A recent upsurge in violence in Somalia's capital has focused attention anew on the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in the chaotic Horn of Africa state. The violence had killed at least 22 people and wounded more than 140 since Saturday.
Sheik Hassan Dahir Aweys, said by the United States to be linked to al-Qaida, is prominent among the religious nutcases fundamentalists increasingly projecting themselves as an alternative to the numerous armed groups running the clan-based fiefdoms that comprise Somalia. Somalia has been without an effective central government since forever 1991, when warlords overthrew the government and then began fighting each other.
Wednesday, Aweys pledged to keep fighting a new alliance arrayed against him in Mogadishu, the Somali capital. Mogadishu was calm Thursday as elders sought to buy him off mediate.
Aweys described his rivals as "forces of evil" supported by Western powers.
Always supported by evil Western powers. No one's ever supported by evil China.
His rivals, meanwhile, describe the fundamentalists as terrorists, accusing them of killing moderate intellectuals, Muslim scholars and former military officials in a string of unexplained murders. Islamic militias have set up their own courts in some parts of Mogadishu, where they shut down bars and destroy shops that reproduce or sell pirated DVDs and music cassettes.
Counterterrorism experts in the U.S. and elsewhere have long worried that al-Qaida could find a haven in Somalia, taking advantage of its utter, complete lawlessness instability and perhaps finding hosts among men like Aweys. The United States linked Aweys, who has vowed to establish an Islamic state, to al-Qaida shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Aweys has said such allegations were invented by his enemies.
"Lies! All lies!"
Last year, U.N. experts monitoring an arms embargo on Somalia reported that Islamic hard-liners were importing heavy weapons and establishing military training camps. Among them were members of Al-Ittihad al-Islami, which wants to impose Islamic law in Somalia and allegedly has ties to al-Qaida.
The arms embargo works as well as everything else the U.N. does.
Also last year, the International Crisis Group reported the emergence of a Mogadishu extremist cell led by a young Somali militant trained in Afghanistan, where al-Qaida was once based. The International Crisis Group, a private think tank which tracks conflicts around the world, noted that al-Qaida contributed to attacks on U.S. and U.N. peacekeepers in Somalia in the early 1990s and used the country as a transit zone for attacks in neighboring Kenya and later as a hiding place for some of its leading members.
Saturday, a coalition of warlords and businessman announced they were taking a stand against the fundamentalists. They said in a statement they would "eradicate the extremists, terrorists and their supporters so as to pave the way for a peaceful country for the Somali children." The emergence of the coalition is evidence the warlords see the fundamentalist as a serious threat. With stakes high on both sides, it could signal the start of a significant deterioration in security in an already lawless land.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
02/24/2006 00:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Al Q barkin' up the wrong tree.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
02/24/2006 2:35 Comments ||
Top||
#2
We may not personally go back into Somalia right now to clean up the fundies; but we do have the Ethiopians right next door who have made it clear that they will not tolerate a jihadi Somalia on their borders. Plus they have half a million troops just sitting around, since the border dispute with Eritrea has cooled down.
#3
The border dispute will flare up again as soon as someone looks at something cross-eyed. It gives the lads something to do when they've finished their chores.
A GREAT DEAL of public and political controversy has arisen in recent days over the proposed deal to allow the United Arab Emirates (UAE) state-owned company Dubai World manage several major U.S. ports, with critics arguing that doing so will leave the United States more open to a terrorist attack. In evaluating this argument, it is worth examining how al Qaeda itself views the UAE, a task made far easier by drawing on a newly-released al Qaeda document from 2002 that contains a list of demands to UAE officials if they wish to avoid terrorist attacks on their soil.
To begin with, it is important to recognize that the UAE is not Iran and has entirely justifiable reasons for claiming that it is both one of the most moderate countries in the Arab world as well as a valuable partner in the U.S.-led war on terrorism.
Ironically, during his defense of the UAE's record on cooperation, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld failed to mention one of their most significant achievements to date: the November 2002 capture of Abd Rahim al-Nashiri, a senior al Qaeda leader generally regarded as the mastermind of the USS Cole bombing and the head of the terror network's maritime operations. While this would indeed be a significant achievement in its own right, it is made all the more remarkable by the fact that the UAE had been directly threatened by the al Qaeda leadership several months prior to al-Nashiri's capture.
According to the now-declassified al Qaeda document labeled AFGP-2002-603856 by the United States, al Qaeda explicitly threatened UAE officials with attacks if they refused to cease cooperation with the United States. Written between May and June 2002 and addressed in particular to officials in the emirates of Abu-Dhabi and Dubai (the UAE is a federation of seven emirates), the document claims that the UAE has engaged in "spying, persecution, [sic] detainments" against al Qaeda members operating on its soil at the behest of the United States, noting that, "authorities have recently detained a number of Mujahideen and handed them over to suppressive organizations in their country in addition to having a number of them still in its custody" and that "these practices bring the country into a fighting ring in which it cannot endure or escape from its consequences." These threats appear to suggest that whatever else al Qaeda thinks of the UAE, it does not regard the nation as being among its friends.
Yet the document also provides ample ammunition to those concerned over the UAE port deal, with its al Qaeda author asserting to the Abu-Dhabi and Dubai officials that "we have infiltrated your security, censorship, and monetary agencies along with other agencies that should not be mentioned" and that "we are confident that you are fully aware that your agencies will not get to the same high level of your American Lords. Furthermore, your intelligence will not be cleverer than theirs, and your censorship capabilities are not worth much against what they have reached . . . you are an easier target than them; your homeland is exposed to us."
In a rare window into al Qaeda's strategic mindset, the author explains, "our policies are not to operate in your homeland and/or tamper with your security because we are occupied with others which we consider are enemies of this nation. If you compel us to do so, we are prepared to postpone our program for a short period and allocate some time for you." A list of demands is then presented to the UAE to avoid the prospect of al Qaeda attacks, consisting only of releasing all known al Qaeda members detained by the UAE since the September 11 attacks as well as anyone else who had been detained on suspicions of involvement with the attacks. It should be noted that the UAE did not comply with these demands and while the nation has been spared any terrorist attacks to date this appears to be due more to al Qaeda's limited resources than a lack of desire. For instance, an audio message in March 2005 by Saudi al Qaeda leader Salih al-Oufi called upon fellow jihadis to carry out attacks against "crusader" targets in the UAE as well as Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, and Kuwait.
THE ISSUE of whether or not the UAE should be allowed to manage U.S. ports highlights many of the paradoxes involved in fighting al Qaeda in the Middle East as well as the dangers of over-simplifying or mischaracterizing U.S. allies in the region. The UAE has been a valuable U.S. ally in the areas of both military cooperation and counter-terrorism and should be rightly recognized as such. Yet it also faces a number of serious problems with regard to al Qaeda infiltration. The UAE is by no means the only Gulf state dealing with this issue, but it is currently the only nation that is seeking to manage major U.S. ports. It is by no means unreasonable for U.S. policymakers to seek strict assurances that these concerns will be rigorously addressed by the UAE before allowing one of its state-run corporations to manage such a sensitive and vulnerable aspect of U.S. infrastructure.
Finally, the debate over whether or not Dubai World should be allowed to manage U.S. ports should serve as the backdrop for a larger national debate on what American policy should be towards corporations, some of them fully or partially state-owned, heralding from countries where al Qaeda or its supporters are known to be active either by having infiltrated local government agencies or in some cases as having the support of established religious leaders or political parties.
Dubai World, which has never been linked to al Qaeda in any fashion, is well within its rights to complain that political opposition is only organized against them while ignoring the far greater number of U.S.-based businesses coming from other Gulf states with far greater levels of al Qaeda infiltration (most notably Saudi Arabia). Therefore, it is extremely important for supporters of the Dubai World deal to recognize that there are entirely valid security concerns relating to the UAE, just as opponents must recognize that these same security concerns are equally valid relating to a number of other countries as well.
Dan Darling is counterterrorism consultant for the Manhattan Institute Center for Policing Terrorism.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
02/24/2006 00:46 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Good piece, Dan.
Stop playing the fear card, know who you're friends are.
Posted by: Captain America ||
02/24/2006 0:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I LIVE IN NYC AND DO NOT WANT ARABS IN CONTROL OF OUR PORT. IS THAT MAKES ME PARANOIC. I DON'T THINK SO.
#4
Americans had best wake up. The entire government is indebted to Japan, China, Saudi Arabia, et al. due to the continual overspending by Congress of hundreds of billions per year. Would it be very painful for Americans to ante up in taxes to pay as we go ? Unh huh. Will it be painful when these people demand payment ? Duh, yeah. We can't pay. We will refuse. What will the response be ? In the mean time, we are now selling real assets to foreign interests. They will not always behave in the manner we expect. Look for a great deal of future turmoil, thanks to American over indulgence. trouble is on the way. Prepare your children and grandchildren for a much rougher go in the future.
Bangladesh has signed a $93.6 million deal with China to procure 16 fighter jets for its air force, the countrys acting defense minister said Feb. 23.
Each fighter plane would cost 5.85 million dollars, Hafizuddin Ahmed, the countrys water resources minister who is also acting minister of defense, told the national parliament, according to the state-run BSS news agency.
The minister did not indicate what kind of planes were being bought but Lieutenant-Colonel Nazrul Islam, spokesman for the countrys armed forces, identified them as F-7 fighter jets.
Dhaka and Beijing have strong defense ties and much of Bangladeshi military hardware is purchased from China.
Last April, Chinese premier Wen Jiabao visited Dhaka as part of his maiden South Asian tour when the two countries signed a raft of agreements covering development, trade, economic and defense cooperation.
China is also Bangladeshs biggest source of imported goods, this year surpassing India for the title for the first time since the country became independent in 1971.
Posted by: john ||
02/24/2006 05:48 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Bangladesh is one of the world's poorest, most densely populated and least developed nations. The government launched reforms in the 1990s to establish a more open, market-based economy and to accelerate economic growth. However, massive flooding in 1998 destroyed most of the rice crop, shattering the economic progress being made. Nearly 30 million people were affected by the floods, and the impact is still being felt today.
The minister did not indicate what kind of planes were being bought
#6
Wonder who they think that they are going to be able to fight with these?
Indeed, especially since BD is surrounded on three sides by India and the fourth side by the Bay of Bengal which is the stomping ground of the Indian Navy carrier group.
Latest word on the Indian MRCA contract is that the tender documents are being rewritten to include the Navy. Total will be 200 aircraft with a probable mix of planes from two vendors.
In the running - the F-18 SH, the F-16, the Mig-35 (an upgraded Mig 29 with French avoinics and a new thrust vectoring engine), the Rafale, the Eurofigter typhoon.
Posted by: john ||
02/24/2006 17:12 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Congratulations, Bangladesh. You've taken nearly one hundred million dollars out of the mouths of your populations and bought...Chinese knockoffs of MiG freaking twenty-ones.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
02/24/2006 19:08 Comments ||
Top||
London's mayor has been suspended from office for four weeks for comparing a Jewish journalist to a concentration camp guard. Imagine if he'd said something nasty about Mo (ptui).
Can't imagine that he would.
The Adjudication Panel for England ruled Ken Livingstone had brought his office into disrepute when he acted in an "unnecessarily insensitive" manner.
The ban is due to begin on 1 March and the mayor's deputy Nicky Gavron will stand in for Mr Livingstone. The mayor said: "This decision strikes at the heart of democracy."
Just started caring about that, did you?
He added: "Elected politicians should only be able to be removed by the voters or for breaking the law.
"Three members of a body that no one has ever elected should not be allowed to overturn the votes of millions of Londoners."
Mr Livingstone said he would announce what action he would be taking next week.
The hearing followed a complaint from the Jewish Board of Deputies, which had not called for the mayor to be suspended over the comment he made to the Evening Standard's Oliver Finegold outside a public-funded party. The chairman of the panel, David Laverick, said it had decided on a ban because Mr Livingstone had failed to realise the seriousness of his outburst. He said: "The case tribunal accepts that this is not a situation when it would be appropriate to disqualify the mayor.
"The case tribunal is, however, concerned that the mayor does seem to have failed, from the outset of this case, to have appreciated that his conduct was unacceptable, was a breach of the code (the GLA code of conduct) and did damage to the reputation of his office."
Mr Laverick went on to say that the complaint should never have reached the board but did so because of Mr Livingstone's failure to apologise.
In a statement, the Board of Deputies of British Jews said it regretted the guilty result, but said Mr Livingstone had been "the architect of his own misfortune" by failing to recognise the upset caused. It added it had never sought anything more than an apology and an acknowledgement that his words were inappropriate for the "elected representative of Londoners of all faiths and beliefs".
But Deputy Mayor Nicky Gavron said the incident had been "blown out of all proportion" and described the decision as absurd.
Association of London Government chairman Sir Robin Wales added the "outrageous ruling" would stall the mayor in his work to increase police numbers and prepare the city for the 2012 Olympics.
Guess the next four weeks are really critical.
Mr Livingstone has said he was expressing his honestly-held political view of Associated Newspapers, but he had not meant to offend the Jewish community.
"No, no! Certainly not!"
The Evening Standard's editor Veronica Wadley said that Mr Finegold had behaved impeccably when he was insulted and accused Mr Livingstone of being stubborn.
The London Jewish Forum welcomed the ruling, with chairman Adrian Cohen calling for the mayor to create a strategy which would ensure London's Jews would be treated with respect. Conservative London Assembly Member Brian Coleman said Mr Livingstone had let Londoners down. All three called for the mayor to apologise. Baroness Hamwee, Liberal Democrat chair of the assembly, said she was "quite taken aback" by the length of the suspension.
If an appeal fails, Mr Livingstone will be responsible for paying his own legal costs, estimated at £80,000.
#1
Although I agree no unelected tribunal should judge a case such as this. I am happy he got gobsmacked anyhow.
Leftism = Anti-Semitism. How could one expect him to even grasp that it was wrong? It's second nature to true believers such as Livingstone. Politicains and true believers like Red Ken are as dangerous to our western culture as any real external threat is. We need to put the hurt on the left and not let up. This is just one reason of many for that.
WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. and North Korean officials will meet next month in New York to discuss a rift over Pyongyang's demonstrated alleged counterfeiting of American dollars, an issue that has contributed to North Korea's boycott of nuclear disarmament discussions.
At the March 7 meeting, U.S. technical experts will brief a Foreign Ministry delegation from Pyongyang on U.S. laws that were applied when Washington imposed sanctions several months ago in response to counterfeiting and other U.S. demonstrated facts allegations. State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said Thursday the purpose of the briefing ``is to respond to issues and concerns that the North Koreans have raised with regard to our actions.'' He said the decision to apply sanctions was unrelated to the six-party nuclear disarmament process.
"They know what they've done."
The North has denied the U.S. allegations and has ruled out participation in a new round until the sanctions are lifted. North Korea's U.N. ambassador, Pak Gil Yon, said at a reception Wednesday night in New York that resumption of the talks ``fully depends on the U.S.,'' according to South Korea's Yonhap news agency.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Now I know what JFKerry meant by his meeting foreigner in NY.
Posted by: Captain America ||
02/24/2006 0:43 Comments ||
Top||
#2
WINDS OF CHANGE website reports that SYRIA may be getting ready to purchase NO DONG IRBMS from the Norkies.
Some state leaders are divided over Treasurer Peter Costello's claims that people should be stripped or refused their citizenship if they do not embrace Australian values.
New South Wales Premier Morris Iemma says he agrees with Mr Costello and has suggested taking the action even further by applying it to people on temporary or long-term visas.
Treasurer Peter Costello has been accused of being deliberately divisive, and preparing for a return to racist immigration policies after comments made in a speech last night.
Islamic groups say it is an appeal to conservative voters but Mr Iemma says it is completely reasonable.
"No matter what your religion or the colour of your skin, this is a warm and generous and welcoming country - leave the extremism and leave the fights behind," he said.
Victorian Premier Steve Bracks says Mr Costello is playing politics.
Mr Bracks says Mr Costello is trying to divert people's attention from the Government's role in the AWB scandal.
"The reality is that people coming into our country come in accepting our values," he said.
"It's self evident, they come in accepting democracy, accepting of course the rule of law more broadly, accepting freedoms that we have here.
"That's what they accept when they come in and they sign on to that, of course they do, so Peter Costello's intervention is really about diversion from the Federal Government."
Queensland Premier Peter Beattie says Mr Costello's comments were a cheap shot for populist approval
"If Peter Costello is trying to appeal back to the 1950s to become the Prime Minister, I think that's a retrograde step," Mr Beattie said.
"I just think sometimes leaders have got to stand up - and I know what I'm saying will not be popular in some places - but someone's got to have the guts to say to Peter Costello, if you want to be prime minister, find the things that bring us together, not the things that divide us."
But NSW Opposition Leader Peter Debnam says he also endorses Mr Costello's comments.
"One of the things I think we need to get rid of is the political correctness and Peter was certainly putting his foot on that last night," Mr Debnam said.
#1
This is issue is a disaster for the Australian Labour Party. Watched the deputy leader of the ALP blather and squirm on this issue this morning and was then forced to say he completely agreed with Costello.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
02/24/2006 7:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"The reality is that people coming into our country come in accepting our values," he said.
Like the fine fellows who gang-raped a girl and said they were justified in doing it because she was dressed like a whore, which is to say she was covered head-to-toe with muslin.
Or the imam who declared that gays should be killed.
Or the one who told kids not to eat bananas because the Jews were poisoning them.
Yep, every immigrant to Australia embraces Australian values.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
02/24/2006 8:04 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Here is the US Citizenship oath. Appears a few here have violated it. Good luck in Oz.
The oath of allegiance is:
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."
In some cases, INS allows the oath to be taken without the clauses:
". . .that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by law. . ."
#6
Reminds me a (French) TV movie: a Jewish woman survives WWII and gets French nationality through a decree of De Gaulle. She is advised to go collect the document and there a low-grade employee makes her sign a receipt and gives her the document.
-Woman: That is all?
-Employee: Yes. That is all.
-Woman: What? No ceremony, no oath of allegiance like in the United States?
-Employee in an arrogant tone: Here we are in France! (Remember that teh scene is supposed to happen in 1945 ie when this guy should have shown some modesty).
Ever thought that our lack of an oath of allegiance was a bad idea, that it converted what should be the joining of a citizen to a nation into just teh product of a bureaucracy.
#7
Reminds me a (French) TV movie: a Jewish woman survives WWII and gets French nationality through a decree of De Gaulle. She is advised to go collect the document and there a low-grade employee makes her sign a receipt and gives her the document.
-Woman: That is all?
-Employee: Yes. That is all.
-Woman: What? No ceremony, no oath of allegiance like in the United States?
-Employee in an arrogant tone: Here we are in France! (Remember that teh scene is supposed to happen in 1945 ie when this guy should have shown some modesty).
Ever thought that our lack of an oath of allegiance was a bad idea, that it converted what should be the joining of a citizen to a nation into just teh product of a bureaucracy.
#8
"The reality is that people coming into our country come in accepting our values," he said.
"It's self evident, they come in accepting democracy, accepting of course the rule of law more broadly, accepting freedoms that we have here.
"That's what they accept when they come in and they sign on to that, of course they do
Oh no they dont. They come because they heard about the welfare and the incredible health, education and infrastructure benefits. Many are blissfully unaware of our values and our laws (speaking from the Canadian experience, very similar to other dem countries) and couldnt give a bigger hoot about them.
Its why it costs a bleeding fortune to provide the services and support for attempting to assimilate muslim immigrants. They insist their religious laws are more important than assimilating, they are only here for the services which must be provided to all. They will not socialize (and will barely speak to) anyone outside their own sect. The kids are not allowed to play with or communicate with the infidels. Their youth are not allowed to work with the opposite sex or with alcohol or pork or . which leaves them with precious little employment opportunities. And on and on.
They DONT accept anything of law or democracy or freedom. They are biding their time, just like they did till run out of their own far-flung village, until their particular sect rises again to power. All they need in this country they all believe and profess is enough kids.
PRIME Minister John Howard has defended Treasurer Peter Costello's comments about Islamic extremism that have angered the Muslim community.
But then, most things anger the Muslim community, don't they? I do hope the U.S. administration is watching Australia, though. They could learn something...
In a speech to the Sydney Institute last night, Mr Costello said anyone not prepared to accept Australian values, and who had citizenship of another country, should not remain an Australian citizen.
"Y'don't like it? Piss off!"
He said anyone who believed Islamic sharia law could co-exist with Australian law should move to a country where they felt more comfortable. Muslim leaders hit back today, calling on Mr Howard to censure Mr Costello over his remarks.
"He must be killed!"
But Mr Howard told Southern Cross Broadcasting the Treasurer's comments were similar to some of his own and Mr Costello should not be censured. Asked why not, Mr Howard said: "Because what he said was fundamentally accurate."
But... but... That's never been an excuse before has it?
"He's not trying to stir up hostilities with Islamic people any more than I was when I made some comments three days before the Cronulla riots," he said. "I made some comments to the effect that there was a section of the Islamic community, because of its extreme views and its rejection of the fundamentals of our society that posed a problem. I also expressed a concern about the attitude of some, I stress some, in the Islamic community towards women. I thought both those statements were perfectly acceptable."
"Unless you're fond of wearing a turban, of course..."
Mr Howard refused to be drawn on whether those who advocated sharia law society run according to a fundamentalist interpretation of Islamic teaching should leave the country. "I think what Peter was doing was to make the point that a belief in that would be inconsistent with Australian values," he said. Mr Howard said he supported multiculturalism if it meant simply showing respect and tolerance for other people's cultures. But he said Australia could not have a federation of cultures. "Over the years at its zenith the more zealous multiculturalism base said that this country should be a federation of cultures," he said. "You can have a nation where a whole variety of cultures constantly influence and mould and change and blend in with the mainstream culture."
Howard believes in the melting pot, which any good multiculturalist will tell you simply doesn't work. The fact that it did work and that it continues to work all around them won't change that opinion.
Mr Howard said Australia had a core culture as an offshoot of western civilisation with a heavily Anglo-Saxon identity and Christianity as the great moral shaping force.
"And we'll be happy to keep it, thankew very much."
ROME - The United States should close its Guantanamo Bay prison as swiftly as possible, Italys Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi was quoted as saying on Thursday, a week before meeting US President George W. Bush in Washington.
Berlusconi, one of Bushs staunchest European allies, made the comment in an interview with Al Jazeera, in which he was asked if Guantanamo should be closed down. Yes, I have spoken about it with many of my colleagues and I too think that these centres, where episodes have taken place that have been condemend by the whole world, must be closed as swiftly as possible, said Berlusconi.
It's not possible right now. Thanks for asking.
The comments were contained in a transcript of the interview made available to Italys ANSA news agency. The interview, recorded in Rome on Tuesday, is to be broadcast by the Qatar-based channel on Friday.
Bush is to hold talks with Berlusconi at the White House on February 28.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That's right Berlu, we'll move these turds over to your villa.
Posted by: Captain America ||
02/24/2006 0:44 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Pandering for the elections, which he will probably lose to Prodi anyway. Thanks, Silvio!
Announce it's closing in two weeks, shut it down as promised, and never let anyone know what happened to the people held there.
"Oh, we just followed the Geneva Conventions. Each of them had their cases reviewed [already done], and then they were handled accordingly."
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
02/24/2006 8:06 Comments ||
Top||
#4
They are not criminals!
They are illegal combatants captured on a battlefield!
Under the Geneva Convention we are fully within our rights to have shot them on the field of battle.
Time for Rice to make a formal announcement to that effect with the stipulation that further comments will be the basis of determining American interests concerning the commentors.
Six members of a fringe church in Kansas picketed Thursday outside the funeral of a Minnesota soldier who was killed in Iraq, leading to a heated exchange with the grieving mother.
The six men and women, standing outside the Anoka funeral for Cpl. Andrew Kemple, 23, who died Feb. 12 after his vehicle came under fire, are members of a church in Topeka, Kan., that espouses the belief that God is killing American soldiers because they fought for a country that tolerates homosexuality.
They were countered by a group of 20 affiliated with the Patriot Guard Riders, a rapidly growing nationwide movement organized to offset the fringe group's message.
"We're just trying to show honor and respect for families," said John Lutsch, a St. Cloud resident who heads the Minnesota branch of the Patriot Guard. "I was appalled when I read about these protests, that they'd use a solemn occasion like this as a forum for their views."
He was interrupted by Steve Drain, who bellowed that God hates gays and their enablers and "so, therefore, God hates the U.S. military."
According to an account reported by the Minneapolis-based Star Tribune, about a half-hour before the service, Deirdre Ostlund, Kemple's mother, approached the six Kansans and told them in a cold fury: "I'm Andrew's mother and I want you to know you are truly hateful people."
As Ostlund turned away to enter Zion Lutheran Church, Shirley Phelps-Roper taunted her: "Adulterer! You can't admit you sent your own child to hell! If she does not heed this warning, she will look up from hell with him."
Phelps-Roper is the daughter of Fred Phelps, the pastor of the nondenominational Westboro Baptist Church. During the 1990s, church members were known mostly for picketing funerals of AIDS victims.
Minnesota is one of at least 14 states considering laws that would make funeral protests illegal.
The Patriot Guard got its start in Kansas last October when motorcycle-riding veterans became fed up with the Westboro church's picketing and decided to show up and place themselves between the demonstrators and mourners. The organization has grown quickly with chapters in nearly every state and more than 8,700 members, about 100 of them so far in Minnesota, Lutsch said.
Just as the funeral service was starting Thursday, the six Kansans got into their van and drove away as the Patriot Guard mockingly serenaded them, "Hit the road, Jack, and don't you come back no more...."
A few minutes later, Deirdre Ostlund stood before a packed church sanctuary, just to the right of her son's flag-draped coffin.
"Nothing can separate us from the love of God, and Andrew knew that," said Ostlund, of Forest Lake. No matter what he did, God loved him. And now, nothing will ever separate me, or any of us, from Andrew."
Kemple was a 2001 graduate of Cambridge-Isanti High School. Inspired by the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, he joined the Army in 2003.
The member of the 101st Airborne Division was the 30th military member from Minnesota to die in Iraq.
#1
...the pastor of the nondenominational Westboro Baptist Church.
He's no pastor, they're not Baptist, and they're sure no Christian Church. They're just a nasty family cult who get press because they push the right buttons to get decent people outraged, and the MSM likes to show them because doing so casts a bad light on real Christians.
#4
I'm fully prepared to join in a demonstration at his lynching.
Posted by: Mike ||
02/24/2006 19:25 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I'll donate the rope. Phelps and his ilk are the Christian looking glass image of Islamism. They are shameless and beyond redemption. It is a deep and fervent hope of mine that Fred Phelps is finally found and photographed dead of AIDS induced cardiomyopathy slumped over the tied-down body of his underage boy toy.
IT IS NO SECRET that the Bush administration and the old guard at the CIA have not, in many instances, seen eye to eye over the last several years. Leaks and anonymously-sourced complaints from agency officials have dominated above-the-fold news stories. The rancorous bureaucrats at the agency have been so hostile to the administration, in fact, that Senator John McCain warned, on ABC's This Week, in November 2004, that "This is a dysfunctional agency and in some ways a rogue agency."
Porter Goss, who became the director of Central Intelligence in April 2005, has confronted this highly-politicized bureaucracy. The result has been a staggering amount house cleaning. Various press accounts have discussed the ongoing purge of senior-level officials from Langley. But the bureaucrats who once ran the nation's supposedly super-secret spook organization aren't going down without a fight. Bureaucracies die hard.
Enter Paul Pillar.
Few, if any, old guard bureaucrats have been more vocal in their opposition to the Bush administration than the man who was the former National Intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia at the CIA from 2000 to 2005.
We still don't know who leaked Pillar's own National Intelligence Estimate, which painted "a dark assessment of Iraq," to the New York Times in September 2004. That leak, which was disclosed just several weeks prior to the presidential election, seemed perfectly timed to discredit the Bush administration and its policies. But it is clear that Pillar long ago discarded his "neutral role" as an intelligence analyst and "inject[ed] himself in the political realm," as Guillermo Christensen, himself a 15-year veteran of the CIA, recently explained in the Wall Street Journal.
It is no surprise, then, that upon departing Langley we find Pillar continuing his career as a critic of the Bush administration in the pages of Foreign Affairs Magazine. With more than a dab of irony, Pillar claims to expose the ways in which the administration "disregarded the community's expertise, politicized the intelligence process, and selected unrepresentative raw intelligence to make its public case."
But while there are certainly legitimate, rational criticisms to be made of the Bush administration's prosecution of the war on terror, the war in Iraq, and the intelligence that informs its handling of both, you will not find any of them in Pillar's piece. Instead, Pillar demonstrates that he himself is a master of the art of politicizing intelligence. Far from being a dispassionate analyst, Pillar practices the very same "manipulations and misuse[s]" he claims to expose.
CONSIDER, for example, Pillar's discussion of the prewar investigation into Iraq's relationship with al Qaeda. The "greatest discrepancy," Pillar claims, "between the administration's public statements and the intelligence community's judgments concerned not WMD (there was indeed a broad consensus that such programs existed), but the relationship between Saddam and al Qaeda. The enormous attention devoted to this subject did not reflect any judgment by intelligence officials that there was or was likely to be anything like the 'alliance' the administration said existed." Moreover, "The intelligence community never offered any analysis that supported the notion of an alliance between Saddam and al Qaeda."
The only reason analysts investigated the relationship, according to Pillar, was because they were continually peppered with pointed questions by the administration, which was on a pre-determined path to war. And the administration's fixation on this non-existent relationship diverted the CIA's preciously scarce resources. So much so that "It is fair to ask how much other counterterrorism work was left undone as a result."
It would be difficult to construct a more skewed history of events.
TO UNDERSTAND how out-of-step with reality Pillar's narrative is, consider what the Senate's bipartisan investigation into the uses of prewar intelligence had to say about the CIA's investigation into Iraq's al Qaeda ties. Far from being an unjustified concern of the Bush administration alone, Pillar's own division at the CIA was independently investigating the issue as the war approached.
The Senate Intelligence Committee's Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq, released July 7, 2004, discusses "five primary finished intelligence products on Iraq's links to terrorism" produced by the CIA. The last two of these, versions of a document called Iraqi Support for Terrorism, are of paramount importance since they were produced in the months leading up to the war.
On September 19, 2002, according to the Senate Intelligence Report, the CIA's first version of Iraqi Support for Terrorism was "disseminated to 12 senior officials by the CIA Directorate of Intelligence." Interestingly, "it was not drafted to respond to a specific request." Instead, "CIA officials decided that new intelligence warranted another look at the issue." (Emphasis added)
That there was "new intelligence" that demanded attention should come as no surprise. On October 7, 2002 George Tenet, then the DCI, reported to Congress that there "growing indications of a relationship with al Qaeda," which " suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action." The paper was initially drafted by "a senior analyst from the Near East and South Asia Division," who "worked closely with the Iraq analysts in the Counter Terrorism Center's (CTC) Office of Terrorism Analysis." Was this analyst Pillar himself? We don't know. But at the very least it must have been one reporting to him.
The CTC later took over responsibility for editing and publishing updated versions of the analysis, which included additional "intelligence collected from detainees between September 2002 and January 2003." A second version of Iraqi Support for Terrorism was then disseminated to a wider audience in January 2003, on the eve of Secretary of State Colin Powell's presentation to the United Nations in early February, with "references to highly sensitive sources and methods" edited out.
Thus, contrary to Pillar's claims, his own division at the CIA thought there were good reasons based on "new intelligence" to investigate the matter--without any "specific request" from the Bush administration--in the months leading up to the war.
Why did officials at the CIA think that the issue warranted an additional investigation? The reality of this matter is far more complicated than the quick and dirty narrative Pillar gives us.
ALTHOUGH the Senate Intelligence Report is heavily redacted, the excerpts of Iraqi Support for Terrorism that were made available for public consumption, as well as the Senate Intelligence Committee's own analysis, paint a very different picture than the one Pillar wants us to see. The CIA, we learn, had failed to collect first-hand human intelligence inside either the Iraqi regime or al Qaeda. Despite this poor collection effort, however, the CIA had acquired intelligence on a relationship between the two--primarily from foreign government services and open sources.
The Senate Intelligence Committee concluded, for example that "despite four decades of intelligence reporting on Iraq, there was little useful intelligence collected that helped analysts determine the Iraqi regime's possible links to al-Qaida." In fact, the CIA "did not have a focused human intelligence (HUMINT) collection strategy targeting Iraq's links to terrorism until 2002." The CIA's intelligence collection was so bad that the agency did not have "any unilateral sources that could provide information on the Iraq/al-Qaida relationship" and was "entirely dependent on foreign government services for that information."
It is true that the CIA refrained from concluding that an "operational relationship" existed--a conclusion that was more forcefully echoed by the 9/11 Commission. But, this was because the CIA did not have "credible reporting on the leadership of either the Iraqi regime or al-Qaida, which would have enabled it to better define a cooperative relationship, if any did in fact exist."
PILLAR DOES NOT TELL US about the old guard at the CIA's poor track record in collecting intelligence. That is not surprising. Good bureaucrats, after all, defend the bureaucracy from outside criticism.
Instead, he pretends to dismiss the issue with absolute certainty--as if he had been reviewing concrete intelligence collected by his colleagues over all these years.
Nor does Pillar tell us that when the CIA revisited the issue they did compile evidence of a relationship. Any intelligence analysis, by its very nature, must deal with vagaries and uncertainties. But here we come to the most egregious aspect of Pillar's Foreign Affairs piece. He avoids substantive discussion of the actual intelligence the CIA had amassed from various other sources; evidence that, in many instances, cuts against his out-of-hand dismissal.
Again, we turn to what Pillar's own division at the CIA told the administration on the eve of war. "Our knowledge of Iraq's ties to terrorism is evolving," the CIA wrote in Iraqi Support for Terrorism. "Regarding the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," the CIA assessed, "reporting from sources of varying reliability points to a number of contacts, incidents of training, and discussions of Iraqi safehaven for Osama bin Laden and his organization dating from the early 1990s."
There was evidence that al Qaeda had metastasized inside regime-controlled Iraq. According to the Senate Intelligence Report, "Iraqi Support for Terrorism described a network of more than a dozen al-Qaeda or al-Qaeda-associated operatives in Baghdad, and estimated that 100-200 al-Qaeda fighters were present in northeastern Iraq in territory under the control of Ansar al-Islam." Furthermore, "A variety of reporting indicates that senior al-Qaeda terrorist planner al-Zarqawi was in Baghdad between May-July 2002 under an assumed identity." Regarding those hundreds of al Qaeda operatives who set up shop in northeastern Iraq, "it would be difficult for al-Qaeda to maintain an active, long-term presence in Iraq without alerting the authorities or obtaining their acquiescence."
Alarmingly the CIA noted, "The most disturbing aspect of the relationship is the dozen or so reports of varying reliability mentioning the involvement of Iraq or Iraqi nationals in al Qaeda's efforts to obtain CBW training." Elsewhere, the CIA's analysts noted that they could not determine if some of these nationals were working for the Iraqi regime or not. But still, "The general pattern that emerges is of al Qaeda's enduring interest in acquiring, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) expertise from Iraq."
(It is worth remembering that one of Pillar's colleagues, Michael Scheuer, was once able to determine that Iraq was, in fact, aiding al Qaeda's pursuit of CBRN expertise.)
There is much more to this story, of course. There is a vast body of evidence that indicates there was an ongoing relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. Pillar, however, would prefer not to debate the meaning of this evidence. It may turn out that the bureaucracy he served missed quite a bit over the last decade. It may also turn out that Pillar's own understanding of the terror network was inadequate.
In either case, it is safer for Pillar to pretend that the relationship was a fantasy of the administration that decided it was time for his CIA to undergo a radical change.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
02/24/2006 00:47 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
There's been several excellent pieces unmarking Pillar. If you want to know what's been wrong with the CIA, Pillar is Exhibit A.
Posted by: Captain America ||
02/24/2006 0:56 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Out with the trash. This moron is exactly the type that needed to be purged in the first place.
#3
find out who he hung with - there's usually a deeper rot
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/24/2006 13:05 Comments ||
Top||
#4
It's past time to put a stop to people like Paul Pillar and to warn others off. We are in a war. If one aids the adversary in any way are a committing treason. People who work in our national Intelligence agencies should know what the act of treason will get them if they should open their mouths to the press or anyone else during a time of war.
I suggest he be found in his car on some back road with a handgun in his hand and a hole in his head. Make sure it is ruled suicide because it really is.
President George W. Bush's disclosure of detailed intelligence about a thwarted al Qaeda plot to attack Los Angeles could prove damaging for U.S. national security, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee said in a letter released on Thursday.
In a Feb. 17 letter to U.S. intelligence chief John Negroponte, Sen. John Rockefeller of West Virginia echoed a warning from CIA Director Porter Goss that revelations about intelligence successes or failures against al Qaeda can aid America's militant enemies.
"Why then did the president and the assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism describe in great detail the information about this plot contained in a highly classified October 2004 CIA document?" Rockefeller wrote.
White House officials were not immediately available for comment.
The Senate Democrat was referring to a Feb. 9 presidential speech in which Bush disclosed new details of a 2002 al Qaeda plot to use shoe bombs to hijack a plane and fly it into the 1,017-foot-(310-metre) high US Bank Tower in Los Angeles.
The Bush administration cited the same plan to attack West Coast targets using hijacked planes last October as being among 10 disrupted al Qaeda plots.
But Bush, while facing criticism over his decision to authorize warrantless eavesdropping inside the United States, provided the public with a more detailed account in his Feb. 9 speech.
He said Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, al Qaeda's operational mastermind behind the Sept. 11 attacks, planned to use four Southeast Asian men in a second-wave attack on Los Angeles and trained the cell's leader on how to use a shoebomb.
Frances Townsend, Bush's homeland security and counterterrorism adviser, also disclosed intelligence details about the plot.
Rockefeller said Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other senior officials have disclosed sensitive information for political purposes on a range of issues from prewar Iraq to National Security Agency eavesdropping.
The disclosures have all been potentially damaging to U.S. interests, Rockefeller said. At the same time, the administration has sought to blame lower-level officials for damage caused by unauthorized leaks.
"Given the administration's continuing abuse of intelligence information for political purposes, its criticism of leaks is extraordinarily hypocritical," Rockefeller wrote.
"The president and other senior members must set an example for others to follow," he added.
A spokesman for Negroponte's office would confirm only that the director for national intelligence had received the letter. Rockefeller spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said the senator has not yet received a response from Negroponte.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
02/24/2006 00:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Rocky off his nut
Posted by: Captain America ||
02/24/2006 0:45 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Americans fought a revolution to get rid of inbred hereditary monarchs. What a shame the founding fathers forgot about the corrosive effects of hereditary Senators and Representatives who carpetbag to out of the way districts and buy their seats.
P.S. Isn't Rockefeller the leading suspect in the NSA leak investigation>
Posted by: ed ||
02/24/2006 0:56 Comments ||
Top||
#4
"Why then did the president and the assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism describe in great detail the information about this plot contained in a highly classified October 2004 CIA document?"
Um, because the Democrats,READ YOUR PEERS, have been screaming for just one example of how the wiretaps helped save Americans! THATS WHY YOU OLD MAN!!! BFOTO
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
02/24/2006 1:29 Comments ||
Top||
#5
"Why then did the president and the assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism describe in great detail the information about this plot contained in a highly classified October 2004 CIA document?" Rockefeller wrote.
Who has the authority to classify information? The President.
Who has the authority to declassify information? The President.
Who should be tossed out of office, disgraced, and then cast out from society? Sen. Rockefeller.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
02/24/2006 8:01 Comments ||
Top||
#6
A classic case of yelling, "Stop, thief!" as you run away with the goods.
#7
You mean Nagin calling for more welfare for N.O. is scrappleface and this isn't? Man, what a tangled web we weave, Sen. Rocky! Good grief, if this isn't the most blatant example of the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is??!!!!
Posted by: BA ||
02/24/2006 9:16 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Rockie is just throwing up a smokescreen because he was one of the leakers of the NSA program to the NY Times...
#10
I think he is just gettting his deck stacked so that, if in the event of another attack ( remember we have to righ ALL the time, the bad guys only have to be right ONCE) he, or some other anti-Bushnut can say, " See I tol' ya so. Now maybe somebody will listen to me."
Weeks before one of its companies sought U.S. approval for its ports deal, the United Arab Emirates contributed $100 million to help victims of Hurricane Katrina, officials confirmed Thursday. The Bush administration said the money it received from the United Arab Emirates was nearly four times as much as it received from all other countries combined. Other countries, including some in the Middle East, also pledged large contributions but have not yet sent the money.
Kuwait just donated $25 million in the past few days as well.
The victim of a fatal Stevenson Expressway traffic accident who attracted the attention of FBI terrorism investigators was a physician from Puerto Rico who had real estate and business investments in the Chicago area but no known ties to terrorism, his attorney and authorities said Thursday. Lafi Hussein Nofal, 45, died Wednesday in a chain-reaction wreck on the southbound Stevenson near the Harlem Avenue exit. Authorities said they found a check for $2 million and "other financial instruments" in the car, drawing the attention of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force. However, the FBI released a statement early Thursday saying there was no known terrorism link and referred further questions to the Illinois State Police.
....
Nofal's lawyer said her client was in town from Puerto Rico to deal with a lawsuit related to an Oak Lawn gas station he co-owned. She said the suit concerns property worth more than $1 million. The lawyer, Roxolana Harasymiw, said she did not know what money or documents were in the car but said she thinks Nofal would have had documents related to the lawsuit, and his business interests involved large amounts of money. More at link
By Guy Dinmore in Washington
Published: February 23 2006 19:07 | Last updated: February 23 2006 19:07
The intelligence wing of the US marines has launched a probe into Iranâs ethnic minorities at a time of heightened tensions along the border with Iraq and friction between capitals.
Iranian activists involved in a classified research project for the marines told the FT the Pentagon was examining the depth and nature of grievances against the Islamic government, and appeared to be studying whether Iran would be prone to a violent fragmentation along the same kind of fault lines that are splitting Iraq.
The research effort comes at a critical moment between Iran and the US. Last week the Bush administration asked Congress for $75m to promote democratic change within Iran, having already mustered diplomatic support at the UN to counter Iranâs alleged nuclear weapons programme.
At the same time, Iran has demanded that the UK withdraw its troops from the southern Iraqi city of Basra which lies close to its border. Iran has repeatedly accused both the US and UK of inciting explosions and sabotage in oil-rich frontier regions where Arab and Kurdish minorities predominate. The US and UK accuse Iran of meddling in Iraq and supplying weapons to insurgents.
US intelligence experts suggested the marinesâ effort could indicate early stages of contingency plans for a ground assault on Iran. Or it could be an attempt to evaluate the implications of the unrest in Iranian border regions for marines stationed in Iraq, as well as Iranian infiltration.
Other experts affiliated to the Pentagon suggest the investigation merely underlines that diverse intelligence wings of the US military were seeking to justify their existence at a time of plentiful funding.
Lieutenant-Colonel Rick Long, a marines spokesman, confirmed that the marines had commissioned Hicks and Associates, a defence contractor, to conduct two research projects into Iraqi and Iranian ethnic groups.
The purpose was âso that we and our troops would have a better understanding of and respect for the various aspects of culture in those countriesâ, he said. He would not provide details, saying the projects were for official use only.
Marine Corps Intelligence defines its role as focusing âon crises and predeployment support to expeditionary warfareâ. It also provides threat and technical intelligence assessments for the Marines.
Marines swimming in funds for outside consultants or is this indicator 11?
#2
wow this seems very peculiar but then again im no expert, Maybe Dan D or one of the real clued up guys can help with this one. My thoughts are first that the Marines are just rying to get more involved with the whole terror thing so as to get funding (and the terrs) not that blatently obviously but i'm thinking how all the other three main services squabble for funding and resources and even who does what mission. Second thought is someone has been paying attention and sees the Marines as one of the if not the best tool with which to tackle terrorists - kind of an elite army if you like but how that conficts with spec ops i wouldnt and dont claim to know. Third is yeah were just months away from a whole big pile of shit hitting the Iranian reactor fans and this is absolutly vital to security. perhaps getting ready to lock down districts of certain heavily Iranian populated towns in the event of protests or far worse (not that i think there would be alot). Very interesting. OT, any burgers play EVE Online??
#3
Possibly prepping the future battlefield for follow on ops. ID'ing whose likely to play ball, local politics/players to be noted or courted, and whose cities will need protection or sanctioning if/when we clip the persians. OTOH, I never discount the $$$ factor. $$$ is policy most of the time.
OS or OP would prolly have sight pictures on this.
#5
Technically speaking this should have been done by the CIA. That the Marines need to obtain a contractor says volumes about their faith in CIA data and intelligence.
#7
Having the USMC directing an intelligence project at your country is sort of like getting a voicemail message from Tony Soprano. It can't be good news.
Posted by: Matt ||
02/24/2006 15:36 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Which might be why this has been published ....
Former spokesman for the US Department of State Richard A Boucher has taken over the responsibility of Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs as the assistant secretary of state. He replaced Assistant Secretary of State Christina B Rocca.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Rocca's Bio has already been wiped of the State Dept. website. She must be in a real hurry to spend more time with her family.
An accountability court in Rawalpindi ordered the confiscation of the property of Asif Ali Zardari in Hyderabad, Nawabshah and Sanghar districts on Friday. The decision comes following Zardari's declaration as a proclaimed offender last year in the BMW case.
Looks like a good, old-fashioned Roman-style proscription coming his way. Caligula would be impressed.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/24/2006 20:51 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Gomez Addams, AKA Asif Zardari
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/24/2006 21:16 Comments ||
Top||
#2
He has a moustache an Eagle could land on! Then crap on his face.
NEW DELHI - Washington and New Delhi may not be able to resolve differences over a groundbreaking nuclear deal before US President George W. Bush visits India next week, an official warned on Thursday. The inking of the pact, which would give New Delhi access to long-denied advanced nuclear technology was being touted as the highlight of Bushs three-day trip to India, starting March 1.
We simply dont know whether we will have an agreement before President Bushs visit. We are trying our best, said US Undersecretary of State Nicholas "Monty" Burns, who is in New Delhi to prepare the ground for the presidential visit. Both of us want to complete these negotations but there are still some remaining differences between us and those differences need to be worked out, Burns told reporters after talks here with Indian foreign secretary Shyam Saran.
He described his exchanges with Saran as good but stressed, There are still remaining differences.
Washington says India must put its fast breeder reactor programme, which can be used to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons, on a list of civilian facilities to be placed under international supervision. Indian scientists however say that this step will compromise the countrys strategic interests.
The scientific adviser to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh weighed in on Wednesday by saying outright India would not open the facility for international inspections. Who said we are going to put the fast breeder reactors in the civilian side? We cannot and will not do so, scientific adviser C.N.R. Rao told the Press Trust of India. We will accept only whatever is good for India ... The deal cannot be forced on us. The countrys interest will be protected, Rao said.
Indias junior foreign minister Anand Sharma also told parliament Thursday that India would separate its facilities voluntarily, and that the exercise would be based on the countrys national interests.
Indian media reports Thursday quoted unnamed government officials as saying that India was likely to tell Burns it would not place more than 32 facilities under safeguards compared to the 60 facilities Washington wants on the list. New Delhi would also agree to international safeguards for its fast-breeder reactors but not before 2010, the reports said.
Ahead of his visit, Bush said in Washington that the nuclear deal would take time and require patience to implement. Bush and Singh signed the deal in July, but it still needs the approval of the US Congress and the 44-member Nuclear Suppliers Group.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan on Thursday rejected an Afghan minister's request that the names of Pakistani missiles be changed because they coincided with those of former Afghan rulers.
"How we gonna change 'em to the names of Pak heroes? We ain't got none!"
Pakistan Foreign Office spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam told the BBC that Islamabad could not fulfill the request because Pakistan and Afghanistan shared a common history and hence common heroes.
"So we'll just have to use theirs. They ain't got no missiles, so they ain't usin' 'em!"
On Wednesday, Afghan Information Minister Syed Makhdoom Raheen had requested the Pakistani government not to give its military missiles former afghan rulers' names. "Education and culture institutes should be named after Afghan leaders like Shahabud Din Ghauri, Mehmood Ghaznavi and Ahmad Shah Abdali instead of naming destructive devices after them," he said. Three Pakistani missiles are named Ghauri, Ghaznavi and Abdali.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Pathetic. Revealing. And just another notch in the limited existence of Pakistan.
And the strengthening of Afghanistan, proving their worth. I still have great hope for Afghanistan and a slow, successful future.
When this contingent of the Indian Air Force spots an advancing Pakistani troop, it has orders to open fire. Nothing unusual in that, except that they will not be firing at their traditional enemies but rather shielding them from a common foe.
Believe it or not, an IAF contingent flew off to the Democratic Republic of Congo on Wednesday with its task cut out: to give air cover to Pakistani ground troops stationed at Bukavu, one of the areas worst hit by the civil war in Congo. Both the Pakistani and Indian troops are part of a UN peacekeeping force.
Currently, there are more than 17,000 UN troops in Congo, of which one Pakistani brigade is stationed in Bukavu, located in eastern Congo on the banks of Lake Kivu. An Indian brigade is stationed on the other side of the lake at a place called Goma. The situation in the area is still volatile. The main task of the IAF contingent will be to protect the Pakistani soldiers when they step out of their camps for action. Moreover, Indian and Pakistani soldiers will be sharing the same camp and eating at the same mess, said an IAF officer.
The IAF contingent called Indian Aviation Contingent (IAC) II comprises 285 personnel, including 40 pilots. They will be flying nine helicopters five MI-17 and four MI-35 attack helicopters. Group Captain Rajan Kapur, with more than 5,000 hours of flying experience, heads the team. Air Marshal Ajit Bhavnani, vice-chief of air staff, flagged off the contingent on Wednesday.
While the IAC II will act as a deterrent to any attack on Pakistani soldiers, it will also provide mobility to ground troops, the officer said. Besides pilots, technical experts, medical, support and administration staff are also part of the team.
The contingents job becomes more important as the first ever elections are scheduled to be held in the African republic later this year.
The IAF at present has three operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Besides Bukavu, it has the IAC I stationed at Goma. The IAF also maintains an airfield for UN aircrafts under the Air Field Services (AFS) contingent at Kindoo. Besides these, it runs a primary school for local children in Bukavu.
Posted by: john ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Lets home the Indian Air Force does not have to ring back to Delhi for "permission" to provide support, as the Paki armor did for Task Force Ranger in Somalia in 1993.
The violence in Iraq after the bombing of a Shiite mosque this week has abruptly thrown the Bush administration on the defensive, and there were signs on Thursday that American officials recognized new perils to their plans to withdraw troops this year. The American enterprise in Iraq seemed beleaguered on two fronts, political and military.
Senior administration officials in Washington and Baghdad said the next few days would test American and Iraqi resolve, as the United States military, despite pressure to intervene and angry accusations that it stood by while Iraq erupted in revenge killings, holds back to see if Iraqis can quell violence themselves. An unusual daytime curfew in Baghdad scheduled for Friday Prayer could help, the officials said.
Iraqis and some American officials also said the Bush administration might have to rethink its political strategy in Baghdad.
ROME - A former detainee at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq claimed on Thursday that Italian-speaking men had interrogated inmates, prompting a quick denial from the office of President Silvio Berlusconi. Ali Shalal El Kaissi, an Iraqi who said he had been detained from October 2003 to January 2004, told Rainews 24 that a fellow inmate had described being questioned by two Italian speakers at the notorious US-run jail.
In comments first published on the Internet late Wednesday and broadcast on the television chain Thursday, Kaissi said fellow-inmate Haitham Abu Gaith, a former diplomat, heard Italian spoken by two of his interrogators.
Doesn't pass the sniff test.
The station described Kaissi as the man hooded in black who appeared in photographs taken at Abu Ghraib that revealed the widespread abuse of detainees by US guards at the Baghdad jail.
Berlusconis office issued a quick denial of any knowledge that any Italians were involved in interrogations there. The government has no knowledge of Italian citizens at Abu Ghraib, it said. The government categorically rules out that any (Italian) servicemen or public agents could have been there.
Kaissis comments were carried Thursday in most newspapers in Italy, where the governments support for the US-led invasion of Iraq has stirred strong public criticism.
Where it's meant to influence the upcoming elections.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
NSA released a piece of critial intercept this morning:
Bobby "Bacala" Baccalieri: The world really went downhill, since 9/11. You know, Quasimodo predicted all of this.
Anthony 'Tony' Soprano Sr.: Who did what?
Bobby "Bacala" Baccalieri: You know, the middle east. The end of the world.
Anthony 'Tony' Soprano Sr.: Nostradamus. Quasimodo's the hunchback of Notre Dame.
Bobby "Bacala" Baccalieri: Oh, right. Notredamus.
Anthony 'Tony' Soprano Sr.: Nostradamus and Notre Dame, that's two things different completely.
Bobby "Bacala" Baccalieri: It's interesting that they'd be so similar, though. You know, I always thought "Ok, you got the hunchback of Notre Dame. But you also got your quarterback and your headback of Notre Dame".
Anthony 'Tony' Soprano Sr.: Notre Dame's a ****ing cathedral!
Bobby "Bacala" Baccalieri: Obviously, I know. I'm just saying. It's interesting, the coincidences. What, you're gonna tell me you never pondered that?
Anthony 'Tony' Soprano Sr.: No
Some wives and daughters of newly elected Hamas lawmakers sat in a back row cradling poster-sized portraits of their husbands and fathers as the Palestinian parliament was sworn in.
When the names were read off, muffled voices followed a brief silence: "He is not here. ... He is in prison."
Posted by: Captain America ||
02/24/2006 05:53 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
ah, too bad. The murderers remain in prison. I look forward to the outrage from the left.
Appearing before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee in a briefing yesterday, Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin devoted most of his security review to Hamas' rise to power in the Palestinian Authority. "In the long run, the Hamas organization poses a strategic threat to Israel," he warned. "We must not fall into the 'honey trap' it is setting for us and agree to its proposals for a 10-year hudna and de facto recognition of Israel. I'm not sure we haven't fallen into the trap already."
Diskin explained that Hamas is trying to get Israel and the world to consent to its ostensibly recognizing Israel in practice, then hold its fire for 10 years while using the time to build its military might against Israel. "We need to be very careful of the vague statements Hamas is bandying about and its sweet words. They must recognize Israel de jure, and not de facto," he said.
Asked by MK Danny Yatom (Labor) what he means by defining Hamas as a strategic threat, Diskin said: "If a radical Sunni Hamas state arises across our border, all the extremist radical elements will come there from throughout the world and from countries like Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen and will deploy along the state's borders. From my standpoint, a state like that, with military capability and the ability to carry out terrorist attacks, is a strategic threat to Israel." Diskin warned that such a state could have a radiating effect on Israeli Arabs, which could be a serious problem.
However, Diskin thinks Hamas will make an effort to prevent terrorist attacks in the near future to prove to the world that it has firm control on the ground. He noted that Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees remain active. On Saturday, the Shin Bet assassinated a senior Islamic Jihad operative in Nablus, but despite such successes the group is still capable of terrorist attacks.
Diskin stressed that the government's decision to stop transferring tax revenue to the PA might make it more difficult for Hamas to solidify its rule. Hamas needs $1.5 billion a year and is unlikely to raise that much from donations, he said.
Diskin got into a verbal spat with MK Ran Cohen (Meretz), who criticized his appearance before students at the pre-military academy in the settlement of Eli, during which he termed the disengagement plan "uprooting." "When you meet with that public and use the term 'uprooting,' you're fawning on those who used that expression to oppose the disengagement," Cohen charged.
Diskin replied that he was merely using the term in its technical Hebrew sense of removing something from its place, and that he had also employed the term during government discussions.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
MANILA, Philippines - President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo announced she had quashed a coup plot Friday and declared a state of emergency, gambling that the backlash wouldn't leave her crippled.
It was one of the toughest and longest days yet for Arroyo, who already has withstood two coup attempts and numerous other crises during five tumultuous years in power.
She started with a pre-dawn meeting of her national security council and was still in the presidential palace in the evening, as opponents accused her of suppressing dissent.
Imposing a state of emergency is a dangerous move in a country still smarting from the martial-law decrees used by former dictator Ferdinand Marcos.
Riot police quickly used force to disperse two protests before they could gather steam. An army general was arrested and a police commander was relieved of his duties as military chiefs moved to quash the rebellion before it could get started.
The military has played major roles in two "people power" revolts and has a recent history of restiveness, so Arroyo ordered a massive security clampdown, with military camps barricaded to keep troops from joining the demonstrations.
Military chiefs said they backed Arroyo and that they had eased the threat of a coup, but hadn't wiped it out completely.
Arroyo vowed she was in control but clearly was worried about losing her grip on events as her opponents tried to hijack commemorations of the 20th anniversary of the "people power" revolt that ousted Marcos.
Presidential spokesman Ignacio Bunye told reporters that the commemorations have been canceled and that the military was ordered "to prevent and suppress lawless violence."
Arroyo said the political opposition, along with extreme elements of the political left and right, were determined to bring down the elected government.
"This is my warning against those who threaten the government: the whole weight of the law will fall on your treason," Arroyo said in a nationally televised statement in which she appealed for calm.
Her chief of staff, Mike Defensor, said no curfew will be imposed but the declaration bans rallies, allows arrests without warrants, permits the president to call in the military to intervene and lets her take over facilities including media outlets that may affect national security.
Arroyo's aides linked former President Joseph Estrada and several others to the coup plot. Estrada laughed off the allegations, saying he's been out of work and under detention for five years and didn't have the money to finance a coup. "I don't have any work, how can I finance?" he asked.
Former President Corazon Aquino and about 5,000 people were allowed to march peacefully to a memorial to her late husband Benigno, whose assassination in 1983 sparked massive protests that led to the revolt against Marcos. But Aquino, a one-time Arroyo ally, criticized the emergency declaration and reiterated a call for the president to "make the supreme sacrifice" and resign."I believe that during these times, we should not forget that many sacrificed to regain our democracy," Aquino said. "We cannot just keep quiet because that is what happened during martial law. Our dictator then believed that he can do anything to keep himself in power."
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the country's largest lawyers' group, said it will question the legality of Arroyo's declaration before the Supreme Court, according to its president, Anselmo Cadiz."It could result in more political hemorrhage and security risk," said Rep. Roilo Golez, Arroyo's former national security adviser, who withdrew support from her. "This could get out of control ... if her crisis team doesn't manage this well." Rep. Teodoro Casino, a leftist leader, said anti-Arroyo protests won't end.
The Philippine stock market and the peso both plunged.
U.S. State Department spokeswoman Janelle Hironimus said: "We are monitoring the situation carefully. We firmly support the rule of law and constitutional government. Violence should be avoided."
Arroyo survived three impeachment bids in September, when her dominant allies in the House of Representatives used a technicality to block complaints of alleged massive corruption and vote-rigging. Police already were on heightened alert nationwide as reports of a coup plot have been circulating for more than a week; even elementary school students were discussing it in detail.
#1
U.S. State Department spokeswoman Janelle Hironimus said: "We are monitoring the situation carefully. We firmly support the rule of law and constitutional government. Violence should be avoided."
Blanket statement to avoid picking sides. The event was really just the yearly EDSA rally that was full of Rumor or wanting of Coupe, the phils love their drama. The military did nothing and by 10PM Makati city police broke up the protestors that were left. Most were filtering home anyway because no one brought food to feed them, last big coupe the opposition purchased food and water to keep the people there. Yes, they will be happy to hang on and protest for a meal. Today all is quiet and clean up crews are out picking up trash.
Posted by: 49 pan ||
02/24/2006 18:15 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Goodness, 49 Pan, it sounds like they could use a couple of rounds of community theater!
Before any major military operation, there are always tell tale signs. With all the talk about Israel or the United States bombing Iran's nuclear weapons program, it would be wise to check for the signs before taking the pundit prattle too seriously.
1. The U.S. Navy stages a "surge exercise" and moves six carrier battle groups into the Indian Ocean.
2. A "regularly scheduled exercise" moves Patriot Missile Batteies to Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. These exercises happen from time to time, but if they happen when other things are happening
3. -- Movement of B-52 and B1B bombers to the island of Diego Garcia (in the Indian Ocean).
4. -- Deployment of F117 stealth bombers and F-22 fighters to anywhere in the Persian Gulf.
5. -- Deployment of B-2 Stealth Bombers to Guam, where there are special facilities for maintaining these aircraft.
6. -- Lockdown of Whitman Air Force Base (where most B-2 bombers are stationed) in Missouri.
7. -- Increased delivery of Pizza to Pentagon
8. Sudden loss of cell service near some air force bases (from which heavy bombers would depart). At the same time, there would be sightings of Middle Eastern looking guys around these bases, trying to get their cell phones to work, while being observed by what appears to be FBI agents.
9. Deployment of KC-135/KC-10 aerial tankers to Diego Garcia, Guam and the Persian Gulf.
10. America asks nations neighboring Iran for basing and over flight rights.
11. Pentagon orders 10 million gallons of Windex. Gotta clean up all that glass after we get done making those parking lots..
These warning signs are no secret, and intelligence officers regularly run down their check lists. As a result, nations will sometimes stage a false alert by deliberately performing many of the items on someone's check list, with no intention of following through.
#4
You hit the nail on the head tipper! I would also add that items 3,4, and 5 will also be evident by increased com-trail displays over the US sky; and although not so noticeably seen in the public, a quiet movement of Israelis and jews out of Arab lands to the US and other western nations 30 days prior. A top secret request from Israel!
Items 1, 5, and 9 will be tipped off to the Iranians by Russian spy satellites which will spawn abrupt troop and missile movements preimptively which ironically will be 'factored in' the US's response as it's detection grid 'lights up'!
Right now we have a carrier (the Reagan) in the gulf along with an expeditionary strike group (special ops capable) and another carrier (the Roosevelt) in the Mediterranean on a 'port visit'.
The Enterprise and the Eisenhower are in the Atlantic ... somewhere.
A reminder about strikes, tho: The B2s struck Kosovo IIRC from Whitman AFB in Missouri, then refueled over the Atlantic and returned home. That was also the first combat use of the JDAMs it carries and the combination -- planes coming stealthily from another hemisphere, precision attacks on the Serbs without massive collateral damage, safe return to their home base -- rather changed the equation about bombing campaigns.
After Saddam invaded Kuwait and the Saudis asked us to intervene, the F-117 Night Hawks flew from Saudi bases, but again despite the massive anti-aircraft defenses around Baghdad we took out their command and control networks at night with no casualties to men or machines.
The point? First, that obvious major deployments of ships and planes may not be a requirement for a massive, but precision, attack on Iranian facilities. And second, that there may well be other capabilities in the pipeline. If we're contemplating sale of the F-117 to allies, it's not the cutting edge any more.
#6
If I were an officer at the Pentagon and I wanted to confound the bad guys, I'd start holding pizza parties for my department every Friday. Really big pizza parties. Maybe I'd order a few deployments to coincide.
Posted by: Mike ||
02/24/2006 7:56 Comments ||
Top||
#7
A tactician friend pointed out to me that there are two different ways that we can attack Iran, and that we need to focus on both for a favorable outcome.
The first is an "acute" attack, like in GW 1, that lasts from 1-30 days and emphasizes anti-missile defense as much as combined air attack offense. This is the war that everybody thinks of as the war; but in truth is only the "mission accomplished" part of the war.
The second is a "chronic" attack, that lasts from 30 days to as long as a year or more. It is designed to so thoroughly reduce Iran that large sections of the country can be sliced off, and Iran permanently partitioned.
The purpose of this is so that we go one step beyond the temporary partitioning of Iraq after GW 1, with its northern and southern "no-fly" zones, and "give" large chunks of Iran to adjacent nations that can both rule them and defend them.
This second part answers the question "What do you do with Iran once you have beaten it?" And it is just as important as defeating Iran in the first place, neutralizing their nuclear ambitions and missile programs.
Unlike Iraq, ruled by minority Sunnis, but still ruling "Iraqis", be they Kurds or Shiites; Iran's Persians are the majority, and do not see their hated minority Kurds, Arabs, Baluchs or Azeri as anything other than useless subjects. Foreigners living in their country.
This means that unlike Iraq, Iran is ripe for partition, enlarging their neighbors with their kind of people, and diminishing Persia from being an inherently large, powerful and unstable state to one that is more equal in size and strength to its peers.
We also learned our lesson with Iraq. That while we thought we could force Saddam to concern himself with his own people in favor of building up his military, he was left with enough resources so that by utterly despising his own people, he still could mount a threat.
So the Partitioning of Iran would be done specifically to prevent them from regaining their threatening stance, even if they committed their entire nation to do so.
#8
Actually all the "movement" is probably pointed at the Euros. They really don't like folks pulling triggers so they may become more accomadating in pressuring the Iranians. My bet would be to start looking where the four recently refitted "boomers" are, since they can carry something like 150 cruise missles. Very accurate and almost no risk involved, not to mention there isn't a whole bunch the Iranians can do to stop an attack like that.
#13
"What do you do with Iran once you have beaten it?"
While a good salt massage (ideally, each granule is laser etched with "US Embassy 1979"), certainly seems a splendid idea, an incredibly vigorous rendition of the Snoopy happy dance also comes to mind.
#14
IIRC, I saw a statistic somewheer to the efefct that most of the people living in Iran today were born after 1979. They're no fans of the mad mullahs; in fact, they'd love to be rid of them as much as we would. Take down the mullahocracy, and suddenly you've got another friendly country in the Middle East.
Posted by: Mike ||
02/24/2006 15:11 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Take down the mullahocracy, and suddenly you've got another friendly country in the Middle East.
Yeah anyways.
Posted by: Rafael ||
02/24/2006 15:45 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
02/24/2006 18:18 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Iran's Persians are the majority
If they are, then only just. There hasn't been an accurate census for over 20 years and Persians could well be less than 50% of the population as they are more urbanized than other groups and hence have a lower birth rate.
#19
"What do you do with Iran once you have beaten it?"
I have my barf bag ready again, incase "W" puts out signals to rebuild Iran, as he did in Iraq, now the muslim mosques! I will just throw up at the thought of such hypocrasy; praying all along that doesn't happen during hurricane season here in the US again.
If Iran doesn't back down before the 'button is pushed' NOT A PENNY toward reconstruction afterwards!!
BEIRUT - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made an unannounced visit to Lebanon on Thursday, keeping up US pressure on Syria and pointedly avoiding any encounter with the pro-Damascus President Emile Lahoud.
Amid stringent security measures in Beirut, Rice met leaders from the anti-Syrian parliamentary majority in a bid to shore up the governments drive for reform and full sovereignty. She also vehemently reaffirmed Washingtons call for Syria to cooperate fully with the inquiry into the murder of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri as the head of the probe held a new bout of talks in Damascus. The sole purpose of this trip is to express support for the Lebanese people and for the Lebanese government as they try to recover fully their sovereignty and they continue their efforts to reform, Rice told reporters.
During the visit, which was to last several hours, Rice met officials including Foreign Minister Fawzi Sallukh, Prime Minister Fuad Siniora, Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir, and parliament majority leader Saad Hariri.
Rice said she would be telephoning parliament speaker Nabih Berri, seen as an ally of Damascus and compromise figure, but would not be meeting or even calling the under-fire Lahoud. I talked in the past to him and my message was it is his responsibility as president of Lebanon to be concerned by the sovereignty of Lebanon, Rice said when asked if she had a message for Lahoud. Rice had held talks with Lahoud on her last visit to Lebanon in July.
She said there was no need for her to visit Syria, which stands accused by a United Nations inquiry of being implicated in the assassination of former premier Rafiq Hariri in February 2005. Damascus denies the charge. The Syrian government is well aware of what it needs to do. And it does not need me to come there to tell them, Rice said. Syria should not be in a position to intimidate, or to continue to occupy by stealth, Lebanon and that there should be an understanding that Syria has responsibilities under (UN resolution) 1559, she added.
Slap.
Rice said she had spoken about the probe with Egyptian and Saudi leaders on the previous stages of her trip, as diplomats mooted an Arab initiative that would allow the inquiry to fulfill its demand of meeting Syrian President Bashar Al Assad. I did talk about it in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, just urging that it will be a common voice, urging that there would be a total cooperation with the investigation.
I think everybody is exactly on the same page about it. I think there will be more messages delivered to Syria about the importance of cooperation, she said.
Her comments came as the head of the probe, Serge Brammertz, visited Damascus for talks with officials on what his spokeswoman described as a very good working visit. But it must be a truly full cooperation, Rice insisted. A full cooperation means the the Syrians should cooperate in any way the investigators of Mr Bremmertz thinks necessary.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Wally and Condi... »:-)
anyone who has followed* events in Lebanon for a few decades and is not totally wack from doing so, may enjoy this pic as I did.
The European Union will impose sanctions on people identified by the UN investigation probe as suspects in the murder of former lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. In a statement released late on Tuesday after a meeting of EU justice ministers, the 25-member bloc agreed to freeze the assets of and ban visas for the suspects that were named in the UN's commission report. The sanctions would affect people linked to planning, financing, organizing or carrying out the bomb attack that killed Hariri and some 22 others. No names were mentioned in the report.
Austrian Ambassador to Lebanon George Maunter-Markhof told The Daily Star newspaper that "this decision was taken to have the legal grounds ready for implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1636." He added: "No names of suspects were communicated from the UN to the EU yet, but they want to be ready so that when names are listed they can implement immediate sanctions."
Austria currently holds the presidency of the EU.
Last October the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1636, which stipulates that "all individuals suspected by the Commission or the Government of Lebanon of involvement in planning, sponsoring, organizing or perpetrating the murder be subject to travel restrictions and freezing of assets." A UN spokesperson said that a UN sanction commission was formed to look into the way to implement the sanctions and to identify the groups and individuals involved in the sanctions. The spokesperson added that it was up to the new head of the UN investigation team, Serge Brammertz, to identify the suspects in the assassination of Hariri. According to a report released last December by the UN commission headed by German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis, 19 individuals are "suspects" in the killing of Hariri. Twelve of the suspects are currently in the custody of Lebanese authorities. It is believed that the list of suspects identified by the UN probe also includes high-ranking Syrian officials. The U.S. Treasury Department decided in January to freeze the assets of Assef Shawkat, head of Syrian military intelligence.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/24/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
No hunting or fishing licenses will be granted, so there.
Posted by: Captain America ||
02/24/2006 0:52 Comments ||
Top||
Lebanese Ministerial Council's session on Thursday was canceled due to the absence of a group of ministers called "March 14 Alliance". Secretary-General of the Ministerial Council Suhail Bouji told reporters that Prime Minister Fuad Al-Siniora informed President Emile Lahoud over the phone that some ministers decided to boycott the session, and so it would be rescheduled. The five ministers representing the Iranian paymastersthe Syrian overseers Hezbollah and Amal movements, in addition to two other ministers, arrived to the Presidential Palace to attend the ministerial session, while all ministers of the "March 14 Alliance" did not show up.
The Lebanese government is formed of 24 ministers.
Meanwhile, Lebanese Minister of Telecommunications Marwan Hmadeh told reporters in the Freedom Square that the "March 14 Alliance" ministers will not attend Ministerial Council sessions in the Presidential Palace, demanding Lahoud to resign "as he is no longer the president of Lebanon". Hmadeh added that "as a president, Lahoud is over", calling for his resignation and asserting that the government will remain intact. Acting Minister of Interior Ahmad Fatfat said in similar statement that the Ministerial Council will continue performing its duties but without sessions in the Presidential Palace. Fatfat added that "Lahoud should respond to the demands of the Lebanese people and announce his resignation" to allow the chance for establishing a sovereign Lebanon.
The alliance ministers gathered in Shuhada Square after postponing the ministerial session and sent messages to Lahoud through the Lebanese media demanding his resignation. Youth groups supporting the "March 14 Alliance" also announced that their activities will continue until March 14 to make Lahoud resign.
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.
A recent upsurge in violence in Somalia's capital has focused attention anew on the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in the chaotic Horn of Africa state. The violence had killed at least 22 people and wounded more than 140 since Saturday.
In a speech to the Sydney Institute last night, Mr Costello said anyone not prepared to accept Australian values, and who had citizenship of another country, should not remain an Australian citizen.
ROME - The United States should close its Guantanamo Bay prison as swiftly as possible, Italys Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi was quoted as saying on Thursday, a week before meeting US President George W. Bush in Washington.
An accountability court in Rawalpindi ordered the confiscation of the property of Asif Ali Zardari in Hyderabad, Nawabshah and Sanghar districts on Friday. The decision comes following Zardari's declaration as a proclaimed offender last year in the BMW case.
, who is in New Delhi to prepare the ground for the presidential visit. Both of us want to complete these negotations but there are still some remaining differences between us and those differences need to be worked out, Burns told reporters after talks here with Indian foreign secretary 
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan on Thursday rejected an Afghan minister's request that the names of Pakistani missiles be changed because they coincided with those of former Afghan rulers.
ROME - A former detainee at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq claimed on Thursday that Italian-speaking men had interrogated inmates, prompting a quick denial from the office of President 
BEIRUT - US Secretary of State 
