<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Eric Burns</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/author/eric-burns/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 07:56:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>The Bedouin Rebellion Against Israel</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/eric-burns/the-bedouin-rebellion-against-israel/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-bedouin-rebellion-against-israel</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/eric-burns/the-bedouin-rebellion-against-israel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 04:25:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eric Burns]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bedouin Rebellion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[land]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rights of Jews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[settle]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=180648</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The campaign against the rights of Jews in Israel gains the upper hand.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/eric-burns/the-bedouin-rebellion-against-israel/bd/" rel="attachment wp-att-180652"><img class=" wp-image-180652 alignleft" title="Bd" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Bd-450x297.jpg" alt="" width="315" height="208" /></a>Various Bedouin tribes are waging a full-scale rebellion against Israel. Negev Bedouin tribes are refusing to settle in designated areas developed by Israel’s government, and stealing Jeeps and other equipment from nearby IDF bases. They use the Jeeps to smuggle drugs and other contraband into Israel, from the Sinai. In central Israel and the Galilee, Bedouin tribes are engaging in agricultural theft, from Moshavs and Kibbutzim, extortion and vandalism against Jewish farmers, and crime sprees in the streets and shopping malls. The Israeli police don’t respond to many of these incidents.</p>
<p>The Bedouin rebellion would be unwelcome by itself, however, their refusal to recognize Israeli government authority is part and parcel of a leftist campaign against the right of Jews to lease, own, and work Israel’s land; and against the sovereignty of Israel’s government. This campaign is conducted by groups such as Peace Now, B’tselem, and Rabbis for Human Rights, and aided and abetted by Israel’s Supreme Court, the U.N., and the European Union. Slowly but surely, this campaign is gaining the upper hand.</p>
<p>Israel’s Bedouins have traditionally lived a semi-nomadic existence, making a bare living as farmers and sheep herders. As of 2004, there were 130,000 Negev Bedouins, and 60,000 in the rest of Israel. Although some have migrated to Israel’s cities, at least half still live the way their grandfathers lived, in tin shack and tent encampments, lacking paved roads, indoor plumbing, electricity, and sewers, without paying taxes to Israel. As of 2007, about 70,000 Bedouin lived in unrecognized Negev settlements, without basic services. With a <a href="http://www.knesset.gov.il/lexicon/eng/bedouim_eng.htm">fertility rate of 5.5%</a>, one of the world’s highest, Bedouin population is increasing rapidly, with attendant high levels of unemployment, poverty, and crime. While a fair number of Bedouin serve in the IDF, there is mounting concern about their increasing Islamic fanaticism.</p>
<p>In 1986, the government established a Negev directorate, as a central authority over unrecognized Bedouin settlements, and to negotiate on land issues. However, by 2007, Israel’s government realized it could no longer ignore burgeoning illegal Bedouin settlement, and asked retired Supreme Court justice Eliezer Goldberg to study the problem, and make recommendations. Ehud Prawer, head of the Prime Minister’s planning division, turned Goldberg’s ideas into a plan. As implemented, the Prawer Plan calls for a massive initial investment of 1.2 billion NIS(roughly $324,000,000), to legalize most of the illegal Negev settlements. For those 20,000 to 30,000 Bedouin whose settlements couldn’t be made legal, the Prawer Plan offers generous gifts of land, up to five dunams(about 1.25 acres) per family. The government then gave Minister at Large Bennie Begin(son of former PM Menachem Begin) the task of converting the Prawer Plan into law.</p>
<p>Begin initiated a review process, which included extensive meetings with the Bedouins, where comments and counter-proposals were welcomed. However, subsequent Bedouin behavior indicated that the review process has been subverted, by leftist NGO’s, such as the New Israel Fund(NIF), and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel(ACRI). These organizations have coached Bedouin representatives to reject government offers, to “just say no,” as “Israel will always come back with a better offer,” resulting in a severe erosion of the Prawer Plan’s original recommendations. Begin’s most recent offer was 63% of the land the Bedouin have illegally expropriated. This includes land registration under Bedouin clan member names. The Bedouins build 1500 to 2000 illegal structures in the Negev, annually. They now claim an area of greater than 200,000 acres&#8211;at least 16 times the size of Tel Aviv. Israel is making a supreme sacrifice to satisfy Bedouin demands.(1)</p>
<p>Equally important, there is little, if any discrimination against the Bedouins (or any Arabs) owning, leasing, or purchasing land, despite leftist claims. 80.4% of Israel’s land is government-owned, while 13.1% is owned by the Jewish National Fund(JNF), a private charitable organization. 6.5% is about evenly divided between private Jewish and Arab owners. Thus 93.5% of Israel’s land is unavailable for private ownership. In 1960, the Knesset passed a number of land laws by which state-owned and JNF lands were both defined as “Israel lands.” These laws reinforced the principle that Israel’s lands could only be leased, not sold, and gave oversight of them to a new government agency, the Israel Land Authority.(ILA) Israeli Jews and Arabs enjoy equal access to state-owned land, however, regarding residential land, the ILA many times offers Israel’s Arabs better terms than it offers to Jews. A prominent example was <em>Avitan v. Israel</em> <em>Land Administration</em>(HC 528/88), in which the plaintiff(Eliezar Avitan) sued the ILA, because they charged a Bedouin family $150 for a long-term lease on a quarter acre plot in Rahat; while <a href="http://www.israpundit.com/2007/?p=4852">charging Avitan $24,000 for a similar plot</a> nearby. Israel’s Supreme Court ruled against Avitan, favoring the ILA’s “affirmative action” policy for Bedouins. There are a number of similar examples of ILA favoritism towards the Bedouins.</p>
<p>The purpose of JNF’s original 1901 charter, and their 1953 charter, was to purchase land for Jewish settlement. This has occasionally been interpreted to mean that JNF shouldn’t make long-term leases to non-Jews. However, in practice, this official restriction isn’t recognized, and JNF land is not only leased to Israel’s Arabs; they’re given long-term residential leases via land swaps, whereby JNF land is traded to the government to lease, while JNF receives other land in return. Nevertheless, there are no restrictions on purchasing Israel’s private lands, and the Palestinian Authority has encouraged wealthy Palestinians to buy private land. Various Palestinian real estate magnates have made a number of such purchases. Thus in practice, there aren’t any restrictions on Israel’s Arabs leasing state-owned land, JNF land, or purchasing private land, and the Bedouins have been treated very well by Israel.(2)</p>
<p>However, the Israeli left wasn’t satisfied. In September 2011, Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch ruled that any area in Judea and Samaria that hasn’t been declared state land, isn’t unowned land, but is considered private Palestinian Arab land, by default. No proof of Palestinian ownership was(is) necessary. Before Beinisch’s ruling, unowned land could be awarded to Jews, or to <a href="http://www.israpundit.com/archives/39784">anyone that worked the land for 10 years</a> without prior proven ownership. Her ruling resulted in the demolishing of Jewish homes in Givat HaYovel, north of Jerusalem; in Haresha, which was targeted by Peace Now, which claimed Haresha’s Jewish homes were on land claimed by Palestinian Arabs; and in Migron, where families with young children were evicted in the middle of the night. The home of a fallen IDF soldier in Givat HaYovel, Major Eliraz Peretz, was spared only because Defense Minister Ehud Barak petitioned the Supreme Court on his behalf. Also according to Israeli law, land ownership questions are decided by the civil administration and the state prosecutor’s office, not the Supreme Court.</p>
<p>Beinisch’s ruling simply accepts at face value unsupported Arab land claims, and ignores illegal expropriation, often practiced by Bedouin tribes. Beinisch also understood that Arab land claims are often poorly supported, with many relying on inaccurate British Mandate era fiscal maps, that in no way provide proof of ownership. As a result, leftist NGO’s have many times been forced to withdraw their claims. However, her ruling will likely stand, unless legislation is passed that overrides it.</p>
<p>Which brings readers to the situation at Bir Hadaj, a Negev Bedouin village of 5,000 residents, where Israel has developed state-owned land, pursuant to recognizing Bedouin ownership. Between September and November, 2012, police made several raids on Bir Hadaj. An article in <em>Haaretz,</em> dated 11/16/2012, describes the November 12<sup>th</sup> raid. The article offers graphic descriptions of how police roughed up some residents, then fired tear gas grenades towards the elementary school, resulting in 29 children being hospitalized, for tear gas inhalation. They were released later that day. However, the article also mentions that the raid was “the second of its kind within a month,” and that there were security personnel “disguised as Arabs” in the village. Were the residents of Bir Hadaj innocent victims of Israeli police brutality, as the article portrays?</p>
<p>Not likely. As a result of leftist NGO encouragement to refuse Minister Begin’s offers, and undoubtedly influenced by Judge Beinisch’s ruling, the Bedouins have illegally squatted on JNF land, outside the developed area of Bir Hadaj. They throw rocks, burn tires, and riot every time police try to enforce the law. Bedouin spokesmen have claimed the unrest is because, “The Housing Ministry unit revoked the master plan, and the Interior Ministry is demolishing houses…to pressure us into accepting new proposals….They do not want to divide the plots as planned, but want us to become a municipal community….”</p>
<p>The Housing Ministry has refuted this claim, “The allegation of decreasing the size of the plots in Bir Hadaj is groundless….” One might reasonably conclude that the Bedouins don’t want to pay taxes to Israel, and don’t want to recognize the government’s authority.(3)</p>
<p>In addition, the article doesn’t mention that another raid at Bir Hadaj, in September 2012, was conducted to recover stolen IDF Jeeps, used to smuggle drugs and weapons into Israel, from Egypt. The police uncovered a warren of hidden compounds, <a href="http://www.israpundit.com/archives/49036">containing dozens of stolen vehicles</a>, including Jeeps and water tankers. Dozens of Jeeps have been stolen in the past few years, from the IDF’s Ketziot and Tze’elim bases in southern Israel. Several were recovered in this raid.</p>
<p>On January 27, 2013, PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet, by a vote of 16 to 3, with 1 abstention, approved Minister Begin’s recommendations on formalizing the status of Negev Bedouin settlements. Will Begin’s plan of compensation(to those Bedouins moved off state land) and vast land giveaway work?</p>
<p>The Prime Minister’s Office supports the plan. However, the plan was approved hastily, without proper consideration. Ministers first read the plan’s recommendations only 2 days before the cabinet vote. The ILA received the recommendations only 2 ½ days before the vote, while neither the Defense Ministry nor the IDF had approved it. Why did the cabinet approve it so quickly? 30% of the land included was quickly withdrawn, because it was unsuitable for residential use and herding; IDF bases, roads, and electric company and water authority structures. Immediately after the cabinet vote, the Negev’s Jewish residents complained that the plan rewards years of illegal Bedouin squatting, while the Bedouins objected that thousands will be uprooted from their homes.(4)</p>
<p>Recognition of the Bedouins would help stabilize Israel, one reason it’s a desirable goal. However, recognition can’t be accomplished without Bedouin cooperation—they must live in designated areas, and the smuggling and theft must stop. This is why Minister Begin’s plan is unworkable—the Bedouins aren’t given any motivation to cooperate. It’s also impractical, and shouldn’t be implemented. In February 2012, Dorit Beinisch retired as President of Israel’s Supreme Court, and was replaced by Judge Asher D. Grunis, a conservative.</p>
<p>Thus far, Judge Grunis has approved a March 2012 decision that evicted 50 Migron families from their homes. It’s therefore unlikely that Grunis would rule to repeal Beinisch’s September 2011 ruling, that made non-state West Bank land Palestinian Arab land, by default. Such a repeal, or similar Knesset legislation, would help stop the runaway appeasement of those whose criminal behavior and appetite for Israel’s land know no boundaries.</p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Footnotes</span></strong></p>
<p>1-“Stop the silent surrender of the Negev,” by Ari Briggs, reprinted in <em>Israpundit</em>, 9/20/2012; report in <em>Israel News</em> 11/08/2012; “Arabs illegally settling the Negev in land grab race,” by Atara Beck, reprinted in <em>Israpundit </em>8/23/2012.</p>
<p>2-“Edward Said’s Documented Deceptions,” at <a href="http://www.camera.org/">www.camera.org</a>, 8/20/1996.</p>
<p>3-“For Bedouin father, Israel is his children’s No. 1 enemy,” by Or Kashti, <em>Haaret, </em>11/16/2012.</p>
<p>4-“Government Bedouin land plan deemed impossible,” by Stuart Winer<em>, Maariv,</em> 02/07/2013.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank">Click here</a>.  </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/eric-burns/the-bedouin-rebellion-against-israel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>China: The Deadly Dragon</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/eric-burns/china-the-deadly-dragon/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=china-the-deadly-dragon</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/eric-burns/china-the-deadly-dragon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2012 04:40:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eric Burns]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united-states]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=168584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new book chronicles the casualties of the U.S.-China trade war. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/eric-burns/china-the-deadly-dragon/110118_china_us_flags-380/" rel="attachment wp-att-168587"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-168587" title="110118_china_us_flags.380" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/110118_china_us_flags.380.jpg" alt="" width="230" height="174" /></a>Around 5:30 a.m., on August 24, 2012, in Harbin City, Heilongjiang province, Manchuria, a ramp leading to the main roadway of the 9.6-mile Yangmingtan bridge collapsed, as did a 130-foot long section of the main roadway, depositing four trucks onto the road below; killing three and injuring five. Pictures of the accident showed the 130-foot long main roadway section dangling downward at a 45-degree angle, while one of the trucks lay on its side, looking as if it had been crushed by a giant foot. Dubious reasons were offered for the bridge collapse. Huang Yusheng, Deputy secretary of Harbin’s municipal government, blamed the collapse on overloaded trucks. Nevertheless, the bridge design and construction materials have come under intense scrutiny, and evidence points to culpability on the part of Harbin city officials.</p>
<p>Construction of the $294,000,000 (1.88 billion yuan) bridge was supposed to take 3 years, but was rushed to meet an 18-month deadline, imposed by Harbin authorities. A comment by Harbin’s construction committee is telling, “Because the commanding office for the construction of the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-19365154">Yangmingtan bridge</a> dissolved (after the completion of the project), we can’t track down the specific unit that was responsible for the segment of the bridge.”[1]</p>
<p>However, stories of injuries and fatalities resulting from shoddy Chinese workmanship and materials reverberate far beyond China. In May 2006, an ambulance in New Mexico, riding on Chinese-made tires, went out of control when the tires blew out. In August 2006, a van using Chinese-made tires crashed on the Pennsylvania turnpike, killing two passengers and causing serious brain damage to another. The American retail distributor, Foreign Tire Sales, Inc, (FTS) inspected the shredded tires. They found that the Chinese manufacturer, Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber Company(HZ), had removed a .6 millimeter thick gum strip, which prevents a tire’s steel belts from separating from the rubber, to save money on production costs. However, because the cost might put them out of business, FTS postponed asking the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue a recall. When FTS failed to submit all of its test results until June 2007, the victims’ attorney sued them.</p>
<p>However, FTS pressed HZ about the missing gum strips; the Chinese company issued a boilerplate denial, effectively stating that the tires were not a problem. At a face to face meeting in Hangzhou, China, FTS pressed the Chinese importer to take responsibility for the recall, and replace the defective tires. <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2007-07-22/an-importers-worst-nightmare">Admitting they had removed the gum strips,</a> HZ was nevertheless noncommittal on replacing defective tires; and silent on which tires lacked gum strips. After issuing a recall on June 11, 2007, the NHTSA sent HZ a letter, effectively stating that their inability to afford a recall wasn’t acceptable. The Chinese importer then questioned the needed recall, reiterating that the tires weren’t defective. As a result, FTS now routinely tests tires, and is considering new contracts; that would obligate Chinese manufacturers to pay for future recalls. New contracts would also obligate the Chinese to settle disputes in Hong Kong, where the legal system is better adapted to American commercial interests. Subsequently, in the case of <em>McCulley v. General Motors</em>, HZ motioned for a protective order from the plaintiff’s discovery requests, which sought “tire specifications, formulas, and change orders.” HZ asserted “…that the information constituted trade secrets, and was irrelevant to pending disputes….” The motion was dismissed on May 6, 2008, when the trial judge characterized it as “an improper attempt to circumvent a judge of co-equal jurisdiction.” [2]</p>
<p>However, Chinese criminal negligence and penny pinching practices include the manufacture of food and medicine. Zhao Lianhai, a well-known activist who had participated in the June 1989 demonstrations in Tiananmen square, was jailed for 2 ½ years in 2010, for campaigning for compensation for victims of a 2008 contaminated baby milk scandal. It was found that the manufacturer had laced the milk formula with melamine, a toxic industrial chemical, to give it a high protein content reading; resulting in the deaths of 6 infants, one of whom was Zhao’s child. Melamine is usually used to make plastics, concrete, and fertilizers; but when added to food, it can cause kidney stones and kidney failure. 300,000 children were sickened by <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11724323">melamine tainted milk</a>; and in 2008, melamine was found in the products of one of every five dairy suppliers in China.</p>
<p>From defective building materials to defective consumer goods, to industrial waste chemicals in manufactured food, to dimethyl fumarate in furniture; to cornering and manipulating the world market in rare earths and industrial metals; to rapacious practices in space exploration; to keeping the value of the yuan artificially low; China is indeed out to impoverish and poison its neighbors, and seemingly itself.</p>
<p>Included in this laundry list of predatory practices, should be stealing American trade secrets, product designs, and top secret military intelligence; in the name of economic domination. Along the way, China has amassed a huge reserve of foreign capital, mostly in U.S. dollars, and they’ve used that reserve to buy U.S. treasury bonds, and strengthen their military. China now owns at least one-third of the $16.3 trillion U.S. debt, and at least 50% of America’s trade imbalance is from China. China has increased its defense budget “by double digits” every year for the past 20 years.[3] The Chinese Navy is now strong enough to challenge the U.S. Navy in the waters off the Chinese mainland, in Indonesian waters; off of Taiwan; and in the Yellow Sea, off Korea. China is arguably the world’s most dangerous nation. What is to be done?</p>
<p>A recent book, “Death by China: Confronting the Dragon—a global call to action,” by University of California economists Peter Navarro and Greg Autry, answers this question admirably. (Prentice-Hall 2011) The authors carefully break down the debilitating economic effects of trading with China, on their terms, and the health risks to those who buy Chinese consumer goods, in chapters titled, “Death by Chinese Poison,” “Death by Chinese Junk,” “Death to America’s Manufacturing Base,” and “Death by Currency Manipulation.”</p>
<p>They also mention that since 1999, China has systematically destroyed America’s manufacturing base, with the U.S. economy growing at a paltry 2.4% per year, on average; while simultaneously, China’s economy has grown, on average, at 10% annually. America’s rate of growth during the first decade of the 21<sup>st</sup> century was 25% below the 3.2% average growth rate of 1946-1999. [4]</p>
<p>In “Death to America’s Manufacturing Base,” Navarro and Autry explain how China has accomplished this destruction; by several unfair trade practices, which they call “Eight Weapons of Job Destruction.” These include export subsidies, currency manipulation, theft of American corporate product ideas/designs; lax health and safety regulations—which result in untold numbers of injuries and deaths of Chinese workers; restricting the export of necessary industrial materials, such as bauxite, fluorspar, silicone carbide, and zinc; jealously guarding their domination of the world rare earth market (China accounts for over 90% of world rare earth production); and high tariffs on imports. [5]</p>
<p>More specifically, the authors emphasize that “America imports almost $1 billion a day more than it exports to China every business day,” and then explain exactly how China’s currency manipulation has devastated American manufacturing. They then mention that as a candidate, President Obama repeatedly promised to pressure China on unfair trade practices. As President, Obama has not only refused to brand Chinese currency manipulation, he has “wrongly put politics and his administration’s short-term financing needs ahead of America’s prospects for long term economic recovery,” by encouraging China to keep buying U.S. Treasury bonds, without taking meaningful action on trade reform. They are also concerned that “President Obama seems totally incapable of connecting the increasingly obvious dots between America’s economic malaise and China’s Weapons of Job Destruction.” [6]</p>
<p>Equally important, the authors emphasize American corporate complicity with outrageous Chinese trade practices. They assert that our current problems with China began partly as a result of “ideological rigidity” on the part of <a href="http://www.ontheissues.org/">President George W. Bush</a>, who had serious misconceptions about China’s responses to American trade initiatives. Bush was convinced that making China a normal trade partner would mean “much lower trade barriers and enormous opportunities for U.S. exporters.”  However, Navarro and Autry further assert that much of America’s trade problem with China results from a lack of patriotism on the part of many American CEO’s, as evidenced by three waves of offshoring. When American CEO’s realized that production could be accomplished cheaply in China, they began to enter into draconian trade agreements with Chinese companies; that often require American companies to surrender control of the enterprise, and mandate forced technology transfers. These transfers have resulted in the “forced export of Western research and development facilities to China,…a gross violation of World Trade Organization rules,” which result in job creation in China, not America. Information contained in these unconscionable and self-destructive transfers is often conveyed to the Chinese government. Specific examples are given, such as GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt transferring GE’s “entire global avionics business” to China, so GE could participate in the development of a Chinese passenger jet. [7]</p>
<p>However, the best part of <em>Death by China </em>is the final chapter, “<em>Life with China: How to survive and prosper in the Dragon’s Century.</em>” It includes practical suggestions as to how America can combat and solve the problems listed above; and how America can reduce China’s cyber warfare, aggressively prosecute Chinese spies, and meet China’s challenge in space. The solutions they offer include: putting Chinese consumer goods back on the shelf, unless absolutely needed; demanding more specific ingredient labeling; tort reform that makes Chinese importers liable, and legislation that foils China’s “Weapons of Job Destruction.” <strong>Death by China</strong> is an easy read, for the layman wanting a straightforward explanation of American-Chinese trade problems; and for the legislator wanting a comprehensive guide to solving a large chunk of America’s unemployment problem.</p>
<p><strong>Notes:</strong></p>
<p>[1] <a href="http://1-www.ministryoftofu.com/2012/08/Another-tofu-dreg/tag/Yangmingtan-bridgeproject">www.ministryoftofu.com/2012/08/Another-tofu-dreg/tag/Yangmingtan-bridgeproject</a>.</p>
<p>[2] Opinion of Judge William Manfredi, Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Pa.; October 15, 2008; David Welch, &#8220;An Importer&#8217;s Worst Nightmare,&#8221; at <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2007-07-22/an-importers-worst-nightmare" target="_blank">www.businessweek.com/stories/<wbr>2007-07-22/an-importers-worst-<wbr>nightmare</wbr></wbr></a></p>
<p>[3] “Morning Bell,” Heritage Foundation Newsletter, 11/17/2011; Death by China: Confronting the Dragon, a global call to action; by Peter Navarro and Greg Autry (New York: Prentice-Hall 2011), 68.</p>
<p>[4] Death by China, 52.</p>
<p>[5] Ibid., 55-66.</p>
<p>[6] Ibid., 68, 73-74, 224.</p>
<p>[7] <a href="http://7-www.ontheissues.org/George_W_Bush_Foreign_Policy.htm">www.ontheissues.org/George_W_Bush_Foreign_Policy.htm</a>; Death by China, 81, 87.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/eric-burns/china-the-deadly-dragon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama Administration vs. Tombstone</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/eric-burns/obama-administration-vs-tombstone/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama-administration-vs-tombstone</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/eric-burns/obama-administration-vs-tombstone/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 04:06:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eric Burns]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tombstone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States Forest Service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[water]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=130363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Historic town faces uncertain future thanks to federal tyranny. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/040209-003..gif"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-130418" title="040209-003." src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/040209-003..gif" alt="" width="375" height="243" /></a>The latest chapter in the Obama administration’s war against state sovereignty and the state of Arizona pits the town of Tombstone against the United States Forest Service. Tombstone is suing the U.S. Forest Service over that agency&#8217;s refusal to allow city officials to repair damaged water transport infrastructure in the nearby Huachuca mountains. The Forest Service’s refusal to allow city workers access to damaged reservoirs, pipelines, and pumping stations, has cut Tombstone off from 50 to 80 percent of its water supply; leaving town residents and tourists dependent on two wells for water, and the town acutely vulnerable to fire. In addition, the water in one well is contaminated with arsenic.</p>
<p>Tombstone is a desert town of 1500 residents located in southern Arizona about 70 miles southeast of Tucson <a href="http://www.summitpost.org/miller-peak/153596">in the shadow of 9466 ft. Miller Peak</a>, which is in the Coronado National Forest. Americans associate Tombstone with the October 1881 gunfight at the O.K. Corral; and the resulting tourist trade has supported the town fairly well. Tombstone has survived the closing of local silver mines and a number of fires, thereby becoming known as “The town too tough to die.” Now, however, that proud title is being severely tested, by our own federal government.</p>
<p>Tombstone is supplied with water from 24 springs, located in the Huachuca Mountains on and around Miller Peak. However, nearly a year ago, from May through July 2011, <a href="http://www.kpho.com/story/14928238/monument-fire-near-sierra-vista-burns-40-homes">the Monument fire destroyed at least 18,580 acres</a> (640 acres equals one square mile) of forest and vegetation in the Huachuca Mountains, including the Miller Peak Wilderness area. Torrential rains followed soon after the fire, and the resulting mud slides pushed boulders “the size of Volkswagens” down on vital pumping stations, pipes, and other infrastructure. Some water pipes remain buried under twelve feet of mud, while others are without support, ominously hanging in the air, as the ground underneath has been washed away. In August 2011, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer declared a state of emergency in Tombstone, authorizing $50,000 in state funds to help cover engineering and repair costs for Tombstone’s water system. Since many of the pipelines are in areas designated as “wilderness,” the U.S. Forest Service won’t allow access for the mechanized equipment needed to fix the pipelines. Huge boulders, downed trees, and enormous piles of dirt and gravel must be moved, to build the structures that will protect the water lines against future natural disasters. However, these obstacles can’t be moved with the hand tools and horse teams that the Forest Service demands the city use.</p>
<p>As of January 2012, Forest Service officials had granted permits to repair infrastructure for only 2 of the 24 springs that supply Tombstone; and city manager George Barnes said “the city was told that the requests for the remaining permits would take a lot longer” to approve. Meanwhile, the state’s emergency funds are being wasted, as rented vehicles and equipment are sitting idle, and several pieces of heavy equipment have been vandalized, with the city required to pay for their repair. In addition, <a href="http://www.wildernesswatch.org/newsroom/guardian/Miller_Peak_Wilderness_Motorization.html">Tombstone has only a two day supply of water on hand</a>, making the town particularly vulnerable to fire.</p>
<p>The Obama administration and the U.S. Forest Service are clearly attempting to regulate the state of Arizona in violation of the Constitution and impose an arbitrary, draconian environmentalist agenda on the land use rights of Americans. In addition, gold prospectors on western federal lands are routinely harassed by over-zealous park rangers, and ranchers have been pressured to surrender access and water rights. The Forest Service cites <a href="http://www.wilderness.net/nwps/legis/nwps_act.cfm">The Wilderness Act of 1964</a>, which defines “Wilderness” as “an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean…an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation…with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable.”  Under “Prohibition of Certain Uses,” this act states, “[S]ubject to existing private rights, there shall be no…permanent road within any Wilderness area designated by this Act and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the Administration of the area…(including measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area) there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment…no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area.” However, the Forest Service has gone beyond the Wilderness Act and threatened Arizona’s sovereignty and Tombstone’s very existence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/eric-burns/obama-administration-vs-tombstone/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muslims Exempt from ObamaCare?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/eric-burns/muslims-exempt-from-obamacare/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=muslims-exempt-from-obamacare</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/eric-burns/muslims-exempt-from-obamacare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 04:16:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eric Burns]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exemption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Individual Mandate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=108489</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Separating rumor from reality. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/580861.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-108797" title="58086" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/580861.gif" alt="" width="375" height="250" /></a></p>
<p>Are American Muslims exempt from the requirement to purchase health insurance under the individual mandate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)?</p>
<p>There has been a lot of talk, and a number of Internet rumors, to the effect that Muslims are exempt from the PPACA’s individual mandate; that Muslims will get free health care under the PPACA, while the non-Muslim population of the United States will be required to purchase government administered health insurance. Therefore, according to rumor, non-Muslim Americans will be paying for American Muslims’ health care; in other words “dhimmitude.” There is even a rumor that the word “dhimmitude” –used to denote subservience to Islam by non-Muslims, is actually used—on p. 107 of H.R. 3590 of the PPACA bill.</p>
<p>The rumors of free health care for Muslims are based on Shariah law’s prohibition on insurance. Insurance violates the tenets against <em>riba</em> (interest); <em>al-maisir (</em>gambling) and <em>al-gharar</em> (uncertainty). Interest paid on insurance investments violates Shariah&#8217;s rules against usury.  Thus, under a strict interpretation of the Koran, Muslims are exempt from ObamaCare. However, the talk and the rumors are false—the word “dhimmitude” isn’t used anywhere in H.R. 3590, and depending on how PPACA rules are applied, there is at least an even chance that the scenario of American Muslims being exempt from the requirement to purchase insurance under the individual mandate won’t play out.</p>
<p>To be sure, the PPACA does grant a number of exemptions from the requirement to purchase the “minimum essential coverage.” (Whatever that is &#8212; Health and Human Service Secretary Kathleen Sebelius hasn’t yet defined it.) Prisoners, illegal aliens, and foreign nationals are exempt. In addition, there is a religious exemption. Under Subtitle F, Part I, Section 1501—the individual responsibility requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage—individuals must be “a member of a recognized religious sect” that doesn’t participate in Social Security. According to a January 2011 Heritage Foundation WebMemo, they must pay no Social Security taxes and receive none of the benefits, in accordance with Section 1402(g)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code. The religious exemption applies to any person who is a member of a “recognized religious sect or division” with “established tenets or teachings” that would forbid that person from accepting public or private insurance. Thus the Amish, who believe in taking care of their own elderly and don’t participate in Social Security, are exempt, as are Mennonites and Scientologists.</p>
<p>The monetary penalty for failure to purchase the “minimum essential coverage” is the larger of a flat dollar amount or a percentage of income between 1.0 and 2.5 percent. The penalty is phased in over a three year period, 2014-2016. The flat dollar amount is $95 in 2014, $325 in 2015, and $695 in 2016. Individuals whose earnings are below the Federal poverty level are eligible for a “hardship” exemption from the penalty, which is determined by HHS Secretary Sebelius. Indian tribes are also exempt from the penalty. In addition, there is an “affordability” exemption that applies to workers whose out-of-pocket costs exceed 8 percent of <a href="http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/exemptions.asp">their &#8220;household&#8221; income.</a></p>
<p>Where do American Muslims stand regarding the individual mandate’s religious exemption? Under a strict interpretation of the Koran, which forbids acceptance of public or private insurance, they are exempt under this loophole. However, since the great majority of American Muslims pay Social Security taxes and receive Social Security benefits, they don’t qualify for the religious exemption. Nevertheless, PPACA rules offer a situation where American Muslims could qualify for the religious exemption. If an individual is a member of a “health-sharing ministry,”—a religious non-profit organization in which members contribute money to cover the medical expenses of those in need—they are exempt from the requirement to purchase insurance.</p>
<p>Health sharing ministries exemplify the Muslim principle of <em>Takaful </em>&#8211;individuals cooperating and protecting one another against loss or damage. This writer knows of no such health sharing ministry organizations in the U.S. at present. However, as of December 2008, Risk Specialists Companies, Inc., a subsidiary of AIG Commercial Insurance, has offered Lexington <em>Takaful</em> Solutions SM <em>Takaful</em> homeowners insurance, which includes health insurance. This is part of a series of Shariah-compliant insurance products in the U.S. The <em>Takaful</em> homeowners policy is underwritten by RSC member company A.I. Risk Specialists Insurance, Inc., in conjunction with Lexington Insurance Company, and is available in <a href="http://www.aigcorporate.com/newsroom/index.html">all 50 states</a>. However, why was this provision—that members of health sharing ministries qualify for the religious exemption—put in H.R. 3590 in the first place? What happens when American Muslims, who participate in the Social Security system, join a “health-sharing ministry”?</p>
<p>The law is vague on this point. Presumably, they will be exempt from the requirement to purchase insurance under the religious exemption. Should this happen, the scenario of American Muslims being exempt from the requirement to purchase insurance, while the great majority of Americans labor under this requirement, will bring “dhimmitude” a big step closer to reality. In addition, what if the PPACA is amended in some way to exempt those who purchase private <em>Takaful</em> health insurance? The health-sharing ministry loophole is one reason, among many, why ObamaCare is unacceptable for Americans and must be removed from H.R. 3590.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/eric-burns/muslims-exempt-from-obamacare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>58</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 505/529 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 07:12:19 by W3 Total Cache -->