Posted by: ed ||
04/30/2006 08:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Suryanarayan's son
Posted by: john ||
04/30/2006 10:26 Comments ||
Top||
#2
So much for negotiating. There is only one way to deal with this kind of mindset. The sooner people come to that conclusion, the sooner we can start winning this thing.
The Sudanese Government says it is ready to sign a deal brokered by the African Union (AU) to bring speedy peace to the war-torn Darfur region despite reservations over some of its contents. But on the eve of the AU's deadline for an agreement, the divided Darfur rebel movements have voiced reticence about the peace accord, which they are negotiating at talks in Nigeria.
"The Government is prepared to sign the (AU) document even with our reservations," spokesman Abdulahman Zuma said. "Our reservations are important but they are not as important as to spoil the peace process. The top priority for the government of Sudan is peace and stability. We also want the AU to claim victory over this crisis. We do not want to let the AU down and that is why we have given a lot of concessions in all aspects of this peace process. We appeal to all parties to exert the utmost degree of concession and to show that we are capable of resolving the reservations we have about the AU document."
Posted by: Fred ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
You don't suppose they mistrust the government's desire to abide by agreement?
In a project unknown in Islam, Morocco has just graduated its first team of women preachers to be deployed as a vanguard in the kingdom's fight against any slide toward Islamic extremism.
"This is a rare experiment in the Muslim world," proudly stated Mohamed Mahfoud, director of the center attached to the Islamic affairs ministry that trained this first class of 50 women.
Ministry spokesman Hamid Rono said that it was the "first [of its kind] in the Islamic world".
This pioneer group of Morchidat, or guides, who finished a 12-month course in early April, were trained to "accompany and orient" Muslim faithful, notably in prisons, hospitals and schools, said Mahfoud.
They will earn a salary of 5,000 dirhams ($560) per month.
Short and plump, a scarf knotted around her head to cover her hair in line with religious custom, a smiling Smira Marzouk, in her 30s like most of the others, exclaims how "proud" she is to be part of this first group.
She sees their mission as one to "fill in the gaps that prevent a solid framework for religion".
"We are going to teach a tolerant Islam by focusing on the underprivileged classes," she added. They will notably work with women and children in poor ghettoes seen as fertile ground for extremist recruiters.
The idea of the Morchidat, spearheaded by King Mohammed VI and the government, took off after Islamic extremist attacks in the Moroccan economic capital Casablanca on May 16, 2003, claimed 45 lives - including the 12 bombers - and left dozens of others wounded.
The King - who is a descendant of Islam's founder, the Prophet Mohammed, and enjoys wide powers - had already started reshaping religious structures to rein in any extremist drift in his North African country, which borders Algeria where violence between government forces and armed Islamic extremists has caused more than 150,000 deaths since 1992.
But the synchronized suicide bomb attacks that hit Jewish and foreign targets gave new urgency to the initiative.
More than 2,000 people were arrested in vast police sweeps after the May bombings as the king vowed that the attacks would be the last to rock Morocco. Investigators concluded that those behind the incident had indeed sought recruits in the teeming slums around Casablanca, Morocco's biggest city.
Marzouk, a young married woman with a diploma in Arab literature who said that she knows the Koran by heart, was quick to specify that she is "not going to take the place of an imam".
"The imamate in Islam is restricted solely to men who are apt at leading prayers, notably those on Friday," the Islamic holy day, she said.
"The Morchidat will be in charge of leading religious discussions, give courses in Islam, give moral support to people in difficulty and guide the faithful toward a tolerant Islam," she added.
Another graduate, Leila Fares, a lively young woman who holds a degree in Islamic studies, said that she saw the Morchidat's role as promoting "the true face of Islam".
"We will help attenuate any drift toward Islamic extremism," she said, stressing that "an overall approach is needed to dealing with radical Islam".
During the yearlong course, the curriculum ranged from Islamic studies to psychology, sociology, computer skills, economy, law and business management.
"Sports was the only subject dropped from the women preachers' training because the schedule was just too tight," regretted Mahfoud, who hopes to include it for the second batch of Morchidat trainees, whose applications are now being accepted.
For the Islamic affairs minister, Ahmed Taoufiq, the Morchidat will also "instruct women on their basis religious duties".
He said that religious radicalism was not part of Morocco's culture "but you can never prevent evil one hundred percent".
Morocco's Islamic fundamentalists are divided over the initiative.
For one, Islamist deputy Mustapha Ramid with the Islamist Justice and Development party (PJD), the main opposition group with 43 seats in the 325-member parliament, the Morchidat is a "positive" development.
"I see nothing more to say about this initiative because in Islam, men and women are equal," he said, pointing to Egypt that has "eminent women scholars of Islam".
But the head of the youth group in Morocco's most radical Islamic fundamentalist association, Al Adl Wal Ihssane (Justice and Welfare), forecast that it would have no effect on the ground.
"The power behind this initiative is the same as the one that commits acts contrary to Islam, notably degrading moral values," said Hassan Bennajeh, whose group is part of an Islamist movement that preaches non-violence and is unrecognized by authorities but still influential.
"This initiative, then, will only have a limited impact on the population," said Bennajeh.
A court Friday postponed the trial of 19 Moroccans who face charges of involvement in an al-Qaida-linked terrorist group that is blamed for the 2003 attacks in Casablanca that killed 45 people, including 12 suicide bombers.
Hearings were not due to start again until June 16 to give some defendants time for medical exams, court officials said. Proceedings originally opened in September.
Prosecutors say the men formed an armed cell of Salafiya Jihadiya, a North African terrorist group that seeks to overthrow Morocco's monarchy and replace it with Islamic rule.
The 19 include six who were returned to Morocco recently by authorities in Algeria, which they entered secretly and where they are alleged to have undergone terrorist training with Algeria's GSPC, or Salafist Group for Call and Combat.
The Moroccan investigation into those six uncovered the existence of a large Salafiya Jihadiya cell in Sale, a city near Rabat widely reputed to be a center of militant Islam. The trial is due to take place in Sale.
Three other bands of alleged Islamic terrorists have been apprehended in the past three months, a Justice Ministry official said.
Morocco has stepped up its counterterrorism measures following the five near-simultaneous terrorist attacks in Casablanca.
Salafiya Jihadiya is believed to be a general name or description of various militant groups, including the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 02:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said, 'Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand
Half-sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings,
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.'
Yasser Arafat-type stable?
Ozymandias stable.
Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak vowed to the nation yesterday that he would never permit anyone to infringe the red line of Egypt's security and stability and said Egypt will always remain a stable and safe country for all Egyptians. Speaking after a week for several bombings in two Egyptian areas, he said "I clearly say that Egypt's security and stability represent a red line that I will not permit anyone to ever transgress." Mubarak added in an address on the occasion of May Day that "I have sworn before God and the nation to protect Egypt's national security and the security of it citizens."
"We will win our battle against terror, we will combat it and will root it out, we will deal very firmly -through the power of the law - with extremism, he said. "Egypt will always remain a stable and secure nation for al Egyptians," he said. Egypt is facing many challenges and dangers that threaten national and regional security, he said, citing the forces of blind terror, extremism and fanaticism.
These forces are trying to drive a wedge between Muslims and Christians in Egypt and tear apart Egyptian society, he said. The dissemination of alien ideas among the country's youth. Such ideas that have nothing to do with the tolerance of religion they only aim at igniting the fire of strife and shaking the country's stability, he added. Stability is the nations' mutual goal, it is a goal the rises above all forms of competition, narrow partisan interest or any differences within the society, he said. "We live in a turbulent area, rife with crises facing m any challenges," the president added.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Must have made a trip to mexico to try their new drugs. How else could you seee stability
A spectacular prison escape by 23 suspected Al Qaeda militants three months ago has raised questions about Yemens ability to contain militancy and cast a chill over US-Yemen relations, analysts say.
The detainees, 15 of whom are still on the run, escaped on February 3 through a 44-metre tunnel dug between their prison cell and a nearby mosque.
The dramatic escape came as a shock, particularly when officials revealed that the prisoners had dug the long but narrow crawl space with random tools and succeeded in furrowing for three months without being caught.
This was a real blow, a real setback to what had been a very successful and productive partnership (between the two governments) against terrorism in Yemen, US ambassador Thomas C Krajeski told AFP.
Two major Al Qaeda linked figures were among the escapees, and have still not been found.
One was Jamal Ahmed al-Badawi, who was serving a 10-year jail sentence for the deadly 2000 bombing of the destroyer USS Cole in which 17 US sailors were killed.
The other was Fawaz Yahya al-Rabihi, who was implicated in a similar attack two years later against the French oil tanker Limburg, in which one Bulgarian crew member was killed.
Diplomats say the escape heightened tensions between the United States and Yemen, whose relations were already strained during a November visit to Washington by President Ali Abdullah Saleh over Yemens failure to press reforms.
Washington criticised Sanaa for failing to take better precautions against escape, with Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld describing it as a shame.
The jailbreak also irritated neighbouring Saudi Arabia, which had arrested several of the alleged militants and handed them over to Yemens political security service detention facility.
At least eight escapees have since been re-arrested.
However, one diplomat in Sanaa who spoke on condition of anonymity blamed negligence, greed and ineptness on the part of the prison authorities, and cited corruption within the prison system for aiding the escape.
Its reasonable to think there was some inside and outside help, he said.
It cast considerable concern and doubt about the ability of the government to hold detainees.
An informed Yemeni source said that several people have been detained in connection with the affair and will be brought to justice, but gave few details.
Yemens president told the pan-Arab Al-Hayat newspaper in a late-February interview published about the re-arrests of several fugitives that contacts were underway with the others, a comment that raised more questions than it answered.
Another Western diplomat said that authorities are clearly in contact with the families of the escapees in order to convince relatives who know the mens whereabouts to turn them in to the authorities.
Despite the jailbreak, Yemenis have proven they have no leniency when it comes to Al Qaeda, he said on condition of anonymity.
In the leadership of the regime, there is no longer any ambiguity, the diplomat added, indicating that there had been some vagueness over Yemens position regarding Al Qaeda militants in the past.
A growing number of alleged Al Qaeda militants have been brought before Sanaa courts in recent months, in a sign that the government is cracking down on terror and doing its utmost to be a good partner to Washington in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.
If you want to have international assistance, you have to play the good guy, said another Western diplomat who asked that his name not be printed.
However the large numbers of detainees parading through the courts also shows the extent of the problem, the diplomat noted.
A Saudi man accused of being the local Al Qaeda branchs number two was sentenced to death on April 18, and officials say around 60 suspected Al Qaeda members accused of terrorist acts will soon to have their day in court.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 01:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Russian prosecutors have detailed their case against a former nuclear energy minister who was extradited to Russia last year from Switzerland, despite a rival U.S extradition request, accusing him and others of defrauding the state of $110 million, the Associated Press reported.
Yevgeny Adamov has been charged with fraud and abuse of power, which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years. No date has been set for his trial. Adamov was arrested May 2, 2005, on a U.S. warrant in the Swiss capital, Bern. U.S. justice officials accused him of diverting up to $9 million intended to improve Russian nuclear security into private projects. He faces up to 60 years in prison on charges of conspiracy to transfer stolen money and securities, conspiracy to defraud the U.S., money laundering and tax evasion.
But Russia filed its own extradition request and said the former minister should face trial here a move observers say was motivated by fears of Russian nuclear secrets falling into U.S hands. Adamov was dismissed from his post in March 2001 after three years in the post. Adamov was flown to the Russian capital on Dec. 30 after a Swiss court ruled that he should be extradited to Russia and has been held in custody since in a Moscow jail.
The Prosecutor-Generals office said in a statement that the investigation into Adamov was complete and it had forwarded the case materials to his defense lawyers for them to study ahead of the trial. The prosecutors statement said that Chernov was on an international wanted list. In the investigators view, these people inflicted losses of $110 million on the Russian budget, enterprises and organizations, it said.
Moscows efforts to prevent Adamovs extradition to the U.S. followed expressions of concern in Russia that the ex-minister has access to state secrets. Adamov, 66, worked on sales of nuclear technology to Iran during his tenure as minister.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
A mayor of a small Colorado town, and the director of the town's funeral home, was sent the savings of a dead Marine by accident. He refused to give this money back to his family even after the courts have ordered him to.
#1
A mayor of a small Colorado town, and the director of the town's funeral home...
I think they flunked the Dale Carnegie course. I hope the good townsfolk ride these two out of town on a rail, wearing tar and feathers, and whatever other archaic humiliation rituals they can come up with.
This is just the tip of the proverbial iceburg. This clown sounds like he is in money trouble and up to now has been playing fast and loose with the accounts he's in charge of. As disgusting as the high profile ripping off a dead Marine is, it is the totality of his deeds that will do the Mayor in. I'll bet he's in deep with the town accounts.
Tens of thousands of anti-war protesters have flooded New York streets to demand an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. About 300,000 people marched through Manhattan on Saturday and stretched for about 10 blocks as they headed down Broadway. The event was organised by the group United for Peace and Justice. Cindy Sheehan, a vociferous critic of the war whose 24-year-old soldier son also died in Iraq, joined the march, as did actress Susan Sarandon and the Reverend Jesse Jackson.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If they magically got their demands and there was an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, there would still be no peace! They know it too.
Posted by: ed ||
04/30/2006 9:19 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Well, a bunch of people wanted to be there, but they were busy shaving their dogs, and stocking up for tomorrow's boycott, and their backs hurt, and their was no direct public transportation there (they are SO intimidated when they have to transfer), etc.
Their intentions were good, though, so they should count in the final total even though they weren't there, right?
The Bush administration on Friday said Canada has become a "safe haven" for Islamic terrorists who exploit lax immigration laws and weak counterterrorism enforcement to raise money and plan attacks.
In its annual Country Report on Terrorism, the State Department expressed growing concern about the presence of "numerous" terror plotters in the country, and said political fallout from the Maher Arar case continues to hamper information-sharing between Canadian and U.S. intelligence agencies.
"Terrorists have capitalized on liberal Canadian immigration and asylum policies to enjoy safe haven, raise funds, arrange logistical support and plan terrorist attacks," the State Department said.
The U.S. noted "only one person" has been arrested under anti-terrorism legislation passed in Canada after terrorist attacks in the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001.
A spokeswoman for Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day said Canadian officials were still reviewing the U.S. report and would not comment on its specifics.
"What I can tell you is that Canada's new government believes in maintaining a vigorous counter-intelligence program to safeguard our nation's security," said Day's communications director Melisa Leclerc.
"This government does not tolerate inappropriate activities and will restore our reputation as a leader and dependable partner in defending freedom and democracy in the world."
The State Department's harsh language on Canada contrasted with its statements in the report of Iraq, which it said was "not currently a terrorist safe haven" despite the continued attacks carried out by al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi and other groups in the country.
While praising Canada for playing "an important counterterrorism leadership role worldwide" -- specifically through its military presence in Afghanistan -- the State Department said the Arar case had cast a chill over relations between the countries' intelligence agencies.
Arar, an Ottawa engineer and Canadian citizen, was detained by U.S. authorities in September 2002 during a stopover in New York on a flight from Tunisia to Canada.
Suspected of terrorism ties, he was sent to Syria under a policy called "extraordinary rendition." A federal inquiry into Arar's detention found he had been tortured while in Syrian custody.
The U.S. says the RCMP gave them information suggesting Arar was a security risk. The ensuing controversy led to restrictions on intelligence sharing that still hamper the "free flow" of information about terror suspects, the U.S. said.
"The principal threat to the close U.S.-Canadian co-operative relationship remains the fallout from the Arar case," the report states.
"The Arar case underscores a greater concern for the United States: the presence in Canada of numerous suspected terrorists and terror supporters."
Last week, the Federal Bureau of Investigation accused two Muslim youths from Georgia of traveling to Toronto in 2005 to plot attacks against American military bases and oil refineries. The arrests were part of an ongoing FBI investigation into Islamic terror cells in Canada, the agency said.
The State Department cited the presence of five other terror suspects -- Mohamed Harkat, Mohamed Mahjoub, Mahmoud Jaballah and Hassan Almrei and Adil Charkaoui -- as further evidence of an ongoing Canadian problem with Islamic extremists.
Harkat, Mahjoub, Jaballah and Almrei are being held on security certificates in the Kingston Immigration Holding Centre, dubbed "Guantanamo North" by human-rights activists. Charkaoui is free on bail.
Harkat, Charkaoui and Almrei -- who allegedly have ties to al-Qaeda -- are challenging the government's use of the security certificates to indefinitely hold terror suspects.
The Bush administration report called Iran the world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism, saying the country's Ministry of Intelligence and Security has had direct involvement in the planning and support of terrorist attacks.
While the U.S. said it has had substantial success disrupting the financing and leadership network of al-Qaeda, the group remains the country's single greatest threat, the report said.
"Our collective international efforts have harmed al-Qaeda. Its core leadership no longer has effective global command and control of its networks," said State Department special co-ordinator for counterterrorism Henry Crumpton.
But remaining at-large and through occasional public statements, al-Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri "symbolize resistance to the international community, demonstrate they retain the capability to influence events and inspire actual and potential terrorists," Crumpton said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 01:29 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Somebody at State doesn't like that there's now a Conservative government up north?
THE USUAL WAY OF ANALYZING the collapse in polls of public approval of the Bush administration is to make a list of all the things the analyst believes are going wrong and attribute the decline to those things. The polls provide plausibility for this method, because the president's performance rating has declined greatly on each of the individual issues that voters are asked about.
But the very universality of these declines should make us wary. In 2002, the U.S. economy was recovering sluggishly from the 2001 recession, yet Bush enjoyed solid public approval of his handling of the economy. Today, the economy has enjoyed three years of much faster growth without inflation--yet Bush's performance rating on handling the economy has collapsed just as precipitously as it has on other issues.
The truth is that in wartime, public perception of a president's handling of the war is more important politically than everything else combined. This was the case in 2002 as it is in 2006. The big difference between these two years, politically speaking, has nothing to do with today's much stronger economy. In 2002 the public rated Bush very favorably on the war on terrorism; today its verdict on him as a war leader is far lower and continuing to decline. And to voters in wartime, a president's handling of the war is not simply the most important of several issues. Fairly or unfairly, it shapes their opinion of him on every other issue as well.
The debate on the war has often taken the form of a debate on whether our decision to seek regime change in Iraq is a necessary, integral part of the larger war on terrorism, or a diversion from it, as many Democrats have argued. It seems likely that Bush has won this debate, but winning or losing this debate has lost its political salience.
That is because the central fact of today's political landscape is that Iraq is seen by voters as going badly--so badly that it is affecting the rest of the war on terrorism. Iran has become more and more aggressive in its nuclear ambitions; there is an upsurge of Taliban activity in Afghanistan; Syria has reverted to terrorism and assassinations in Lebanon; democracy in the Arab world is meeting new resistance in Egypt and elsewhere--pick your own bad-news list. To voters who still believe Iraq is a diversion from the larger war, these non-Iraq developments represent vindication. If Bush hadn't invaded Iraq, they argue, we would have more resources to fight all the other battles.
Far more important is the reaction of voters who always agreed with Bush about the strategic centrality of Iraq, or have come to believe in its centrality in the years since the invasion. The key premise Bush and all these voters share is that success or failure in Iraq will affect success or failure in a war of global reach. To increasing numbers of these voters, such disturbing events as the escalating challenge from Tehran are a sign that U.S. frustration in Iraq is beginning to mean what Bush always said it would mean: marked progress, perhaps even victory, for Islamist radicals in the war as a whole.
Is Iraq going as badly as voters believe it is? There is much evidence that it is not. But this is another argument of declining political relevance. The reason lies in the nature of asymmetric warfare. By definition, the weaker side in an asymmetric war cannot prevail militarily. Its central objective is to convince the political decision-makers of the superior side that continuing the war is an exercise in futility. That is why the Communists' Tet offensive of early 1968 could be, at one and the same time, militarily disastrous and politically decisive in inducing the United States to terminate its involvement in the Vietnam war.
Our enemies in Iraq, particularly Abu Musab al Zarqawi, clearly have studied Tet and learned well. At each stage of the three-year conflict in Iraq, Zarqawi has chosen tactics of high psychological impact on America's home front over conventional military success in Iraq. Each of a series of tactics--the beheading of western hostages, suicide bombings in civilian areas, roadside bombs aimed at American soldiers, and (most recently) terror attacks on Shiite mosques designed to provoke a wave of ethnic cleansing--have been well designed to make American voters and political elites feel an overwhelming sense of futility.
The explicit connection to Tet in the thinking of the enemy was recently underlined by the discovery by allied forces of a plan to attack and occupy the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. In 1968, one of the most potent blows of the war was struck by the Vietcong when it invaded and briefly occupied part of our embassy grounds in Saigon--a move that had absolutely no military significance yet was reported around the world as a devastating symbol of American failure.
If our view is right, nothing the administration does on the economy, health care, immigration, or any other non-war issue will affect the president's overall performance rating very much. Only a change in public perception of the administration's handling of the war on terrorism is capable of doing that.
Does that imply that only a sharp reduction of enemy activity in Iraq could improve the public's rating of Bush's handling of the war? If so, it is very bad news. Given the track record of Zarqawi's success in Tet-style asymmetric warfare, there's a very good chance he and his friends could come up with new psy-war tactics to demoralize American voters and political elites. If the past is prologue, such tactics could easily be executed even at times when American and Iraqi government forces were achieving great progress in pure military terms, or even in the midst of an American-Iraqi push to successfully counter the earlier Tet-style tactics. Asymmetric warfare, after all, does not require armed strength or military success on the part of the weaker power, but only an ability to keep undermining the political will of the stronger power.
An American military withdrawal from Iraq, whether swift or gradual, announced or tacit, would be even less likely to improve the public's rating of Bush as a war president.
If a withdrawal came in the wake of a visible movement toward victory in Iraq, it would of course be welcomed. But that scenario implies fulfillment of the goal of swift, near-term movement toward victory in Iraq, which by the nature of asymmetric warfare, and the enemy's mastery of it, is highly unlikely.
A U.S. withdrawal in the absence of visible progress, on the other hand, would be devastating to Bush. For voters who bought Bush's argument on the centrality of Iraq in the larger context of the world war on terrorism, it would be something very close to an admission of global failure. And for voters who always thought Iraq was a diversion or sideshow, it would be taken as ratification of their long-held view that Bush spilled our blood and treasure in Iraq for nothing.
Looking only at Iraq, and its intimate relationship to the decline of voter confidence in Bush's handling of the presidency as a whole, the picture is bleak and unlikely to change very much in the foreseeable future.
But this view is claustrophobic, because it leaves out Bush's handling of the rest of the war on terrorism. This is the one issue where Bush's ratings have remained respectable. And it is the one area with considerable upside potential for a change in voters' overall view of Bush.
Why? Because most voters now believe this is a world war. This includes many if not most voters who disagreed with the president's decision to invade Iraq.
Yes, visible progress toward achieving democracy in Iraq would be a positive force all over the Arab and Islamic world. Bush is right about that, and that is why success in Iraq is still worth sacrificing for. But the nature of a world war, which this is, implies that the relationship goes both ways--indeed, in all directions. That is, positive developments in any one sector of the battlefield are capable of reverberating back through all the others.
THE TRUTH IS, even as the struggle in Iraq has intensified over the past three years, other fronts in the world war have become far more active than they were earlier. Think of the suicide bombings in Madrid and London. Think of the expulsion of the Syrian Army from Lebanon. Think of the cartoon crisis, which originated in Denmark and caused riots and mass killings far and wide--some of the worst of which came in Nigeria.
Think, above all, of the Islamist regime in Iran. A regime that threatens repeatedly to annihilate Israel, that threatens to make its nuclear program completely secret, that threatens to share nuclear technology with the genocidal regime in Sudan and (at least by implication) with nongovernmental terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. This, don't forget, is the same regime whose willingness to stonewall in negotiations coincided with the political demise of one American president (Jimmy Carter) and came quite close to bringing down another (Ronald Reagan).
President Bush has never ruled out the use of military force against this toxic regime. But all high officials on his second-term foreign-policy team--including his secretary of state, secretary of defense, national security adviser, and director of intelligence--act not just as if this is not under active consideration, but as if the very idea were absurd. They shrug off the simple reality, abundantly plain to the most casual American voter, that Iran is moving ahead with obtaining and (in the regime's own stated scenarios) disseminating nuclear weapons. They act as if our utter failure to deter Iran is less important than the fact that we are not being attacked as warmongers by France and Germany.
Their body language says that Iraq has tied our hands everywhere else. If that is true, then engaging in Iraq has in fact handcuffed the United States in a world war, and the Bush administration will not make a comeback in public opinion.
But if, as we believe, Bush and the majority of American voters are right--in their belief that Iraq is one front, important but not all-encompassing, of a much wider war--then a failure to act elsewhere will also deny the administration a comeback, because most Americans believe that acting elsewhere is possible, and may in certain grave circumstances be required.
The president's decision on who is right--those who would handcuff him because of Iraq, or those who believe a world war sometimes requires grave, unpleasant decisions on more than one front--will almost certainly determine the future of his presidency in the eyes of the American electorate as a whole.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 02:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The country is divided across party lines and the political spectrum. The left HATES Bush and blames him for everything that goes wrong INCLUDING meterological phenomenom. Yet he and the GOP keep ignoring the base and 'reaching out' to the left. THAT is the cause of his problems and the GOP's problems.
The base was out in force in 2004. By 2006, many of what should be his core supporters are wondering why Bush and/or the GOP are supporting:
1) Spending like drunken Democrats.
2) Open borders
3) Amnesty (again) for illegals
4) Unqualified pals for the supreme court
5) Outsourcing to India
6) Endless rounds of 'diplomacy' with the mad mullahs of Iran
7) Failure to drill for new oil - especially in ANWR. But also off the US coasts.
8) Failure to actively confront attacks by the Democrats / Left and the MSM.
(and I'm sure I left out a few issues)
So, the media can spin the polls (and they WILL), but the bottom line is this - alienating much of your political base is a very poor political strategy.
#2
1. Gas price seems to have the strongest correlation with Bush (un)popularity polls. Not economy, not Iraq, not immigration.
2. Anti-war types fail to understand one very basic principle:
War happens when opponents EACH think they can win.
Peace happens when ONE opponent knows it would lose.
As the saying goes: 'Peace Through Superior Firepower'
#3
DMFD, you nailed it. I can't even begin to express my disgust with the GOP, which is only tempered by my complete contempt of the dims.
I'm searching for a 3rd party alternative, and the Constitution party seems to be a viable alternative. I don't subscribe to their stance on foreign policy however, it's rather isolationist which to me isn't realistic in today's world. Frankly seeing that I'm more on board with the rest of their platform than with what the GOP has been up to for the past however long - I'm thinking aboout making the leap. http://www.theamericanview.com/
#5
JerseyMike, make that leap and enjoy living under a Dhimmicrat regime that will sell state secrets to Chine as the first Clintonista regime did. I'm not thrilled to death with W and DMFD hit some of my buttons, but this is no time to go wobbly.
#6
The US has a first past the post election system. Any third party only splits the votes and ensures the more cohesive party wins (e.g. 1992 with Clinton 43%, Bush 41%, and Perot 16%). The ideological battle needs to be fought in the primaries when candidates and platforms are selected.
Posted by: ed ||
04/30/2006 9:26 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Whoops. It is: 1992 with Clinton 43%, Bush 37.4%, and Perot 18.9%
Should have read the Googled article instead of just the headline.
Posted by: ed ||
04/30/2006 9:37 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I also agree DMFB and Jersey. The Dems and the Repubs have little to no difference on domestic issues.
#11
Despite my loathing for current GOP policies - the '06 election comes down to ONE issue. Which party is most likely to whack the mad mullahs in the next year or so. Iran MUST NOT be allowed to get nukes. The UN isn't going to do Jack. The Euros are a pathetic joke. The only hope is the GOP - and I got to admit - I've got a real quesy feeling about 'em.
One of the nation's foremost al Qaeda experts abruptly quit his new NYPD post because Commissioner Ray Kelly's top anti-terror intelligence czar launched into a foulmouthed tirade against the FBI - where the lawman had spent his career, The Post has learned.
The stunning incident involving renowned former FBI agent Daniel Coleman - considered the bureau's pre-eminent authority on Osama bin Laden - came just days before he was scheduled to formally start working at the NYPD.
Sources said Coleman was attending a morning briefing session at Police Headquarters at the invitation of Deputy Commissioner of Intelligence David Cohen and Deputy Commissioner of Counter-Terrorism Michael Sheehan, the two honchos who had lured him to join the NYPD's expanding global anti-terror empire.
Coleman, a 32-year FBI veteran known at the bureau as "The Professor," took his seat at the conference table along with Cohen, Sheehan and several others, including a current official of the CIA, where Cohen had worked for three decades.
The meeting barely started, sources say, when Cohen and Sheehan started to discuss the NYPD's anti-terror initiatives and plans.
The discussion prompted Coleman to innocently ask Cohen whether he had spoken with the department's detectives on the FBI-NYPD Joint Terrorist Task Force who had global contacts.
Cohen responded with derision and swear words, saying at first he didn't want to talk with the 150 NYPD detectives because he did not want to deal with the FBI's terror division chief, Chuck Frahm, whom he cursed out.
Coleman suggested Cohen needn't attack people personally, and that Frahm was a friend and former colleague.
Then Cohen really erupted, broadening his assault to include the entire bureau - railing about the "'f---ing bureau' this and the 'f---ing bureau' that, and going on about how the FBI was always withholding information," a source said.
Cohen was essentially saying, "F--- the FBI, we do what we want!" the source added.
After listening to the brutal diatribe, Coleman pushed his chair away from the table, calmly stood up and announced that he was resigning - before he ever technically started - and walked out.
Ironically, Coleman, who declined comment, was the first FBI agent to team up with the CIA in 1995, when they created "Alex Station" to specifically zero in on bin Laden.
"My guess is that this account is being peddled by someone who's unhappy about the outstanding relationships between the FBI and the NYPD at the highest levels on down," an NYPD spokesman said, adding that two top former G-men with 60 years of combined experience presently work for Cohen.
An FBI spokesman said, "We continuously strive to maintain our strong working relationship with the NYPD."
On Thursday, with Commissioner Kelly at his side, FBI Director William Mueller made a speech at the Hilton in Midtown that heavily emphasized the good relations between the NYPD and the bureau.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 01:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
sniff, sniff ...what's that smell? Fish? Bull plop?
The first four of the new littoral combat ships will be based in San Diego, the Navy has announced.
This is a huge innovation for the Navy, said San Diego-based Vice Adm. Terrance Etnyre, the Navy's top surface warfare commander and head of Naval Surface Forces. (These ships will) take us down the road to the 21st century, not only in the way we operate but also the way we train.
Littoral combat ships are designed to operate in the shallow and congested waters close to shore, an area called the ocean littorals. Slightly smaller than the current surface warships, the new ships are expected to travel much faster, be more maneuverable and be harder to detect by radar and other sensors.
They also will be operated by a much smaller crew 40 officers and enlisted personnel in the basic ship's crew, compared with more than 300 for destroyers and 200 for frigates.
The littoral combat ships' unique feature is a platform for portable mission modules. These modules will enable the vessels to perform a variety of functions.
Modules are being developed to counter sea mines, submarines and small attack boats and to conduct maritime interdiction missions, which are an increasingly important task in the fight against terrorists and piracy.
The Navy expects to buy 55 littoral combat ships.
The first, named Freedom, is a conventional-hull ship being built by Lockheed Martin. It is scheduled to arrive in San Diego in fall 2007, Etnyre said. The second ship, Independence, is a trimaran or triple-hulled ship being built by General Dynamics. It should reach San Diego in 2008, Etnyre said.
The first four littoral combat ships will bring about 300 Navy personnel and their family members to San Diego. They also will likely attract representatives from the firms building the ships and mission modules.
San Diego already is home to three experimental vessels: the Sea Shadow, Seafighter and Stiletto.
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/30/2006 16:49 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Technically, the littoral zone is the intertidal zone, between the highest high and lowest low tides.
#2
I would call these "class A" littorals. As was known to previous generations, brown water boats cannot be too small, too fast, or too expendable.
A "class B" littoral would be more like the traditional torpedo boat, limited to something like three weapons systems: a weapon of opportunity, such as torpedos; either a heavy mortar or a howitzer; and a heavy machine gun. It would also function as a platform for several different weapons systems, to include SAMs, small area denial mines, etc.
The "class C" littorals are the traditional river gun boats, possibly made with advanced plastics that are far more bullet and frag resistant.
#3
I saw mention of this, but really haven't had a chance to follow it as was local news and traveling a lot recently. Sounds like he's gunna be in deep water for this so good.
Colorado is also footing a grass roots anti-imigration bill locally. CO will no longer pay services for illegals. 68K signatures are needed to get it on the ballot, given mood around here of late that should be no problem.
I believe, except for the few square miles of un-reality that is Boulder, most people in CO are fed up with the BS ... if presented an alternative via ballots and what not they will take it.
I am guessing this is true in most real America, people don't know how to start the momentum, but once started they'll jump in board instantly.
#4
Time for the good people of Fort Lupton to make their voices heard - this guy sounds like;
a) someone who shouldn't be involved in the finances of the city and
b) an arsehole
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
04/30/2006 10:13 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Ah, Boulder... Ancient memories of a simpler, freer, more vacuous time... rolling in the park grass, I "could feel her breasts all perfume yes and his heart was going like mad and yes she said yes I will Yes." and then came the Free Clinic and salvation...
#9
This guy's an ass who needs a few midnight visitors. But then the people of Colarado don't much care for our military so this is no big surprise and the people will be more worried about some woodpecker than the men and women who give them freedom.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
04/30/2006 13:51 Comments ||
Top||
#10
It seems the good people elected a thief as Mayor. I bet the town accounts are a mess. Every taxpayer in town must be waiting for the other shoe to drop.
#11
Fort Lupton is just north of Denver a few miles, about on the same level as Boulder. It used to be referred to disparagingly as "hippieville". Most of the people live there and work in Denver, although there are still a few working farms and ranches to the northeast.
This mayor is a jerk, and needs to do six months or so in the slammer for contempt of court. If I were the parents of this Marine, I'd file a lein against this guy's mortuaries and anything else he owns.
As for Coloradans' "not caring much" about the military, there are about 400,000 retirees and 125,000 active-duty, reserve, and Guard folks in the state, and most of them care a LOT about the military. The closer you get to Boulder and Fort Collins, however, the fewer people care about military.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/30/2006 18:56 Comments ||
Top||
#12
that kind of "dan't care about the miltary" is used in CA too. F*&k you and your ignorance if you use it again.
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/30/2006 18:59 Comments ||
Top||
#13
OP, your right in my over generalization here about the people of CO, I stand corrected. The fact that a guy can blow off a judge sounds like old, 70's, Fayetteville and really gets me pissed. If a soldier blew off the judgement, the mayor would have his sheriff buddy throw his soldier ass in jail and back in front of the judge. This just reeks of a community leadership bigotry that has no respect for soldiers.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
04/30/2006 19:47 Comments ||
Top||
#14
or law in general. Lien his funeral home, private home and vehicles. Gotta be an atty who will do it pro bono. Regarding blanket accusations of Caliphornication: 2 of my neighbors (2 tours Iraq- Marines, each) and 1 - Navy retired/reserve discussed this and ....let's say...they disagree
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/30/2006 19:58 Comments ||
Top||
#15
My guess is that he already has other debts that take legal precedence and that exceed the value of his assets. He's acting like someone who is in virtual bankruptcy, i.e. figuring he has nothing to lose financially at this point by refusing to make good on the money, because there's nothing to be gotten from a lawsuit or a lien.
Two men charged last week in a terrorism case traveled to Washington D.C. to shoot "casing videos" of the Capitol building and other potential targets, a prosecutor alleged during a bail hearing.
Prosecutors leveled the new allegations against Ehsanul Islam Sadequee and Syed Haris Ahmed while challenging a New York judge's earlier decision to release Sadequee to house arrest at his mother's residence in Roswell, Georgia on $250,000 bail.
U.S. District Judge Sandra Townes reversed that ruling and ordered Sadequee, 19, held without bail after citing a pretrial report detailing the defendant's ties to Bangladesh, where he lived for the past several months and has a new bride.
"I feel that the risk of flight is just too great," Townes said.
Sadequee, 19, a U.S. citizen who grew up near Atlanta, is accused of lying to federal authorities amid an ongoing FBI terrorism investigation. He was jailed in New York on Saturday following his extradition from Bangladesh.
An FBI agent's affidavit accused Sadequee and Ahmed, a 21-year-old Georgia Tech student, of meeting with at least three other targets of the FBI probe during a trip to Canada in March 2005. The men allegedly discussed attacks against oil refineries and military bases and planned to travel to Pakistan to get military training at a terrorist camp.
About a month after the men returned from Canada, they allegedly "went to Washington D.C. for the purpose of making a series of videos -- we call them 'casing videos,'" prosecutor Colleen Kavanagh said Friday.
The pair made tapes of the Capitol, the World Bank, the Masonic Temple and a fuel depot in the Washington D.C. area that were to be shipped to "overseas brothers," the prosecutor said.
Defense attorney Doug Morris argued that Sadequee, though charged with making materially false statements, was technically not facing terrorism charges. He also labeled his client's capture and extradition from Bangladesh "reverse rendition" -- a spin on "extraordinary rendition," or the strategy of transferring terrorism suspects to third countries for interrogations.
Ahmed, who was indicted on suspicion of giving material support of terrorism, was being held at an undisclosed location. His court-appointed lawyer could not be reached for comment Friday evening.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 00:34 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
The old revolving door. Now with Uranium!
A senior Pakistani scientist suspected of helping leak nuclear weapons technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea has been released after two years in detention, an army spokesman said Sunday.
Mohammed Farooq, who worked at Pakistan's top nuclear weapons facility, was detained in December 2003, along with 10 other people, when it was revealed that the head of the facility, Abdul Qadeer Khan, gave sensitive technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Farooq, who was director general at Khan Research Laboratories, was suspected of allegedly leaking technology on Khan's orders.
He was freed last week, army spokesman Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan told The Associated Press. Asked whether Farooq would be allowed to keep his job at the laboratories, Sultan said only that "he has been advised to restrict his movement and activities and stay at home for security reasons." Sultan would not say whether Farooq had been found guilty of any wrongdoing.
Farooq was the last of the 11 people detained in 2003 who remained in custody. The 11 scientists, security and administration personnel who worked at the lab were detained for questioning over the spread of nuclear technology in the alleged black market network that Khan headed. Rest at link.
Posted by: ed ||
04/30/2006 08:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan will purchase 44 F-16 fighter planes from the United States, of which only 18 will be brand new while 26 will be used ones.
F16 blk 200 lo miles gently flown Sdewndr HAARM Sp'rw $25 mil firm dlr 202-456-1414.
Pakistan, which had originally asked the US to provide 72 brand new F-16 aircraft, will have to pay the price of the 44 planes from its own kitty, though it was assumed last year that their price would be paid from the US military aid announced during President Pervez Musharrafs visit to Washington.
The US Air Force and the Navy have been using these 26 planes for 20 years for training purposes. Initially, the planes were manufactured for delivery to the Pakistan Air Force during General Zias regime, which paid $650 million for them. The US will now charge about $12 million more as the price of these secondhand F-16 planes. The 18 brand new planes will be provided at approximately $50 million per piece, with the overall deal estimated to cost Pakistan $1.2 billion.
All the 44 planes will be delivered to Pakistan within 30 months. The first batch of the used planes will be handed over to the country before the commencement of the general election next year.
Posted by: john ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Let's sweeten the deal...
If they hand us Binny and the mad doktor alive...
we cut the purchase price in half.
#2
Initially, the planes were manufactured for delivery to the Pakistan Air Force during General Zias regime, which paid $650 million for them. The US will now charge about $12 million more as the price of these secondhand F-16 planes.
KATMANDU, Nepal (AP) - Newly returned Nepalese legislators demanded Saturday that King Gyanendra be stripped of control over the 90,000-strong army, fearing he could use it to regain power after his recent concession to weeks of pro-democracy protests.
Nepal's constitution gives the monarch supreme command of the army, and Gyanendra's seizure of power in February 2005 included sending soldiers to arrest opposition politicians, censor the media and guard his palace.
Legislators said Saturday the king must lose control over the army when the constitution is rewritten by a special assembly. Elections for the assembly were proposed Friday by lawmakers meeting for the first time in four years. "It is the prime minister who should be the supreme commander of the army and not the king. The existing laws should be amended immediately, and that is what we are going to do," Shivraj Basnet, a lawmaker from Nepali Congress, the country's largest party, said Saturday.
Army officials could not be immediately reached for comment, but they have said previously they would do whatever the government ordered. The king did not respond to the lawmakers.
While the recent weeks of protests dramatically weakened the king's power, he still has support among a small coterie of politicians, judges and civil servants.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I had no idea the August King had won the Nepal Masters. must be a Peach of a guy.
MIRAN SHAH, Pakistan - Pakistans army on Saturday asserted it had not lost its grip on a restive tribal region where hundreds of pro-Taleban militants have escalated attacks, triggering fighting that has left nearly 400 dead.
"We got 'em where we want 'em!"
Major Gen. Akram Sahi, the very model of a modern major general army commander for the rebellious region, said some 45,000 troops were deployed in North Waziristan, and are doing their best to seal the porous border with Afghanistan. If someone says that there is no writ of government here, it hurts me, he told a group of visiting reporters at the fortified command office of the military in Miran Shah, the main town in North Waziristan.
Truth hurts, huh?
I am here to kill anyone who is a suspected terrorist.
"I'll moidalize 'em!"
Sahis comments came hours after Osama bin Ladens No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahri - who is believed to be hiding near the Pakistan-Afghan border - criticized President Gen. Pervez Musharraf and urged the Pakistan army not to obey his orders.
Had to get a message out quick?
In Rawalpindi, a garrison city near the capital, Islamabad, an army spokesman said Pakistans army fully supports the president under whose leadership al-Qaidas backbone has been destroyed. No soldier or officer is going to pay any attention to this nonsense from al-Zawahri, who has issued such statements in the past.
Sahi said that since his Golden Arrow army division launched operations in North Waziristan in July 2005, it has killed 324 militants, including 76 foreigners, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Chechens and Arabs. Fifty-six security forces have died.
Which leaves several thousand krazed killers, a few ten thousand simmering syncophants, and many more psychotic Pashtuns in wacky Wazoo.
Sahi, the top army official in the region, maintained that there were just a few hundred militants active in North Waziristan and that four to five militant leaders _ local Muslim clerics trying to impose Taleban-style religious fundamentalism _ had been forced out.
"We got 'em on the run!"
However, Sahi said up to 1,500 people, including local tribesmen who sympathize with the militants, had battled with security forces in the bloody four-day clash in Miran Shah last month that left 145 militants dead.
And the rest angry.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I detect cynicism, SW?
pretty sharp, huh? Subtle, but I caught it....
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/30/2006 0:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Of course they are. They are about as in control of the border as the cops are in control of the slums of Chicago.
#3
I live near Chicago, Da Mayor has a much better grip on the slums than Sahi will ever have on Wazoo.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/30/2006 0:20 Comments ||
Top||
#4
In Rawalpindi, a garrison city near the capital, Islamabad, an army spokesman said Pakistans army fully supports the president under whose leadership al-Qaidas backbone has been destroyed.
Yep, that terror training camp in Rawalpindi is actually a girl scout facility
Posted by: john ||
04/30/2006 0:21 Comments ||
Top||
Iraq's speaker of parliament on Sunday called for parliament to convene on May 3, but Prime Minister-designate Nuri al-Maliki is not expected to present a cabinet line-up at that sitting.
Parliament designated Maliki, a Shi'ite politician, a week ago to head Iraq's first full-term government since the fall of Saddam Hussein. Maliki has 30 days starting April 22 to present his cabinet for a vote in parliament.
Maliki, a member of the ruling Shi'ite Alliance, is in talks with other political blocs to form a government of national unity seen as the best hope to avert a sectarian civil war.
An aide to Maliki's office said Maliki was still studying candidates for each ministry, which are to be submitted by each parliamentary bloc.
Maliki has said he will choose capable and non-sectarian ministers, including for the sensitive posts of Interior, Defense and Oil, based on their qualifications and not on their sectarian and ethnic affiliation and background.
Under Shi'ite leadership for the last year, the Interior Ministry has been accused of running death squads and militias that have targeted minority Sunni Arabs. Shi'ite officials deny such charges.
A statement from the office of assembly speaker Mahmoud al- Mashhadani said that on May 3 the 275-seat parliament is expected to form a committee charged with reviewing Iraq's constitution, which was voted in a referendum last October.
Sunnis, who dominated Iraq under Saddam and before, are demanding changes to the constitution, including guarantees that Kurds and Shi'ites in the oil-rich north and south will not be granted more autonomy.
Parliament is also scheduled to choose a committee to draft the assembly's internal regulations.
Leaders of Iraq's powerful Shiite Muslim political bloc said Friday that they are willing to give up control of the Interior Ministry and its police forces, a move that could ease both the fears of other sectarian groups and the formation of a new government.
Under the Shiites' dominion for the last year, the ministry has been accused of providing cover for death squads and militias who have stoked mistrust of security forces among minority Sunni Arabs and spurred the growth of destabilizing militias.
In Friday's talks aimed at forming a new government, the Shiite bloc proposed surrendering control over the state's internal security apparatus, top Shiite negotiator Khudair al-Khuzaie said in an interview. In return, the coalition would want control over the Defense Ministry and the country's armed forces, he said.
Willingness to give up control of the Interior Ministry, which has far more influence than the Defense Ministry over the lives of average Iraqis, could reassure Sunnis who fear that Shiites plan to wield the country's domestic security apparatus as a sectarian weapon.
"We don't want to make obstacles, and we want the negotiations to proceed quickly," said al-Khuzaie, a confidant of Prime Minister-designate Nouri al-Maliki.
Despite widespread criticism, the Shiite coalition -- composed of political figures who were hunted, jailed and tortured by Saddam Hussein's security apparatus -- had vowed to never give up control over the ministry. But U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and other top U.S. officials have called on Iraqi leaders to name nonsectarian, nonpolitical professionals without ties to militias to head key security posts.
With a prime minister, presidential council and parliamentary leadership named, filling the security ministries and other sensitive posts such as the ministries of oil, finance and foreign affairs remains the most significant matter before Iraqis can stand up a functioning government.
Iraqi negotiators, often meeting for hours at a time in Baghdad's secure Green Zone or in the well-guarded home of President Jalal Talabani, must balance pressure from party loyalists who demand power and patronage with domestic and international pressure for competent and independent professionals at the helm of government agencies.
U.S. and Iraqi officials are concerned that the country will ignite if security ministries continue on their sectarian course, the Interior Ministry becoming the domain of Shiite militias and the Defense Ministry run by equally sectarian Sunni Arabs as well as Kurds. A swapping of ministries, or at least a willingness to shuffle the top posts, could help avoid fears that the country is being carved up into permanent fiefdoms.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 01:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Previous posts indicate that Coalition forces are rather tightly embedded with Defense forces, but were prevented under al-Jafari (spelling probably wrong, I think it's actually "Sadr", or "Iran") from doing the same with Interior. Hopefully, this move will allow us to do the same with Interior, which forces do not appear to be of the same stuff as Defense.
As the U.S. military struggles against persistent sectarian violence in Iraq, military officers and security experts find themselves in a vigorous debate over an idea that just months ago was largely dismissed as a fringe thought: that the surest -- and perhaps now the only -- way to bring stability to Iraq is to divide the country into three pieces.
Those who see the partitioning of Iraq as increasingly attractive argue that separating the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds may be the only solution to the violence that many experts believe verges on civil war. Others contend that it would simply lead to new and dangerous challenges for the United States, not least the possibility that al-Qaeda would find it easier to build a new base of operations in a partitioned Iraq.
One specialist on the Iraqi insurgency, Ahmed S. Hashim, a professor at the U.S. Naval War College who has served two tours in Iraq as a reservist, contends in a new book that the U.S. government's options in Iraq are closing to just two: Let a civil war occur, or avoid that wrenching outcome through some sort of partition. Such a division of the country "is the option that can allow us to leave with honor intact," he concludes in "Insurgency and Counter-Insurgency in Iraq."
Bush administration officials have expressed relief and optimism since Iraqi politicians ended a four-month impasse this month by finally choosing a prime minister, Jawad al-Maliki, a Shiite politician. Such political milestones, coupled with the ongoing training of Iraqi security forces, are the cornerstones of U.S. policy and the keys to building a unified, stable Iraq, U.S. officials say.
At the same time, the continued violence across the country has convinced some analysts that U.S. options in Iraq are narrowing, as both U.S. influence inside the country and patience at home for the war wane.
The fundamental fact of Iraq is that insurgent attacks on Iraqi police and army troops continue essentially unabated, said Jeffrey White, a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst of Middle Eastern security issues.
"There are peaks and valleys," he said Friday at a seminar of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "It goes up and down, but it seems to grow over time." Also, he said, lately there has been a spate of worrisome, large-scale direct attacks on Iraqi police stations and army outposts, some involving as many as 50 fighters.
The goal of U.S. foreign policy right now, said former ambassador James Dobbins, a Rand Corp. expert on peacekeeping, should be to prevent the country from sliding into a large-scale conventional civil war. "Our economic leverage is already essentially gone," he said at a recent discussion at the American Enterprise Institute, and "our military leverage is also a waning asset." So he is calling for a much more intense campaign of regional diplomacy by U.S. officials.
Others say it is too late to go shopping for help in a region whose governments are generally hostile to U.S. goals in Iraq.
"I agree with Ahmed," said retired Marine Col. T.X. Hammes, a counterinsurgency expert who has worked in Iraq on training security forces there. "The Iraqis are positioning for civil war," and so, he said, the United States should be contemplating a "soft partition" of the country by design, rather than through violence. An all-out civil war would not only endanger U.S. troops more but also would be more likely to spill over into neighboring states and so wreak havoc on the international oil market, Hammes said.
On the other side of the debate are many military insiders who believe steady progress is being made in Iraq, despite violence and setbacks.
"I do not agree that there are only two options, especially these two options" of civil war or breaking the country apart, said Army Lt. Col. James A. Gavrilis, a Special Forces officer who participated in the invasion of Iraq and now works on Iraq issues for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Gavrilis said that allowing a civil war or a partition of Iraq would be an admission of failure that is not required by the current situation.
"The potential for civil war is there, certainly, but it is not as far as many are claiming. We have not seen indicators of full-scale civil war or mass mobilizations or a collapse of politics," said Gavrilis, noting that he was expressing his personal views. He argued for continuing to emphasize the democratic revolution that he believes is changing Iraq. Likewise, Gary Anderson, a retired Marine colonel who in the past advised the Pentagon on the Iraqi insurgency, thinks that the administration should stay the course: "I think drawing down our participation . . . and continuing to grow security forces that are loyal to the central government rather than to sects is the way to go, but that is obviously easier said than done."
The U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, declined to provide a senior officer to be interviewed about the issues addressed in this article.
Even carrying out a planned division of Iraq may prove more difficult than it appears, warned an officer now serving in Iraq with the 101st Airborne Division, which is on its second tour there. "It's a simple, blunt approach to preventing sectarian violence," he said. "However, it won't stop all infiltrations and violence, and it may simply result in armed camps that eventually resort to all-out, partitioned state-on-state war."
Preventing major ethnic and sectarian massacres such as occurred in the 1947 partition of India and Pakistan would require huge investments of time and money, hard to come by four years into the war, warned Hammes, the counterinsurgency expert. "We will have to develop and fund some kind of displacement agency to move the families and set them up -- very manpower and civilian expertise intensive!" he said in an e-mail interview.
Because of those hurdles, Hammes said, he expects that the U.S. government will be incapable of managing a breakup of Iraq. He considers a "hard" division of Iraq, achieved through civil war, more likely. "This will spread disorder to Saudi and other Gulf states," he predicted.
Others think that dividing Iraq itself is a pipe dream because it wouldn't solve the basic problems racking the country.
"There is no way a partition would work," said Army Reserve Lt. Col. Joe Rice, who recently returned from a tour of duty in Iraq, expressing his personal opinion. Baghdad is a deeply mixed city, he noted: "The largest Kurdish city in Iraq? Baghdad. The largest Sunni city? Baghdad. The largest Shiite city? Yep, Baghdad." Also, he said, it would be difficult to parcel out Iraq's greatest treasure, its oil reserves, in a way that all three major groups would find acceptable.
What's more, if partition actually happened, it probably would have several unintended consequences, such as creating a hard-line, anti-American Sunni mini-state, possibly giving al-Qaeda a new haven, said Michael Quigley, a former expert on terrorism at the Defense Intelligence Agency who has served in Iraq.
The most radical view, which even now appears to have only a few proponents in the U.S. military establishment, is that the United States should step back and let a civil war occur. In this argument, the U.S. government created a revolutionary situation when it invaded Iraq and brought about a wholesale transfer of power from the country's Sunnis to its Shiites. So, this argument goes, civil war isn't something to be avoided, but rather a necessary part of the process of changing Iraq.
One of the few officers who have expressed this view publicly is Maj. Isaiah Wilson III, an inventive former planner with the 101st Airborne in Iraq who now teaches at West Point.
"Should we give civil war a chance in Iraq?" Wilson asked in an essay posted on the Internet last month. His answer: probably yes. That is, such a conflict may be what is needed to save the country.
"For Iraq, as ironic and illogical as it may seem," he said, "a true and sustainable future may come in the aftermath of the very sectarian-based civil war we have been striving to prevent."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 01:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I need to eat crow to admit this (ummm yum, yum...an acquired taste I've come to love) but I have come to believe that the best thing that happened to Iraq is the need to compromise between the three major divisions to create a country.
Way back when, I thought it was crazy not to just divide them into three unified countries - but I have changed my mind and now think that a good government is one that is capable of being able to handle such divisions and still survive.
I now think that these divisions may be the best thing that happend to them. I think the best chance is for them to form a government that can satisfy all citizens of Iraq - and I think they can do it. I wish them luck.
#2
military officers and security experts find themselves in a vigorous debate over an idea that just months ago was largely dismissed as a fringe thought: that the surest -- and perhaps now the only -- way to bring stability to Iraq is to divide the country into three pieces.
#5
There will be partition and it will be 'hard'. The only way I see it could be avoided is if the Shiias and Sunnis decide to bury their differences and combine to fight the Kurds, which I don't see happening nor would the Americans tolerate.
I agree Baghdad is a thorny problem and the partition there may be particularly bloody, but I strongly suspect ethnic partitioning is already happening and has been for a while in Baghdad and elsewhere. The issue is, will the tempo increase?
British troops in Iraq "lack the confidence to open fire" because of a "fear of prosecution", says a confidential Ministry of Defence (MoD) report seen by The Sunday Telegraph. It confirms that soldiers believe that if they shoot dead insurgents they will become embroiled in a "protracted investigation" and if prosecuted will receive "no support from the chain of command".
The study into soldiers' confidence is understood to have been ordered by senior officers because of a growing belief that the fear of prosecution could result in a soldier being killed because he was too scared to open fire. Senior officers from the Land Warfare Centre flew to Iraq to question dozens of soldiers from the 7th Armoured Brigade. The report's observations are "drawn solely from those discussions".
Under the heading "Confidence to Open Fire", the report says: "All agreed that there was a certain British reticence to open fire, and that this was largely a positive feature at the start of an operational deployment. Further, given that this reticence will be reduced as the tour continues there should be some caution in case it is reduced too much. However, there remained a common belief that many soldiers lack the confidence to initiate opening fire when it is tactically and legally sound to do so.
"There is a widespread fear of being investigated for having opened fire, and of a protracted prosecution system that might ensue. Some believe that individual soldiers would not open fire as a result of this fear."
In a section headed "Lack of Support from the Chain of Command", the report indicates "widespread feeling that whilst the battalion/regiment would support an individual, the wider chain of command (senior officers) provided insufficient support".
The report follows persistent denials by the MoD of claims made by senior officers to this newspaper that soldiers were becoming "over cautious" because they feared investigation and prosecution.
The Royal Military Police Special Investigation Branch has conducted more than 150 investigations in Iraq involving British soldiers, with more than 100 of these launched after troops opened fire when attacked by insurgents.
The report's findings come at the end of a three-year investigation into the death of Sgt Steven Roberts, who was killed in a friendly fire incident in the opening days of the Iraq war. Five soldiers, including an officer, faced a variety of charges including murder, manslaughter and negligence over the death of Sgt Roberts, a tank commander, who was shot dead by a soldier under his command. On Thursday, the Attorney General told Parliament that none of the soldiers would face charges because of a lack of evidence.
Patrick Mercer, the Tory spokesman on homeland security, who is a former infantry commanding officer, said last night: "We went through all of this in Northern Ireland 30 years ago and we arrived at rules of engagement that worked. The MoD has got to be held to blame for eroding a soldier's ability and willingness to defend himself. You can't send lads into action who are not completely confident that they will be backed to the hilt by the people who sent them to this war in the first place. The MoD has been consistently economical with the truth on this matter."
An MoD spokesman said: "Soldiers have nothing to fear from the investigation of incidents, so long as they act within their rules of engagement. The Armed Forces can also be certain that they will always receive the full support of the chain of command.
''The Land Warfare Centre's dialogue in Iraq, and their training recommendations, provides the Armed Forces with the reassurance needed to operate confidently within their rules of engagement, without fear of prosecution."
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Total bull shit. The is the Damnage the TRANZIS bring to a nation write large. The UK's legalistic Socialism is at teh root of this.
Posted by: SPoD ||
04/30/2006 2:32 Comments ||
Top||
#2
This is consistant with the reluctance of UK police to make arrests in cases of minor crimes such as public drunkeness, robbery, and assault, and suggest that any home intruders not be confronted verbally and certainly not physically, which could put the homeowner at risk of being sued by the burglar.
David Welch, advisor to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, expressed concern on Friday over a possible connection between al-Qaeda and Hamas following al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden's call for terror attacks in response to the situation of the Palestinians.
Welch said in an interview with the Al-Hayat newspaper that Hamas had orchestrated many terror attacks with the help of international terror organizations.
Washington was engaged in efforts to stem the flow of money and weaponry to the Hamas, he said, but the organization had apparently discovered a way unknown to the American government to move money to the territories.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 01:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That's the way to the top, linking up with Al-Qaeda. It worked so well for the Taliban and all.
#2
Israel is right to be concerned about this (and us, too).
Read Michael Totten's latest from the region. Iran has moved in with Hezboallah on the Lebanese border. They're bringing in bullet-proof windows, high powered arms, money and other equipment.
The coalescing of these groups, with Iran also sponsoring Hamas, is one more sign that Ahmadinajad and the MMs are going to destabilize the world if they can. It's pretty clear the Europeans won't stop them and Russia and China think they have a stake in their success.
Now add in those centrifuges whirling away ... or the purchased devices and missiles, plus the anti-missile defense systems that Iran is getting from Russia.
We may have disrupted the al-Qaeda / Taliban connection, but that's just one tactical move.
These people intend to create a worldwide caliphate with Islam dominating over what they consider will be its humiliated enemies (Israel, the US). And meanwhile Europe indulges its insecurities and its guilt by attempting to trip up the US and undermine Israel, while Putin plays a deep game with a weak (but dangerous) hand and China continues its decade-long rise to world power, enabled in part by technologies sold to them under the Clinton administration.
#3
And it is not clear to me that we are up to the challenge.
Bush cannot initiate effective action in Iran without Congressional approval. He will not get that approval from this partisan congress unless it is clear that failure to do so would mean electoral defeat. I simply don't sense that will in the electorate.
Instead of looking at the truly major events happening in Iran, the people are fixated on gas prices and wetbacks, one problem somewhat derivative, the other long term and minor. It's going to take something bigger than 9/11 to get the American people to take action against the Religion of Pieces.
#4
It's going to take something bigger than 9/11 to get the American people to take action against the Religion of Pieces
The growing interest of Joe Couch in Darfur might serve this purpose. If Clooney and his crowd can get LLL's all hot and bothered about raging into Darfur to save "the people", the actual causes of strife in the region might actually start to come out.
The fact that Sudan refuses to enterain the idea of any infidels stepping into their land and the long list of muzzie on muzzie violence and the complete silence (and closed purses) of other muslims, might actually come out in MSM.
Might actually start to put 2 and 2 together, correctly.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh threatened last week to resign together with his cabinet if Khaled Meshal, head of the Hamas political wing in Damascus, did not retract the harshly critical statements about Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah he made last week.
Meshal's statements last week at a rally in memory of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in the Syrian capital's Yarmuk refugee camp generated the worst internal violence to date in the PA, beginning with stone-throwing by students of rival Hamas and Fatah groups and rapidly deteriorating into exchanges of gunfire and firebombs Saturday between rival groups, resulting in dozens of injured and raising the specter of civil war.
"We can understand that Israel and America are persecuting us and seeking ways to besiege and starve us, but what about the sons of our people who are plotting against us? Today is not the time to expose them, but I say the day will come soon when we will reveal to all the truth," Meshal said in Damascus. His veiled accusations deepened the rift between Abbas and Haniyeh, who then decided on the unprecedented move of threatening to resign.
Meshal subsequently issued "clarifications" in which he argued that his statements "had not been properly understood," and that he did not intend to describe Fatah and its leaders as traitors. The clarifications were seen as an apology and cleared the air between Haniyeh and Abbas.
The incident was further proof of strained relations between Hamas in the territories and the organization abroad, to which was added this week the revelation that weapons had been smuggled from Damascus to Hamas warehouses in Jordan - a step Haniyeh reportedly did not know about.
Or at least says he didn't.
Sources in Jordan said they believed that Hamas in the Palestinian Authority territories, represented by Haniyeh and groups affiliated with him, was not involved in the smuggling and not even aware of it. The operation was planned and executed by a group from outside the territories led by Meshal and Mousa Abu-Marzuk, said the sources. To support their supposition, the Jordanian sources pointed to an unattributed statement by Hamas accusing Jordan of conspiring against Hamas, while Haniyeh came out with a public condemnation of "any action that might harm the security of Jordan."
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
BERLIN - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a psychopath and anti-Semite whose declarations resemble those of Adolf Hitler, Israeli acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in a newspaper interview on Saturday. Ahmadinejad speaks today like Hitler before taking power, Olmert told Germanys Bild newspaper. He speaks of the complete destruction and annihilation of the Jewish people.
Ahmadinejad has questioned the Holocaust and called for Israel to be wiped off the map. He has also suggested the Jewish state should be moved to Europe or North America. So you see, we are dealing with a psychopath of the worst kind, with an anti-Semite, Olmert said. God forbid that this man ever gets his hands on nuclear weapons, to carry out his threats.
Israel, believed to have the Middle Easts only atomic arsenal, says Iran is months away from acquiring the know-how to make nuclear weapons. Other experts say Iran is still years away from being able to produce a nuclear weapon.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Whether it's months or a few years, only two questions matter:
Who will utterly destroy the Iranian regime and industrial infrastructure? will it be in time to save us from defending ourselves in a nuclear war?
#3
The nuclear infrastructure includes the engineers, physicists, and technicians that bring it to life. When the day comes, they, along with the theocracy, the IRG, and all military installations within 100 miles of the borders
#9
It seems obvious to me that Iran is getting its proxies and ducks together for the big push to destroy Israel. There IS going to be a showdown, ready or not. This is going to go to the brink, with everyone waiting till the last possible minute. I feel that I am living in 1936 to 1939 again and I know how the story will play out, and it is not pretty.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/30/2006 15:23 Comments ||
Top||
The leaders of Jordan and Egypt have agreed to ask major powers to revive Middle East peace talks next month to pre-empt Israeli unilateral moves, their foreign ministers say. King Abdullah and Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president, are worried about the prospects for Arab-Israeli peace after the election of a new Israeli government under Ehud Olmert and a new Palestinian government led by Hamas. Olmert says he aims to set Israel's borders unilaterally if no basis can be found for negotiations - a prospect that seems remote since Hamas is sworn to Israel's destruction and has refused to sign up to existing interim peace deals.
After a summit in the Red Sea port of Aqaba, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, the Egyptian foreign minister, and his Jordanian counterpart Abdelelah al-Khatib, said they would lobby a meeting of the Middle East Quartet in New York on May 9.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
And perhaps the turks (and the kurds) could give back "Turkey" to the greeks and the armenians, and possibly some celts, too.
As for arabs, don't forget northern Africa too. Thinking of it, Pakistan should go back hindu, and the converted-through-slavery black african countries should stop of thinking themselves "muslim"... all of dar el islam is an occupied territory.
French President Jacques Chirac proposed Friday the creation of a special account at the World Bank to channel international aid funds to the Palestinians and head off an impending financial meltdown in the territories. The escrow account could be used to send payments directly to 160,000 Palestinian civil servants, thus bypassing the Hamas-led government being boycotted by the international community because of its opposition to peace with Israel. Chirac made the suggestion during talks in Paris with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who is in France on the last leg of a European tour urging the resumption of aid. Accord to Chirac's spokesman, the president told Abbas "France would propose to its European and international partners ... that they reflect very rapidly on a mechanism to allow the resumption of aid."
Posted by: Fred ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
Ready to give more of everyone else's hard-earned money aaway, Jacques? What about your own country's economy? What is the big deal about not giving anything to the Paleos? What about actions and consequences? You sho' likes to pi$$ away everyone's money.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/30/2006 1:05 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Tranzi nonsense from a total crook. Shows his total crap for brains.
Posted by: SPoD ||
04/30/2006 2:36 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The Palestinian civil servants chose the terrorist government. Let them reap the effects of a bad choice. Chosing badly doesn't absolve them of connection with Hamas and their bad choices - it should serve to make them change their minds and choose again.
Israel's Foreign Ministry Director-General Ron Prosor yesterday summoned Swedish Ambassador Robert Rydberg and expressed Israel's protest at Sweden's withdrawal from an international air force exercise to be held in Italy next month, under the pretext that Israel is not qualified to participate because it is not peace seeking.
Prosor stressed that Sweden's "declaring that Israel does not seek peace puts its credibility at risk." He added that, given such a worrisome position, doubt arises as to Sweden's ability to play a significant role in the peace process in future. Prosor also expressed Israel's deep concern over reports reaching Jerusalem that Sweden intends to grant entrance visas to a number of Hamas activists. He pointed out that such a step -- which would be the first of its kind by a European country -- is liable to be interpreted throughout the world as giving approval to terrorism and to terrorist organizations.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
As a jesture of friendship, send a planeload of Hamas boyz to Sweden each day.
Posted by: ed ||
04/30/2006 1:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
is liable to be interpreted throughout the world as giving approval to terrorism and to terrorist organizations.
Because it is approval of anti-Israel terrorism and terrorists.
Addressing the United Nations Seminar of Assistance to the Palestinian People, Member of Palestinian Legislative Council, Nabil Shaath, said the new Government was willing to accept financial oversights or to have money transferred through President Abbas, but it could not accept the attempt to bypass the Palestinian National Authority (PNA).
He called for the serious reconvening of the conference of High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to protect Palestinians, an increased United Nations presence, implementation of donor pledges, the return of a free transfer of funds to the Palestinians, and the revitalization of the Rafah agreement on the freedom of movement.
The session, part of a two-day meeting sponsored by the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, heard presentations by experts on the scope of the economic and humanitarian crisis in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Shaath said the issues Palestinians now faced were both chronic and acute and required different solutions, adding that the Israeli attempt at serious demographic change had been going on since the beginning of the peace process.
"The building of the Separation Wall which would enclose huge areas of Jerusalem, separating people from their jobs, schools and hospitals, continued, and Israel now said openly that it was imposing a unilateral solution," he stressed.
Long-term solutions had to be considered, he continued. A move to end the Israeli occupation had to go hand in hand with humanitarian aid and serious international commitment to a solution.
He supported the reconvening of the conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to protect Palestinians. Additionally, Palestinians might have to call for an increased United Nations presence.
"All donors had to be persuaded to resume the implementation of their pledges. The return of a free transfer of funds to the Palestinians was imperative. The attempt to interfere with the banking system to prevent people from receiving money, even from Palestinians and other Arabs, was unacceptable," he told the Seminar.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That should read,
separating people from their Israeli provided jobs, schools and hospitals
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 02:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sure it's just not the religion that is making it difficult? It my first assumption.
Posted by: SPoD ||
04/30/2006 3:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
1. He was never there and his aides were setup.
2. He was never there and someone was paid off.
3. He was there and someone smuggled him out for 'questions'.
4. He was there and someone smuggled him out for cash and his aides were killed.
Iran's hardline President Mahmud Ahmadinejad is coming under heavy fire at home - and it's not because of the worsening international standoff over the Islamic republic's nuclear program.
Last week the president revealed his seldom-seen softer side by ordering an end to a decades-old ban on women entering stadiums for major sporting events, including football matches.
But this directive has not gone down well among religious right-wingers eager to maintain the male-female segregation ushered in by Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution. Furthermore, some members of Iran's left are also sceptical.
"It would have been better if you had avoided a hasty announcement and consulted," fumed the hardline Jomhuri Eslami newspaper, which usually praises Ahmadinejad as a champion of revolutionary values.
Allowing the fairer sex into stadiums has "emboldened those loose elements that cruise streets and parks of Tehran", it said, evoking fears that Islamic Iran may experience some kind of 'Summer of Love'.
Ahmadinejad announced a week ago that despite reservations, "experience has proven that when women and families are allowed into stadiums, ethics and chastity will prevail".
But the hardline Kayhan newspaper was also working up a sweat. It voiced astonishment that the austere president could even think of letting women into such an "awfully unethical and corrupt environment".
A string of far-right MPs have been warning of "bare legs" and obscenities shouted at referees, while powerful right-wing Shia clerics have also started a pitch invasion.
Ayatollah Mohammad-Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi - considered to be Ahmadinejad's ideological godfather - has filed a complaint from his office in Qom, the clerical nerve-center just south of Tehran.
Grand Ayatollah Mohammad Fazel-Lankarani, another Qom-based Shia cleric with clout, has also ruled that "women looking at male bodies, even without enjoyment, is not permissible".
"When everyone can easily watch a match live at home, what's the necessity of having women and families in stadiums?" chimed in another grand ayatollah, Nasser Makarem-Shirazi.
And Ayatollah Mirza-Javad Tabrizi has also raised the red card over the "gathering of men and women for corruption-driven actions and the committing of harams [actions forbidden by Islam]."
But Ahmadinejad is sticking by his guns.
"Any distinction between men and women that leads to their separation hurts women. In places where women are present, the atmosphere is healthier," he was quoted as saying in Saturday's press.
And in comments that could easily come from the mouth of a feminist, he argued that "sadly, when we speak of corruption the finger is pointed at women. Are men without reproach?" "Some people think that women are the cause of corruption, but they are wrong," said the president, who is not known to back down.
Iran's Physical Education Organization has meanwhile sought to calm tensions by asserting the directive will take time to implement - given the need for special seating arrangements and women's toilets. It has also asserted that single ladies would remain excluded from stadiums.
Ahmadinejad's ruling was initially greeted with surprise and relief from women's rights activists, who have for years been campaigning for access to football matches given that both sexes in the Islamic republic share an intense passion for the beautiful game.
But some left-wingers remain cynical, arguing the directive was more of a propaganda exercise that will never be put into practice. "This is like a beautiful giftwrapped package that is empty inside," pro-reform journalist Isa Saharkhiz said.
"Ahmadinejad wanted to soften the atmosphere ... to earn popularity. But he cannot deliver on this promise and he has to back down. He may not openly back off, so there will be glitches so the decision is not implemented, and people will gradually forget," he predicted.
Mahbubeh Abbasgholizadeh, a feminist activist, is also cynical. "Ahmadinejad is playing the good cop," she said, arguing that the president needed to drum up support at home while he defied UN Security Council demands that Iran freeze its disputed nuclear program. "The government is being very calculating, with the president suddenly coming up with such a decision at the same time as the problems with the Security Council," she said.
The audience gasped in awe then broke into applause as the unashamed actress declared that her genital organ, "coco", was angry, in the first Arab adaptation of the US hit play "The Vagina Monologues".
After winning a tough battle with censors, the taboo-breaking "Hakeh Neswan," or "Women's Talk", has taken Lebanese theater by storm with sold-out performances and rave reviews. In a Middle East ruled by strict social and religious traditions, calling genital organs by their name - let alone their nicknames - is an act of courage.
Even in more avant-garde Beirut, where the stage has recently offered plays about women's liberation, "Hakeh Neswan" beats them all.
"I found 'The Vagina Monologues' liberating. I wanted to explore how it could be done in Arabic," said director and playwright Lina Khoury, 30, who holds a master of fine arts in theater-directing from the University of Arkansas. "But because of cultural differences, I had to 'Lebanize' it."
Four young, talented and unblushing actresses have been luring crowds with 12 monologues breaking taboos on sex, venereal infections, menstrual syndromes, rape, violence against women, homosexuality and even lewd conduct at the gynecologist's office.
Three of the monologues were adapted by Khoury from US author Eve Ensler's award-winning play, which has been staged around the world and starred such top names as Susan Sarandon and Whoopi Goldberg.
She wrote the other nine in Arabic after interviewing dozens of Lebanese women of all ages and backgrounds about their intimate and social problems.
"I did not want to just shock people. I wanted it to be an occasion to start talking about these things, so it is less about sex and more about women's problems," she said.
But Khoury, who also works in film production and teaches television and advertising at the American University College of Science and Technology (AUST) in Beirut, had to fight hard to get past the censors.
"For a year and a half, they kept scrapping off pages and paragraphs. And I kept arguing and rewriting the script. Then I decided to go to the minister of culture, even without an appointment. After I explained the situation, he helped me."
Finding actresses was also a challenge. Some declined nicely, citing family pressure, and she had to tone down parts for others who stayed on.
After every show, Khoury, who now hopes to take the play elsewhere in the Arab world, says her biggest pleasure is to see people actually talking and arguing about it, lingering outside the theater for an hour or more.
"Many things happen in the Arab world where everything is allowed if nobody talks about it. But now at least, these very important issues are put out in the open in a very interesting and courageous manner," said Khalil Hayek, a teacher. "Women learned that other women have similar problems. And men understood that women are not just hysterical, but have real and urgent issues," he said.
On a sparse set, the four actresses provoke gasps, laughs and sometimes uneasy silence by listing the various names for the female genital organ, most commonly known here as "coco," and its discomfort from tampons, G-strings and medical check-ups.
They also rail about latche, or verbal harassment on the streets, and outright sexual harassment in taxis, buses or even at the gynecologist.
In a scene describing often-unreported rapes, the actress playing the part of an 11-year-old girl raped by a friend of the family says: "I could tell my parents that Israel has invaded Beirut, but I could not tell them that your friend has invaded me."
On a lighter note, the show plays on ambiguities in this country whose political system has deeply religious roots. One actress wonders why a doctor's questionnaire on venereal disease asks: "What is your religion?"
Another, still unmarried at a later age, marvels that relatives who once forbade her to talk or date men now pressure her: "Why don't you have a boyfriend? Why don't you go out?"
And in a country where homosexuality is banned by law and rejected by society, a lesbian's unknowing mother will only allow her daughter to sleep over at her girlfriend's house after making sure that "there are no boys there." This, too, is Bush's fault.
Iran said on Saturday that it was willing to resume allowing snap UN atomic inspections if its case were dropped by the UN Security Council and passed back to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). But Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, said that Iran would not yield to UN demands that it abandon uranium enrichment, and criticised Friday's report by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the IAEA. ElBaradei said that UN checks in Iran had been hampered and Tehran had rebuffed requests to stop making nuclear fuel.
"The report was not completely satisfactory for us and we believe that the report could have been done better than that," Saeedi told state television. However, Saeedi insisted that Iran would be able to answer ElBaradei's concerns about the access granted to UN inspectors if Tehran's nuclear dossier were dropped by the UN Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions. "If the case returns to the agency again, we will begin the section that concerns the Additional Protocol," he said. "The enrichment will continue. But we will continue implementing the Additional Protocol as a voluntary measure." The Additional Protocol to the Non-Proliferation Treaty allows short-notice inspections of nuclear facilities.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Trickery! TRICKERY! Look at their other hand!
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/30/2006 0:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
They're going to back down in bad faith. They must be made to lose face when they do so.
#4
As predicted and right on schedule. Mamhoud needs to play the delay game until late August or early September when he plans to attack Israel The small nukes will be ready by then.
Participants in Lebanon's national dialogue held their first official discussion of potential replacements for President Emile Lahoud on Friday, bridging what had been a psychological barrier before adjourning until a follow-up session on May 16.
Although the names of the four individuals under consideration - MP Michel Aoun, MP Butros Harb, former MP Nassib Lahoud and Social Affairs Minister Nayla Mouawad - had been among the country's worst-kept secrets for months, this was the first they had been publicly acknowledged.
At a press conference after the talks, Speaker Nabih Berri said the entire session had been dedicated to the presidency but that it would have to be revisited in the next round of talks. He told reporters that regardless of whether or not a decision was reached on presidency issues on May 16, participants would move on to another subject of considerable contention, that of Hizbullah's arms.
Speaking with The Daily Star immediately after the talks, Harb confirmed that the names discussed were those made public earlier in the day by Lebanese Forces (LF) leader Samir Geagea. Geagea had mentioned the four names during a visit to Bkirki to see the Maronite patriarch, Cardinal Nasrallah Butros Sfeir.
Asked if Aoun had put his own name forward as a candidate, Berri said: "We've always said that Aoun is a very serious candidate for the presidency, but other names were put forward as well."
Asked if the next session would deal with the subject of border demarcation and the Shebaa Farms again - a source of much disagreement between Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt and Hizbullah's secretary general, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, - the speaker tried to change the subject. "Does it look like we're playing here?" he asked. This decision has been taken." Asked whose version - Nasrallah's or Jumblatt's - had been agreed upon, Berri was non-committal. "Go back and re-read exactly what I announced after the last session," he said. "We won't be discussing that again."
Posted by: Fred ||
04/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
For the first time ever, the world now has heard from three of the world's top terrorists in one week, leaving analysts wondering if it's a coincidence or a coordinated message.
It began Sunday, when the Arabic news channel al-Jazeera aired an audiotape of Osama bin Laden. Two days later, a video from his top man in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, appeared on an Arabic Web site.
Now, wearing the black headdress of an Arab warrior, al Qaeda's second in command boasts on an Internet video that his fighters in Iraq have conducted 800 suicide missions since the war began. That, Ayman al-Zawahiri claims, has broken the back of America.
"His message is not only to the America people, but to his own supporters telling them that they are winning, telling them that they should hang in there," says Richard Clarke, the former White House counter-terrorism director who is now an ABC News consultant.
None of the communiqués threatens an attack on the United States, but Clarke notes that each encourages Muslims to help drive American forces out of Iraq.
Clarke believes al Qaeda's leaders may be losing influence.
"I think for at least bin Laden and for his deputy Zawahiri, they have been reduced to commentating on events in the Islamic world," Clarke said. "They have almost become terrorist bloggers, rather than terrorists' commanders."
Clarke also thinks it is more than coincidence these tapes surfaced just days before the third anniversary of President Bush's trip to the U.S.S. Lincoln, when the president spoke of an end to combat operations in Iraq in front of a banner declaring, "Mission Accomplished."
With the U.S. death toll in Iraq now topping 2,400 and the State Department reporting terrorist attacks there have nearly doubled, the mission is far from accomplished, and al Qaeda likely is trying to remind Americans of that.
In Bush's radio address today, responding to Zarqawi's taped taunts, the president said terrorists feel threatened by the newly-formed Iraqi government.
"The enemies of freedom have suffered a real blow in recent days," Bush said, "and we have taken great strides on the march to victory."
The White House says the tapes show al Qaeda's leadership is under pressure and on the run.
But they also clearly show that more than four years after the war on terror began, the world's three most wanted terrorists remain alive and seemingly well.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 01:27 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Clarke believes Binny, Ayman, and Zark coordinated release of messages
"They have almost become terrorist bloggers useless experts, rather than terrorists relevant commanders."
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
04/30/2006 9:25 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It's almost like the three have matching Blackberries.
Posted by: ed ||
04/30/2006 9:30 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Clarke is living proof that there are plenty of career opportunities for you with the MSM if you were an incompetent at your job in the White House and are critical of the Bush administration.
Al Qaeda is no longer the organization it was four years ago, as international efforts have disrupted its operations and many of its leaders have been killed or captured.
According to the annual report on worldwide terrorism in the year 2005, issued by the State Department on Friday, Al Qaeda is nevertheless adaptive and resilient and important core members of the group remain alive. There is an increasing Al Qaeda emphasis on ideological and propaganda activity, which has led to terrorist operations in Iraq and Al Qaeda affiliates around the world. Last year, there was an increase in suicide bombings, including in Afghanistan. Also witnessed was a growth of strategically significant networks that support the flow of foreign terrorists in Iraq. The US, the report added, was still in the first phase of a potentially long war and would face a resilient enemy for years to come.
Discussing general trends, the report noted that increasingly small autonomous cells and individuals drawing on advanced technologies and the tools of globalisation combined with the motivation to commit a terrorist act represented micro actors who were extremely difficult to detect or counter. Many terrorists worldwide moved to improve their sophistication in exploiting the global interchange of information, finance and ideas. They also improved their technological ability across many areas of operational planning, communications, targeting and propaganda. The report stated that in some cases, terrorists used the same networks used by transnational criminal groups, exploiting the overlap with organizational networks to improve mobility, build support for their terrorist agenda and avoid detection.
The report pointed out that the most intractable terrorist safe havens worldwide tend to exist astride international borders or in regions where ineffective governance allows their presence, such as Afghanistans borders or Somalia or some parts of Southeast Asia. The report said that denying safe havens to terrorists requires a regional approach based on coordinated action by the US working with partner governments, who, in turn, world with regional partners and institutions. Corruption, poverty, a lack of civic institutions and social services, and the perception that law enforcement and legal systems are biased or brutal are conditions that terrorists exploit to create allies of to generate a permissive operating environment. Efforts to build partner capacity and encourage more effectively with each other at the regional level are key to denying terrorists safe haven, the report stated.
In its section on India, the report noted that as in previous years, terrorists staged hundreds of attacks on people and property in India, the most prominent terrorist groups being violent extremist separatists operating in Jammu and Kashmir, Maoists in the Naxalite belt in eastern India, and ethno-linguistic nationalists in Kashmiri terrorist groups who made numerous attacks on elected Indian and Kashmiri politicians, targeted civilians in public areas, and attacked security forces. Hundreds of non-combatants were killed, most of whom were Kashmiri Muslims. The report said according to Indian experts, the April 2005 attack on the bus depot for Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus was designed to inhibit growing Kashmiri enthusiasm for normalization of ties between Indian- and Pakistani-controlled Kashmir. Lashkar-i-Tayyaba and and Jaish-e-Mohammad claimed responsibility for many of these attacks. Some of these groups, the annual review said, are believed to maintain ties to Al Qaeda.
The report noted that civilian fatalities from terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir continued a five-year decline in the first nine months of 2005. The Indian Government and military, it added, credit improved tactics and a fence that runs along the Line of Control for having significantly reduced the number of terrorists who cross into Indian Kashmir, thus resulting in a lower number of attacks and fatalities in Jammu and Kashmir. The report said, After the October 8 earthquake in Pakistan that reportedly killed many Kashmir-based terrorists, however, the terrorists launched a series of high-profile attacks across the degraded frontier defences in an effort to prove their continued relevance. Indian experts believe that the car bombs, grenade attacks, daytime assassinations, and assassination attempts on Kashmiri political leaders, including current and former state ministers, were designed to signal that the terrorist groups retained the ability to conduct spectacular operations despite their reported losses.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 01:02 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Terrorists use the press and public relations as weapons, said a study released Wednesday by Arizona State University.
"People are surprised the jihadis think of the media as a weapon," said Steven Corman, director of the school's Consortium for Strategic Communication and a Defense Department consultant on communications networks and counterterrorism.
His study analyzed almost 300 al Qaeda statements, letters and other documents, many of them captured during U.S. military actions in the Middle East and recently declassified by the Pentagon.
The report found that jihadist operations use consistent patterns of outreach that establish them socially and religiously, generate public sympathy and intimidate opponents. Threats, in fact, are part of terrorist "talking points."
"Jihadis pursue these strategies using sophisticated, modern methods of communications and public relations," Mr. Corman said. "There's evidence in the documents that jihadis segment audiences and adapt their message to the audience."
This week, audio and video messages from Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab Zarqawi were posted on the Internet and immediately picked up by international news organizations.
The report cites similar demonstrations as the "ideological machinery" of terrorist organizations, which maintain formal information committees and are adept at using print, broadcast and online resources on a global basis. The Internet provides such a promising terrorist forum that Mr. Corman suggests the United States create a permanent "geek battalion" to disrupt jihadist message boards and Web sites.
The United States monitors terrorist messages through clandestine agencies or within the State Department's Office of Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. That office follows the objectives set forth by Undersecretary Karen Hughes: to "isolate and marginalize the violent extremists; confront their ideology of tyranny and hate;" and "undermine their efforts to portray the West as in conflict with Islam by empowering mainstream voices and demonstrating respect for Muslim cultures and contributions," the office's mission statement says.
Mr. Corman and co-author Jill Schiefelbein said the Arizona study is a response to "controversies about efforts by the U.S. to influence foreign media coverage of jihadi activities. ... While we deliberate such issues, the jihadis are busy executing a communications and media strategy of their own."
The authors worked closely with the Combating Terrorism Center, a research facility established in 2003 at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.
Mr. Corman offered six measures to counter al Qaeda's media savvy. He recommended that the United States try to improve its credibility with Muslim audiences, "degrade" the jihadis' outreach efforts, draw attention to terrorist messages that contradict Islam, deconstruct idealized historical concepts, systematically disrupt Internet operations and seek assistance from sympathetic American Muslims.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 00:59 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm just plumb out of room on my refrigerator door for any more of these "they're so smart" and "they're so scary" and they're so bouncy and resiliant" and "we're doomed" and "we're just shit" stories. Never in history have there been assholes caught or dying in such numbers and yet glorified for their imaginary prowess.
#2
The best PR weapon is dead jihadis. Nobody likes to back a loser. The next best weapon is economic development. It's great to go to Paradise and all, but a new fridge is a higher priority. Unfortunately, most policy makers think economic development means big factories, big roads, big bridges, when what it really means is little guys specializing and trading amongst themselves.
The U.S. military has only seen "loss, disaster and misfortune" in
Iraq, al-Qaida's No. 2 said, in a video message that a U.S. official deemed part of a propaganda campaign to demonstrate the terror network's relevancy.
The video by Ayman al-Zawahri, posted on an Islamic militant Web forum Saturday, came within the same week as an audiotape by
Osama bin Laden and a video by the head of al-Qaida's branch in Iraq a volley of messages by the group's most prominent figures.
Al-Zawahri, an Egyptian militant believed to be hiding in
Afghanistan or Pakistan, also denounced the leaders of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iraq as "traitors" and called on Muslims to rise up to "confront them."
He said that U.S. and British forces in Iraq had bogged down in Iraq and "have achieved nothing but loss, disaster and misfortune."
Al-Qaida in Iraq "alone has carried out 800 martyrdom operations (suicide attacks) in three years, besides the sacrifices of the other mujahedeen, and this is what has broken the back of American in Iraq," al-Zawahri said.
The video by al-Zawahri was first obtained by IntelCenter, a U.S. contractor that provides counterterrorism intelligence services to the U.S. government
U.S. counterterrorism officials were aware of the video and analyzing it, two officials said on condition of anonymity.
One of the officials, who would not be identified in compliance with office policy, said it was part of al-Qaida's ongoing propaganda blitz to demonstrate the terror group remained relevant.
Bin Laden issued an audiotape on Sunday accusing the United States and Europe of supporting a "Zionist" war on Islam in what many analysts saw as an attempt to draw support from moderate Muslims.
Two days later, the head of al-Qaida in Iraq the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi issued an audiotape in which he showed his face for the first time and denounced Iraq's attempts to form a new government. He called on Sunni Arabs to join the "jihad" or holy war in Iraq.
It was not known what prompted the release of bin Laden's, al-Zawahri's and al-Zarqawi's messages within the space of one week and to what degree they were coordinated.
Al-Zawahri's 16-minute video posted Saturday, entitled "A Message to the People of Pakistan," was mainly dedicated to criticism of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, accusing him of undermining his own country to help the United States,
Israel and India.
There was no date in the video, but al-Zawahri mentioned a "recent" visit in early March by
President Bush to India and Pakistan. During the visit, Bush "gave a great push to India's nuclear program while handing out orders and instructions in Pakistan," al-Zawahri said.
"Every soldier and officer in the Pakistani military should know that Musharraf is throwing them into the burner of civil war in return for the bribes he is getting from the United States," al-Zawahri said
"For this reason I call on every soldier and officer in the Pakistani army to disobey the orders of his commanders to kill Muslims in Pakistan or Afghanistan or otherwise he will be confronted by the mujahedeen," he said.
In the video, the gray-bearded al-Zawahri sat indoors, in front of a semi-translucent white curtain with rows of lace embroidery on it. Wearing a black turban and white traditional robes, he motioned often with his right hand, while his left arm remained largely still, as it has in other recent videos.
Al-Zawahri messages have closely followed bin Laden ones in the past, suggesting a degree of coordination. Al-Zarqawi's tapes, however, have often appeared more closely timed with events in Iraq.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 00:32 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Insurgents have "broken the back" of the U.S. in Iraq, Osama bin Laden's top lieutenant claims in a new video that surfaced on the Internet on Friday.
Ayman al-Zawahiri, al Qaeda's second-in-command, praises the fighters in Iraq and also urges Pakistanis to topple their president, whom he calls a "bribe-taking, treacherous criminal," in the tape.
He begins the 15-minute speech, titled "A Message to the People of Pakistan," with a reference to last month's three-year anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
He says al Qaeda operatives in Iraq have perpetrated "800 martyrdom operations in three years, besides the sacrifices of the other mujahedeen, and this is what has broken the back of America in Iraq."
He adds, "We praise Allah that three years after the Crusader invasion of Iraq, America, Britain and their allies have achieved nothing but losses, disaster and misfortunes."
Al-Zawahiri appears to be encouraging the Pakistani people to follow the lead of the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, telling them to stand up against "the Zionist-Crusader assault" on Muslims and overthrow Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.
Al-Zawahiri calls Musharraf a "traitor" who placed the country's nuclear program under the supervision of the U.S. government.
"I call on them to strive in earnest to topple this bribe-taking, treacherous criminal, and to back their brothers in the mujahedeen in Afghanistan with everything they've got," al-Zawahiri said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/30/2006 00:31 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Here is another 800 reasons to send in the B52's.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
04/30/2006 13:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
What's he want? An E for Effort? It's results that count, Zman. And you're coming up short on earth and depleting the virgin supply up above.
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/30/2006 15:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
800 martyrdom operations in three years
"And I'm happy to report that I wasn't the martyr in any one of 'em. Too important to the cause, ya know. They also serve who only hide in their caves."
Posted by: Matt ||
04/30/2006 15:39 Comments ||
Top||
#5
MINSTREL (singing): Brave Sir Robin ran away
ROBIN: No!
MINSTREL (singing): Bravely ran away away
ROBIN: I didn't!
MINSTREL (singing): When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled
ROBIN: No!
MINSTREL (singing): Yes Brave Sir Robin turned about
ROBIN: I didn't!
MINSTREL (singing): And gallantly he chickened out
Bravely taking to his feet
ROBIN: I never did!
MINSTREL (singing): He beat a very brave retreat
ROBIN: Oh, lie!
MINSTREL (singing): Bravest of the brave Sir Robin
ROBIN: I never!
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The Sudanese Government says it is ready to sign a deal brokered by the African Union (AU) to bring speedy peace to the war-torn Darfur region despite reservations over some of its contents. But on the eve of the AU's deadline for an agreement, the divided Darfur rebel movements have voiced reticence about the peace accord, which they are negotiating at talks in Nigeria.
Russian prosecutors have detailed their case against a former nuclear energy minister who was extradited to Russia last year from Switzerland, despite a rival U.S extradition request, accusing him and others of defrauding the state of $110 million, the Associated Press reported.
Tens of thousands of anti-war protesters have flooded New York streets to demand an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. About 300,000 people marched through Manhattan on Saturday and stretched for about 10 blocks as they headed down Broadway. The event was organised by the group United for Peace and Justice. Cindy Sheehan, a vociferous critic of the war whose 24-year-old soldier son also died in Iraq, joined the march, as did actress Susan Sarandon and the Reverend Jesse Jackson. 
KATMANDU, Nepal (AP) - Newly returned Nepalese legislators demanded Saturday that King Gyanendra be stripped of control over the 90,000-strong army, fearing he could use it to regain power after his recent concession to weeks of pro-democracy protests.
MIRAN SHAH, Pakistan - Pakistans army on Saturday asserted it had not lost its grip on a restive tribal region where hundreds of pro-Taleban militants have escalated attacks, triggering fighting that has left nearly 400 dead.
British troops in Iraq "lack the confidence to open fire" because of a "fear of prosecution", says a confidential Ministry of Defence (MoD) report seen by The Sunday Telegraph. It confirms that soldiers believe that if they shoot dead insurgents they will become embroiled in a "protracted investigation" and if prosecuted will receive "no support from the chain of command".
Palestinian Prime Minister 
BERLIN - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a psychopath and anti-Semite whose declarations resemble those of Adolf Hitler, Israeli acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in a newspaper interview on Saturday. Ahmadinejad speaks today like Hitler before taking power, Olmert told Germanys Bild newspaper. He speaks of the complete destruction and annihilation of the Jewish people.
French President Jacques Chirac proposed Friday the creation of a special account at the World Bank to channel international aid funds to the Palestinians and head off an impending financial meltdown in the territories. The escrow account could be used to send payments directly to 160,000 Palestinian civil servants, thus bypassing the Hamas-led government being boycotted by the international community because of its opposition to peace with Israel. Chirac made the suggestion during talks in Paris with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who is in France on the last leg of a European tour urging the resumption of aid. Accord to Chirac's spokesman, the president told Abbas "France would propose to its European and international partners ... that they reflect very rapidly on a mechanism to allow the resumption of aid."
Iran said on Saturday that it was willing to resume allowing snap UN atomic inspections if its case were dropped by the UN Security Council and passed back to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). But Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, said that Iran would not yield to UN demands that it abandon uranium enrichment, and criticised Friday's report by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the IAEA. ElBaradei said that UN checks in Iran had been hampered and Tehran had rebuffed requests to stop making nuclear fuel.
Participants in Lebanon's national dialogue held their first official discussion of potential replacements for President Emile Lahoud on Friday, bridging what had been a psychological barrier before adjourning until a follow-up session on May 16.
