Kareem Shora Appointed

June 11, 2009 by · Leave a Comment 

ADC Press Release

Kareem Shora was appointed by DHS Secretary Napolitano on Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC)

Washington, DC | June 5, 2009 | www.adc.org |  The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) is proud to announce that earlier today at a ceremony held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore-in ADC National Executive Director Kareem Shora as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).

Kareem_Shora HSAC members, limited by charter to no more than 21, are appointed by the DHS Secretary and are comprised of national security experts from state, local and tribal governments, first responder communities, academia and the private sector.  HSAC provides advice and recommendations directly to Secretary Napolitano on homeland security issues. ADC President Mary Rose Oakar said “This appointment is a great reflection on Kareem’s ability and the work of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. We are very proud of Kareem and believe his appointment will be very helpful in the protection of the civil rights of people with Arab roots as well as others”.

Other members of the HSAC include Lee Hamilton, former Congressman and President of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars; Martin O’Malley, Governor of Maryland; Judge William Webster, former Director of Central Intelligence; Sonny Perdue, Governor of Georgia; Raymond Kelly, New York City Police Commissioner; Louis Freeh, former FBI Director and Senior Managing Partner at Freeh Group International; Frances Fragos Townsend, former White House Homeland Security Advisor; Kenneth “Chuck” Canterbury, National President of the Fraternal Order of Police; Manny Diaz, Mayor of Miami, Florida; Jared “Jerry” Cohon, President of Carnegie Mellon University; Leroy “Lee” Baca, Sheriff of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department; Clark Kent Ervin, former DHS Inspector General and Director of the Homeland Security Program at The Aspen Institute; Sherwin “Chuck” Wexler, Executive Director of the Police Executive Research Forum; Harold Schaitberger, General President of the International Association of Firefighters; and Joe Shirley Jr., President of the Navajo Nation, among others.

Shora, who joined ADC in 2000 as Legal Advisor, was ADC Legal Director before he was appointed to his current position as National Executive Director in 2006.  He is a recipient of the 2003 American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) Arthur C. Helton Human Rights Award. He has been published by the National Law Journal, TRIAL Magazine, the Georgetown University Law Center’s Journal on Poverty Law and Public Policy, the Harvard University JFK School of Government Asian American Policy Review, the American Bar Association (ABA) Air and Space Lawyer, and the Yeshiva University Cardozo Public Law Policy and Ethics Journal. A frequent guest on Al-Arabiya and Al-Jazeera and numerous American television programs, Shora has spoken about civil rights, civil liberties and immigration policy with many national and international media outlets including the Wall Street Journal, Voice of America, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, CNN and the Chicago Tribune among others. He has also testified before major international human rights bodies including regular testimonies before the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the United Nations Human Rights Commission. He is also a member of the ODNI Heritage Community Liaison Council.

11-25

US to Drop Mullah Omar From Blacklist

November 6, 2008 by · Leave a Comment 

Courtesy PressTV

mullah_omar The US agreed to drop the name of the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar from the terror list ahead of talks with the insurgents, an official says.

“US intends to remove Mullah Omar from the black list in a bid to provide a suitable seedbed for holding contacts with the Taliban,” said Sunday, the US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs Patrick S. Moon.

Moon added that during his upcoming visit to Kabul, he will fully support the idea of negotiated settlement with the Taliban militants to end the violence in the region. He also reiterated that the talks with the Taliban insurgents were possible within the Afghan Constitution.

Also, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday that the US was considering taking part in talks with Taliban in a sharp change in tactics in Afghanistan.

The developments come at a time when US, British and NATO forces are experiencing some of the most violent attacks since the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.
Mullah Mohammad Omar, known as simply ‘Mullah Omar’, is the reclusive leader of Taliban of Afghanistan and was the country’s de facto head of state from 1996 to 2001. He went into hiding, following the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

Mullah Omar was wanted by the US for harboring Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network.        

JR/RA

10-46

US Willing to Talk to Taliban

October 30, 2008 by · Leave a Comment 

By Anwar Iqbal and Masood Haider

2008-10-28T144412Z_01_ISL12_RTRMDNP_3_PAKISTAN-AFGHAN

Head of the Afghan Jirga delegation Abdullah Abdullah (L) and Head of the Pakistan Jirga delegation Owais Ahmed Ghani talk during a news conference in Islamabad October 28, 2008. Pakistan and Afghanistan agreed on Tuesday to establish contacts jointly with Taliban militants through tribal leaders after two days of talks over how to end bloodshed in both countries.

REUTERS/Faisal Mahmood    (PAKISTAN)

Washington/New York, Oct 28: The US is willing to hold direct talks with elements of the Taliban in an effort to quell unrest in Afghanistan, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday, citing unidentified Bush administration officials.

The Washington Post reported that Taliban leader Mullah Omar had shown openness to the idea of repudiating Al Qaeda, which encouraged the Bush administration to explore the possibility of holding direct talks with the militia.

Jane’s Defence Weekly reported that the Taliban had conveyed this message to representatives of the Afghan government during a meeting in Saudi Arabia last month.

Amid these reports of a possible breakthrough in the search for a peaceful solution to the Afghan conflict, Christian Science Monitor noted that on Monday the Taliban militia showed “a new potency” in the fight against coalition forces, bringing down a US military helicopter near Kabul, while a suicide bomber struck and killed two Americans in northern Afghanistan.

The Los Angeles Times on Tuesday highlighted the significance of the attack, noting that “choppers are a crucial mode of transport for troops and supplies” in Afghanistan.

Speculations about a possible breakthrough in the talks with the Taliban follow a series of meetings last month in Saudi Arabia between representatives of the Afghan government and the militia.

But even before the Saudis initiated the talks, the Karzai government had been putting out feelers to the Taliban for negotiating an end to its insurgency in exchange for some sort of power-sharing deal.

Though the US has so far been on the sidelines but at a recent news conference Gen David McKiernan, the commander of US troops in Afghanistan, grudgingly said he would support the Afghan government if it chose to go down the path of negotiations.

And now the Wall Street Journal is reporting that the US might get involved in those negotiations directly. “Senior White House and military officials believe that engaging some levels of the Taliban — while excluding top leaders — could help reverse a pronounced downward spiral in Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan,” the report said.

Both countries have been destabilised by a recent wave of violence.

Senior Bush administration officials told the Journal that the outreach was a draft recommendation in a classified White House assessment of US strategy in Afghanistan. The officials said that the recommendation called for the talks to be led by the Afghan central government, but with the active participation of the US.

The US would be willing to pay moderate Taliban members to lay down their weapons and join the political process, the Journal cited an unidentified US official as saying. The Central Intelligence Agency has been mapping Afghanistan’s tribal areas in an attempt to understand the allegiances of clans and tribes, the report said.

WSJ noted that joining the talks would only be a first step as the Bush administration was still in the process of determining what substantial offer it could make to persuade the Taliban to abandon violence. “How much should (we) be willing to offer guys like this?” asked a senior Bush official while talking to the Journal.
Gen David Petraeus, who will assume responsibility this week for US military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan as head of the Central Command, supports the proposed direct talks between the Taliban and the US, the WSJ said.

Gen Petraeus used a similar approach in Iraq where a US push to enlist Sunni tribes in the fight against Al Qaeda helped sharply reduce the country’s violence. Gen Petraeus earlier this month publicly endorsed talks with less extreme Taliban elements.

Gen Petraeus also indicated that he believed insurgencies rarely ended with complete victory by one or the other side.

“You have to talk to enemies,” said Gen Petraeus while pointing to Kabul’s efforts to negotiate a deal with the Taliban that would potentially bring some Taliban members back to power, saying that if they were “willing to reconcile” it would be “a positive step”.

US Afghan experts outside the Bush administration have also been urging the White House to try to end violence “by co-optation, integration and appeasement”, as one of them said.

They urge the Bush administration to give the Taliban a positive reason to stop fighting. This, they argue, would allow Washington to separate hardcore militants from others within the Taliban and would also expose the extremists before the Afghan people.

10-45

Middle East Hit by U.S. Financial Crisis

October 16, 2008 by · Leave a Comment 

Courtesy New America Media, Shane Bauer

Editor’s Note: Even oil-rich Arab countries, which until recently were smug about being insulated from the financial debacle on Wall Street, are starting to worry. Analysts are predicting that they are sure to increase regulations and start pulling their economies away from the United States. NAM contributor Shane Bauer is a journalist and photographer based in the Middle East.

Stock traders in the Middle East

SANA’A, Yemen–While Washington was hashing out the terms of its largest financial bailout in history, Arab bankers were saying everything in the Middle East was as good as ever.

A full-page ad in one Middle Eastern magazine advertised a proposed business park called Falcon City, another fantasy land to add to the skyscrapers and glitter of oil-rich Dubai. Office buildings were shaped to resemble the Eiffel Tower, the Great Wall of China, the Pyramids of Egypt, and the Taj Mahal.

“As a residential or business address, each wonder is a totally amazing investment,” the caption read.

A few days later, the same newsstands spelled dread. Images of fear-stricken men in white robes and kafiyyas, their eyes fixed on strings of red numbers, splashed the front pages. Headlines announced that the Middle East’s markets were crashing, and columnists spit fire, calling on the Arab world to free itself “from the shackles of American imperialism.”

The degree to which Arab investors, which have some $800 billion invested internationally, will rein in their international investments will likely depend on how heavily they are impacted by the crisis. But analysts say that at the very least, Arab countries are sure to increase regulations and start pulling their economies away from the United States.

“U.S. influence has long been waning, both in its capacity to inspire and to intimidate,” says David Levy, senior fellow and director of the Middle East Initiative at the Washington, D.C., think tank the New America Foundation. “The region has been increasingly looking elsewhere for investments and markets. The crisis on Wall Street will only hasten that process.”

2008-10-12T102958Z_01_DUB09_RTRMDNP_3_DFM-LIMITDOWN But Arab analysts say the United States was becoming increasingly unattractive for investment well before the financial crisis hit. Washington had rejected several investment attempts in recent years by Arab companies on the basis that they were, well, Arab.

The last rejection came when some Gulf companies showed interest in investing nearly $20 billion to help save Citi Group and Merrill Lynch when they were initially threatened with bankruptcy. The deal was stopped in Congress when opponents said an increase in Arab investment in the United States would present a national security problem.

As Arab stock markets fall for their third day since reopening after a one-week post-Ramadan holiday, one thing is clear: those with the most open markets and the strongest ties to the U.S. economy are being hit the hardest.

In the past three days alone, banks in the Persian Gulf have lost about $150 billion. On Tuesday, the Tadawul All-Shares Index, home to the Arab world’s biggest market, finished at its lowest close in four years.

Countries that last week were saying that their economies were “insulated” from international financial disasters are now bailing out their banks. The central bank of the United Arab Emirates pumped $17.5 billion into its banks this week and said it is ready to give more if needed.

Jan Randolph, an economic analyst at Global Insight, says that “Arab investors and banks are going to start looking locally for investments.”

The president of the Union of Arab Banks, Adnan Yusif, has announced that there needs to be an increase in regional investment, and economists have been calling for a meeting of financial ministers and policy makers to come up with a regionwide plan to deal with the crisis.

But inter-Arab economic cooperation might not be easy. The Middle East is home to some of the world’s most closed economies, like Syria, as well as countries whose names are virtually synonymous with unfettered growth, like the United Arab Emirates.

Antagonisms over competing economic ideologies run deep in the Arab world, and the current crisis seems to be reigniting debates about how much regional economies should be bound to the global economy.

“If this crisis does send real shockwaves through the region, and you start seeing that economies more closed to the world are more protected, people might start seeing open economies as a double-edged sword,” says David Levy.

Masa’ad al-Kurdi of the Saudi-owned Al-Majella magazine writes that neo-liberal globalization is to blame for the crisis. “The developing world’s economies are dependent on the U.S., the world’s largest importer, to buy their exports,” he argues. As the dollar weakens, “developing countries are going to pay the most,” writes Al-Kurdi, who concludes that “the United States of America is driving the world into the abyss.”

10-43

It’s Not Just Me

April 24, 2006 by · Leave a Comment 

It’s Not Just Me
By Bob Wood
Any Bear will tell you it’s tough making a living on the short side of the markets, risking your hard-earned capital on the idea that markets are heading lower. And it’s just as hard for the Bear writing weekly columns about the markets’ shaky footing. Since, in both cases, “wrong” can be costly, never assume that a Bear takes his position just to be contrarian or different.
You can be sure of one thing about the Bears whose work I follow. Neither are they pessimistic or negative by nature. But to me, it seems only the Bears are doing any real analytical work, though few people prefer listening to or believing Bears over Bulls, so strong cases must be made for their side.
Several better-known Bears tend to agree about the near- and long-term future of stock and bond markets and now add information relating to real estate. To me, their analyses are much more compelling than those offered by TV’s Bulls. And to assure you that not only the guy writing on page 6 of TMO is bearish, I’m sharing thoughts from other financial writers, whose thinking I respect and follow.
On the stock market, I can hit two birds with one rock by citing a quote from one guy whom I wouldn’t have known except for the other. In his most recent work, the Mogambo Guru quotes Robert Prechter from the “Elliot Wave.”
And in talking about Newtonian physics and “big moves,” Robert Prechter, of Elliott Wave fame, says that the recent huge (>40%) losses in Middle-Eastern stock markets is just prolog. “This year the U.S. stock market is shaping up to drop at least as fast. Generally when stocks levitate into a market cycle, they make up for it by crashing.
In 1929, stocks rose for 2.5 years into the 2.7-year cycle. Then they lost 50 percent of their value in 2 months. In 1987, stocks rose for 3.1 years into the 3.3-year cycle. Then they lost 40 percent of their value in 7 weeks.” If you think you got the guts to weather a 40% drop in your portfolio, maybe you ought to re-think that optimistic assessment when he goes on to say “But given that the bear market is of Grand Supercycle degree, the largest in nearly 300 years, the coming drop should dwarf both of those crashes.”
And not only these two voice their concerns about today’s stock market. Richard Russell also chimed in this past week.
“But with the massive amount of debt built into the US economy, I don’t see how the Fed could tolerate a path of contracting liquidity—it would be too dangerous. The more probable path would be the Fed raising rates too high and setting off trouble in the housing market— remember, the effects of rate changes don’t usually appear until six months to even a year after the last rate change.
In the meantime, stock market action is erratic and suspect. While the Dow holds and even creeps higher, the majority of stocks are failing to follow. How about this surprising statistic—only 50% of the stocks in the S&P 500 are now holding above their 50-day exponential moving average (statistics from the great DecisionPoint site). In other words, we’re seeing persistent internal deterioration in the stock market, despite the better performance of the Dow.
What are the markets waiting for or looking at? One thing they’re looking at is the oil situation, and they’re wondering if there’s any way that it can be resolved—Nigeria, Iraq, Venezuela, Iran? Has the US lost control of the world’s oil markets? Well, there’s always Canada.
In response to all the uncertainty, the stock market seems to have adopted a “what, me worry?” attitude. Here we have an “Iran problem,” an expensive mess in Iraq, huge negative trade balances, China taking away our manufacturing base, rising interest rates, record high oil prices—and lots, lots more. And does Wall Street worry? Not at all. The only thing the boys on Wall Street are worried about is the size of next year’s bonus.
Jim Stack of Investech Research now allocates 39% of his model portfolio to cash. While his reading of technical tools like charts leads him to think that bull market trends will continue, his concerns center on the real estate market. Of particular concern: more than $2 trillion in mortgages are the adjustable rate variety. And with rates now rising, those debts will see rates “that will be reset at much higher levels in 2006-07.’’
Since the middle class seems to save little, the pain could be most intense there. And speaking of real estate, Bill Fleckenstein noticed this Wall Street Journal item.
“It is indeed the financial institutions that are most at risk in the real-estate market (which is not to say that consumers and speculators won’t get hurt). They will bear the brunt of the pain, because in many cases, they loaned the entire purchase price. As I have said often, the housing bubble has been more a lending bubble. It will be the impairment of the financial institutions that will stop the flow of credit to the real-estate market.
In turn, that will accelerate the collapse in house prices somewhere along the way.
The story closes with a description of how slow the market has recently become in Florida, demonstrated by an email sent last week by real-estate broker Mike Morgan read as follows: “We went three days this week with not a single showing.
That’s incredible. I have 35 listings. We usually get 2-6 showings a day. . . . I received more desperate calls from sellers than ever. One lady broke down into tears. Her husband bought two investment properties, and they are now going to lose their ‘life savings’ if they sell the homes in today’s market.”
Ladies and gentlemen, that is going to happen to a lot of people around the country.
And, after they have lost their life savings, the financial institutions that were the engine behind this folly will take their own hit. Easy Al tried to bail out one bubble with another bubble. While it bought some time, it will end in far-worse pain.’’
But the overall economy looks pretty good, doesn’t it? How many times have you heard that the economy is ‘’strong and getting stronger’’ and unemployment and inflation rates are nearly at record lows? But here’s another problem: whom do you believe when smart arguments come from both sides of an economics issue? We’ve all seen glorious statistics issued by government agencies and touted by those making fiscal policy!
I tend to listen to people who work for me—those whom I pay for access to their work, including some cited in this article. I don’t see much conflict in their thinking. One such source, Kurt Richebacher, notes in his latest letter how government statistics have changed over the past 40 years.
“We have pursued these and other changes in the U.S. statistics for years with great misgivings. There has been an unusual, concerted drive to produce better looking statistics. Obviously, these contributions have been decisive in creating the perception of the U.S. economy’s superior performance. The particular importance of the inflation rate arises from the fact that it has a large effect on real GDP and productivity growth, two aggregates of highest economic and political assessment’’.
So, if you understate inflation enough, the economy looks like it’s growing smartly when it is actually in recession—the thinking of some right now. John Williams of “Shadowstats.com” shows how using methodology of the 1980s to calculate today’s rate of inflation produces a result of 6.6%, while using a method from the 1970s yields a 7.4% inflation rate. And that would take GDP growth to about a negative 4%.
Speaking of government accountability and the veracity of its reports, Williams offers more interesting items this week. It seems that some have misgivings about reporting our country’s financial position, such as material weaknesses and “problems with fundamental record keeping and financial reporting, incomplete documentation and weak internal control.’’
He adds that auditors will not apply their signatures to attest accuracy of the nation’s financial accounting, with three reasons cited: “serious financial management problems at the Dept. of Defense, the federal government’s inability to account for billions of dollars of transactions between federal government entities, and the federal government’s ineffective process for preparing the consolidated financial statements.’’
Comforting? Here’s more. Deeper in his report is the writer’s opinion of the National Debt, “only $7 trillion,’’ at the time, which does not account for the federal government’s true liability total. Left out are items for projected Social Security and Medicare benefits at about four times that amount. And “the new prescription drug benefit, which is one of the largest unfunded commitments ever undertaken by the federal government, will serve to increase this financial and fiscal challenge.”
It seems the President has pushed through his prescription drug plan with no apparent thought about how to pay for it. This information comes from David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States, who should know! And since we borrow to pay our deficits — and more every year to pay interest costs on that debt, rapid money printing as seen during the Greenspan era seems like the easiest thing for government leaders to do. And so they continue the printing.
Williams concludes that “risks of the current circumstance evolving into a hyperinflationary depression remain extraordinarily high. An unfolding inflationary recession is the worst of all worlds for financial markets. Particularly hard hit will be the U.S. dollar, with downside implications for both equity and bond prices.’’ But the story does get better. He adds that “when the system re-stabilizes, post-crisis, there will be exceptional investment opportunities for those who have been able to preserve their wealth, capital and liquidity.’’ And Russell agrees.
So what do we do about this now? If you’ve been reading this column regularly, you’ve heard it all before. In his latest “Gloom, Boom and Doom Report” (wish I’d thought of that!), Marc Faber says, “In my opinion, the dollar will depreciate mostly against gold. In the long run, what you will see is the standard of living in America decline very significantly compared to the standard of living in Asia.
And the stock market capitalization of the U.S., which is now 52% of the world’s stock market capitalization, which will decline to somewhere between 20 and 30% and the Asian stock market capitalization will rise to between 20% and 30%, possibly 50% of the world’’.
And you thought I was gloomy, eh? To me, these sources make perfect sense. Remember, it is hard being the Bear when investors would much rather be hopeful. But there is hope! In economics, we always find winners and losers, just as in the markets. The outlook for gold, energy and Asian markets offer hope for positive returns. And of course, hedging with bear market mutual funds makes any bear market a lot less worrisome.
Have a great week…I mean it!
Bob

« Previous Page