Well, 10 people weighed in, and many of them did a whole "the cultural, political and spirtual ties" argument to justify supporting the alliance, but the only real cold analysis of the alliance came, interestingly enough, from two voices who thought such an alliance is not worth its trouble. First there is Michael Sheuer:

Israel is not only an unnecessary and self-made liability for the United States, it is an untreated and spreading cancer on our domestic politics, foreign policy, and national security.  America has no genuine national security interests at stake in either Israel or Palestine; if they both disappeared tomorrow the welfare of Americans and the security of their country would not be impacted a lick. The Arab-Israeli religious war is a war that properly belongs solely to Israelis and Arabs; let them fight each other to the death with no interference in favor of either side from the United States. The continued, automatic, and idiotic identification of U.S. national interests as identical with Israel's made by our bipartisan political elite, the media, and those U.S. citizens who prefer Israeli to American security is only earning Americans deeper hatred and more wars with Muslims. There is no question that Israel has every right in the world to militarily defend itself to whatever extent it deems necessary, but neither Israel, the United States, nor any other nation has a "right" to exist. Nation-states survive if they can vanquish their enemies. The democratically elected Israeli govermment is right to try to vanquish Hamas; and the democratically elected Hamas regime has every right to try do the same to Israel. The point to keep squarely in view is that it does not matter to America's security who emerges the winner. 

And the other opinion comes from the previous principal officer in the US military intelligence relationship with Israel, and he had this to say:

It is not possible to "set aside the emotional and religious anchors of the US-Israel alliance." Those are the principal bases of the alliance. Israel’s welfare is a self assigned interest of the United States. That does not make that interest less real, but it renders the interest a "duty" of a spiritual and moral nature rather than the kind of thing that a British PM meant in the 19th century when he supposedly said that "countries do not have friends or enemies. They have interests." That kind of interest confers an advantage militarily, economically, geographically or in some other material way. The US interest in Israel’s welfare does none of those things and it costs a lot of money. The Israelis have been careful to separate "things" into neat groupings. They have operated on the basis that their things are their things and US things are their things. I was the principal officer in the US military intelligence relationship with Israel for many years. That was how the relationship worked. It was not a truly two-sided arrangement. The products of Israeli intelligence are sometimes valuable but often do not reach the standard of the legend concerning them. The reverse is not true. US military operations have not been benefited by the relationship with Israel. Israel does not want to be a military client of the United States. Our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been based in or logistically supported from Israel. Israel has never functioned as an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" for the United States and it does not wish to do so. Aside from providing useful liberty ports for the Sixth Fleet’s sailors and marines, and an occasional venue for small military maneuvers, it is hard to see what Israel does for the US in the military field that is worth the trouble that the relationship causes diplomatically with the surrounding states. Israel does not contribute to the well being of the US economy. In fact, in many high tech fields Israeli companies are competitors of American companies. I will not dwell excessively on the USS Liberty and Pollard incidents. Those events speak for themselves and most Americans have long ago forgiven the offenses and chosen to forget.

No, in the end, the US/Israel alliance is an affair of the heart. Such affairs are not to be analyzed too closely on the basis of mere material interests.

What do you think?

What is needed is a rational and concerted effort to broker a peace deal which maximizes justice, and which creates new realities on the ground that will help to sustain the peace once it is in place. And so, if you get a call, in the middle of the night, from President Obama, informing you that you have just been appointed U.S. Middle East Envoy; what would you do to bring peace to the Middle East? Here are a few suggestions. Perhaps you have something to add.

Gaza: Negotiate a ceasefire, and then a truce, between Israel and Hamas, on the basis of an Israeli pullout, accompanied by a cessation of missile and mortal fire by Hamas, to be monitored by U.N. observers. Suggest to Hamas to give up their military ambitions in exchange for: an easing of border restrictions, a lifting of an economic blockade, and an opportunity to partner with Fattah to provide a democratic government for the Palestinian people. If Hamas agrees, launch an international investment program for Gaza, with the purpose of: creating jobs, building infrastructure, growing the economy, and weakening the hold of extremist thinking. Along with the hope that comes from economic growth, launch a series of programs to sustain the hope: a more balanced and modern approach to education, a student exchange, a cultural exchange, an empowerment of women, an expanded Peace Corps presence, a media campaign, international conferences, etc.

West Bank: Continue to train Palestinian soldiers, so as to enable the duly elected government to defend itself from outside threats, including the threats posed by Hamas and other extremist factions. Encourage Fattah to reach a workable agreement with Hamas so that the two could work together to negotiate a comprehensive peace deal with Israel for the creation of a Palestinian state, along the lines of the understandings that have been reached between President Abbas and Foreign Minister Livny, and reminiscent of the deal offered by President Clinton and Prime Minister Ehud Barack to President Arafat in the year 2000. Continue to develop the four industrial zones in the West Bank, and launch an international effort to invest in good paying jobs, jobs which grow the economy, jobs which protect the environment, and jobs which help to neutralize extremist thinking. Work to inspire Palestinians with a Vision of Hope, and support that economic effort with Public Diplomacy Programs which are specifically designed to prop the vision up and to carry it forward. Use an Ideology of Common Sense to speak to Palestinians with common sense and with a sense of personal dignity.

Israel: Encourage Israel to embrace and enhance the possibility of peace, and to take positive action in that regard by: negotiating a truce with Hamas, allowing Hamas to partner with Fattah for the sake of democratic rule, helping Hamas to build infrastructure and to grow Gaza’s economy, and helping Fattah to do the same in the West Bank. Encourage Israel to negotiate a final status agreement, one that protects Israel’s security, but one that also allows Palestinians to achieve at least most of their political aspirations. To the extent possible, convince Israel to become actively involved in orchestrating the economic growth of the new fledgling state so that the ordinary Palestinian citizen is finally given a place at the table, a stake in his or her future.

Syria: Encourage Syria to negotiate peace with Israel on the basis of an Israeli pullout from the Golan Heights, along with a U.N. monitored military free zone in that area. Structure a series of economic and diplomatic incentives to lure Syria away from Iranian control, and to cause Syria to stop its support of terrorist organizations, and to stop interfering with internal Lebanese affairs.

Lebanon: Continue to bolster Lebanon’s democratically elected government. Try to steer Hezbollah away from military confrontation, in favor of a political role as part of a duly elected government. Use a Vision of Hope to empower the Lebanese people to embrace the possibility of peace among themselves, and with Israel.

Egypt: Encourage the international community to continue to invest to grow Egypt’s economy and to create good paying jobs. Support Egypt’s efforts to mediate regional disputes. Empower the man on the street with the notion that his life could get better, and use that hope to weaken the hold of extremist thinking. Push for warmer relations between Israel and Egypt on the basis of peace in Palestine, and on Israel’s efforts to help orchestrate an economic revitalization of the Middle East with her technological know-how and her economic drive.

Saudi Arabia: Give Saudi Arabia credit for proposing a comprehensive peace deal with Israel. Encourage Saudi Arabia to continue mustering Arab support in this regard. Encourage Saudi Arabia, in light of lower oil prices, and worldwide green demand, to diversify its investment portfolio by investing in green technology in Palestine, and throughout the Middle East. Use oil profits to create green profits, and use these profits to create even more good paying green jobs, jobs which will grow the economies, jobs which will protect the environment, and jobs which will weaken the strangle hold of extremist thinking. Use a growing economy, and the prospects for Middle East peace, to shift the thinking on the street from an extremist ideology to an ideology of common sense. Use the momentum of change to gear the educational system to a more modern and balanced approach, and to gear religious practice to be more in keeping with the more peaceful aspects of Islam.

Iran: Try to convince Iran that its nuclear ambitions are not in keeping with Iran’s best interests long term. Make the point that a nuclear Iran will be in the crosshairs of many a potent foe, and that the least bit of miscalculation could spell a doomsday scenario. Use diplomacy and economic incentives to convince Iran to give up its nuclear aspirations. As such, Iran could begin to play a vital role in pushing a comprehensive peace process forward, based on mutually shared economic and political interests. Iran could also cooperate by having Hezbollah and Hamas play political, as opposed to military roles. Iran would also be able to quell dissatisfaction from within by delivering to its people the promise of a better day.

With this much on your plate, you may think twice about taking the job. But don’t you agree that a chess game of this sort is what is called for, given current realities on the ground? Don’t we have to table at least some of the emotions and passions, for there to be even the slightest chance for peace? And do we have any choice but to try, even against all odds?

For more information, please visit our website www.sellingavisionofhope.org

You may have even thought you were watching an episode of Saturday Night Live before reality kicked in and that yes, you had just seen breaking news on TV. And that yes, Bush, at 62, still has catlike reflexes and managed to avoid both shoes. The conference was held in Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al Maliki’s office to mark the signing of a security agreement.

Several news reports explained that in Arab culture, throwing shoes is a grave show of disrespect. “This is the farewell kiss, you dog,” Al Zeidi reportedly yelled at Bush in Arabic. In the Twittersphere, that sentiment may be shared by an even greater number – with thousands of ‘tweets’ expressing their desires to throw their very shoes – and other inanimate objects – at the outgoing 43rd US president.

David Hughes, from Glasgow, Scotland, said simply:

“If I had a shoe, I would throw it at Bush too.”

Rami Ismail, from the Netherlands, said:

“An Iraqi decided to throw a shoe at Bush during a conference. I can only imagine how sad fundamentalists are that the shoe wasn't a grenade.”

Several others commented on Bush’s reflexes and his shrugging the incident off, including Australian Kyle Buttress, who said:

“Bush had some good ducking and weaving action there during the Shoe toss… Good to see he didn't turn his back or anything.”

Erik Rasmussen, in Spain, said:

“This video of Bush & the shoe was the lead story on the news in Spain. Very telling, really, of his “accomplishments”. Needed a bloody nose.”

The Blogosphere is sure to come up with more reactions with each passing hour, but Englishman Georgie Hammerton was one of the quick ones to blog about the incident on My Bloggy Wog.

“I know this isn’t funny.. but, well it is isn’t it?

“On a side note; is this what passes for journalism in the US!? *shudder*. BBC, I salute you!”

Malaysian blogger Shamsul Yunos noted how the media covered the incident.

“If you watch CNN or BBC, they have put a fantastic spin on the story. It goes something like this: ‘Sure the image of someone throwing a shoe at Bush is bad but the fact that the man lived to tell the tale shows just how free Iraq is right now.’

“Great.

“The BBC interviewed people on the ground and the few Iraqis they met agreed with the shoe thrower in wanting Bush and the Americans out of their country.

“Apparently the white house doesn't think the image will seriously damage Bush's legacy.

“So what exactly is his legacy? Leaving a lot of mess behind? I'm sure that legacy is only being reinforced by the shoe throwing incident.”

Yunos was one of the few bloggers I came across that noted that Al Zeidi, the now well known shoe-attacker, had covered events in Sadr City extensively.

“(He) had lost several relatives in the conflict. He was also recently kidnapped and tortured in a three-day ordeal.”

Chicago-based Indian blogger Saqib Salman Shafi in his blog SaqibSaab questioned what Al Zeidi was really trying to accomplish.

“Now, based on the fact that he was using shoes, one may ask what exactly was he trying to accomplish? Best case scenario, Bush gets a black eye or a scoffed up nose. But you know what, I feel the disgruntled journalist, along with millions across the globe, could care less at the effectiveness of his weapons of choice. It was the statement that spoke loudest. Upset with the leader of the super powerful nation of the world? Take off your jutha(shoe) and chuck it at him. I can see the internet jokes of “epic shoe maneuver,” already.

“And check out how quickly he launches the first one and then removes his other shoe (reloads) and fires away. Maybe he had them untied and ready for deployment? Or rather, perhaps he wore slip-ons or loafers that day.”

Egyptian blogger, Zeinobia, was quite sorry Al Zeidi missed Bush’s head.

“This is the news of the day , sorry the news of the week or may be even the month and the end of the year.

“Bush was having a press conference today in his surprise visit to Baghdad with Al Maliki when Muntader Al-Zeidi , a reporter threw his shoes at him. Unfortunately he missed him :(”

She continued to blog about Al Zeidi, being a correspondent for Al Baghdadia Television, an Iraqi-owned station based in Cairo, Egypt, Zeinobia said she feared for his life.

“He has entered the history, already I wish that someone tells his news now in Baghdad because I fear on his life.

“Idiot Bush of course tried made fun from the incident and said these words : All I can report is a size 10.”

And in the Philippines, someone was up late enough - or way too early - to blog about it almost immediately as it broke. Dreamer4U asked why there was so much hatred in the hearts of Iraqis for Americans and other Westerners.

“It is for sure I thought an embarrassing time for America and Iraq, now I knew how mad is the Iraqi to the American, if you know why let me know here.

“Anyway the shoes of the Iraqi reporter is size 10, Bush should be glad it didn't hit him or else he would be injured before going home in the states. Now I know “W” is good on something, he could have been a good military guy, sadly he was a very ineffective President though.

“Why is it that there are hatred in the heart of the Islam/Iraqi for the American or western people?”

Bush arrived today in Baghdad on a surprise visit — his last to Iraq as commander-in-chief — to celebrate the agreement, thank U.S. troops and meet with Iraqi leaders.

It was Bush’s fourth visit to a nation transformed by the U.S.-led war he started in 2003. It follows three weeks after Iraq’s parliament approved an accord with the U.S. that provides for the withdrawal of American troops by the end of 2011.

Some are appallingly racist 

and some are positive and self-critical at the same time:

American Obama

Check them all out here. 

Bloggers from around the world chime in to catch up on the action after Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich and his chief of staff John Harris were arrested and charged by the FBI of corruption in the selection of Obama's successor for the empty Senate seat.

From Egypt, Zeinobia, who writes at Egyptian Chronicles, notes:

of course this political scandal is the talk of the media in the States now. It is a political corruption scandal beside of course the attractive Obama factor.

The blogger also reminds us of another scandal earlier in the year, concerning another Democrat Governor:

Of course this is the second big major Governor scandal in 2008 in America after the Spitzer scandal

Zeinobia draws parallels between governors in the US and in her own country, saying:

Why am I interested in all this ?? Well because it is good to see governors getting arrested while they are still in their position !! It is good see that the Governors are well monitored !!??

I spoke before about our governors, I do not want to accuse most of them but I will be modest and say some of them profited from their position in a way or another.

Will the day come in Egypt and we will find that the Administrative control authority presented enough evidence to General prosecutor to issue a warrant against Governor “X” for taking bribes from Company “Y” to pass their pollutant project or from businessman “Z” to give him the permission on building in an agricultural land !!??

Most if not all our Governors conspired and will continue to conspire with the NDP [ruling party in Egypt - National Democratic Party] in the Parliamentary elections. Well they are' appointed by the head of the NDP ,so they know the rules of the game. If they go along with the orders ,they won’t continue in their position.

Writing at Dutch blog PoliGazette, Jason says this latest scandal is “a stunning blow to Democratic Party claims to represent a reversal of years of Republican corruption.” He further reminds us:

This event serves also to highlight Illinois’ famously corrupt Democratic Party political machine, where personal favors are traded for political action in scenes reminiscent Tamany Hall. During the 2006 and 2008 elections, Democrats reveled in pointing fingers at Republican corruption from Mississippi to California to Alaska. But with Blagojevich coming after the William Jefferson bibery scandal in Louisiana, Democrats may nee to tend to their own garden.

Andrea Mann, writing for England for Obama, says the whole scandal reminds her of a Chicago gangster movie. She further adds:

According to the New York Times, Barack Obama “placed the call” which led to Rod Blagojevich’s downfall. And then he turned around in his swivel chair, and stubbed out his cigarette.

Actually, Barack’s call only indirectly led to it. And he made it three months before Blagojevich’s “downfall”. But, y’know, I have a Chicago gangster movie to script here.

Richard Silverstein, a Jewish blogger who blogs at Tikum Olam, notes:

The brazenness of his corruption is simply staggering.  Most corrupt politicians attempt to devise a slick scheme to conceal their venality.  But Blagojevich was hardly hiding anything.  The senate seat was for sale to the highest bidder, plain and simple:

“I’ve got this thing,” Mr. Blagojevich said on one recording, according to the affidavit, “and it’s f***ing golden. And I’m just not giving it up for f***ing nothing. I’m not going to do it. And I can always use it. I can parachute me there.”

Crian P, at A Political Glimpse from Ireland exclaims “Holy Cow” at the news and further adds:

Governors have been indicted before, but it’s pretty amazing to see one hauled out of his house before dawn in handcuffs. But if the charges are true, it was warranted. He needed to be taken down before he could make the appointment.

The indictment and the statements so far are very carefully worded. They do not impute any blame to the President-Elect Of The United States–but they don’t rule out that He or His aides had any knowledge of the plot, either. That wording leaves open the possibility that Blagojevich might point to Obama to get a deal. But I suspect this prosecutor would have to have some seriously good evidence beyond just the governor’s word before he would proceed against anyone in the the President-Elect Of The United States’ camp.

From what I have seen so far, the President-Elect Of The United States came out of the slimy Illinois machine with remarkably little clinging to Him. If this latest chapter in the dismal history of the Illinois’ chief executive doesn’t seriously damage Him, it would be more confirmation of His remarkable political skills.

Another day, and yet another scandal in Obama's long road to the White House.

The Governor has been arrested along his Chief of Staff , of course this political scandal is the talk of the media in the States now. It is a political corruption scandal beside of course the attractive Obama factor.

Of course this is the second big major Governor scandal in 2008 in America after the Spitzer scandal “Strangely Spitzer for the first time came out publicly and is writing now a financial column in Slate Magazine” .

Why am I interested in all this ?? Well because it is good to see governors getting arrested while they are still in their position !! It is good see that the Governors are well monitored !!??

I spoke before about our governors, I do not want to accuse most of them but I will be modest and say some of them profited from their position in a way or another.

Will the day come in Egypt and we will find that the Administrative control authority presented enough evidence to General prosecutor to issue a warrant against Governor “X” for taking bribes from Company “Y” to pass their pollutant project or from businessman “Z” to give him the permission on building in an agricultural land !!??

Most if not all our Governors conspired and will continue to conspire with the NDP in the Parliamentary elections. Well they are' appointed by the head of the NDP ,so they know the rules of the game. If they go along with the orders ,they won’t continue in their position.

I know that this day will come but I do not know when , I just hope it will be very soon “I am an optimistic person”

Anyhow Obama knows that he is more popular than Bush in the Islamic world and thus he will use this popularity to enhance America’s damaged image. Already he should know that it is not only Bush that damaged America’s image in the Islamic world “surely he had the biggest share” ,it is an old accumulating thing from decades of unconditional support to Israel and conditional support to dictators in the region. 

Now back to the main theme or rather question in the article “Where shall Obama say his expected speech ?? “ The search for an Islamic Capital that is not danger on his security and is still influential  can be considered a dilemma.

To tell you the truth I was waiting to read the name of our capital Cairo in the report ,otherwise I would feel very sad , I feel that we are no longer important in the region. Still Cairo is Cairo ,the Jewel of Islam and the perfect secure capital for Obama.You got one of the biggest population in the Arab Islamic world.This made me happy because we are still considered important despite the fact Mubarak made us lose our position in the region. Ironically there is one obstacle in choosing Cairo that is also Mubarak and his dictatorship. Obama can neglect the fact that Mubarak is a dictator and choose Cairo as place for his message to the Islamic world but this send a wrong message in the world : He is still supporting the dictators of the Arab Islamic world. I think this is from the earliest indicator that Obama won’t be Mubarak friendly.

Well it is not only Egypt that is ruled by a dictator ,most of the Islamic world is ruled by dictators whether are with or against The U.S.

Some people especially the Nationalists will not welcome Obama just like they did not welcome Nixon, I respect their view and totally understand it but I look from the way that we lost a lot from our position as a leading influential country in the region. I do not know how to explain , it is not about supporting Obama but about knowing your country is still considered an important player in the region.Lately I feel that we are so weak thanks to Mubarak. Mubarak took Egypt and it was leading Country from Sadat and he managed to alienate us more than Sadat and the time of the Arab boycott.  It is not about being a puppet in the hands of U.S this time ,it is about delivering a message to the Islamic world. Of course because we are ally we can be considered as biased.

Seriously it is a dilemma ,you need an influential Islamic democratic country that is widely respected by the world and the Islamic world and not considered a puppet in the hands of the Americans to send from it a message to the Islamic world

Of course now in my mind I believe that Obama can say his speech in Qatar as the new face of change in the Arab Islamic Gulf world !! Qatar our little new rival but again it does not fit the profile , it is a puppet in the end.

Anyhow if Obama wants to say a speech in Cairo to addressing the Islamic world in Peace ,then he will be mostly welcomed.

Here's what Abbas wrote:

* This post also appears on Global Voices Online.

• Yahoo ! News : Clearance Lost,Muslim Scientist return home
Technorati Tags: Egypt,America,Puttsburgh,El-Ganayni,Nuclear,scientists,9/11,democracy,education,science,geek,Bettis Atomic power,Mideast,Middle East

According to Egyptian blogger Hossam el-Hamalawy dealers in the Mediterranean town of Marsa Martrouh are peddling an Obama brand hashish:

A new brand of (presumably black Moroccan) hashish has appeared in the Egyptian town of Marsa Matrouh, called “Obama”!
I recall in in 2003, a quite popular brand of hash that appeared in Cairo was named “Saddam” coz it was “stronger than chemical weapons.”

The news first hit the online world via Twitter, when award-winning blogger Wael Abbas announced it, saying (Ar):

In English, the Tweet says:

Urgent - a new type of hashish appears in Marsa Matrouh - Obama

Elijah Zarwan, also based in Egypt, further comments:

By the hash-o-meter, Barack Obama may be the most popular foreign leader in Egypt since Saddam Hussein.