As most of you probably know by now, Democratic Representative from New York, Eric Massa, has resigned his post, which he has held only since 2009.

The official House of Representatives website of the former congressman resolves into one, where Office of the Clerk informs that:

“Office of the Twenty-Ninth Congressional District of New York
Formerly the Office of Representative Eric J. J. Massa

The Washington, D.C. office and the district of the Honorable Eric J. J. Massa will continue to serve the people of the Twenty-Ninth Congressional District of New York under the supervision of the Clerk of the House of Representatives. Representative Massa resigned on March 8, 2010. The vacancy became effective March 9, 2010.”

And what was the reason for the resignation? That’s all very unclear at this point.

The Atlantic’s Josh Green reports that Massa was “notorious for making unwanted advances toward subordinates” during his 20-year Naval career.

Massa, who is married and has four children, was never formally accused of inappropriate behavior. Asked by CNN’s Larry King if he is gay, he declined to answer the question and deemed it offensive.

The day before Massa told Fox News’ Glenn Beck that he had groped one of his staffers, though he said it had been non-sexual. He had previously said he told a male aide he should be “frakking” him while at a wedding.

Reports surfaced earlier in the day that Massa had been under investigation for allegedly groping multiple male staffers and behaving inappropriately with interns.

Eric Massa announced his resignation last week after it came to light that the House ethics committee was investigating him on sexual harassment charges. Massa said he had been pushed out because of his opposition to the health care reform bill, a charge the White House and top Democrats deemed ridiculous.

Massa has cited his battle with cancer as the primary reason he is leaving office.

As the Ides of March approach, we might all reflect on the age-old question: To grope, or not to grope?

Technorati Tags: cancer, congress, democrats, Eric Massa, groping, health care bill, resignation

There is little doubt that without finally solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict we can probably forget about ending all kinds of jihads, anti-western and anti-American conflicts and movements and can comfortably continue to wage Bush’s “war on terror” for the foreseeable future.

Here is a fragment of one of Washington Post’s Tuesday editorials:” THE OBAMA administration appears near to a diplomatic achievement it expected long ago: the relaunch of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. It will be a modest start – not a big conference or a convocation to Camp David but “proximity talks,” in which envoy George J. Mitchell will shuttle between the two camps. This is, in one sense, a step backward for Israeli-Palestinian relations, since the two sides have been talking directly to each other, off and on, since 1991. But Mr. Mitchell says he hopes his brokering will quickly lead to direct talks, and the administration believes that even this stunted process will be better than none at all.”

At the same time, Vice President Biden strongly criticized Israel on Tuesday for approving construction of 1,600 new housing units in the eastern part of Jerusalem, a decision announced a day after Israeli leaders and the Palestinians agreed to U.S.-mediated, indirect peace negotiations.

This is not the first time Israel has been criticized for building and expanding Jewish settlements on occupied Arab land. Both the U.N. Security Council and the General Assembly have passed well over 100 resolutions concerning Israel. Practically all of them went unheeded and any and all attempts to sanction Israel have been blocked by the United States. Those are facts and not commentary.

As a matter of fact, between 1967 and 2000, Iraq was the subject of 69 U.N. Security Council resolutions. By comparison, Israel, our closest “ally” in the Middle East, has been the subject of 138 resolutions. Not surprisingly, most of those resolutions call upon Israel to comply with basic principles of international law embodied by the UN Charter. Many of them condemn actions taken by Israel and call upon Israel on more than one occasion to comply with previous resolutions that Israel ignored and continues to ignore to this day.

This is not to say that the Palestinian side is totally blameless in this quagmire, but according to international law, the occupying power must assure the safety and well being of the population living under its occupation. Through Resolution No. 237, the U.N. Security Council called upon Israel to “ensure the safety, welfare and security of the inhabitants, facilitate the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas since the outbreak of the hostilities and recommends the scrupulous respect of the humanitarian principles contained in the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.” In subsequent resolutions, the Security Council deplored Israel for the delay in its implementation of Resolution 237. Yet, Israel continued to defy the world community, including the United States. The Security Council, in the face of Israel’s defiance, passed no less than five subsequent resolutions demanding that Israel comply but to this day the defiance continues.

This appears to be the crux of the matter. The whole issue does not seem to be just the fact of Israel existing as such, but the continuing occupation of the West Bank, the whole road, security and utility infrastructure built and maintained mostly to serve and secure the Jewish settlements. As of November 2009, approximately 400,000 Israelis lived in the 168 officially recognized settlements in the West Bank, and 280,000 Israelis lived in East Jerusalem. Every time we open a paper, still another settlement is about to be enlarged, or a new one built.

The latest problems and latest clashes have erupted in Hebron, after Israel’s decision to add Hebron’s Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem to Israel’s list of national heritage sites.

The sites are holy to both Jews and Muslims.

To make a long story short: For the benefit of Israel, the Palestinians and indeed the entire world, time is running short on actually coming to the negotiating table in earnest, to be ready to compromise, if needed – and lots of that, in addition to an open mind and a lot more good will be necessary – and finally agree on a workable framework, which will lead to a long-overdue Israeli-Palestinian agreement. We can only hope that this day will actually come soon, because the simmering conflict has already spread its tentacles worldwide and nobody, but nobody in his right mind needs, or wants still another war.

Technorati Tags: Biden, israel, Jewish settlements, Mitchell, negotiations, occupation, palestinians, peace, talks

The present British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said it was right to go to war, also saying that the United States dismissed warnings of chaos and violence once Saddam Hussein was toppled.  Brown testified for over four hours before a public inquiry panel about Britain’s role in the conflict and its aftermath.

Defending his role in the conflict, but at the same time cautious not to inflame tensions over the unpopular war ahead of a looming national election campaign, Brown said joining the 2003 U.S.-led invasion was a tough call.

“We have got to recognize that war may be necessary, but it is also tragic in the effect it has on people’s lives,” said Brown, who voted – like most British lawmakers – to approve Britain’s role in the war.

“These were difficult decisions. I believe they were the right decisions for the right reasons,” he said.

But he was critical of U.S. planning, saying American officials failed to heed warnings about the need for clarity on how to protect and govern Iraq in the aftermath of the invasion.

Unlike Tony Blair, who defiantly stood by the invasion and argued Saddam was a threat to the entire world; Brown said he believed the war was justified because Baghdad had breached international rules in failing to abide by U.N. resolutions.

If you do some searching, you will find that a number of countries, including the main U.S. ally in the Middle East have also failed to abide by a whole slew of U.N. resolutions. Nevertheless, the “coalition” has not invaded those countries.

Brown insisted that Iraq had posed the first serious test to the post-Cold War world, claiming that any failure to depose the Iraqi leader would have emboldened other dictators and stirred global tensions.

Brown also sought to distance himself from President George W. Bush, suggesting their relations were “amicable” and criticizing the doctrine of some members of Bush’s administration.

“I never subscribed to what you might call the neo-conservative proposition that somehow, at the barrel of a gun, overnight, liberty or democracy could be conjured up,” Brown told the panel.

Hard to believe that either Brown, or Blair could actually believe in the crud they were spewing. It was without a doubt still another case of justifying their crimes and of covering their well-fed asses.

Technorati Tags: Britain, defend, Gordon Brown, Iraq invasion, Tony Blair

Bush’s top aide Karl Rove just wrote a memoir, entitled Courage and Consequence, in which he claims that Bush 43 did not mislead the nation about weapons of mass destruction as a way to “lie us” into a war.

Crap! Remember the memoirs by other neocons, such as Douglas Feith, who has denied any responsibility in the Abu Ghraib prison-abuse scandal and really any responsibility for anything altogether?

While defending the Bush administration’s handling of Iraq, Rove concedes that the failure to find weapons of mass destruction damaged the administration’s credibility. And he blames himself for failing to set the record straight.

Yes, Karl, please DO blame somebody for not finding stacks and warehouses full of WMDs. You might as well blame yourself too for a very different than expected – by people like you – Iraqi reception of our invading troops. After all, some neocons claimed that the Iraqi people would line the streets and welcome us with flowers and tears in their eyes.

“When the pattern of the Democratic attacks became apparent in July 2003, we should have countered in a forceful and overwhelming way,” wrote Rove. “We should have seen this for what it was: a poison-tipped dagger aimed at the heart of the Bush presidency.”

Rove also comes up with all kinds of lame excuses for the administration’s abject failure after Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans and other parts of the Gulf coast.

We’ll keep this short and succint: Don’t waste your money buying another neocon memoir.

Technorati Tags: bush, Iraq War, justifying, Karl Rove, Katrina, memoir

Republicans and Democrats attending the a Bipartisan Meeting on Health Reform meeting at the Blair House across from the White House have very different definitions of the event.

President Obama urged lawmakers on both sides to focus on areas of agreement. An email from the so-called GOP Action Team in turn says in part: “After pledging to listen to Republican ideas at this Thursday’s photo op- er, “bipartisan health care summit,” President Obama has decided to stick with the Senate Democrats’ health care legislation, a bill that Americans have already rejected as a massive restructuring of our economy that is a short walk down the road to government run health care. He’s rejected alternative methods of tackling our health insurance crisis before hearing them. He’s betrayed the American people’s trust.”

Republicans and Democrats admit that they remain far apart on key provisions advocated by each side. There were also major unresolved divisions within the Democratic Party itself, whose leaders were looking beyond a meeting they expected to amount to little more than political theater and focusing on a final round of negotiations within the party.

The White House said discussions at the meeting would revolve around four main themes: controlling costs, reforming insurance coverage, reducing the federal deficit and expanding coverage.

Senator Lamar Alexander, speaking for the Republican side, said, “We want you to succeed, because if you succeed, our country succeeds.” But Alexander also said Republicans want to “change the direction” that Obama is pursuing, get rid of the bills already passed by the House and Senate and aim for less ambitious reforms.

Obama has said that his latest proposal, aimed at salvaging the stalled health-care legislation, would cover 31 million Americans who currently lack insurance and would cost about $950 billion over 10 years. It would require people to buy health-care insurance and would penalize large employers who do not offer it.

Republicans reject mandating the purchase of insurance and have advanced an alternative that would cover 3 million people at a cost of $61 billion.

What will the meeting actually achieve is anybody’s guess.

In the meantime, our health care and health insurance system needs reforming quite urgently. Are the GOPistas and the tea baggers listening?!

Technorati Tags: democrats, Health, obama, republicans, summit, white house