LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
June 02/12

Bible Quotation for today/Paul's Prayer
Ephesians 01/15-23: "For this reason, ever since I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all of God's people, I have not stopped giving thanks to God for you. I remember you in my prayers and ask the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, to give you the Spirit, who will make you wise and reveal God to you, so that you will know him. I ask that your minds may be opened to see his light, so that you will know what is the hope to which he has called you, how rich are the wonderful blessings he promises his people, and how very great is his power at work in us who believe. This power working in us is the same as the mighty strength which he used when he raised Christ from death and seated him at his right side in the heavenly world. Christ rules there above all heavenly rulers, authorities, powers, and lords; he has a title superior to all titles of authority in this world and in the next. God put all things under Christ's feet and gave him to the church as supreme Lord over all things. The church is Christ's body, the completion of him who himself completes all things everywhere.

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
 Syria fiasco, Iran disaster/By: Amnon Shamosh/Ynetnews/June 01/12
 Is it Morally Legitimate for Israel to Address the Iranian Nuclear Issue/By Ali Omidi/Foreign Policy Journal/June 01/12
 Obama’s God Complex/By: Yvonne Ridley/Foreign Policy Journal/June 01/12
After Houla, will Ankara act/By: Alex Rowell/Now Lebanon/ 01 June/12

U.S.: Window of opportunity for peaceful Syria solution won't stay open for long
By Natasha Mozgovaya | May.31, 2012/Haaretz
White House spokesman urges international community to come together and further unify against the Assad regime; Clinton: Military intervention in Syria unwise at the moment.
The window of opportunity for a peaceful solution to the ongoing crisis in Syria is closing, a top U.S. official said on Thursday, adding that the international community had to unite against the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Earlier Thursday, in another reference to escalating violence in Syria, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton rejected the possibility of a military intervention in the country, saying
"A lot of people are trying to figure out what could be an effective intervention that wouldn't cause more death and suffering," Clinton said, arguing Syria's population density increased the odds of civilian casualties in any armed action.
However, speaking on the subject later in the day, White House spokesman Jay Carney said that U.S. President Barack Obama "and others have made clear that the window of opportunity here to allow for a peaceful political transition in Syria is -- will not remain open for long."
"There is an urgent need for the United -- the international community to come together and further unify against the Assad regime in an effort to persuade the Assad regime and pressure and isolate the Assad regime to the point where that transition is allowed to fully take place," Carney added.
Carney added that if that solution is not reached "the consequences are very serious."
"And that's what Ambassador Rice was talking about, and Secretary Clinton and I, because the consequences of not taking that firm action are more violence -- violence that spills over Syria's borders; violence that results in even greater participation in this by Iran, for example, and others, to the point where it becomes a proxy war of sorts," he added, saying: "And this is bad for the region and bad for the Syrian people and bad for the world."
Also referring to the possibility of a peaceful resolution of the Syrian crisis, U.S. State Department Deputy spokesman Mark Toner said on Thursday that "Assad, his regime is the greatest stumbling block right now."
"They've failed to comply with any of the six components of the Annan plan. They've continued to besiege population centers, including the horrible events that happened in Houla over the weekend. You know, let's put responsibility for this bloodletting squarely upon Assad," Toner added.
Also on Thursday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice responded to reports on a Russian arms ship that had docked at the Tartous harbor in Syria.
"With respect to the reported docking of a ship carrying Russian arms, this is obviously of the utmost concern given that the Syrian government continues to use deadly force against civilians, she added, saying: "It is not technically, obviously, a violation of international law since there’s not an arms embargo, but it’s reprehensible that arms would continue to flow to a regime that is using such horrific and disproportionate force against its own people."
Friday's massacre of more than 100 civilians in Houla, many of them children, has triggered calls for the West to take more robust action in Syria, despite Russian and Chinese opposition.
Clinton said earlier Thursday that she had not given up on the possibility of persuading Russia to support stronger action against the Assad government, saying she had made the case that the chances of a full-blown civil war were higher if the world failed to act.
"The dangers we face are terrible," she said, saying the violence between government forces and pro-Assad militias against the opposition forces would turn into something much worse.
"[That] could morph into a civil war in a country that would be driven by sectarian divides, which could then morph into a proxy war in the region because remember you have Iran deeply embedded in Syria," she said.

Syria fiasco, Iran disaster?
Amnon Shamosh Published: 05.31.12/Ynetnews
Op-ed: Israeli intelligence failure on Syrian front raises concerns about our plans to strike Iran
The Syrian people’s tragedy continues. It will continue for many months and years to come. The brutality is horrifying and a solution is not on the horizon. Both rulers and rebels are murderous and corrupt. Obama and Clinton will not move Bashar al-Assad from his path or post. Neither will the Arab League or the UN. Neither will the whole world’s fury and the rivers of blood. The only person who can convince Assad to hand over power to regime supporters and embark on a quiet life far away from Homs and Damascus is his wife, Asma, the mother of his children. A historical change in Syria will only take place should Asma take Bashar’s hand and say “let’s go, darling; we’re leaving.” That’s why I was so happy to hear that finally such inquiry was made with the London-born Asma, an educated, opinionated woman and a mother.
Yet the likelihood of her doing it isn’t high. She realizes that capitulating to the vengeful rebels would mean mass slaughter of the Alawites and their allies that would make the current slaughter pale in comparison. Assad already told her that he understands the issues faced by Syria’s weaker strata and has started to improve their condition, but that caving in to the avengers in Hama and Homs would mean mass suicide.
Assad may only vacate his place in favor of those who would continue his regime; a secular regime combining various religions and sects as established by the Baath party. A regime that radical Muslims, who aspire to impose Sharia Law in Syria, started to rebel against some 30 years ago.
Assad Senior butchered some 10,000 of them and this kept them down for a generation. The descendents of these rebels have yet another reason to rise up: Revenge. Some elements out of Syria also have a clear interest in toppling Assad and his regime, especially after he turned his back to the West and joined forces with Iran, temporarily in my estimate.
Beware Iran war
Had most Syrians – Alawites, secular Sunnis, Christians, Druze, Armenians and Kurds – failed to stand by the regime, we would have seen it fall a year ago already, as Ehud Barak predicted with the confidence of a defense minister. Yet Barak’s sources got it wrong and erred as result of wishful thinking and deep hatred.
I was happy to see that Israel’s intelligence establishment already admitted openly that its assessments regarding Assad’s survival were wrong. Russian intelligence always understood Syrian society’s complexity and uniqueness better. This is a multifaceted religious and ethnic society, free of Shiite influence.
The Shiite Iran could be a political partner, yet will forever remain a religious foe - mostly to the Alawites, but also to secular Sunnis, the regime’s second pillar. Hence, our defense minister’s arrogance, rashness and contempt for the enemy concern me, especially as a testament to inaccurate intelligence and puzzling judgment, combined with exaggerated confidence in the face of things to come.
An “Iran strike” is not just another strike in Gaza or in Syria. We should call this monster by name. This would not be a strike, but rather, the initiation of war against a well-armed, dangerous regional power, even without nuclear weapons.
The world and history will not forgive us should we embark on war that could turn into a regional war and possibly a third world war. The unstable economic and political situation will mobilize all 200 states, including leading states, against those who initiated the war.
To the new Israelis who will soon embark on rallies nationwide, I say: Continue with your “the people demand social justice” chants,” but also add “the people say no to war.” These two things are interdependent, because this is the same money and the priorities are either more jets and bombs or more apartments, education and healthcare.
Israel’s intelligence establishment should be lauded for admitting that its assessments on Syria were off. Yet who can guarantee that its assessments regarding a war (strike) in the distant Iran and its outcome aren’t even more flawed and much more dangerous?

Private sector warns tax hikes will slow economy
June 01, 2012/The Daily Star
Safadi meets with representatives of the private sector.
BEIRUT: Representatives of the private sector Thursday voiced their strong opposition to any additional taxes as these measures would put more pressure on the economy.
The representatives met with Finance Minister Mohammed Safadi to express their objection to some items in the 2012 draft budget which would create new taxes.
Among the taxes proposed by Safadi was to raise the Value Added Tax on all consumer products from 10 to 12 percent and to raise the taxes on interest rates on customer deposits from 5 percent to 7 percent. The draft budget also calls for a new 15 percent tax on profits made through real estate transactions.
According to Safadi, the planned real-estate tax would apply to sales of land and real estate purchased after 2009. Property bought before 2009 would be taxed 4 percent of the total sale amount, the minister added. “The hike on VAT would be equivalent to 1 percent of GDP, while the wage increase given last January constitutes 2 percent,” Safadi said in defense of his proposal to raise the unpopular VAT tax. But it is very unlikely the budget will be approved by the Cabinet because most ministers fear that additional taxes could trigger widespread protests in the country, further undermining the credibility of the government. Chamber of Commerce chief Mohammed Choukeir said the economy is already reeling under the severe slowdown, noting that sales and volume of business have plummeted to alarming levels. Most businessmen and merchants complain that the political wrangling and the volatile situation in Syria have exacerbated economic conditions.
Hotels in Beirut and Mount Lebanon all reported cancellations of reservations after the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain advised their citizens to avoid Lebanon this summer.
Lebanon counted heavily on the tourism season this summer to achieve economic growth, improve the balance of payments and boost foreign currency reserves.
The private sector has lobbied successive governments and rival politicians to tone down their rhetoric and cast aside their differences for the sake of the country and economy.
Companies keep reminding the government that any security setback would prompt firms, hotels and restaurants to lay off thousands of employees.
The private sector reluctantly agreed to raise the wages by a maximum LL399,000 to help employees cope with the high cost of living.
Nicolas Chammas, the head of Beirut Merchant Association, said the representatives of the private sector briefed Safadi about the economic difficulties which most companies are passing through these days.
“For this reason, we believe that additional taxes mentioned in the draft budget are not appropriate at the moment and will further complicate matters,” Chammas said.
He added that the private sector will submit two papers to the government; the first will include the demands of the companies and the second will include proposals to reform government economic policy.
However, the government of Prime Minister Najib Mikati seems to be caught between a rock and hard place and its options to boost revenues are very limited and even unpopular.
Safadi has told ministers that if the budget does not contain new taxes then the ministries will not receive additional allocations to carry out vital projects.
The minister warned that the Finance Ministry cannot keep borrowing to finance projects and for this reason taxes are important to ease the burden on the treasury.

Is it Morally Legitimate for Israel to Address the Iranian Nuclear Issue?
by Ali Omidi/Foreign Policy Journal
May 31, 2012
On Friday, May 25, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak despicably refused even to meet with the top US negotiator on Iran in Baghdad, Wendy Sherman, who had travelled to Tel Aviv to brief Israeli officials about negotiations between Iran and the P5+1—Britain, China, France, Russia, and the United States plus Germany. She just wanted “to reaffirm our unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security,” read a statement by the US Department of State.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said earlier that world powers “must show determination, not weakness” and toughen their stance against Iran. “They do not need to make concessions to Iran. They need to set clear and unequivocal demands before it: Iran must halt all enrichment of nuclear material. It must remove from its territory all nuclear material that has been enriched up until now and it must dismantle the underground nuclear facility in Qom,” he said.
In the 2012 annual AIPAC meeting, President Obama took his strongest stance to date in favor of the defense of Israel. In a speech to the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the president declared that the United States would not accept the creation of a nuclear Iran. “Iranian leaders”, he said, “should understand that I do not have a policy of containment. I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon”.
The President told APAIC that he “had Israel’s back” and acknowledged that a nuclear Iran posed a threat, not just to Israel, but to the United States and the world. Yet while adding he would use military force to protect the US and its interests if necessary, he claimed that “crippling sanctions” against Iran were working.
Three months ago, Tucker Carlson, an American political analyst, went much further in an interview on Fox News on America’s position on Iran: “I think we are the only country with the moral authority [...] sufficient to do that. [The U.S. is] the only country that doesn’t seek hegemony in the world. I do think I’m sure I’m the lone voice in saying this: that Iran deserves to be annihilated. I think they’re lunatics. I think they’re evil.”
Washington and Israel always aggrandize Iran’s peaceful nuclear program as a threat. Seven points are noteworthy here from moral perspective.
First, Iran has been a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency since its establishment in 1956. Iran immediately signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), a treaty banning the promotion of nuclear weapons which went into force in 1970. Accordingly, Iran is and has been under strict IAEA supervision since 1993. Israel, however, is not a member of IAEA, nor is Israel a signatory to the NPT. Not one inspection has ever been carried out on Israeli nuclear facilities by any international body.
Secondly, Israel reportedly has two hundred nuclear bombs. Israeli and American officials primary concerns however, are that Iran “may” someday gain access to a single nuclear bomb sometime in the future.
So far, the Israeli government not only despises all international supervision mechanisms, but also has been bullying to all the world. How and Why?
Indeed Israeli officials claim all Middle Eastern governments should be subject to extreme IAEA supervision, other than Tel Aviv. They seem to believe a Jewish theocracy has the sole right to possess nuclear weapons in a region redolent of different faith systems, giving all other regional governments no right whatsoever to enrich uranium, let alone develop nuclear weapons. Where then does Israel derive such discriminatory rights? Is it that the Israeli government has had carte blanche from America against several hundred millions people in the region?
Nevertheless, thirdly, Iran has never been charged or convicted of “war crimes” or “crimes against humanity”. Since the establishment of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) however, the Israeli government has been condemned for war crimes in Gaza (2009). Furthermore, a United Nations panel of human rights experts appointed by the UNHRC has accused Israel of war crimes through unlawful killing, unnecessary brutality, and torture in its “clearly unlawful” assault on board the MV Mavi Marmara in May 2011.
Fourthly, Israel and its supporters justify Tel Aviv’s unilateral rights on the basis that only Israel is in danger of attack. No other regional governments, apparently, have security concerns. While the history has shown that it Israel has been the aggressor.
Fifthly, Iran has not only never attacked any country in the 20th or 21st centuries, but has been a victim of a devastating war that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of Iranians, all of which was fully supported by the America and “the West”. Israel, however, was founded on warfare. History is pretty clear on the Jewish immigration and the subsequent occupation of Palestinian territories in 1948 to predicate a Jewish state through racial dispossession in which Tel Aviv drove Palestinian people from their homes, depriving them of their basic rights, thereby claiming statehood.
Israel claims to be a state. A modern state is defined with national boundaries. The question is: Where are Israel’s geographic boundaries? Israel does not accept any borders as international borders at all.
One of initial universal plan (although not legally binding) for coping the Middle East crisis was the UN General Assembly Resolution 181. It proposed partitioning Palestine, with forty-five percent of the territory going to the Palestinians. As Jeremy Hammond rightly put it: “it would, in other words, take land from the Arabs and give it to the Jews.”” Accordingly, fifty-four percent was to be transferred to Israel. One percentage of the remaining area was to be considered as an international area. Israel has never accepted this solution. Furthermore, Israel has been establishing Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territories. On the other hand, up to two to three million Palestinians who are living in “occupied territories” are not considered citizens. They have no passports and other citizenship rights. They are for all intents and purposes being subjected to Israel’s past demons of Diaspora. According to the Quartet (the US, Russia, Europe and the United Nations), there should be a Palestinian state alongside Israeli 1967 borders. Israel has rejected all solutions, even those that were offered by its close allies. The strategy seems to be that of buying time, to overcome the first generation of Palestine, and by extension the issue of occupied territories will be forgotten.
Sixthly, as previously stated, Israel has twice attacked and bombed neighboring countries, such as Iraq and Syria, for nuclear reasons. The facts remains, however, that Israeli military aggression has been applied to other countries for whatever reason. Israeli nuclear ambitions, too often seem an existential threat to the region. Too often Israel acts as a law unto itself. Too often Israel ignores standing international law.
Seventhly, regarding ”terrorism”, Israel has killed a large number of Palestinians inside Palestine and outside via terrorist methods since it came into existence. Yet Israel is generally portrayed by the U.S. mass media as the victim of terrorism. Its own role as a major perpetrator of state terrorism is consistently downplayed or ignored, in accordance with the general principle that violence employed by ourselves or by our friends is excluded from the category of terrorism, by definition. The record of Israeli terrorism, however, is substantial, far too extensive even to attempt to outline here. The recent ones is the assassination of four Iranian nuclear scientists.
Israel, thus, as a state that was established via a nation’s dispossession, that has acted via terror and held to war crimes, as well. Is it morally legitimate for this regime to talk about Iranian nuclear issues or attack Iran? Is President Obama or the US morally right to defend and justify the Israeli regime unequivocally while he is sure that there hasn’t been found any smoking gun of Iranian nuclear weapons activity?

Obama’s God Complex
by Yvonne Ridley/Foreign Policy Journal
May 31, 2012
The fatal shooting of black teenager Trayvon Martin shocked a nation, inspired tens of thousands to march for justice, and even prompted the US President to declare, ”If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon”.
It took nearly six weeks for George Zimmerman, the Florida man accused of killing the teenager, to be arrested and charged with second-degree murder after enormous pressure from the public.
Zimmerman, the captain of a Neighbourhood Watch group, pursued Trayvon because he said that he thought he was acting “suspicious” and was “up to no good”. And that is exactly the same excuse used by President Barack Obama as he justifies ticking off names on a “kill list” for drone attacks.
While Obama called on federal, state, and local authorities to work together as part of the investigation into the killing of Trayvon, just who is going to investigate the President for his extra-judicial killings? He is a man out of control, and while his predecessor justified his actions with a catch-all “God told me to do it”, this president thinks he is God, making decisions about who should live and who should die.
If he was the head of a banana republic, the UN Security Council would be meeting as I write to bring about regime change, with the International Criminal Court on standby with a writ to charge Obama with war crimes.
But the USA is not a banana republic—not yet, anyway—and Obama is the head of a superpower and supposed to be the most powerful man in the world; the man who in 2009 went to Cairo and convinced us all that he was going to engage positively with the Muslim world from the Middle East to Asia.
Looking back at that historic day, all I can visualize is a fox being heralded and saluted by his victims as he walks up the ramp into the chicken coop.
We don’t know how many people Barack Obama has ordered to be killed, but according to the New York Times he has “placed himself at the helm of a top secret ‘nominations’ process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical”.
There is huge hypocrisy in the media and from the so-called liberal left when it comes to this particular White House incumbent. The tame journalists who make up the Washington press pack ignore the fact that several times a month around 100 members of the government’s sprawling national security apparatus gather, by secure video teleconference, to discuss who should live and who should die.
This murderous secret nomination process was the invention of the Democrat Obama Administration, just as the Democrat Bill Clinton Administration brought kidnap and extraordinary rendition flights to the world. Republicans must look on enviously at how the Democrats get away with breaking international laws and conventions without being challenged.
It is almost beyond belief that this kill list has been sanctioned by a man who won the Nobel Peace Prize and ran his US Presidential campaign on a human rights platform. Remember Obama’s declaration that he wanted to close down Guantanamo, end torture, stop secret renditions, and raise the bar in fairness and justice? He clearly doesn’t.
In Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan, Obama’s killing machines are not even clinical or always on target; thousands of innocent men, women and children have been taken out by his drone attacks. Their blood is on the US President’s hands, and even his own people are sickened by the hypocrisy and double standards coming out of the White House.
America’s outgoing Ambassador to Pakistan, Cameron Munter, a man with more backbone and guts than his predecessor, has revealed that he regards the drone strike-driven policy of his government unacceptable. Rather tellingly, he has complained to colleagues that “he didn’t realize his main job was to kill people”.
This was revealed in another article published this week in the New York Times, one of the few US media titles finally to adopt a critical stance over Obama’s foreign policies.
I can only assume that Obama’s killing spree has gone largely unchecked by ordinary Americans because they haven’t a clue what this president is doing in their name. This is sad, because Americans do care about justice and fair play; they showed this when they rallied and demonstrated after the killing of black teenager Trayvon Martin by a man who thought he was “up to no good”.
Trayvon’s killer will now stand trial for his actions and his fate will be decided by a judge and jury looking at openly presented evidence. That is real justice, not the shoot and kill version which is coming to define Obama’s presidency.
Many of us who cheered when the first non-white president moved into the White House were hoping for a new era of peace and justice, but we have been conned. The true Barack Obama is an out of control psychopathic killer with a loaded God complex, and he’s running America. This makes him the most dangerous man in the world as well as the most powerful. And that should make every right-minded person in America and beyond shudder with disbelief.