THE JEWISH REBELS OF JERUSALEM

“In the end, only kindness matters”

By Mazin Qumsiyeh

I gave a talk at the NATO Defence College in Rome to some 82 officers and
civilians from many NATO countries and affiliated or partner countries
(including Egypt, UAE, Jordan, etc). An Israeli colleague who lives in
London also presented his point of view and read on things and then we took
questions. We also participated in small group meetings and discussions. I
was pleased with the level of sophistication, excellent questions asked, and
hospitality we received. The commanding officers and all others were very
kind to us. We will not forget this visit. While in Rome for three days we
got to visit the Vatican including seeing the magnificent Sistine Chapel
paintings. We got to tour the museums and also visit the Roman Forum and
the Palatine. There, I was interested to see for the first time Titus arch
which was built after the death of this emperor. On one of its panels it
celebrates its victory over the Jewish rebels in Jerusalem.

Most people today identify with the Jewish rebels and not with the Romans.
Even the guidebook to the ruins we were using referred to “destruction of
Jerusalem” (actually careful and unbiased historians disagree with such a
description since the rebellion was rather small and narrow and its was
contained rather quickly with Jerusalem flourishing later except for limited
access by the Jewish community which was then still a minority of the
population of Palestine). Historians also tell us that Jews continued to
live in small communities throughout Palestine (later many of them
converting to Christianity or to Islam). Before this rebellion, Jews in
Palestine had full autonomy with their own King (e.g. King Herod who
condemned Jesus). The Roman administration was until this armed rebellion
rather liberal in its dealings with ethnic and religious minorities. Before
and after the rebellion, Palestine remained a multi-ethnic and
multi-religious community despite many efforts of many rulers who failed to
change it by military force sometimes succeeding for a few decades )one of
the crusader kingdoms lasted 110 years before Palestine was restored to have
Christian, Muslim, and Jewish communities living side by side). Let us hope
that this is the last failed attempt to create a homogenous Palestine (aka
Eretz Yisrael). I for one can never understand the desire to live in a
homogenous state since variety is the spice of life.

Like Jesus who identified with and preached to Jew and gentile, I find
myself identifying with both the Romans and the Jews of Palestine of that
first century AD as I identify today with all communities in Palestine.
This is first because they were human beings like all of us caught in a set
of historical structures and machinations that left them in the situation
they faced. I identified especially with the Jews who resisted Roman
occupation non-violently. Jesus was to become the symbol of such power of
such resistance. That the armed resisters ultimately failed (they ere
called saccari because they hid their assassination knives in their cloths)
while eventually the philosophy of Jesus spread like wild fire in the Roman
Empire should be telling to us. It was three plus centuries and hundreds of
thousands of martyrs before finally the Roman Empire decided itself to adopt
Christianity rather than keep fighting it. Yet unfortunately as the Jewish
theologian Marc Ellis articulated effectively, such a Constantinian
(transformation of) Christianity in the form of state power would inevitably
lead to the atrocities of the Crusades and far more (e.g. use of
Christianity to justify colonization). Ellis further argues that the new
Constantinian Judaism in the form of Zionism is equally damaging to
Prophetic Judaism. One day I would like to write more on this but for now,
the sight of ruins of great empires AND visiting with great people
descendent of oppressors and oppressed and getting along in equality always
remind me that we all die someday and that great stone edifices, palaces,
and statues are all equally ephemeral while people remain and in many cases
improve. And as the song goes, “in the end only kindness matters.”

Sure enough, I saw so much kindness, so much human beauty in Italy that
trumps all other beauty. The last 24 hours we spent time in rural Italy
among kind and generous farmers who remind me so much of Palestine (in the
areas of Offida. San Benedetto, Ascoli). I think to myself that the hundreds
of Palestinian villages (including my own of Beit Sahour) would have been
just as nice, just as peaceful and tranquil as those villages if it was not
for that Constantinian form of Judaism that decided to take on the crazy
project of transforming a multi-ethnic, multi-religious society into a
Jewish state (maximum geography and minimum demography). Instead, hundreds
of villages, most dating to millennia (2-4 thousand years old) were
destroyed and those like mine that remained lost so much land and received
so many displaced people that their character is no longer what it used to
be or would have been.

While we were here we followed closely the travails of the Gaza Freedom
March (finally denied entry to Gaza) and the Viva Palestina Convoy to Gaza
(finally allowed entry after detours and clashes). It is an honor to call
many of the people in both groups friends. Actually we might miss seeing
some of our Italian friends who are still in Gaza. I spoke tonight at San
Benedetto to 50 people. Tomorrow, I speak in Milano, then in Turino on the
9th, possibly Bologna on the 10th then in Roma again on the 11th. I will
then travel to Amman on the 12th. But as always, you are welcome to visit us
in Palestine-

PS: Just to be clear, thanks to Israeli restrictions, less than 3% of
Palestinians are able to travel like I do and a smaller fraction can
actually do it financially or logistically and the numbers in Gaza are
closer to 0.001%.

US sheds 85,000 jobs in December, dampening optimism

The US economy lost 85,000 jobs in December while the unemployment rate held at 10.0 percent, the government said Friday in a report dashing hopes of a turnaround in the ailing labor market.

The Labor Department report on nonfarm payrolls was a disappointment to those hoping for growth in jobs, which is critical to recovery from recession.

The figure was far worse than the consensus expectation for no change in overall employment levels, and came amid a wide array of predictions ranging from steep losses to modest gains.

The unemployment rate meanwhile was in line with expectations, remaining near its highest level since the 1980s.

In revising data for prior months, the data showed a net gain of 4,000 jobs in November instead of a loss of 11,000 previously reported, the first positive month after 22 months of losses.

But the agency also revised its October estimate to show a loss of 127,000 jobs in October instead of 111,000.

"We're getting a steady but very slow improvement in the job market," said Robert MacIntosh, economist at Eaton Vance.

"We are going to have to get used to a frustratingly high unemployment rate."

Cary Leahey, senior economist at the research firm Decision Economics, called the data "disappointing" and consistent with a still-sluggish economy.

"The labor market is struggling and is stuck in the water," he said.

"You are seeing gains in output and manufacturing because of liquidation of inventories... but we haven't seen a decisive turn in the labor market."

Robert Brusca at FAO Economics said however the market is healing, and that the losses were probably due to bad weather and government cuts.

"Pessimists are out in force, but the good trends remains in place," he said.

"You cannot take each monthly jobs report as though it is an authentic change in trend or speed. In fact most of the good stuff is still underway."

The December report showed the goods-producing sector shed 81,000 jobs including 27,000 in manufacturing and 53,000 in construction.

The services sector lost a modest 4,000 jobs, with a loss of 10,000 in retail offset by gains in education, health care and professional services.

Government sector employment fell by 21,000 in the month.

Average hours worked, sometimes seen as a proxy for economic activity, was unchanged in December. Average hourly earnings meanwhile rose 0.2 percent.

The civilian labor force fell by 661,000 in the month, suggesting that more people are stopping their search for employment.

"The unchanged unemployment rate of 10 percent understates labor market slack, since labor force participation fell sharply," said Sophia Koropeckyj at Moody's Economy.com.

"Accordingly, the broader measure (of unemployment) increased to 17.3 percent," she said.

The Labor Department data showed that for all of 2009, employment dropped by 3.0 percent, the worst since 1949. The economy lost 4.6 million jobs for the year, the most since data collection began in 1939.

Terrorists R US

Click this link ...... http://pulsemedia.org/2010/01/07/terrorists-r-us/

Fed Plan to Stop Buying Mortgages Feeds Recovery Worries

The Federal Reserve's pledge to stop buying mortgages by the end of March is sparking fears among home builders, mortgage investors and even some Fed officials that mortgage rates could rise and knock the fragile housing recovery off course.

View Full Image

Bloomberg News

Home-mortgage rates have risen by about a quarter percentage point over the past month. Here, an unfinished home in Raleigh, N.C., in November.

Rates on 30-year fixed-rate mortgage have risen by a quarter of a percentage point in the past month to around 5.2%, according to HSH Associates, near their highest levels since September as the bond market has pushed up long-term interest rates amid signs of an improving economy.

The recent rise in mortgage rates could be a prelude to even bigger increases in coming months as the Fed steps away from support for the market. That prospect has some in the markets counting on the Fed to change course and keep buying past March, which many officials are reluctant to do.

When such a big investor stops buying, "that could lead to material increases in [interest] rates across the board," said Ronald Temple, portfolio manager at Lazard Asset Management. He sees mortgage rates rising by a percentage point when the Fed stops buying. A withdrawal of government support, combined with high unemployment and rising mortgage foreclosures, could push home prices down 20%, he said.

The Fed now holds $909 billion of mortgage-backed securities. In the past year it has purchased 73% of the mortgages that government-backed Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae have turned into securities. Purchases by the Treasury pushed total government purchases above $1 trillion. The Fed says it plans to top off its purchases at $1.25 trillion by the end of March, but must decide in the months ahead whether the economy is strong enough to stick with that plan.

The urgency of sustaining the housing market has sparked a debate inside the Fed. Many Fed officials don't think ending the purchases will have a large effect.

If mortgage rates shoot up or the economy weakens, some Fed officials argue, the central bank might need to keep buying. But with the economy improving and the mortgage market already heavily dependent on government, other Fed officials are eager to get on with an exit.

"I think the economy is starting its recovery, and there's reason to be optimistic," Thomas Hoenig, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, said Thursday.

Minutes from the Fed's December meeting, released this week, pointed to the Fed's internal debates.

Some Fed officials fretted that "mortgage markets could come under pressure as the Federal Reserve's agency MBS [mortgage-backed securities] purchases wind down." The bottom line, officials say privately, is that it would take a surprisingly sharp upturn in mortgage rates, or a worsening economic outlook, to prompt them to change their plans.

The government has already taken steps to reassure investors. In late December the Treasury Department said it would provide unlimited support to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and wouldn't force them to sell securities they hold. That should soften the sting of the Fed's removal from the market.

"Now that the question of [Fannie and Freddie] selling is off the table, the market is less worried about the Fed's exit," said Mahesh Swaminathan, a mortgage strategist at Credit Suisse.

Nevertheless, home builders and others are hoping the Fed will flinch. Some market participants haven't reacted to the Fed's promises to exit, believing the central bank won't have the will to wind down its purchase program.

If the Fed stops buying, "it would be the beginning of a crisis again, and we haven't emerged from the last one," said Larry Sorsby, chief financial officer at home builder Hovnanian Enterprises Inc., which had a $250.8 million loss in its last quarter on a 39% drop in revenue.

Mr. Sorsby figures the Fed's withdrawal will prompt at least a one-percentage-point rise in mortgage rates, which he fears could squash recent glimmers of more demand for homes. He expects the Fed will, in fact, keep buying. "I doubt they'll just pull out," he said.

On a $250,000 conventional 30-year mortgage, a mortgage-rate increase from 5% to 6% would raise monthly payments by about $150 per month to $1,499.

"The Fed wants to keep mortgage rates low," said Mitch Flack, co-head of the mortgage group at TCW Group Inc., a money manager that hasn't been a big seller of mortgage securities. "It's very possible that they'll slow purchases now, but should mortgage rates rise significantly after the end of the program in March, they may decide to extend that purchase program further."

Many Fed insiders expect the end to their mortgage buying to have a mild effect on rates, a half-percentage-point increase or possibly much less. Mortgage rates didn't move up much when the Fed initially signaled in September that it intended to end the $1.25 trillion mortgage program by March.

One theory inside the Fed is that what matters for mortgage rates isn't the central bank's day-to-day purchases, but the magnitude of mortgages that it has taken from the private sector. According to this view, the impact of removing more than a trillion dollars of supply should help to keep rates low even after the Fed stops buying.

Fed officials take comfort that yields on Treasury bonds remained little changed during a stretch between August and November when the Fed was completing its $300 billion of Treasury purchases, meaning the Fed's exit from that program didn't severely disrupt that market.

The Fed's heavy buying last year drove yields on mortgage bonds to within 0.65 percentage point of comparable Treasury bonds, much lower than the traditional spread of 1.15 percentage points. Lower mortgage rates helped sustain the housing market, and housing prices recently appear to have stabilized. But a looming wave of foreclosures, still-high unemployment and other factors are clouding the housing outlook for this year.

Global Warming US Cities Getting Warmer

Click this link ...... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_G_-SdAN04

Let the plunder begin: The return of Robert Rubin

“Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.”
–John Maynard Keynes

There’s no denying that the economy is getting better, but will it last? Many economists don’t think so, including experts at opposite ends of the ideological spectrum, like Paul Krugman and Martin Feldstein. They think the economy will begin to fizzle sometime in the latter part of 2010 when Obama’s $787 billion fiscal stimulus runs out and consumers are forced to pick up the slack in demand. That’s a safe bet, too, considering that unemployment will still be somewhere in the neighborhood of 9 percent and households will still be digging out from the $13 trillion they lost during the crisis.

And the fact that the Fed is planning to end its quantitative easing (QE) program in early April, doesn’t help either. That will just suck more liquidity out of the system and push long-term interest rates higher. When that happens, housing prices will fall, inventory will rise, and a surge in foreclosures will put more pressure on the banks balance sheets. That’s why the pros are so glum, because they know the economy needs a second dose of stimulus to stay on track, but the politicos are dead-set against it. Congress is afraid of the backlash from voters in the upcoming midterm elections. They’d rather drive the economy back into recession then risk losing their jobs.

Despite the propaganda in the media, stimulus works. In fact, Goldman Sachs attributes all of last quarter’s (positive) growth to Obama’s stimulus. Here’s how Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz sums it up in his China Daily article “Harsh lessons we may need to learn again”: “Keynesian policies do work. Countries, like Australia, that implemented large, well-designed stimulus programs early emerged from the crisis faster. Other countries succumbed to the old orthodoxy pushed by the financial wizards who got us into this mess in the first place.

Whenever an economy goes into recession, deficits appear, as tax revenues fall faster than expenditures. The old orthodoxy held that one had to cut the deficit — raise taxes or cut expenditures — to “restore confidence.” But those policies almost always reduced aggregate demand, pushed the economy into a deeper slump, and further undermined confidence.

When consumers are forced to cut back on spending, because they’re too far in debt or worried about their jobs, the government has to step in and make up the difference or the economy goes into a tailspin. The deficits need be big enough to maintain aggregate demand while the private sector regains its footing. Otherwise, consumer spending declines, which lowers earnings and forces businesses to lay off more workers. It’s a viscous circle. But if the stimulus is distributed wisely, multipliers kick in and help to lift the economy out of the doldrums. Here’s a good breakdown of how it works from an article in the New York Times:

“Every dollar of additional infrastructure spending means $1.57 in economic activity, according to Moody’s, and general aid to states carries a $1.41 “bang” for each federal buck. Even more effective are increases for food stamps ($1.74) and unemployment checks ($1.61), because recipients quickly spend their benefits on goods and services.

“By contrast, most temporary tax cuts cost more than the stimulus they provide, according to research by Moody’s. That is true of two tax breaks in the stimulus law that Congress, pressed by industry lobbyists, recently extended and sweetened — a tax credit for homebuyers (90 cents of stimulus for each dollar of tax subsidy) and extra deductions for businesses’ net operating losses (21 cents).” (“New Consensus Sees Stimulus Package as Worthy Step “ Jackie Calmes and Michael Cooper, New York Times)

So far, the stimulus has done exactly what it was designed to do; give the economy a big enough boost to get through a deflationary rough patch. Unemployment is flattening out, manufacturing is expanding again, the stock market keeps climbing higher, and a recent survey of individual investors shows the highest ratio of bulls-to-bears since 2007. That’s a good start, but the economy is still weak and needs more help. So why are policymakers so eager to take the patient off the ventilator before he can breathe on his own again?

Politics, that’s why.

Congress is worried about voter rage at the ballot box, but that doesn’t explain why Obama has started moaning about slashing deficits in the middle of a severe slump. The administration’s agenda is entirely different than Congress’s. The White House economics team is trying to garner support for policies that will strap the faltering economy into a fiscal straightjacket and pound the green shoots into mush. All the railing against deficits is just empty blather backed by junk economics.

Here’s ex-Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin — one of the chief architects of the global financial crisis — articulating the position of his protégés at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Robert Rubin: “Putting another major stimulus on top of already huge deficits and rising debt-to-GDP ratios would have risks. And further expansion of the Federal Reserve Board’s balance sheet could create significant problems . . . Today’s economic conditions would ordinarily be met with expansionary policy, but our fiscal and monetary conditions are a serious constraint, and waiting too long to address them could cause a new crisis. . . .

“First, there must be sound fiscal and monetary policies. The United States faces projected 10-year federal budget deficits that seriously threaten its bond market, exchange rate, economy, and the economic future of every American worker and family. Those risks are exacerbated by the context of those deficits: a low household-savings rate, even after recent increases; large funding requirements for federal debt maturities every year; heavy overweighting of dollar-denominated assets in foreign portfolios; worsened fiscal prospects in the decades after the current 10-year budget period; and competing claims for capital to fund deficits in other countries.” (“Getting the Economy back on track” Robert Rubin, Newsweek)

Interesting. Rubin admits that the recession “would ordinarily be met with expansionary policy,” but suggests that he has a better remedy than stimulus. Does that make sense? After all, it was Keynes counter-cyclical public spending (stimulus) that just produced positive GDP for the first time in four quarters, whereas, it was Rubin’s deregulation of the financial system that pushed the global economy to the brink of disaster. There’s no question of whose theory is more credible or likely to work. Even so, it’s worth considering what Rubin has to say, because it clarifies the views of Obama’s chief economics advisors, Geithner and Summers. After all, the trio is joined at the hip.

Rubin again: “The American people are growing increasingly concerned about deficits, creating a public environment more conducive to political action. And the Obama administration, in my view, has a deep understanding of the critical importance of addressing this issue. . . .”

Indeed. So, Obama has already joined the ranks of the deficit terrorists.

Rubin again: “As President Obama and the other G20 leaders warned, restrictive trade measures in response to the current crisis could lead to highly destructive trade wars. For the long run, we should continue pursuing the open markets that the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington think tank, estimates have added $1 trillion to America’s current GDP.”

So Rubin is working for Peterson? That explains everything. Here’s an excerpt from a Dean Baker article which appeared in the UK Guardian this week: “Peter Peterson is a Wall Street billionaire and former Nixon administration cabinet member who has been trying to gut Social Security payments and Medicare for at least the last quarter of a century. He has written several books that warn of a demographic disaster when the baby boomers retire. These books often include nonsense arguments to make his case. For example, in one of the books making his pitch for cutting Social Security as matter of generational equity, Peterson proposes reducing the annual cost of living adjustment.” (UK Guardian)

Ah ha! So, the real goal is to slash spending to impose onerous austerity measures that will lay the groundwork for dismantling critical social programs, like Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare. That’s why Rubin is working hand-in-hand with his allies in and out of the White House. It has nothing to do with what’s best for the country. It’s another looting operation spearheaded by the same band of Wall Street pirates who just blew up the financial system.

Rubin again: “For American workers, sustained growth is the most powerful force for higher wages and greater personal economic security. . . . The dynamism of American society, its flexible labor and capital markets, its entrepreneurial spirit and the sheer size of its economy, are great strengths for succeeding in a rapidly transforming global economy. . . . Finally, in an increasingly interdependent world, transnational issues key to all of us can only be addressed through effective global governance.”

Yada, yada, yada. More free trade, more outsourcing, more off-shoring, more lost jobs, more structural adjustment (at home, this time) more privatization, more screwball globalist Utopianism. It’s all right out of the neoliberal playbook, corporate America’s sacred text. And it looks as if President Moonbeam is marching in lockstep with the rest of the hucksters.

Face it, the Obama administration is less interested in engineering a strong recovery than they are with micromanaging a protracted downturn. That’s because a long drawn-out mini-Depression puts the Rubin troupe right where they want to be — with one hand choking the life out of the economy while the other steals whatever is left in the national vault.

Reis: Strip Mall Vacancy Rate Hits 10.6%, Highest on Record

Click on graph for larger image in new window.

From Reuters: US shopping center vacancies hit records - report

Strip malls ... had a vacancy rate of 10.6 percent in the fourth quarter, surpassing the high set in 1991, Reis economist Ryan Severino said in a report released on Wednesday.

This is up from 10.3% in Q3 2009 and 8.9% in Q4 2008.

The vacancy rate at large regional malls rose to 8.8 percent from 8.6 percent the third quarter.

The 8.8% is the highest since Reis began tracking regional malls in 2000.

"Our outlook for retail properties as a whole is bleak," Severino said in a statement. "... we do not foresee a recovery in the retail sector until late 2012 at the earliest."

"Late 2012 at the earliest" ... ouch!