mortgages, and by the end of the year we expect this program to have reached 300,000 families.

You know the issue like I do, though. I'm old enough to remember savings and loans, and remember who my savings and loan officer was, who loaned me my first money to buy a house. And had I got in a bind, I could have walked across the street in Midland, Texas, and say, I need a little help; can you help me readjust my note so I can stay in my house? There are no such things as that type of deal anymore. As a matter of fact, the paper -- you know, had this been a modern era, the paper that had -- you know, my paper, my mortgage, could be owned by somebody in a foreign country, which makes it hard to renegotiate the note.

So we're dealing in a difficult environment, to get the word to people, there's help for you to refinance your homes. And so Hank Paulson put together what's called the HOPE NOW Alliance to try to bring some reality to the situation, to focus our help on helping creditworthy people refinance -- rather than pass law that will make it harder for the market to adjust. This HOPE NOW Alliance is made up of industry -- is made up of investors and service managers and mortgage counselors and lenders. And they set industry-wide standards to streamline the process for refinancing and modifying certain mortgages.

Last month Hope Now created a new program. They take a look -- they took a look at the risks, and they created a program called Project Lifeline, which offers some homeowners facing imminent foreclosure a 30-day extension. The whole purpose is to help people stay in their houses. During this time they can work with their lender. And this grace period has made a difference to a lot of folks.

An interesting statistic that has just been released: Members of the Alliance report that the number of homeowners working out their mortgages is now rising faster than the number entering foreclosure. The program is beginning to work, it's beginning to help. The problem we have is a lot of folks aren't responding to over a million letters sent out to offer them assistance and mortgage counseling. And so one of the tasks we have is to continue to urge our citizens to respond to the help; to pay attention to the notices they get describing how they can find help in refinancing their homes. We got toll-free numbers and websites and mailings, and it's just really important for our citizens to understand that this help is available for them.

We've also taken some other steps that will bring some credibility and confidence to the market. Alphonso Jackson, Secretary of HUD, is proposing a rule that require lenders to provide a standard, easy-to-read summary statements explaining the key elements of mortgage agreements. These mortgage agreements can be pretty frightening to people; I mean, there's a lot of tiny print. And I don't know how many people understood they were buying resets, or not. But one thing is for certain: There needs to be complete transparency. And to the extent that these contracts are too complex, and people made decisions that they just weren't sure they were making, we need to do something about it. We need better confidence amongst those who are purchasing loans.

And secondly, yesterday Hank Paulson announced new recommendations to strengthen oversight of the mortgage industry, and improve the way the credit ratings are determined for securities, and ensure proper risk management at financial institutions. In other words, we've got an active plan to help us get through this rough period. We're always open for new ideas, but there are certain principles that we won't violate. And one of the principles is overreacting by federal law and federal regulation that will have long-term negative effects on our economy.

There are some further things we can do, by the way, on the housing market that I call upon Congress to do. By the way, Congress did pass a good bill that creates a three-year window for American families to refinance their homes without paying taxes on any debt forgiveness they receive. The tax code create disincentives for people to refinance their homes, and we took care of that for a three-year period. And they need to move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.

Congress can also take other steps to help us during a period of uncertainty -- and these are uncertain times. A major source of uncertainty is that the tax relief we passed in 2001 and 2003 is set to expire. If Congress doesn't act, 116 million American households will see their taxes rise by an average of $1,800. If Congress doesn't act, capital gains and dividends are going to be taxed at a higher rate. If Congress doesn't make the tax relief permanent they will create additional uncertainty during uncertain times.

A lot of folks are waiting to see what Congress intends to do. One thing that's certain that Congress will do is waste some of your money. So I've challenged members of Congress to cut the number of, cost of earmarks in half. I issued an executive order that directs federal agencies to ignore any future earmark that is not voted on by the Congress. In other words, Congress has got this habit of just sticking these deals into bills without a vote -- no transparency, no light of day, they just put them in. And by the way, this executive order extends beyond my presidency, so the next President gets to make a decision as to whether or not that executive order stays in effect.

I sent Congress a budget that meets our priorities. There is no greater priority than to make sure our troops in harm way have all they need to do their job. That has been a priority ever since I made the difficult commitment to put those troops in harm's way, and it should be a priority of any President and any Congress. And beyond that, we've held spending at below rates of inflation -- on non-security spending, discretionary spending, we've held the line. And that's why I can tell you that we've submitted a budget that's in balance by 2012 -- without raising your taxes.

If the Congress truly wants to send a message that will calm people's nerves they'll adopt the budget I submitted to them and make it clear they're not going to run up the taxes on the working people, and on small businesses, and on capital gains, and on dividends, and on the estate tax.

Now, one powerful force for economic growth that is under -- is being questioned right now in Washington is whether or not this country is confident enough to open up markets overseas, whether or not we believe in trade. I believe strongly it's in our nation's interest to open up markets for U.S. goods and services. I believe strongly that NAFTA has been positive for the United States of America, like it's been positive for our trading partners in Mexico and Canada. I believe it is dangerous for this country to become isolationist and protectionist. I believe it shows a lack of confidence in our capacity to compete. And I know it would harm our economic future if we allow the -- those who believe that walling off America from trade to have their way in Congress.

And so I made it clear that we expect for Congress to move forward on the Colombia free trade agreement. And this is an important agreement. It's important for our national security interests, and it's important for our economic interests. Most Americans don't understand that most goods and services from Colombia come into the United States duty free; most of our goods and services are taxed at about a 35-percent rate heading into Colombia. Doesn't it make sense to have our goods and services treated like those from Colombia? I think it does. I think our farmers and ranchers and small business owners must understand that with the government finding new markets for them, it will help them prosper.

But if Congress were to reject the Colombia free trade agreement, it would also send a terrible signal in our own neighborhood; it would bolster the voices of false populism. It would say to young democracies, America's word can't be trusted. It would be devastating for our national security interests if this United States Congress turns its back on Colombia and a free trade agreement with Colombia.

I intend to work the issue hard. I'm going to speak my mind on the issue because I feel strongly about it. And then once they pass the Colombia, they can pass Panama and South Korea, as well.

Let me talk about another aspect of keeping markets open. A confident nation accepts capital from overseas. We can protect our people against investments that jeopardize our national security, but it makes no sense to deny capital, including sovereign wealth funds, from access to the U.S. markets. It's our money to begin with. (Laughter.) It seems like we ought to let it back. (Applause.)

So there's some of the things that are on my mind, and I appreciate you letting me get a chance to come by to speak to you. I'm -- you know, I guess the best to describe government policy is like a person trying to drive a car on a rough patch. If you ever get stuck in a situation like that, you know full well it's important not to overcorrect -- because when you overcorrect you end up in the ditch. And so it's important to be steady and to keep your eyes on the horizon.

We're going to deal with the issues as we see them. We're not afraid to make decisions. This administration is not afraid to act. We saw a problem coming and we acted quickly, with the help of Democrats and Republicans in the Congress. We're not afraid to take on issues. But we will do so in a way that respects the ingenuity of the American people, that bolsters the entrepreneurial spirit, and that ensures when we make it through this rough patch, our driving is going to be more smooth.

Thank you, Glenn, for giving me a chance to come, and I'll answer some questions. (Applause.)

MR. HUBBARD: Thank you very much, Mr. President.

As is the Club's tradition, we do have two questioners. On my left, Gail Fosler, the President and Chief Economist of the Conference Board. On my right, literally and metaphorically, Paul Gigot -- (laughter) -- the editorial page editor of The Wall Street Journal.

Gail, the first question for the President is yours.

Q Thank you, very much.

THE PRESIDENT: Who picked Gigot? I mean, why does he -- (laughter.) All right. Excuse me. (Laughter.)

MS. FOSLER: I'm glad you don't know me, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, well -- (laughter.) I'd be more polite, trust me. (Laughter.) My mother might be watching. (Laughter.)

MS. FOSLER: I would like to probe your thoughts on trade. You raised trade in your speech very passionately. And the Conference Board is made up of 2,000 businesses around the world; about a third of them are outside of the United States. And they look at the move toward protectionism in the United States with great alarm, even the shift in the Republican Party toward protectionism. And you mention that a confident nation opens its borders, and there does seem to be a lack of confidence in this country. And I wonder if you would give us a diagnosis of why we find ourselves in the situation we do today?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, a lot of folks are worried about their neighbors losing work. In other words, they fear jobs moving overseas. And the best way to address that is to recognize that sometimes people lose work because of trade, and when that happens, the best way to deal with it is to provide educational opportunities so somebody can get the skills necessary to fill the higher-paying jobs here in the United States.

And I think, for example, of what happened to the textile industry in North Carolina. And stories like these really do affect how people think about trade. You know, some companies because of mismanagement, some companies because of trade couldn't survive. And it created a wholesale displacement of workers throughout North Carolina. And what the state of North Carolina did was they wisely used their community college system to be able to fit needs and skills.

In other words, a community college system -- the interesting thing about it, it's probably the most market-driven education system in the United States. Unlike some higher education institutions that are either unwilling or sometimes incapable of adjusting curriculum, the community college system is capable of doing that.

And North Carolina recognized they had a great opportunity to become a magnet for the health care industry. And a lot of their textile workers -- with government help, called trade adjustment assistance -- went to community colleges to gain new skills. And it turns out that when you analyze what happened, just the added value -- just kind of the increase in productivity and the relevancy of the job training made the wages higher for those than they were in the textile industry. There's a classic example of how to respond, rather than throwing up trade barriers.

Secondly, a lot of people don't understand this fact, that by having our markets open it's good for consumers. The more consumers get to choose, the more choice there is on the shelves, the less likely it is there will be inflation. And one of the great things about open markets is that markets respond to the collective wisdom of consumers. And so, therefore, it makes sense to have more choice, more opportunities. And yet when you read, "made from" another country on the shelves of our stores, people automatically assume that jobs are fragile. And so we've got to do a better job of educating people about the benefits of trade.

Third, it's -- sometimes, when times are tough, it's easy to -- it's much easier to find a -- somebody else to blame. And sometimes that somebody else that's easier to blame is somebody in a distant land.

And so those are the some of the fact -- and plus it's easy politics. It's easy to go around and hammer away on trade. It's -- and I guess if you're the kind of person that followed polls and focus groups, that's what your tendency to be. I'm the kind of person who doesn't give a darn about polls and focus groups, and I do what I think is right. And what is right is making sure that -- (applause.) And sometimes if you're going to lead this country, you have to stand in the face of what appears to be a political headwind.

And so those are some of the dynamics that makes it hard. And I'm troubled by isolationism and protectionism. As a matter of fact, I dedicated part of my State of the Union address a couple of years ago to this very theme. And what concerns me is, is that the United States of America will become fatigued when it comes to fighting off tyrants, or say it's too hard to spread liberty, or use the excuse that just because freedom hadn't flourished in parts of the world, therefore it's not worth trying, and that, as a result, we kind of retrench and lose confidence in our -- the values that have made us a great nation in the first place.

But these aren't American values; they're universal values. And the danger of getting tired during this world [sic] is any retreat by the America -- by America was going to be to the benefit of those who want to do us harm. Now, I understand that since September the 11th, the great tendency is to say, we're no longer in danger. Well, that's false. That's false hope. It's either disingenuous or naive, and either one of those attitudes is unrealistic.

And the biggest job we've got is to protect the American people from harm. I don't want to get in another issue, but that's why we better figure out what the enemy is saying on their telephones, if you want to protect you. (Applause.) Notice I am deftly taking a trade issue and working in all my other issues. (Laughter.)

But I'm serious about this business about America retreating. And I've got great faith in the transformative power of liberty, and that's what I believe is going to happen in the Middle East. And I understand it undermines the argument of the stability-ites -- people who say, you just got to worry about stability. And I'm saying, we better worry about the conditions that caused 19 kids to kill us in the first place.

And the best way to deal with hopelessness is to fight disease like we're doing in Africa, and fight forms of government that suppress people's rights, like we're doing around the world. And a retreat from that attitude is going to make America less secure and the world more dangerous, just like a loss of confidence in trade.

And yet the two run side by side: isolationism and protectionism. I might throw another "ism," and that's nativism. And that's what happened throughout our history. And probably the most grim reminder of what can happen to America during periods of isolationism and protectionism is what happened in the late -- in the '30s, when we had this "America first" policy, and Smoot-Hawley. And look where it got us.

And so I guess to answer your question, there needs to be political courage, in the face of what may appear to be a difficult headwind, in order to speak clearly about the effects of retreat and the benefits of trade. And so I appreciate you giving me a chance to opine. (Laughter and applause.)

MR. HUBBARD: Thank you, Mr. President. The second and final --

THE PRESIDENT: Never bashful, never short of opinions. (Laughter.) Just like my mother. (Laughter.)

MR. HUBBARD: The second and final question for the President is from Paul Gigot.

Q Welcome to New York, Mr. President. And I want to ask you about something you didn't -- an issue you didn't address, which is prices.

THE PRESIDENT: Which is what?

Q Prices. Gasoline is selling for $4 a gallon in some parts of the country, but food prices are also rising very fast -- grain prices, meat prices, health care prices. And the dollar is weak around the world, hitting a record low this week against the Euro. The price of gold is now about $1,000 an ounce. Many observers say, oh, this means that we have an inflation problem. Do you agree with them, and what can be done about it?

THE PRESIDENT: I agree that the Fed needs to be independent and make considered judgments, and balance growth versus inflation. And let me address some of those issues one by one.

We believe in a strong dollar. I recognize economies go up and down, but it's important for us to put policy in place that sends a signal that our economy is going to be strong and open for business, which will -- you know, which supports the strong dollar policy, such as not doing something foolish during this economic period that will cause -- make it harder to grow; such as rejecting -- shutting down capital from coming into this country; such as announcing that, or articulating the belief that making the tax cuts permanent takes uncertainty out of the system.

Energy: Our energy policy has not been very wise. You can't build a refinery in the United States. You can't expand a refinery in the United States. The Congress believes we shouldn't be drilling for oil and gas in a productive part of our country like ANWR because it will destroy the environment, which, in fact, it won't. Technology is such that will enable us to find more oil and gas. And so as a result of us not having, you know, been robust in exploring for oil and gas at home, we're dependent on other countries. That creates an economic issue, obviously, and it creates a national security issue.

And, look, I'm very -- I'm an alternatives fuel guy, I believe that's important. As a matter of fact, we've expanded -- mightily expanded the use of ethanol; a slight consequence if you rely upon corn to grow your hogs, but nevertheless it's a -- it is a policy that basically says that we got to diversify. But diversification does not happen overnight. You know, I firmly believe people in New York City are going to be driving automobiles on battery relatively quickly. And it's not going to be like a golf cart, it will be a regular-sized vehicle that you'll be driving in. (Laughter.) And I think it's coming. I think this technology is on its way.

But there's a transition period, and we, frankly, have got policies that make it harder for us to become less dependent on oil. You talk about the price of oil -- yeah, it's high. It's high because demand is greater than supply, is why it's high. It's high because there's new factors in demand on the international market, namely China and India. It's also high because some nations have not done a very good job of maintaining their oil reserves -- some of it because of bureaucracy, some of it because of state-owned enterprise. And it's a difficult period for our folks at the pump, and there's no quick fix.

You know, when I was overseas in the Middle East, people said, did you talk to the King of Saudi about oil prices? Of course I did. I reminded him two things: One, you better be careful about affecting markets -- reminding him that oil is fungible; even though we get most of our oil, by the way, from Canada and Mexico, oil is fungible. And secondly, the higher the price of oil, the more capital is going to come into alternative sources of energy. And so we've got a plan that calls for diversification, but it's -- our energy policy hadn't been very wise up to now.

Anyway, I'm going to dodge the rest of your question. (Laughter.) Thank you for your time. (Applause.)

END

A Celebration of Peace

Allah, may there never be war again.
This crowd of Arab Palestinians are hearing the announcement that the war is completely over and that Armistice was signed on 14 March 2008.

I am thinking everyone in Palestine is celebrating and while I wish I was there to join them, everyone has a very good right to celebrate and I am so very happy for everyone in Palestine.

Muslims boycott Paris book fair over Jewish honor

14 March 2008

Seven Muslim countries, including Iran and Saudi Arabia, protest against choice of Israel as guest of honor at literary event due to 'crimes against humanity it is perpetrating in Palestinian territories

The Paris Book Fair opened on Thursday under the cloud of a boycott by seven Muslim countries in protest against the choice of Israel as guest of honor at the French-speaking world's largest literary event.

The international fair, featuring 39 Israeli writers and publishers, was due to be officially opened by visiting Israeli President Shimon Peres, who described the boycott as "the most ridiculous thing I have heard in my life".

During the event four people were lightly injured after the Israeli booth at the International Paris book fair collapsed. The incident occurred after Peres entered the booth causing a fracas. The president was not injured.

Algeria, Iran, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Yemen announced in advance they would shun the fair in response to a call from the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO).

The Morocco-based organization said last month it had urged the boycott to protest against Israel's actions against Palestinians.

"The crimes against humanity Israel is perpetrating in the Palestinian territories ... constitute, in themselves, a strong condemnation of Israel, making it unworthy of being welcomed as a guest of honor," ISESCO said in a statement.

It pointed out that Israel was being honored in the year that the Jewish state marked the 60th anniversary of its creation.

'Nothing to fear from books'

Among Israeli writers expected to take part were Amos Oz and David Grossman.

Peres, on a state visit to France, said on Wednesday: "I am against the boycott of books ... Books are written to awaken reflection, to try to make sense of ideas."

Speaking to journalists on Thursday, David Martinon, spokesman for President Nicolas Sarkozy, said the boycott was regrettable, adding: "There is nothing to fear from books."

The organizers said the object of the fair was to honor literature and denied that Israel had been chosen because of its 60th anniversary.

Christine de Mazieres, speaking for the French Publishers' association which organizes the fair, said last week: "What is happening in the Middle East is very sad, but it is not linked to our event."

She added all the countries that had withdrawn were aware Israel was being honored when they signed up and many of the Israeli writers taking part favored a Palestinian state.

A similar controversy is brewing about the May book fair in Turin, Italy, which is also highlighting Israeli works.

Source

--------------
Commentary

by HRM Deborah

The information I received, their seems to be a misunderstanding of why the Jewish people are not being allowed to go to this book fair.

I agree that this situation is unfair, to anyone within my country.

While I did see this article or similar yesterday, I am doing everything, I can at this time to remedy this problem with the hope that those that wish to attend this fair may do so.

In conclusion, as of today with my understanding with the Armistice greement all charges where dropped against both the Jewish and Palestinians in regards to what happened in wartime, excluding the Fatah Organzation.

In conclusion, the Jewish legal matter that was brought to my attention, I do agree with what was said, it is according to Jewish law and as for the lawsuit their is no foundation as far as my understanding of the situation.

Armistice Day for Palestine

A Statement from HRM Deborah of Palestine and the Messenger of Peace

14 March 2008

As of this morning at 9:00 AM, the Armistice Agreement between the Palestinian and Jewish people was signed, signifying the legal end to the war in Palestine. All people living in Palestine regardless of their religion is a citizen of Palestine with all due respect.

As we continue the reconstruction of our country after this horrendous war, may we as citizens of Palestine instead of shedding tears, we can now rejoice.

As for building construction in Palestine at this time, the United Nations has no jurisdiction within Palestine boundaries, for they have never recognized the country or the people of Palestine since their inception. The building construction in Palestine will continue, with gratitude towards the Jewish people for their efforts to create housing for those who are homeless among the Arab population. I hope that in the near future the refugee camps will be no more.

As for Dick Cheney, wishing to come for a visit on Sunday, it is not necessary or welcome, because the proposal’s I understand he was going to make towards President George W. Bush’s peace plan and roadmap is nullified.

Vice-President Cheney would be better spent; using the money that he would have used to make his trip to Palestine, to give to charity within the United States, to relive the suffering among those in his own country, with the hope that some of the people in his country would be relived of their hardships and tears.

As of today, the United States cannot dictate policy also within the boundaries of Palestine.

Now in regards to the Fatah terrorist organization led by Mahmoud Abbas, all people within this terrorist organization, has two options, surrender or be assassinated for the high crime’s against all the citizens of Palestine and Internationally.

As for Palestine herself, may she become a great country once again and the sorrow’s that was created by an unjust war be no more. May we put this sorrow behind us and live in the manner that all people in Palestine were intended in the first place.

Finally, may Allah’s peace and blessing’s shower upon all the people of Palestine forever!