Thursday, July 31, 2003
This would be due to the newly pro-American stance of Italy in the international issues such as the political and indirect support of the war on Afghanistan and Iraq,plus the support to Israel and the partecipation to the global war on terror( Italy has in fact some troops in Afghanistan and Iraq who are gaining a vital role against the taliban in afghanistan and the saddam-loyalists in Iraq).
However, this is said to be a normal warning as the US prepares for the anniversary of Sept 11 attacks.
Many say also that this worldwide known warning makes the terrorist aware that the world is on alert everymoment , and they cannot do anything of what they plan..
One thing which many people in the West is worried about is the final objective of the islamic terrorists: conquer Rome,as it was in Constantinopolis,Turkey.
This is wrote in the islamic 'traditions' (hadith) but i doubt that this may be realistic.
however,the free people of the world cannot close an eye on this issue.
He took an aggressive stance against Bush on a side and the american policy on Iran and Sirya on the other side..
As a jew,he should approve the american policy against two terroristic regimes that also are a serious threat to Israel.
But, a leftist is a leftist.
Specially if italian.
Wednesday, July 30, 2003
Yesterday,Prince Nayaf flied to the USA in a tentative to see the document who openly accuses the Saudi regime.
He affirms that his govt 'nothing to hide.We are fighting terror and just arrested over 500 suspected terrorists'.
These words are not eventually enough for its credibility.
They instead show the controversial role that the regime played and still continues to play.
Its so-called 'arrests' show just the double standard it always adopts.
It's well known that within the royal family there is much support and simpathy for Al Qaeda and trust-worth sources say that it directly finances Al Qaeda through his so-called 'charities', who help the radical organizations instead of benefiting the people they are supposed to help.
The royal family itself is well aware of its financial and moral support to the international terrorism , but it avoids to take the great responsibility to tell the truth.
There are clear signals of change of the traditional soft stance on the saudis .
It's time to put the Saudi regime on the list of the "Axis of Evil" countries.President Bush is slowly going towards this direction.
It's time to blame on Saudi Arabia!
The women's rights are not as much guaranteed as a rule of law-based civil society should do.
The women in Kuwait lack the real basic equal rights due to the man's supremacy.
Here is as explained by a US scholar and Professor in the Weekly Standard.
Democracy in Kuwait
A liberal Arab state wrestles with its own private clash of civilizations.
by Peter Berkowitz
07/11/2003 12:00:00 AM
IN THE MID-1990s, the renowned political scientist Samuel Huntington provoked a worldwide debate with his thesis that foreign affairs would no longer be defined by war between nations but by the clash of civilizations. The experience of Kuwait, our small but indispensable ally in the Persian Gulf, suggests that we must stay attuned as well to the clash of civilizations within nations.
What grabs your attention as a newcomer and nonspecialist are the cultural contradictions of Kuwait. You encounter them in the airport corridors, the luxury hotel lobbies, the rundown beachfront amusement parks, the corporate headquarters, and the truly extravagant shopping malls.
The culture of the Arabian desert and the culture of the West constantly come into contact in Kuwait, and discover ways to peacefully coexist. Sultry young women sashaying in designer jeans and high, high heels pass by, without missing a beat, while women covered from head to foot in dark robes drift along the same streets like ghostly apparitions. Men in traditional garb--flowing white gowns, white headdresses, and leather sandals--confer with male colleagues who could pass for casual-Friday corporate lawyers. And perhaps most startling, since women in Kuwait lack the right to vote, men and women mingle freely on the street, at the mall, and in the workplace.
I traveled with a small delegation of journalists, think tankers, and Senate staffers as a guest of the Kuwaiti government to learn more about democratization in Kuwait, whose 850,000 citizens and 1.25 million guest workers live in a small, sun-baked land beneath which lies 10 percent of the world's proven oil reserves. The special occasion was the July 5 parliamentary election, the 10th since the ratification of Kuwait's constitution in 1962, and the 4th since 1991, the year that Kuwaitis typically, and with emotion, refer to as their "liberation."
Kuwait is, in many ways, the most democratic of the Arab states in the region. This year's campaign season was lively, with candidates for the National Assembly frequently renting space in vacant lots, pitching tents, giving speeches every evening, and providing a late buffet supper where their constituents' conversation--that venerable and transcultural mix of politics spiced with grumbling and gossip--could continue.
Home to one of only two natural ports in the Persian Gulf, Kuwait has for hundreds of years been a commercial and cosmopolitan center. In contrast to Saudi Arabia, a large country with a closed and cleric-driven society, Kuwait is compact--from Kuwait City on the Persian Gulf it is an hour drive north to Iraq and an hour drive west or south to Saudi Arabia--and historically open to outside influences. Its constitution guarantees the equality of all citizens. Its ruling family, from whose ranks come a substantial number of the government's ministers, tends to be Western-educated, enlightened, and generally progressive. Its 50-seat parliament is the most active in the Gulf, its press the freest, and its women, who account for 34 percent of the labor force and two thirds of the bachelors degrees in the country, are the most economically active in the Arab world. Perhaps this is why the legal exclusion of women from voting and holding political office was on the mind of every politician, journalist, and activist with whom we met.
It's not that the woman question was the only issue faced by voters. From the owner and editor-in-chief of Kuwait's largest newspaper, to the chief executive officer of Kuwait Petroleum Company, to the former Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States, our interlocutors argued that the Kuwaiti economy is stagnating and that the remedy is privatization. This is a difficult proposition, however, in a country where 90 to 95 percent of the labor force is employed by the government, which generally pays more than the private sector. And designing institutions to create the right incentives will be difficult in a country whose oil wealth supports a massive welfare state with no taxes that generously funds its citizens' health, education, and housing needs.
YET IT IS SUFFRAGE that has become the focal point in the contest between Islamist and liberal forces. The law prohibiting women from voting, we were told by former Minister of Oil and ex-Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States Sheikh Saud Nasser Al-Sabah, is "completely unconstitutional."
In 1999, the emir of Kuwait dissolved parliament and, along with a variety of other liberalizing measures, sought to grant women the right to vote by decree. But even liberals opposed his action on the grounds that such a law should arise from within the National Assembly. Shortly thereafter, when the liberals put the measure to the test, it came up two votes short. So far, court challenges to the law have been dismissed on procedural technicalities, though one of the leaders of the Women's Social and Cultural Society has a constitutional challenge pending, and expects a judgment in the fall. An activist organization as old as the Kuwaiti constitution, the Society is composed of journalists, professors, businesswomen, medical doctors, research scientists, and lawyers, and its board has expressed confidence that regardless of this court decision, women will be voting four years from now in the next National Assembly election.
ON JULY 5th Kuwaiti citizens went to the polls. Liberals had been hopeful and Islamists worried, but the liberals fell from 9 seats to 3, and Islamists gained slightly, giving them about a third of the seats in parliament. Nevertheless, this is not the debacle for democracy that the Western press has made it out to be. Because most of the rest of the seats went to candidates loyal to the government, a generally liberal force in Kuwait, informed observers believe that this National Assembly, with the support--and perhaps at the initiative--of the government, will indeed enact legislation giving women the right to vote. If that happens, the further tempering of the clash of civilizations within Kuwait may well contribute to the tempering of the clash of civilizations beyond its borders.
Peter Berkowitz teaches at George Mason University School of Law and is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
i will be back in 5 days.
meanwhile,continue to read my posts who i continue to pubblish till i go on holiday..
I'll be going in one of the most exclusive places in the world, Emerald Coast, North Sardinia, the italian Saint Tropez!!!
It's enough to analize the issue that underlines how correct these words are.Arafat is the leader of a very famous and old terroristic organization since 30 yrs.This group organized several of the most brutal attacks such as the infamous "Black September" ( where innocent jewish athlets were killed during the Olympyc Games),
the hijacking of the famous italian cruise ship "Achille Lauro"(when the wanted terrorist Abu Abbas ordered the merciless killing of a handicapped jewish passenger by jumping him into the sea.Despite the palestinian protests,Italy and the italians want Abbas to be extradited in Italy so that he can face a severe punishment).
Arafat and his group also supported the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, by sending thousands of palestinian fighters to kill thousands of innocent iranians,guilty also for their ancient hostility to the arabs.
The iranians hostility against the arabs is historical, since the arab occupation of the Zoroastrian Persia.
This hostility,and specially the one against the palestinians can see well saw into the students-led popular protests,where the people always chanted slogans such as "Leave Palestine alone,think about us!" or "Palestine is not our cause,we must destroy the mullah's regime, not Israel !"
The simphathy of the Iranian people towards the jewish is to be dated the times of the kingdoms of Darioosh and Koroosh ( Cyrus ).
The Persians freed the jews in Babylon.
A group of mullahs from the Seyedis minority occupied the power by the force, trying to delete all the traditions and heritage of the Aryian land.
They eventually failed to do so.
In fact, in the last few years,the iranian people celebrates openly the traditional pre-islamic persian traditions,such as the Persian New Year,even though they would face the regime's repression.
As for the arabs,they occupied the Persian land again in 1979 and changed also the traditional iranian flag ( The Lion and the Sun )
But the iranian people swears that as long as they overthrow the mullahs regime and return their country back,they will return to their original flag and their pre-islamic traditions.
Mr. Arafat always lied and still lies to the international community.
He shows his 'goodwill' to the most stupid and fool part of Europe in order to get support .
While at home, he incites to the hatred and violence against the jewish and oppresses his own people alike.
His men execute in the most brutal ways all the people who they think are "spies for the Zionists".
Without any evidence and without a fair trial,these innocent palestinians are hanged and beaten by the population and the arafat's men in a manner that should scandalize the so-called "human rights organizations".
Arafat and his terror group spread misery death and oppression.
For his fault,the palestinian people is unable to get a state and living in peace and prosperity.
The problems of the palestinians are not due to Israel, but to themselves.
Tuesday, July 29, 2003
Israel also cannot allow something that might mean its destruction.
On this point, the European nations are divided.
The French-German-Russian-Belgian axis agree with the palestinian demand.
Spain,Portugal,Italy,Bulgaria,Poland,Romania,Hungary,etc.. disagree and stand by Israel .
2nd:the controversial issue of the liberation of the palestinian "political" prisoners. Sharon decided to free a great number of them and Bush alike.
But this move is wrong and very dangerous. First of all,how can you free the murderers of your people??
I doubt that this will bring more security.
It may also cause anger at the Sharon's administration.
3rd,the controversy about the building of the Wall ( who should protect the israelis and the Israel state at whole from the islamic terrorism).
It's quite difficoult to understand if this can be helpful to the cause of peace and security for Israel or not.
President Bush disapproves this move,although he understands very well the reasons of Israel.
He disagrees with this becoz he think it might cause more tension and violence.
Thinking of our jewish friendsand their daily troubled life,my opinion is that the wall is eventually necessary if it is used to stop terror,who otherwise might last forever.One would say 'This is the lesser of the evils'.
In fact,almost all the italian media refused to show them for some simple reasons:
those images were so hard for the kids to see them: a dead man must be respected,they say,even the worst criminal.I dont know what exactly the majority of the italians thinks on this issue.In America,there are different point of views.But the major part of the american public eventually agreed with the Pentagon's move.Some just reason may explain this sentiment.
In effect, they are loosing a lot of their soldiers and they look forward at the capture of the main character of this daily tragedy: Saddam Hussein. Wanted Alive or Dead.I also think that the Pentagon was just to realising the videos of Uday and Qusay, even though i was so shocked by seeing them..
Yet, the objectives are clear:tell the iraqis that those that for years terrorized and brutalized them are gone and won't be coming back.
The other objective was to show the american public opinion that, maybe, now the US might going towards their second victory: win the peace.
Unofficial sources say that the capture of Saddam is next.
One point is to be clarified:
Do you want Saddam to be killed or brought in front of the Iraqi people and see him as we saw Mussolini, Cheausescu and the others?
Monday, July 28, 2003
in fact, who but them could be happier for this news ?
By the way, two elements of instability for the peaceful and democratic transition in the after-Saddam Iraq , have been eliminated.No illusions , hoewever.The game is not over yet.the main objective is still to be found.Once Saddam is captured ( alive or dead) the game might be maybe over.And there's no doubt may be the real great success for George W. Bush.He goes almost surely towards the second mandate.One last thing remains to be told:if still alive,Saddam got a great punishments by the death of his two dearest sons.
Tuesday, July 22, 2003
Be sure he would never supported the tyrants, if he was alive today..
I have some doubt.
I think he is a real hypocrit.
Take a read to this article from the Front Page Magazine-
-Where Is Mandela's Apology?
By Myles Kantor
FrontPageMagazine.com | July 22, 2003
It’s disgusting to see people apologize for doing nothing wrong, especially to wrongdoers.
On July 14, Miami-Dade County mayor Alex Penelas spoke at the NAACP’s national convention in Miami Beach and apologized for protests of Nelson Mandela during his June 1990 visit to Miami. Why did these protests occur?
Maybe it had something to do with the former South African president’s affection for mass murderers.
Sentenced to life imprisonment in June 1964 for armed resistance to the apartheid regime, Mandela was released in February 1990. In May he visited Libyan tyrant Muammar Qadhafi and received the “International Qadhafi Prize for Human Rights,” an award with the moral logic of an “Heinrich Himmler Prize for Religious Tolerance.” Mandela’s remarks included:
We consider ourselves to be comrades in arms to the Palestinian Arabs in their struggle for the liberation of Palestine. There is not a single citizen in South Africa who is not ready to stand by his Palestinian brothers in their legitimate fight against the Zionist racists.…
Mandela returned to Libya in 1997 and called Qadhafi “my dear brother leader,” decorating him with South Africa’s highest honor, the Order of Good Hope. He called Yasser Arafat his “comrade in arms” in 1990 and in 1999 laid a wreath at the Ayatollah Khomeini’s tomb, saying, “[W]e are indebted to the Islamic Revolution.” When Iran’s theocrats charged 13 Iranian Jews with spying for “the Zionist regime” in 2000, Mandela called the sham proceedings “fair and just.”
More painfully in the context of Miami, Mandela is an ardent admirer of Fidel Castro. In October 1995, Mandela held a “solidarity conference” between Cuba and South Africa in Durban where he said:
I went to Cuba in July 1991, and I drove through the streets with Fidel Castro. There were a great deal of cheers. And I also waved back believing that these cheers were for me. Fidel was very humble; he smiled but he never said a word. But when I reached the square where I had to make some remarks to the crowd, then I realized that these cheers were not meant for me, they were meant for Fidel Castro. Because everybody forgot about me, and was really aroused by Fidel Castro. Then I realized that here was a man of the masses.
Indeed, so much a man of the masses that Castro has denied Cubans elections and freedom of thought for 44 years. “Long live Comrade Fidel Castro,” Mandela said during that 1991 visit, claiming that Communist Cuba had achieved the “systematic eradication of racism.”
I’d like to hear him say that to Eusebio Peñalver, a black Cuban who opposed Fulgencio Batista’s dictatorship and then suffered 28 years of imprisonment for his opposition to Castro’s totalitarianism. Peñalver has recalled how his jailors told him, “Nigger, we brought you down from the trees and cut your tail!” (Former political prisoner Jorge Valls notes in his memoir Twenty Years and Forty Days how black peers “always got more than their share of the beatings and bayonets.”)
I’d like to hear him say that to black Cuban human rights activists in exile like Marcos Lázaro Torres, Vicky Ruiz Labrit, and Ramón Colás.
I’d like to hear him say that to black Cuban prisoners of conscience like Dr. Oscar Biscet and Jorge Olivera, sentenced to 25 years and 18 years in April.
I’d like to hear him say that to the families of Lorenzo Enrique Copello, Bárbaro Leodán Sevilla, and Jorge Luis Martínez. On April 11, the Castro regime executed these three young black Cubans after summary proceedings for hijacking a ferry to flee Cuba.
Writing of Mandela’s tyrannical sympathies and claim in January that President Bush seeks “to plunge the world into a holocaust,” Christopher Hitchens observes: “this latest garbage is a very timely caution against our common tendency to make supermen and stars and heroes out of fellow humans…being on the right side of history once is no guarantee that the subsequent fall will not be from a very great height.” (Cuban American National Foundation executive director Joe Garcia recently said, “I think history will judge Nelson Mandela as a great man.” Maybe in South Africa, but what will the suffering blacks of Cuba or murdered Israeli civilians say?)
Cuban Miami owes no apology to Mandela, but Mandela owes an apology to them and to the Cuban people. And not just Mandela but also the NAACP, which has yet to issue a single press release calling for the liberation of heroes like Dr. Biscet.
Myles Kantor is a columnist for FrontPageMagazine.com and Director of the Center for Free Emigration, a human rights organization dedicated to the abolition of state enslavement. His e-mail address is kantor@FreeEmigration.com.
-No excuse for the brutal apartheid regime.
But is Mandela really a democracy-lover?
It seems he is not.
He is friend at many dictators such as Fidel Castro,Lybian tyrant Qadhafi,terrorist Arafat,North Korean dictator,Siryan dictator and i think the Islamic Regime as well.
In 1999,the year of the first big student demonstration,Mandela visited the Khomeini's tomb and declared : "We are indebted to the Islamic Revolution".
This shows how hypocrit he is.
Mandela is a racist also.
You can see that by the anti-semitic conference in Durban , where he invited many dictators, to speak against the "Zionist enemy" .
He clearly supports all the tyrants, even the most brutals,who hate Israel,the Jewish and America.
Including the Islamic Regime and the hard-liners.
In fact, where is Mandela in front of the regime's brutalities against the Iranian students ??
Why does he stay silent
Why does he stand by the dictators instead than with the innocent victims of these regimes??
It sounds to me so hypocrit and racist.
The author of this article is a human rights activist.
I am a tolerance-lover.
I am for equal rights for blacks,whites,yellows,etc..
No one must claim the superiority of his race on another one.
But i think Mandela did.
If we look at what his supporters do against the white minorities...
many whites are escaping from South Africa.
Hey,these whites have nothing to do with the brutal apartheid regime.
South African people,both black and whites,muslims or christians,must be aware that every one is equal.
The whites have learned this.
Now it's up to the Mandela's boys understaning this.
Saturday, July 19, 2003
i hope you all forgive me!
I will try all my best to update my weblog often.
Am very committed in following the situation in Iran but i also dedicate much time to myself and other interests,typical to all the normal girls.
Italy has proposed a serious reform of the U.N. and the Security Council.
The reform proposed consists in this:
Reforming all the system, by granting a seat in the Security Council only to the Democratic countries and all the countries who respect the human rights and the individual liberty.
Unfortunately, today we see that Libya is the chairman of the UN commission for the Human Rights.
Well, every one knows what is the record of the human rights violations of the Qadhafi's regime.
Other dictatorial regimes have a great voice in the UN.
Let's think of Cuba, Sudan,Pakistan,China, etc..
The UN have "approved" a very soft resolution against the Cuban regime after its recent wave of Repression.
The UN has put many ifs and buts to this resolution.
Still, the UN Security Council is formed by many anti-democratic regimes.
Well, can the free world allow this?
The UN was born as a pro-human rights organization aiming to the defense of the oppressed people of the world and defense of the human rights in the world.
Now the UN is completely corrupted by these nations.
It openly contradicts its goal for which it was created.
The oppressed citizens of the not-free world look at UN with anger.
We cannot but agree with Bush when he says that the UN is becoming a useless organization.
No one says that UN must be abolished.
But it must be completely reformed by granting seats only to the democratic nations ( who are not only in the West )..
while isolating the anti-democratic regimes.
Reforming the UN is very important if we want it to survive, otherwise it will end like the Society of the Nations.
This proposed was advanced by the Italian Trasnational Radical Party and accepted by the italian govt.
This would be the best way to help the oppressed people to freeing themselves of their oppressive regimes.
Actually, the UN is legitimizating the dictatorial states.
I'd be ready to organize a sit-in in solidarity of the Iranian freedom fighters , here in my city and i have some people already told they will attend.
I believe that the slogan is "We are all Iranian Students".
July 9th is passed,but the Iranian people is still being massacred.
Solidarity must be expressed always.
Many newspapers, after promoting the July 9th demonstration,seem to have forgotten the iranian cause.
Well, an italian serious and honest newspaper, Il Foglio, dedicates every day articles on the Iranian students, and it is one of the few newspapers who exactly says the truth as mentioned by the SMCCDI.
e-mail to its director: