Unlike what's being said in the media about global sanctions biting into the Iranian economy, my Iranian sister-in-law who has only last week returned to the US from a four month stay in Iran, tells me that you wouldn't notice anything different from pre-sanction Iran, in fact the shops everywhere in Tehran and the other major cities across the country are full of manufactured items of every description, and no shortage of produce in the markets.
I don't know from where they are getting this abundance, my guess is China and other nearby countries (probably even Israel) defying the UN sanctions.
The surprising comment she made was that on this trip to Iran it was noticed that people are resigned to the regime's ideology, but not necessarily agreeing with it, and therefore are happier in their everyday life.
"But now Britain has joined them, and Canada may as well."
Unlike Israel's proposal to remove the Palestinian's birthright citizenship, I'm assuming Britain is only talking about foreign born residents that have acquired citizenship through naturalisation.
I wonder how many suicides are directly attributable to the overwhelming stress of not being able to repay student loans, for which even bankruptcy is not an option.
Israel is rated 13th in military strength internationally, without the nuclear option - has 187,000 active front-line personnel and 565,000 active reserve personnel, as well as 3870 tanks, 656 aircraft, 65 naval vessels and a military budget of $15, 209,000,000. So my question and thought on the matter is, why isn't Israel contributing to the Obama initiative on the eradication of Isis from it's neighbours and it's own borders.
When the perceived opponent is a weak entity living in a Israeli created ghetto armed with only bottle rockets and stones, the Israelis have no problem using their tremendous firepower without discrimination to attack on a pretext of security concerns.
I agree with you Nel! For the past week or so, most of the International news coverage, has been given to the Ukrainian plane disaster and the numerous daily interviews with the usual pundits.
The Gaza conflict seems to have taken a back seat to other world events that were important newsworthy items, but don't really need any further attention. So why is the ongoing brutal assaults on civilians by the Israeli government not taking precedence on our nightly news reports. Hundreds of innocent Palestinians have been killed since last week, and all I hear from the US newscasters are mainly interviews with Israelis and Sen. Kerry.
I see no difference between Bashar al-Assad (president of Syria) and Benjamin Netanyahu in the present indiscriminate shelling and bombing of civilians in Gaza, (glad to know that Israel hasn't used phosphorous in their shells/bombs this time around). So why hasn't the Israeli government been even a little of the condemnation that Syria receives for it's indiscriminate bombing tactics, much of it with little or no warning.
My thoughts on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict are quite simply, the Palestinians are not terrorists in the strict sense, but they do have a legitimate agenda in their reaction to the Zionist theft of 'their' land and resources. I would equate the Palestinian fighters to the French resistance during WW2, unlike the Israeli Zionist government who are a self proclaimed expansionist entity, the Palestinians are doing what any other people would do for survival when faced with an unequal power that's trying to (successfully I might add) take away their ancestral land, livelihood, and aspirations for self determination.
If I were faced with the same situation with my family forced off our land, and made homeless after our house is bulldozed, then I too would join a resistance group and fire off a few hundred rockets, for the enemy to get the message that we don't want to be occupied with the eventual annexation of our land.
Also I suspect it's because traditionally women are known as the nurturers and givers of life, they raise the nation's future generations and are generally considered the weaker gender (well physically anyway).
The elderly of either gender should be considered one of the vulnerable in these situations, but to paraphrase the original responder, the equaliser, is 'a life is a life'.
If Dianne Sawyer is unable to distinguish between an Israeli woman and a hijab wearing Palestinian, then she definitely shouldn't be covering news from the the Middle-East, maybe ABC should stick to what they do best - celebrity news.
Exactly, these run a-mock Libertarians on a war footing, have the Constitution as their Bible, but feel that they get to define the meaning of the Articles, which mean (according to them) there is no place in the Constitution for government.
I can see a lot of trouble from these people in our future, forget about international terrorism domestic terrorism is the future unfortunately.
It was also stated on the morning news that the "shooter", no mention of the word "terrorist", had four explosive devices at his home. My question is, what is the difference between this potential massacre and that of the Boston massacre except that the deranged extremist wasn't a Muslim. It would seem that in America it is your particular religion that decides if you're a terrorist or just a shooter.
"British forebears’ preference for fists and brawls as a form of social expression". Times have not changed and this is what I was referring to in my post, the Brit's propensity for violence, which can lead to deaths but not necessarily. Since my time living here in the US I've found your average American to be milder mannered and shall we say more civilised than my fellow countrymen (maybe the drinking habits should be taken into account).
An example I encountered a couple of years ago in a crowded London street market where a brawl erupted between two of the market traders, the men probably in their forties having exhausted their vocabulary of expletives started lashing out with their fists, scattering customers, blood streaming down their faces - it took a middle-aged woman to bring them to their senses as she chastised them in the manner of a annoyed mum to her ten year old.
Nope, I still prefer the quality of life in the US where my personal safety is concerned.
I am a Brit now living in the US, and I must say that while the UK has all but eliminated non sporting weapons from the general public I must agree with Bill that the Brits are a more aggressive people than your average American, the difference being that British violence is more 'in your face', in other words more personal since firearms are out of the question, (five years mandatory prison time for being caught with one for the first time) the weapon of choice is a knife or a brick - imagine if handguns were as easily available in the UK as in the US, I shudder to think.
I've never thought of the Egyptians as being a particularly religious people, at least from my perspective.
I remember when working in the UAE with some Egyptian lads working under me during the month of Ramadan, they not only sneakingly drank bottles of Cola during the day to avoid being seen by devout local Muslims, but would come around to our villa at night asking to purchase a bottle or two of spirits, which were denied them by the authorities.
We, as non-Muslim foreign workers, were allowed a generous quota per month of alcohol to purchase from a government controlled liquor store run by a trusted Scottish entity of which I forget the name.
But some desperate expat Brit must have mentioned to the local Sheik that gin and hot climates go together.
So, I don't know if my experience is indicative of today's Egyptian youth, but it certainly surprised me.
"The Iranians would think twice before they sent their “fleet” into the Atlantic."
Lol Jack, you mean the one ancient destroyer, and several Chriss-Craft attack boats?
"No such luck, so if you’re a Murdoch tabloid, it’s open season, no consequences guaranteed."
Well not exactly, Murdock did get his comeuppance, when Karma paid a visit with plenty of consequences for his infamous yellow journalistic rag's actions.
Why have AIPAC not been designated as an agent of a foreign power since they represent only two percent of the of the U.S. population, but 100 percent of the Israeli Jewish population.
AIPAC lobbying is almost exclusively aimed at US foreign policy towards Israel, so it would seem to be very much in their interest to keep things the way they are, since if Israel made peace with it's Arab neighbours their raison d'etre would no longer exist resulting in a drying up of their donations.
An old, well maybe new, Irish proverb.
Just in case you were wondering, the last sentence is relevant to Professor Cole's article.
"Tax his tractor, tax his mule; tell him, taxing is the rule.
Tax his car, tax his gas, tax his food, tax his cash
Tax him good and let him know, that after taxes, he has no dough.
If he hollers, tax him more; tax him till he's good and sore.
Tax his coffin, tax his grave, tax the ground in which he's laid.
Put these words upon his tomb, "Taxes drove him to his doom."
Once he's gone, we won't relax, till we collect the inheritance tax."
John O'D, I'm an expat Brit living in the US for more than twenty years, and have never experienced human rights violations, or any disrespectful behaviour by any authority in this country.
That doesn't mean to say that I have never been charged with any infraction of the law (traffic violations) I have, but attitude and resistance to the implementation of the law goes a long way to how one is duly treated by police.
Of course the instances of errant behaviour by law enforcement do happen, no doubt, but are the exception rather than the rule.
There's not much the world can do whenever Israel abuse human rights in their quest for a Greater Israel, since the US will always veto any criticism of their continued outrages and inhumanity towards Arabs.
As an Englishman living in the US, and having my eyes and ears violated by a constant stream of royal inanity. I'm surprised that the people of this great country, have taken away an essential freedom from me, ( I think it's in the Bill of Rights) the right to change TV channels without duress. I truly believe that more Americans are into matters of British Monarchy and love the Pomp and Circumstance surrounding it than most UK citizens - maybe that's because they don't have to pay for it. Oh, and by the way for those gamblers betting on the soon to be announced royal name, I believe it is being named after its grandfathers - Charles and Hewitt - so my bet's on Chewit!!
Actually I may be in favour of the Monarchy as long as we can execute some of them from time to time. Monarchy should always remember the ancient Shakespearian Aphorism "Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown".
International travel isn't free, but public schooling is and libraries are, so that greatly diminishes the excuse factor for lacking experience with the world.
Also those that have the luxury and the time committed to worldly travel as genuine travellers as opposed to just being tourists, may well gain from that prospective of being in the position to form socially reactionary views.
Before the 1930's at the time of the Reza Pahlavi rise to power.
Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, where Trump has business ties are exempt.
Why are there no talks of sanctions by the UNSC
on Israel?
Bigots of course, just like America is today.
But what's going to keep America safe from Carly Fiorina?
Unlike what's being said in the media about global sanctions biting into the Iranian economy, my Iranian sister-in-law who has only last week returned to the US from a four month stay in Iran, tells me that you wouldn't notice anything different from pre-sanction Iran, in fact the shops everywhere in Tehran and the other major cities across the country are full of manufactured items of every description, and no shortage of produce in the markets.
I don't know from where they are getting this abundance, my guess is China and other nearby countries (probably even Israel) defying the UN sanctions.
The surprising comment she made was that on this trip to Iran it was noticed that people are resigned to the regime's ideology, but not necessarily agreeing with it, and therefore are happier in their everyday life.
"But now Britain has joined them, and Canada may as well."
Unlike Israel's proposal to remove the Palestinian's birthright citizenship, I'm assuming Britain is only talking about foreign born residents that have acquired citizenship through naturalisation.
I wonder how many suicides are directly attributable to the overwhelming stress of not being able to repay student loans, for which even bankruptcy is not an option.
Israel is rated 13th in military strength internationally, without the nuclear option - has 187,000 active front-line personnel and 565,000 active reserve personnel, as well as 3870 tanks, 656 aircraft, 65 naval vessels and a military budget of $15, 209,000,000. So my question and thought on the matter is, why isn't Israel contributing to the Obama initiative on the eradication of Isis from it's neighbours and it's own borders.
When the perceived opponent is a weak entity living in a Israeli created ghetto armed with only bottle rockets and stones, the Israelis have no problem using their tremendous firepower without discrimination to attack on a pretext of security concerns.
I agree with you Nel! For the past week or so, most of the International news coverage, has been given to the Ukrainian plane disaster and the numerous daily interviews with the usual pundits.
The Gaza conflict seems to have taken a back seat to other world events that were important newsworthy items, but don't really need any further attention. So why is the ongoing brutal assaults on civilians by the Israeli government not taking precedence on our nightly news reports. Hundreds of innocent Palestinians have been killed since last week, and all I hear from the US newscasters are mainly interviews with Israelis and Sen. Kerry.
I see no difference between Bashar al-Assad (president of Syria) and Benjamin Netanyahu in the present indiscriminate shelling and bombing of civilians in Gaza, (glad to know that Israel hasn't used phosphorous in their shells/bombs this time around). So why hasn't the Israeli government been even a little of the condemnation that Syria receives for it's indiscriminate bombing tactics, much of it with little or no warning.
My thoughts on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict are quite simply, the Palestinians are not terrorists in the strict sense, but they do have a legitimate agenda in their reaction to the Zionist theft of 'their' land and resources. I would equate the Palestinian fighters to the French resistance during WW2, unlike the Israeli Zionist government who are a self proclaimed expansionist entity, the Palestinians are doing what any other people would do for survival when faced with an unequal power that's trying to (successfully I might add) take away their ancestral land, livelihood, and aspirations for self determination.
If I were faced with the same situation with my family forced off our land, and made homeless after our house is bulldozed, then I too would join a resistance group and fire off a few hundred rockets, for the enemy to get the message that we don't want to be occupied with the eventual annexation of our land.
Also I suspect it's because traditionally women are known as the nurturers and givers of life, they raise the nation's future generations and are generally considered the weaker gender (well physically anyway).
The elderly of either gender should be considered one of the vulnerable in these situations, but to paraphrase the original responder, the equaliser, is 'a life is a life'.
If Dianne Sawyer is unable to distinguish between an Israeli woman and a hijab wearing Palestinian, then she definitely shouldn't be covering news from the the Middle-East, maybe ABC should stick to what they do best - celebrity news.
I agree but I doubt Turkey will allow that!
Exactly, these run a-mock Libertarians on a war footing, have the Constitution as their Bible, but feel that they get to define the meaning of the Articles, which mean (according to them) there is no place in the Constitution for government.
I can see a lot of trouble from these people in our future, forget about international terrorism domestic terrorism is the future unfortunately.
It was also stated on the morning news that the "shooter", no mention of the word "terrorist", had four explosive devices at his home. My question is, what is the difference between this potential massacre and that of the Boston massacre except that the deranged extremist wasn't a Muslim. It would seem that in America it is your particular religion that decides if you're a terrorist or just a shooter.
"British forebears’ preference for fists and brawls as a form of social expression". Times have not changed and this is what I was referring to in my post, the Brit's propensity for violence, which can lead to deaths but not necessarily. Since my time living here in the US I've found your average American to be milder mannered and shall we say more civilised than my fellow countrymen (maybe the drinking habits should be taken into account).
An example I encountered a couple of years ago in a crowded London street market where a brawl erupted between two of the market traders, the men probably in their forties having exhausted their vocabulary of expletives started lashing out with their fists, scattering customers, blood streaming down their faces - it took a middle-aged woman to bring them to their senses as she chastised them in the manner of a annoyed mum to her ten year old.
Nope, I still prefer the quality of life in the US where my personal safety is concerned.
I am a Brit now living in the US, and I must say that while the UK has all but eliminated non sporting weapons from the general public I must agree with Bill that the Brits are a more aggressive people than your average American, the difference being that British violence is more 'in your face', in other words more personal since firearms are out of the question, (five years mandatory prison time for being caught with one for the first time) the weapon of choice is a knife or a brick - imagine if handguns were as easily available in the UK as in the US, I shudder to think.
By stating the obvious are you trying to say that two wrongs don't make a right ;)
You are correct Bill, since I do recall the UK calling theirs accurately as "The War Department".
I've never thought of the Egyptians as being a particularly religious people, at least from my perspective.
I remember when working in the UAE with some Egyptian lads working under me during the month of Ramadan, they not only sneakingly drank bottles of Cola during the day to avoid being seen by devout local Muslims, but would come around to our villa at night asking to purchase a bottle or two of spirits, which were denied them by the authorities.
We, as non-Muslim foreign workers, were allowed a generous quota per month of alcohol to purchase from a government controlled liquor store run by a trusted Scottish entity of which I forget the name.
But some desperate expat Brit must have mentioned to the local Sheik that gin and hot climates go together.
So, I don't know if my experience is indicative of today's Egyptian youth, but it certainly surprised me.
"The Iranians would think twice before they sent their “fleet” into the Atlantic."
Lol Jack, you mean the one ancient destroyer, and several Chriss-Craft attack boats?
"No such luck, so if you’re a Murdoch tabloid, it’s open season, no consequences guaranteed."
Well not exactly, Murdock did get his comeuppance, when Karma paid a visit with plenty of consequences for his infamous yellow journalistic rag's actions.
Why have AIPAC not been designated as an agent of a foreign power since they represent only two percent of the of the U.S. population, but 100 percent of the Israeli Jewish population.
AIPAC lobbying is almost exclusively aimed at US foreign policy towards Israel, so it would seem to be very much in their interest to keep things the way they are, since if Israel made peace with it's Arab neighbours their raison d'etre would no longer exist resulting in a drying up of their donations.
An old, well maybe new, Irish proverb.
Just in case you were wondering, the last sentence is relevant to Professor Cole's article.
"Tax his tractor, tax his mule; tell him, taxing is the rule.
Tax his car, tax his gas, tax his food, tax his cash
Tax him good and let him know, that after taxes, he has no dough.
If he hollers, tax him more; tax him till he's good and sore.
Tax his coffin, tax his grave, tax the ground in which he's laid.
Put these words upon his tomb, "Taxes drove him to his doom."
Once he's gone, we won't relax, till we collect the inheritance tax."
John O'D, I'm an expat Brit living in the US for more than twenty years, and have never experienced human rights violations, or any disrespectful behaviour by any authority in this country.
That doesn't mean to say that I have never been charged with any infraction of the law (traffic violations) I have, but attitude and resistance to the implementation of the law goes a long way to how one is duly treated by police.
Of course the instances of errant behaviour by law enforcement do happen, no doubt, but are the exception rather than the rule.
There's not much the world can do whenever Israel abuse human rights in their quest for a Greater Israel, since the US will always veto any criticism of their continued outrages and inhumanity towards Arabs.
I saw this sad news item on the BBC this morning, but as usual no mention at all on the US networks.
As an Englishman living in the US, and having my eyes and ears violated by a constant stream of royal inanity. I'm surprised that the people of this great country, have taken away an essential freedom from me, ( I think it's in the Bill of Rights) the right to change TV channels without duress. I truly believe that more Americans are into matters of British Monarchy and love the Pomp and Circumstance surrounding it than most UK citizens - maybe that's because they don't have to pay for it. Oh, and by the way for those gamblers betting on the soon to be announced royal name, I believe it is being named after its grandfathers - Charles and Hewitt - so my bet's on Chewit!!
Actually I may be in favour of the Monarchy as long as we can execute some of them from time to time. Monarchy should always remember the ancient Shakespearian Aphorism "Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown".
International travel isn't free, but public schooling is and libraries are, so that greatly diminishes the excuse factor for lacking experience with the world.
Also those that have the luxury and the time committed to worldly travel as genuine travellers as opposed to just being tourists, may well gain from that prospective of being in the position to form socially reactionary views.