[..]
United States-Russia Working Group on Counterterrorism (CTWG) revealed that the two sides had reached "agreement in principle over the supply of Russian weaponry to the Afghanistan National Army"
[..]
#1
A garbage article written by one of the neo-Marxists of the Indian Foreign Service establishment. The only significance of the agreement is that Russia will now have an easier time selling upgrades/rehabs of MiL helicopters, GAZ trucks and jeeps, and perhaps some rebuilds on T-55/62 series tanks. Otherwise, the Afghan Army is switching to all Western equipment : AK-47 switched to M-16, artillery being switched over to 155 NATO standard, etc.
Afghan government on Monday deported 12 Pakistanis and handed them over to Pakistani authorities at Torkham border. The deportees belong to settled areas of NWFP. They were arrested on allegations of carrying illegal travel documents like visas and passports.
The deportees told border officials that they had gone to Afghanistan in search of work.
Just itinerant job seekers. With rifles ...
They have been identified as Shah Hussain, Hayatuddin, Muhammad Omer, Sardar Hussain, Malik Zeb, Badsha Zeb, Nehar Ali, Wajid Ali, Sartaj, Hazrat Ali, Amjad and Shad Ali.
The Afghan government has been deporting a number of Pakistanis for travelling without legal travel documents daily. On the other hand, Abdul Manan Afghan Shinwari, believed to be the main source for illegal trafficking of Pakistanis to Afghanistan, has also been arrested.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Afghan government on Monday deported 12 Pakistanis and handed them over to Pakistani authorities their superior officers at Torkham border.
Fixed it.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
06/24/2008 14:04 Comments ||
Top||
Virtual Caliphate examines how Islamic extremists based in the UK have set up several websites in response to British anti-terrorism measures put in place following the London bombings of 5 July 2005. The report examines how these websites allow extremists to continue spreading their pro-jihadist ideas, organising themselves and recruiting new followers.
The report focuses on Islambase.co.uk, the most important extremist website for British radicals which is run by former members of radical groups like al-Muhajiroun and distributes communications from deported and exiled radical leaders such as Omar Bakri and Abdullah Faisal. The report also uses an online discussion on the Islambase forum about users favourite Islamic websites to catalogue and examine other sites popular with British extremists.
In light of this, the report calls on the government to:
- Prosecute individuals who run the websites or distribute pro-terrorism materials through them. The 2006 Terrorism Act specifically enables the prosecution of those who distribute material which glorifies terrorism attacks or is likely to encourage readers to undertake such actions.
- Prosecute Internet Services Providers (ISPs). Under the 2006 Terrorism Act, ISPs and other commercial organisations can be held liable for hosting websites whose content promotes terrorism. Some ISPs like BT Group already use a web filter called Cleanfeed in order to block websites which host unacceptable images of child pornography or sexual abuse.
- Explore whether laws used to tackle internet use by paedophiles can be adapted to tackle terrorism. For example, laws to tackle paedophilia allow prosecution of those who distribute and possess paedophilic images. They also criminalise online grooming of children. Individuals found guilty can be banned from using the internet.
- Block foreign-based websites. In extreme cases, the government can ask UK-based Internet Service Providers (ISP) block foreign websites which aim to incite terrorist violence in the UK. Some European governments have already considered similar steps.
Failure to take action against these websites and the individuals who run them put the British public at risk of further terrorist attacks. I'm no technical genius, but I could figure out how to circumvent many of these suggestions. Getting into the censorship business is tricky. And it seems the dange of another attack arises more from the readership of such sites than the producers. Instead, how about a database of those who frequent the sites?
#1
Already being done. Thing is, we dont really want legislation to criminalize this kind of activity, which would put most RB users at risk of prosecution. This article discusses potential new legislation that would be useful against future cases such as that of Babar Ahmed.
#3
Compiling lists of people who frequent sites (such as Rantburg, LGF, Jawa Report, or Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler) - all of which could easly be considered hate sites by organizations like the 'Canadian Human Rights Commission' - can be particulary risky.
We definitively don't want to go there.
Simply take this piece and replace 'terrorism' with 'racism' or 'religion' and you suppress any non-sanctioned discussion of the cult of Islam and just about all of us would be lined up against the wall of the HRC.
#4
Instead, how about a database of those who frequent the sites?
If MI-5, MI-6, Scotland Yard and the local police forces are not already doing that, they should be cited as criminally negligent. But likely the U.S. has also been collecting that information -- at least connected to any electrons that pass through the U.S. -- since about 9/12/01.
#3
DISA's op tempo has been a killer the last 7 years and especially the last 4. Not just with the explosive growth in demand for battlefield tactical networks, and with starting to implement the global information grid, but also and especially with info assurance attacks from a variety of sources (cough China, etc. etc.).
They've gotten sub-tactical in focus, which is understandable but also a danger. And personnel are stretched thin ....
#4
...Normally I wouldn't give Senator Levin the time of day - I had an up close and personal view of how he treats the military many years ago. But in this case, I gotta agree with him. By all accounts Admiral Hight is an honest and upright officer in the best traditions of the Naval Service, but the appearance of a potential conflict was just way too great.
Now - let's talk to the idiot who nominated the Admiral in the first place...
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/24/2008 20:17 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Mike, DISA desperately needs the expertise and leadership of this woman. That's why she was nominated.
DISA is really stretched right now. I can see why the Pentagon would find it really important to utilize a proven leader who is technically competent, respected not only within DISA but within the services who resisted the creation of that agency. And who can rally an over-stretched workforce doing a really mission-critical job.
#7
Her promotion to the director's job would have made her a three-star vice admiral, of which there are currently only two women, out of a total of 34.
Qualifications motivation for initial nomination clearly identified.
#8
And, in the midst of all this, they're uprooting DISA in N. VA and moving the whole Sha-Bang to rural N.E. Maryland...Totally destabilizing and inefficient. Just the sort of out-of-the-box thinking we've come to expect from a GIG-think DOD.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/24/2008 21:02 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Deacon: After the Darleen Druyan scandal with Boeing, and a few other recent scandals, this selection should have never passed the sniff test. Admiral Hights spouse's BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT postion at NG should have removed her from the short-list long before it became a news item. Political correctness should never trump conflict of interest, or the perception of conflict of interest. Just my take on it mate.
#12
Lt. Col. Patrick Ryder, a Pentagon spokesman, confirmed the nomination had been withdrawn, "to prevent any perceived conflict of interest due to her husband's current position within the defense industry."
But at least Admiral Hight now knows exactly how highly her commander and her organization think of her. That's worth a great deal.
#15
Nonsense. Charlie Croom is an old boss of mine. He's one of the brightest stars to ever wear the Air Force uniform. DISA may not be perfect, but it does its job pretty well and has adapted well to emerging demands under Charlie.
As for Levin, he was my senator and has long struck me as a partisanly congenital moron.
Posted by: Black Charlie Unurt7863 ||
06/24/2008 22:42 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Robin - that's nonsense. Regardless of their personal qualities, the relationship stinks if the projected positions comes about.
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/24/2008 23:52 Comments ||
Top||
In a tense moment during negotiations over the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act, Sen. Kit Bond the ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee said that his side of the aisle could never accept one of the proposals the Democrats were pushing.
According to Democratic insiders, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer abruptly stopped the meeting and said that, if a deal was made, no one would get more grief than he would.
Hoyer was right about that.
The Maryland Democrat shepherded a set of FISA amendments through the House last week winning praise from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and even some in his party to who opposed the deal but now finds himself subjected to a barrage of criticism from his partys left.
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) called the House bill a capitulation. Salon.coms Glenn Greenwald called Hoyer an evil, craven enabler of the Bush administration. Firedoglake.com blogger Jane Hamsher delivering the lowest possible blow from the liberal blogosphere declared Hoyer the new Joe Lieberman. . . . At Firedoglake.com, 'Lieberman' is a four-letter word.
In an interview with Politico on Monday, Hoyer called the FISA legislation a significant victory for the Democratic Party one that neutralized an issue Republicans might have been able to use against Democrats in November while still, in his view, protecting the civil liberties of American citizens.
... liberal activists were furious at what they view as a sellout by House Democrats on FISA, particularly on the retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.
Two liberal groups, Blue America PAC and ColorofChange.org PAC, ran a full-page ad in The Washington Post spelling out their displeasure with Hoyer.
I am aware of it, Hoyer said of the loud criticism from progressive groups of the FISA agreement. When you try to reach a compromise, the people on one side or the other are not pleased.
Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) called the FISA compromise a very terrible bill. Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio) said the bill would allow large corporations and big government to work together to violate the United States Constitution and use massive databases to spy, to wiretap, to invade the privacy of the American people.
But Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) said Hoyer did what he had to do in getting the deal done.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/24/2008 11:57 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Funny thing is he is in a rock solid safe district. So they are as powerless to do anything about him as we are about San Fran Nan.
MIAMI - Two foreign-born men were charged in a federal complaint unsealed Monday with illegally providing U.S.-made parts to Iranian buyers for military aircraft, including fighter jets and attack helicopters.
Hassan Saied Keshari, 48, of Novato, Calif., and Traian Bujduveanu, 53, of Plantation, Fla., face between five and 20 years in prison if convicted of violating arms export laws and circumventing the U.S. embargo against Iran.
Prosecutors said Keshari, an Iranian who became a naturalized U.S. citizen, acted as the middleman between aircraft parts buyers in Iran and Bujduveanu, one of his suppliers. A Romanian by birth, Bujduveanu is also a naturalized U.S. citizen, they said. "In essence, they are charged with helping Iran build up its military," said U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta of Miami.
Neither had the proper U.S. license to export parts for aircraft such as the F-14 Tomcat fighter, the F-4 Phantom fighter, the C-130 cargo plane, the CH-53 helicopter and the AH-1 attack helicopter, prosecutors alleged.
When Bujduveanu was arrested Saturday at his home, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigators found hundreds of parts for the C-130 and other aircraft, prosecutors said. Keshari was arrested Friday at Miami International Airport after arriving on a flight from Atlanta.
The two men were being held without bail after a brief court hearing Monday. Lawyers for the two declined comment. A hearing is scheduled Thursday on whether they should remain in custody until trial.
According to an ICE affidavit, Iran has a web of parts brokers and suppliers who scour the globe for the parts necessary to keep its military gear working. Most of these items are fairly mundane in nature - an F-14 harness assembly, a wrenching bolt, a vertical gyro - but are specific and vital to each airplane.
Keshari's business, Kesh Air International, found suppliers for Iranian clients and used U.S.-based e-mail accounts to make the transactions. According to the affidavit, the e-mails provided much of the evidence in the case, including 857 recent e-mails between Kesh Air and Bujduveanu's business, Orion Aviation Co.
Once the deals were made, the ICE affidavit said the parts were shipped from Broward County, Fla., to the United Arab Emirates and then on to Iran.
There have been at least 17 major federal prosecutions in recent months around the country involving illegal exports to Iran. Those have involved such prohibited items as night vision goggles, computer software for oil and gas operations, Uzi submachine guns, rifle scopes and weapons, and several cases involving parts for the F-14 and other aircraft.
#1
Well done, ICE! They've been accomplishing an awful lot this year. Oh, does anybody know if such convictions lead to naturalization being revoked? Would revocation be followed by expulsion at the end of the prison term, like for illegals?
There is an explicit and quantifiable cost to public debate during wartime in the form of increased attacks. Based on these results, it appears that Iraqi insurgent groups believe that when the U.S. political landscape is more uncertain, initiating a higher level of attacks increases the likelihood that the U.S. will reduce the scope of its engagement in the conflict. However, the magnitude of the response by Iraqi insurgent groups is relatively small. To the extent that U.S. political speech does affect insurgent incentives, it changes things only by about 7-10 percent. And if total deaths have been 4,000 that's 280-400 Americans. Relatively small. Unless you or your brother are one of them. But still, a small price to pay for Nan and Harry to mug for the evening news.
Second, the insurgent response to low resolve periods may not represent an overall increase in the total number of attacks, but rather a change in the timing of attacks. New information about U.S. cost-sensitivity increases the perceived return to violence and thus insurgent groups condense the violence they would have committed over several weeks into a shorter time horizon.
Third, regardless of whether the observed effect represents an overall increase or inter-temporal substitution, the evidence in this study indicates that insurgent groups are strategic actors that respond to the incentives created by the policies and actions of the counterinsurgent force, rather than groups driven by purely ideological concerns with little sensitivity to costs. There appears to be a systematic response of Iraqi insurgent groups to information about the U.S. willingness to remain in Iraq and/or public support for the war.
Finally, it is not possible to determine from these results the overall benefits or costs of public debate, or its net effect on counterinsurgency effectiveness. One issue is how to weigh the difficult tradeoff between U.S. and Iraqi casualties. If the goal of U.S. policy is to minimize harm to Iraqi civilians and to shift the costs and risks of the conflict from non-combatants to U.S. forces, more public debate may be better. I have to admit that this is how economists look at the world. In addition to the potential social preference for protecting civilians, there are pragmatic reasons why such a shift may be desirable. Because military targets tend to be more difficult to successfully attack, the total number of fatalities (civilian plus military) tends to decline as targeting increases. The targeting also forces insurgents to reveal themselves to the military (more so in certain types of attacks), making detection easier. Maybe Nan and Harry can coordinate their outbursts with Centcom operations planners. Third, protecting and reducing civilian fatalities may increase support for the counterinsurgent among the general populaceconsistent with the hearts and minds approach to counterinsurgency.
As mentioned above, there may be additional benefits to a vigorous public debate, from improving the quality of political and military policy choices to reducing the moral hazard effect of unconditional support for the incumbent government. Without analyzing and measuring the additional consequences, it is not possible to determine if antiwar criticism of U.S. policy is on balance bad.
#1
I do love real research results! Thank you for posting this, Nimble Spemble. The author did make a good point about motivating the terrorists to concentrate on hardened military targets rather than civilians, but it would be better were such things deliberate rather than the result of political malice aforethought.
Lt. Gen. Dunwoody nominated for promotion to General & command of Army Materiel Command. Previously was the Army G-4 (general staff in charge of logistics) and then deputy commander at AMC. And before that, got stuff to Afghan and Iraq in 2002-2004.
#2
Considering that the first one star for a woman was in 1970 this is pretty accelerated pace for the Army bureaucracy. How come the Clinton WH didn't nominate the first woman for a 4 star?
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
06/24/2008 10:02 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Jack, that question can lead to all sorts of nasty speculation knowing Bill Clinton....
#5
Jack,
Clinton had a candidate in Claudia Kennedy, who made it to three stars, but she went public with a sexual harassment claim that she had been groped by a one star - who was about to become the Army's IG. At the time of the grope, she had two stars on the guy, and waited three years to file a complaint. The Clinton DOD was terrified that a fourth star would be seen as an attempt to shut her up, so she didn't get it. She certainly had the proper groupthink to be a Clinton general; if Dubya has made any kind of decision, she's been out front against it.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/24/2008 11:24 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Couple of rather well publicized promotions lately;
First the USAF 'Cargo Driver'
and now
a Logistics expert.
Opening doors to other than dedicated front line warfighters.
Looks like somebody finally figured out that all the fast movers in the world or special ops ain't squat without gas in the tank or bullets in the gun.
Just sayin.....
#7
The Army had to waive the usual restriction that a 4th star only goes to combat arms generals in order for her name to be put forward. So it's not just a matter of 'how many years ....'.
Word I've heard is that she was incredibly good in making sure that arms and equipment got to the war zones when needed. It was a massive job with lots of firewalls which she got down sufficiently to provide outstanding support to the warfighters.
#9
Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.
That quote, attributed to Napoleon is either apocryphal or uttered in St Helen. Truth is that Napoleonic armies travelled light and lived on the country. This made them faster than their opponents ans was crucial in many victories (eg ULM) but didn't work too well when country was poor like in Spain (in addition when people are poor they don't take it gently when their food is requisitioned or downright robbed) and made them vulnerable to burned earth tactics like in Russia.
#10
The way I've heard it is "Amateurs talk strategy, dilettantes talk tactics but professionals talk logistics".
Sometimes attributed to Omar Bradley.
Which reminds me of the incredible contributions of Gen Marshall to WWII. Story goes that FDR called both the Chief of Naval Operations and Marshall into his office and asked how they would prosecute the war if we entered. ADM King talked about ships and commanders and how to position the fleet etc. Marshall talked about the logistics necessary to draft, train, equip and ship a huge army in a sort period of time. It cost him command in Europe - he was simply too valuable to give operational command duties too. So they gave him a 5th star as soon as Congress approved that rank, to make it up to him.
Meanwhile, King went back to the Navy staff and reportedly demanded, "I don't know what this logistics is that Marshall's got but I need some now!"
#14
of interest to you, lotp, my Mother's uncle was Maj General Eugene Salet, Commandant of the Army War College back in the 60's. I still have a nice photo of him and the Shah of Iran riding in a jeep
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/24/2008 19:32 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Most peopel don;t realize one of the best weaposn the US NAvy had from WW2 onward was Operational Research.
#16
"The Army had to waive the usual restriction that the Fourth Star goes only to Combat Arms Generals" > SO-O-O, BEING AT PENN STATE WID CIA'S VALERIE PLAME, ETAL. HAD NUTHIN' TO DO WID IT???
D *** NG IT, HENRY FONDA > I REMEMBER KAAAYDET = CAPTAIN DUNWOODY!
#17
There are so many reasons FDR could not let Marshall go to the ETO, but I suspect the most important may have been the vote to extend the Draft of October 1940 in August 1941. Had the draft not been extended, the draftees would have gone home in October 1941 and the Army would have shrunk down to 220,000. Roosevelt tried all his tricks to extend it, but could not come up with the votes. Marshall went up to the Hill to plead and the extension passed the next day, 203-202. Yes, we came that close to not having any Army at Pearl Harbor. And FDR knew he owed it to Marshall's sway with Congress.
Though peace agreements between the government and militants are not ideal they are positive and should be honoured, NWFP Environment Minister, who is also a key member of peace talks committee, Wajid Ali Khan said on Monday.
The NWFP government is trying its best to honour peace agreements with Swat militants. If these agreements were scrapped there would again be war between security forces and militants.
Khan was speaking at a Peace Accords - Expectations and Reservations Women Workers Helpline meeting. Khan said militants had been stopped from bombing CD and barbers shops and girls schools, and carrying out suicide bombings. The Aurat Foundations Tariq Khan said however such attacks were ongoing.
The NWFP minister said peaceful militant campaigns for Shariah law were their right, and neither un-Islamic, adding the provincial government is optimistic about talks in Swat and Dir. Provincial labour unions secretary-general Farman Ali echoed this, saying the government should honour genuine demands.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday reserved its verdict on the bail plea of former Lal Masjid cleric Maulana Abdul Aziz in a criminal case regarding his alleged involvement in the occupation of the Childrens Library by female students of the mosques madrassa Jamia Hafsa.
An IHC division bench consisting of Justice Syed Qalb-e-Hassan and Justice Raja Saeed Akram reserved its verdict after hearing arguments from both sides, observing that it would be announced later in the day. However, the bench had not announced the verdict by late on Monday and it is now expected to be announced on Tuesday (today).
Criminal cases registered against Aziz include the abduction of Chinese nationals, shooting on Rangers, abduction of on-duty law-enforcement personnel and terrorism against the state.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
NWFP Chief Minister Ameer Haider Khan Hoti on Monday expressed his opposition to the use of force against militants, saying force would be the last option to restore peace in the province.
The use of force will be made when we have no other options. We will protect the life and property of our citizens at any cost and establish the writ of the government, Hoti said during his policy speech in the NWFP Assembly.
Hoti condemned the United States air strikes in Mohmand Agency and Afghan governments unfriendly attitude towards Pakistan, and called for a review of Pakistans policy towards Afghanistan.
Hoti said that peace in Pakistani areas was linked to peace in Afghanistan. If there is no peace in Afghanistan, there will be no peace in FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas), and if there is no peace in FATA, there will be no peace in the province (NWFP), he said.
Hoti said the government would fully develop FATA and give equal rights to its people.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
The Lashkar-e-Islam (LI) militia of tribal warlord Mangal Bagh has said it released all the Christians kidnapped unconditionally and that their kidnapping from Academy Town, Peshawar on Saturday night, was the result of a misunderstanding. LI Bara ameer Haji Abdul Karim Afridi told reporters on Monday that the organisation regretted its actions. An informer had told their organisation that the people assembled in the house were engaged in vulgarity following which immediate action was taken against them but without the consent of an LI shura. Afridi said that they did not know the kidnap victims were Christian and when the organisation discovered the groups identity, they were released. He said action would be taken against the informer, and had deep respect for minorities.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Lashkar-e-Islami
#3
I'm prepared to bet that they knew the Koran better than their kidnappers and that the Amir released them before they starting edjumacating them too much about what it actually sez...
LAHORE, PAKISTAN Iqbal Aslam and four buddies meandered through the narrow alleyways. Centuries-old brick houses and apartment buildings loomed over them, shrouding the streets in a surreal dusk.
Upon reaching their destination, they knocked on the white metal door of a five-story brick edifice. A man opened it, Aslam's group nodded at him and then set off to climb a winding cement staircase to the roof that overlooks a city of nearly 10 million people. Then, Aslam did something completely illegal here: He pulled out a kite and cast it skyward.
As Pakistan, the sixth-largest nation in the world, struggles to implement democratic reforms, the kite flying ban is another intriguing battle between social moderates and religious conservatives over the place of Islam within society.
On one side are those who contend kite flying has no link to Muslim customs, and therefore has no place in the Islamic republic, where 97 percent of the country's 165 million people are Muslims.
On the other are those clinging to the tradition of a popular sport.
And caught in the middle are the people who make and fly kites.
'Part of our life and history is fading away,' said Shahid Malik, a 49-year-old kite flier.
In 2005, Pakistan's supreme court banned kite flying across the country. The lawyers who presented the case for the prohibition cited three key reasons in their argument:
Banned metal string from stray kites was fatally cutting the throats of motorcyclists and bicyclists.
Children were being injured or killed chasing fallen kites.
People retrieving fallen kites from cables with metal wires were being electrocuted and causing millions of dollars of damage to the country's power authority.
Those reasons aside, the ban is not popular with many especially those who argue their leaders have surrendered to the influence of religious conservatives. 'Kite flying is not permissive in Islam according to some religious elements,' said S.M. Masud, 70, an attorney who argued against the ban. 'The government has used all tactics to stop it.'
But, he continued, 'kite flying is in the blood of the people here. You can't stop it.'
The current clash has its roots in Basant an ancient Hindu festival celebrating spring. Basant is highlighted by thousands of people flying kites from rooftops. According to historian Tahir Kamran, a Hindu boy named Haquiqat Rai was charged with blaspheming Islam and sentenced to death in the mid-18th century. The Qazi, or Muslim magistrate, offered to spare Rai's life if he converted to Islam. Rai refused and was executed. To honor Rai and protest his killing, Hindus in Lahore flew kites across the city.
'Orthodox Islamists view kite flying as having antecedents in Hinduism and therefore anti-Islamic,' said Kamran, who chairs the history department at Government College University in Lahore.
Laqman Qazi, a high-ranking member of Jamaat Islami, an Islamist political party here, stated it more bluntly: 'Basant is from the Indian culture and has nothing to do with us.'
Kite flying here is a highly competitive sport that traces its roots nearly 3,000 years to China. Serious flyers battle in the sky to cut their opponent's twine and send the attached kite fluttering to the ground in defeat.
Traditionally, string was cotton coated with wheat-flour, dye and finely ground glass. However, recently, metal-reinforced, glass-coated string has fatally severed the necks of unsuspecting pedestrians and cyclists.
The one point Pakistanis on both sides of the new debate agree on is that 'the reinforced string is too dangerous for people on the ground,' Aslam said. But those fighting the ban fault the country's leaders for failing to simply prohibit the sale and use of the reinforced string.
'Many argue that other sports, such as Formula 1 racing, is dangerous but it's not banned,' said Masud, the attorney. 'We need to develop rules and regulations to reduce the dangers.'
The government's prosecuting attorney in the Punjab province, Shabbir Ahmad Lali, countered that 'it would be very difficult to enforce' a metal-string law.
Despite a potential penalty of four years in jail and a fine of 100,000 Pakistani rupees about $1,500 Aslam and his friends took to the inner-city rooftop one late afternoon last month. At first, one kite drifted alone in the sky. Then, others slowly appeared, including one launched from a nearby rooftop that engaged in several clashes.
It was a cautious act of defiance.
A tradition, if only barely, had been preserved another day.
Posted by: john frum ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If you have not yet seen it, see the movie The Kite Runner.
It shows just how nasty the SOviets were -- and how brutal and evil the Talib were and still are.
Kargil Ghazis, they are sardonically called at officers messes across Pakistan: the warriors who received medals and promotions for fighting and losing a war Islamabad still refuses to admit it was involved in.
In order to legitimise the coup that brought him to power, President Pervez Musharraf insisted that the Kargil offensive he authored had been a success and handed out sackloads of medals to prove it. In his version of events, the former Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharifs perfidy cost Pakistan a certain triumph.
But earlier this month, a soldier, who was one of the retired General Musharrafs closest aides, set about demolishing his one-time mentors account of what happened in Kargil. In print and television interviews, Lieutenant-General Jamshed Gulzar Kiani candidly described Kargil as a debacle. Mr. Sharif, he said, was not properly briefed on an ill-conceived operation in which Pakistani soldiers were sent to certain death.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: john frum ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...and another nail is driven into Perv's coffin.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
06/24/2008 11:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
While Gen. Kianis revelations have provoked a furore in Pakistan,...
Hell, farting in their general direction provokes furores in Pakistan.
(VOI) Former Iraqi Minister of Defense (under Saddam Hussein) and a defendant in the 1991 Shaabaniya Uprising case, Saadi Toama Abbas al-Jubori, on Monday denied that the Iraqi army participated in military operations in the events that took place in Basra city, during March of 1991.
Justice Mohammed Araiby today opened the Iraqi Supreme Criminal Court's session by hearing al-Jubori's testimony, who was the leader of the southern area during the uprising.
Al-Jubori entered the courtroom dressing in the Arab traditional style, and started reading a written statement. "Events in Basra, which lasted for only one day, from March 2 to March 3 1991, did not witness any Iraqi army participation, because the events did not have the military nature, and this cancels the army's right to intervene," al-Jubori explained. "When the Basra events started, the army troops had just ended a confrontation with the coalition (Operation to Liberate Kuwait), and were therefore tired and experiencing hard circumstances. The Iraqi army's officers and military personnel were killed and kidnapped during the events in Basra, but the army did not receive orders from the command to intervene," he added.
"This issue kept the army operating within the permanent procedures of self-protection and preserving military equipments," he noted. By the end of his testimony, al-Jubori said that he is "innocent of all the charges directed against him."
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Baath Party
(VOI) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Monday announced during his visit in Missan the formation of 17 tribal councils in the province to support security forces and the governmental institutions.
This'd be the Shiite version of the Swaha infrastructure. It makes sense, given Iraq's tribal nature. The 'democracy' that's eventually going to take root in the country, assuming we're successful, is going to be a lot more obviously an oligarchy than we're used to seeing.
Something akin to late 1700s democracy: landowners, powerful merchants and tribal chiefs will run the country.
Speaking at the tribal conference held today in Missan and attended by chieftains, lawmakers, security officers, and senior officials, the premier said '17 tribal councils will be formed in Missan, three in the center of the province, five in districts, and nine in the neighborhoods. The councils' role will be consultative in coordination with the police and army forces and the local authorities.'
He highlighted the large role of that tribal councils have played in Iraq's history in various domains, mainly in Missan. 'The Bashaer al-Salam (Promise of Peace) operation is not only a security operation but also envisages reconstruction operations and providing job opportunities through joining police and army forces as well as other official departments,' he added.
Large divisions of Iraqi army and police personnel flocked into Missan in preparation for Bashaer al-Salam security plan, taking Batira airport, 10 km northwest of Amara, and the Missan sports playground as their headquarters.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
17th Century is still an improvement over the 7th century. Don't knock it.
As I kept telling anyone who listened: Nobody truly understood just how broken and backward Muzz culture is. Nobody. That is why the mess of 2004-2007. It took us 3 years to "get it" and figure out how to fix it.
Someday, the honest historians are going to have some realy nice things to say about Bush and Petreaus.
Posted by: N guard ||
06/24/2008 8:53 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Something akin to late 1700s democracy: landowners, powerful merchants and tribal chiefs will run the country"
or a tad more relevantly, 1950's India. Or 2008 Pakistan ;)
Just weeks after being under siege from Al Qaeda insurgents, residents of Mosul are enjoying a newfound sense of security as Iraqi forces bring stability to the country's third largest city. With Iraqi soldiers and police filling the streets, shopkeepers have opened their doors without fear of being targeted by insurgents. Commerce is back. Many locals say the city is much safer than it was just three months ago. "There used to be shootings, and children could not go outside," a resident told FOX News early this month, holding the hands of his two young sons. "It was difficult we could not move around. But now it's better."
Iraqi security forces, with the help of the U.S. military, have launched sweeping operations against Al Qaeda in Mosul, which is considered the insurgent group's last major urban stronghold.
Recently, Riyadh Jalal Tawfiq, the Iraqi army commander in Nineveh province, declared the offensive dubbed Operation Lion's Roar a success, saying insurgents will not return to the area now that the Iraqi Army has taken control. Joined by his U.S. counterpart and Mosul's mayor, Riyadh toured the city on a foot patrol and held an impromptu news conference at a new police station to announce the creation of a jobs program.
Locals eagerly vented their grievances to the visiting authorities, including U.S. Brig. Gen. Raymond Thomas, who walked with Riyadh and told shopkeepers that the mayor of Mosul would be hiring 8,000 men to assist with reconstruction. Thomas encouraged the residents to apply.
Despite the new sense of calm, the Northern city is still considered the central front in the battle against Al Qaeda, and the U.S. military continues to emphasize that while armed groups are bloodied, they're not crushed. Major Adam Boyd, an intelligence officer for the 3rd Armored Cavalry division, which is based in the city, stressed that Al Qaeda isn't entirely defeated. "Al Qaeda still operates in Mosul. ... I will tell you, tales of a final battle have been greatly exaggerated," he said. "It would not necessarily be a final battle because all that has to happen is Al Qaeda simply lays low. That does not mean they will thrive, but they can survive."
Iraqi forces now lead operations in all three of Iraqs major cities Baghdad, Basrah and Mosul but they still depend on the U.S. military for critical advice, backup and logistical support. Lt. Col. Robert Molina, an operations officer for the 3rd Armored Cavalry, said Iraqis still need U.S. military forces to stay. "We need to continue to be here and mentor them, to be their friend and ally, to continue to allow them to fight while we help build that sustainment, that foundation," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda in Iraq
#1
The Third Armored Cavalry *what*? In the seventh year of the WoT, and reporters are *still* confusing regiments and divisions?
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
06/24/2008 8:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
You have to WANT to learn something before it'll stick, Mitch. The reporters in this war don't want to know anything about the military other than "it sucks". The military is NOT an ally of the left, so it's pooplisted.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
06/24/2008 12:08 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Old Patriot, things like that are just too complicated for the non-military mind to understand. I know, I've tried. I'm just proud I finally grasped the difference between captains in the Navy versus captains in the other services. If you really want to know which unit it was, Mitch, go look it up on the military's information website.
#4
I understand the confusion, TW. I'm still learning about some of the units too.
Mitch's annoyance is understandable, tho. The 3rd armored cavalry regiment has a 160+ year distinguished history and the US has never had cavalry divisions.
FWIW, the 3d ACR has less than 2000 troops, maybe a little less IIRC. An average infantry division would have ~10,000. There's a huge difference between saying we're making progress in Mosul with the former vs. suggesting we have occupied that city with a full up division.
To put it into perspective, the 3d ACR is commanded by a colonel. A division is commanded by a major general, 2 ranks higher.
(Xinhua) -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki announced on Monday that Iraqi forces will soon launch a massive offensive against al-Qaida militants in Diyala province, northeast of Baghdad. Diyala province stretches from the eastern edges of Baghdad to the Iranian border in eastern the country. The province has long been stronghold for al-Qaida in Iraq network.
Maliki's remark came during his visit to Amara, capital of Maysan province, where Iraqi security forces backed by U.S. troopsare conducting a massive operation dubbed 'Operation Basha'er al-Salam' (Promise of Peace) against Shiite militiamen. 'We are today in Maysan province, and God willing tomorrow we will complete our march to Diyala,' Maliki said in a televised address to tribal leaders in the province without specifying the date of the crackdown.
Maliki also vowed to 'continue chasing the remnant of the defeated al-Qaida elements, former regime followers, militias and the outlaws.'
'We will not stop using force against those who revolt against the will of the nation,' Maliki said.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda in Iraq
A border policeman committed suicide Tuesday afternoon in the middle of a farewell ceremony in honor of French President Nicolas Sarkozy at Ben Gurion International Airport. A Magen David Adom paramedic crew unsuccessfully attempted to revive the policeman, who sustained severe injuries from the bullet. "We are carrying out a preliminary investigation at this time," a Border Police spokesman said. "We will release more details after our check and after we speak to the policeman's family," he added.
Police spokesman Shlomi Sagi confirmed that the border policeman committed suicide just as Sarkozy was about to board his plane. Another police spokesman, Micky Rosenfeld, denied reports that there had been an assassination attempt on the French leader. A statement from the Prime Minister's Office said that the circumstances of the incident were under investigation.
In attendance at the ceremony were Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, President Shimon Peres and other state dignitaries, Israel Radio reported.
Initially, the prime minister's security personnel drew their handguns and rushed Olmert and Peres to bullet-proof cars, while Sarkozy and his wife Carla Bruni-Sarkozy were rushed to the French president's plane. When the incident ended, Olmert and Peres boarded Sarkozy's plane to inform the French president what had transpired and to bid him farewell.
It was not immediately clear whether the soldier died from the impact of the fall or from the misfired bullet.
Israel Radio said that the officer who died was about 100m away from the Sarkozy plane as it waited on the runway at Ben Gurion, Israel's largest international airport. Two women soldiers who witnessed the incident fainted and were treated by medics.
The policeman apparently fell from a vantage point on a high building, where he had been guarding the event. Reports suggest the policeman shot himself in the head. This was in no way an assassination attempt, said Micky Rosenfeld, a police spokesman. A border policeman ... committed suicide during the farewell ceremony.
According to Mr Rosenfeld, the guard who shot himself was a paramilitary policeman and had been assigned to a security patrol at the airport. The area police commander, Nissim Mor, said police were investigating the incident to determine if the officer had intended to commit suicide, or if he had accidentally discharged his weapon. His mission was to secure an area to prevent people from reaching the ceremony, he said.
John Bolton, the former American ambassador to the United Nations, has predicted that Israel could attack Iran after the November presidential election but before George W Bush's successor is sworn in.
The Arab world would be 'pleased' by Israeli strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, he said in an interview with The Daily Telegraph. So would I.
'It [the reaction] will be positive privately. I think there'll be public denunciations but no action,' he said.
Mr Bolton, an unflinching hawk who proposes military action to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons, bemoaned what he sees as a lack of will by the Bush administration to itself contemplate military strikes. 'It's clear that the administration has essentially given up that possibility,' he said. 'I don't think it's serious any more. If you had asked me a year ago I would have said I thought it was a real possibility. I just don't think it's in the cards.'
Israel, however, still had a determination to prevent a nuclear Iran, he argued. The 'optimal window' for strikes would be between the November 4 election and the inauguration on January 20, 2009.
'The Israelis have one eye on the calendar because of the pace at which the Iranians are proceeding both to develop their nuclear weapons capability and to do things like increase their defences by buying new Russian anti-aircraft systems and further harden the nuclear installations.
'They're also obviously looking at the American election calendar. My judgement is they would not want to do anything before our election because there's no telling what impact it could have on the election.'
But waiting for either Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate, or his Republican opponent John McCain to be installed in the White House could preclude military action happening for the next four years or at least delay it.
'An Obama victory would rule out military action by the Israelis because they would fear the consequences given the approach Obama has taken to foreign policy,' said Mr Bolton, who was Mr Bush's ambassador to the UN from 2005 to 2006. 'With McCain they might still be looking at a delay. Given that time is on Iran's side, I think the argument for military action is sooner rather than later absent some other development.'
The Iran policy of Mr McCain, whom Mr Bolton supports, was 'much more realistic than the Bush administration's stance'.
Mr Obama has said he will open high-level talks with Iran 'without preconditions' while Mr McCain views attacking Iran as a lesser evil than allowing Iran to become a nuclear power.
William Kristol, a prominent neo-conservative, told Fox News on Sunday that an Obama victory could prompt Mr Bush to launch attacks against Iran. 'If the president thought John McCain was going to be the next president, he would think it more appropriate to let the next president make that decision than do it on his way out,' he said.
On Friday, Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency, said military action against Iran would turn the Middle East into a 'fireball' and accelerate Iran's nuclear programme.
Mr Bolton, however, dismissed such sentiments as scaremongering. 'The key point would be for the Israelis to break Iran's control over the nuclear fuel cycle and that could be accomplished for example by destroying the uranium conversion facility at Esfahan or the uranium enrichment facility at Natanz.
'That doesn't end the problem but it buys time during which a more permanent solution might be found.... How long? That would be hard to say. Depends on the extent of the destruction.'
#1
No way. Israel wouldn't attack Iran without US approval. The special US relations with Israel didn't commence until the Kennedy administration. In fact, Israel was under US trade sanctions for several years in the fifties. At that time, the UK and France were their main supporters.
#4
I think if Obama wins, we could see a US strike around the 24th-26th of November. New moon on the 27th and most of the lawmakers and story pushers will be gone for Thanksgiving.
#5
"Israel 'will attack Iran' before new US president sworn in, John Bolton predicts"
Wow thats quite the bold headline...aint it? I mean for career diplomats to make definitive predictions is rare but one of this magnitude is cause for investigation. Gosh I wonder what he really said?
Given that time is on Iran's side, I think the argument for military action is sooner rather than later absent some other development."
Oh I see Bolton presents an argument and then speculates on timing. So the Telegraph has no choice but to mischaracterize his intent into a Headline attention grabber. Yeah it may be cheap journalistic projection but hey you know how those evil Neo-cons like to speak in code.
#6
So long as Israel and India continue to develop their understanding, Israel can increasingly afford to defend herself whether France, the UK, the USA and the rest of a craven West like it or not.
#7
I read in our local newspaper today that the U.S. is establishing some kind of diplomatic presence in Iran--the first time since 1979. I had to do a double-take. This doesn't sound like an attack is imminent. Maybe we are just trying to be disarming.
#8
This is one time ISRAELI + US-WESTERN INTEL can't afford to get it wrong, as per IRAN [Nuclear intent] + NORTH KOREA [Agriculture collapse in 2009].
EVEN PRO-DEM MSM MEDIA PUNDITS WANT DUBYA TO ATTACK IRAN BEFORE JAN 2009.
#9
I think if Obama wins, we could see a US strike around the 24th-26th of November. New moon on the 27th and most of the lawmakers and story pushers will be gone for Thanksgiving.
While I certainly hope Candidate Obama doesn't win, the rest of your thought makes me happy, DarthVader.
The Israeli government denied reports it was backing off a planned prisoner swap with Hezbollah.
Israeli media were dominated Monday by reports that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, whose associates last week said a deal was in the works to retrieve two soldiers held by the Lebanese militia, was rethinking the exchange after Hezbollah said it wanted hundreds of jailed Palestinians released.
Israeli officials had indicated they would agree to free only a handful of Lebanese terrorists from prison in exchange for abducted army reservists Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, whose condition is not known.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
(Xinhua) -- Hamas leader in Gaza Ismail Haneya on Sunday denied that the ceasefire deal with Israel comprises the entry of Arab forces to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.
'No one has officially spoken about Arab forces in Gaza Strip and there is no Arab state thinking of sending troops to Gaza,' said Haneya. Moreover, he added that Hamas 'doesn't accept Arab forces' to prevent friction with Israel, but 'welcomes Arab forces helping the Palestinian people in their liberation.'
A few days ago, an Israeli newspaper reported that the Egyptian-brokered ceasefire may include the deployment of multinational Arab forces in Gaza in its final stages. The ceasefire, started on Thursday, will last for six months. It aims at halting Gaza rocket attacks against Israel in exchange for stopping the Israeli army operations and easing the siege that Israel imposed on Gaza for one year.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Hamas
(Xinhua) -- A spokesman for Fatah on Monday ruled out that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas may meet Hamas chief when he visits Syrian capital Damascus.
"President Abbas will visit Syria to meet President Bashar al-Assad to discuss situation in the region and the Arab-Israeli conflict," said Ahmed Abdel Rahman, spokesman for Fatah movement.
As for a possible meeting between Abbas and the Damascus-based Hamas political chief Khaled Mashaal, Abdel Rahman said "it was too early to predict such a meeting because it is subject to a stance by Hamas proving they support the legitimacy and unity at home."
In June last year, Hamas routed pro-Abbas forces, ousted Fatah movement and took control of Gaza Strip in a deadly fighting. Since then, Abbas fired a Hamas-led government and formed a western-backed administration ruling from West Bank. Hamas neglected Abbas' decision and continued to rule Gaza.
"The irregular situation in Gaza Strip must end and then President Abbas can return to Gaza," Abdel Rahman added, calling on Hamas to respond to a new initiative that Abbas launched for dialogue with Hamas.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Hamas
(Xinhua) -- Islamic Hamas movement's spokesman in Gaza Fawzi Barhoum said Monday that his movement's commitment to a truce brokered by Egypt is linked to Israel's commitments to it. On Thursday morning, Israel and Gaza militant groups implemented a six-month truce brokered by Egypt in the Gaza Strip for gradual reopening of the closed crossings and easing a one-year blockade Israel imposed on the enclave.
Barhoum warned Israel, in a statement, of using the Israeli High Court of Justice decisions, related to the appeal of the family of captive Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, to violate the truce. Shalit's parents appealed to the court in Israel not to reopen Gaza Strip borders crossing until the Israeli government gives them a clear answer that their son's release would be part of the truce.
The Israeli High Court of Justice accepted the appeal and ordered to temporarily keep the activities of goods transfer into the Gaza Strip through Gaza crossing point on a low profile.
'If the Zionist occupation wants to use the decision of the court in order not to implement the truce agreement, our commitment to the truce would also be linked to what extent the occupation would be committed to it,' Barhoum said. He added that the Palestinian side doesn't care about the internal Israel differences on the truce, adding 'all what we care about is to see a full implementation of the truce agreement.'
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Hamas
Pressure is building on Iran. This week Europe agreed to new sanctions and President Bush again suggested something more serious possible military strikes if the Islamic Republic doesn't bend to the will of the international community on its nuclear program.
But increasingly military analysts are warning of severe consequences if the US begins a shooting war with Iran. While Iranian forces are no match for American technology on a conventional battlefield, Iran has shown that it can bite back in unconventional ways.
Iranian networks in Iraq and Afghanistan could imperil US interests there; American forces throughout the Gulf region could be targeted by asymmetric methods and lethal rocket barrages; and Iranian partners across the region such as Hezbollah in Lebanon could be mobilized to engage in an anti-US fight.
Iran's response could also be global, analysts say, but the scale would depend on the scale of the US attack. "One very important issue from a US intelligence perspective, [the Iranian reaction] is probably more unpredictable than the Al Qaeda threat," says Magnus Ranstorp at the Center for Asymmetric Threat Studies at the Swedish National Defense College in Stockholm.
"I doubt very much our ability to manage some of the consequences," says Mr. Ranstorp, noting that Iranian revenge attacks in the past have been marked by "plausible deniability" and have had global reach.
"If you attack Iran you are unleashing a firestorm of reaction internally that will only strengthen revolutionary forces, and externally in the region," says Ranstorp. "It's a nightmare scenario for any contingency planner, and I think you really enter the twilight zone if you strike Iran."
Though the US military has since early 2007 accused Iran's Qods Force an elite element of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of providing anti-US militias in Iraq with lethal roadside bombs, and of training and backing "special groups" in actions that the US government alleges have cost "thousands" of lives, US commanders have played down Iran's military capabilities.
Even Admiral William Fallon, who publicly opposed a US strike on Iran before he resigned in April, dismissed Iran as a military threat. "Get serious," Adm. Fallon told Esquire in March. "These guys are ants. When the time comes, you crush them."
But that has not kept Iran from rhetorical chest-beating, with an active military manpower of 540,000 the largest in the Middle East dependent on some of the lowest per capita defense spending in the region. Iran "can deal fatal blows to aggressor America by unpredictable and creative tactical moves," the senior commander Brig. Gen. Gholam Ali Rashid said in late May. "It is meaningless to back down before an enemy who has targeted the roots of our existence."
Iran's supreme religious leader Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei also warned of far-reaching revenge in 2006. "The Americans should know that if they assault Iran, their interests will be harmed anywhere in the world that is possible," he said. "The Iranian nation will respond to any blow with double the intensity."
Analysts say Iran has a number of tools to make good on those threats and take pride in taking on a more powerful enemy. "This is not something they are shying away from," says Alex Vatanka, a Middle East security analyst at Jane's Information Group in Washington.
"They say: 'Conventional warfare is not something we can win against the US, but we have other assets in the toolbox,' " says Mr. Vatanka, noting that the IRGC commander appointed last fall has been "marketed as this genius behind asymmetric warfare doctrine."
"What they are really worried about is the idea of massive aerial attacks on literally thousands of targets inside Iran," says Vatanka, also an adjunct scholar at the Middle East Institute. "Their reading of America's intentions in that scenario would be twofold: One is to obviously dismantle as much as possible the nuclear program; and [the other], indirectly try to weaken the [Islamic] regime."
Any US-Iran conflict would push up oil prices, and though Iran could disrupt shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf, its weak economy depends on oil revenues.
But nearby US forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Gulf provide a host of targets. Iran claimed last October that it could rain down 11,000 rockets upon "the enemy" within one minute of an attack and that rate "would continue."
Further afield, Israel is within range of Iran's Shahab-3 ballistic missiles, and Hezbollah claims its rockets enhanced and resupplied by Iran since the 2006 war to an estimated 30,000 can now hit anywhere in the Jewish state, including its nuclear plant at Dimona.
Closer to home, Iran has honed a swarming tactic, in which small and lightly armed speedboats come at far larger warships from different directions. A classified Pentagon war game in 2002 simulated just such an attack and in it the Navy lost 16 major warships, according to a report in The New York Times last January.
"The sheer numbers involved overloaded their ability, both mentally and electronically, to handle the attack," Lt. Gen. K. Van Riper, a retired Marine Corps officer who commanded the swarming force, told the Times. "The whole thing was over in five, maybe 10 minutes."
During the 1990s, Iranian agents were believed to be behind the assassinations of scores of regime opponents in Europe, and German prosecutors issued an arrest warrant for Iran's intelligence minister.
Iran and Hezbollah are alleged to have collaborated in the May 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires in revenge for Israel's killing of a Hezbollah leader months before. Argentine prosecutors charge that they jointly struck again in 1994, bombing a Jewish community center in the Argentine capital that killed 85, one month after Israel attacked a Hezbollah base in Lebanon.
With some 30,000 on the payroll by one count, Iranian intelligence "is a superpower in intelligence terms in the region; they have global reach because of their reconnaissance ability and quite sophisticated ways of inflicting pain," says Ranstorp. "They have been expanding their influence. Who would have predicted that Argentina would be the area that Hezbollah and the Iranians collectively would respond?"
Past examples show that "Tehran recognizes that at times its interest are best served by restraint," says a report on consequences of a strike on Iran published this week by Patrick Clawson and Michael Eisenstadt of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
But Iran could target the US, too, depending on the magnitude of any US strike. "Iran's capacity for terror and subversion remains one of its most potent levers in the event of a confrontation with the United States," says the report, adding that "success" in delaying Iran's nuclear programs could backfire.
If "US and world opinion were so angered by the strikes that they refused to support further pressure against Iran's nuclear ambitions, then prevention could paradoxically [eventually ensure] Iran's open pursuit of nuclear weapons," concludes the report.
And the long list of unconventional tactics should not be taken for granted in Tehran, says Vatanka, noting that the Islamic system's top priority is survival.
"So the Iranians have to be careful," says Vatanka. "Just because the US doesn't have the will right now, or the ability to produce the kind of stick that they would fear, doesn't mean the way of confrontation is going to pay off for them in the long run."
#1
My take on this article is "duh!". It seems to be an article written by Iranian intelligence to deter Americans from supporting any action against it. Of COURSE we would expect an unconventional response. It is probably the only kind of response Iran could muster. They can't abide by the rules of war and actually confront us with regular military as we would slaughter them wholesale.
The only chance they would have is as "illegal combatants" engaged in criminal acts against civilians and military alike. But since we have now expanded US constitutional protections to illegal combatants abroad, we have just removed one major barrier to their fighting that way.
#3
This reminds me of Edward Luttwak's testimony before Gulf War I. You would have thought we were going up against Wehrmacht II based on the scenarios he laid out.
Probably the worst thing we will have to face when Iran is attacked (note use of passive voice) is EUroscorn, not because of its direct effect but because of the guilt and cowardice it induces in the DoS and MSM. Whatever Iran chooses to do can be absorbed and dealt with at lower cost than allowing them to have the bomb.
I think you really enter the twilight zone if you strike Iran.'
Hitler was right when he said something to the effect of going to war is like walking through a dark room for the first time. If you don't understand that, you really shouldn't be in the war business. If Iran isn't struck, the Twilight Zone will seem like the path we wish we'd taken.
#4
But since we have now expanded US constitutional protections to illegal combatants abroad, we have just removed one major barrier to their fighting that way.
Perhaps it would change some minds if someone in the Bush administration started citing what is permitted wrt illegal combatants according to the Geneva Conventions.
#5
BARACK OBAMA's problem here is that even many of the traditionally PRO-DEM MSM Pundits are in favor of the USA, including either a POTUS OBAMA OR POTUS MCCAIN, taking some sort of major mil action agz Iran ASAP lest Islamist Iran acquire nuke weapons. THE ERA OF US-SPECIFIC GEOPOL/MIL "UNILATERALISM" AS PER DUBYA WILL BE OVER ONCE RADICAL ISLAM GOES NUKULAR. + ACKNOWLEDGE WILL CONSTRAIN/HAMPER DUBYA'S SUCCESSOR IN WAGING THE WOT.
IOW, MSM CONVENTIONAL WISDOM > SSSHHHHHHHHHH, RELUCTANTLY RECOGNIZE ITS TO THE DEMS AND POTUS OBAMA'S LT POL ADVANTAGE FOR DUBYA = USA [wid or widout ISRAEL, ALLIES] TO ATTACK IRAN ASAP BEFORE JAN 2009.
E.g. DICK MORRIS + BOB BECKEL > BARACK OBAMA's ME agenda either benefits the TERRORISTS, or in the altern is prone to PRO-NUCLEAR anti-US exploitation by Iran + Militants, i.e. DON'T TRUST IRAN = RADICAL ISLAMISM TO NOT TO GO FOR NUKE WEAPONS + STRATEGIC WEAPONS???
Again, 2008-2012 > "MAKE OR BREAK" BOTH NASCENT US-LED/CENTRIC OWG-NWO, + RADICAL ISLAMISM's JIHAD.
#6
Ok, dark scenarios. How about one for the Mullahs. TV and satellite video showing American forces racing through liberated Iranian cities with cheering crowds who occasionally duck their heads when a die hard Revolutionary Guard pops one off and is then seen being run down like a cornered fox to be ripped to shreds by the populous or who's dead body is thrown out of a high rise window, passing a mullah hanging from a lamp post, on the way down. I wonder who's nightmare is closer to the real picture [given that the Iranian people have a general idea of the freedoms and liberties and prosperities their neighbors are now enjoying].
#7
This is the old standard "Hide in the corner!!! The Iranians will unleash terrorists on us!!!" ploy that was used before the OIF started in Iraq : remember how Saddam was supposed to slather on the chemical weapons, how the PLO was going to be setting off car bombs in Mid-West, etc? This is the only major card that those who would permit Israel and America to suffer nuclear attacks by the mullahs have - to promote a nebulous fear of mass terrorism against the general public, in order for that public to prevent the Administration from stomping the Iranians (in this case) flat.
AP: Drug traffickers in well-armed desert convoys roll across the border from Afghanistan. Standing in their way are Iranian soldiers and drug agents trying to choke off one of the world's busiest pipelines for opium and heroin.
The battles waged far from the world's attention in the arid badlands of eastern Iran represent one of the dwindling patches of common ground between Tehran and the West. The United States has applauded Iran's anti-drug campaign and European nations help fund the fight.
But now this international support could be threatened by the standoff over Tehran's nuclear policies.
Western nations have told Iran that they could cut off any new help to Iran's anti-drug units unless the Islamic regime halts uranium enrichment, which Washington and its allies worry could be used to develop nuclear arms.
The warning was a small but potentially significant item tucked amid an array of trade and economic incentives seeking to sway Iranian leaders to strike a deal. Iran has not formally responded to the package, presented June 14 by the five permanent U.N. Security Council members plus Germany.
But Iran has repeatedly said it will not back off uranium enrichment pushing the European Union this week to expand sanctions.
The EU froze assets of Iran's largest bank and updated the blacklist of Iranian nuclear experts and companies, but has not yet decided on whether to trim its aid to Iran's anti-drug fight.
In response, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Mohammad Ali Hosseini, said Tuesday that the "carrot and stick policy" by the 27-nation EU won't stop Iran's "pursuit to realize its nuclear rights."
The incentive package has been widely endorsed in the West as a way out of the impasse. But tying the drug battle to the offer could be counterproductive, some U.N. officials say.
A "heroin tsunami" could hit Europe if the drug interdiction by Iran is weakened, warned Antonio Maria Costa, the director of the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime.
"We should definitely assist Iran in this respect," he said.
Roberto Arbitrio, head of the U.N. drugs and crime office in Iran, said the war on drugs should be viewed as "a non-political area of mutual interest."
The new stance is a sharp departure from the strong but mostly behind-the-scenes cooperation the United States and other Western countries forged with Iran on Afghanistan after the Taliban's fall in late 2001.
The West and Iran shared a common enemy in the Taliban, the Sunni extremist group that gave shelter to al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and now continues to fight the U.S. military and NATO.
Taliban fighters help finance their battles by taxing Afghanistan's opium farmers, whose poppies provide the raw material for heroin. The West has had little success reducing the huge opium crop in southern Afghanistan where the Taliban is strongest.
Overall opium production in Afghanistan has more than doubled in the last four years and smuggling the drug into Iran is the first step toward reaching Western markets. Afghanistan produced 93 percent of the world's opium last year, and about 50 percent of the drugs leaving the country flowed through Iran, the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime says.
"Cooperating with Iran in Afghanistan on this and other issues is not a favor we do for Iran but something we need to do in our own interest," said Barnett Rubin, an expert on Afghanistan at New York University.
The incentive package promised Iran "intensified cooperation in the fight against drug trafficking" from Afghanistan but only if it suspends uranium enrichment first. Iran claims its nuclear program is only for energy producing reactors and insists it has the right to have uranium enrichment technology.
White House and State Department officials have refused to comment on how halting aid to Iranian anti-drug units might affect the flow of drugs from Afghanistan or the fight against the Taliban.
Washington has recently accused Iran of providing support to the Taliban in order to bog down Western militaries in Afghanistan, although it has offered little public evidence. Iran denies the charge.
The office of EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who offered the Iran incentives, also refused comment on the new anti-drug link.
"Fighting drug trafficking should not be politicized," said Ismail Ahmadi Moghaddam, the top anti-drug official in Iran. "When narcotics reach Europe, it is the people, not governments, that suffer."
Establishing security and delivering aid in southern Afghanistan would do much more to tackle the drug problem and stop the Taliban, said Anthony Cordesman, a security analyst for the U.S.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
The United States has spent $878 million since 2001 trying to wean Afghan farmers off growing opium even as production has skyrocketed. Washington also has praised Iran's anti-drug steps.
Iran has built a series of dikes and trenches along large portions of its roughly 560-mile border with Afghanistan to stop drug smugglers and has seized hundreds of tons of opium and heroin. Moghaddam said 900 tons of narcotics were seized last year, including what the U.N. estimated was 80 percent of total world opium seized.
The efforts have taken their toll: More than 3,500 Iranian law enforcement officers have died in clashes with heavily armed drug traffickers over the last two decades, the Iranian government says.
"There is overwhelming evidence of Iran's strong commitment to keep drugs leaving Afghanistan from reaching its citizens," said the U.S. State Department in its 2007 narcotics report on Iran.
Despite that praise, the United States does not donate money to the U.N. to support Iran's anti-drug efforts because of unilateral sanctions. The United Nations, however, has received contributions from several European nations, including Britain, France and Italy, to aid Iran's drug-fighting efforts.
But political disputes have made fundraising to help Iran difficult, Arbitrio said. His office has raised only $8.5 million since 2005 for a three-year program originally budgeted at $20 million to help Iran intercept narcotics smuggled from Afghanistan and other measures.
"Iran is a front-line country," said Costa of the United Nations.
United Nations nuclear inspectors were in northeast Syria on Monday, examining the site of an alleged nuclear facility that was bombed by Israel nine months ago. The visit is being held under secrecy, with foreign reporters barred from following the inspectors to Al Kibar in the middle of the Syrian desert.
"There has been very little information about what is going on," the CBC's Nahlah Ayed said, reporting from nearby Beirut."We are probably not going to hear any leaks about what they are finding," she added, noting that information will likely only be available when the UN International Atomic Energy Agency meets in Vienna in September.
She said sources have suggested that the inspectors might search water pipes and a water treatment plant in the area to determine if there is any nuclear material present or any sign that a nuclear facility was operating, or being built.
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, who has condemned the Israeli raid, has expressed low expectations about what inspectors will find."It is doubtful that we will find anything there now, assuming there was anything there in the first place," he said, according to Reuters. Nope. Nuthin to see here...
U.S. intelligence suggests that Syria had nearly completed a plutonium-producing reactor at the site, possibly with the help of North Korea. The U.S. said the facility was part of a covert nuclear weapons program. Syria has denied the allegations, saying the site was an ordinary military structure and did not violate the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Syrian officials have accused the United States of fabricating evidence in collusion with Israel.
Israeli warplanes bombed the site on Sept. 6 without warning. Only a month later did Israel and Syria admit the attack took place, and Syria has not shown any indication that it will retaliate.
After the bombing, Syria bulldozed the site, which will make the nuclear inspectors' jobs difficult, Ayed said. Adding to their troubles will be the restrictions Syria has placed on their movements, Ayed said. The inspectors had hoped Syria would allow them access to three other sites they are interested in visiting, but Syrian President Bashar al-Assad denied the request, saying the three sites are irrelevant to the investigation.
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (CBS) ¯ The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said Iran could create a nuclear weapon in six months.
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei spoke on Al-Arabiya television on June 20, discussing Iran's nuclear program, and the potential for the Middle Eastern country to produce a nuclear weapon. "If Iran wants to turn to the production of nuclear weapons, it must leave the NPT, expel the IAEA inspectors, and then it would need at least, considering the number of centrifuges and the quantity of uranium Iran has...It would need at least six months to one year," ElBaradei said."Therefore, Iran will not be able to reach the point where we would wake up one morning to an Iran with a nuclear weapon," he said. Huh?
His interviewer then asked "If Iran decides today to expel the IAEA from the country, it will need six months to produce [nuclear] weapons?" The IAEA chief answered, "It would need this period to produce a weapon, and to obtain highly-enriched uranium in sufficient quantities for a single nuclear weapon."
The ElBaradei interview was conducted one day after reports emerged of a large-scale military exercise by Israel. U.S. officials said they thought the Israeli exercises were meant to warn Iran of Israel's abilities to hit its nuclear sites.
ElBaradei also warned that he will resign as chief of the UN nuclear agency if Iran is attacked by any country. Awwwwwwww, no! Say it ain't so, Mo!
"I always think of resigning in the event of a military strike...If military force is used, I would conclude that there is no mechanism left for me to defend," he said. I will take my Nobel Peace Prize and go home.
"The reports this week of Israeli military maneuvers, which took place in early June, provoked the IAEA warning," said CBS News Foreign Affairs Pamela Falk, who is based at the U.N., "because atomic energy chief ElBaradei has been pleading with Iran to accept a new package of incentives before another round of sanctions would be imposed. The problem in the region is that, as time passes and the clock is ticking on Iran's uranium enrichment program, there is a fear that Israel will act, as it did in Syria last year, to attack at least one of Iran's nuclear facilities," said Falk, who was in Saudi Arabia earlier this week. "Israel is evidently the most threatened by the last IAEA report, which concluded that there are unanswered questions about Iran's ability to eventually develop nuclear weapons," said Falk, "so it is elBaradei himself who produced the report that is making Israel nervous." Who's elBaradei working for here?
Meanwhile, Iran is reiterating its decision to continue enriching uranium, calling Western pressure to suspend the work "illogical." When did Mr. Spock go to work for the Iranians?
The statement by a government spokesman came as Europe waits for Iran's formal answer to an international package of incentives designed to rein in its nuclear program. Iran's official IRNA news agency quoted Iranian spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham on Saturday as saying that his country will respond to the package at a convenient time. Probably after they get a bomb...
The package would give Tehran economic incentives, and the chance to develop alternate light-water reactors, in return for dropping the uranium enrichment. Nah, they're no fun...
#2
I wouldn't listen to this nincompoop any other time but when he quits the "kumbiyah" and fuzzy bunny talk about Iran and says they can make a nuke in six months, that tells me they can make one in probably six HOURS!!!
This little tidbit does not make for a restful nights sleep.
I swear that we are going to wake up one morning and one of our cities, here in the US, has disappeared because of this idiot's incompetence.
Posted by: James Carville ||
06/24/2008 11:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
ElBaradei also warned that he will resign as chief of the UN nuclear agency if Iran is attacked by any country.
What happens if Iran attacks somebody? Does he get a bonus?
#7
The IAEA, like the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, has become nothing more than a bureaucratic sinecure for otherwise unemployables, and should be dismantled. They both have failed miserably in their primary duties: the IAEA in preventing nuclear proliferation, the UNHCR in caring for and settling refugees. The sooner they're ended, the sooner we can quit paying for this foolishness.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
06/24/2008 12:42 Comments ||
Top||
#8
How does the ball of abolishing these apparatchiks get started down the Plink-O board of the UN?
Posted by: Grenter Protector of the Geats4975 ||
06/24/2008 16:25 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Grenter Protector of the Geats4975 - by refusing to fund the UN.
Iran said on Monday Israel could not threaten it, a few days after a U.S. newspaper reported that Israel's air force had apparently rehearsed a potential bombing raid of Iran's nuclear facilities. Then why are your turbans in such a knot?
Iran and Israel have engaged in a sharp exchange of words this month over suspicions Tehran is looking to develop nuclear weapons, helping to push global oil prices higher.
"They do not have the capacity to threaten the Islamic Republic of Iran," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini told a news conference.
He was asked about a New York Times report on Friday that quoted U.S. officials as saying Israeli jets conducted a long-range Mediterranean exercise this month that appeared to be a practice for a mission against Iran.
"They (Israel) have a number of domestic crises and they want to extrapolate it to cover others. Sometimes they come up with these empty slogans," Hosseini said in comments translated by Iran's English-language Press TV satellite station. Hmm. Seems they are projecting their own culture on another.
Iran's defense minister on Sunday accused Israel of "psychological warfare", but said Tehran would give a "devastating" response to any attack.
On Friday, the U.N. nuclear watchdog chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, said a military strike on Iran would turn the Middle East into a fireball and prompt Tehran to launch a crash course to build nuclear weapons. Somehow I think that if this were the case then Iraq would be more than willing to roll right into Tehran and set up shop after wiping out whatever portion of Iran's army put up any resistance along the way.
Western powers suspect Tehran is seeking to develop nuclear bombs and European Union president Slovenia said the 27-nation bloc was scheduled to agree a new round of sanctions against Iran on Monday over its refusal to stop uranium enrichment. Natter Natter Natter.
Israel, widely believed to have the Middle East's only atomic arsenal, has described Iran's nuclear program as a threat to its existence.
Earlier this month, Israeli Transport Minister Shaul Mofaz told an Israeli newspaper an attack on Iran looked "unavoidable" given the apparent failure of United Nations sanctions to deny Tehran technology with bomb-making potential. I wonder if Israel has those deep-penetrating mini-nukes that they have been working on operational yet.
Tehran, which does not recognize Israel and regularly predicts its demise, says its nuclear work is a peaceful drive to wipe Israel off the map generate electricity.
Israel bombed an Iraqi reactor in 1981 and an Israeli air raid on Syria last September razed what the United States said was a nascent nuclear reactor built with North Korean help. Syria denied having any such facility.
But many analysts say Iran's nuclear sites are too numerous, distant and fortified for Israel to take on alone. Who says they are? They might have all sorts of supernatural help. The likes of which only Goblins and Spirits might be able to provide.
Iran has threatened to retaliate if it is attacked. Its Shahab-3 missile, with a range of 2,000 km (1,250 miles), is capable of hitting Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf, Iranian officials say.
#3
I wonder if Iran is in that weird Muslim mindset that is so land-centric that nothing else matters.
That is, "You are unable to *occupy* our lands, therefore you do not threaten us!"
Muslims have really taken this idea to extremes before, not caring if they are slaughtered, their cities destroyed, and nothing left but a few rural peasants scraping the soil to survive. For them, this is a win, because the hated infidels are not occupying "Muslim" lands.
It is truly insane. However, as such, it might be the key to get them to stop enriching uranium.
That is, if the US threatened to take away some of their lands and give them to non-Muslims, it might throw the Iranians into a frantic panic.
And though this obviously isn't practical, maybe the threat alone would freak them out enough to get them back to the bargaining table.
It would be worth it for the US government to try some tentative suggestions along these lines, to see if that is their psychological weak point.
I know it sounds utterly whack, but if Iranians are as land obsessed as other Muslims, it might just work.
#4
What would totally get the Iranian's panties in a knot would be if we were to say we would take their land and grant the inhabitants religious freedom.
Why their heads would implode from the mere suggestion.
(Xinhua) -- French President Nicolas Sarkozy vowed during a special session of the Knesset (parliament) on Monday that his country would always stand by Israel against those who call for its destruction. 'A nuclear Iran is unacceptable. Anyone trying to destroy Israel will find France blocking the way,' Sarkozy said in his address to the Israeli lawmakers, the first by a French president since Francois Mitterrand in 1982. 'Israel must know it is not alone in the battle against Iran's nuclear ambitions,' he added.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#2
Breaking news on FOX this am: A shot fired during Sarkozy's departure caused a scare, as security surrounded Olmert and the Sarkozy's were hustled into the plane. An Israeli soldier chose the event to publicly shoot himself, causing two female soldiers witnessing it to faint. Strange, eh?
Regarding the Israel-Palestinian conflict, Sarkozy stressed that recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of both Israel and a Palestinian state was a condition for peace.
The Palestinians, he said, 'have the right to a viable state of their own,' noting that such a state would 'ensure Israel's security.'
He also called on Israel to end its settlement activity in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, saying there would be 'no peace without a solution to the problem of the Palestinian refugees,' a sticking point in negotiations between the two sides. 'There will be no peace if the Palestinians do not fight terrorism,' Sarkozy said. 'Each side has to make an effort. Peace is not possible if the Palestinians cannot move about freely.'
Sarkozy and his wife Carla Bruni were given a festive reception in their honor at the Knesset. Earlier Monday, the French presidential couple visited the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum in Jerusalem.
Sarkozy arrived at Ben-Gurion International Airport Sunday afternoon for a three-day visit in the region. The trip is Sarkozy's first to Israel and the Palestinian territories since he became president in May 2007.
During a meeting with Israeli President Shimon Peres on Sunday, Sarkozy criticized the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and the construction in East Jerusalem. 'You have made some bad decisions, like the expansion of settlements and east Jerusalem, where the construction is not good for Israel,' said Sarkozy at Peres' residence in Jerusalem. 'The best and only guarantee for the state of Israel is an independent, democratic Palestinian state at its side,' he added.
Peres responded 'there are no disagreements between us on the issue of the Palestinian state and the settlements. However, we evacuated many settlements in the Gaza Strip and the unfortunate result is Hamas firing at civilians, firing missiles at them.'
The French president is scheduled to meet with Israeli opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu and will also talk with Palestinian National Authority (PNA) President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank city of Bethlehem.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Palestinian Authority
British lawmakers formally removed the People's Mujahedeen of Iran from the country's list of banned terror groups on Monday, after a seven-year campaign by Iranian opposition group.
The decision will give it more freedom to organize and raise money in Britain.
The People's Mujahedeen of Iran, or PMOI, is considered a terrorist organization in the United States and European Union, and it was banned in Britain in 2001.
Although the group participated in Iran's Islamic Revolution, it later became opposed to the clerical government. Members of the group moved to Iraq in the early 1980s and fought Iran's Islamic rulers from there until the United States invaded in 2003. American troops have since disarmed thousands of PMOI members.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yeah the PMOI may have conducted several assassinations of U.S. military personnel and civilians and actively supported the US embassy takeover and hostage ordeal in Iran but when you think about it thats soooo 1970s.
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - European Union nations have approved new sanctions against Iran, including an assets freeze of the country's biggest bank. EU officials say Iran's Bank Melli has been blacklisted by the decision, which was formally adopted without debate at EU talks in Luxembourg on Monday.
Western officials have accused Bank Melli of providing services to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. The United States placed the bank on its blacklist last year. The sanctions also include a travel ban on high-level experts dealing with Iran's nuclear program.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/24/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
US officials on Tuesday cracked-down on the violent MS-13 gang, arresting 26 people for a range of crimes committed in three US states and the Central American nation of El Salvador.
"Early this morning, federal, state, and local law enforcement officials here in North Carolina began executing arrest warrants against 26 alleged members of the gang La Mara Salvatrucha, also known as MS-13," US Attorney General Michael Mukasey said.
The defendants face a variety of charges stemming from crimes committed between 2003 and June 2008 including four murders, narcotics distribution, robberies, illegal firearms possession, extortion, assault, intimidating witnesses and obstruction of justice, the Department of Justice said in a statement. Ah, the rich rewards of multiculturalism.
The arrests followed the unsealing of a 55-count indictment from a federal grand jury in Charlotte, he said.
A gang leader directed many of the activities from his prison cell in El Salvador, where he received money wired by gang members, the statement said.
"Criminal gangs such as Democrats and Rinos MS-13 increasingly recognize no borders, which means that international cooperation is more important today than it ever was before," Mukasey said, thanking the government of El Salvador for its role in the bust.
"Thankfully, that collaboration is on full display in our relationship with the government of El Salvador," he said. The problem we have is with the government of the United States.
MS-13 is an extremely violent gang that originated in El Salvador and operates there and in Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico and throughout the United States, Mukasey said.
"Today's indictment is merely the latest sign of the gang's reach, and it shows the breadth and seriousness of the crimes that MS-13 members are alleged to have committed," he said.
Many of the defendants were in the United States illegally, and two were additionally charged with re-entering the country unlawfully after having been deported, the DOJ statement said. How can this be?
#2
Summary execution for these thugs would make sure they never illegally reentered the U.S.
Posted by: Thaimble Scourge of the Pixies4707 ||
06/24/2008 18:11 Comments ||
Top||
#3
US officials on Tuesday cracked-down on the violent MS-13 gang, arresting 26 people for a range of crimes committed in three US states and the Central American nation of El Salvador.
File under: Doing the jobs Americans won't.
26 huh. So that was last Wednesday's and Thursday's recruiting tally?
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.
Afghan government on Monday deported 12 Pakistanis and handed them over to Pakistani authorities at Torkham border. The deportees belong to settled areas of NWFP. They were arrested on allegations of carrying illegal travel documents like visas and passports. 
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday reserved its verdict on the bail plea of former Lal Masjid cleric Maulana Abdul Aziz in a criminal case regarding his alleged involvement in the occupation of the Childrens Library by female students of the mosques madrassa Jamia Hafsa. 
John Bolton, the former American ambassador to the United Nations, has predicted that Israel could attack Iran after the November presidential election but before George W Bush's successor is sworn in. 
On Friday, the U.N. nuclear watchdog chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, said a military strike on Iran would turn the Middle East into a fireball and prompt Tehran to launch a crash course to build nuclear weapons.
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - European Union nations have approved new sanctions against Iran, including an assets freeze of the country's biggest bank. EU officials say Iran's Bank Melli has been blacklisted by the decision, which was formally adopted without debate at EU talks in Luxembourg on Monday.
US officials on Tuesday cracked-down on the violent MS-13 gang, arresting 26 people for a range of crimes committed in three US states and the Central American nation of El Salvador.
