From RedState.com
Pentagon humor [AcademicElephant]
In his opening remarks at today's Townhall meeting at the Pentagon, Peter Pace asked those in the audience who were transferring or retiring this summer to raise their hands. He turned around to scan the 360-degree crowd. Secretary Rumsfeld, who was sitting behind him, said, "Did you want to see if my hand's up?"
Taliban insurgents and their al-Qaeda allies, once thought defeated in Afghanistan, are regaining strength as the U.S. prepares to cede military control of the war on terror's initial battleground to NATO forces. ``We have lost a lot of the ground that we may have gained in the country, especially in the South,'' Afghanistan's ambassador to the U.S., Said Jawad, said in an interview. The fact that U.S. military resources have been ``diverted'' to the war in Iraq ``is of course hurting Afghanistan,'' he said.
Which is why the Brits and Canadians are there, since we trust them to do the same job we did.
The escalating violence is reviving questions about President George W. Bush's decision to make Iraq the central front in the war on terrorism. Instability in Afghanistan could allow Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network to regroup there, analysts said.
``Afghanistan is a wild, tribal place in which the various armed actors take advantage of any decrease in pressure,'' said W. Patrick Lang, former chief Middle East analyst at the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency. ``We pulled troops out and put them in Iraq and that took pressure off. I don't think the U.S. effort there backsliding should come as any surprise.''
Bush administration officials and military commanders say they're optimistic that conditions in Afghanistan will improve. ``We should take stock of the tremendous progress that Afghanistan and the international community have made to date and apply that same commitment to the difficulties that lie ahead,'' Army Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, head of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, said in a May 10 Pentagon briefing.
Some experts on defense policy and the region say that confidence is misplaced. ``They absolutely miscalculated from the beginning,'' said Barney Rubin, director of New York University's Center on International Cooperation. ``We don't have enough forces where they should'' be, and ``that has absolutely led to insurgency,'' said Rubin, who visited Afghanistan last month.
The lack of forces didn't lead to insurgency, the insurgency has been there all along. We've rotated forces, and the new forces will take some time to get things back into the box.
Nazif Shahrani, a professor of Central Asian and Middle East Studies at Indiana University at Bloomington who focuses on Afghanistan, said, ``If we were serious about the war on terror we should have focused our efforts on fighting a more effective war on the Pakistani side of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.''
``Instead,'' he added, ``we focused on Iraq and that gave the Taliban and al-Qaeda time to regroup and find money and weapons.''
There have been at least five suicide bombings in Afghanistan since May 8 and more than 20 in the past two months, the U.S.-funded Voice of America reported on its Web site, citing officials it didn't identify. ``There wasn't the drop-off'' in attacks ``we normally see in the winter months,'' said Chris Riley, a NATO spokesman. ``We're not characterizing it as a resurgence, but there is a level of activity in the south and east.''
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has begun assuming security operations in southern Afghanistan, a process due to be completed in July, Riley said. The multinational force will increase its troop strength to about 21,000 from 9,000 and will assume responsibility for the entire country, probably by the end of the year, he said. The U.S. plans to withdraw 6,500 of its 23,000 troops now in the country because NATO and Afghan security forces are assuming a bigger role. The Afghan National Army has 34,000 soldiers and the police have about 30,000 officers.
Some Afghan officials are concerned NATO forces won't be as aggressive as U.S. troops in countering insurgents. ``We are discouraged by some of the statements coming from the NATO countries that they will not engage the terrorists,'' said Jawad, the Afghan ambassador. ``If they are coming, then they should be ready to fight the terrorists.''
The Brits and Canadians will be. The rest?
NATO officials say they will operate aggressively. Britain has already sent more than 3,000 troops and eight Apache attack helicopters to Afghanistan's southern Helmand province in a show of force, Riley said. ``I am pretty sure its going to be fairly robust stuff from NATO for the first few months,'' said Riley. ``People on the ground have to know that we're not screwing around.''
Military officials trace the rising violence in Afghanistan to Pakistan's continuing failure to control its borders. Insurgents enjoy sanctuary in western Pakistan and cross over the mountainous border into Afghanistan to launch attacks. Al-Qaeda fighters ``have sanctuaries on both sides of the border,'' Lieutenant General Sher Karimi, the Afghan Army's chief of operations, said at a May 4 briefing.
They do, don't they. At some point we'll get Perv to look the other way.
Taliban and al-Qaeda are ``no doubt'' making a comeback in at least nine of Afghanistan's 30 provinces, not just the five bordering Pakistan, said Shahrani. ``There have also been incidences in urban areas in the North as well as in Kabul.''
``Troops being moved out of Iraq should be redeployed to Afghanistan,'' said Caroline Wadhams, senior national security analyst with the Center for American Progress, a Washington-based policy research group. The level of U.S. troops there ``needs to double,'' she said.
Thanks Caroline. Here. Here's a rifle. Care to join our troops?
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/19/2006 01:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The British and the Russians both learned the hard way that Afghanistan's a pretty tough place to govern. Everyone complains the Bush administration -- which I believe is completely and utterly butchering the Iran crisis -- doesn't learn from its mistakes. No one seems to note how well they have learned from the mistakes of others in history. It is not feasible at reasonable cost to impose order on a place like Afghanistan by ramping up boots on the ground. The enemy -- and those of ambiguous status -- will react to what one does. Lots of troops on the ground can easily be seen as part of the problem rather than part of the solution, or can become a permanent crutch. Institutions need to arise endogenously, out of the will, desires, and needs of those who live there. In the case of Aghanistan, this means that there will be periodic resurgences of the enemy, but these can be managed as they arise. Most importantly, the Afghan people need to learn to deal with the Taleban on their own in the long run.
#2
"Thanks Caroline. Here. Here's a rifle. Care to join our troops?"
Chickenhawk meme? You dont need to be a soldier to make a comment on strategy. Either shes wrong or shes right (im not sure - more troops in themselves wouldnt hurt, but there are less obvious uses for them than in Iraq, and the political situation has in the past been very unfavorable for any but the lightest touch - maybe thats changed now that Afghan has govt with internal legitimacy for the first time since the monarchy fell, but I dont know)
#3
The talliwackers are making a comeback because they have a safe-haven in Pakistan. We played that game in Vietnam, with sanctuaries for the NVA and Viet Kong in Laos and Cambodia. Have we learned nothing? We need to start whacking the people in "Balouchistan" daily, and dare Musharrif to do anything about it. A few ARCLIGHT strikes along the eastern edge of the border would do wonders on making the taliban unacceptable 'guests'.
There are no 'civilians' in this war - there are only participants and supporters. It's time to quit playing kids games and go to war, like we did in WW II and Korea. The rest is just getting people killed for no reason.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/19/2006 15:25 Comments ||
Top||
#4
New York University's Center on International Cooperation.
Center for American Progress, a Washington-based policy research group.
With experts like these, who needs smug, arrogant pontificators?
#7
Another circa 2003-2004 meme floating in a trial balloon. Will this one stay aloft through the Fall 06 elections? Only time and a few IPSOS polls will tell....
#10
Afghanistan is not the center of gravity. We have yet to attack the real threats. Save our troops (NATO too) for the real Islamic threats of Iran, the Arabian peninsula and eventually Pakistan. Quit trying to do everything for every people. Otherwise they become passive/aggressive and useless. Let the Afghans decide whether they want to fight and for which side. Better to get our most of our troops out of there, hire 100,000 Tadjiks and Uzbeks for 5% of what are spending and let them get payback on the Pashtuns.
Posted by: ed ||
05/19/2006 19:54 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Pakistan is becoming a problem that grows exponentially by day. That Perv isn't frightened by the smack that's coming to the NWFP any day to clear this nest, makes one wonder just how deep Al Q has him in their pockets. And who's financing them? And how does this feed into Iran?
The Afghan government knows where Osama Bin Laden and Mullah Omar are hiding but hopes to find a better way to fight terrorism with Pakistan, Afghan Foreign Minister Rangeen Dadfar Spanta told BBC television on Thursday.
Best way to fight terrorism would be to send a couple battalions to raze Sami's guest house and shoot the inhabitants thereof.
Although a Predator UAV and a couple of Hellfires would also work ...
"The sources of terrorism in Afghanistan funding and providing weapons to insurgents here - are not in the country," said Spanta. Afghanistan's problem could only be solved through regional cooperation, he said. Pakistan must directly attack the sources of terrorism, he said, adding, "Pakistan can do a lot more in the war against terrorism. The Afghan government mentions the situation to Pakistani authorities daily, including the Pakistani prime minister and foreign minister."
Posted by: Fred ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Speaking of Hellfires, read the USDOD is trying to dev a "loiter" capability for the Hellfire series, to be coupled wid improved target sensors.
Pakistan should know that gone are the days when Afghan governments were formed in Pakistan and dissolved there, Afghan President Hamid Karzai was quoted as saying on Thursday. "Afghans are now themselves masters of their country and the Afghan people themselves will take decisions," Karzai was quoted as telling tribal elders and officials in Kunar.
"So keep yer goddamned jihadis and ISI on your own side of the Durrand Line!"
He alleged that Pakistan was training militants and sending them into Afghanistan. "Islamabad should realise it no longer has power to determine events in Afghanistan. Pakistani intelligence gives military training to people and then sends them to Afghanistan with logistics," the Afghan Islamic Press news agency quoted Karzai. Karzai described Taliban leader Mulla Mohammad Omar as a coward "hiding in the other country and sending youth to kill our people".
Mullah Omar didn't have the nerve to surrender when he was defeated. Instead, he ran back to his owners in Pakland for a second try.
"Pakistan wants that Afghanistan be its military base but that dream will never come true."
"Your strategic depth ain't as deep as it used to be!"
Pakistan Foreign Office spokeswoman Tasneem Aslam has termed Karzai's statement "baseless and absurd". She said that instead of accusing Pakistan, Afghanistan should take action against infighters.
Like Pakistan is. Tell 'em about the TNSM, Hamid.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
CAIRO The Shiites in Egypt are planning to float a political party, which will be open to all their fellow citizens, according to a self-styled spokesman for the Shiites. "It will not be a religion-based party, but a party with a political, economic and social platform," Saleh Al Wardani told Gulf News.
The number of Shiites in predominantly Sunni Egypt is not known. Their adherence to the rule of taqia or concealing identity makes it difficult to know their exact number. Researchers, however, estimate their number to be around 1 per cent of Egypt's 73 million population. Al Azhar, the highest Sunni authority in Egypt, recognised the Ga'fari (also called the Twelver Shia) as an official school of Islamic thought.
The Shiite followers in Egypt say they have been harassed by security agencies. Since Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution, a suspected link between the Egyptian Shiites and Tehran has apparently prompted occasional security crackdowns.
Al Wardani himself was detained in 1988 in connection with what then came to be known as the Organisation of Khomeini, in reference to the Iranian revolution's spiritual leader. "Shiites are spread across Egypt. Many of them observe taqia due to the misunderstanding by many Sunnis of the Shiites. Some even regard Shiites as infidels," said Al Wardani.
He, however, sounds optimistic about the future of Shiites in Egypt. "I think the Shiite sect will gain ground in Egypt because fundamentalism, which has held sway in the past decades, has not projected a good image of Islam." He categorically denies receiving financial support from abroad.
Police beat demonstrators and detained members of the Muslim Brotherhood Thursday near a courthouse in downtown Cairo where two hearings for pro-reform figures were scheduled to be held. Most of the demonstrators Thursday appeared to be from the banned but tolerated Muslim Brotherhood group. Police said they detained about 100 of the group's members, along with one of its leaders, Essam al-Erian. Other protesters were from the pro-reform Kefaya movement whose members include secularists and Islamists.
A disciplinary hearing was scheduled Thursday for two judges who spoke to the media about allegations of fraud during last year's parliamentary elections. At least one of the justices, Hesham El-Bastawisy, would not be attending because he underwent an emergency heart operation Wednesday. Security banned journalists from being present during the hearing.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
A member of a password-protected jihadist forum recently posted a message in which he seeks to explain why al-Qaeda has not targeting individual members of the Saudi government. He argues that the military establishment within Saudi Arabia is weak, as it does not possess a real army, and is unable to compete when its leadership is lost. Moreover, the author states that the Saudi regime is structured on illusions, that its ego in claiming victories has surpassed reality, and if al-Qaeda should change its strategy, the government will collapse.
In his opinion, al-Qaeda has the capability of executing a new strategy, attacking symbolic figures of the Saudi regime, but it has not yet done so for local tactical and global strategic reasons. According to the author, al-Qaeda perceives that American forces will fill the vacuum left following the collapse of the Saudi government, before al-Qaeda is prepared to face them. Strategically and on the global scale, to effect collapse before the knockout blow against America is not al-Qaedas plan. Rather, the author believes al-Qaeda will cause such significant damage on the United States that it will cause the American administration to lose its mind and use nuclear weapons as revenge. In this event, Saudi Arabia will be an umbrella that protects against an American counterattack.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/19/2006 01:22 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Yup follow the money. SA Princes are the money men.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/19/2006 4:26 Comments ||
Top||
#3
al-Quaida's did try to strike at Saudi but couldn't come close to attacking the elite. Their attempts at striking the oil industry failed miserably and their strike at soft targets like apartment complexes only hurt them in the p.r. war. They managed to motivate the security apparatus against them and their networks have been largely rolled up. So, now they are going for the typical tactic of trying to mask their impotence with 'fox and the grapes' hogwash.
#4
Saudi Arabia will be an umbrella that protects against an American counterattack.
Funny, I didn't know "umbrella" was Arabic for "target"
Posted by: Steve ||
05/19/2006 10:06 Comments ||
Top||
#5
eniac: They know who writes the checks.
It's possible the Saudi government writes the checks. Even if this were true, it's always better to own the bank account and write the checks yourself. I don't think Islamists are a monolithic force. The Muslim world has a history of factionalism - much like every other religion. There have been many Muslim empires in the Middle East since Islam was born. They were Arab, Persian, Mongol, Kurdish and Turkish. Within the religion, and within each tribe, they have always fought each other for power, much like everyone else. In this sense, they were no different from the kingdoms within Christendom, Buddhism, Hinduism, et al. Muslims have frequently allied with people of other religions against fellow Muslims. The simple reason is that non-Muslims would have less of a claim to Muslim lands than fellow Muslims.
To the Saud family, it makes a difference whether Saudi Arabia is ruled by the Sauds or some generic Muslim ruler. To al Qaeda's present leaders, it would be preferable if they ruled all the Muslim countries as one empire. To the existing leaders of the Muslim nations, it would be preferable if they continued to lead their countries - and they will take action against any al Qaeda attempt to subvert them, just as the mujahideen in Afghanistan fought the Taliban - not because they like the West but because they view al Qaeda as just another contender for power.
Bottom line is that both the Saudis and al Qaeda are hostile to Western values. But this does not mean that the Saudi government supports al Qaeda. I would say that they are mutually hostile factions of Islam that cooperate or fight depending on whether the opposition is strong or weak at any given moment. Do Saudis get a charge out of dead Westerners? Sure. Does the visceral thrill of seeing dead infidels trump the fear of being bombed by them? No. Does it make the Saudi government want to abdicate power in favor of al Qaeda? No.
May 19, 2006: North Korea appears to have decided to allow its conventional forces to deteriorate. The amount of money required to rebuild the aging weapons and equipment is far more than the north can expect to extort from its neighbors or the United States. What resources that are available are going into the secret police, ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. The North Korea leadership is intent on keeping their tyranny going, because the alternative is death at the hands of an angry population, or war crimes trails for a long list of atrocities.
South Korea believes that the North Korean government will eventually undergo a "soft collapse" that the south can manage. The U.S. fears that North Korea will, in the meantime, sell missile and nuclear weapons technology to hostile nations and terrorists. South Korea doesn't care about that, and is more concerned about an uncontrolled collapse in the north.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/19/2006 16:43 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#5
Soft collapse is not an option. The export of nuclear weapons and more missles and technology is not in anyone best interest. We should tell the South Koreans no, pull out our
troops and start intrerdicting all shipping leaving all ports in North Korea if that is what it takes. We have a cease fire not a peace treaty.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/19/2006 17:42 Comments ||
Top||
#6
We should just pull out our troops. Let the Roks keep the cease fire if they want it.
#8
As Seafarious noted before, it's amazing how Kimmie can be only 5'2" and still be the tallest guy in Nkor-land.
Mass starvation will do that.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
05/19/2006 18:54 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Actually, the whiteness of white clothing in Korea has long been a mystery to Americans. During the Korean War, our soldiers were mystified how seemingly just by washing clothes in a creek on some rocks could do the trick.
#11
Norkie soldiers are emaciating already, and all the smart laundering/drycleaning of uniforms in the world isn't gonna hide it - they're well-dressed skin-and-bones!?
I kinda have a soft spot for Sezer. He looks like a man with no sense of humor.
Turkey's president, backed by 40,000 chanting marchers, has sounded a warning that the country's secular status will not be overthrown after a judge was shot dead by a suspected Islamist terrorist. In an apparent warning to the Islamic-rooted government, President Ahmet Necdet Sezer, himself a former judge, said the shooting "is indeed an attack on the secular republic." In an apparent warning to the government and pro-Islamic newspapers, Sezer said Thursday that "those who provided the reason for this attack must review their attitudes and behaviors." He also cautioned that "no one will be able to overthrow the (secular) regime."
Prime Minister Romano Prodi on Thursday vowed to undo most of the policies of his predecessor, Silvio Berlusconi, and pledged to bring all Italy's troops home from what he called the "occupation" of Iraq.
Wasn't long in coming, was it?
Posted by: Fred ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Expect more reports of dead Italian troops and attacks to increase in Afghanistan. AQ will claim victory by pushing them out of Iraq with the recent attacks and will work to drive them from the field in Afghanistan also. EU part of NATO is learning right now why if you look act and sound weak it makes you a bigger target not safer the hard way in Afghanistan.
#2
What does one expect fronm this TRNAZI fool? That he was not going to do this? Europe has followed his policies, look what it has got them. Expect more of the same.
Bye, Bye.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/19/2006 4:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Start kidnapping the Italians - they're in season.
#1
Great news that the tide is turning with regard to politics in the classroom. No pun there Alabama fans. But this guy was not fired for the Bush comments and video, that only started the investigation. He was fired for porn. We still have a long way to go here.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
05/19/2006 8:13 Comments ||
Top||
#2
49 pan, I'm sure the district lawyers went over this guy's case very closely.
Part of the problem is "Mr Science" is also a political candidate, and if they went after him officially for his political views, no matter how stupid or offensive, you'd have the ACLU, et al, going apeshit on his behalf. They're better covered by firing him for the porn, since most public employers have a "lookie at nookie, you outta here" policy.
An Egyptian terror suspect testifying in Federal Court on Thursday refuted claims by Canadas spy agency that he trained and fought as a terrorist.
A CSIS summary of evidence says Mahmoud Jaballahs alleged travel pattern in the early 1990s was consistent with those of an Islamic mujahedeen extremist, and accuses him of fighting alongside terrorists in Afghanistan and Chechnya.
However, Jaballah denied having ever been to either country, and testified he was working as a teacher in Pakistan during the time in question. He also disputed CSIS claims that he had trained as a terrorist in Yemen, saying he was in the country to apply for a teaching job.
CSIS also says Jaballah had an operational relationship with Egyptian-born Canadian Ahmed Said Khadr, a suspected Al Qaeda operative killed by Pakistani forces in 2003, before Jaballah moved to Canada. The spy agency claims Jaballah spent time at Khadrs Pakistani residence while in the country on business.
Jaballah admitted he had met Khadr in Canada, but denied CSISs claims about their relationship. He said he would shake hands with Khadr and say hello when the two crossed paths in a Toronto mosque, but insisted they were not friends.
I never stayed with him, I never discussed anything with him, Jaballah said. He was like anyone else in the mosque.
Jaballah has been detained since August 2001 on a national security certificate, which allows Ottawa to indefinitely hold foreign nationals who are determined to be security threats.
CSIS has provided only summaries of evidence to the defence, and will not identify specific sources. But Jaballah said on the stand he is 100 per cent certain the accusations and alleged travel itineraries came from the Egyptian government.
Egyptian authorities have accused Jaballah of being a high-ranking member of an Egyptian-based terror group, al-Jihad, which is said to provide terrorists with logistics, weapons and escape plans.
In court Thursday, Jaballah denied any involvement with terrorist organizations.
I applied for refugee status because of the persecution I experienced in Egypt, he said. Thats the main reason I wanted to live like any other human being in Canada.
Jaballah was testifying after a judge agreed earlier Thursday to place limits on the future use of his testimony.
His lawyers had asked Judge Andrew MacKay to grant Jaballah protection against his testimony being used against him should he face another security certificate charge.
MacKays order would limit the use or derivative use of Jaballahs testimony to this current case and any proceedings arising directly from it, such as a claim for appeal or charges of perjury or contempt.
Though there is no statutory compulsion to testify, the circumstances compel him to testify if he is to have any chance of remaining in Canada, MacKay said.
The defence has also argued that greater disclosure of the evidence is necessary for Jaballah to properly argue his case.
How can you answer a case when youve not been given a case? said defence lawyer Barbara Jackman, who likened the process behind the security certificate hearings to walking in the dark.
MacKay reminded the defence of the courts obligation to not release information that could be damaging to national security, but said he will meet with government lawyers in Ottawa next week to see if more evidence against Jaballah can be made public.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/19/2006 01:47 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The Conservative Defence Minister intervened personally to stop the Royal Military College of Canada from awarding an honorary degree tomorrow to a retired American general who has been highly critical of the Bush administration.
Gordon O'Connor ordered officials at RMC, the Canadian Forces' training academy for officers, not to award a doctorate in defence studies to U.S. General Anthony Zinni. "Our original plan was to give an honorary degree to Gen. Zinni at this week's convocation ceremonies," John Cowan, the principal of RMC, told the National Post. "That plan has since been revised.... There were concerns in Ottawa about the timing."
Mr. Cowan confirmed that Mr. O'Connor, who as Defence Minister is also chancellor of the college, made the decision not to confer the degree on the retired Marine Corps general. "The Minister was concerned that doing this would appear to be taking sides in a domestic political dispute in the United States," he said.
Instead, two retired Canadian soldiers, both former RMC professors, will be given honorary degrees at the ceremony.
#4
I'd personally have no qualms w/Zinni being given this award. He was my general for a while when I first came in. Damn good one to - straight shooter - unlike a lot of the peacocks I've seen. I'm not sure anyone in the U.S. would've even noticed Canada even giving him this thing.
#5
I'm not sure anyone in the U.S. would've even noticed Canada even giving him this thing.
Agree with you, BH6, but lots of folks in Canada will notice and that's what's important. Harper is defining himself for the Canadian people so that they know in the next election who he is and where he stands. Good for him, eh.
#6
NS, you might be right. However, most officers in the U.S. military don't even know which foreign military generals that West Point, Annapolis, or the USAF academy confer honorary degrees on etc. I'm not sure this would even be on the average canucks radar. Either way, now it is.
#9
I didn't have a problem w/his criticisms about the execution of the war. Shit, there were things I saw over there that I thought should've been handled different. I'm not sure I would've been as vehement about it though. As most of you know I just got back from there in March.
I've heard the guy speak several times before the war and even after - he bitched about not having enough troops, Rummy allegedly not listening to his senior commanders, and the strategic execution of the conflict as a whole being done poorly as 10 years of meticulous planning was according to him discarded. I may agree or not w/his positions and his decision to do that book w/Clancy - but, the fact is his background and prior outstanding service at least gives him the credibility to play devil's advocate as opposed to a carbon blob like Murtha, Mike Moore, or any other hollywood pussy, etc. I also don't remember Zinni every lying about anything. I don't have a problem w/retired generals who are now civilians bitching if they can give the tangible/logical/constructive argument to better prosecute the war, i.e. kill more sand clowns and save more Yank lives. Troop strength is a valid argument imho after having been there. I think Zinni has plenty of honor and is one tough old sob. If he said something was hosed up, heck, maybe it was. IIRC didn't something like 26 other retired stars agreed w/him wrt Rummy. I don't dislike Rummy & I think he's got a strong intellect and is a tough old bird as well, but when 27 retired stars can agree on something maybe we as commonsense patriots need to take another look. I couldn't tell ya about ten years of CentCom planning as I wasn't there. OTOH, if you think Zinni should've did less bitching in the msm while working for us in the ME then I could definitely see your point on that.
As far as the ME in general - he stated publicly Arafat was an un-repentent liar who couldn't be trusted - some of our own politicos didn't even have the nads to throw that bomb.
Oh well, we'll prolly just agree on disagreeing on this one - such is life.
The US Senate is looking into allegations that a former US senator urged Baghdad to give a US company lucrative contracts under the much-criticised United Nations oil-for-food programme. This is the first time that a leading US lawmaker has been linked to the controversial UN programme, whose shortcomings have been an important element of the Bush administrations critique of the UN.
Oil for Food Weapons, the gift that keeps on giving
The investigation involves one of the most vivid figures in US east coast politics, former senator Robert Torricelli, a New Jersey Democrat who was forced to pull out of the 2002 election after being severely admonished by the Senate ethics committee for accepting expensive gifts from David Chang, a campaign contributor. Mr Chang, a Korean-American businessman, was found guilty in 2002 of conspiring to violate federal campaign laws and was jailed for 15 months.
Senator Norm Coleman, the Republican chairman of the US Senate permanent sub-committee on investigations, said: We take these allegations seriously and will continue to investigate in a bipartisan manner allegations of wrongdoing under the oil-for-food programme. We have investigated the illicit conduct of politicians in Russia, France, and the UK. We have a similar interest in preserving the institutional integrity of the US Senate, so we take these allegations regarding former Senator Torricelli seriously and will continue our investigation into them and will refer our findings to the appropriate agencies. The British, French and Russian politicians investigated by the subcommittee deny the allegations.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Steve ||
05/19/2006 14:22 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Honest Bob"? I hear you could own him for a new suit.
Somebody gave USA Today the story. At least two of the named cooperating phone companies are absolutely denying it is true. Possibilities: 1) the companies are lying, 2) the story was planted to divert attention from some real operation or to scare terrorists into different communication systems, or 3) the story was planted WITHIN NSA to identify a source of leakage.
BellSouth demands USA Today retract NSA claims
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - BellSouth Corp., the No. 3 U.S. local telephone company, on Thursday demanded USA Today retract claims in a story that said the company had a contract with a U.S. spy agency and turned over customers' telephone records.
BellSouth spokesman Jeff Battcher denied the company had a contract with the National Security Agency and did not give access or provide call records to the spy agency as part of an effort to thwart any terrorist plots.
USA Today reported last week that the NSA has had access to records of billions of domestic calls and collected tens of millions of telephone records from data provided by BellSouth, Verizon and AT&T Inc..
"BellSouth insists that your newspaper retract the false and unsubstantiated statements you have made regarding our company," BellSouth said in a letter to USA Today President Craig Moon and the general counsel at the newspaper's parent company Gannett Co.
The NSA and the Bush administration has refused to confirm or deny the USA Today report.
...
Verizon has also denied it was approached by the NSA and had a contract to provide the agency with data from its customers' telephone records. But the company has declined to comment on whether it gave the NSA access to its records.
AT&T has refused to comment directly on the USA Today report.
#3
I am in telecommunications. It is true that no carrier "gave" the information to the NSA. However each carrier allows the NSA to install equipment in their racks which can sniff the operational equipment for information. Thus all the carriers have to fess up to is a black-box in their building.
#4
I had an uncle who worked for NSA. He said he was in procurement ("I buy all the cloaks and daggers.") and didn't get to do all the really cool stuff.
Well, that's what he said, anyway.
Posted by: Mike ||
05/19/2006 13:02 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Given what they do at NSA and the elasticity of the term procurement, I'd bet he did come cool stuff.
Just a LOT smarter than people think. Especially reporters and leakers (who are self important and oblivious as to their lack of smarts) to whom NSA or CIA may have just given exactly the right amount of rope . . .
End of briefing. That is all.
(I have a massive amount of respect for those braniacs at Ft Meade - glad to see they are sending their best leader Gen Hayden to turn the CIA into the same quality professional agency)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/19/2006 15:06 Comments ||
Top||
#9
My take: USA Today is not known for breaking stories of this nature. WaPo and/or NY Slimes had the story but were not interested in moving it to their front page just yet.
WaPo and Slimes are feeling the heat, so USA Today ran with the story. Huge egg on face, as they try in vain to hold onto any remaining credibility.
Remember: AT&T (now including BellSouth), Verizon, et al are companies who spend a great deal in print adverts. I suspect they won't be running much advertising in USA Today.
Posted by: Captain America ||
05/19/2006 15:11 Comments ||
Top||
#10
The phone companies didn't sell or otherwise provide the information to the NSA.
They sold it to an NSA front company.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
05/19/2006 15:40 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Yo! #4 and #7.
By ego-stroking yourselves, you just might be placing some brave soul or a distant relative in harm's way. a.s.
Posted by: as ||
05/19/2006 21:35 Comments ||
Top||
Air Force Gen. Michael V. Hayden vigorously defended the legality of the Bush administration's domestic wiretapping program and declared that the CIA "must be transformed" to stay abreast of terrorist and other threats during an often contentious hearing on his nomination to be the next CIA director.
Hayden spent much of the day fending off questions about his previous job as director of the National Security Agency. The four-star general acknowledged playing a larger than previously understood role in the creation of the controversial domestic eavesdropping program, and repeatedly refused to respond to questions about details of the operation during the public portion of his testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
But Hayden also described ambitious plans for the beleaguered agency he hopes to lead next, saying he intends to push the CIA to be more aggressive in mounting clandestine operations and more rigorous in the assessments it produces to avoid the mistakes that plagued the prewar estimates on Iraq.
In perhaps the clearest signal of a looming shift in course for the troubled agency, Hayden made it clear that he believes the CIA has become too bogged down tracking daily developments in Iraq and other global trouble spots.
Instead, he suggested that the CIA should surrender more of that work to the Pentagon, focus more of its energies on anticipating longer-term threats and trends, and reconcile itself to a diminished role in which it is an important, but not isolated, member of the U.S. intelligence community.
At one point, Hayden likened the CIA to "a top player on a football team -- critical, but part of an integrated whole. Even the top player needs to focus on the scoreboard, not on their individual achievement."
Hayden, 61, currently serves as the deputy director for national intelligence, the principal deputy to the nation's top spymaster, John D. Negroponte, who oversees the activities of all 16 U.S. spy agencies. The general played a behind-the-scenes role in ousting former CIA director Porter J. Goss, who resigned two weeks ago amid criticism that he was too turf-conscious and resistant to reforms.
Lawmakers and Senate aides emerged from Thursday's session saying that Hayden was likely to be confirmed by the Senate as early as next week. Even so, the hearing made it clear that Hayden's standing among some members has been diminished by his involvement in domestic surveillance programs that have been major sources of controversy for the Bush administration in recent months.
Shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush authorized the NSA to intercept communications between people in the United States and individuals overseas suspected of having ties to al-Qaida. In doing so, the NSA bypassed the usual requirement that the government obtain permission from a court before placing wiretaps on a U.S. resident. The Bush administration also kept the program hidden from all but a handful of lawmakers until it was exposed in news reports last year.
During one particularly tense exchange Thursday, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., challenged Hayden to reconcile details that have emerged on the scope of the surveillance operation with previous public comments downplaying its significance or suggesting that the government was not eavesdropping on Americans without court warrants.
"General, I can't tell now if you've simply said one thing and done another, or whether you have just parsed your words like a lawyer to intentionally mislead the public," Wyden said. "What's to say that if you're confirmed to head the CIA, we won't go through exactly this kind of drill with you over there?"
Hayden shot back: "Well, Senator, you're going to have to make a judgment on my character."
Hayden acknowledged that the program raised privacy concerns, but said repeatedly that he believed it was lawful. "I'm very comfortable with what the agency did, what I did," he said.
He resisted pressure to provide more details, saying he would address matters in a closed session with senators scheduled later in the day. He similarly deflected questions about the CIA's interrogation methods and handling of detainees.
But Hayden did provide some new information on the origins of the domestic surveillance program, indicating that he proposed the idea after being prompted by then-CIA director George J. Tenet to consider what else the NSA might do to combat terrorism.
Tenet "invited me to come down and talk to the administration about what more could be done," Hayden said. "There then followed a discussion as to why or how we could make that possible."
He did not elaborate, but disputed reports that Vice President Cheney or other administration officials put pressure on the NSA to be even more aggressive in spying on Americans.
Some lawmakers have questioned whether Hayden's lengthy military career is a liability at a time when the Pentagon is increasingly encroaching on the CIA's traditional turf. Hayden expressed support for the expanding military role in intelligence-gathering, saying that the burden on the CIA has been so taxing that "we welcome additional players on the field."
But he also sought to distance himself from the Pentagon, noting that he and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld had disagreed over reforms that eroded the military's influence over intelligence operations and budgets.
Hayden was also sharply critical of the activities of a controversial intelligence analytic unit set up within the Pentagon by former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith, a leading advocate for the war in Iraq.
The team Feith assembled helped make the case for war by uncovering supposed links between Saddam Hussein's regime and al-Qaida. Their findings were presented to the CIA and officials at the White House, but have since been discredited.
Feith's team, Hayden said, had set out to prove a case by assembling "every possible ounce of evidence" and ignoring contradictory information. Using that method, he continued, analysts can build a convincing case against even innocent targets.
"I got three great kids, but if you tell me, 'Go out and find all the bad things they've done, Hayden,' I could build you a pretty good dossier," Hayden said. "You'd think they were pretty bad people because that's what I was looking for and that's what I built up. That'd be very wrong, OK? That would be inaccurate. That would be misleading."
Hayden said he was concerned that numerous investigations and public criticism have taken a toll on the agency.
"It is time to move past what seems to me to be an endless picking apart of the 'archaeology' of every past intelligence failure and success," Hayden said. "CIA needs to get out of the news -- as source or subject -- and focus on protecting the American people by acquiring secrets and providing high-quality all-source analysis."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/19/2006 01:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush sent Congress a $1.9 billion request Thursday to increase border security as supporters of sweeping immigration legislation reasserted control in Senate debate.
The White House said the money would pay for the ``first 1,000 of 6,000 new Border Patrol agents that will be deployed in the next two years,'' as well as the temporary deployment of up to 6,000 National Guard troops to states along the Mexican border. The request includes funds for new fencing and other barriers as well as two new unmanned surveillance aircraft and five helicopters to curb illegal immigration.
It's a start, but we need more fencing.
The White House sent the request to Congress as the president traveled to Yuma, Ariz. to dramatize his commitment to border control and the Senate labored over the most sweeping overhaul of immigration law in two decades. Bush's funding request came with a pledge that it would not lead to a short-term increase in the deficit. The White House said it would off-set the spending by ``delaying certain less-urgent military procurement efforts'' to future spending bills.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
$1.9B would buy 12,666,666.67 ft - or 2399 miles of fence in Chris Simcox's $150/ft design (pic).
The head of a group of Federal Air Marshals says the service is badly broken.
"Right now we cannot protect the public," says Frank Terreri, an active duty air marshal who represents a group of 1,500 air marshals. "And not because we're not proficient, not that we're not capable, it's because federal air marshal management, along with the Department of Homeland Security, won't let us do our jobs."
Terreri says air marshals are not able to work undercover because check-in and boarding procedures at airports make it impossible for air marshals to maintain their anonymity:
"We're supposed to be undercover. But basically when everybody knows who you are, you're just the guys on the plane with the gun. Either they're gonna avoid you or overcome you, you're at a severe disadvantage."
Terreri has spent three years trying to get the air marshals management to address these issues with no response. Instead he says they've retaliated against him, with four separate investigations, including one for misuse of his business card.
"The items that he was being accused of were so surreal that they were obviously intending to terrorize the other air marshals into silence," says Tom Devine, an attorney with the Government Accountability Project. The project has petitioned the U.S. Office of Special Counsel to open an investigation into Terreri's allegations.
The House Judiciary Committee is expected to release a critical investigation of the air marshal service next week. Committee Chairman Rep. James Sensenbrenner says the air marshals lack of anonymity violates federal law. He hopes the Federal Air Marshal Service Agency will "at least be a little bit more compliant with the law and whistleblowers, rather than trying to shut them up," citing the case of Frank Terreri as one of several examples.
In an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit filed last year, Terreri challenged policies prohibiting air marshals from speaking publicly about their jobs or the agency. The Federal Air Marshal service agreed to change those policies in settlement reached last month.
Department of Homeland Security officials declined to be interviewed or provide comment to ABC News regarding the Federal Air Marshal service which will be the subject of an upcoming ABC News special report to air Friday on ABC's World News Tonight and 20 / 20.
#1
Dear Frank: Before you bitch and moan to loudly, I suspect your lads could actually do quite a lot to enhance their cover or .... "clandestinni" role. Cargo pocketed para-trousers, pocketed clip knives, photographer vests, Danner boots, black carry on knapsacks and weapons sachels kinda give it all away don't ya think. Reminds me of pagers going off at local bars in Fayetteville, NC. The DCA to ATL run..... I'm just say'in.
WASHINGTON -- Five Chinese Muslims recently released from the Guantanamo Bay prison are living under increasingly dangerous conditions in Albania, the only country to let them in after the United States determined they were not ''enemy combatants," according to their lawyer.
The lawyer, Sabin Willett of Boston, asked in court papers filed yesterday that the Bush administration bring the five men to the United States for their own safety.
The men, who are members of an ethnic group known as Uighurs, were arrested in Afghanistan four years ago. A military tribunal later determined that the men had never been enemies of the United States, and ordered them released.
But because the Chinese government has a history of persecuting Uighurs, who have been seeking greater independence, the men could not be sent back to China.
Two weeks ago, on the eve of a court hearing into their fate, the military announced that it had dropped the men off in Albania, a mostly Muslim country in southeast Europe. Willett, who has been waging a court battle to get the Uighurs brought to the United States as refugees, flew to Albania.
In an affidavit filed yesterday with the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Willett described a harrowing trip to a slum where the five men are living in a refugee processing center. He said he was able to take his clients to a restaurant and get glasses made for one of them, but since he left, they have been afraid to leave the compound.
The men's arrival has caused a sensation in Albania, he said. The Chinese government has called on Albania to extradite the men, whom it calls terrorists. Members of the Albanian parliament have vowed to send them to China. And even if the men are allowed to stay in Albania, Willett said, they would face a bleak future.
''The impoverished country where they were dumped without community, common language, family, or prospects is ill-suited to withstand the strident demands of the most powerful communist dictatorship on earth," Willett wrote. ''These men never wronged the United States in any way. What has happened is shameful."
The Bush administration has asked the court to dismiss the case on the grounds that it is now moot. A Justice Department spokeswoman did not return a call yesterday
Also yesterday, Saudi Arabia's foreign minister announced that 16 captives held at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp would be transferred to Saudi jails in coming days -- the first large-scale transfer from this isolated island prison camp in more than a year.
Well, P. Sabin, ya wanted them out and they're out. Be careful what you wish for.
I'll bet you got a nice big house in a Boston burb. Why don't you have them move in with you?
Now there's an idea for a sitcom. "The Uighurs Who Wouldn't Leave". I'll bet it would be "zany".
The United States of America will release 16 Saudi detainees from Guantanamo Bay during the next few days, revealed Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal currently on a visit in the US. In a press interview with U.S. media in Washington on Wednesday, he said that the Kingdom will interrogate those detainees upon arrival in the Kingdom, set free those whose charges are not proven and refers others to the judiciary authority.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
The US should shut Guantánamo Bay and give detainees access to a fair trial or release them, a UN human rights watchdog said today. The UN committee against torture voiced concern that detainees were being held at the camp for long periods without judicial scrutiny of the reasons for their detention, adding that Guantánamo detainees had insufficient legal safeguards. "The state party should cease to detain any person at Guantánamo Bay and close the detention facility," a committee report, published today, said.
The committee - part of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights - expressed concern over allegations that the US had established secret prisons around the world at which the international Red Cross aid agency did not have access to detainees. The watchdog called on the US to ensure that nobody was detained in secret detention centres under its control and reveal the existence of any such facilities. "The state party should investigate and disclose the existence of any such facilities and the authority under which they have been established and the manner in which detainees are treated," the report said. Detainees at Guantánamo and other camps should not be returned to any countries where they could face a "real risk" of torture, the committee added. The report said the US must "take immediate measures to eradicate all forms of torture and ill-treatment" committed by its personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq. It called on Washington to investigate allegations thoroughly, prosecuting any personnel found guilty.
Earlier this month, the US made in its first appearance before the Geneva-based committee against torture in six years. It was called to address a series of issues ranging from Washington's interpretation of the UN's absolute ban on torture to its interrogation methods in Guantánamo and the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Photos of abuse committed by US troops at the Baghdad prison sparked international outrage, while hundreds of "enemy combatants" are still being held at Guantánamo as part of the "war on terror". The committee said the US should halt interrogation techniques constituting torture or cruel treatment, citing methods including sexual humiliation, mock drownings and the use of dogs to induce fear.
Its report said some methods of interrogation had "resulted in the death of some detainees", and criticised vague US guidelines on the treatment of detainees that "have led to serious abuse". US officials in Geneva have so far declined to comment on the committee's findings. Guantánamo has been criticised by human rights campaigners and governments across the world. Earlier this month, the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, called for the immediate closure of the camp, claiming its existence was "unacceptable". However, the Bush administration has consistently defended the treatment of detainees at the facility, insisting its existence is legal under international law.
#6
Damn, I wish our politicos read the 'burg. The posters here have the best rebuttals/comebacks. When I weasel my way into politics I'm stealing some of the lines from this place.
#7
Capsu 78, is there a difference between your dog taking a dump and closing the UN? Both involve elimination of waste and other awfully smelly things...
#8
The United Dictatorships Nations is a waste of time and energy. The US needs to withdraw, and give the UN 'delegates' 72 hours to leave town. I don't care where they go, as long as they leave here. The US can then begin building an organization of free nations, and quit paying for all the trash in the world.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/19/2006 15:59 Comments ||
Top||
#9
...and give the UN 'delegates' 72 hours to leave town.
Will they have to pay off all their parking tickets first?
#10
With so very many, many, many other much larger problems out there for the UN, shut the crap up and try UNing something of greater abuse and danger. Why, oh why doesn't some jihadi blow up the UN?
BAGHDAD - Iraqs parliament expects to vote on a new government on Saturday, the speaker told lawmakers on Wednesday, signalling the prime minister was close to a deal on a cabinet line-up.
As parliament wound up for the day, one member asked speaker Mahmoud Al Mashhadani if the next session, scheduled for Saturday, would include a vote on the government. Mashhadani replied: Thats what we have from the prime ministers office; weve had a note saying the prime minister wants to present his government to parliament on Saturday.
A source close to Prime Minister-designate Nuri Al Maliki said he hoped to be able to finalise the line-up of a national unity coalition on Thursday, four days ahead of a deadline. Parliament must approve the appointments before the government, Iraqs first full-term, sovereign administration since the US invasion of 2003, can take office. With most parties expected to be represented in cabinet, the vote is likely to be a formality.
Malikis 30-day deadline for forming a government expire on Monday. Although minority Sunni, secular and other parties, including members of Malikis own Shia Islamist bloc, said publicly they were still holding out for concessions, negotiators said agreement was close.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
May 19, 2006: The Palestinians have never been able to create anything resembling effective armed forces. At most, the Palestinians have raised some irregular infantry formations. But now, even that kind of force appears to be slipping from their grasp.
For example, it's quite possible that the stand-off between Fatah and Hamas is not going to be resolved any time soon. This will result in the further erosion of the "authority" of the Palestinian Authority, not to mention increasing deterioration of the infrastructure in the Palestinian Territories, and a worsening of the already abysmal standard of living among Palestinians. The rabble the Palestinians call their "security forces" is already becoming more splintered and troublesome.
Meanwhile, the Palestinians may be taking some blows on other fronts as well. Lebanon, has recently announced plans to disarm the 400,000 Palestinians in the country (many of whom are now second- and even third-generation "refugees," and have never actually been in Palestine). This has been followed by a decision to invest in resettlement of many of the Palestinians, which may indicate a very belated attempt to initiate their assimilation.
In addition, Jordan has begun putting pressure on Hamas. The Government of Jordan has quietly informed Hamas that it will not entertain any negotiations or meetings with its leaders until the organization identifies its secret arms depositories on Jordanian soil. In addition, Jordan, which, under agreement with Israel, controls the assignment of imams and other officials to mosques in Jerusalem, has apparently been "purging" personnel who are found to have ties with Hamas. Jordan disarmed it's Palestinians in 1971, and forced the Palestinian Liberation Organization into Lebanon. There, the Palestinians were, by 1975, instrumental is triggering a 15 year civil war. The Lebanese never forgave the Palestinians for that.
Restoring the Palestinians as the rulers of "Palestine" (Israel and the Palestinian territories) has been a linchpin of Arab politics since the late 1940s. But neither the Palestinians, nor all the armed might of the Arab nations, have been able to dislodge the Israelis. The latest round of the "war" between Palestinians and Israelis involved the use of terrorism. The Israelis defeated that as well. If the Palestinians can't raise a force capable of doing the job, then other Arab nations, without saying as much, are finally giving in and absorbing Palestinian refugee populations.
Many Palestinians, and other Arabs, believe the Israelis are, like the 11th century Crusaders, a foreign presence. But the Israelis point out that they are locals who have returned after a long exile. And about 40 percent of Israelis are a Jews who fled (often expelled) from other Arab nations in the 1950s. These Israelis are genetically, and in appearance, as "Arab" as the Palestinians. It took several centuries to get rid of the Crusaders, and the Israelis have no plans for leaving, or getting pushed out.
Without any effective armed forces, and a dismal track record, the Palestinians themselves are headed for extinction, being absorbed and ignored because they could not fight their own fights.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/19/2006 16:48 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This creates an interesting situation. If the Jordanians and/or the Lebanese start to accept the Paleos, then Israel might feel some freedom to deport troublemaking Paleos to these Arab lands, with or without compensation.
But it all depends on the intestinal fortitude of the Israelis.
#4
I expect the Paleo treatment under Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt t o be a little "harder" than under the Joooooos. They won't be so tolerant of their Arab brothers once they can't be a tool to stick it to Israel. Expect the Paleo population rate to decline
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/19/2006 21:04 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Many Jews remained in Palestine after the Roman Diaspora - except for the Jerusalem area, Palestine became a grossly neglected, mostly poverty-stricken, minor backwater of the regional Muslim empires that succeeded the Romans and Byzantines, one TAIWAN of many.
#6
Let's let Fatah and Hamas go at it a while longer. I'd like to see Gaza return to Egyptian control, then move the surviving Paleos out of Israel to the ancient boundaries of Bashan, Moab, Ammon, and Edom. Use the Jordan R. as the border and let Jordan control them. That's their original homeland, anyway, and they can be totally absorbed by the Arabs. The West Bank is a time bomb and it will never work to put them in the middle of Israel.
Changed link to more detailed article:
GAZA - Rival Palestinian forces faced off briefly at Gazas border crossing with Egypt on Friday after a Hamas official was caught with 639,000 euros ($804,000) hidden in his clothing, authorities said. Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh vowed during Friday prayers not to disband a new Hamas-led security force and said he was prepared to increase its size in defiance of President Mahmoud Abbas and the Bush administration.
About 100 Hamas gunmen raced to the Rafah crossing, which is guarded by Abbas presidential guard, raising fears of fresh Palestinian infighting. Abbass elite guard also called in reinforcements. The standoff followed gunbattles overnight in Gaza City between police and a new security force set up by the Hamas-led government in defiance of Abbas. Four people were hurt in the first fighting since the force deployed on Wednesday. The clashes sent terrified residents fleeing from the streets, where tension has soared amid fears of civil war. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called the emergence of rival security forces a dangerous situation.
We do not intend to make one step backward. The force will stay, Haniyeh said during Friday prayers in Gaza City. Their task is to protect internal security and if there will be a need to increase its number, we will do it.
Sami Abu Zuhri, the Hamas spokesman who was caught at Rafah, initially refused to leave the border terminal without the money, which was confiscated by Palestinian customs agents. But witnesses said he later left and the gunmen withdrew. Hamas lawmaker Mushir al-Masri said Abu Zuhri was carrying donations from Arab nations to the Palestinian government and it was meant to be paid for prisoners in Israeli jails. Abu Zuhri, who is the spokesman of Hamas rather than the government, told Reuters he left after an agreement was reached for the money to be released soon.
The Palestinian Authority is facing a financial crisis after international donors suspended aid because of the Hamas-led governments failure to renounce violence and recognise Israel since coming to power in March. Israeli officials on Friday confirmed that Prime Minister Ehud Olmerts top two deputies will hold talks with Abbas next week in the highest-level contact since Hamas swept to power. But Haniyeh said Hamas, whose charter calls for Israels destruction, would not soften its stance as demanded by Israel and Western powers. We will not take any step in the direction of recognising the legitimacy of the occupation on the Palestinian land, he said.
Samir Abu Nahla, the Palestinian director of the Rafah crossing, said Abu Zuhri was wrapping the money around his belly and that was an illegal act.
According to the law, we have confiscated the money and an investigation should be held to determine whether it came from a legitimate source, Abu Nahla told Reuters, adding that agents have seized Abu Zuhris passport as well.
Abu Zuhri said some of the money was in a bag and the rest in his pockets.
In the overnight clashes, members of the Hamas force, mostly bearded young militants who fought Israel in an uprising for years, surrounded the main police station in Gaza City and traded fire with security men taking cover inside. There is no reason for the two forces to fight. There is no dispute of authority, said Khaled Abu Hilal, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry. Police accused Hamas of starting the clashes by opening fire on the police station.
The 3,000-strong Hamas-backed force, formed under the authority of Interior Minister Saeed Seyam, was deployed in a challenge to the authority of Abbas, whose Fatah movement was defeated by Hamas in the January elections. Haniyeh said the Hamas forces formation was agreed by Abbas, an assertion Abbass aides denied.
In response, Abbas ordered the deployment of a Fatah-loyal police unit. The decision marked the latest step in a deepening power struggle between Abbas and Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. The rival deployments followed growing insecurity in Gaza, with at least five rival gunmen killed this month.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
05/19/2006 07:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
caught by the Pal Border Police. Aside from showing how desperate Hamas is for cash, another sign of things heating up between Hamas and Fatah.
#3
There's something you're all overlooking.
Hiding 8ooK in your clothes means they have to be large denomination bills (Unless you want to look like Santa Claus)
So just how does this help, you have no way to change the bills to lower denomination, they've been saying there's NO money, so unless you plan to make purchases at a thousand bucks a pop, what's the use.
To expand on this, you can't pay salaries, buy food, gasoline, etc with thousand euro notes, so it's just somebody's private kimchee that he's trying to smuggle. And got Busted.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
05/19/2006 14:20 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Depends on who's retailing the arms they're buying. $800k in 500 Euronotes would do nicely for a short term arsenal.
Ft. Benning, GA. - The newest version of the Stryker vehicle, designed to provide fire power to Infantry units, will be unveiled May 15 at Fort Knox's Armor Warfighting Symposium.
The development of the Mobile Gun System is being managed by Fort Benning's Training and Doctrine Command System Manager-Stryker/Bradley.
The system was developed to meet the infantrys need for a highly mobile support vehicle to supply rapid, direct fire, specifically during close assaults, said Dave Rogers, a TSM-Stryker senior analyst. The Mobile Gun System will eventually be integrated into Stryker Brigade Combat Teams.
"The Mobile Gun System brings a tremendous battlefield capability to the Stryker formation, providing direct fire support to infantrymen in close, complex terrain," said Col. Donald Sando, the director of the TSM Stryker/Bradley.
The Mobile Gun System's firepower includes a turret-mounted 105 mm cannon, a mounted M-240C machine gun and a pedestal-mounted M-2.50 caliber machine gun for the vehicle commander.
The cannon can blast holes through reinforced concrete walls creating a breach point for infantry, and destroy bunkers and machine-gun nests that typically pin down infantry squads and platoons.
The 105 mm cannon can also take out snipers, Rogers said, because with one shot, it can destroy the entire area where a sniper is firing from. The cannon also fires canister rounds, which are used when confronting large groups of combatants. The canister round sends out a spray of titanium balls, similar to the pellets from a shotgun, which can impact several targets at once.
It's the heavy fire power and versatility that will make the Mobile Gun System an asset in combat, Rogers said.
"People will assume it's a tank when they see it because it has a big gun," Rogers said, "but it's much lighter than a 70 ton tank, making it more mobile. Its primary role is to support the infantry, not to go head to head with tanks."
The Mobile Gun System also features the Ammunition Handling System, an ammo loading device for the 105 mm cannon. With the ammo system, several types of rounds can be loaded in advance, then the ammunition types are displayed on the cannon operator's central control panel monitor. Depending on the mission, the operator can select which ammunition to use and the Ammunition Handling System automatically loads the cannon.
This capability gives the Mobile Gun System an advantage over other Army vehicles, which must be manually loaded with specific ammunition by a fourth crew member, Rogers said. The Ammunition Handling System makes loading and firing on targets faster and more efficient, he said.
"When planning for the 10 variants of Strykers, the Army took into account everything a Soldier could need on the battlefield," Rogers said. "From that, they developed the other Stryker variants, like the Medical Evacuation Vehicle, the Antitank Guided Missile Vehicle and the Engineer Squad vehicles, which are all uniquely designed for their mission. The Mobile Gun System fills a hole, and gives the infantry another capability."
The Mobile Gun System will be the last Stryker variant to be fielded. The Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Reconnaissance Vehicle, the other new Stryker vehicle, was fielded to the 2nd Cavalry Regiment at Fort Lewis, Wash., in February. Soldiers with the 2nd Cav. Regt. will also be the first to receive the Mobile Gun System. They will receive 27 vehicles from July to August, which will be tested in an operational unit environment.
The Army designated 14 Mobile Gun System vehicles for extensive testing at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Md., Yuma Proving Grounds, Ariz., and White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.
Testing the vehicle in extreme climates and terrain helps the Mobile Gun System's designers look for potential problems that may appear in a combat environment.
"People go to great pains to almost abuse the vehicle," Rogers said. "It's tested realistically in harsh settings so we can identify any shortcomings during the testing stage. We don't want to find out about a problem after its in combat, so we're not cutting corners. During the tests, these vehicles aren't treated with kid gloves. We want to make sure we don't equip our Soldiers with a weak vehicle."
It will still be a while before the Mobile Gun System will get to the battlefield. The Defense Acquisition Executive will decide if the vehicle should go into full rate production in July 2007.
#5
They have tungsten flechettes as well (the old Beehive rounds). I thnk the ball will be used for prevention of overpentration, flechette when they need each submunition to penetrate multiple targets or body armor.
Bascially, this is a re-invention of the old infantry assault gun, except with a turret and wheeled for mobility. The bushmaster on the Bradley was supposed to have provided this funtion in Mech Infantry and Armored Cav units.
Glad to see it for direct-fire support. They have a mortar carrier verion stryker too?
#6
They'll need to do some field test firing on Jihadis for vaporization. Any laser gun version coming?
Posted by: Captain America ||
05/19/2006 15:15 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Team them up with GPS-controlled AC-130s, and see the jihadis mess their pants all the way up to their eyeballs! Peace through superior firepower - always a winner.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/19/2006 16:09 Comments ||
Top||
#8
But...but...but...it's inhumane.......
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
05/19/2006 18:36 Comments ||
Top||
#9
True, AP, once their fried, they are no longer human
Posted by: Captain America ||
05/19/2006 18:53 Comments ||
Top||
#10
our targets have proven their inhumanity. Fire at will
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/19/2006 20:43 Comments ||
Top||
May 19, 2006: Islamic radicals operating in the southern Philippines have found that while the "Moro" tribesmen in the area are staunchly conservative Moslems quite willing to engage in war with the "infidel," they don't make good suicide bombers. In fact, they don't become suicide bombers at all.
The Moros have a very strong warrior ethos that glorifies death in battle. But suicide isn't viewed as compatible with their warrior traditions. The way to go is to plunge into battle with the enemy, smiting him left and right until he finally gets you, not blowing yourself up in the middle of a bunch of unsuspecting innocents.
This is where the U.S. Army decided the old .38 didn't have enough stopping power and switched to the .45
As a result, Filipino Islamists have been trying to recruit suicide bombers from outside the region.
Getting outsiders to do the suicide thing made more sense in Iraq, because the Iraqis have a dismal record as warriors. But most people would be surprised to hear that the notoriously fierce Moros disdain that sort of thing. This is not a unique situation. The Afghan warriors also disdain suicide, and al Qaeda has to import foreigners for that work.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/19/2006 16:39 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I am wondering if this is not a trend. People who have tradition of victory or at least of quaklitative superiority over enemies (Moros, Pashtooons, Tchetchens) do not suicide. Arabs make poor fighters so they turn to suicide operations, in the same way the Japanese initially didn't use kamikazes. They turned to them when the training of their pilots became so awful they were unable to kill anything in conventional combat ( by 1945 the Japanese were losing more pilots in air accidents than in combat: they were not even able to keep formation).
Thinking about it; it makes sense: someone who believes that by staying alive he will be able to kill scores of enemies will not be tempted by suicide even when fanatic (eg German SS fought to death but did no suicide attacks), it is when you know that if you trade shots you will be killed without harming the ennemy that you attempt suicide attacks.
#2
The Moros would also wrap their major muscles and torso in tight leather, that while leaving them mobile, would "hold them together" when being shot or sliced. That, combined with smoking plenty of hashish, could sometimes allow them to waltz through a hail of .38 caliber bullets long enough to use their knife on a US officer.
More Fascism fromthe "Religion of Peace" -- Be sure to point htis law out to your well meaning (but ignorant) "we can negotiate with the Islamics" liberal friends/associates
... [A] law passed by the Islamic Majlis (parliament) on Monday.
The law mandates the government to make sure that all Iranians wear "standard Islamic garments" designed to remove ethnic and class distinctions reflected in clothing, and to eliminate "the influence of the infidel" on the way Iranians, especially, the young dress. It also envisages separate dress codes for religious minorities, Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, who will have to adopt distinct colour schemes to make them identifiable in public. The new codes would enable Muslims to easily recognize non-Muslims so that they can avoid shaking hands with them by mistake, and thus becoming najis (unclean).
. . .
Religious minorities would have their own colour schemes. They will also have to wear special insignia, known as zonnar, to indicate their non-Islamic faiths. Jews would be marked out with a yellow strip of cloth sewn in front of their clothes while Christians will be assigned the colour red. Zoroastrians end up with Persian blue as the colour of their zonnar. It is not clear what will happen to followers of other religions, including Hindus, Bahais and Buddhists, not to mention plain agnostics and atheists, whose very existence is denied by the Islamic Republic.
I am further and further convinced that the only answer we can give to Muhammedism is eradication. Complete, utter and total eradication. Before they do the same to us.
As Washington is stepping up pressure on Iran to stop enriching uranium, the Al-Qaeda, for its part, is waiting for a new opportunity to expand the circle of war with the United States.
Arab Gulf sources believe the Al-Qaeda-linked groups in the Gulf and the Red Sea are preparing for the period that will follow a US-Iran clash over the Iranian nuclear issue, as it waited for the US invasion of Iraq.
According to these sources, the Al-Qaeda thinks this clash will offer it a new great opportunity to open a large front after Afghanistan, Iraq, Chechnya and Waziristan in Pakistan.
A US-Iran clash will not have a limited impact. It will rather have repercussions on the whole region. All the tacit agreements between Iran and the USA on Iraq and Afghanistan are likely to collapse.
In addition, Iran and Al-Qaeda may put their differences aside and stand side by side against the United States.
The GCC states, including notably Saudi Arabia, do not want the situation to deteriorate any further. They rather prefer to contain it before it is too late.
They believe the way out of the crisis is to see the Americans agreeing to their demand to have the Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction.
Circles close to the Saudi Foreign Ministry say the Saudis will not give up efforts to settle the Iranian nuclear issue despite Washington and Tehran hardening their positions.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/19/2006 01:43 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Like Saint Bill, IRAN wants to make it categorically absolutely undeniably, unequivocally unconditionally, but only co-incidentally, clear to its ME neightbors - Iran and MadMoud will NOT attack or destroy its ME neighbors! SSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHH,Iranian-supported/controlled Radical Terror groups-militias will, ergo Iran cannot be blamed for anything.
#2
I would love to see the United States go totally anal on all the governments of the Middle East, from pakistan to libya, and south to somalia and sudan. I'd even volunteer to go back into uniform and be assigned anywhere the Air Force wants me. I can't speak for OS or CyberSarge, but I'm sure the sentiment is valid for a lot of us "old fogies". It wouldn't take very long to build the US military into a 10-million man force, if the Government would quit playing games.
Of course, the first thing that would have to be done would be to round up all the dummycritter "peaceniks" and send them to Guantanamo...
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/19/2006 16:04 Comments ||
Top||
#3
All the tacit agreements between Iran and the USA on Iraq and Afghanistan are likely to collapse.
Oh, really? And what might these "tacit agreements" be?
In addition, Iran and Al-Qaeda may put their differences aside and stand side by side against the United States.
What, will Iran now give them their Teheran apartments rent free?
#4
al-Q is making a very bad assumption, namely that "the Ummah" will at some point rise up to defeat the US and whoever else. Again and again they posit that *something* will finally motivate *everybody* to take up arms and go to war.
However, the US knows better. Most people are not inclined to fight at all, and a minority will only fight if it is their neighborhood. And only a tiny number will leave their neighborhood to go fight somewhere else, even if someone holds their hand and pays for them to go.
This is why armies are created only by governments. Only governments can stimulate men to go fight en masse. Otherwise, you just have a small handful of hotheads, and when they are gone, they are gone.
And the US has been systematically bleeding the hotheads throughout the Moslem world in Iraq and Afghanistan. There just aren't that many left.
So al-Q stupidly looks forward to the Moslem world getting thumped. It assumes, time and again, that this will be *the* last straw.
In a US and Iran fight, the Iranian government will demand that all non-Mullahs go to the front lines and die for the cause of the Mullahs. But the US is not going to slaughter a bunch of green and unwilling recruits. We will go around them and take out the dedicated and determined Mullah supporters, and hopefully the Mullahs themselves.
Optimally, the tens or hundreds of thousands of green recruits sent to the front will get little out of the experience other than some foot blisters and an appetite from not eating a whole lot for two or three weeks. Then they will go home.
RAMIEH, Lebanon (AP) - The calm on Lebanon's border with Israel feels increasingly fragile these days as the Iranian nuclear crisis heats up and the adversaries dig in.
The threat of an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, some 900 miles east of here, is being taken seriously enough for both sides to be speculating on what the ripple effect could be. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is calling for Israel's destruction, Israel is threatening to respond in kind, and there are fears that any attack on Iran could trigger an immediate war between the Israeli army and pro-Iranian Hezbollah guerrillas.
Along the 49-mile border, an Arab-Israeli battlefield for decades, "There's been a lot of construction work on both sides," said Milos Strugar, a Yugoslav who serves as senior adviser to the commander of the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon.
"The issues we are dealing with on the ground are between Lebanon and Israel, but the regional context is important in that regard," he said.
In a report to the U.N. Security Council last month, Secretary-General Kofi Annan linked Iran to instability in Lebanon for the first time, urging Tehran to cooperate in trying to restore Lebanon's political independence and disarm militias.
A half-hour's drive east from the Mediterranean, at their outpost near the Israeli village of Zarit, Israeli troops are dug in behind stacks of concrete blocks and wire mesh to stop incoming rockets. An electronic fence runs the length of the border.
A few hundred yards away, Hezbollah fighters are rebuilding positions destroyed by Israeli tanks and planes during an outbreak of fighting last November, reinforcing them with earthen mounds, carving new access roads and building new positions, U.N. officers say.
Near Ramieh, a Lebanese farming village of tobacco fields and olive groves a mile north of Israel, Hezbollah guerrillas drive trucks with tinted windows and no license plates. Each side watches the other ceaselessly, while U.N. peacekeepers watch, report incidents and to try to sustain the cease-fire.
Next Wednesday marks six years since Israel withdrew its army from South Lebanon, ending an 18-year occupation, and there hasn't been any shooting since February. But "the situation is still volatile," Strugar said in an interview.
The Israeli army regularly goes on high alert over reports of Hezbollah plans to kidnap soldiers to trade for Arab prisoners. Israeli planes routinely violate Lebanese airspace and Hezbollah, which is armed with thousands of rockets, has occasionally targeted the Israeli army in Chebaa Farms, a disputed sliver of land where the borders of Syria, Israel and Lebanon meet.
Hezbollah's Lebanese political opponents accuse it of doing the bidding of its backers, Iran and Syria.
Hezbollah rejects the charge but doesn't discuss its military activities publicly.
Shiite Muslim like Iran, it says it's working in Lebanon's interest, although its leader is ambiguous about what it would do if Iran were attacked.
"We are friends of Iran but we are not lackeys," Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said in a recent speech.
In a newspaper interview, he said discussing the matter was premature - that if he declared now that Hezbollah had no intention of responding to an attack on Iran, "I would be giving the Israelis and the Americans free words of comfort."
Defense analyst Reuven Pedatzur of the Israeli newspaper Haaretz believes an attack on Iran could mean "legitimacy for Hezbollah to attack Israel from Lebanon on Iranian orders."
Hezbollah is branded a terrorist organization by the United States and Israel. But in South Lebanon it is effectively in charge. Its yellow flags fly from rooftops and lampposts, and roads are marked with billboards bearing portraits of Hezbollah and Iranian leaders.
A major attack from Lebanon would almost certainly provoke massive Israeli retaliation, and radical Palestinian guerrillas with bases in Lebanon could rise to Iran's defense as well.
If either Syria or Iran is attacked, "we will not only be on their side, we will be in the forefront," warned Ahmed Jibril, a Palestinian guerrilla leader.
But the guerrillas are in a political bind, pressured by a government in Beirut that is dominated by anti-Syrians.
Hezbollah has rejected U.N. demands that it disarm, but is under domestic and international pressure to refrain from launching attacks on Israel.
Caught in the middle of all this are the villagers of South Lebanon, who have known war on and off for nearly 40 years and are wondering how much longer this latest lull can last.
"The events of Syria, Palestine and Iran are intertwined," said Ahmed Hussein, a gray-haired 45-year-old elementary school teacher. "But we wish for peace. We've had bitter experiences with wars. We want to be safe."
Thanks China! Anyone else think we need their approval in the UNSC?
Iran used stocks of high-quality uranium gas from China in order to hasten a breakthrough in enrichment for a programme the West fears could be hiding nuclear weapons work, diplomats told AFP. "The Iranians have sought to accomplish a technological achievement for political purposes and chose the Chinese feedstock gas because of its quality, which ensures a better (uranium) enrichment process," said a diplomat with access to intelligence sources.
The diplomat, who asked not to be named due to the sensitivity of the issue, said Iran had "wanted to declare it had done uranium enrichment and were in a hurry," as they wanted to have a fait accompli before the UN Security Council could move against them once an April deadline fell. The Security Council had given Iran until April 28 to halt enrichment.
A second diplomat said Iran had indeed used uranium hexafluoride (UF6) gas supplied by China to feed a 164-centrifuge cascade, or array of machines, that enriches uranium. But the diplomat said Iran had also tried out some of its own UF6, which intelligence sources say is believed to contain contaminants that can cause centrifuges to crash.
Guess the secret CIA formula worked, huh?
Although Iranian UF6 has gotten better, the Iranians are "trying to create facts on the ground that are not there," non-proliferation analyst David Albright said. He said the Iranians have not yet mastered enrichment and still "have a lot of tests to do.".
The Iranians "did not use their own UF6 because they wanted to be completely sure" they could turn out enriched uranium in time, the first diplomat said. Iran began feeding UF6 gas into centrifuges in February, thus beginning the enrichment process, at a facility in Natanz in the center of the country.
On April 11, Tehran announced that it had actually made enriched uranium but only to levels appropriate for reactor fuel, not for weapons. The first diplomat said that Iran had made only "dozens of grams" of enriched uranium, far from the 15-25 kilograms (30-55 pounds) needed to make a nuclear bomb. "It is a technological success, but it is politically that it is very important," the diplomat said.
Albright agreed with this analysis, saying: "Iran has barely operated its cascade. It needs to operate the cascade much longer and with much greater output" to show that it knows what it is doing. He said that if Iran had operated the 164-centrifuge cascade full-time for two weeks it would have produced two kilograms of enriched uranium but is loading the centrifuges much less than that.
China began building a conversion facility in Isfahan in the 1990s to make UF6 and supplied Iran then with about a ton of the gas but broke the contract in 1997 under US pressure. Iran completed the facility using Chinese designs.
The second diplomat said the Iranians used Chinese feed but also their own UF6, made in Isfahan, at the Natanz enrichment facility, where they had built the 164-centrifuge cascade. "We think they used both, perhaps to compare the two, and certainly to demonstrate to themselves that their own UF6 is capable of being enriched without too many centrifuge problems," the diplomat said.
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
IOW, a base of sufficient level of expertise for the future dev of nuclear missles.
"diplomat, who asked not to be named" how convienent right during the time the debate is shifting to how long till we must take action is getting to be primetime. This "leak" strangley enforces strongly the 3+years assesment.
The United States will not give Iran security guarantees in exchange for forfeiting its nuclear programme, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said on Wednesday. Thats not something from the US thats on the table, McCormack told reporters when asked about European willingness to present Iran with incentives tied to security.
Earlier on Wednesday Irans President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ridiculed the EU plan during a rally in Arak, Iran, saying, They say they want to give us incentives. They think they can take away our gold and give us some nuts and chocolate in exchange. When asked about the comment, McCormack said: I think that once this is presented to the Iranian regime, we will have at least a better idea of what their intent is.
McCormack also said that the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany would meet on Tuesday to work out a common approach on Iran. He said diplomats from the major powers were trying to talk through the question of how would the international community react to either Iran agreeing to this package of incentives or rejecting this package of incentives? A London meeting scheduled for Friday involving world powers on Irans disputed nuclear programme will now take place on May 24, a spokesman for Britains Foreign Office said on Thursday.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
A divided UN Security Council on Wednesday pressed Syria and Lebanon to establish formal diplomatic ties and clarify their shared border to help turn the page on decades of Syrian domination of its neighbour. China and Russia abstained from a 13-0 vote in the 15-member Security Council to implement fully a 2004 measure seeking an end to outside interference in Lebanon, which at the time had been under Syrian domination for 29 years.
The 2004 text, Security Council Resolution 1559, calls for the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon, free and fair presidential elections, and the disarming of all militias so the government could extend its control to all of its territory. It has been only partly implemented.
US Ambassador John Bolton welcomed the vote, but acknowledged he would have preferred it to be unanimous. "It makes clear the burden is now on Syria" to respond to the Lebanese government's request for formal relations and a delineation of the border, Bolton told reporters. "It clearly says Syria needs to do more to stop the flow of weapons across the Syrian border." Council diplomats had predicted that Qatar and Argentina would either abstain or vote against the resolution, but both countries voted in favour of the measure drafted by France, the United States and Britain.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/19/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm pretty certain about this but the CIA had intell' to target OBL pre-9/11 whilst he was at a falcon-hunt in Afghanistan - they had to pull due to the presence of Arab Royals amidst the gathering...
even witnessed the Sheiks meetings with Yasser Arafat (who Parrot says threatened to assassinate Zayeds children if he did not donate to the PLO)Mmmm... very interestin' a5089
Posted by: Howard UK ||
05/19/2006 8:25 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Taliban insurgents and their al-Qaeda allies, once thought defeated in Afghanistan, are regaining strength as the U.S. prepares to cede military control of the war on terror's initial battleground to NATO forces. ``We have lost a lot of the ground that we may have gained in the country, especially in the South,'' Afghanistan's ambassador to the U.S., 
The Afghan government knows where Osama Bin Laden and Mullah Omar are hiding but hopes to find a better way to fight terrorism with Pakistan, Afghan Foreign Minister Rangeen Dadfar Spanta told BBC television on Thursday. 
Pakistan should know that gone are the days when Afghan governments were formed in Pakistan and dissolved there, Afghan President Hamid Karzai was quoted as saying on Thursday. "Afghans are now themselves masters of their country and the Afghan people themselves will take decisions," Karzai was quoted as telling tribal elders and officials in Kunar. 
Police beat demonstrators and detained members of the Muslim Brotherhood Thursday near a courthouse in downtown Cairo where two hearings for pro-reform figures were scheduled to be held. Most of the demonstrators Thursday appeared to be from the banned but tolerated Muslim Brotherhood group. Police said they detained about 100 of the group's members, along with one of its leaders, Essam al-Erian. Other protesters were from the pro-reform Kefaya movement whose members include secularists and Islamists.
May 19, 2006: North Korea appears to have decided to allow its conventional forces to deteriorate. The amount of money required to rebuild the aging weapons and equipment is far more than the north can expect to extort from its neighbors or the United States. What resources that are available are going into the secret police, ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. The North Korea leadership is intent on keeping their tyranny going, because the alternative is death at the hands of an angry population, or war crimes trails for a long list of atrocities. 
Prime Minister Romano Prodi on Thursday vowed to undo most of the policies of his predecessor, Silvio Berlusconi, and pledged to bring all Italy's troops home from what he called the "occupation" of Iraq. 
An Egyptian terror suspect testifying in Federal Court on Thursday refuted claims by Canadas spy agency that he trained and fought as a terrorist.
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush sent Congress a $1.9 billion request Thursday to increase border security as supporters of sweeping immigration legislation reasserted control in Senate debate.
The United States of America will release 16 Saudi detainees from Guantanamo Bay during the next few days, revealed Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal currently on a visit in the US. In a press interview with U.S. media in Washington on Wednesday, he said that the Kingdom will interrogate those detainees upon arrival in the Kingdom, set free those whose charges are not proven and refers others to the judiciary authority. 
The US should shut Guantánamo Bay and give detainees access to a fair trial or release them, a UN human rights watchdog said today. The UN committee against torture voiced concern that detainees were being held at the camp for long periods without judicial scrutiny of the reasons for their detention, adding that Guantánamo detainees had insufficient legal safeguards. "The state party should cease to detain any person at Guantánamo Bay and close the detention facility," a committee report, published today, said.
BAGHDAD - Iraqs parliament expects to vote on a new government on Saturday, the speaker told lawmakers on Wednesday, signalling the prime minister was close to a deal on a cabinet line-up.
The United States will not give Iran security guarantees in exchange for forfeiting its nuclear programme, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said on Wednesday. Thats not something from the US thats on the table, McCormack told reporters when asked about European willingness to present Iran with incentives tied to security. 
A divided UN Security Council on Wednesday pressed Syria and Lebanon to establish formal diplomatic ties and clarify their shared border to help turn the page on decades of Syrian domination of its neighbour. China and Russia abstained from a 13-0 vote in the 15-member Security Council to implement fully a 2004 measure seeking an end to outside interference in Lebanon, which at the time had been under Syrian domination for 29 years.
