'Scotland Yard today revealed it has been unable to trace all but two of 300 black boys aged four to seven reported missing from school in a three-month period.
Child welfare experts say the number highlights the scale of the trade in children brought to Britain as domestic servants and covers for benefit fraud.
The figure emerged through the murder inquiry following the discovery of a child's torso in the Thames in September 2001. The identity of the victim, named "Adam" by police, is not known but his background was traced to Nigeria, it is believed he died in a ritual sacrifice. '
#3
Appears some folks are having trouble "assimilating" maybe? Although it appears they aren't so attached to the old country that they'll pass up the chance to go on the government tit.
Stay tuned on this nightmare...
#7
Final paragraph from the article: The Met's recent Paladin child investigation found hundreds of unaccompanied children arrive in Britain each month.
D'you think that might be a starting point for the investigation? Who is sending these children/ who is picking them up at the airport/ are any of the latter habitual picker uppers?
C'mon, guys -- on all the BBC shows the police brilliantly solve even the most horrible crimes... so this shouldn't tax their ability!
What're the bets up to on whether he'll show or not?
GEORGE GALLOWAY will confront a US Senate committee in Washington next week over its charge that he received an allocation of 20 million barrels of oil from Saddam Hussein's Iraq. The MP, who won the Bethnal Green & Bow seat as an antiwar candidate in the general election, accepted an invitation to testify next Tuesday before the Senate permanent sub-committee on investigations to answer its allegations.
"I'll be there to give them both barrels — verbal guns, of course, not oil — assuming we get the visas. I welcome the opportunity to clear my name," Mr Galloway said. "My first words will be, 'Senator, it's a pity that we are having this interview after you have found me guilty. Even in Kafka there was the semblance of a trial.'" "Assuming we get the visas", Georgie? Planning your out already?
Mr Galloway dismissed what the Senate committee described as "substantial evidence" that he had oil dealings with Iraq. "The hearing will begin promptly at 9.30am and there will be a witness chair and microphone available for Mr Galloway's use," a committee spokesman said. Come early for good seats. Get close enough to watch the sweat drip off his face. If he shows...
The committee also denied Mr Galloway's accusation that it refused to let him testify before issuing its findings. "Contrary to his assertions, at no time did Mr Galloway contact (the committee) by any means including, but not limited to, telephone, fax, e-mail, letter, Morse code or carrier pigeon," said a spokesman. Oh, it was the United States Senate? I thought it was the Somalian Senate! Damn!
Norm Coleman, the committee's Republican chairman, said that Mr Galloway had benefited from doing business with Iraq. When he was asked yesterday if he was saying that Mr Galloway received money, he replied: "Yes, we are saying it is very, very clear, very clear. There's absolutely no doubt in our mind that the individuals who received these allocations, received commissions. There is absolutely no doubt." Damn! Look's like those "visa problems" should be propping up any minute now, right, Georgie?
But he said he had not seen Mr Galloway's bank statements and refused to say whether he thought the MP should face any legal action in Britain. "I'm not going to make any judgment about what happens in Britain. All I'm going to say is that the evidence is clear," Senator Coleman said. "It's incontrovertible that George Galloway received allocations from Saddam Hussein, that he financially benefited from it, that he did it over a period of time, and I believe in the Galloway case about 20 million barrels is the figure . . . so clearly he benefited from doing business with Saddam Hussein." Sorry, chaps. It appears the dog has eaten my visa!
The committee based its case on documents from the Iraqi Oil Ministry and the testimony of officials, including Taha Yassin Ramadan, then the Iraqi Vice-President. The committee traced four of the six transactions in which Mr Galloway allegedly received allocations of oil and concluded that he may have used his Mariam Appeal charity to conceal payments. Well doesn't that answer one of my questions. Scumbag.
One transaction in 2001 was listed in Iraqi documents as being with "Mr Fawaz Zuraiqat/George Galloway/Aredio Petroleum" and with "Aredio Petroleum Company (Fawaz Zuraiqat — Mariam's Appeal)".
Mr Galloway founded the Mariam Appeal to help Mariam Hamze, a four-year-old Iraqi leukaemia victim, to receive treatment in Britain. It later began lobbying against UN sanctions on Iraq. Mr Zuraiqat, also spelt Zureikat, a pro-Saddam businessman in Jordan, was one of the charity's main financial backers.
Two weeks after the 2001 contract, Aredio Petroleum lifted 1,1014,403 barrels of oil. Iraq demanded a bribe of about $300,000 (£160,000), which was allegedly paid in violation of UN sanctions.
"According to the senior Hussein-regime officials interviewed by the sub-committee, every individual who received oil allocations throughout the surcharge period (from September 2000 to late 2002) knew of and were responsible for paying the illegal surcharges," the Senate panel said. "These officials further stated that, although the allocation recipient knew of the surcharges, the actual oil purchasers may have facilitated or made the illegal payments. "According to the senior Hussein regime officials interviewed by the sub-committee, George Galloway would have known of — and perhaps facilitated — the illegal, under-the-table payment of $304,320.90." Oh, yeah. He'll be there Tuesday. Sure he will.
Mr Galloway said: "I will repeat this for the 500th time — I have never seen a barrel of oil, I have never seen a voucher for a barrel of oil, I have never bought one, sold one, traded in one and neither has anyone on my behalf." Now, on little Mariam's "behalf"...
#2
Scott Burgess had one funny quote from Galloway...essentially, "the only barrel of oil I've ever had was the one the Sun newspaper placed in my garden..."
#3
Futures market:
--Galloway fails to show: 42
--Galloway shows but storms out of hearing within first 5 minutes, overturning table and water pitchers: 23
--Galloway shows but disrupts hearings with a performance-art routine by Cynthia McKinney, Michael Maroon and Arianna As The Beaver: 10
--Dog eats George's visa: 25
Normally I'd side with those who prefer not to give publicity platforms to desperate anti-American clowns. Esp when said sad clown is the self-appointed head of Jihad Global PR, Ltd.
But there's a compelling argument that the scenes to ensue will be too rich for the MSM to pass up, forcing them to at last make UNSCAM the top-of-fold, story of the year that it is. Go for it. But keep one figure on the off switch for Georgie's mike.
#8
I put $50 up before my brain caught up with my hands LOL. I say he won't show - he'll claim "witch hunt" and beg off....but if he shows I'll help out the Fred fund for $50
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/13/2005 20:03 Comments ||
Top||
#9
"Both barrels," quoth he. It will take only a single barrel to dispose of Mr. Gallowsway.
The first summit of Latin American and Arab states has ended in Brazil with a vow to work together to promote economic stagnation growth and alleviate sudden outbursts of democracy poverty.
The two-day meeting brought together leaders and representatives of 34 countries from Latin America, north Africa and the Middle East. Its closing declaration included criticism of Israel and the US. Wotta surprise.
The countries pledged to jointly seek reform of international trade, seen by many as favouring people other than the leaders' families rich countries. Thanking the delegates for attending, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Be-Bop-A Lula da Silva said the world was in a new age and that this was a solid new relationship - part of a broader economic and political alliance in the developing world.
Overtly political statements in the closing declaration included a call on Israel to dismantle settlements in the occupied territories and to withdraw to its pre-1967 borders. I am sure that will jump start the Ecuadorian economy.
The leaders expressed deep concern about the imposition of sanctions on Syria by the US. They declared that US policy violated international law. I'm sure Syria's occupation of Lebanon violated international law, too...
There was a call, too, for the elimination of farm subsidies through the World Trade Organization and for reform of the United Nations. Not bad ideas, but I don't think they mean quite the same things as what most RB'ers would mean by those statements.
Brazil and Egypt are among the countries seeking a permanent seats on the Security Council. Why not? They're pretty ineffective, and so is the Security Council. It could work.
Finally, the summit approved a resolution by Argentina criticising the European Union's constitutional treaty. It lists the Falkland Islands in the south Atlantic as a British overseas territory but Argentina disputes the islands' sovereignty. "Yeah! Just 'cause they whupped our ass without trying very hard, that doesn't mean it's settled!"
#1
This has boondoggle written all over it. "Hey guys, who's up for a free trip to Rio?"
Posted by: Matt ||
05/13/2005 8:20 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I happened to be in brazil this past week. flying back last night, I encountered two journalists who covered the conference. They worked for al Reuters.
#3
oh. and they said it was going to be a "nonpolitical" meeting...simply to explore mutual economic interests. Then they told me Chavez gave a ranting, paranoid speech (as he always does these days). I know it railed against US imperialism and Bush, not sure about the other stuff he talked about. So, since this was supposed to be nonpolitical, I asked how the delegates reacted. They said he got a standing ovation. From everyone.
#4
Another blogger (can't remember who, sorry, will post link if I do) was assessing this summit. Only 7 of 22 invited heads of Arab states attended, and one of those was a Kurd (Talabani, heh.) There was a moderate amount of friction between los Americanos and the Arabs, primarily because they had differing agendas. The Arabs wanted to denounce Israel and whinge about the Paleos, the Western Hemisphereans were really only interested in economics. As you can see by the statement, they compromised, but apparently not happily.
Foreign pro-democracy activists are secretly plotting revolution in Belarus, Russia's spy chief has said. Nikolai Patrushev, head of the FSB security service, said foreign NGOs had been working covertly to help unseat President Alexander Lukashenko. The US has called Belarus, a close ally of Russia and President Vladimir Putin, "Europe's last dictatorship".
Speaking to Russia's parliament, Mr Patrushev accused US, British, Kuwaiti and Saudi NGOs of spying.
"Everyone's plotting against us! Deep sinister plots!"
Mr Patrushev, considered an ally of Mr Putin, said that at least $5m (£2.6m) has been funnelled to opposition groups in Belarus for 2005. He did not specify who he suspects of providing the money. Viktor Vegera, deputy head of the Belarusian security service, the KGB, supported Mr Patrushev's allegations in a TV interview.
Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko recently said foreign efforts to impose democracy or end his alliance with Russia would fail. A referendum in 2004 showed massive support for him running for a third term - but many observers said it was rigged.
Mr Patrushev said that foreign intelligence services were actively working to repeat the success of Ukraine's "Orange Revolution". "Our opponents are steadily and persistently trying to weaken Russian influence in the Commonwealth of Independent States and the international arena as a whole," Mr Patrushev said. "The latest events in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan unambiguously confirm this." An uprising in Kyrgyzstan in March forced long-serving President Askar Akayev into exile in Moscow.
Earlier this week US President George W Bush spoke to huge crowds in Tbilisi, capital of Georgia, praising the peaceful "Rose revolution" that installed Mikhail Saakashvili as president in 2003. A day earlier, Mr Bush stood alongside Mr Putin in Moscow at ceremonies marking the 60th anniversary of the Allied victory in Europe in World War II.
"Plans are being drawn up to involve Ukrainian 'orange' officials to carry out a similar revolution in Belarus," Mr Patrushev said in Moscow. "Foreign secret services are more actively using unconventional methods in their work and are using the teaching programmes of various NGOs to promote their interests."
The FSB chief singled out the US Peace Corps, which pulled out of Russia in 2002 amid spying allegations, British medical group Merlin, the Saudi Red Crescent and a Kuwaiti group called the Society of Social Reforms.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/13/2005 8:14:35 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Its the BBC. When Russia was surrounded by nutbag dictators Lukashenko didn't stand out too much. Each one of them that goes down makes Lukashenko more of an embarassment to Russia. Putin will drop him like the proverbial hot potato despite the Beeb's most fervent wishes.
EFL: Japan's parliament has approved a law to rename a public holiday in honour of World War II Emperor Hirohito. The Showa Day holiday, named after Hirohito's posthumous title, is intended to mark Japan's post-war rebirth as well as look to the future. But critics say the move will upset other nations, especially China and the two Koreas, who will say it glorifies Japan's often brutal militaristic past.
Seething in 4..3..2..
A similar bill was abandoned in the past, due to political pressure. But this time the main opposition Democratic Party of Japan backed the bill, which was proposed by the ruling coalition. The opposition said it now accepted the idea that the holiday would encourage public reflection of the turbulent 63 years of Hirohito's reign, rather than glorify the emperor himself.
The bill enacting the new name was promoted by members of Prime Minister Koizumi's Liberal Democratic Party, which argues that Japan has already apologised enough for its past. But correspondents say the move will upset other Asian nations because it refers to the period when Japanese troops brutally occupied neighbouring states.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/13/2005 8:09:59 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
[snark]I'm sure the Gauls were happy with July (Julius) and the Germans with August (Augustus) on their calendars too.[/snark]
#3
We were gonna call it China day but you guys protested and acted all unfriendly so we're going to the fallback name. ~Koisumi with middle fingers verticle.
#6
maybe I'm over-reacting but I feel it's a slap in the face to us as well. I know we have a decent relationship with Japan now, but history does repeat itself. Like when I visited the USS Arizona recently, you had more Japanese there than Americans and all loudly (disrespectfully) jabbering in Japanese. We may or may not need them for North Korean negotiation and it's clear they're a great economic partner however if Germany came up with an Adolph Hitler Day, I'd be just a teensy bit suspicious...
#10
Shellback, were there any Japanese tourists on the Missouri? The normal celebratory swarm of Japanese at the Arizona only have to look up to see the site of Japan's surrender. George H W Bush, a veteran of the war in the Pacific, placed it there deliberately and with great satisfaction.
Allies - 1st place (won WWII)
Germany - first runner up (damn near won the thing)
Japan - second runner up (beaten by what could be seen as USA's "second team", not to denigrate brave warriors who gave their all there, but FDR had committed to "Europe First" policy of material distribution)
I guess my main point was even "runner-up" status too complimentary for Japan's WWII history. We need them now, and I respect them as a culture and as a more staunch ally than most, but they really do have to do a better job of coming to terms with that era, IMO.
The US Defense Department is weighing whether a decision to shoot down any suspected inbound North Korean missile should go all the way to the president, a top general told Congress on Wednesday.
Ummm... How's "no" sound?
Marine Gen. James Cartwright, commander of the Strategic Command that coordinates US missile defense operations, said the authorization would ideally come from the president and the secretary of defense, but there might not be time enough.
Jumped right on that one, didn't he?
"As you can imagine, getting the president, the secretary, the regional combat commander into a conversation and a conference in a three to four-minute time frame is going to be challenging," Cartwright told the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on defense. "So what are the rules that we lay down? We are working very hard with the secretary to lay down those rules and understand the risks associated with those very quick and timely decisions that are going to have to be made ... when we deal with the North Korean threat," he testified.
I'd go with "shoot first and ask questions later." How about you?
North Korea, at odds with the United States over its nuclear programme, is believed to have the capability to mount a warhead on one of its long-range missiles, Vice Adm. Lowell Jacoby, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told Congress last month. Cartwright said the US missile defense system is designed to "characterize" a threat in its first three to four minutes of flight.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What possible reason could there be for not intercepting an inbound missile?
#3
The only real question should be whether or not the president then authorizes the retaliation that turns NK a parking lot. Honestly, our nukes should be in the air even before we shoot down their incoming.
#6
The article has to have its facts wrong because how did a Narine General end up in charge of Strategic Defence? The Air Force,Army and Navy all have anti-missile programs,but not the Marines.I remember an article telling of how mediocre the current crop of Army Generals is,as evidenced by a Marine given Europe,but this? Was he a compromise between services,or are the Marines promoting the right people?
Posted by: Stephen ||
05/13/2005 4:30 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Marine GEN Cartwright is indeed the commander of STRATCOM. He is an F-4 and F-18 pilot and has carrier logistics command experience. Both of those planes are multirole fighters used by the Marines for close air support of land/littoral combat operations as well as air-to-air combat.
His appointment to this command is not so surprising when you look at his experience, the kinds of conflict that are likely to percolate for the next 19-20 years and this SECDEF's focus on nimble, integrated ops that differ in several ways from the force-on-force conflicts of past major wars.
For similar reasons Marine GEN Pace has also been nominated for Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
#9
What possible reason could there be for not intercepting an inbound missile?
It's going to land on Ottawa?
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/13/2005 8:52 Comments ||
Top||
#10
It sounds to me like the answer quoted was a debunk of a question along the lines of off 'Will the President make the decision to shoot down a Nork missile?' He can hardly say 'That's a stupid question.' He clearly states they are in the process of defining the rules of engagement, i.e. it will not be dependant on the decision of any specific individual.
#11
One of the things I like about Bush, if a commander made the decision to blow up a incoming missle, Bush would support the commander. Unlike some Donks I know who would use the commander as a sacrificial lamb even if the commander made the right call.
#12
All this is Pentagon fodder for public consumption. The system for "protocol" responding has been worked out long before 911. During the heydays of the movie "Dr. Stranglove..." when a lower ranked military officer was shown as 'commandeering' the US's nuclear launch triggering schemes; was such senarios thoroughly strategized. I surmise this at being propaganda for North Korean dissemination!
#14
SMN,
Amusing footnote to your DR.Strangelove reference. Gen.LeMay hated the film and banned it from SAC airbases and informally made it known no SAC personnel should watch it. My dad was a KC-135 pilot based at Rapid City at the time,and when he took my mom to see a late showing,the theatre was packed w/nothing but base personnnel and their wives/girlfriends.
When the Cuban Missile Crisis got hot,there were a bunch of accidents from people fleeing Rapid City. My mom decided to stay and was going shopping,when my dad told her to just remember,we might not go to war and we'll have to actually pay the credit card bills.
In what at first glance seems a wonderful bit of military insanity,the war plans at time had the KC-135s based on East Coast fly into interior of US,while the KC-135s based in interior flew to East Coast,and then on to refuel the bombers. No doubt the logic was bases in the coastal States would get hit in a suprise attack,and any survivors would form reserve,while bases in interior hopefully had more warning and thus could support the first strikes better.(Incidentally,one plan had the KCs over Atlantic delivering so much fuel to bombers that they wouldn't have enough fuel to make it do bases in Norway. Unofficially,most of pilots told their crews they would keep enough to make it to a base.)
Posted by: Stephen ||
05/13/2005 16:13 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Dr Strangelove was funny On the Beach was shit scary.
#16
On the Beach was great for its time. I re-read it again about a year ago and was struck by the fatalism, but even more by the acceptance of it all. Everyone just took their red pill when it was time. Somehow I doubt that would happen today.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/13/2005 17:54 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Counterpoint to On the Beach is Alas Babylon which is has a much more positive take on Nuclear Combat and humanity. :)
#22
IIRC, my older sister had to read Alas Babylon in junior high in California in the mid-70's. It's a conspiracy, Shipman!
Re fatalism and On the Beach... I never understood why Shute didn't have the Aussies put a few thousand folks in mineshafts until the Co60 dissipated.
It also seems to me that we are entering an On the Beach kind of world. Shute's story involved massive nuclear proliferation. Nasserites start WWIII with a suicide nuke attack on Washington D.C. Kind of reminds me of something that happened a few years ago... hmmm.
via DhimmiWatch An outspoken Sydney Muslim leader has been sacked and replaced by supporters of a radical cleric he criticised for claiming women incited rape. Keysar Trad was on Saturday night deposed as president of the Lebanese Muslim Association after a falling-out with the spiritual leader of Australia's Muslims, al-Hilali, the grand poobah of Australian muslims is now in Iraq, discussing ransom negotiating over hostage Douglas Wood
sparking community fury following his criticism of Faiz Mohammed. Supporters of Mr Trad, who until yesterday also acted as spokesman for Mufti Taj Din al-Hilali, claim that 11 of the 15 new LMA directors are strong supporters of Sheik Faiz, who caused widespread anger last month when he linked the way women dressed and behaved to their risk of rape. Mr Trad said yesterday he had been threatened in the lead-up to the LMA elections by students and supporters of the firebrand cleric. Resort to threats when you can't defend your ideas or actions. It's the islamic way.
Three imams carried the bulk of influence among the board and Mr Trad believes at least two had voted against him. "I believe that my criticism of the comments by Sheik Faiz may have influenced The Real SlimImam Shady to withdraw his support and allow the committee to select a more pliant board member," he said. "Most of the comments were received when the Faiz issue blew up in the media. "I received calls from students of Faiz, one of whom called me directly and said I should not criticise the brother. But this (rape) comment is something he should not have made."
Sheik Faiz courted controversy last month when he gave a lecture at Bankstown Town Hall in which he said women who dressed provocatively could blame only themselves if they were raped. "A victim of rape every minute somewhere in the world. Why? No one else to blame but herself," he said. "She displayed her beauty to the entire world. She degraded herself by being an object of desire." Mr Trad also attributed his demise to personal acrimony between himself and Sheik Hilali over his outspoken dealings with media. So much for the moderate muslim when even the Caliph of Australia won't condemn a high ranking imam saying that women who are raped had it comming to them. Instead get rid of the man who does the only decent thing. What al-Hilali and the Lebanese Muslim Association are really saying is that it is OK to give it "Leb style" to infidel women.
This article starring:
FAIZ MOHAMED
Lebanese Muslim Association
IMAM SHADY
Lebanese Muslim Association
KEYSAR TRAD
Lebanese Muslim Association
TAJ DIN AL HILALI
Lebanese Muslim Association
Lebanese Muslim Association
Posted by: Fred (actually Ed) ||
05/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ok, how did Fred's name get on this post? I meant to post this article to page 2. Can a moderator move it? Thanks.
Posted by: ed ||
05/13/2005 0:13 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Muslims think a it a right to rape non muslim women. If you don't believe it take a good look at rape in the Nehterlands and Sweden. The rapes are mostly muslim on non muslim. The Muslims will alwys tell you they had it coming. It is rarely properly investigated or prosecuted.
#3
But of course, SPoD! If they didn't want to be raped, they would have put on a modest black tent, and then never left their house. How else is a good, Muslim man to react to such provocation, and how dare we lack understanding of such cultural differences?!?
HAMBURG - Germany has agreed to extradite a suspected CIA informer to Switzerland to stand trial for his alleged role in smuggling nuclear technology to Libya, according to a report on Friday. The report in Der Spiegel news magazine quoted federal officials in Berlin as saying Urs Tinner would be extradited "within days" to Switzerland.
Tinner allegedly oversaw production in Malaysia and Turkey of components for a centrifuge destined for the Libyan nuclear programme.
He was the on-site quality control expert for B.S.A. Tahir's operation, subcontractors to the Khan network.
He was arrested in Germany last October on a Swiss warrant after reportedly having tipped off the CIA to his work in a deal for clemency.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/13/2005 11:33:26 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
PARIS, May 12 (AFP) - Former French interior minister Charles Pasqua on Thursday denied taking kickbacks in the 1990s from Saddam Hussein's ousted Iraqi regime under the UN oil-for-food programme, as alleged in a US probe. "In January 2004, and then again in October 2004, I denied having received any advantages whatsoever, in any form, from the Iraqi authorities or the regime of Saddam Hussein," Pasqua said in a statement.
A US Senate committee said Thursday it had "detailed evidence" that Pasqua and controversial British MP George Galloway received "lucrative oil allocations" in kickbacks from Baghdad. The report by the US Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations is based on what it says are Iraqi oil ministry documents and testimony of senior officials in Saddam's regime, ousted in the US-led invasion in March 2003. Earlier reports pointing the finger at Pasqua's alleged illicit involvement in the oil-for-food programme emerged in January 2004 in the Iraqi newspaper Al-Mada, and again in October 2004 in a CIA report.
"The report published today by the US Senate Permanent Sub-committee on Investigations is largely based on these earlier reports. Once again, I deny the allegations," Pasqua said. "This report also touches on points raised in articles published on April 28, 2005 in the Financial Times and an Italian daily, Il Sole 24 Ore. I will sue them for libel," the former interior minister added.
The US Senate panel said it had found evidence that Pasqua received some 11 million barrels of oil in allocations from Iraq and that Galloway had received 20 million barrels. US Senator Norm Coleman, head of the subcommittee, said: "This report exposes how Saddam Hussein turned the oil-for-food programmeme on its head and used the programmeme to reward his political allies like Pasqua and Galloway." Earlier, Galloway furiously denied the allegations as "a big lie."
"Having not had any government responsibilities in France since 1995, I hope that those running the affairs of this country since that date will assume their own responsibilities," Pasqua said. Pasqua served twice as France's interior minister - from 1986 to 1998 and again from 1993 to 1995. He is best known for pushing through a series of anti-immigration laws. The US panel said in its report that Pasqua sought to conceal his involvement because he "feared political scandals".
The USD 64 billion UN oil-for-food programmeme, which ran from 1996 to 2003, allowed Baghdad, which was under international sanctions, to sell limited quantities of oil so it could buy food and medicines for the Iraqi people.
Last month, a former aide to Pasqua, Bernard Guillet, was placed under judicial investigation in France - a step short of formal charges - as part of a corruption probe connected with the UN oil-for-food programmeme. Investigators believe Guillet received commissions from a middleman who brokered the resale of Iraqi oil. Pasqua, as a member of the French senate, currently enjoys parliamentary immunity from prosecution.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/13/2005 11:17:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
I think it is a mediatic trap: ensure the wrong guy is accused and when proven innocent the accuser will be paralyzed at investigating the real culprits.
Pasqua is the ideal suspect: he has been involved in secret-services style operations since he was young. In the 60s he created a kind of private secret service for fighting those who wanted to kill De Gaulle in the 60s. He has also the reputation of being quite corruptible and he virtually created Chirac.
Problem is that he broke with Chirac in 1994 and is no longer access to the deciding circles in France while the media more or less boycott him for being right wing. If the Iraki officer in charge in France was remotely competent the last person he would hire would be Pasqua: he has no influence outside his district: why spend money on him?
The European Court of Human Rights on Thursday upheld a ruling in favour of jailed Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan, saying that he had been unfairly tried by a Turkish court, and urged Ankara to retry him. Ocalan was sentenced to death in a high-profile trial in 1999, but his sentence was commuted to a life sentence, which he is currently serving in the prison island of Imrali. In an 11-to-6 ruling, the European judges considered that the Turkish state security court judging Ocalan was neither independent nor impartial because of the presence of a military judge on the panel.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
European court says Ocalan trial unfair, recommends retrial
Can't these guys wait until Turkey is an EU member before interfe....er, uh, getting involved?
Oh yeah, right, there's that little issue of IF Turkey will ever become an EU member...
Yep, Babs Boxer is at it again.
Democrats in the US Senate have made a fresh bid to derail the appointment of John Bolton, the embattled White House pick for UN ambassador, after a Senate panel declined to back him ahead of a floor vote. Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer "put a hold on the nomination" of Bolton as US ambassador to the United Nations, her spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz said without indicating how the process could be delayed. The move is intended to either force further negotiations or ultimately to prevent his nomination from reaching the Senate floor.
A Senate panel took the rare step Thursday of refusing to endorse President George W. Bush's choice for UN ambassador, although it did send the nomination to the full Senate for confirmation. The White House had hoped that Bolton would receive the seal of approval of the committee's 10 Republicans, whose backing would have improved his odds for success in the Senate vote. Instead, Bolton barely squeaked out of the polarized Senate committee. His nomination was apparently saved after several Republicans agreed to forward his nomination for the UN post, without giving him explicit support.
Despite the lack of a congressional endorsement, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she was "pleased" by the outcome, and expressed hope for Bolton's quick confirmation. Rice argued that Bolton, currently undersecretary for arms control and international security at the US State Department, would bring the "skill and dedication necessary to advance the president's reform agenda" at the UN. A date has not been set for the vote in the Senate where Republicans hold a 55 to 45 majority. But Democrats promised they would continue to fight tooth and nail against the nomination as it moves to the chamber. "If this comes to the floor, we're going to have a fight," Senator Barbara Boxer said during the committee meeting. It'll be a short fight, Babs, and you'll lose.
#2
I am not surprised they would take this route, but couldn't the Republicans stop this? Jeebus, all they had to do was take Bab's talking paper away and she would have babbled on about anything. I just can't wait for the sound bites come 2006 when the Democrats are SLAMMED for their "civility" during this legislature. Again I want to apoligize for having such a loser of a Senator that represents my state. If need be I will run against her next time and trounce her but good.
#6
IIUC a single senator can't hold a cabinet or other pick. Holds are courtesies given to a senator over the nomination of a judicial pick from their state. Since the judicial appointments are for life, the courtesy allowed a homestate senator leeway ... Boxer's dumb as the proverbial box of rocks, and no doubt believes she can stop Bolton, but I don't think so...
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/13/2005 15:40 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Boxer's running for the Dem president/VP nomination. This is intended both to stir up the Left and to cause as much damage as she can along the way.
Posted by: too true ||
05/13/2005 15:52 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I live in the state this dumb retard is representing. She doesn't represent me or my political opinion ever.
I wish we could just turn the Bay area and LA into city states and quit being dominated by their socialist majorities.
The f-bomb isn''t even profane enough to express my feelings about my Senators. She doesn't listen to our opinions in this part of the state thats for damn sure.
Get out of the way and shut the hell up, you plastic faced bitch.
#9
I think the pointlessness must be the point. The Dems desperately want to win at *something*. So they picked a battle that doesn't matter at all. The Repubs didn't see it coming. Viola. The Dems came close to derailing a nominee before we even knew what was going on. If they had won they could have gone one endlessly (like this post) in Moveon.org emails about how they are beating the "extremists" and needs lots more money for Bush=Hitler ads.
Besides voting down a nomination, how else can the Senate block it?
Through filibusters or the more common "hold." Filibusters are rarely used, but in 1995 Clinton's nomination of Dr. Henry Foster for surgeon general died due to a Republican filibuster. More common are the mysterious Senate holds. This process, not spelled out in the Senate rules, allows any senator, for no given reason, to anonymously put on hold a nomination by simply asking his or her party leader for the delay. It was originally a sort of courtesy accorded to senators who wanted a vote delayed briefly due to scheduling problems or who needed time to gather more information. In recent years it has turned into a method for permanent obstruction. Holds can be put on for purposes that have nothing to do with a nominee as a way of forcing the administration to accommodate a senator's wishes on another matter. In recent years there have been 30 or more holds at a given time on nominees for judicial, ambassadorial, and other posts. A recent reform is requiring identification of the senator requesting the hold, but that has not always been forthcoming.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/13/2005 18:02 Comments ||
Top||
#11
not spelled out in the Senate rules, allows any senator, for no given reason, to anonymously put on hold a nomination by simply asking his or her party leader for the delay. It was originally a sort of courtesy accorded to senators who wanted a vote delayed briefly due to scheduling problems or who needed time to gather more information
think that'll work? The only weapon the Dems have is to not show up to try and avoid a quorum. That'll look good. Good catch SW -thx!
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/13/2005 19:06 Comments ||
Top||
U.S. Border Patrol agents have been ordered not to arrest illegal aliens along the section of the Arizona border where protesters patrolled last month because an increase in apprehensions there would prove the effectiveness of Minuteman volunteers, The Washington Times has learned.
More than a dozen agents, all of whom asked not to be identified for fear of retribution, said orders relayed by Border Patrol supervisors at the Naco, Ariz., station made it clear that arrests were "not to go up" along the 23-mile section of border that the volunteers monitored to protest illegal immigration.
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
05/13/2005 14:13 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
U.S. Border Patrol agents have been ordered not to arrest illegal aliens along the section of the Arizona border
WASHINGTON — The Defense Department on Friday will propose shutting 33 major military installations across the country, FOX News has confirmed, triggering the first round of base closures in a decade and an intense struggle by communities to save their facilities. The Pentagon's list is merely a list of recommendations. The list then goes to a nine-member commission that will review it, travel to those installations and discuss the potential closings with community members. The panel is known as the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) commission.
More than 100 other smaller facilities would also be closed, including scores of Reserve and National Guard installations. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld will announce the Pentagon's recommendations around 10:30 a.m. EDT Friday. The defense secretary has said the move would save $48.8 billion over 20 years while reshaping the military for America's expected 21st century adversaries.
Among the major closures is Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota, home to 29 B-1B bombers, half the nation's fleet of the aircraft, and the state's second largest employer. During the 2004 campaign, Republican John Thune told voters that if elected to replace then Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, his GOP ties would ensure that the base remained open. Daschle said that as minority leader, he would have an appointment to the Base Realignment and Closure Commission and be in a better position to help Ellsworth.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/13/2005 10:00:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Closing the submarine base at New London? That's a pretty deep cut.
#4
Most of bases listed are real small, mostly reserve. I see most all DFAS regional offices are closing with HQ at Indianapolis gaining. Other bigs going, Fort Gillen, Ft. McPherson, Naval Shipyard Portsmouth, Otis Air Guard Base, Ft. Monmouth, Cannon AFB, Ellsworth AFB, Brooks City Base, Naval Station Ingleside, Red River Army Depot, Ft. Monroe.
Now it goes to the BRAC Commission and the politicing begins.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/13/2005 11:00 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Closing a couple here in Az.less than 70 personel combined.
#6
Internally there has been a belief for a while that Monroe should have been closed with the Training and Doctrine elements moved to the Combined Arms Center at Fort Leavenworth. Monroe couldn't physically expand, there is room to grow on the existing grounds at Leavenworth [outside and inside the walls :)].
#8
no big closings because SECDEF is serious about bringing units home from Europe and Korea.
Posted by: too true ||
05/13/2005 12:29 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Mojo:
They are just closing the NWSSB deteachment at Concord. That's only 71 people. Seal Beach and Concord themselves are not closing.
They are closing Corona, though. I used to work there in 87-95. No loss. I hated that place. Though, it looks like they'll all be moving to beautiful China Lake. Ha ha.
Arizona came out OK. D-M AFB was never in any danger. Luke and Ft. Huachuca are losing about 200 each, but not actually closing.
#10
Hey China Lake is wonderful. heheheh
Only if you have never been their through may through October. It's a freeking oven but Ridgecrest is actually a nice little town these days.
Given there is no data in this report, Its hard to seperate genuine issues from spin. Otherwise things are not good or bad, they are better or worse. Without a basis for comparison absolute staements like these are meaningless. What's the baseline for comparison - Darfur or Downtown Manhattan?Daily living conditions in Iraq are dismal, with families suffering from intermittent water and electricity supply, chronic malnutrition among children and more illiterate young than ever before, a new report by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Iraqi Government shows.
"While many aspects of living conditions in Iraq in 2004 are dismal, most reflect the courage, endurance and determination of the Iraqi people to overcome the hurdles they are facing," Staffan de Mistura, the UN Deputy Special Representative for Humanitarian, Reconstruction and Development Affairs, said at the ceremony to launch the three-volume survey.
Despite the conflict, the society was functioning, though under considerable stress, he quoted survey results as showing.
Iraqi questioners, trained by a Norwegian research non-governmental organization (NGO), asked 22,000 households in 18 governorates about their housing, infrastructure, population, health, education, work, income and the status of women, and the analysis followed international standards for statistical reporting.
Although a large percentage of the population in Iraq is connected to water, electricity and sewage networks, the supply has been too unstable to make a difference to people's lives, the survey results show.
Almost a quarter of the children between 6 months and 5 years suffer from chronic malnutrition. The young today are more illiterate than preceding generations and this, in a country where 39 per cent of the people are younger than 15. Young men with a high school education or better are suffering from 37 per cent unemployment.
The survey "not only allows for a good understanding of socio-economic conditions in Iraq, but will also be a building block for further analysis that will certainly benefit the development and reconstruction processes in Iraq," Mr. de Mistura said.
"It will be especially helpful in addressing the grave disparities — urban and rural as well as those between the governorates — revealed by the survey, in a more prioritized and targeted fashion."
#1
âWhile many aspects of living conditions in Iraq in 2004 are dismal, most reflect the courage, endurance and determination of the Iraqi people to overcome the hurdles they are facing,â Staffan de Mistura, the UN Deputy Special Representative for Humanitarian, Reconstruction and Development Affairs, said at the ceremony to launch the three-volume survey.
Chief hurdle being the UN.
I bet were Kofi and all his buddies were to return the money stolen from the Iraqi people during OFF, we wound't be having more UN buddies trying to skew statistics to cover their own asses.
#2
How many surveys did the UNDP do during Sadaam's days? You know, so we got a benchmark to compare the current situation to? I'll bet is it's probabaly like...none?
Myanmar's military government has stepped up security and ordered medical workers not to speak with reporters about three bomb blasts that shook the capital, Yangon, over the weekend. Eyewitness reports indicated the death toll could spike sharply higher.
Medical workers contacted by telephone told [Radio Free Asia's] Myanmar service they had been warned against disclosing anything related to the blasts on Saturday at two upscale supermarkets and the Yangon Convention Center, site of a Thai trade fair. Thai officials, meanwhile, said at least 21 people had been killed - 10 more than the fatalities reported by the Myanmar junta.
The Myanmar government routinely restricts information on sensitive incidents such as bombings, clashes between authorities and the opposition, conflict with the country's fractious ethnic minorities, and even natural disasters.
The junta is blaming the bombings on ethnic rebel groups, including the Karen National Union and the Shan State Army, and exiled dissidents in the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB). Karenni National Progressive Party (KNPP) secretary Raymond Htoo, Karen National Union (KNU) secretary Phado Mansha, and Shan State Army (SSA) spokesman Nang Khur Sen have all denied any role in the blasts, along with NCGUB leader Dr Sein Win.
The explosions came less than two weeks after a bombing at a market in the northern city of Mandalay killed two women and wounded 15 people. The junta blamed that attack on unnamed rebels.
According to the witness, security in Yangon has been tightened since the blasts. "Monasteries and houses were ordered to report all overnight guests. Also, at the city gate and bus and train stations, security is up," the witness said.
[Reprinted by Asia Times with permission of Radio Free Asia]
TEHERAN - Two more prominent Iranian hardliners on Friday signed up to contest the June 17 presidential election, leaving the right-wing camp divided in its battle to prevent a comeback by more moderate conservative cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani.
There is no right or left in Iran.
Former national police chief Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf told reporters that he had the best chance of beating Rafsanjani - widely seen as the favorite to succeed incumbent reformist President Mohammad Khatami.
Also turning up at the interior ministry to register as a candidate was Tehran's mayor Mahmood Ahmadinejad, bringing to three the number of prominent hardliners bidding for the country's second-highest post.
Dressed in a casual white suit -- a change from his more familiar uniform or dark three-piece -- Qalibaf complained that the hardline camp had failed to respect an understanding that opinion polls would decide the nomination of a single candidate. And despite his background as a top commander in the powerful Revolutionary Guards, Qalibaf dismissed suggestions that he will install a military-style government as "immoral campaigning".
"I will observe ethics in the campaign," a jovial-looking Qalibaf told reporters as he released a three-page campaign declaration entitled "An Iranian deserves a good life."
"And anyone who disagrees with me will be shot. Insh'allan."
His statement said Iranians did not have an adequate quality of life, which to him included the "social and spiritual dimensions".
Qalibaf, 44, quit as police chief last month in order to contest the elections, and some analysts have painted him as a favorite of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But Qalibaf said he was "not a part of any political party or group".
Although Ahmadinejad also registered Friday, many believe he may later be forced at gunpoint to withdraw in favor of Qalibaf. The same is expected of Mohsen Rezai, a former head of the Revolutionary Guards, who registered his candidacy on Wednesday. Another top conservative candidate, former state television boss and Khamenei advisor Ali Larajani, has also yet to register. He had been selected as the conservative's sole contender, but has been placed far behind Qalibaf.
So who does the Calipah favor, anyways?
Former foreign minister and another Khamenei advisor Ali Akbar Velayati, has not registered yet amid expectations he will pull out in favor of Rafsanjani.
Rafsanjani, a pragmatic conservative who served as Iran's president from 1989 to 1997, has been placed by a string of informal opinion polls as a clear frontrunner. Seen as a figure who favors closer ties with the West and economic liberalization, the 70-year-old cleric and regime veteran opened his campaign by pledging to save the country from life, liberty and personal happiness "extremists".
The reformist camp, increasingly isolated after being ousted from parliament last year in polls that saw most of their candidates disqualified by hardliners, are lacking a strong candidate. Their main candidate is Mustafa Moin, a former higher education minister.
After registering, would-be candidates will go through a tough screening process overseen by the Guardians Council -- an unelected hardline-controlled body that has the power to decide whose names can go on the ballot sheet. Moin has in the past been at odds with the Guardians Council and risks being disqualified.
The registration period closes late on Saturday, after which the vetting process commences.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/13/2005 09:07 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
TEHRAN - A top Iranian reformist jailed for publishing an opinion poll stating most people wished to see dialogue resume with the United States has been freed after Iran's Supreme Court ruled he was not guilty of spying, his lawyer told AFP on Friday.
Abbas Abdi, a prominent member of the Islamic Iran Participation Front (IIPF), the main pro-reform party, was sentenced to four and half years behind bars in 2003 on charges including "providing information to the enemies of the Islamic regime."
Abdi's lawyer, Saleh Nikbakht, said "the Supreme Court, in an unprecedented decision, declared that Iran and the United States were not in a state of hostilities and the differences between Iran and the United States were political differences.
Though it's hard to tell, this being Iran.
"Abbas Abdi has been cleared and freed after 30 months in prison," he added.
He said the court had ruled that the charges of "cooperating with an enemy goverment were not fair" and that "the sale of information from an opinion poll ... is not covered by laws of the Islamic republic."
Contacted at his home by AFP, Abdi politely declined to make any comment. "I prefer to say nothing, because if I do say something it would stir things up, so therefore I will shut up for the time being," he said.
"Please don't kill me!"
In late 2002, Abdi sparked uproar among hardliners and a judicial backlash by releasing an opinion poll stating that 74 percent of Iranians want their clerical regime to talk with Washington. The subject of US-Iran relations is something of a taboo here, where the United States is often labelled as the "Great Satan" and crowds are encouraged to chant "Death to America".
Ironically, Abdi was also one of the leading players in the seizing of the US embassy in Tehran in 1980 and the holding of its diplomats for 444 days, an event that prompted the severing of ties between Tehran and Washington.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/13/2005 09:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is such an amazingly perverse black comedy that, were it not actually happening, no one would buy it as fiction - it would simply be too absurd, melodramatic, and inane. Self-respecting actors would shun the roles as radioactive career-enders.
Referring the MM's to the UNSC is just another box to check off in the apparently MM-scripted march to a showdown.
#3
SPoD - I certainly agree: if the US were to insist the resolution have real teeth, indeed, the Gummy Bears would veto it. But I don't think that's a surprise to Dubya in any way.
Okay, I'll prolly regret it, lol, but here's my big picture take on all of this shit. There's a real and subtle strategy at work here, I believe. I'd say that there are 4 parts to it:
1) Expose all of the players to public scrutiny
2) Demonstrate / prove that the official game is now rigged to defeat or cripple American interests
3) Forge a new approach - one that actually is serious about problem solving and uses bilateral agreements to accomplish it.
4) Showcase a bona-fide long-term plan - completely different from the idiocy of those who went before him, merely reacting to events and attempting to buy off adversaries. Placation, accommodation, wasting valuable time and resources, and either allowing US capabilities to atrophy or actively dismembering them are the hallmarks of Clinton and Carter, in particular. The Bush Doctrine is Big JuJu - the effects are obvious to all except the willfully ignorant and self-blindered BDS freaks.
To accomplish 1 and 2, Bush still plays the game by the rules, as he did with Iraq, checking off the boxes along the way. That the UN failed so miserably, becoming mired in French shenanigans and Tranzi games, after being directly and publicly challenged by Bush to prove itself relevant, was not lost on the American public. The first real cracks in the UN's facade came via Iraq. America realizes that the entire Iraq situation would've ended in stalemate, which infuriates the Moonbats who would be happier if Saddam was still filling mass graves - and proved to the sane Americans that Bush has balls, says what he means, means what he says, and that the UN is a sham and a merely a featured venue for hobbling American interests and goals.
That the opposition, the Looney Left, Tranzis, EU Triangulators, et al, don't give him any credit for it afterwards, has begun to make the players much more clear to Joe Sixpack, too. Cracks run through some once-hallowed tenets of conventional wisdom. The incredible slant and bias of the MSM, for example, have been exposed more clearly than ever before - and the number don't lie: people, Americans, are turning away from them in drives. Another example is the never-ended efforts of the Socialists to suborn America, and that this is rooted in Academia and in certain government agencies, such as the State Dept, and that our once revered "allies" are, without doubt, not.
I believe that covers 1 and 2 pretty well. For 3, we have the efforts in Iraq - the much maligned coalition of the willing. Who's unwilling? France and Germany, primarily. Are they so important that their lack of support on Iraq make the US wrong? No - and Americans now see it. They now see France for whom they really are and are boycotting their products in sufficient number that the point is well and truly made. Germany, to a lesser degree, is now also seen as less an ally than adversary. Same goes for Turkey. Such betrayals are not forgotten and forever poison the well. Anyone who says they trust a cheating spouse is a liar, a fool, or both. It is NEVER the same again. Rummy nailed the bitches to the wall with "Old Europe". It hurt them and they squealed. The coalition worked. The bilateral approach is being proven every day with new trade agreements - which cause those lacking one to whine and whimper.
Interestingly enough, IMHO, item 4 has already been proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt. From the obvious scramble all across the M.E. to, at the very least, put up some "democratic" window dressing to the real hard fact that AlQ and its minions are fractured, running, and far less effective that they would be were it not for the Bush Doctrine and the stones to execute it. The Us Congress, for all of its recent stupidity and 3-ring circus foolishness, not only authorized Afghanistan, Iraq, the WoT, etc., but it has already approved action to stop Iran from acquiring nukes. HCONs 307, 332, 398 / SCON 73, 81 all explicitly state that "by all appropriate means" the US must prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. HR 1823 demands Syrian accountability for supporting terrorist and the freedom of Lebanon. Shit has happened. It's all bad for the Bad Guys.
The recent Dhimmidonk Circus, aided and abetted with all means at the disposal of the MSM have failed - or will fail. These games will hand the Pubs even more House and Senate seats in 2006.
#5
Just a few days ago I attended an international conference in lovely (but cold) Bavaria. Iran was one of the subjects.
It may not seem so in public but the positions of Europe and the US on Iranian nukes do not differ that much in whether we should allow the mullahs to have them. The difference of opinions and strategies lies in the way to stop them. It was interesting to hear the French view, that was less pronounced than the German one but still very much against Iran developing nuclear arms. It's the approach that sets us apart in some respects but there is one common point that brings us together again: "Iran first".
You probably know what that means. The strategy is, if Iran can't be persuaded to stop its nuclear ambitions, it must be set wrong in such an open, blatant way to get Europe, the US and possibly Russia to agree on action against the mullahs. A Chinese veto would be unwelcome but simply ignored (which may lead to China refraining from using its veto power).
European diplomatic actions have been (mostly) quietly endorsed by the US government to buy time. Iranian nukes are not seen to be happening in 2005 and probably not 2006, which gives the US time to pacify Iraq and free up combat forces, refill depleted stocks of smart weapons and allow for a slow build up of pressure on Iran, which you are going to see in the next months. This is wise because current options are limited.
Economic sanctions against Iraq without including oil exports are likely to fail. If they include oil, they will need to be enforced by a maritime blockade PLUS a Russian blockade (the most difficult part). Russia must be persuaded that Iranian nukes pose a vital threat to Moscow, therefore better intelligence and cooperation is needed.
Military strikes against Iranian nuclear targets are most likely to be of little effect and will possibly even strengthen the mullahs' grip on the Iranian population.
The strategy is to increase economic pressure (or economic rewards if Iran complies) and to strengthen the Iranian opposition. This is what Europe will probably agree on.
But we need Russia. Combined US and European efforts could win Russia over. If that happens the mullahs face certain doom.
#6
Russia is not currently getting with the program.
In fact just made a public pronouncement in oposition to the "wests" position in Iran and nuclear matters.
France, Germany and England are being led by the nose by the Iranian Theocracy. Nothing will come of it. Almost daily the Theocrats flaunt their intentions in the international press. We have a year at the outside to act. So the EU3 will have that time to do whatever they think they can. One year no more.
TGA I respect you however as .com put so well "Such betrayals are not forgotten and forever poison the well." Germany and France were not even willing to hold our coat in Iraq. They infact worked against the US and as far as I can tell still are. I want my country out of NATO. No US blood for western Europe again ever. No more borrowing money to defend Europe and help run the UN. I want the US out. All bases in western Europe closed. All our military material and units withdrawn from western Europe. Let the EU pay for the UN, NATO and it's own defense since the western European people and press can do nothing but carp on how wrong and evil my country is in every respect. For 40 years the US helped defend western Europe. Europe can't even be bothered to do what is right by the US today.
#7
TGA - I have no doubt that Russia's "support" is for sale. Should "we" be willing to pay the tab, which would undoubtedly be huge as Putty has wasted his tenure, thus far, in building Russia in any demonstrable or substantive way, I also seriously doubt that Russia would stay bought. Russian contractual integrity is on a par with the word of the Mad Mullahs.
I also have no doubt that with or without Russian or MM cooperation, Bush will act against the MM's. He already has the congressional "mandate" in his pocket and he has clearly said they will not succeed. It was as close to unequivocal as I've heard him speak on any topic. And I find his record in keeping his word unsurpassed by any world leader.
The only questions, it seems to me, are these:
1) Will the Persian people do it?
2) Will Israel do it?
3) Will the US do it?
4) Some combination of the above?
That anyone buys, even for a second, the drivel that they have ever "stopped" their program while "negotiating" is simply ludicrous. I do not believe a blockade against exports will work, either. For example, I'm picturing a Chinese tanker entering the Straits of Hormuz, with a complement of Chinese military on board quite likely under those circumstances, and some blockade ships (whose, beside the US and maybe UK) being ordered to, after 3 or 4 failures by radio and hailing, forcibly stop it. How would you see that playing out? Will German ships be there, on station, and execute an order to shoot off the rudder of a Chinese flagged vessel?
In sum, I believe the evidence accumulated and publicly available thus far indicates they won't quit their efforts, Russia won't cooperate or we won't agree to Russian demands, China would be openly hostile and willing to subvert UNSC efforts - even if they abstain from the vote, and it will come to a military confrontation.
#8
BTW, what if other OPEC nations cooperated with their sister state, Iran, if she is blockaded? It would be easy for any of them to picture themselves in a similar situation, no? Chavez would join in protest without hesitation, regardless of the consequences to his country - because he doesn't care a rat-shit about Venezuela or its people, only himself. How much oil would be off the market? What effect would that have on the world's economy? How great would the pressure be to yeild? How long would the blockade last? Who would give up first?
Just one of many reasons, IMHO, a blockade is not an answer.
#9
Well .com we have a oil reserve that will last quite some time. I don't think any of the nations of Europe do. I think you can measure their reserves in weeks not what we have which is in months.
I also think the Chinese would be happy to stir the pot and keep us distracted.
#10
SPoD - In the SPR we currently have 53 days of "import protection" - of the 90 we're supposed to try to maintain. The draw-down limit is 4.3 Mbpd and it can begin 13 days after Presidential decision to release. You'll find that is less than current demand and, if refined products are not available - for whatever reason, it means we'd be relying upon domestic refining capacity to a larger degree - and it's maxxed out.
The real key is who else would love to take the US (hell, the world) down a notch by either reducing output (not necessarily taking a financial hit because prices would rise to meet market demands), refusing to contract with US (thus forcing us to the spot market), or cut it off, altogether with maybe only exports to symp regimes?
#14
SA is in the process of ensuring all its oil can be exported via pipelines that run West toward the Red Sea. There is some capacity to export oil through Oman bypassing Hormuz but its limited. By sometime next year perhaps 10 MBPD can go West and 100k BPD can go East in the event of a blockade. So who do you think will blink first if Hormuz is blockaded?
#15
First of all, everyone hopes that Israel stays out of this. IDF action would terribly complicate things. Israel would never be able to take out Iran's nuclear program and it would absolutely enrage Muslim opinions against the West (not just Israel). But for actions against Iran to be successful, we need at least some tacit approval of the major oil countries. Saudi Arabia is not likely to join an oil embargo (they know that this time things are different and the US is not likely to tolerate a Saudi embargo), but if Israel is involved this could be different. Actually the West's dependence on ME oil will grow dramatically in the next years, so action now will probably do less economic harm than say in 5 years. Iran is a major oil exporter, but Europe and the US could live without Iranian oil for quite a while (especially if Iraqi production can grow fast enough). France gets most of its energy from nuclear power, Germany relies to a large extent on Russian gas. Due to the excellent infrastructure of public transportation Germans can reduce their driving habits with a lot less pain than Americans.
The consensus was that no one wants full blown military action. The best case scenario is, of course, Iran backing down and an eventual peaceful overthrow of the mullahs. The mullahs are of course aware of the Western dilemma. But they are also, despite being turbans, a deal smarter than Saddam: If the West, including Russia, form a united front, they will back down... that's the speculation.
Russia is the hard work. They want to become a world power again (futile attempt), showing America its place. If the Europeans can convince Putin that Russia's future lies in the West, and not with China, we will be getting somewhere. The Ukrainian revolution was a warning shot for Putin... it can happen in Minsk next, and even in Moscow. Also watch developments in Uzbekistan (already on the move) and Turkmenistan.
Chavez will not block oil exports. He might be up to something in the next years but right now he could not survive a move like that.
#19
Russia is the hard work. They want to become a world power again (futile attempt), showing America its place. If the Europeans can convince Putin that Russia's future lies in the West, and not with China, we will be getting somewhere. The Ukrainian revolution was a warning shot for Putin... it can happen in Minsk next, and even in Moscow. Also watch developments in Uzbekistan (already on the move) and Turkmenistan.
THe problem here is that "Russia" is not a unitary, disciplined, well-functioning state. Putin does not, probably cannot, control a wide variety of criminalized elements within the FSB, the border police, the army, the economics ministries, labs etc responsible for nuke technology and production. All of these have a huge financial interest in Iran's nuclear program and can easily thwart Putin's feeble efforts at cracking down.
The issue isn't so much whether Russia's with or against the "West" as whether Putin can rein in his own version of Pakistan's ISI. I doubt it.
#20
Why in the world would Russia join with us to stop a nuke program *they* sold to the MMs???
It's not gonna happen!
Especially right now, when Russia's running out of friends and areas of influence in its old satellite neighborhood, as Bush made so clear to Putin just this week.
And you can bet the farm that Israel WILL get involved if they think that the first Iranian nuke-tipped missiles are ready to fire at Israel and I don't blame them.
You're a great guy, TGA, but it's easy to dream about the way you'd like the world to be when you live in post Cold-War Germany.
Just because Schroeder can schmooze with Putin at V-E Day in Moscow doesn't really mean "we're all friends now," to paraphrase Basil Fawlty.
#25
Jen, I'm probably the last person who harbors any dreams or illusions about Russia. I'm a rather cold "realpolitiker".
People who deride the European approach (and there are reasons to do so) must come up with alternatives. And right now, there are few.
The IDF cannot take out Iran's nuclear program, even if they manage to get a number of planes through unfriendly airspace. They simply can't. Iran has been expecting them for years, targets are underground, multiple and probably moving a lot. It can't be done. A short delay, maybe. Nothing to risk so much for.
A full blown US war against Iran is not on the agenda, either. Even if the US bomb the hell out of Iran, the nuclear program won't be stopped. Germany was under severe bombing every day, and still Albert Speer managed to increase (underground) arms production in 1943 and 1944, and it still went on in early 1945. The U.S. can't go full force either because they need spare capacities for a conflict with North Korea or even China that might take advantage of the situation. An invasion of Iran would be very difficult to achieve, an occupation quite impossible. We could only hope for an overthrow of the mullahs but we cant take this for granted.
Military options right now are limited. Economic sanction will only work if Russia is on board. Right now they certainly aren't. It will require a masterpiece of diplomacy to convince them that it is in their best interest to join the party.
Never say "it's not gonna happen".
Lots of things weren't believed to happen in 1988... or 2002.
#27
First off, I'd like to say welcome back to Jennie, and also to TGA. It's nice to see both of y'all, and please excuse me for currently needing to remain an shambling faceless horror. As you read, you'll understand.
Jennie wrote:
Why in the world would Russia join with us to stop a nuke program *they* sold to the MMs???
It's not gonna happen!
Especially right now, when Russia's running out of friends and areas of influence in its old satellite neighborhood, as Bush made so clear to Putin just this week.
If you want to get in the realm of paranoid conspiracy theories, well, Russia is an oil exporting nation. IF they do something and as a result there's a war in the Middle East and the price of oil goes up, they make more money off of it. The problem with this hypothesis is they've been busily inhibiting the foreign investment needed to actually take advantage of the crisis when it comes.
Earlier, TGA wrote:
Chavez will not block oil exports. He might be up to something in the next years but right now he could not survive a move like that.
Well, the thing is, Chavez doesn't have to "cut off the oil" per se. There are things he can do to get the same effect. When his current term started, he was mismanaging the reservoir depletion of his current production setup, while also underinvesting in exploration, which, predictably, lead to a shortfall in production. This was a factor in why a lot of people at PDVSA (many of whom had previously supported him) went on strike. He not only fired those people, but banned them from working in the oil industry in Venezuela ever again. This hasn't had any effects, however, because oil industry work is pretty stupid, can be done by trained monkeys, and it's easy to replace the trained over years and years workers with politically connected idiots....
NOT!
Summarizing, he's mismanaged things, he's fired everyone in the state oil company who didn't go along, for as long as he shall run the plantation country (and he can't go back on that, because face is just about more important to a Caudillo dictator such as him as it is to a medieval Chinese mandarin), and NOW, as recounted earlier this week on Rantburg, he's also starting to run off what western corporations are still there and have maintained actual abilities to do things (via expatriate or Venezuelan employees) by threatening them with tax evasion.
The net result is that from a projected production level of 500,000 barrels a day today from back in 2000, it's now at 200,000 barrels a day, more or less. As long as he can keep that number sinking through a process of aggressive incompetence and stupidity, and make sure whatever's left is tied up in long-term contracts with China, he can do the same thing as Cutting Off The Oil, more or less, without having to live with having publicly made the decision to do so.
(And yes, that hurts Venezuela, but he doesn't care about that. Probably just the opposite: he thinks the more poor people he has, the greater his support. It's not like there have ever been any challenges to Castro because of what he's done to Cuba's economy over the last forty years... as Jerry Pournelle has pointed out, if you ignore the communist rhetoric Castro looks remarkably like the sort of central/south American dictator that's been the bane of the region's history for the past two centuries.)
TGA went on to write:
Germany was under severe bombing every day, and still Albert Speer managed to increase (underground) arms production in 1943 and 1944, and it still went on in early 1945.
On the other hand, not only do we have much better guided munitions than we did in WW2 (to the point where we could actually bomb a factory or power plant rather than dropping bombs in the general vicinity and hoping) but we've also done post-analysis of what we did wrong during the bombing campaigns in Germany and Vietnam. After WW2 ended it was discovered that the US and the allies had completely missed the fact that the German power distribution system was massively vulnerable to cascade failure if the right power distribution elements and generation plants were hit. It was a hard struggle for many on the allied side to get the resources to do things like close air support, or bombing/strafing of railroad yards and the like, because Air Marshall Harris and others like him had concluded that those wouldn't really work and weren't important compared to the campaign to dehouse German civilians. To a large extent, in WW2 the allies practiced strategic bombing where no actual real strategy was allowed.
Posted by: The Anonymous Crawling Horror From Beyond ||
05/13/2005 23:12 Comments ||
Top||
#28
Jennie -- welcome back! It has been a while.
TGA -- welcome back to the real world, such as it is. Catch your breath, take a long nap, then come back and share with us your wisdom and experience.
Faceless Horror, what would Chavez do for power and influence without oil to sell? I understand your point about his attitude toward his citizenry, but without a significant exports, who cares about his peacocking around?
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 15:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Fred, isn't that the part of the Army you work for?
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
05/13/2005 22:33 Comments ||
Top||
#2
That's my day job.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 23:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Now I have another reason to be grateful to you, Fred. God willing, you'll never have to program the handling of my children's things, but if it should happen someday, I can't think of anyone better. Thank you.
Aljazeera has reported that Egyptian security authorities arrested eight members of its crew preparing to cover a meeting of the General Assembly of Cairo's Judges Club. Aljazeera's correspondent Samir Omar and producer Ahmad Nour are among those arrested on Friday.
"Into the paddy wagon wit' yez!"
The afternoon meeting is aimed at pressing the judges' demand that they be allowed to fully monitor the presidential elections, and is expected to announce the judges' final position on the issue of supervision of the forthcoming elections. The judges have threatened not to supervise the elections at all if they are not given full control over each step of the election process. They have also demanded the approval of a law on the independence of judicial authorities.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 11:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
May 13, 2005; Sunni Arab terrorists have stepped up their violence, with over 400 civilians killed so far this month. American casualties are up as well, with about two coalition troops dying each day, versus one a day two months ago. But more and more of the killers are foreigners. Syrians, Egyptians, Yemenis and Saudis are among those being captured, or identified after their are dead. Raids on terrorist safe-houses usually yield documents and computer records that list the large number of foreigners involved in the terrorism. Over the last two decades, Saudi Arabian charities have established tens of thousands of religious schools that preach Islamic radicalism and hatred of non-Moslems. Most of the Sunni Arabs coming to die in Iraq are the products of those religious schools. These "martyrs" can't get to North America or Europe, and are unable to get organized sufficiently to kill Infidels (non-Moslems) in their own countries. But in Iraq, the Baath Party will supply weapons and some direction for those who want to kill, and are willing to die in the process. The foreigners are particularly wanted because they are willing to kill Iraqis. To an Islamic radical, the wives and children of Iraqis who collaborate with the Infidels are worthy of death. Thus the majority of terror attacks are in neighborhoods where Iraqis support the government. Everyone there is considered a legitimate target by the terrorists. There are still many neighborhoods where the terrorists are welcome, and where the terrorists do not set off their bombs. These are the neighborhoods where police, soldiers and coalition forces encounter ambushes and hostility.
American Marines are still finding and shutting down terrorist safe-houses along the Syrian border. There, well armed groups of Islamic radicals have stood and fought. But these fanatics are not well trained, and suffer over twenty dead for each American they manage to kill. Iraqi border guards are already making it more difficult to cross the Iranian, Saudi and Kuwaiti borders. But most of the killers come across from Syria, where the government does not want to stop the flow, fearing that these Islamic killers would realize that they have plenty of targets in Syria (where the government is dominated by Alawites, an Islamic sect considered heretical by Islamic conservatives.).
Posted by: Steve ||
05/13/2005 9:02:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But most of the killers come across from Syria, where the government does not want to stop the flow, fearing that these Islamic killers would realize that they have plenty of targets in Syria (where the government is dominated by Alawites, an Islamic sect considered heretical by Islamic conservatives.).
Hey, Mahmoud? Did you read this? It'd cut down on the commute...
#2
It's pretty easy for Iraqis to tell a local from an outsider. They could be taken out right there.
I can't figure out why we can't kill these bastards while they are crossing the border, but of course we have a government that refuses to protect our own border.
Muslim clerics in Zanzibar have blocked a bid by two gay lovers to exchange marriage vows. The discreet ceremony was stopped after reports reached members of the Zanzibar Imams' Propagation Association. Police have arrested four imams who allegedly assaulted the couple. They have also launched investigations with a view to prosecuting the partners. Zanzibar is a predominantly Muslim island, where acts of homosexuality are illegal and few people are openly free happy gay. One of the partners is from Mombasa in Kenya and another from the island of Pemba in the Zanzibar archipelago.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/13/2005 8:06:25 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qorei said yesterday there were no plans to postpone the July 17 Palestinian Legislative Council elections. Qorei spoke after Tayeb Abdel Rahim, a senior aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, was quoted in the Al-Quds daily as saying the elections could be delayed for a variety of reasons.
Abdel Rahim said as the Council had not yet passed a new election law that it had been debating for several months, it would be difficult to hold the elections on time. On Tuesday, the Council failed to pass the amended Palestinian election law on third reading. A number of Palestinian lawmakers have called for delaying the legislative elections. Jamal Al-Shobke recently called for postponing the elections until the Israeli government implemented what it called the unilateral disengagement plan on Aug. 15. He said this would deprive the Israeli government of any excuses for not going ahead with its planned Gaza and West Bank pullbacks.
Hamas quickly rejected the call. It urged the Egyptian government to intervene and pressure the Palestine Authority to hold the elections on time. The group said in statement: "The movement rejects the voices that call for the postponement of the elections and calls on the PNA to commit to what was agreed upon at the Cairo talks." The statement said that a delay will not be in the interest of the Palestinian people. Fatah activists have warned Abbas the party is headed for defeat if it goes to elections in July. Polls show Palestinian voters are fed up with corruption and inefficiency in the Palestinian government. Without Yasser Arafat's charisma and standing, Abbas could lead his Fatah Party to a poor showing, further eroding his ability to carry out reforms and rein in militants.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Without Yasser Arafatâs charisma and standing, Abbas could lead his Fatah Party to a poor showing,..
"Charisma and standing"? That idea is good for a laugh, but not much else..
..further eroding his ability to carry out reforms and rein in militants.
Oh? He could actually rein in "militants"? Sure had me fooled.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
There's an awful lot of spittle in that article - vent that spleen!
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
05/13/2005 0:05 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I hear every time they riot or say "death to america" thousands of Qurans are desecrated and a 100 muslims are forced to convert to Judaism at special Haliburton camps.
#5
Let's see. Curse Muhammad and die. Sneeze on the Koran and die. I think you survive if you curse God, though. Muhammadans are a strange lot . . . who was it they said they worshipped, again?
Posted by: James ||
05/13/2005 11:55 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Bravo Newsweek. How does it feel that your irresponsible rumor mongering has already lead to seven deaths.
Newsweek is going to get burned when the details come out. I read that on Brit Hume's show it was stated that a detainee ripped pages of the Koran and stuffed them down a toilet. When all is known, Newsweek should be sued for damages.
Posted by: ed ||
05/13/2005 0:11 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Well it doesn't take much to drive the Waki neighbor of the Paki into riot, after all they put the Taliban in power. Look for riots to spread to Pakiland tonmorrow after "prayers"
Hearing it was an coreligionist who did it will do no good. I can only see this "desecration story" being embelished and spreading like wildfire. We are dealing with people who still live in clans and tribal society regarless of their embrace of the "modern world."
#3
Agreed, SPoD. This is just too convenient to pass up. Every lame excuse for an ideology or political bowel movement needs a bogeyman or three to divert attention from the hard facts. Besides, demonization is a proven crowd pleaser in the propagandist's toolkit. It is especially effective on the short-bus crowd riddled with ancient superstitions and fears.
#8
Need to print millions of rolls of toliet paper with the Koran.
Drop over PakiWaki land from the air as open rolls.
Should keep the whole population busy for many decades saving the texts....
Nepal's powerful Maoists will support the country's main political parties in their campaign to restore democracy after King Gyanendra seized power three months ago, a rebel statement said. The monarch stunned the world on Feb 1 when he fired the government, suspended civil liberties and jailed politicians saying the move was necessary to crush the Maoists who are fighting to topple the world's only Hindu ruler and install a single party communist republic. On Sunday, seven centrist and leftist political parties who have often bickered in the past said they will launch a joint programme seeking restoration of democracy including the revival of parliament dissolved in 2002.
"It is a progressive step. Our party has decided to help the joint protest movement by the political groups," Maoist chief Prachanda, who uses only one name, said in a statement received by the news agency late on Wednesday. The Maoist overture to the politicians came as US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Christina Rocca, ended a visit to Nepal on Wednesday. She urged the king and the political parties to fight the Maoists jointly and said the revolt was a threat to regional stability. Prachanda made a fresh appeal to the political parties to form an "extensive front" with his group to establish democracy in the impoverished nation perched in the central Himalayas between China and India. There was no immediate comment from the political groups but they have turned down such appeals in the past, asking the rebels to stop violence instead.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
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.
The US Defense Department is weighing whether a decision to shoot down any suspected inbound North Korean missile should go all the way to the president, a top general told Congress on Wednesday. 
An outspoken Sydney Muslim leader has been sacked and replaced by supporters of a radical cleric he criticised for claiming women incited rape. 
Aljazeera has reported that Egyptian security authorities arrested eight members of its crew preparing to cover a meeting of the General Assembly of Cairo's Judges Club. Aljazeera's correspondent 
Muslim clerics in Zanzibar have blocked a bid by two gay lovers to exchange marriage vows. The discreet ceremony was stopped after reports reached members of the 
Palestinian Prime Minister 
Nepal's powerful Maoists will support the country's main political parties in their campaign to restore democracy after 
