Prime Minister Stephen Harper will lead off Wednesday's debate on whether to extend Canada's military mission in Afghanistan. The debate, scheduled to begin at 3 p.m. ET, will decide whether Canada's 2,300 troops will come home next February or stay in Afghanistan until early 2009. On Tuesday, Harper said the mission is a vital one. "What we are doing there is not just protecting our national interests, but [we are] providing international leadership and providing real advancement to the standard of living and human rights of the Afghan people. These are important things for which Canada should stand."
The opposition parties believe that if Canada extends its stay in Afghanistan it won't be able to respond to other trouble spots such as Darfur, Sudan. "Did [the prime minister] realize that this would render Canada incapable of responding to other situations in the world?" asked NDP Leader Jack Layton. For Layton, Darfur is a great humanitarian mission with no Americans involved (as of yet). That's a win-win for Layton. It's not like he actually cares. Watch him change tune if ever the US shows any interest in Darfur.
Harper says that, for Canada, the priority is Afghanistan. "We understand that a commitment of this magnitude creates some real constraints on our ability elsewhere," he said. On Wednesday night, after a six-hour debate, MPs will vote on a motion for a two-year extension of Canada's diplomatic, development, civilian police and military personnel in Afghanistan, including funding and equipment.
Increasing casualties, including the deaths of 15 soldiers since 2002, have caused many Canadians to question how long Canada should be in Afghanistan. The Liberals suggest that may be why Harper is putting it to a vote now so that the mission extension is dealt with well before a possible election looms next year. "It's not about whether or not the mission should be until February 2009," said Liberal defence critic Ujjal Dosanjh. "Now the question is whether or not it should be extended." Ah yes, the Liberals. "We were for it before anyone else was, but now that you're for it, we're against it." This applies to anything - the budget, childcare spending, you name it.
Layton also says MPs haven't been given much time to prepare. "What we don't know is the nature of the extended mission. Canadians have not been told about it. MPs have not been told about it, yet they're going to be asked to vote on it after a few speeches on the House of Commons."
But Harper says MPs have had lots of time to decide. "Members of this House, the parties of this House, have had five years to decide what their position is on this mission. We want to be sure that our troops have the support of this Parliament going forward." Great response!
Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay has just returned from a trip to Afghanistan. He says Afghan President Hamid Karzai has asked about Canada's involvement after next February. "They want to know that Canada is going to be there," said MacKay.
#1
Canada wants to take over command of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan for a year, most likely starting in 2008, Prime Minister Stephen Harper told Parliament on Wednesday
And so we do. We have a lot of making up to do. And we need to rebuild our military.
Mogadishu 17 May. 06 ( Sh.M.Network) Anti-war rally is now underway in Mogadishu, with hundreds of people are attending that demonstration on Wednesday. The rally in which people are against fresh fighting in the capital was organised by administration of Banadir province.
" We dont want any more clashes, any more bloodshed amid the slogans the demonstrators were chanting, as shabelle correspondent Ismael Tahta reports who is now at the scene of the rally. Civilians mostly women and children were taking part in the rally and they demonstrated their opposition to other clashes in the capital.
Despite the demonstrations going on in the city both rival sides are still regrouping for fresh battle possibly in southern outskirts of Mogadishu and are ignoring the calls of ceasefire by city elders. It is the first rally organised by the civilians in the city since the clashes between militia of warlords and Islamic militiamen erupted.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/17/2006 08:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
first rally organised by the civilians
Correction: organized by the losing side of recent battles.
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2006 8:57 Comments ||
Top||
This is too important to excerpt, I think, so I present it here complete. From the Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com. Moderators, edit for length if you feel it's necessary.
Gadhafi's Leap of Faith: Libya's strongman feared appearing weak.
BY JUDITH MILLER
On Dec. 16, 2003, three days after Saddam Hussein was pulled from his hole near Tikrit, Robert G. Joseph, who headed counterproliferation on the White House National Security Council, flew to London for a secret meeting with his British and Libyan counterparts to discuss how and when Libya would announce the abandonment of its weapons of mass destruction. "The trip was so close-hold that it was cleared neither with the British Embassy in Washington nor the American Embassy in London," a senior U.S. official recalled. Neither Donald Rumsfeld nor Colin Powell knew of it in advance.
Seated around an antique wooden table with senior British and Libyan officials at the Traveler's Club in London--chosen by the British for being a discreet place to meet--Mr. Joseph was stunned by the evasiveness of the draft announcement initially presented by Musa Kusa, Libya's U.S.-educated foreign intelligence chief and de facto head of its six-man delegation. The statement failed to mention even the existence of banned weapons or programs in Libya, nor did it say that Moammar al-Gadhafi, Libya's strongman, was prepared to abandon them. Instead, the draft spoke of the "spirit of Christmas," of all things, and Libya's desire to establish a "WMD-free zone" in the Middle East, according to an official who saw several early drafts. "It was a mushy mess," he recalled.
The Libyans also wanted an explicit quid pro quo: In exchange for Libya's renunciation of WMD, the U.S. would abandon any effort to foment "regime change" in Libya, ensure that sanctions were lifted, and restore diplomatic relations. Mr. Joseph balked. There would be no such deal, or even negotiations about it, he insisted. Libya and the West still had differences to resolve on terrorism and other fronts.
Pan Am 103
Of all the U.S. officials involved in the secret talks, Mr. Joseph was the most skeptical of Col. Gadhafi's intentions, colleagues recalled. He had reason to be. "Bob and I were supposed to be on Pam Am 103 the day it crashed," said Ron Lehman, who heads the Center for Global Security Research at California's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Messrs. Lehman and Joseph had arrived at Heathrow Airport early enough that morning to get seats on Pan Am 107, direct to Washington, without stopping in New York, 103's destination. So they switched flights. Mr. Joseph later told friends he had seen the long lines of Americans assembling at the gate for the flight that exploded over Lockerbie soon after takeoff. He recalled a lively group of students and thought of his own son and daughter. Mr. Joseph never said a word about his narrow escape to his Libyan interlocutors. But he had no illusions about those with whom he negotiated.
Did Libya not want the world to believe that it had made a voluntary, strategic decision to renounce its weapons and programs? Mr. Joseph asked Musa Kusa, rumored to have been a coordinator of the Pan Am attack, and Abdullahi Obeidi, Col. Gadhafi's close aide who was then Libya's ambassador in Rome. It was not in Libya's or the West's interests for critics to think that Col. Gadhafi had been forced, or bribed, into doing so, Mr. Joseph argued. Libya, moreover, had to be specific about what "eliminating" its programs meant. Would it commit to destroying and removing all dangerous equipment and material? Would it destroy empty chemical munitions and lethal agents, as well as sign the treaty banning such weapons? Would Libya destroy its imported centrifuges? Would it eliminate conventional missiles that violated a treaty banning weapons capable of carrying a 500-kilo payload with a range of more than 300 kilometers?
Because nothing is ever easy with Col. Gadhafi, Tony Blair had to phone the Libyan leader the next day--their first conversation ever--to encourage him to be bold in announcing his decision. Col. Gadhafi was still hesitant, a diplomat recalled, concerned about appearances that he was caving in to pressure. Mr. Blair assured him that both he and George W. Bush would be supportive if Col. Gadhafi's renunciation were explicit. "But until the last minute," said an official who watched amended drafts of Libya's statement as they were faxed back and forth between Tripoli, London and Washington less than four hours before the announcement was scheduled, "we really weren't sure we would have an agreement."
As it happened, the announcement of the renunciation of Libya's WMD programs was delayed by an official reluctance to interrupt the broadcast of a major soccer game that Col. Gadhafi was watching. The statement he was supposed to deliver was read, instead, by Libya's foreign minister. The Brother Leader, as Col. Gadhafi styles himself, had suddenly gotten a cold--in his feet, a diplomat suggested. He had a sore throat and couldn't talk, the Libyans said. The date: Dec. 19, 2003.
Afraid that Col. Gadhafi might change his mind even after having publicly renounced his WMD, U.S. officials rushed to move sensitive nuclear equipment and material out of Libya. The mission fell to the State Department, and specifically to John Bolton, then undersecretary of state for verification and arms control, and Assistant Secretary Paula DeSutter. Donald Mahley, a veteran Foreign Service officer and former Army colonel who was deputy assistant secretary for arms control implementation, was chosen as "on the ground" coordinator.
Over Christmas, a team of experts assembled by Ms. DeSutter pieced together an emergency plan. Because the Libyans insisted on a "small footprint" in Libya, the size of a joint U.S.-U.K. team was limited to 15 experts (10 Americans and five Brits). They had to rotate in and out of Libya to stay under the limit. Even getting to Libya was challenging. "Americans were not allowed to travel there," Ms. De Sutter said. "So when our first team secretly flew in, the airline's computer kicked their reservations and tickets out of the system." The teams also needed licenses for everything, given the sanctions--even to buy Libyan officials a cup of coffee.
And there was the map problem. "I wanted a detailed, but nonclassified, map of the country," said Mr. Mahley. "But there was none in the entire U.S. government." Mr. Mahley said that nothing he had done before, including commanding two companies in Vietnam, facing down the Russians over arms-control disputes, or negotiating the germ and chemical weapons treaties in Geneva, was as complicated as dismantling Libya's WMD infrastructure in less than four months between January and April 2004.
Several things surprised him: first, the relatively small number of Libyans involved in the WMD programs. "Though the Libyans I dealt with were knowledgeable, dedicated, and innovative," he said, "there was almost no bench." "The same six people--most of them American-educated--did almost everything," said Harry L. Heintzelman IV, senior adviser on noncompliance. A second lesson was how relatively easy it was to hide elements of a WMD program, even in an open desert, "if there is a national dedication to do so," Mr. Mahley wrote in a "Lessons Learned" paper for an arms-control newsletter.
"Tony" Sylvester Ryan, known as "Chemical Tony" to distinguish him from the team's other Tony who helped dismantle banned missiles, recalled being taken to a place they wound up calling the "turkey farm." Other officials said that the site, previously unknown to U.S. intelligence, was where Libyans had hidden unfilled chemical bombs and where they were going to set up centrifuges to enrich uranium. Libya, Mr. Ryan said, came clean in stages: "They'd start by saying 'I think we have only 1,500 unfilled bombs,' and by the end of the visit, they'd acknowledge having stored about 3,000. But we never would have found the place at all if the Libyans hadn't shown it to us."
Team members were also struck by the extent to which sanctions had complicated Libya's hunt for unconventional weapons, especially biological. Though U.S. intelligence officials still debate whether Libya has disclosed all aspects of its early effort to make or acquire germ weapons--in particular, how much help, if any, was provided by Wouter Basson, head of South Africa's illicit germ-warfare program under apartheid--sanctions apparently helped dissuade Col. Gadhafi from building an indigenous program. "The program, if you can call it that, just kind of fizzled out," said a member of the British-led biological team that first toured suspect Libyan sites and interviewed some 25 scientists during a two-week trip in the late spring of 2004.
In 1985, for example, the three Libyans who headed the germ-weapons program, known as the Scientific Medical Research Establishment, got $55 million to build a medical lab with Bio-safety Level Three and Four capacity to handle the most dangerous germs. Though the Libyans said the facility was for peaceful medical purposes, two companies they approached--from Finland and South Korea--both declined, citing the sanctions ban on selling Libya dual-use facilities, officials disclosed. Sanctions also meant that Libya often imported shoddy merchandise at exorbitant prices: for instance, four different systems to fill white plastic bottles with mustard agent, none of which worked. One German system "leaked all over the place," Mr. Mahley recalled. "Seeing the liquid on the warehouse floor, we were hesitant even to look inside without protective gear." The Italians had sold Libya a system that involved filling containers atop trucks. That, too, was a disaster. "In the end," said Mr. Ryan, "they manufactured small tanks themselves, set them on metal legs, put a petcock on the tanks, put on their protective gear, and filled the plastic containers by hand. Not exactly high-tech, but it worked."
Then the Libyans seemingly forgot about the chemical weapons they had stored away. Libyan officials insisted that, contrary to Western intelligence reports, they had never used the weapons in their war with Chad, or anywhere else; and while they had tested agents for potency and filled shells with nonlethal material, they had never field-tested shells filled with chemical agents. The Libyans also shrugged when team members asked about some of the more antiquated spare parts Libya had bought on the black market for its chemical weapons program. "They told us, 'Yeah, we know we've been had. But what were we going to do? Take them to small claims court for selling us junk?' " Mr. Ryan recalled. "They knew they had no recourse if they were sold a pig in a poke."
Although sanctions had made acquisition more expensive and time-consuming, it had not stopped the programs. Instead, Libyans had turned to one-stop shops, like the network run by Abdul Qadeer Khan, "father" of the Pakistani bomb, for their nuclear program; and for chemical weapons they improvised. "Libya still pursued WMD, but sanctions raised the cost sharply and impeded the programs" Ms. DeSutter said.
The dismantlement effort did not always go smoothly. A chartered 747 that was supposed to take team member Christopher T. Yeaw and the sensitive warhead design blueprints back to Washington, for instance, broke a wing flap while landing at Metiga Airport, the former Wheelus Air Force Base, which the U.S. vacated in 1970. Because Libya had no spare parts, his return was delayed until the part could be flown in and the wing repaired. In the meantime, Dr. Yeaw, one of the few team members whose "Q" security clearance authorized him to handle such sensitive drawings, could not find a safe enough place to store the blueprints. So for the next two days, "I took it to restaurants, to the restroom. I even slept alongside it in the double bed in our villa," he said. "It was closer to me than my wife--like a baby, which is what the Libyans called it: Chris's 'baby.' "
Aides to Ma'atouq Mohammed Ma'atouq, head of Libya's nuclear program, recalled that the "baby" was the focus of tension between the Americans who came to his office to retrieve the documents and the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, who arrived even earlier that same day at the Ministry of Scientific Research, well in advance of the Americans, to examine the two-inch thick sheaf of Xeroxed engineering blueprints. The IAEA thought it should keep the blueprints and asked the U.S. to turn them over, prompting a standoff before the bewildered Libyans. "My mandate was clear: Collect the documents and deliver them to Paula DeSutter in Washington," said Dr. Yeaw, a nuclear engineer who now teaches at the Naval War College in Rhode Island. "So unless they wanted to remove them from my hand, they were not going to get them." Ms. DeSutter, in fact, was waiting at the airport when the unmarked 747 finally taxied into Dulles on Jan. 22, 2004. Dr. Yeaw, fellow members of his team and his "baby" were the only cargo.
Tanks and Bulldozers
The dismantlement mission was completed in record time. In four months, the U.S.-U.K. team managed to airlift 55,000 pounds of the most sensitive documents and nuclear components, including several containers of uranium hexafluoride and two P-2 centrifuges, of some 10,000 that Libya had ordered from the Khan Research Laboratories in Pakistan. By mid-February, the inspection team and a representative from the Hague-based Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons, which Libya had finally agreed to join, watched Libyans crush with tanks and bulldozers more than 3,200 unfilled chemical weapons shells they had laid out on the desert floor. By March, the team had sent out by chartered ship over 1,000 tons of additional centrifuge and missile parts, including the five SCUD-C missiles (minus warheads), launchers and related equipment. And Russia had removed 13 kilos of fresh, 80% highly enriched uranium from the Tajura reactor--a uniquely successful joint venture in WMD disarmament.
Libya's continuing political repression and human rights abuses have prompted officials to cite Reagan's motto for dealing with the Soviet Union during its own tumultuous transformation: Trust, but Verify. "And this is exactly how we approached the case of Libya," said Mr. Bolton, now U.S. ambassador to the U.N., in a July 2004 speech. But not even the very conservative Mr. Bolton defends the halfhearted effort to assure Col. Gadhafi that he was right to renounce WMD. Calling Libya's about-face "an important nonproliferation success" because it "proves that a country can renounce WMD and keep its regime in power," Mr. Bolton told me recently that preventing the spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons "requires long-term strategic thinking and concentration."
The preoccupation with the continuing insurgency in Iraq, the inability to stop Iran and North Korea from pursuing nuclear weapons, and plunging domestic support at home for Mr. Bush may explain Washington's distraction. Libya's removal from the list of state sponsors of terror was also delayed by its alleged plot to assassinate King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, as late as 2003. A new factor that complicated the U.S.-Libyan rapprochement was Congress's refusal to permit a company based in Dubai, a key ally in the war on terror, to operate U.S. ports. Blindsided by the virulence of the opposition, the White House was even less inclined to inform Congress that it intended to remove Libya from the terrorism sponsor list. Moreover, apart from a few men--notably Reps. Tom Lantos (D., Calif.), Curt Weldon (R., Pa.) and Peter Hoekstra, the Intelligence Committee chairman; and Sens. Richard Lugar, who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, and Joe Biden--few legislators have taken the time to monitor Libyan affairs closely.
Libyan exile groups expressed dismay yesterday over Libya's removal from the terrorist list. And there will undoubtedly be objections from Congress and elsewhere. But for all the possible questions, Libya stands as one of the few countries to have voluntarily abandoned its WMD programs, and out of options for countering Iran's stonewalling, the White House belatedly opted to do more to make Libya a true model for the region. Human rights abuses are more likely to be remedied in a full bilateral relationship.
Ms. Miller, a former New York Times reporter, is a writer in Manhattan. This concludes a two-part essay on Libyan WMD.
#1
Those blueprints were for Chicom4, the fourth Chinese test, a missile deliverable, 1 m diameter, implosion weapon using HEU that weighed 500 kg.
The blueprints were wrapped in a plastic bag from Dr AQ Khan's dry cleaners in Rawalpindi. They included copious notes in Urdu, explaining fabrication procedures of each componant.
The Chinese have not been punished for this blatant irresponsible act of proliferation, nor has Pakistan.
Posted by: john ||
05/17/2006 19:46 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Iff I remember correctly, either "the Colonel" or another high-ranking Libbie official was quoted as saying how Libya is one of the most tunneled nations or region in the ME-North Africa, wid vast, deep, multi-layered underground networks in large areas of Libya proper, including extensions into neighboring sovereign countries.
KUWAIT: A Kuwaiti court yesterday cleared the Islamist founders of the state's first political party of charges of violating the law, a defence lawyer said. The court imposed a fine of 50 dinars ($173.4) on just one of the 15 founders of the Ummah (Nation) Party, who had been taken to court by the government on charges of breaching press and public gatherings laws, Nasser Al-Duwailah told AFP. The men could have faced six months in jail if convicted of the alleged offences.
The party's secretary general, Hakem Al-Mutairi, was fined "on charges of circulating publications without prior authorisation from the side concerned", Duwailah said, adding he would appeal. The lawyer said he was "happy" with the verdict acquitting his clients, which he saw as "a legal recognition" of the Ummah Party's existence. None of the 15 defendants, who launched their party in January 2005, were in court when the ruling was pronounced.
Duwailah had urged the court to drop all charges, pointing out that the public gatherings law his clients were accused of violating had been revoked by the constitutional court and that parliament has passed a new press law to replace the legislation they allegedly breached. The men were accused of holding a public meeting and issuing statements without prior permits from authorities. The Sunni Islamist activists took the unprecedented step of launching the Ummah Party, the first of its kind in the conservative Gulf region, saying it intends to promote pluralism and a peaceful rotation of power.
"They have so far shelved the case. We think they have no evidence against us. We are a peaceful party and we are demanding - like any other group - plurality, freedom and democracy," Ummah Party Vice-Chairman Awad Al-Zufairi told Reuters. Last year, state security summoned leaders of the Ummah Party for interrogation, saying they were "trying to change the regime" in Kuwait. The group has dismissed the government's allegations as an attempt to silence its members, who include prominent Islamists.
Kuwait was the first Gulf Arab state to have an elected parliament and a constitution in 1962, one year after independence, but the premiership and all key ministries are controlled by members of the ruling Al-Sabah family. Many liberal and Islamist political groupings - but not parties operate openly in the state. Kuwaiti law makes no reference to political parties, but the government has repeatedly said it was premature to legalise such parties.
The United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan has called for the resumption of six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear program. In a meeting in Seoul with South Korean president Roh Moo Hyun, Mr Annan urged the six countries involved in talks on North Korea's nuclear programs to resume negotiations as soon as possible.
The talks have been stalled since late last year, with North Korea refusing to return unless the United States lifts financial sanctions on banks that do business with Pyongyang. The US has shown no sign of giving in to that demand and in recent days has been reportedly considering more sanctions against Chinese banks with links to North Korea.
Even if we did lift the sanctions, which'd be stupid, there would then be another reason why they couldn't possibly have talks with imperialists like us.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Rome - A cartoon published in an Italian communist newspaper, which compares Palestinian living conditions to Nazi death camps, has provoked the wrath of the Israeli ambassador and a dispute on the Italian left.
Ambassador Ehud Gold sent a letter to Liberazione, which the newspaper published on Tuesday, to denounce "the contempt for the Holocaust and the terrible insult to the memory of the victims".
The letter demanded an apology for the publication of the cartoons.
The incident has also created controversy because the newspaper is the vehicle of the Party of Communist Refoundation (PRC).
The PRC was led by the new president of the lower house of parliament, Fausto Bertinotti, until his election on May 6.
The cartoon was published last Friday.
It shows the gate of a death camp topped with the slogan "Hunger brings freedom" - an obvious allusion to the inscription "Work brings freedom" at the entrance to the Auschwitz Nazi death camp.
Cartoon is 'pro-Palestinian'
Lawmaker and journalist Furio Colombo, director of L'Unita - the daily paper of the ex-communist Democratic Left (DS) - said the cartoon was "offensive" and repeated "one of the worst cliches about Jews".
The PRC and the DS are both part of the leftist majority.
Italian newspapers gave a lot of coverage to the incident.
Members of Italy's Jewish community denounced what they called "a despicable comparison". They accused the far left of leading a "misinformation campaign" about the conflict in the Middle East.
The director of Liberazione, Piero Sansonetti, said the cartoon was "very polemic and pro-Palestinian" but it was not "anti-Semitic".
Bertinotti published a statement on Monday, judging it improper to implicate him in the affair.
The statement read: "But I think that in these difficult times for cultures and religions to live together we have to avoid all demonstrations, including satire, that could be perceived as offensive by the communities concerned." It's because jews are nazis, don't you know, and paleo are WWII jews.
#1
well, let this be a lesson to all of us. It's really not cool to go around posting intentionally offensive cartoons. While I think that the uproar and demands for apology only inspire other jerks to seek attention by using offense, ignoring it completely has its own set of problems too.
#3
Not mentioned that the Paleos choose of their own free will to live in those conditions while the Jews of the Death camps hardly had a choice in the matter.
#6
More frightening is the implication that Italy, with it's current government, will embrace the jihad to eliminate jews that Pals so worship. Visits to Syria and Iran and welcoming Hamas can't be too far behind as Italy aligns itself in the coming war. Que sera sera.
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands Under withering criticism, the Dutch immigration minister has agreed to rethink her threat to revoke the citizenship of a Somali-born former lawmaker known for her opposition to fundamentalist Islam.
Minister Rita Verdonk said she acted on the basis of a television program that aired last week in which Ayaan Hirsi Ali admitted lying about her name and age on her asylum application when she fled to the Netherlands in 1992 to escape an arranged marriage.
Hirsi Ali has become one of the best-known figures in the country. She has lived under police protection since a film she wrote criticizing the treatment of women under Islam provoked the murder of its director, Theo van Gogh, by an Islamic radical.
Hirsi Ali resigned from parliament Tuesday, saying in a sometimes teary voice it would be impossible for her to function as a politician while fighting a legal battle over her immigration status.
The threat to strip Ayaan Hirsi Ali of Dutch citizenship unleashed a fierce debate in parliament at a time of heightened anti-immigrant sentiment in the country. Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende said he was "surprised by the speed" with which Verdonk acted and asked her for an explanation.
Verdonk said Monday that under Dutch law, Hirsi Ali's naturalization is automatically void since she lied to get it. But she said a day later that Hirsi Ali would retain an immigrant visa, and would be eligible to reapply for citizenship.
At the end of a parliament debate that lasted far into the early hours of Wednesday morning, Verdonk agreed to two motions, one to reconsider her first decision, and another to reprocess Hirsi Ali's naturalization as quickly as possible if necessary.
"I've agreed with the parliament that I'll look at it. I have six weeks time now that I've taken my position and Ayaan has time to react," she said.
Some politicians questioned Verdonk's motives.
Verdonk, from the libertarian VVD Party, is locked in a neck-and-neck race for her party's leadership in next year's general election. She has built her reputation on taking a hard line in immigration cases, and is popular with Dutch who say they are fed up with crime and the perceived failure of Muslim immigrants to integrate with the rest of Dutch society.
Femke Halsema, leader of the Green Left party, said she didn't believe Verdonk was previously unaware Hirsi Ali had lied about her name, given that Hirsi Ali has said so publicly dozens of times in interviews and even on the first page of a 2002 book of essays.
Hirsi Ali has declined to say what she will do next, or confirm reports she will go work for the American Enterprise Institute.
But the conservative think-tank's president, Christopher DeMuth, said in an open letter Tuesday he was "looking forward to welcoming you to AEI, and to America."
Dutch media also reported that U.S. Ambassador Roland Arnall had met with Hirsi Ali to tell her the United States will accept her regardless of her Dutch immigration status. The U.S. Embassy in The Hague declined to comment.
Hirsi Ali said Tuesday that she would continue to voice criticism of fundamentalist Islam and that she plans to make a sequel to "Submission," the film that led to Van Gogh's murder in November 2004.
"Submission" was a fictional study of women suffering abuse in Muslim households, and used scenes of near-naked women with texts from the Quran written on their flesh, which many Muslims found deeply offensive.
The Senate voted to build 370 miles of triple-layered fencing along the Mexican border Wednesday and clashed over citizenship for millions of men and women who live in the United States illegally.
Amid increasingly emotional debate over election-year immigration legislation, senators voted 83-16 to add fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers along the southern border. It marked the first significant victory in two days for conservatives seeking to place their stamp on the contentious measure.
The prospects were less favorable for their attempt to strip out portions of the legislation that could allow citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants and create new guest worker programs.
The Senate acted in a volatile political environment, as the White House struggled for a second day to ease the concerns of House Republicans who contend that President Bush favors amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Thousands of demonstrators massed a few blocks from the Capitol demanding immigrant rights.
Construction of the barrier would send "a signal that open-border days are over. ... Good fences make good neighbors, fences don't make bad neighbors," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. He said border areas where barriers already exist have experienced economic improvement and reduced crime.
"What we have here has become a symbol for the right wing in American politics," countered Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. He said if the proposal passed, "our relationship with Mexico would come down to a barrier between our two countries."
The Senate labored to complete work by next week on immigration legislation that generally follows an outline Bush set out in a nationally televised speech this week.
The measure includes provisions to strengthen border security, create a new guest worker program and crack down on the hiring of illegal immigrants.
Most controversially, it offers an eventual chance at citizenship for many of the estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country. Senate Republicans staged an impromptu, occasionally emotional debate over whether that amounted to amnesty.
Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana said it did. "Surely this is a pardon from what present law says must happen," he said of provisions in the bill that require immigrants to undergo background checks, pay back taxes and take other steps before they can become citizens.
Sens. John McCain and Chuck Hagel replied heatedly it was not amnesty.
"Let's stop the nonsense," said Hagel, addressing fellow Republicans. "You all know it's not amnesty." Said McCain, addressing Vitter, "Call it a banana if you want to ... to call the process that we require under this legislation amnesty frankly distorts the debate and it's an unfair interpretation of it."
Vitter sought the last word. "Methinks thou dost protest too much."
The clash erupted after Vitter sought a change in the legislation to strip out provisions of the bill that would allow for guest worker programs and give some illegal immigrants a chance at citizenship.
Supporters of the Senate measure credited Bush's prime-time Monday night speech with giving fresh momentum to the effort to pass long- stalled legislation.
Across the Capitol in the House, the story was different. Republicans pushed through a border security bill last year, and several members of the rank-and-file have criticized Bush for his proposals. To calm their concerns, the White House dispatched Karl Rove to their weekly closed-door meeting.
Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, an outspoken opponent of the Senate bill, derided the effort. "I didn't see it was a persuasive event. If it was about Karl Rove seeking to convince members of Congress after debate that he's right and we're wrong it would have been better not to have the meeting," he said.
King said Rove told lawmakers Bush is sincere about enforcement. But, he added, "The president doesn't want to enforce immigration law because he's afraid he'll inconvenience someone who wants to come into the country for a better life."
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., agreed that Rove did not seem to have been persuasive. "It's not the kind of issue you can compromise on; either you're giving amnesty to people who are here illegally or you aren't."
At the White House, press secretary Tony Snow defended Bush against criticism. "The president is actually taking a more aggressive role on border security than the House itself took," he said. "That is the sort of thing that is going to answer a lot of the complaints that we have heard."
The National Capital Immigration Coalition organized the afternoon demonstration on the National Mall a few blocks from where lawmakers debated the issue they cared about.
"This is a critical moment. We oppose the militarization of the U.S- Mexican border," said Juan Jose Gutierrez, one of the event's organizers.
#1
A lot of noise which in the end will ammount to nought. The Dems and country club Republican's that benefit from not paying living wage jobs to US citizens by hiring illegals and importing H1B visa holders will block any action. Guys like me will continue to get screwed and displaced in the jobs market.
Every Friday and Saturday if I need gas I see the line of illegls cashing their checks at the Korean owned mini mart that serves as a bank for them.
No attempts at real enforcement of existing imigration law is made. Any new law will get the same treatment. These folks are sitting ducks and the Border Partol knows where they are at it is choosing to do nothing.
This ought to be the motto of the Border Partol: The U.S. Border Patrol stealing jobs from US citizens while enjoying the comfort of a Union protected government job.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/17/2006 15:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"What we have here has become a symbol for the right wing in American politics," countered Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. He said if the proposal passed, "our relationship with Mexico would come down to a barrier between our two countries."
That should've happened about 20 fuckin years ago, asshole.
Next they can keep the "guest worker" rpgoram, but they MUST strip out the "automatic citizenship" provisions, and substitute a "you can get your card in your country of origin" policy - meaning these people have to GO HOME FIRST and then come back ONLY WIATH A CARD.
As for the morons pontificating on this - this fence was overdue from the 1980's. The immigration amnesty with a failure to buidl a fence, and Beruit, were Reagan's only major mistakes IMHO.
If youw ant to blame someone for the fence - bleame the corrup statist Government of MExico for failing to open thier economy to free-market capitalizim and restricting foregin investment and corporations - whus a failure to improve citizen's living conditions and hamstrining job creation.
If Mexico had a cronyism-free government and a less statist heavy had, they'd have a lot mroe job and a lot less of them would "need" to come N to get work.
The blame for the wall lies with MEXICO.
And if they dont like us militarizing our side, then they shoudl get control of thier side. Plus what about all their ARMED TROOP INCURSIONS of the past few years by Mexican military forces into US Territory? Local Sherrifs have had trouble, but our Guard troops, desert combat veterans that they are, will drop these assholes DEAD if they set foot inside US territory.
#5
SPDO - good point abotu H1B - they need to chop that at the knees. If we need these skilled peopel, then lets open up the Green Card to them and get them in here on the citizen path.
All H1B is, is an "iundentured servant" plan that allows the techology industry to artificially depress salaries for computer programmers and other technical professions. It does this by flooding the market with people on whom they can force grossly lower salaries and threaten with deportation if they speak out about the salary, or if they do not accept the alary (usually half what a non-H1B worker gets).
I've met some H1B's in the civilian sector, and to a man, every one of them was technically competent, willing to work, and decent people. Most (if not all) ultimately hoped to get a green card and then US Citizenship. Why do we allow them to be screwed over to enrich a few already fat-cat millionaires who are abusing the immigration lawmaking process to make themselves money at the expense of the H1B and US Workers?
H1B should be abolished, and the green card should be expanded for people with technical skills. Give those whoare willing to play by the rules a fair chance - and don't let them be abused in terms of pay - and in turn don't let them be used to depress pay for US Technical Workers.
#7
IIUC, H1B's are targeted - specific jobs with a specific "sponsor" company. I believe a green card allows the holder to seek amployment with any employer.
#8
1) I dont support the Guest Worker program, I tolerate it. Its too late to do anything else - you simply cannot mass deport 12 million people. Anyone that thinks you can has obviusly not done the logistics and is smoking crack if they think its even remotely politically possible.
2) The GW program has a time limit on it, H1B does not. Also (and this is the key part) H1B gives the employer the power to fire the person and then have the worker deported. GW allows them time to find another job as long as they dont become a draw on social service spending.
The GW program is designed to get a census of, register and ultimately control illegals who are already inside our borders due to our neglicence over decades of porous border security.
H1B, on the other hand, was supposed to ease allowing skilled technical professionals into the country. It did so in an unjust and unfair way.
One thing that I think is being overlooked is that the GW program should have sunset provisions worked into as well, so that its not a permanent conduit sitting wide open like it is now - it should allow the registration of however many we have right now, then peel those numbers down every year until there are NONE left in the program within a decade - either they enter the green card system on their way to citizenship the same as anyone else, or else they leave the country and are not allowed back in, or else their work pass expires and they are deported a few at a time over a decade.
The primary solution for illegals is to dry up the jobs for illegals by cracking down hard on employers, while shutting down the border, and channelizing all the illegals into programs where we can track them (so we know who is where , where they are, and what they are doing). But ultimately the best solution (after locking down the border) is to pressure Mexico into reforming its government and economy to where they have no need to come here in order to earn a living - the Mexican political and economic systems are so borke, which is why we basically have a refugee problem, looking at the numbers.
#9
Senator Vitter made a very eloquent, well reasoned, and persuasive argument to eliminate the legalization component from the current Senate Immigration reform bill. Just the sort of thing you would expect to prompt McCain to indignantly shout the usual Its not amnesty followed by the straw-man argument We cant deport 11 million people. Hagel chimed in with the standard Its not a perfect bill none are. line indicating the ram-rod of expediency is destined to trump political will. I urge anybody concerned with this issue to either watch or read the transcript of Vitters proposal. If after you hear his Devil in the Details and youre still not concerned about this legislation then I suggest you focus your attention on the missing girl in Aruba story.
The Guest Workers remain free agents, in the capitalist sense, abel to sell their labor to whomever they wish at a price they can get, within the laws of the nation.
The H1B gave the corporation control over the worker - who was bound to that job and that company with the threat of deporation if the employer decided to terminate them for any reason. They were essetnially indendured servants - they had no rights to the fair price of their labor nor to feely contract or associate.
As a side note, I've seen H1B's abused because of that - workign 60 hour weeks for 40 hour salaries, becaue they wre told if they compoained, they'd be terminated and deported and the company would get another person just like them to fill the billet. Also, I saw job openings posted with rediculously low salareis (40K for a software engineer in telecom with 5 years experience required), that they accepted applicants from the US but never processed the few they got, because they wanted to fill the slot with an H1B. So the H1B law hurs everyone involved excpet the businesses who pressured congress to pass this abomination of a law.
#11
Viter did a good job for no automatic citizenship - but not really for the no guest worker program 0- with the proviso that it have a sunset provision built into it. Without a sunset provision, the GW program becomes a permanent spigot allowing millions in for no good reason at all. For every person that moves off the GW program into green card & citizenship programs (getting in line behind those already there), the allotement of GW cards shoudl be dropped, 1 for 1.
And the remaining people who have no desire to be citizens should be put on a clock, with deportation to follow if they have worked the alotted time, no more than a decade, and have nto made a move toward being a citizen or at least a green-card holder.
That sort of deportation is possible, as it woudl be spread over time, limited in scope, and doiable with the resources ICE will have in hand within a few years of good budgeting. And the fence and better border enforcement, as well as the end of catch-and-release (more detention beds), will make deportation much more effective within a few years from now. Right now? Not really worthy it.
Get the GW program going so we can register the people here so we at least have a way of tracking who we have inside our borders, where they came from, and what they are doing. The unhearlded positive to the GW program is that it also allows the automatic assumption that someone NOT in the GW program is up to no good and can be summarily arrested, held and deported. Sorts the wheat from the chaff so to speak.
#13
They all complain we can't deport 11-12 million people but no one ever acknowledges the 6 million the President said they have returned to their native countries. I've heard that figure a couple of times but obviously, if so, 12 million illegals is a serious underestimate because they are still around everywhere. The Guard is also good at constructing landing strips and detention facilities quickly, and could also take DNA and other biometric information down. There are lots of units that could aid in the battle without actually apprehending migrants. They need to get a handle on who is here and take note of the Israelis' solution with suicide bombers. They should deport entire families of those gang members with serious criminal records first so they can identify the real contributors to society. Get a database going.
#14
Just how does this bill take the jobs illegals hold and one them up to people like me?
Giant gaping hole in this whole discussion in the Senate. But us old white guys don't count anywhere so no wonder, eh?
Yea we can't piss of the country club Republican and deprive them of their slave labor and force them to pay real wages for real work done but US citizens.
Tell me when they really do something. Bush and Rove can bite me. I am forced to vote Republican because it's whats best for the Nation and our war effort. It's certainly not best for me and my family. The Republican party is out of touch but has a great PR machine going.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/17/2006 18:54 Comments ||
Top||
#15
SPoD-My sentiments are somewhat like yours, but I don't feel forced to vote for a Republican CONGRESS. For the commander in chief, if the party doesn't pick a rabid moralist/religionist, if they could back someone like Giuliani, then yes, I would vote Republican. We need someone with intellectual and moral clarity in this WoT. But feel compelled to vote for Republican Congressfolks? Not necessarily. People need to keep pressure on Republicans in Congress to think their positions over VERY carefully. I don't know what will happen in the next Congressional election, but a continued Republican majority is not a given. Nor is my pro-Republican vote. I've voted Independent before and didn't regret it one bit. We don't have to be part of a flock that wastes our votes on folks who take our support for granted and turn a deaf ear to our concerns. Is it going to be a dysfunctional two-party system for time eternal, or are enough folks gonna trailblaze and try to shape our political system to reflect the broader American will?
#16
Unfortunately, its already well-settled US caselaw that the children of illegals, and the children of these children, etal, are de facto US citizens by virtue of being born here. The Border Patrol and other Fed agencies do not have the manpower or the budget to investigate the birth history of each and every descendant let alone their older/elderly illegal ancestors. Dubya in his speech is doing what any POTUS can do, but the ball is now in the hands of the GOP-led US Congress - as illustrated by France's experience wid the MAGINOT LINE during WW2, NOT EVEN THE BEST LAID, MOST POWERFUL OR IDEAL PLANS WILL WORK IFF NOT PROPERLY MANAGED OR SUPPORTED. The Maginot Line fulfilled its intent despite defects - it was French planners, 'crats, and politicians whom forgot about the Ardennes Forest and WW1.
#17
Until there is agreement between bills passed in both the House and Senate, nothing can happen anyway. I'm afraid I haven't been following closely -- are we anywhere near that point?
Of course we can deport 12 million people, just not at one exact time. It would have to be done very incrementally to say the least but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted. However, realpolitik will kill it off because our politicians are for the most part wimps.
I agree w/Jules, I've voted independent plenty of times and still sleep darn good.
If I may suggest to my fellow RB'rs, if you have not already done so, check up on your respective state senators and reps to see how they voted on this. Then take 5 minutes to send their office an email either supporting or criticizing their vote. It may not seem like much but that's how we eventually get heard. I'm telling my elected officials that I'm going to ensure they are out of a job next term if they didn't do the right thing to protect our sovereignty. (of course that's a big bluster but what the f*ck - makes me feel better to say it).
#19
Iff one believes that America is at war becuz someone or some group(s), andor some nation(s), attacked America on 9-11, then America's leaders should act appropriately, i.e. as if we are indeed at war, and do everything in their power to protect America and Amer interests for the durtaion, UNTIL VICTORY IS WON. Pragmatically, its always better to have too much than too little, aka "bigger is better", even when fighting terrorists, anarchists, and radical Governmentists-Socialists wilfully disguising and hiding themselves amongst the mainstream civilian population. America can "trim the fat" after the WOT is won. I agree in principle wid Dubya's "earned citizenship", etal. scheme - as for deporting all the illegals, unless THE CONGRESS [includ State-Local Govts.] votes to make the proposed reform schemes RETROACTIVE, any and all reforms or changes will only affect those illegals after the passage of reform legislations. We all know the ACLU and other Lefty legal orgs will do their PC, lawsuit-happy best to challenge or "clarify" anything Dubya-GOP Congress does. These illegals as a class were "invading" America during the Saint Clinton years and no DemoLefties ever complained about it back then, even after OKC + KHOBAR + WTC 1 + USS COLE - ditto for the NSA.
#20
Unfortunately, BH - I live in Duncan Hunter's district (couldn't ask for more and contributed my limit) and have two dickhead senators Feinstein and "Box-of Rocks"
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/17/2006 21:34 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Frank, that does suck about your state senators, although Michigan ain't much better. At least you got a good representative out there.
#22
Don't feel bad, Frank: I've got Sen. Sphincter...
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/17/2006 22:02 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Actually the wall can work quite well - the East Germans and Czechs had one that worked quite well for several edcades - with a much tougher task: keeping people in rather than preventing intrusion is a far more difficult task.
#2
Iff many of these illegals are armed, or being protected by armed black marketeers or elements of the Mexican police and army as reported, then any shooting incident bears a high risk of an international incident. Yes, America should make use of its tech superiority or dominance + employer reforms to deter illegal transits, but in addition is backed up by sufficient armed manpower levels. Iff Amer needs to draft, lets draft - if America is in a war, then the borders must be secured until victory is won. PC HAS LITTLE TO NO PLACE IN ANY WAR TO THE DEATH - BE IT BY SECULAR SOCIALISM ANDOR GOD-BASED SOCIALISM, THE WOT IS A DE FACTO WAR TO THE DEATH OF AMERICA-WEST AS FAR AS AMER'S ENEMIES IS CONCERNED. WHY FEAR A DRAFT OR NUCLEAR WAR WHEN ONE KNOWS HIS ENEMY(S) IS PLANNING TO DESTROY HIM NO MATTER HOW MANY CONCESSIONS OR AGREEMENTS IS MADE, NOW OR IN THE FUTURE!?
CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico (AP) -- Mexico warned Tuesday it would file lawsuits in U.S. courts if National Guard troops detain migrants on the border and some officials said they fear the crackdown will force illegal crossers into more perilous areas to avoid detection.
President Bush announced Monday that he will send 6,000 National Guard troops to the 2,000-mile (3,200-kilometer) U.S.-Mexico border, but said the troops will provide intelligence and surveillance support to U.S. Border Patrol agents and will not catch and detain illegal immigrants.
"If there is a real wave of rights abuses, if we see the National Guard starting to directly participate in detaining people ... we would immediately start filing lawsuits through our consulates," Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez said in an interview with a Mexico City radio station.
Mexican officials worry the crackdown will lead to immigrant deaths. Since the U.S. toughened security at crossing spots in Texas and California in 1994, immigrants have flooded Arizona's hard-to-patrol desert and deaths have increased.
Immigrant support groups estimate 500 people died trying to cross the border in 2005. The Border Patrol reported 473 deaths as of September 30.
In Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, Julieta Nunez Gonzalez, the local representative of Mexico's National Immigration Institute, said Tuesday she will ask the Mexican government to send a protection force, Grupo Beta, to remote sections of the border.
Sending the National Guard "will not stop the flow of migrants. To the contrary, it will probably go up," as people try to get into the U.S. with hopes of applying for a possible amnesty program, Nunez said.
Waiting to cross in Ciudad Juarez was Juan Canche, 36, who traveled 2,000 kilometers (1,243 miles) to the border from the southern Mexican town of Izamal, where he had left his wife, five children and mother.
"Even with a lot of guards and soldiers in place, we have to jump that puddle," said Canche, referring to the drought-stricken Rio Grande, dividing Ciudad Juarez and El Paso, Texas. "My family is hungry and there is no work in my land. I have to risk it."
Mexican newspapers Tuesday characterized the National Guard plan as a hardening of the U.S. position, and some criticized President Vicente Fox for not taking a stronger stand, though Fox called Bush on Sunday to express his concerns.
Fox's spokesman, Ruben Aguilar, said Tuesday that Mexico accepted Bush's statement that the Guard troops didn't imply a militarization of the area, and that Mexico remained "optimistic" that the U.S. Senate would approve an immigration reform "in the interests of both countries."
He noted Bush expressed support for the legalization of some immigrants and the implementation of a guest worker program.
"This is definitely not a militarization," said Aguilar, who also dismissed as "absolutely false" rumors that Mexico would send its own troops to the border in response.
Critics have accused Bush of using the plan to win support for immigration reform from U.S. conservatives, who are more interested in tightening border security.
Bush said it was a stopgap measure while the Border Patrol builds up its resources to more effectively secure the border.
Presidential hopeful Felipe Calderon of Fox's National Action Party issued a statement that the military presence would endanger migrants without stopping them.
"These measures have been proven mistaken. They increase the social and human costs for migrants and only benefit criminal groups that make money on the hopes and suffering of those looking for an opportunity," Calderon said.
Salvadoran President Tony Saca said he was worried that there could be an increase in abuses against immigrants because National Guard troops are trained to handle natural disasters and wars.
Along the border in Nuevo Laredo, across from Laredo, Texas, Honduran Antonio Auriel said he was determined to make it into the United States.
"Soldiers on the border? That won't stop me," he said. "I'll swim the river and jump the wall. I'm going to arrive in the United States."
#3
And exactly what standing does Mexico have in US courts on an issue of US law? Is this an admission that Mexico is helping people sneak into the US? Do you think that the US can get a discovery motion for all Mexican government records?
#4
The scary part is, with the current state of the U.S. Judicial system - they might stand a chance at winning - or getting a judgement ordering residence or citizenship for illegal mexicans.
Can anyone else see an advocate judge making such a judgement?
#5
This would end up in the Supreme Court. It doesn't matter how the lower court judges rule... and at this point a majority of th SC judges lean conservative. In the meantime, each captured border crosser would be handed a chit to turn in some time in the distant future, then sent back home anyway.
#6
"If there is a real wave of rights abuses, if we see the National Guard starting to directly participate in detaining people ... we would immediately start filing lawsuits through our consulates,"
Main reason I posted this was to ask this question: If the armed forces of a sovereign nation 'detain' illegal immigrants from another nation, how is that a 'rights abuse'? This is such a revealing comment. Our total lack of leadership on this issue has emboldened the Mexican government to such an extent that they actually believe they can dictate American policy. Had we told them to f*ck off decades ago when the illegal flood was first beginning, they would know their place now.
#7
Maybe the Attorney General opf the US will countersue MExico .
Sue for Human rights abuses leading to mass waves of illegal refugee migrants.
Sue for the amount paid in social services the last 20 years.
Go Atty. Gen. Gonzalez !
#9
"My family is hungry and there is no work in my land"
And that, my poor Meican friend, is why you whoudl be fighting to overthrow the corrupt Nationlist government that has suppressed you and failed to create an economy that will provide you a job.
Because you wre not going to be able to get in or back, quite soon.
If he doesnt lliek it then open his economy and allow it to create JOBS for his people. Stop with they cronyism and corrput statist government. Mexico is hardly better than Cuba in that respect.
On May 23, the Dartmouth Asian Organization will host a free, public lecture featuring Chaplain James Yee at 4:30 p.m. in Filene Auditorium in Moore Hall. The title of his talk is "A U.S. Army Muslim Chaplain's Struggle for Justice."
Yee is a third-generation Chinese American and West Point graduate. He served in the aftermath of the first Gulf War as a Patriot Missile Fire Control Officer, and he converted to Islam in 1991. Yee returned to active duty as a U.S. Army Muslim Chaplain in 2001.
After September 11, 2001, he represented Muslims in the military and worked to educate soldiers about Islam. Subsequently, Yee was selected to serve as the Muslim Chaplain at the U.S. prison camp for declared enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay.
In September 2003, after being officially recognized twice for outstanding performance, Yee served 76 days in solitary confinement in a naval prison after being falsely accused of spying, espionage, and aiding the alleged Taliban and Al-Qaeda prisoners. After months of government investigation, all criminal charges were dropped. Yee tendered his resignation from the U.S. Army and received an Honorable Discharge in January 2005.
Yee's lecture at Dartmouth will cover his experience at Guantanamo, as well as issues of religious and ethnic diversity. He will also speak about the challenges of protecting both national security and civil liberties.
#2
Yee was caught with classified data on Gitmo prisoners. He was most likely going to send it to Syria (wife is Syrian, as well as another arrested Gitmo translator). Instead of facing a firing squad or life imprisonment, the US government dropped the charges to keep information from becoming public.
Just another illustration of why trying to fight the Islamic enemy is a losing proposition, when a spy can't even be tried for fear of making the classified data public. I am disgusted with our leaders fiddling while Rome burns.
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2006 7:13 Comments ||
Top||
#3
ed, these charges were found to be false and were found inconclusive by the Army, better get your facts correct there.
Posted by: bk ||
05/17/2006 9:40 Comments ||
Top||
#4
bk,
When charges were dropped, the military said it was to avoid making public classified data, not because the charges did not have merit. That has been all to common in prosecuting those who have classified info. In addition, when he was arrested, agents reported at the time testified that the materials were of national security. That sounds like the names of prisoners and the info they gave up.
If you have details on why he is innocent, I would like to know more.
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2006 10:11 Comments ||
Top||
#5
IIRC was there also an adultery/sexual misconduct angle wrt Yee?
LOS ANGELES Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union are asking the FBI to reveal any surveillance of Muslims in Southern California since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Using the Freedom of Information Act, the ACLU filed the request for documents Monday on behalf of six Islamic organizations and several individual Muslims.
Islamic leaders said the FBI gave them little information when they alleged that investigators had been monitoring local Muslims and mosques.
Shakeel Syed, head of the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, said many area Muslims have reported being questioned by the FBI about sermons delivered in local mosques.
The government has 20 days to respond to the ACLU's request under the Freedom of Information Act. In an e-mail to the Los Angeles Times, FBI officials said they would address the request but did not say if they would turn over documents.
"The FBI does not investigate anyone based on their lawful activities, religious or political beliefs," said J. Stephen Tidwell, Assistant Director of the FBI's Los Angeles office.
Federal authorities have emphasized a commitment to build ties with Muslims and Arab group, partly to help with terrorism investigations, but recent disclosures of Bush administration domestic surveillance programs have strained those relationships.
"People are asking me if it is safe to worship," said Ranjana Natarajan, an attorney working on the FOIA request. "People began to worry that maybe there is something wrong with going to the mosque."
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
05/17/2006 7:23 Comments ||
Top||
#2
what worries me most when I read stories like this is that you can see where the future will take us. There are 250 plus million people in the US. A small percentage of them are radicals who wish to bring us down. A greater, but still small percentage of them provide lip service to these radicals because they think it makes them superior to be for something chic and different from the norm; no ordinary folks, these.
But the majority of people in the United States are sane, well adjusted, and want to live peaceful lives, be they white, black, hispanic, Christian, Muslims or Jews.
To get some idea of the actual number of people who really get into these wacko ideas you only need look at the "success" of Air America. Yet they have the stage and the megaphone and have come to believe that they really have numbers and suppor that they don't have.
Anyway, my point is that at some point the majority of people in the US will reach a point where we understand what humans have understood for centuries - that you cannot tolerate having seditious traitors walking in your midst, smiling and telling you how wonderful it is that they intend to get you killed. So at some point, a threshold will be crossed and if history is any guide, it won't be pretty when it happens. It starts with pogroms and ends in war. If we don't step up to the plate and stop these people now, the past is pretty clear as to what the future will bring.
#5
To be clear Im no fan of the ACLU. With that said, mitigating any governments encroachment on individual civil liberties is a good thing right? The question is; what is the appropriate balance? Not surprising, groups like the ACLUs only concern is advancing their causes, at any cost, and have no apprehension of blurring any semblance of balance between government order vs. individual liberties. Instinctively, many in government see this as a reverse threat causing them to recoil into more opaque methods of governance. Which in turn is viewed as by the self appointed defenders as further violations and the cycle continues. Bottom line, the owness is on the governments not the individuals to prove their case. I for one am confidant that just laws will withstand any challenge...no matter how outrageous the charge.
#7
Can anyone think of anything positive the ACLU has ever done ? Who funds these ratshit bastards ? Is this another Ford Foundation/Teresa Kerry collaboration ? These asshholes need to be disbanded and their communist members run out of the US. They perpetuate daily damage on our society.
#10
FNC last night > Euros recognize that America is singularly/unilater several times wealthier than all of the Euro-states as a region combined, and is so despite Europe having 170? Milyuhn more citizens than America, and that this same "wealth gap" between America and Europe will only get worse over the next 20 years. I mave had heard it incorrectly but I believe FNC also mentioned that "Europe" included the post-USSR Eastern Euro nations + post-Soviet Russia, separately or jointly wid Western Europe. It was also staed that although the Euros enjoy more GOVT/PUBLIC SEOTR BENEFITS than Americans do, said benefits has NOT resulted in parity against America or the Amer way of life - THUSLY, MANY EUROS ARE NOW ENGAGED IN A "RE-THINK" OF THE ROLE OF PUBLIC GOVT. IN THEIR NORMAL QUALITY-AFFAIRS OF LIFE.
* T'aint it funny how the Euros may wanna decentralize and de-Socialize in the LT whilst here in Clintonian Amerika our DemoLefties and aligned want America to do the opposite. Our DemoLefties and aligned are fighting hard for those handful of special reserved seats on the Politburo and Presidium of the future Amer People's Revolutionary Central Committee of the Communist Party of the USA which Russia-China never promised them, and more importantly won't and will never give them iff Commie history is any measure.
#1
Mmmm.. knowing many UK Paks I can imagine that the relationship between the Wazibillies and AQ is cemented by cash and not the Koran. The battle in Wazoostan is almost won? Just starting more like.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
05/17/2006 3:49 Comments ||
Top||
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senior U.S. and Indian officials plan to meet in London next week to try and rescue an imperiled agreement that would give India access to U.S. nuclear energy technology for the first time in three decades.
Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, the lead U.S. negotiator, said he and Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran agreed on the talks in a phone call on Tuesday. "We agreed to meet to go over all aspects of the U.S.-India agreement so we can move this along on both sides .. We agreed to meet next week in London," Burns said in remarks at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He did not specify a day.
The nuclear agreement has run into serious trouble in Washington and New Delhi, where critics on both sides complain their side got too little and the other side got too much. In the United States, Congress must approve the deal, which was first agreed in principle by President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh last July 18. The leading Democratic supporter, Rep. Tom Lantos of California, last week said the accord lacked the support needed to pass and proposed a compromise intended to keep it alive but which could delay the process.
It was a cold dose of reality since the administration, Burns in particular, has been upbeat about quick passage of the agreement, which would radically alter 30 years of U.S. policy designed to punish India because it developed nuclear weapons in contravention of international norms.
Burns said he would meet Lantos on Wednesday and declined to publicly critique the lawmaker's compromise. Another senior U.S. State Department official last week rejected Lantos' proposal and Burns said "we feel we have put our best foot forward." But Burns also seemed to leave the door open to discussion saying he would share with Lantos "our ideas about how this agreement should best be put forward for a vote."
He said Congress had finished its hearings on the issue and he hoped for a vote, "perhaps this summer." Lantos last week said there are too few days left on the legislative calendar to resolve disputed issues this year.
Under Lantos' initiative, Congress would welcome both the nuclear deal and vastly improved relations with the world's largest democracy. But the proposal would delay making critical changes in U.S. law until the two countries negotiated a stalled formal peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement -- implementing last July's political deal -- and until India agreed on a system of inspections of its civil nuclear facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Washington has given India a draft text of the implementing agreement but there has been no formal reply from New Delhi, according to congressional and expert sources.
The Indians have objected to a provision -- standard in such accords -- asserting the United States has the legal right to halt nuclear cooperation if India tests a nuclear weapon. India wants assurances the flow of technology, including reactors and fuel, will not be interrupted. Without saying how the dispute could be settled, Burns said he was confident India would abide by its July 18 commitment to maintain a voluntary testing moratorium.
Many non-proliferation experts and lawmakers have expressed concern about the U.S.-India deal, arguing it could allow India to increase its nuclear weapons stockpile. Burns rejected this analysis. India never signed the nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, developing weapons in contravention of international norms.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
A convoy of more than 350 people belonging to the Masuri and Kalpar clans on Tuesday reached Dera Bugti from Fort Munroe. Rangers and paramilitary forces escorted the convoy. These people left Dera Bugti in 2004 and settled in Dera Ghazi Khan and Multan districts. The government is actively involved in their resettling the tribesmen who had migrated from Dera Bugti. The government is providing transport, food and to these people.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
President General Pervez Musharrafs claims that the rise of Taliban-like extremism and not Al Qaeda - is cause for concern in Waziristan is unrealistic, reported the British Broadcasting Corporation. Experts said the Al Qaeda and Taliban were locked in a symbiotic relationship in which a crackdown on the former automatically galvanises the latter. Officials make a clear distinction between the Taliban and Al Qaeda. We told the Taliban that they have a future as a political entity indigenous to the area, whereas Al Qaeda doesnt, a top military source told BBC.
This is known as subtle thinking in Pak intelligence circles, I suppose. First they claim that they're supporting the U.S. against the Taliban, they tell the Afghans that they're not supporting the Talibs, then they try to distinguish between the Talibs and their owners. Then they make the assumption that there's a circumstance in which the U.S. will allow the Talibs to regain power. Half of the world population's IQ is below 100, by definition. That doesn't mean the lower half is distributed evenly across the globe.
Experts say this perception allowed a large number of Afghan Taliban and their fellow Al Qaeda fighters to enter Waziristan during the US bombing of the Tora Bora mountain ranges in December 2001. Pakistan said at the time that it had sealed the border to prevent militants hiding in Tora Bora from crossing over into Waziristan.
And we know now that it wasn't what you'd call a tight seal.
But locals tell a completely different story. Hundreds of Taliban and foreign militants were seen lining up at public baths in Wana and Miranshah in those days, says Zubair Mehsud, a law professor at Peshawar University. They would be covered in dirt, some would be injured, others near starvation. They would clean themselves up, arrange for local protection and disappear into the rural areas, said Mehsud. Wana residents say these refugee militants included Afghan Taliban, Central Asians and Arabs.
All they did was move to the quiet part of Pashtunistan. The geniuses in Karachi thought they were conserving resources that they were going to need later.
According to BBC, trafficking in foreign militants was a relatively controlled affair before the September 2001 attacks, closely monitored and often orchestrated by the Pakistan Army.
At that point they still thought they were in charge.
But the sudden influx after the Tora Bora bombing led to a kind of a free-for-all, said a Wana tribal leader. Swathes of unemployed locals, many of whom had never had connections with the militant networks in Afghanistan, suddenly discovered the lucrative business of harbouring foreign militants. Grocery stores in towns such as Wana and Miranshah were suddenly overflowing with canned foodstuffs such as tuna fish and mushrooms.
The roots of terrorism don't lie in poverty, but it's fertilizer for terrorism.
Military officials don not deny these events - only interpret them differently. It is impossible to completely seal off Pakistans border with Afghanistan along the Waziristan region, said the military official.
"So why bother trying?"
So when the bombing of Tora Bora drove the militants into Waziristan, a large number of local smugglers and criminals seized it as an opportunity for making money by providing them with shelter and provisions, he said. A 20 kilogram sack of sugar worth $10 was sold to the Arabs for as much as $100 in those days, he added. This was very different from the culture of hospitality seen during the anti-Soviet war, when militants were housed as honoured guests by the proud tribesmen.
They were a different breed of "militants," too. The guys who had fought the Sovs were the Tadjiks and Uzbeks and Hazaras, for the most part. The Pashtun branch of the mujaheddin spent a lot of time in Pakland, intriguing against each other and against Masood. The Taliban weren't even involved in the anti-Soviet war, though some Arabs were.
Officials said that for nearly two years between 2002 and 2004, this new breed of tribal entrepreneurs acquired a prominence and wealth that they never had before. Sadly, it was these extortionists that took over the Pakistani Taliban uprising in October last year, says this official. They saw an opportunity to cash in on the local anger at the general lawlessness and umpteen gangs of bandits on the prowl and in doing so, assumed the leadership of the Taliban. He contends that these people are now making fortunes milking the Arabs in the garb of anti-US ideology.
It wouldn't surprise me if they were playing both ends against the middle. It's kind of a Pashtun tradition, like beating your wife.
BBC says the new situation presents Pakistan with two policy options: it could declare an indiscriminate war on all foreign militants and their local protectors or it could try to isolate the locals from the foreigners. The government chose the latter.
They chose it for a number of reasons, not all of which make sense. One is surely that since the Pak military has never won a war they have no confidence of winning one against the Wazoo hillbillies, who are fearsome of aspect, if not particularly ept at warfare.
There are many in Pakistans security apparatus who expect that one day, when the Americans are gone, the Taliban will regain power in Afghanistan. Therefore, they argue, it is essential to have good relations with the Taliban in order for Pakistans western borders to be secure.
I would be surprised to see that happen, though I suppose anything is possible under a Democrat administration. I'm sure they'd come up with some sort of justification for doing nothing.
Few understand the nuances of such policy issues better than local tribesmen.
I'm not convinced the local tribesmen have a real good comprehension of anything, much less nuances. Ignorance is considered a virtue.
And many have their own distinct way of putting it. Making a distinction between Al Qaeda and the Taliban or between good and bad Taliban is like picking white hairs from your beard, said a Wana tribesman. No matter how long you do it, the white is eventually going to win.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I once read that a 100 megaton nuclear weapon has an effective radius of 50 miles. That's a 100 mile diameter kill zone. If there is any place on earth that deserves to be treated to a few dozen of these it is the mountainous area between pak and afghanistan. These guys are nothing but skidmarks on society and should be eliminated from the worlds genepool.
Bangladesh Buccaneers - Chittagong anchorage, Bangladesh. Eighteen incidents have been reported since January 28 2006. Pirates are targeting ships preparing to anchor. Ships are advised to take extra precautions.
Recently reported incidents
May 13 2006 at 2125 LT in posn: 19:04N - 017:09W, Nouadhibou roads, Mauritania. Pirates in an unlit boat approached a refrigerated cargo ship drifting 60 nm off coast. Master raised alarm, took evasive manoeuvres, crew mustered and activated fire hoses. Unlit boat increased speed to 17 knots and continued to chase the ship. Master increase speed to maximum and found another boat tried to block the ship's course. Boats pursued the ship for almost three hours and then aborted the chase. Master tried to contact local MRCC but could not communicate due to language difficulties.
May 13 2006 at 1330 LT in posn: 06:01S - 106:52E at outer roads, Tg. Priok anchorage, Indonesia. Five persons in a 5 metre green coloured boat tried to board a container ship using grappling hooks. Alert crew prevented boarding.
May 12 2006 at 1900 LT at Chittagong anchorage 'b', Bangladesh. Five robbers armed with long knives boarded general cargo ship via anchor chain. Alarm was raised and crew mustered and robbers escaped.
May 12 2006 at 0001 LT, Chittagong anchorage 'b', Bangladesh. Three unlit boats approached a bulk carrier from stern and seven robbers armed with long knives boarded using grappling hooks. They stole ship's stores and escaped. Local authorities informed.
May 10 2006 at 1530 UTC in position 12:55.2N - 049:36.6E, Gulf of Aden. Nine persons in a 10-12 meters wooden boat, white/red hull came close and tried to board a tanker underway. Master took evasive manoeuvres and crew mustered. Boat followed for 20 mins and then moved away.
May 10 2006 during night at Chittagong anchorage 'a', Bangladesh. A group of robbers attempted to board a bulk carrier. Crew raised alarm and robbers aborted boarding.
May 09 2006 at 0800 - 0910 UTC in position: 17:52.9N - 076:46.6W, Kingston outer anchorage, Jamaica. Six robbers armed with knives boarded a general cargo ship at port bow. They threatened deck watchman with knives. They broke open paint locker and stole large quantity of stores and escaped. Local authorities informed.
May 09 2006 at 0200 LT at Chittagong anchorage 'a', Bangladesh. Ten robbers armed with long knives boarded a bulk carrier via anchor chain. They took hostage two shore watchmen and one crewmember and robbed them of their belongings. Alarm was raised and robbers escaped in their speedboat.
And from the Better Late Than Never Desk:
May 26 2006 off Spratly islands, South China Sea. About 13 pirates armed with guns boarded a fishing vessel underway. They opened fire with automatic weapons killing four crewmembers and injuring three others. They stole ship's property and escaped. The Philippines authorities are investigating the incident.
Piracy may not be the motive, especially in that disputed region.
A US lawmaker and former Marine colonel accused US Marines of killing innocent Iraqi civilians after a Marine comrade had been killed by a roadside bomb.
"Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood," John Murtha told reporters. The November 19 incident occurred in Haditha, Iraq.
"There was no firefight" that led to the shootings at close range, the Vietnam war veteran said, denying early official accounts, which said that a roadside bomb had killed the Iraqis.
"There were no (roadside bombs) that killed these innocent people," he said.
Time magazine reported the shootings on March 27, based on an Iraqi human rights group and locals, who said that 15 unarmed Iraqis died, including women and children, when Marines barged into their home throwing grenades and shooting.
"It's much worse than reported in Time magazine," Murtha said.
At least three Marine officers are under official investigation, and no report has been released, Army Times said Tuesday.
Murtha is a harsh critic of the war in Iraq and said that such incidents are the result of inadequate planning, training and troop numbers in Iraq.
#1
If Murtha pulled this one out of his butt, I suggest that several of the Marines in that unit file a lawsuit against him for slander. When he would cite congressional privilege, it would be the same as citing the 5th Amendment, and would be tantamount to confessing that he was a liar.
#4
TW, unfortunately "once a Marine always a Marine" - even applies to pompous, arrogant, and stupid old men. Officially, nothing we can do, *however* he will be ostracized for this on a social level - no more invites to the 10 Nov birthday ball in Quantico or Friday Night Parades at 8th & I. What I find disturbing is that there have been no court martials adjudicated yet wrt this incident and here Murtha is already running his mouth. Any active duty Marine knows that when in public we do not comment on incidents under investigation due to the swaying of public opinion of the accused, presumption of innocence, etc. Murtha should've kept his mouth shut. He's wrongly using the alleged incident to go after the admin.
#5
Time? Murtha? Iraqi Sunnis? Is there no-one here we can trust? All have done their best to ruin success. Time for dickhead to resign or be forcibly retired by an ashamed PA district
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/17/2006 21:32 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Terrorists disguise themselves as civilians, just as Socialists and Commies are [deficit] Conservatives or Ultra-Conservatives. among many other sur-labels.
#7
Was he there? No - he takes his talking orders from human rights groups. And as I recall the 'family' was hosting a couple of terrorists who started shooting first - then hid themselves behind women and children like the cowards they are.
If Mumra wasn't there himself then he should sit down and STFU!
And I beleve congressonal privledge only exists on the floor of congress - not during a press conference.
#14
Even if this is remotely true, why and the hell would he make such public comments?
There are ways of challenging the results from investigations without making such public accusations.
The only conclusion is that he is trying to garner support his long-forgotten recommendations that we pull out of Iraq.
Murtha, your name is loser.
Posted by: Captain America ||
05/17/2006 23:08 Comments ||
Top||
#15
I think a motion is in order for his censure by the full House of Reps. Let him see how the callers to his fellow Representatives come down on this. I am guessing 95% of the house would vote for censure. Only total dipshitz like Mc Kenny and Pelosi would stand but him if this can't be backed up by FACTS from the USMC. He needs to be removed from any leadership role he mioght have in the house as well.
"Time for this one to go home."
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/17/2006 23:26 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Can the Republicans get someone to run against him this year? Given the outragoues things he has been syaing, eh shoudl be vulnerable, especially if thye can drum up another Vteran who can call him out on this shit he has been spreading.
Iraq Has Lower Violent Death Rate per 100,000 People than Washington, DC and Other Countries
Columbia ............ 61.7
New Orleans .......... 53.1
South Africa ......... 49.6 Washington, DC ....... 45.9
Baltimore ............ 37.7
Atlanta .............. 34.9
Jamiaca .............. 32.4
Venezuala ............ 31.6 Iraq ................. 25.71
#3
This will be on no page on in any newspaper and will never make a broadcast news outlet.
The MSM's Treason should cost them however they will get off of the hook and actually get praised instead.
Im book from worst to least worst. lawyer, journalist, pedophile.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/17/2006 1:22 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Gosh, this is kinda sorta unfair to Washington, DC because, as Crackhead exMayor Marion Barry said, outside of the killings, the crime rate ain't so bad.
#5
I once stepped out of a hotel into Washington DC for a pre-prandial evening stroll. I will never make that mistake again.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
05/17/2006 3:52 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Shoddy reporting. I really hate it when a journalist doesn't do the barest of idiot checks. While the DC homicide rate is accurate, the Iraq death rate is pulled from thin air. 25.71/100,000 in a 25 million population gives 6428 deaths. Iraq Body Count project shows 12,617 civilian deaths from 20th March 2005 to 1st March 2006. That's over 50/100,000. That number includes 1,500 Iraqi army/police/gov deaths. Terrorists/insurgents killed by coalition and Iraqi forces are not included. For instance, US forces have killed or captured more than 25,000 each year for the past 2 years (dead/captured rate unknown).
What's sad is the absolute failure of the Feds to govern the nation's Capitol. Obscene amounts of federal money is thrown to the local DC government, but still it manages to pull up the rear of all quality of life measurements: crime, education, poverty, illegitimacy, welfare, corruption, life span. For comparision, New York City's 2002 murder rate was 7.3.
In 1969, the DC murder rate increased 50% and rapes tripled. Since then, while rapes have been cut in half, the murder rate has increased another 25%. Any parts of DC below sea level that can be flushed out to sea?
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2006 6:44 Comments ||
Top||
#7
whoa, whoa, whoa. So you are including traffic deaths and want to include terrorist deaths? Don't go claiming simple "idiot checks" unless you want to source it better than that.
#8
2b, Those figures do not include traffic deaths. They include Iraqis killed by the terrorists, guerillas, militias and coalition forces (370), but do not include terrorists and guerillas killed by coalition and Iraqi forces. It also includes homicides listed as "criminal", which often are war related, such as kinap, ransom and murder to finance the guerillas and militias. Here is the reference I used: Iraq Body Count
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2006 7:20 Comments ||
Top||
#9
What's sad is the absolute failure of the Feds to govern the nation's Capitol. Obscene amounts of federal money is thrown to the local DC government...
Effect and cause are in that statement right there.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
05/17/2006 7:23 Comments ||
Top||
#10
It's just a frigg'n blog ed. And Iraq is a war zone, where a murderous dictator was just deposed and where AQ sends every disenfranchised brainwased pawn it can muster to blow themselves up.
I lived in DC. And in two of the four quadrants, you can walk without fear in the day, and in the NW you can walk at night - so it makes it a tiny little area. Yes, I understand that it's per 100,000, but it's per 100,000 in a very small area.
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. But its clear your source is little more than a blog working overtime to make the point that Iraq is worse off now than before the war. I guess if you don't mind living under a dictator and his two sons who don't mind using torture and genocide on a whim - you can make the numbers say whatever you want.
#11
2b, IBC has the most comprehensive tally of Iraq deaths. They use press accounts as their source material, and in effect, undercount the deaths because not all dead make the papers. While they are anti Iraq war, their methodology is better than the discredited (but still quoted) Lancet study. No one else has as comprehensive a study as does IBC. Unless you can show a better source, I will refer to IBC as needed.
2b, less people are dieing in Iraq than the average under 3 years of Saddam's rule (30,000 or so a year + Iran-Iraq war dead). But my point is journalists should not print unsourced hearsay as gospel. Even if out of ignorance, propaganda is still propaganda.
As for Iraqis being better off or not, I really don't care. I care about those that threaten or kill Americans (and to a certain extension the West). In Sept 2001, that meant Saudi Arabia and Iran. In 2006, that means taking out Iran, and if need be, to take over and colonize those parts that interest us and salt the rest.
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2006 8:29 Comments ||
Top||
#12
under 30 years of Saddam's rule
Posted by: ed ||
05/17/2006 8:31 Comments ||
Top||
#13
I'll stick up a bit for DC here...under Tony Williams the city is vastly improved and many of the worst crimes are now committed on the Maryland side of the border.
We have no IEDs, no mosque bombings, and no Badr Brigades. And the 'lectricity is on 24/7. So there.
#15
the other thing thats wrong with this is youre comparing a city to an entire country. If you tossed in the suburbs, metro washingtons homicide rate is much lower. OTOH the Iraq rate includes villages, and stuff like that. Look at the homicide rate in Baghdad, its a helluva lot worse.
The situation in Baghdad sucks. Now theres some good reasons to think it will get better (the new Iraqi cabinet, more Iraqi forces, etc). But pretending that we can win this thing while Baghdad is as bad as it is now, by playing with statistics, is just the kind of foolishness thats WEAKENED the hawkish case. Pure Rummyspeak. Hopefully we can find SOMEONE to lead this country who is committed to VICTORY, but isnt interested in polyanish twisting of numbers.
#17
I call this part of the "C.O.P.S. theory". That is, Iraq has progressed from a war zone to literally a police action, moving more and more in the direction of an episode of "C.O.P.S."
Way back when, when the left was really shrieking that Iraq was a "quagmire", I proposed that the standards they had set were ridiculous.
That is, at what point has Iraq become "normal"?
Since several other countries already had violence levels far greater than Iraq, the scale only really comes into effect when you can compare Iraq with U.S. cities.
So, finally, these are the statistics that really hit home for Americans (note: stats are from 2002):
New Orleans.......53.1
Washington, D.C...45.9
Baltimore.........37.7
Atlanta...........34.9 Iraq..............25.7
Memphis...........24.7
Chicago...........22.2
#18
anon, why not go ask pro US Iraqi bloggers like "Iraq the Model" what they think.
The murder rate needs to get down to what it was before we went in. Security has to get good enough for economic development to pick up, and not just in Kurdistan. "things got worse, but its still not as bad as Venezuala" wont cut it.
#19
I would walk around D.C. during the day without hesitation, at night I have gone out many times and never had a problem. However, I would not advise going outside at night unless you aree looking for fun.
Bagdad OTOH, I would be hard pressed to go outside regardless of hour even if my hotel was on fire.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
05/17/2006 11:29 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Come on, Liberalhole, we're just pretending we're winning in Iraq, why spoil our fantasy ?
We know it's all Bush's fault, and a missile hit the Pentagon, but we want to believe in something other than Hillary is the smartest woman in the world. ROFL.
#21
LH is right about playing with numbers not leading the U.S. to victory. I just don't know who he is talking about that plays with the numbers.
LH you elude to Rummy, is that who you are refering too?
As for leaders, good luck. GWII seems about as good as it's going to get. I can't think of anone better.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
05/17/2006 11:47 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Man! I really need to learn the English language.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
05/17/2006 11:47 Comments ||
Top||
#23
"What's sad is the absolute failure of the Feds to govern the nation's Capitol. Obscene amounts of federal money is thrown to the local DC government...
Ahh yesssss. But DC has a baseball team now! Can't watch it on TV. But they do have a ML baseball team!
#24
Liberal Hawk - its a per capita number. There are far fewer people living in the Iraqi countryside. To really compare, you need to understand that its a war zone, with Syria, Iran, and countries from all over the world sending money, arms and stupid people willing to blow themselves up for The Cause(TM). But then you knew that. So your point is what?
Ed - it may be the best source - but .... news reports? From AP and Reuters? Hmmm... Did they count those 35 guys that had their heads chopped off? Or what about the ones counted twice in the same article. Seems to me the Media reporting hasn't been exactly stellar and reliable. And your blog doesn't exactly seem unbiased in its tone. But hey, I guess in this world of people willing to shill for murderers, you take what you can get.
Whatever, I accept and agree with your point about propaganda.
#25
The fact is, even if we accept the Liberal talking points, the death rate in Iraq is still lower than New Orleans - and the murder rate has gone down since Katrina!
Al
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
05/17/2006 12:13 Comments ||
Top||
#26
"Liberal Hawk - its a per capita number. There are far fewer people living in the Iraqi countryside."
Iraq is a heavily rural country, Id be surprised if the rural population isnt enough to pull down the per capita (and yes, I know thats how crime rates are calculated). Probably some cities in Iraq are pretty safe to, like in Kurdistan, and some of the towns in the Shiite area. But Baghdad is very bad.
"To really compare, you need to understand that its a war zone, with Syria, Iran, and countries from all over the world sending money, arms and stupid people willing to blow themselves up for The Cause(TM)."
Well thats the point isnt it? Its a warzone. Its STILL a warzone 3 years after the invasion. Now you can say thats failure, you can say thats whats to be expected, or you can say thats worse than it should have been, but not a failure. But trying to say (as the post seemed to imply) that its no big deal, its just like DC, is really silly.
"But then you knew that. So your point is what?"
Why dont you first tell me what the point of posting these stats was?
If you take the crime murder rate for all of DC, and compare it to the murder rate for the highest crime precinct in, say, Minneapolis, I bet the Minneapolis rate would be higher. But what woud be the point of that?
#27
"LH is right about playing with numbers not leading the U.S. to victory. I just don't know who he is talking about that plays with the numbers."
well first of all this post. Ive seen other examples of cherry picking numbers, but none at hand. (and yes, I KNOW the left cherry picks to make things look worse - thats just as misleading)
"LH you elude to Rummy, is that who you are refering too?"
I dont have a specific quote to cite. So i wont get more specific at this time
"As for leaders, good luck. GWII seems about as good as it's going to get. I can't think of anone better."
Weve had enough discussions of US politics. I wont start another one now.
#28
Frozen Al said it best: The fact is, even if we accept the Liberal talking points, the death rate in Iraq is still lower than New Orleans - and the murder rate has gone down since Katrina!
What does it mean - it means that NO and DC are very dangerous places, yet we don't hear the liberals ever taking off the rose colored glasses to acknowledge and apologize for the fact that their failed policies of victimization and entitlement are the cause of a bloody, 40 year quagmire.
#29
Dems don't care about the murder or crime rate or even Iraq unless they can practice their famous brand of demagoguery and get the votes of places like NO and control DC.
I wouldn't pee on a Democrat if they were on fire. I will never vote for one again, ever.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/17/2006 14:30 Comments ||
Top||
#30
.....but D.C. has midnight baseball and basketball.
#31
Why is the whole nation of Iraq being compared with individual US cities? Wouldn't a fairer comparison be Baghdad or Fallujah or Basra vs. US cities?
#32
I personally don't think you should factor in nutjob islamofascists whacked by the Military in the violent death rate.
You really should only factor in those killed by terrorist etc. to get a picture of the level of violence.
I spent three weeks roaming the streets of Baghdad in 2004, lived in Qadisiya district, stayed away from the Green Zone never felt threatened, was treated like visiting royalty by many Iraqis. I was knocked out of bed by the suicide bomb that hit the school and killed 24 kids lined up for exams (a classic example of the brave intrepid freedom fighters at work).
Another thing to consider is that the US Military loses more personnel to automobile accidents annually than are killed or wounded in Iraq.
I still think the answer to our problems in Iraq is to Nuke Damascus.
#35
ya ever notice how much they look like the old test pattern graphix on Tee Vee?
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/17/2006 19:34 Comments ||
Top||
#36
Greamp Elmavinter1163, dear, the CAPS LOCK key is over there on the left of your keyboard. Please tap it once, and stop shouting. My eyes are going deaf.
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's new government is finally taking shape and could be unveiled this week, negotiators said on Tuesday, signalling a compromise among sectarian and ethnic factions to rally behind Shi'ite strongman Nuri al-Maliki.
Senior negotiators from most groups involved in efforts to form a national unity government told Reuters Maliki could name his cabinet as early as Thursday, before the Muslim weekend and four days ahead of a constitutional deadline set a month ago. "The government is in its final form now. Maliki will absolutely meet the constitutional deadline and will announce the government before it," said Dhafir al-Ani, spokesman of the main Sunni bloc in parliament, the Iraqi Accordance Front. "Nobody wants him to fail. Even those who oppose the political process will not put up obstacles."
A senior Shi'ite negotiator said: "The government will be ready soon ... I mean probably in the next 48 hours."
All played down the significance of a widely leaked list indicating which party would take which ministry, saying there were still disputes, notably on the health ministry. Many names are still in play for key posts, including interior minister. One surprise could be the nomination of controversial former exile Ahmad Chalabi to that vital security job, several sources said. The much-criticised interior minister may go to finance.
Good lord, Chabbers rises from the dead again. He's got more lives than Rasputin, and a worse reputation.
In a three-year-old political system used to pushing any deadline to its limit -- and indeed beyond -- an early end to the talks may be a sign Maliki has managed to put his inclusive rhetoric into practice in his month as prime minister-designate. Once a hawkish defender of the Shi'ite Islamist corner in parliament, some minority leaders and Western diplomats praise what they call his new-found statesmanship and portray him as a classic hardliner strong enough to make concessions for peace.
He has faced some of his toughest opposition within his own Alliance bloc. One party in the Shi'ite coalition walked out of the negotiations in protest at losing the oil ministry. It is now widely expected to go to another Alliance figure, former nuclear physicist and dissident Hussain al-Shahristani. Similarly, followers of cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Mehdi Army, are making veiled threats of a walkout if they do not retain the health ministry, promised to the Sunnis.
Some officials said it was still possible Maliki may leave sensitive posts such as interior and defence vacant if he cannot resolve disputes this week. The former is expected to go to a Shi'ite and the latter to a Sunni -- but both, not least due to heavy U.S. pressure -- are subject to a veto by every party.
Chalabi, a wealthy, U.S.-educated businessman turned secular Shi'ite power broker on his return home, has emerged as a possible interior minister, sources from several parties said. Though the outgoing deputy prime minister failed to win a seat in December and has long lost his pre-war clout with the Pentagon, he has won respect for his handling of Iraq's battered economy in the past year and is a consummate political survivor.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/17/2006 00:03 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Azerbaijan plans to open a trade office in Israel in the coming year, according to Azerbaijan officials.
There has long been talk of Azerbaijan, a secular Muslim state in the Caucasus, establishing an actual embassy in Tel Aviv. Israel opened an embassy in Baku in 1993. A trade office could be a prelude to the opening of a such an embassy in Israel.
An Azerbaijan government source told The Jerusalem Post that the trade office would open "within the year." In an interview with the Post on Tuesday, Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov indicated that opening a trade office this year is "on our agenda." He added that "having [full] diplomatic relations will happen for sure."
Mammadyarov also discussed the possibility of Israel joining in the oil pipeline Baku is building from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean via Turkey, to reach Western buyers.
That pipeline might then be linked with Israel, which could both use it as an energy source and provide an outlet via Eilat for shipping oil to the Far East.
Israeli Ambassador to Azerbaijan Arthur Lenk said such an arrangement would represent "a natural connection [for Israel] as a customer and for national and strategic reasons." He said "developing ties" such as the opening of an Azeri trade office or embassy in Israel "serves the interests of Israel and Azerbaijan."
The strong Azeri link with Turkey, its moderate Muslim stance, and its energy resources point to the key diplomatic importance the country could play for Israel, particularly given its location next to Russia and Iran.
But that very geopolitical significance means that the country has to balance its Western aspirations with its strategic location.
In the past, it has been suggested Azerbaijan was concerned that fuller relations with Israel could provoke Iran, and that it needed to toe a careful line as it prepared to host the Organization of the Islamic Conference this June.
However Yevda Abramov, the first Jewish member of the Azerbaijan legislature, said the issue of opening diplomatic missions was a financial one for a small country that only gained independence after the fall of the Iron Curtain.
As soon as the country begins to receive revenue from the expanded pipeline, it will open an embassy in Israel, he said.
Mammadyarov, Lenk and Abramov were among those who welcomed MK Yosef Shagal (Israel Beiteinu) for a tour of Baku this week, organized by the Euro-Asian Jewish Congress. Shagal was born in Baku and became the first Azeri member of Knesset when he was sworn in this spring. He was visiting Azerbaijan in hopes of strengthening ties between the two countries.
RAMALLAH, West Bank - Security measures to protect Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, are reported to have been stepped up amid worries about an alleged assassination plot possibly tied to political rivals Hamas.
Restrictions have been imposed on traffic in the area around his Ramallah office and snipers have been placed in buildings near his West Bank residence, officials said.
"We have information there are plans to kill President Abbas," a senior Palestinian source said on Monday, declining to give any details.
Some officials said assassinating Abbas would help Hamas, since the speaker of the Hamas-led parliament would automatically become president, in line with the Palestinian basic law or constitution.
Meanwhile, Israel's Haaretz newspaper reported that another group, Islamic Jihad, was plotting to kill Abbas with a car bomb.
"Sources close to Abbas reported the matter in talks with Israeli security officials," the Haaretz Website reported on Monday.
Unlike Hamas, Islamic Jihad has continued suicide bombings in Israel despite the one-sided Palestinian truce.
"There is no difference between us and President Mahmoud Abbas that would make anybody even think of throwing a stone on him," said Khaled al-Batsh, an Islamic Jihad leader in Gaza.
Palestinian officials said that last month security forces discovered a 20-metre tunnel dug beneath Abbas house in Gaza and they suspected it was linked to an assassination plot by Hamas members.
Hamas, which won control of the Palestinian government earlier this year, denied any involvement.
Earlier this month a report in Britain's Sunday Times newspaper said a cell from Hamas' Izzedin al-Qassam armed wing planned to kill Abbas during a visit to the Gaza Strip.
The newspaper said Israeli intelligence got wind of the plot and warned the Palestinian leader that his life was in danger.
Abbas cancelled his planned visit, it said.
A senior Israeli security source confirmed that Israel suspected a plot to kill Abbas, who wants statehood talks with Israel.
Tension has been growing between Hamas and Abbas's Fatah faction over control of Palestinian security forces and the near bankrupt Palestinian Authority's finances.
Several Palestinians have been killed in clashes between Abbas loyalists and Hamas gunmen.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas appealed on Tuesday for the European Union to give the Hamas-led government a chance to adapt to international requirements and end a freeze in aid to the Palestinian Authority. Stopping assistance to the Palestinian Authority, cutting aid, will exacerbate the deteriorating economic and social situation, Abbas told the European Parliament. He said the cuts left the Palestinians facing a humanitarian catastrophe. Abbas said he hoped to start a national dialogue in the next few days that could lead the Hamas government to amend its platform and conform with commitments to the peace process made by the previous Palestinian administration.
Our approach needs the support of the international community, Abbas told the EU assembly. The new government must be given the chance to adapt to the basic requirements of the international community. He warned of dire consequences if the Israeli government goes ahead with plans to impose a border on the Palestinians.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Chance to adapt? Hamas is an evolutionary dead end.
#5
"The new government must be given the chance to adapt to the basic requirements of the international community."
How many more decades of "adaptation time do Palestinians need?
No "adaptation" time; Hamas needs to sh*t or get off the pot. And because Hamas got its authority from the Palestinian people, it is not only Hamas that must do the adapting. The Palestinians will either accept a really very simple, reasonable request-recognize Israel's legitimate existence and recognize that suicide bombings are not a legitimate form of political negotiation (and pressure Hamas to uphold these principles), or let land greed, stubborn pride, and intransigence lead to more meaningless deaths for their families and children.
But HAMAS MUST ACT FIRST. No more of this damn "everyone else must give concessions before we will do anything" shit. YOU FIRST, ABBAS. YOU FIRST, HAMAS. I am goddamned sick and tired of working with people who think they're the center of the goddamned universe, with the egos and mentalities of 3 year olds still in diapers wailing at the top of their lungs when someone as much as asks them to do anything.
#8
abbas is asking EU to give money to Hamas, even as he sends his boys out to kill Hamas. This is a request with a wink, designed for the Pal street, not real pressure on the EU. I mean c'mon.
#10
That didn't make any sense to me either LH. I was thinking it was more to get a chance at a dialog with the not-quite-as-unreasonale-as-the-other-genocidal-bastards faction within Hamas.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
05/17/2006 16:42 Comments ||
Top||
Malaysia is considering its multi-cultural credentials after a crowd of Muslims on Sunday broke up a meeting called to defend the rights of religious minorities.
The country's leaders condemned the disturbances, but the BBC's Jonathan Kent in Kuala Lumpur says non-Muslims feel increasingly beleaguered.
"I'm becoming an alien in Malaysia, in my own country," says Dr Jacob George.
The president of the Consumers Association of Subang and Shah Alam in Selangor State has been helping to organise efforts to stop the local authorities in the ethnic Malay-Muslim dominated city of Shah Alam from demolishing a 107-year-old Hindu temple.
Earlier in April another 19th-Century temple was demolished a few kilometres away in the capital Kuala Lumpur.
The authorities said in both cases the temples' founders did not have permission to build them. But the demolitions are surprising because Malaysia has forged for itself a reputation as a successful multicultural society. More at link
#2
If the reactor at Arak is a heavy water reactor, something I just learned today, why do they need to enrich uranium? The whole point of a heavy water moderated reactor is that you can use natural uranium (~.7% enriched anyway). The only other benefit is that it produces Plutonium. So they don't need enriched uranium for the Arak plant, but it would take years to produce plutonium from spent fuel rods, in just 2-3 years they could enrich enough bomb grade uranium with an enrichment facility though.
Figure it out for yourself and you'll be smarter than the whole U.N. put together.
#5
See, whatd I tell ya? He rejected the offer anyway. So what are the Russkies and Chinese gonna say to the Euros now, when they say theyve tried negotiating.
Course they could say, we're gonna veto, whether its justified or not. But it increases the cost of a veto.
#6
LH, the Euros have tried negotiating for years and the Russians and Chinese haven't changed thier tune yet. It would be unlikely that they would now.
Also, I don't see how the cost of a veto is going up because of this latest rejection.
Everybody with half a brain knew this program could not be stopped with hand-wringing as soon as they rejected the Russian offer to provide the enriched uranium.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
05/17/2006 14:48 Comments ||
Top||
#7
HEAVY WATER REACTOR!!!!!!!!
Oh Sister Mary and Margaret.......that is BAD.
I think the Iranians are far closer to going nuclear than everyone thinks.
The IAEA should be disbanded in disgrace for letting this thing get this far without any knowledge.......oh wait ElBaradei got the Nobel prize.......for what? There is going to be no peace in this world if those mullahs in Teheran get the big one.
#8
why do they need to enrich uranium? The whole point of a heavy water moderated reactor is that you can use natural uranium (~.7% enriched anyway). The only other benefit is that it produces Plutonium. So they don't need enriched uranium for the Arak plant, but it would take years to produce plutonium from spent fuel rods
A very good question. I expect the Persians might be looking to the future when a uranium jacket can be brought to together with a Plutonium core.
#9
Mike N, cause they (The Russians and Chinese) have recently said that further inducements need to be offered, and now they have been, and the mullahs still say no.
Will add to the cost - not much but some. Im not going to go into detail on that, since it largely means loss of reputation and "soft power" and this forum is not in agreement that soft power, reputation for reasonableness, etc is worth anything. If one thinks theres no costs for the US going all Jacksonian, then why would one expect there to be costs for Putin to go all Jacksonian? Putin doesnt appear to think there is. I think hes wrong, but this simply isnt the place to argue it out.
#10
Mike N, cause they (The Russians and Chinese) have recently said that further inducements need to be offered, and now they have been, and the mullahs still say no.
So obviously more inducements need to be offered.
If you think the reaction will be any different, you're delusional. The UN is not interested in keeping Iran from getting nukes; IMHO, the UN is interested in HELPING Iran get nukes.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
05/17/2006 16:13 Comments ||
Top||
#11
LH, I will agree that soft power has no value on this board, but between you and I, (Don't tell anyone at Rantburg)soft power does have a purpose and it's importance is often understated. I do feel however, that others give it too much importance.
As far as Russian soft power goes, arguably thier soft power is almost entirely centered around thier seat at the UNSC. If they veto this, they make the U.N. a little bit more worthless than it already is therebye making what little bit of soft power they do have a bit more meaningless. I guess if one values soft power enough this could be seen as a cost. If your case is anything like what I have just said, we will have to agree to disagree.
Now on to China.
China's soft power is basically economic. They really don't care about having U.N. permission to support any international "adventures" they may chose to go on, so degrading the U.N. really costs them nothing. In fact the U.N. going away completely would most likely be a plus for the Chinese because it would help remove some of the international eyes and pressure. They can only gain from a weaker U.N.
The only real way a veto could hurt them is economically, and no nation on this planet right now is willing to give up a part of the booming Chinese economy. A veto will cost the Chinese nothing at all. Nothing.
A veto will cost the Russians something that doesn't matter, and the Chinese nothing at all. I would hardly consider that a cost.
And on to going Jacksonian. You're right, this would not be the place to discuss that.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
05/17/2006 16:34 Comments ||
Top||
#12
how many untold countries have the bomb?
Saudi?
Syria?
#13
I learned on CSI that these immature nutjobs are eccentric because they didn't have a mother that loved and nurtured them. Tend to have a real big anal fixation...and he did have 2 large phallic missiles on his yellowcake. I also read he was one of the youngsters sent to the minefields during the Iraq/Iran border dispute, as another good Islamic mother offers her children to the sacrifice. I think what he needs is a good ballistic enema.
TEHRAN: Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, said on Tuesday that many global media outlets are controlled by people who possess the most destructive nuclear weapons.
In a meeting with representatives of national radio and television networks at the 7th International Radio Program Festival, Ayatollah Khamenei said that the media can be used to facilitate cultural exchanges between nations, and the loftiest human values.
But the Leader lamented that global media outlets are suffering from an epidemic characterized by magnifying insignificant events and ignoring human tragedy.
Global media networks casually ignore the deaths of 120,000 Iraqi civilians during the U.S.-led attack on Iraq, but instead give wide coverage to the victims of bird flu.
Ayatollah Khamenei said that the way of thinking and culture that has dominated global media outlets has served the interests of multinational corporations and the hegemonic powers.
"If ethical values and virtue ever find a way to influence the administration of these global media outlets, the situation of humanity will improve, and these bodies will work toward the happiness and prosperity of mankind," he noted.
He went on to say that while mass media could have a positive impact on the human condition and promote world peace and security, up to now they have become tools in the hands of warmongers, who seek to ignite the flames of war and promote a particular lifestyle, at the expense of the cultural identity of nations.
Mass media should instead provide dialogue among nations, he added.
Citing an example of "one-way propaganda," the Leader said that global mass media outlets claim that Iran's civilian nuclear program is actually a front for "weapons production," while many of these outlets are themselves working for companies that manufacture conventional arms and nuclear weapons.
"Every day, they spread tremendous lies. They fail to cover the daily massacres of defenseless Palestinians by the Zionist regime, but instead give full coverage to explosions that occur and result in few injuries," Ayatollah Khamenei pointed out.
VIDEO FROM QATAR: SYRIA BELIEVES IRAN HAS PEACEFUL INTENT
"We believe the Iranian assurances that its [nuclear] activity is for peaceful purposes."
WASHINGTON The United States' intelligence agencies suspect Syria was offered and received nuclear weapons technology from the covert Pakistani supplier group headed by A.Q. Khan, according to an intelligence report quoted by the Washington Times.
An annual report to Congress on arms proliferation states that Pakistani investigators have confirmed reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that the Khan network "offered nuclear technology and hardware to Syria."
The report covered the period of 2004. Its release was delayed by the new Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which took control of the report from the CIA as part of an intelligence reorganization.
"We are concerned that expertise or technology could have been transferred," said the intelligence report, which is the first time the Bush administration has publicly linked Syria to Khan's Paksitani network, which is responsible for supplying nuclear goods to Lybia, Iran and North Korea.
Syria conducts nuclear research at three facilities located at Dayr, Al Hajar and Dubaya, the report said, adding that "in 2004 Syria continued to develop civilian nuclear capabilities, including uranium extraction technology and hot cell facilities, which may also be potentially applicable to a weapons program."
Referring to missiles, the report said Syria continued to seek help in building solid-propellant rocket motors, and that North Korea supplied equipment and assistance to the missile program.
The report added that Syria is building its own liquid-fueled Scud missiles and is developing a 500-mile-range Scud D and other variants with help from North Korea and Iran.
The US government is closely following Syria's research and development efforts in a bid to search for any hint of activities that may end in a nuclear weapons program. The US intelligence is also following Syria's attempts to purchase civil nuclear technologies from the IAEA for fear that this technology would be used to build a program for nuclear weapons.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
05/17/2006 7:25 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Syrian owned facilities or outsourced from Iran to avoid inspection?
Posted by: Steve ||
05/17/2006 8:18 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Syria also has the port facilities to export any missiles they may have, while all eyes are the Persian Gulf. I'd watch every logging ship or open cargoed ship in the region.
Lebanese lawmakers say they have failed to agree on whether to force President Emile Lahoud to step down before his term ends in 2007.
The politicians met in Beirut Tuesday for the latest round of talks on the pro-Syrian Mr. Lahoud. Anti-Syrian politicians have been demanding that he resign since Syria withdrew its forces from Lebanon last year. But anti-Syrian lawmakers do not have enough seats in parliament to force him out.
Parliament speaker Nabih Berri says the lawmakers will meet again on June 8 for talks on another key issue - the disarming of the militant group Hezbollah.
A 2004 United Nations Security Council resolution demanded the disbanding of militias in Lebanon, including Hezbollah. But the group says it needs to be able to defend Lebanon against Israel.
Until last year, Syria dominated Lebanon both militarily and politically. After the 2005 assassination of Lebanon's former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, Syria withdrew its troops from the country. But Lebanese politicians say Damascus still wields strong influence over the government in Beirut.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The 26 countries that belong to the International Energy Agency could cover any disruption in Iran's crude oil exports for more than four years, a U.S. Energy Department official said on Tuesday.
"When you take all of the stocks that all of the countries hold together in the IEA, we have the ability to meet a complete shutoff of Iranian oil for over four years," Karen Harbert, assistant secretary for policy and international affairs at the Energy Department, said at a hearing before a House Government Reform Committee panel.
Concern that a standoff between Iran and the West over Tehran's nuclear ambitions could cut exports from the OPEC member have been one factor behind high oil prices this year. Harbert declined to estimate how much a hypothetical cutoff in Iranian oil imports would impact oil prices. "There would certainly be some sort of price reaction," Harbert said, pointing to tight spare capacity globally.
Iran in April pumped about 3.8 million barrels per day, the second-biggest OPEC producer behind Saudi Arabia, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Iran exports about 2.7 million bpd of that to major customers in Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan and Europe, the EIA said.
IEA member countries hold about 4.1 billion barrels of public and industry oil stocks, and about 1.4 billion of those are in government hands for emergency purposes, according to its Web site. IEA members released about 60 million barrels of crude oil and refined products last year to allay shortages caused when hurricanes Rita and Katrina walloped the U.S. Gulf Coast.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We wouldn't have to do it for 4 years. After a month the Iranians would be broke. Nice psych-war story though. Hope they read it and realize that it is true in Iran.
Lebanese leaders yesterday adjourned the latest round of reconciliation talks, still unable to find a consensus on the future of embattled pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud. The leaders, following nearly four hours of round-table talks at Parliament house amid tight security measures, set the next round of negotiations for June 8 to continue discussions on the arms of the Hezbollah resistance group. Participants did not reach an agreement on the presidency, so they moved on to the remaining item on the table: the strategic defense policy against potential Israeli dangers on Lebanon, said Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri. Berri told reporters that the next round of talks will take place on June 8 because some colleagues have trips abroad and there are some holidays.
Lahouds fate has been a key sticking point at the round-table talks, with the Damascus protege at loggerheads with the anti-Syrian parliamentary majority that considers him a continuation of Syrian domination. When we fail in a subject, we said that we would come out and say it. We are not ashamed of it, said Berri, referring to the discussions on the fate of Lahoud, who still has a year and a half in office.
The seventh round of talks was taking place amid global pressure on Damascus to stop interfering in its smaller neighbors internal affairs. Lebanon has been in political turmoil since the February 2005 murder of five-time Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, an attack widely blamed on Syria which was later forced to withdraw troops after 29 years on Lebanese soil.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
Russia and China will "definitely not" approve the use of force against Iran over its nuclear programme, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Tuesday after meeting with China's leaders. "Russia and China definitely will not vote for a resolution which could be an excuse for the use of force," Lavrov said through a translator after meeting with his Chinese counterpart, Li Zhaoxing, and President Hu Jintao. "We believe we shouldn't isolate Iran or increase pressure. This will not only not reduce the possibility of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, it will have the opposite effect."
Who expected anything else from the League of Authoritarian Nations?
Posted by: Fred ||
05/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ah, the Iraq strategy. It worked well there. *snicker*
But academics, policy analysts offer solutions at UD forum In other words, get out your barf bags and brace yourself for smokescreens and whitewash.
NEWARK -- With a long history of conflict, hostilities and misperceptions as the backdrop, it was no wonder that the "State of US-Islamic World Relations" was described in gloomy terms at a University of Delaware panel discussion Tuesday night.
About 200 people packed a room in Kirkbride Hall to hear five panelists -- academics and policy analysts -- describe facets of the tension between the United States and Islamic states around the globe.
One of them, UD professor Stuart Kaufman, traced the worldwide decline in public support of the United States. He said the country is in a state of "low-intensity war with the entire Muslim world," and ended his stinging commentary on the "catastrophic, inept" foreign policy by saying he had no answers. Who better to criticize foreign policy than an academic with no answers?
"I'll just leave being really depressed about the Middle East," he said.
Peter Singer, senior fellow and director of The Brookings Institution's project on U.S. relations with the Islamic world, offered suggestions on how the country could better face its challenges.
Among his recommendations:
Move away from the Cold War mentality that invests in post-Soviet Union scientists and work toward developing a new generation of Muslim scientists that could build up their economy. In other words, give oppressive anti-American governments teams of scientists.
Find ways of leveraging American strengths in business, arts and science. "We got more out of McDonald's in the Cold War than we did out of any MX missile," he said. Like that time Ronald McDonald stood up to Gorbachev in Iceland.
Invest more in humanitarian aid. In other words, give oppressive anti-American governments lots of money.
Many questions remain about how political and religious reforms will look in this century, Singer said, and many Muslim-majority states are looking at huge rates of population growth that will put pressure on governments. The United States must find ways to "measure up to its own best traditions," he said.
Mahmood Monshipouri, a professor of political science at Quinnipiac University, urged the United States to address its differences with Iran with direct negotiations that do not include intimidation.
Monshipouri said the American news media tend to exaggerate the Iranian threat. ?! Efforts to disrupt Iran's nuclear program would increase hostilities and mistrust between the two countries, he said, which actually have many common interests, including stability in Iraq and Afghanistan, and concerns about terrorism, oil and Israel.
Democratic transitions, he said, would be more successful at a gradual pace, emerging from homegrown initiatives. "Democracy is more likely to emerge from the daily tussles and struggles," he said.?!
Mumtaz Ahmad, a professor of political science at Hampton University, noted that anti-Americanism in Pakistan no longer is confined to religious groups, but can be seen throughout the society.
The anti-American sentiment of many Muslims is not deeply embedded, though, said program organizer Muqtedar Khan, a nonresident fellow of The Brookings Institution and an assistant professor of political science and international relations at UD. It has more to do with how America is perceived as treating Muslims.
Public opinion of the United States improved when American dollars poured in after the devastating tsunami, he said.
"Muslim public opinion is significantly rational," ?!?!he said. "You invade them, they hate you. You help them, they love you."
The discussion was sponsored by the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding, with funding from the Tides Foundation, in partnership with UD's Department of Political Science and International Relations and The News Journal.
#1
Problems between the US and muslims? All US's fault. Solution? US bends over and grabs ankles.
The only point of a conference like this is for moonbats to emote and increase their self-hatredesteem by having a hate-America fest.
#2
I suspect there's a second purpose, Spot. Deep down inside most of these people are scared .. scared that their nice neat ideological boxes don't really have a place for heads being sawn off of screaming live people in agony, scared that the order and prosperity they took for granted (even while attacking nasty capitalism) are vulnerable, scared that people might actually want to kill them.
Not that they can admit or deal with that fear. So they continue the charade ...
#3
OK, so we don't seem to like people who call us dogs and pigs and fly planes into our skyscrapers and strap dynamite to themselves and blow us up, etc. ***sigh***
#4
"The anti-American sentiment of many Muslims is not deeply embedded..."
The anti-Muslim sentiment of many Americans is becoming more "deeply imbedded" with every Palestinian suicide bombing, every "Death to America" chant, every burning embassy, every maniacal leader swearing to remove Israel from the map, every murderous riot over cartoons, every decapitated southeast Asian schoolgirl...the Muslim community should be very concerned about how they are perceived while they still have a chance to reverse that hardening opinion.
#5
Once upon a time in a world far far away their was a trueism that could reappear in this great country ...
It went something like
"The only good xxx is a dead xxx"
#8
In other words if we give them shiploads of money they will like us again. We already tried that once. If we let them flog us diplomatically they may like us again. If we leave them alone and let them build nuclear and chemical weapons to one day destroy us, they will like us(?).
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/17/2006 11:36 Comments ||
Top||
#11
No 4, "The anti-American sentiment of many Muslims IS deeply embedded..."
It is being strongly indoctrinated even in so-called moderate muslim countries. Part of islam's supremacists finger pointing - one finger at the USA and four at itself.
#14
It [perception] has more to do with how America is perceived as treating Muslims.
The perception is shaped by internal media, i.e. propaganda. Reference the Danish cartoon fiasco, which was really instigated 3 or 4 months after the fact.
ME media is really outrageous in general.
The problem in this case is how to combat homegrown propaganda, and it is very difficult to avoid being affected by it when you live in an environment that is deluged by it.
Posted by: Azad ||
05/17/2006 17:50 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Ironic isn't it - if the Jihadists ever won, these morons would be the first to go.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan has called for the resumption of six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear program. In a meeting in Seoul with South Korean president Roh Moo Hyun, Mr Annan urged the six countries involved in talks on North Korea's nuclear programs to resume negotiations as soon as possible. 
CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico (AP) -- Mexico warned Tuesday it would file lawsuits in U.S. courts if National Guard troops detain migrants on the border and some officials said they fear the crackdown will force illegal crossers into more perilous areas to avoid detection.
President General Pervez Musharrafs claims that the rise of Taliban-like extremism and not Al Qaeda - is cause for concern in Waziristan is unrealistic, reported the British Broadcasting Corporation. Experts said the Al Qaeda and Taliban were locked in a symbiotic relationship in which a crackdown on the former automatically galvanises the latter. Officials make a clear distinction between the Taliban and Al Qaeda. We told the Taliban that they have a future as a political entity indigenous to the area, whereas Al Qaeda doesnt, a top military source told BBC.
But locals tell a completely different story. Hundreds of Taliban and foreign militants were seen lining up at public baths in Wana and Miranshah in those days, says Zubair Mehsud, a law professor at Peshawar University. They would be covered in dirt, some would be injured, others near starvation. They would clean themselves up, arrange for local protection and disappear into the rural areas, said Mehsud. Wana residents say these refugee militants included Afghan Taliban, Central Asians and Arabs. 
But the sudden influx after the Tora Bora bombing led to a kind of a free-for-all, said a Wana tribal leader. Swathes of unemployed locals, many of whom had never had connections with the militant networks in Afghanistan, suddenly discovered the lucrative business of harbouring foreign militants. Grocery stores in towns such as Wana and Miranshah were suddenly overflowing with canned foodstuffs such as tuna fish and mushrooms.
Officials said that for nearly two years between 2002 and 2004, this new breed of tribal entrepreneurs acquired a prominence and wealth that they never had before. Sadly, it was these extortionists that took over the Pakistani Taliban uprising in October last year, says this official. They saw an opportunity to cash in on the local anger at the general lawlessness and umpteen gangs of bandits on the prowl and in doing so, assumed the leadership of the Taliban. He contends that these people are now making fortunes milking the Arabs in the garb of anti-US ideology. 
Bangladesh Buccaneers - Chittagong anchorage, Bangladesh. Eighteen incidents have been reported since January 28 2006. Pirates are targeting ships preparing to anchor. Ships are advised to take extra precautions.
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's new government is finally taking shape and could be unveiled this week, negotiators said on Tuesday, signalling a compromise among sectarian and ethnic factions to rally behind Shi'ite strongman Nuri al-Maliki.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas appealed on Tuesday for the European Union to give the Hamas-led government a chance to adapt to international requirements and end a freeze in aid to the Palestinian Authority. Stopping assistance to the Palestinian Authority, cutting aid, will exacerbate the deteriorating economic and social situation, Abbas told the European Parliament. He said the cuts left the Palestinians facing a humanitarian catastrophe. Abbas said he hoped to start a national dialogue in the next few days that could lead the Hamas government to amend its platform and conform with commitments to the peace process made by the previous Palestinian administration. 
WASHINGTON The United States' intelligence agencies suspect Syria was offered and received nuclear weapons technology from the covert Pakistani supplier group headed by A.Q. Khan, according to an intelligence report quoted by the Washington Times.
This follows Tehran's stubborn refusal to suspend uranium enrichment - even for an incentives package.
Lebanese leaders yesterday adjourned the latest round of reconciliation talks, still unable to find a consensus on the future of embattled pro-Syrian President 
Russia and China will "definitely not" approve the use of force against Iran over its nuclear programme, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Tuesday after meeting with China's leaders. "Russia and China definitely will not vote for a resolution which could be an excuse for the use of force," Lavrov said through a translator after meeting with his Chinese counterpart, Li Zhaoxing, and President Hu Jintao. "We believe we shouldn't isolate Iran or increase pressure. This will not only not reduce the possibility of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, it will have the opposite effect."
