The number of Taliban fighters in Uruzgan has increased, the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan is as leaky as a sieve, and the Taliban are now using types of bombs previously used mainly in Iraq. These are just some of the conclusions contained in the latest annual report the MIVD, the Dutch military intelligence and security service.
The MIVD has been looking at the situation in Afghanistan for some two years, with its work in the last 12 months focussing mainly on the province of Uruzgan, where Dutch troops will be deployed as from 1 August this year. It has been and still is the task of the military intelligence service to provide military command and the political world with reliable and objective information about the real situation in Afghanistan. To that end, all available means have been put to use: 'observers' on the ground, monitoring satellite and radio communications, aerial photographs and local information sources.
In an exclusive interview with Radio Netherlands, the outgoing director of the MIVD, Major General Bert Dedden, talked about the situation in southern Afghanistan and about the work of the service he leads. With regard to Uruzgan, Major General Dedden reports a growth in the of Taliban fighters in this province where The Netherlands will deploy a 1400-strong military - as part of a NATO operation - starting this August. Only a year ago, the MIVD counted some 300-350 Taliban fighters in Uruzgan; now that figure is estimated to be around 500.
A big problem, according to General Dedden, is the 'porous' border with neighbouring Pakistan. According to his service's annual report, al-Qaeda has shifted its attention from Iraq to Afghanistan, although this 'attention' mainly consists of al-Qaeda training camps in the border area and a flow of money from the Gulf region used to finance these camps and other 'training activities'.
Despite the presence of some 100,000 Pakistani security troops along the border, the Taliban seem to be able to cross over into Afghanistan almost without hindrance. According to the MIVD report: "Although the Pakistani security forces are busy rounding up foreign militants in the areas bordering Afghanistan, supporters of the Taliban are largely being left undisturbed," so says the 2005 annual report from the MIVD.
Not only are fighters being 'imported' with support from al-Qaeda, methods and materials previously unknown in Afghanistan are also starting to make an appearance: suicide bombings for example, a phenomenon rarely seen before in Afghanistan, and certain types of improvised bomb which, until now, were mainly used in Iraq. And while the actual number of Taliban fighters in Uruzgan may not seem particularly high, they pose a threat nonetheless.
General Dedden explains, "The problem is that this element [...] can move through the region very quickly, and that they can also merge in very easily among the population." This is why one of the tasks of the Dutch troops who will be operating in the province later this year is that of winning the confidence of the local population by means, for example, of running aid projects which produce real results. This kind of support and assistance could result in valuable information coming in from local people about the whereabouts of the Taliban.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I seem to recall a lot of "never again" following Vietnam, where the State Dept refused to allow us to pursue our enemies across borders into sanctuary areas. Yet we seem to have the same situation vis-a-vis Afghanistan and Pakistan. It's time for it to end. We need to tell Perv in no uncertain terms that the border needs to be closed, or WE'LL close it - permanently. A long string of overlapping, glowing craters will do the job. You'll be able to tell where the border is, day or night. Might be a little rough on the inhabitants, but then the inhabitants deserve a little rough treatment. One thing about it, they won't complain much.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/03/2006 13:28 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Only a year ago, the MIVD counted some 300-350 Taliban fighters in Uruzgan; now that figure is estimated to be around 500.
I realize I'm speaking out of complete ignorance here, but while my calculator says this is a 43% increase, the numbers still don't seem all that large to me. Especially considering that likely 100+ (or perhaps even several hundred) border crossers have been quietly killed in the interim, based on what some of Rantburg's correspondents have mentioned. Can anyone tell me if my understanding is seriously flawed?
#4
I did mention complete ignorance, gromgoru. No, I did not know that about Hamas. Do you have numbers on the other terror organizations, so I can (selfishly) decrease my ocean of ignorance? Todah rabah -- thanks!
When the US State Department issued its annual Country Reports on Terrorism last Friday, it listed numerous state-sponsors of terrorism, like Iran, and groups it considers foreign terrorist organizations, like Hamas, Al Qaeda, and Hizbullah. Conspiciously absent from the lists, however, was the Taliban.
In an article entitled "Terrorism's Dubious 'A' List," the non-partisan Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) reports that the religious extremist organization has never been listed as a terrorist group by the US, Britain, the EU, Canada, Australia, or any of the coalition partners, despite the fact that during its six year rule in Afghanistan, it provided save haven for Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, and currently is staging terrorist attacks against coalition forces and waging a national campaign of intimidation and fear.
The new report did designate the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region as a terrorist "haven," however.
In a CFR Q&A on the Taliban, Chistopher Langdon, a defense expert at the Institute for International Strategic Studies, describes the group as "an insurgent organization that will periodically use terrorism to carry out its operations."
According to Kathy Gannon, the former Associated Press bureau chief for Pakistan and Afghanistan, these [Taliban] have at times aligned themselves with Al Qaeda fighters and with mujahadeen (holy warriors) led by the anti-government warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. During the Soviet occupation, Hekmatyar received more support from US and Pakistani agents than any other fighter. "The Afghan Taliban is better organized today than it was in 2001," says Gannon, "they have more recruits [and they] have been able to take advantage of the lawlessness, the criminal gangs, and the corruption in the government."
Langton says Taliban forces "have largely recovered from their initial defeat," and are proving a savvy enemy for coalition forces. Taliban fighters have become encouraged by the domestic opposition some NATO nations face as they deploy in former Taliban strongholds previously patrolled by US forces, he says. "They are very adept at reading these signals and seeing where the weaknesses lie."
Some experts, like Mr. Langdon, say the Taliban aren't terrorists. "You could never say that the Taliban themselves espoused the wholesale use of terror," Langton says. But the CFR article points out that many others, like Amin Tarzi, the Afghanistan analyst for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, say that if the activities that the Taliban are carrying out were happening in any other country, they would be called terrorism.
He says a political motive is behind this double standard. In order to gain a broad base of support, Afghan President Karzai has reached out to Pashtuns, many of whom were members of the Taliban. "You can't call them 'terrorists' and at the same time reconcile with them," Tarzi says. In an April 2003 speech, Karzai noted a distinction between "the ordinary Taliban who are real and honest sons of this country [and those] who still use the Taliban cover to disturb peace and security in the country." Steven Simon, CFR's Hasib J. Sabbagh Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies, says Tarzi's explanation is plausible, "The designation of 'Foreign Terrorist Organization' has always been highly political," he says.
Former National Public Radio reporter Sarah Chayes, who has been living and working in Afghanistan since 2002, wrote in the March/April edition of The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that one only needs to look at how the traditional Afghan values of hospitality have changed to see how effective the Taliban have been in their campaign of intimidation and terror. In previous years, Ms. Chayes could freely visit local villages to buy produce and goods from local farmers for the organizations she helps run. But now she must ask them to come to her office because if she is seen talking to them publicly, they will probably be killed.
In reality, the four years since the Taliban's demise have been characterized by a steady erosion of security in distinct phases. The most recent phase, signaled by the rebuffs I received from the farmers, may represent a point of no return. These rebuffs are the consequence of a highly effective intimidation campaign that has been carried out in tightening circles around Kandahar by, for lack of a better term, resurgent Taliban. Handbills appear in village mosques threatening anyone who dares collaborate with foreigners or the Afghan government. Homes receive armed visitors, demanding provisions or other assistance. One of my farmer friends, afraid even to pronounce their name, refers to them as "fairies who come at night."
Chayes also writes that the US military obsession with Al Qaeda and "an Osama bin Laden-style, ideological confrontation" have acted like a set of blinders to the real problem with the Taliban, and that this has greatly disillusioned the average Afghan.
The steadily worsening situation in southern Afghanistan is not the work of some ineffable Al Qaeda nebula. It is the result of the real depredations of the corrupt and predatory government officials whom the United States ushered into power in 2001, supposedly to help fight Al Qaeda, and has assiduously maintained in power since, along with an "insurgency" manufactured whole cloth across the border in Pakistan a US ally. The evidence of this connection is abundant: Taliban leaders strut openly around Quetta, Pakistan, where they are provided with offices and government-issued weapons authorization cards; Pakistani army officers are detailed to Taliban training camps; and Pakistani border guards constantly wave self-proclaimed Taliban through checkpoints into Afghanistan.
Chayes says the result is that people in Kandahar, where she lives, "have reached an astonishing conclusion: The United States must be in league with the Taliban ... In other words, in a stunning irony, much of this city, the Taliban's former stronghold, is disgusted with the Americans not because of their Western culture, but because of their apparent complicity with Islamist extremists."
The Globe and Mail of Toronto reported Tuesday how Afghanistan's new parliament is having troubles learning to function correctly, but it is still moving ahead. The new parliament is "odd mixture of Muslim fundamentalists, former Taliban commanders, ex-Communist politicians, Western-educated women and even a former United Airlines pilot." The parliament is a baby, its members say, but they are hoping to "build and institution that lasts" longer than they do.
Finally, the Associated Press reports that, in a study being released Tuesday, Afghanistan and Iraq are listed as two of the world's ten most vulnerable states. Foreign Policy magazine, in its second annual "failed states index," ranked Sudan as the country under the most severe stress. The magazine goes on to say that the situation in Iraq (No. 4) and Afghanistan (No. 10) has deteriorated since 2005, the first year the survey was taken.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Our state department, our tax funded Ivy league colleges and our nationally funded radio - all stuck in a 20th Century mindset that is self-destructive. Sigh - it's time for these dinosaurs to head on down to the LA tarpits of their own making and step in.
#2
Taliban aren't terrorists...no certainly not, they're simply..."an insurgent organization that will periodically use terrorism to carry out its operations."
#3
Aad the point is... They are not lawful combattants, don't wear uniforms, don't respect Geneva convenetions and that means that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to them and so they are justicaibale to summary execution be them terrorists or not.
#4
Once they're dead, it makes no difference. Therefore, the way to settle this argument is to kill them all. Begin immediately, use any weapon that might be useful, and continue until the objective is achieved.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/03/2006 13:31 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Terrorists, shmirorists. I'm sick and tired of this stupid WoT mindset.
The African Union has extended the deadline to reach a peace agreement for Darfur by 48 hours. Salim Ahmed Salim, the chief AU mediator, said late on Tuesday that the extension aimed at giving negotiators a further chance to strike a deal. "Nigerian President and African Union Chairman Olusegun Obasanjo requested to further extend the deadline for ending the talks by another 48 hours ... to explore what more could be done ... to adopt and sign the agreement," Salim said moments before a midnight deadline for the talks to end expired.
Noureddine Mezni, AU spokesman, said the Nigerian president had also requested the extension so that a group of African heads of state who are due on Wednesday in the Nigerian capital Abuja, the talks venue, could participate.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The African Union has extended the deadline to reach a peace agreement for Darfur by 48 hours years.
Last week there was a minor shoot-out between the security forces of Chechen Prime Minister Ramzan Kadyrov and President Alu Alkhanov's men. All the free mass media in Russia reported this incident, which was actually nothing out of the ordinary. But not long ago, Bibo Dzutsev, considered a hero in Abkhazia and South Ossetia for fighting for their separatist causes, was killed in North Ossetia, and his death went unmarked in the national media.
This is a telling example: The mass media typically pay attention to Dagestan and Chechnya -- that is, to the East Caucasus. But the tinderbox in the Caucasus is moving to the West Caucasus.
Moscow has already committed a number of errors in the West Caucasus, all the more vexing since they were acts of idiocy, not conspiracy. Without any cause whatsoever, the Moscow authorities "cleaned up" peaceful Adygeya, threatened to oust President Khazret Sovmen and merge the republic with the Krasnodar region. They drove a small number of Wahhabis up against the wall in peaceful Kabardino-Balkaria and essentially provoked their uprising.
Ingushetia and North Ossetia are perhaps becoming Russia's two most serious problems in the Caucasus. In Ingushetia, the number of people who have been kidnapped and not found is increasing as real control is decreasing. Shamil Basayev gave an interview to Andrei Babitsky with impunity, and the camp of the Beslan terrorists was a few hundred meters from the Ingush village of Psedakh. The kidnapping of the elderly father-in-law of Ingush President Murat Zyazikov had the same impact as the kidnappings of General Gennady Shpigun or presidential envoy Valentin Vlasov in the late 1990s. How could this happen on "controlled" territory?
The situation in North Ossetia is as grave. Ossetia is doomed to be the Russian outpost in the Caucasus forever -- although Beslan, the "350 hostages" and the grenade launcher that, according to the version of events established by Ella Kesayeva's Voice of Beslan organization, hit the roof of the gymnasium just before it was stormed may change that.
It appears that President Vladimir Putin has not forgiven either the women of Beslan for their harsh words during their 2005 meeting or the Ossetian men for their reluctance to shut their women up. Deputy Prosecutor General Vladimir Kolesnikov, sent to investigate the Beslan terrorist act, has for some reason been detaining Ossetian officials who don't want to hush up the investigation.
Today armed policemen fill North Ossetia, and Kolesnikov is as popular in Ossetia as the notoriously brutal 19th-century General Alexei Yermolov is in Chechnya.
In these circumstances, a number of Kremlin actions seem like direct provocations, especially the arrest of the North Ossetian leader's respected chief of staff Sergei Takoyev; the repressions against the Alania football club (yet another blow to national pride); and Valery Gizoyev's call for Putin's re-election to a third term on behalf of a previously unknown nongovernmental organization.
Other actions may have been taken by the Kremlin with the best intentions (for example, returning Ingush refugees to the Prigorodny region), but turned into provocations. Most dangerously, even actions not arranged by the Kremlin (as Dzutsev's death seems not to have been) are believed to be provocations anyway.
Just a couple of lit matches would redirect the Ingush and Ossetians' hostility away from the Kremlin and toward each other. Then Moscow would be able to justify additional troops in Ingushetia or a change of power in North Ossetia.
The most horrifying thing is that such a decision might not by made at a high level. As the experience of Karbadino-Balkaria has shown, decisions about the Caucasus are made not by the Kremlin, but by local cops. But the fire of a new Ossetian-Ingush conflict would blaze so strongly that no one would be able to tell if the lit match was arson or an accident.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 07:06 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The ghost of Josef Vissarionovitch smiles knowingly...
Pakistan and Uzbekistan have signed nine agreements to reinforce cooperation in several fields including counter-terrorism.
The agreements were signed in Islamabad Tuesday after talks between Pakistan's President General Pervez Musharraf and visiting Uzbek President Islam Karimov to boost ties in trade, agriculture, counter-terrorism and consular matters.
Musharraf and Karimov told reporters that they had agreed to reinforce cooperation in counter-terrorism to promote regional peace and stability.
One major concern of Uzbekistan has been the presence of leading Uzbek Islamist Tahir Yuldashev in Pakistan's remote and turbulent region, bordering Afghanistan.
Tahir Yuldashev is wanted in Uzbekistan in relation to the involvement of his Uzbekistan Islamic Movement in a series of terrorist acts.
During Afghanistan's Taliban era, Yuldashev had settled down in Afghanistan along with hundreds of fighters but fled to the Pakistani tribal region of Waziristan after the rout of the Taliban regime in a US-led military action in Afghanistan in December 2001.
Yuldashev sustained serious injuries in a military operation in South Waziristan in March 2004 during a shoot-out with the Pakistani military but managed to escape. Since then there has been no trace of the pro-Al Qaeda rebel.
Pakistan's South and North Waziristan regions, bordering Afghanistan's Paktika and Khost provinces in the west have been the sites of frequent military operations since late 2003.
These operations have been aimed at tracking down fugitives of the Al Qaeda terrorist network and remnants of the Taliban, who fled the US-led military action in Afghanistan and took refuge in Pakistani tribal regions.
Visiting Pakistan after a gap of 14 years, Karimov described his talks with Musharraf as "constructive and open," saying that during both one-on-one meetings and delegation-level talks, issues were discussed of regional as well as global interest.
Musharraf said there was "complete" understanding between himself and his Uzbek counterpart on important regional and international issues of mutual concern.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:29 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
CHENGDU, April 28 (Xinhua) -- An advanced version of the China-developed new-generation fighter plane, the Xiaolong/FC-4, succeeded in its first flight on Friday in southwest China's Sichuan Province. Based on previous models, the Xiaolong/FC-1 and FC-3, the FC-4 is equipped with advanced electronics and weapons systems, which improve its combat capabilities, say experts.
Looks like an F-4 Phantom in some ways; no stealth whatsoever. Wonder if they'll sell a bunch to Hugo?
The success of the 16-minute test flight marks a significant step in China's aviation industry, and makes mass production possible.
The Xiaolong series is a multipurpose light fighter aircraft developed by the China Aviation Industry Corporation I(CAIC-I), the Chengdu Aircraft Group Corp. and China Aero Technology Import and Export Corporation. With advanced design and manufacturing technology, this export-oriented fighter plane is small, low in cost and suitable for modern warfare and the demands of military fighters, experts said.
The development program for the new-generation fighter aircraft was officially launched in 1999, led by the CAIC-I, the country's leading operator in the aerospace industry.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/03/2006 01:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The one in the picture is the FC-1. I tried to find a picture, but there is remarkably little information in google about the FC-4.
#2
The success of that plane will be its pricetag.
It is said that the plane is costing between $12 - $15mln dollar which is damn cheap compared to an F16.
So it will have a good market in Africa and some Asian countries.
Posted by: Murat ||
05/03/2006 3:18 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Diffuicult o say wit a single sideshot photo but it looks like a Mirage III (the fighter who was state of the art 4O years ago in the Six Days War). It is definitely not stealthy, has poor backwards vision (compare with the canopies in F15, F14, F16 and F/A18) and its aerodynamics look really old fashioned.
Now aht reamins to know is how good its electronics and how capable its misiles but for now I am unimpressed.
#4
I think it looks like an old MIG. There lies the truth... nothing but old building concepts with some new junk in it. Nothing to see here.
The key to China's Air Force is numbers (much like their Army)not technology. We could shoot these things out of the sky all day but, sooner or later, we got to reload. And that is their advantage, swarm their opponent with numbers.
#8
The key to China's Air Force is numbers (much like their Army)not technology. We could shoot these things out of the sky all day but, sooner or later, we got to reload.
Having a lot of little capable planes instead of a smaller number of capable ones means
1) Needing loooooots of fuel
2) Needing to train a looooooot of pilots
3) Needing loooooots of mechanics (otherwise you will be lucky if you get 10% vailability)
4) Needing loooooots of airfields
5) Neeeing to produce looooooots of spare parts
6) Needing loooooots of aircontrollers
Plus there is a limit on how many planes you can put in a given portion of sky before they begin to intefere with each other
For illustration of the quality force vs the unmanageable large mob think in how Wavell's 30 thousand gobbled a force of 200,000 Italians or how when the Germans invaded the Soviets had more tanks than rest of the world combined (60% of themuinavailable due to lack of spare parts) and less than five months later Stalin had to deny 200 tanks to Joukov for the counteroffensive because there was simply none in the reserve. None, Zero. Nada
#11
The Chinese have never really put a good airplane together that could seriously challange western fighters. Against the old Soviet planes in third world countries, they do great.
#12
FC-1 through FC-4 are essentually the same airframe. The FC-4 is upgraded with Italian avionics (digital displays, moving map). It also uses the MiG-29's engines (poor engine controls). Don't know about FC-4 radar upgrades, but the FC-1's Israeli radar (Elta-2032, Italian and Russian radar were options at one time) is decent, but limited in range and multi target attack modes.
From a Chinese perspective, it still has the drawback of the FC-1, namely it has a lot of foreign components (including joint production with Pakistan) that limits it's attractiveness for the PLAAF. The FC-1 was quoted at around $15 million. Compare that to stripped export versions of the F-16 that go for $20 million.
Posted by: ed ||
05/03/2006 9:06 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Difficult to use Google to find info on Chinese fighter aircraft?
#16
Does it need a pilot? If yes, semi-obselete. Does the pilot need to be trained? If yes, what's the quality of training? Is the training based on decades of air combat experience? If yes, against whom?
One could go on backwards into the past, and arrive at the invention of gunpowder - at which point, the Chinese were at the head of the technological field. A lot has happened since then, though.
#17
There are two reasons to build airplanes: home use and export. For the Chinese, having an aircraft industry means jobs, manufacturing experience and export income.
These babies may not stand up against modern American or Euro fighters, but not everyone is going up against First World militaries. Even if you have the planes, you still need pilots.
No doubt, lots of South American and African countries could use these against their neighbors and their own populace. Guys like Hugo will stock up on the grounds of preparing for the forthcoming Yankee invasion. I bet the Chinese sell a *bleep*load.
#18
Looks to me like an up-engined, slightly-modified cross between a Mig-21 and an F-5 (sold to the Vietnamese in three versions back in the early 1970's), with a vew other modifications thrown in for good measure. The tail is pure T-38. The underside strakes are similar to those on the Mig-23. The cockpit is pure Mig-21. The wings are T-38 with forward-projecting strakes similar to those found on the F-16 and some late-model F-5s. No innovation, just copy, cut-n-paste, and work it all together until it actually flies, then try to refine it to see if you can get it to do better. That's typical of World War II era thinking.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/03/2006 13:43 Comments ||
Top||
A German brothel seeking to drum up business during the World Cup has been forced to remove the national flags of Saudi Arabia and Iran from an array of flags on its facade after threats from Muslims saying it was insulting their faith.
It must have seemed like a good idea at the time. Europe's largest brothel, the Pascha in Cologne, which incidentally claims to be the world's only brothel with a money-back guarantee for dissatisfied customers, attached the flags of all 32 nations competing in the World Cup to its façade in a bid to demonstrate international flair and attract custom during the tournament this summer.
A giant poster covering the side of the seven-story, 126-apartment building showed a friendly-looking blonde woman lifting up her bra above the slogan "A Time to Make Girlfriends", in a play on the World Cup's official slogan "A Time to Make Friends." Right beneath her pink panties were posters of the flags, including those of strictly Islamic Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Pascha's manager Armin Lobscheid had also erected real flags of all the World Cup nations on another side of the building.
The campaign provoked excitement, but not the kind the management was hoping for. Men from the Muslim community came to the door complaining that showing the flags of Saudi Arabia and Iran was an insult to the Prophet Muhammad. Later, some returned in masks.
"On Friday evening we were threatened by 11 masked men who demand that we take down the Saudi Arabian flag," Lobscheid told the Kölner Express, a local newspaper. Not wanting any trouble, the brothel obliged and removed it and the Iranian one. But that still left the flags printed on the poster.
"On Saturday night there were 20 masked men armed with knives and sticks. They threatened to get violent and even bomb the place unless we black out the Iranian and Saudia Arabian flags on the poster as well," said Lobscheid.
The men had left before the police arrived. But to spare his establishment any more trouble, Lobscheid ordered a crane to black out the two flags as well. Lobscheid is now considering filing a complaint but also wants to hold talks with the local Muslim community.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 07:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Goo Lord! There is no limit to muslim stupidity.
Posted by: ed ||
05/03/2006 9:08 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Nonsense, ed. There will be plenty of earthly delites for all of the teams, with hot and cold running blondes for the Soddies. The locals were just showing the dhimmis who's boss.
The European Union's foreign policy chief said on Tuesday he had no proof U.S. intelligence agents had transferred al Qaeda suspects through Europe and that he had no powers to investigate the allegations.
A Washington Post report last year that the CIA had run secret rendition flights and secret prisons in eastern Europe for al Qaeda suspects unleashed a spate of investigations, but none have so far produced a "smoking gun", or solid proof.
"I have no information whatsoever that tells me with certainty that any of the accusations, allegations, rumours, that have taken place are true," Javier Solana told a committee of European Parliament lawmakers probing the allegations. "I do not have the information - I do not have the competence - to ask the countries how they have handled these questions," Solana added.
He said the European Union treaty only allowed the bloc's executive branch, the European Commission, or at least a third of member states acting in concert, to raise the issue. Solana advised lawmakers to question NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, but de Hoop Scheffer told the parliament's foreign affairs committee: "I have no information on so-called, alleged, quote-unquote, CIA flights or alleged renditions."
"Don't ask me, ask him!"
Solana's comments were sharply criticised by some EU lawmakers. British European parliamentarian Sarah Ludford said Solana had a political duty to probe the allegations. "It just paints such a pathetic picture of the EU," she said of Solana's assertion that he could not ask questions about the allegations and the possible complicity of some EU states.
You mean it paints a morepathetic picture of the EU.
Solana told EU lawmakers pressing him on whether EU countries had used information obtained under torture that he believed they were respecting the prohibition. "I have been tortured and I know what that means ... to say 'no' to torture," Solana said, referring to his past as a young socialist activist under Franco's dictatorship in Spain.
Solana said the accusations of CIA abuses were "certainly not marginal issues for the transatlantic relations." He said the US had given assurances about not using torture on CIA flights but that he would welcome similar assurances on not using incommunicado detentions.
Solana's powers are limited as he has no formal role as EU foreign minister.
Which doesn't stop him from yapping, and doesn't stop the EU parliament from giving him money.
According to Claudio Fava, an Italian EU lawmaker responsible for drafting the parliamentary committee's first interim report last week, more than 1,000 CIA flights had transited the European Union since 2001. Amnesty International has given the same figure, and the Council of Europe, another rights organisation investigating the allegations, said last month that one European state had admitted handing over terrorism suspects to foreign agents.
They think, since they can't prove anything.
A team led by Fava probing the alleged CIA abduction of a Kuwaiti-born German on Saturday visited a hotel where he stayed in Macedonia in 2004 and questioned whether his 23-day stay there was voluntary. Fava said on Friday there was no "hard evidence" to confirm Masri's claim he was kidnapped by Macedonian agents before being flown by the CIA to Afghanistan for interrogation.
The European Parliament committee has no legal or judicial power but can recommend sanctions against states.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:47 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I don't do very much. But it pays well...
Posted by: Javier Solana ||
05/03/2006 12:24 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Actually they don't want to be embarrassed by their strong support and participation in said renditions.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/03/2006 16:13 Comments ||
Top||
COPENHAGEN: A Danish newspaper said on Tuesday it had filed a defamation lawsuit against a lawyer representing a group of Muslim organisations that sued the daily for publishing cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
The Jyllands-Posten sued Michael Christiani Havemann for saying its top editors ordered a cartoonists to deliberately make a gross drawing of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) because those solicited by freelance artists were not good enough. The 12 cartoons published by the daily in September prompted angry mobs to attack Western embassies in Muslim countries, including Lebanon, Iran and Indonesia. The cartoons later were reprinted in several countries worldwide.
Jyllands-Posten Editor in Chief Carsten Juste said Havemanns accusations are simply so gross and insulting that he has crossed the line for what we will accept. The cartoonists were explicitly asked to freely depict the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as they saw him, in other words without any directions from the newspapers side, he said in a statement. The purpose of the cartoons was to challenge a perceived self-censorship among artists afraid to offend Islam, Juste said.
The newspaper is seeking $16,800 in damages, and demanded a court ruling stating Havemanns statement was incorrect. In a March 29 news release, Havemann wrote: According to my information, the grossest of the cartoons, the one with the bomb, was drawn by the papers employed cartoonist, apparently on the instructions of management because the cartoons drawn by the freelance artists were not gross enough.
Havemann was not immediately available for comment. On March 29, 27 Muslim organisations represented by Havemann filed a defamation lawsuit calling the drawings gratuitously defamatory and injurious. They sought $16,800 in damages from the daily. No date for a hearing has been set. The newspaper apologised for offending Muslims, but stood by its decision to print the drawings, citing freedom of speech.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'll raise your TRANZI law suit and call you. Turn about is more than fair play.
What is the saying about folks that buy ink by the barrel?
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/03/2006 3:41 Comments ||
Top||
#2
This lawsuit business cuts both ways, eh Mamoud?
Personally, I thought the bomb-in-the-turban cartoon was the best of the lot. Three cheers for the Danes for standing up to this crap.
In all the recent talk about whether Donald H. Rumsfeld should quit running the Pentagon, little has been said about successors who might be better able to complete the U.S. military mission in Iraq.
When lawmakers and others are pressed, the names that come up most often include several current and former members of the Senate. Some say a member of Congress taking the defense secretarys job would improve an oft-cited Rumsfeld shortcoming impatience with the legislative branch and a reluctance to consult fully with its members.
A current or former lawmaker also might do a better job of communicating with the public a key factor in an election year in which party control of Congress will be up for grabs.
Even a supporter, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, calls Rumsfeld not overly communicative.
Names sometimes mentioned include Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., a former Navy secretary; Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.; and former Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga.
With President Bushs strongly worded public support, it appears Rumsfeld will remain at the Pentagon, where after more than five years in the job he is one of the longest-serving defense secretaries in history.
When his critics attack Rumsfeld, they generally focus on blame for what has gone wrong in Iraq. A resilient insurgency has taken nearly 2,400 American lives since the 2003 invasion, far more than expected, and Iraqis have struggled mightily to create a stable government and provide their own security.
But the critics have said little about who might do better at this stage, which the Bush administration has labeled a year of transition from U.S. to Iraqi control, with the hope of beginning to withdraw some American forces.
America deserves a secretary of defense who has the vision to implement a policy in Iraq that is worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform, said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., one of Rumsfelds harshest critics.
Jon Soltz, a veteran of the Iraq war and director of a political action committee for Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, said his group is neutral on the question of whether Rumsfeld should go or stay.
Whats more important than identifying a possible successor is that those of us who have been on the ground in Iraq, have served in the war on terror in Afghanistan, know that there needs to be a fresh start, Soltz said.
He rejected the administrations emphasis on staying the course in Iraq and said fresh ideas are urgently needed.
Michael OHanlon, a defense analyst at the Brookings Institution, said he has little doubt that Rumsfeld will remain at the Pentagon for some time, despite the unpopularity of the Iraq war and criticism of his management style. He called Lieberman one of the few Democrats who would accept the job and who could get along with Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
There is recent precedent for having a member of the opposing political party at the head of the Pentagon. William Cohen, a former Republican senator from Maine, served as defense secretary throughout President Clintons second term.
Clintons first defense secretary was Democrat Les Aspin, a former chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, who stepped down after one year in the aftermath of U.S. intervention in Somalia.
OHanlon also mentioned Nunn, a former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, as another possibility. But Im not sure even he would take it under these circumstances, OHanlon said.
Of the several retired generals who have stepped forward to urge Rumsfelds sacking, none has proposed a specific replacement. Many lawmakers from both parties also were mum when pressed for possible replacements for Rumsfeld, perhaps seeing little point in advancing a candidate for a job that might not be vacant.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 07:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sam Nunns missed the boat about 5 times now. He coulda been a contender.
#4
Hint: It's not about Rumsfeld. It's about Bush. And unfortunately (for them), even if they impeached Bush the prescribed presidential succession would bring them their worst nightmare, President Cheney. So they're left with Rummy as the whipping boy. Sorry, Don.
#5
Hmmmmmmm, "impatience with the legislative branch " since Donny Dear was a congress critter himself, you think this might be due to some first hand experience?
#7
Yes, LH, you're correct, but that doesn't mean that the Congress should get to "run" the war itself. Or just say he doesn't communicate with them, just because they don't like what he's told them before. One of the most dangerous things we could do with our military is allow it to become politicized and directed by either the Executive of the Legislature. I believe that even having the President call the detailed shots day-to-day may be pushing it. When in war, let the Generals and the COs on the ground call the shots.
Posted by: BA ||
05/03/2006 10:30 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Oops, Executive OR the Legislature...
Posted by: BA ||
05/03/2006 10:31 Comments ||
Top||
#11
"I believe that even having the President call the detailed shots day-to-day may be pushing it."
well then the current president is the man for you. No danger of that under his watch. Its been said that under no previous prez (at least recently) has the president had so little direct contact with the brass, and delegated so completely to the SecDef.
#12
"The U.S. Constitution
Although the Constitution grants no formal, express authority to oversee or
investigate the executive or program administration, oversight is implied in Congresss impressive array of enumerated powers.3 The legislature is authorized to appropriate funds; raise and support armies; provide for and maintain a navy; declare war; provide for organizing and calling forth the national guard; regulate interstate and foreign commerce; establish post offices and post roads; advise and consent on treaties and presidential
nominations (Senate); and impeach (House) and try (Senate) the President, Vice President, and civil officers for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Reinforcing these powers is Congresss broad authority to make all laws which
shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all
other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any
Department or Officer thereof.
The authority to oversee derives from these constitutional powers. Congress could
not carry them out reasonably or responsibly without knowing what the executive is
doing; how programs are being administered, by whom, and at what cost; and whether
officials are obeying the law and complying with legislative intent. The Supreme Court
has legitimated Congresss investigative power, subject to constitutional safeguards for
civil liberties. In 1927, the Court found that, in investigating the administration of the
Department of Justice, Congress was considering a subject on which legislation could
be had or would be materially aided by the information which the investigation was
calculated to elicit.4
Statutes The necessary and proper clause of the Constitution also allows Congress to enact
laws that mandate oversight by its committees, grant relevant authority to itself and its
support agencies, and impose specific obligations on the executive to report to or consult
with Congress, and even seek its approval for specific actions.
Broad oversight mandates exist for the legislature in several significant statutes. The
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (P.L. 79-601), for the first time, explicitly called
for legislative oversight in public law. It directed House and Senate standing
committees to exercise continuous watchfulness over programs and agencies under their
jurisdiction; authorized professional staff for them; and enhanced the powers of the
Comptroller General, the head of Congresss investigative and audit arm, the General
Accounting Office (GAO). The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-510)
authorized each standing committee to review and study, on a continuing basis, the
application, administration and execution of laws under its jurisdiction; increased the
CRS-4
professional staff of committees; expanded the assistance provided by the Congressional
Research Service; and strengthened the program evaluation responsibilities of GAO. The
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-344) allowed committees to conduct program
evaluation themselves or contract out for it; strengthened GAOs role in acquiring fiscal,
budgetary, and program-related information; and upgraded GAOs review capabilities.
Besides these general powers, numerous statutes direct the executive to furnish
information to or consult with Congress. For example, the Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-62) requires agencies to consult with Congress on their
strategic plans and report annually on performance plans, goals, and results. In fact, more
than 2,000 reports are submitted each year to Congress by federal departments, agencies,
commissions, bureaus, and offices. Inspectors general (IGs), for instance, report their
findings about waste, fraud, and abuse, and their recommendations for corrective action,
periodically to the agency head and Congress. The IGs are also instructed to issue special
reports concerning particularly serious and flagrant problems immediately to the agency
head, who transmits them unaltered to Congress within seven days. Inspectors general
also communicate with Members, committees, and staff of Congress in other ways,
including testimony at hearings, in-person meetings, and written and electronic
communications. The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-531), moreover,
instructs the IGs to identify and describe their agencies most serious management and
performance challenges and briefly assess progress in addressing them. This new
requirement is to be part of a larger effort by individual agencies to consolidate their
numerous reports on financial and performance management matters into a single annual
report. The aim is to enhance coordination and efficiency within the agencies; improve
the quality of relevant information; and provide it in a more meaningful and useful format
for Congress, the President, and the public.
In addition to these avenues, Congress creates commissions and establishes task
forces to study and make recommendations for select policy areas that can also involve
examination of executive operations and organizations.
There is a long history behind executive reports to Congress. Indeed, one of the first
laws of the First Congressthe 1789 Act to establish the Treasury Department (1 Stat.
66)called upon the Secretary and the Treasurer to report directly to Congress on public
expenditures and all accounts. The Secretary was also required to make report, and give
information to either branch of the legislature ... respecting all matters referred to him by
the Senate or House of Representatives, or which shall appertain to his office.
Separate from such reporting obligations, public employees may provide information
to Congress on their own. In the early part of the 20th century, Congress enacted
legislation to overturn a gag rule, issued by the President, that prohibited employees
from communicating directly with Congress (5 U.S.C. 7211 (1994)). Other
whistleblower statutes, which have been extended specifically to cover personnel in the
intelligence community (P.L. 105-272), guarantee the right of government employees to
petition or furnish information to Congress or a Member.
#13
Well, that is unreadable but appears to be a long winded version of "Well yeah, Congress doesn't have oversight power but if it plays it's cards properly and uses its actual powers properly it is tantamount to oversight power." Which is different from saying Congress provides oversight of the Executive. It does not.
It acts as a co-equal branch in a check and balance system that provides for independence but works best with cooperation between the branches.
1. No the constitution dont say "the congress shall all cabinet secretaries to testify in order to exercise oversight" but it DOES say that congress shall appropriate the money, pass laws of all kinds, including laws directly impacting the functioning of the executive. Hard to do that without the info from oversight.
2. This was first approved by SCOTUS, way back in 1927. IE before anyone had heard of Justice Warren. Back in the days of "strict constructionist" courts.
3. Statutes have repeatedly reaffirmed this.
I mean cmon. Nobody really denies that Congress has this right. The Repubs exercised it during the Clinton years, and probably will again. Nobody, AFAIK has challenged the constitutionality of the statutes that provide for it. Youre going way out there now.
#15
The problem is the definition of words, LH. To the current Congress, especially the donkey half, "oversee" means "control". The Congress passes laws, the Executive implements them. Congress has NO authority to implement laws on its own. The Supreme Court and the justice system is there to ensure that none of the laws Congress passes, nor any of the implementation done by the President (directly, or through appointed officials, i.e., cabinet leaders) infringes upon the basic rights of the citizen.
If all of our government did the job they were supposed to do, our government would be 1/3 its size, spend 10% of what it currently spends, and be less intrusive in everyone's life. Unfortunately, it's the character of the bureaucratic beast to assume greater and greater control at the expense of the "peasants". It takes a revolution every now and then to get things back on an even keel. It's rough on bureaucrats, but they deserve anything they get.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/03/2006 14:20 Comments ||
Top||
#16
LH: well then the current president is the man for you. No danger of that under his watch. Its been said that under no previous prez (at least recently) has the president had so little direct contact with the brass, and delegated so completely to the SecDef.
my mother is a retired teacher [life long Dhimmicrat], and she says all kinds of stuff LH. »:-) hi mom!
Congress and war powers:
The Founders considered and rejected [sic Congress meddling , wading into Presidential Powers ] such a contention. The Constitution provides a check to the Executives power over the military by vesting in the Legislative Branch the sole authority to raise armies, and to declare war.[103] But that the Constitution vests the war making authority in the President seems beyond dispute.[104] Thus, the Constitutions own internal framework checks Presidential power while at the same time energizing the Executive. Congress likely has many checks on the program, including defunding the program or aspects entirely, but rewriting the Presidents Article II war powers is not one of those options.
Nor is the uniqueness of this war [sic WOT] a substantive charge. That the war on terror might last for years, decades, or even generations does not lessen the Constitutional gravamen set forth in Article II, Section 2....
*********
Congress
..
has authorized the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
Whereas on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and Whereas such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and Whereas in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and Whereas such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States
************
Courts of recent .
As a threshold question, this inquiry demands a determination of whether the United States is in fact at war such that the Executives Article II war powers are invoked? The absence of a formal Congressional declaration of war in this instance is unpersuasive. Likely dispositive is the Authorization for Use of Military Force, which declared the President may use all necessary and appropriate force against nations, organizations, and persons associated with the September 11th attacks.
[93] The Congressional Authorization clearly intended and authorized use of the American military forces. As Commander in Chief of those forces the Presidents war powers are necessarily implicated.
[94] The Supreme Court confirmed this when it reasoned that, There can be no doubt that individuals who fought against the United States in Afghanistan as part of the Taliban, an organization known to have supported the Al Qaeda terrorist network responsible for those attacks, are individuals Congress sought to target in passing the AUMF.[95] The NSA program is directed at Al Qaeda and its members and supporters.[96] Thus, the Presidents Article II war powers are involved.
That the War on Terror crosses transnational boundaries including the borders of the United States, or that it implicates citizens of numerous nations including this Nations, only serves to heighten the Constitutional powers delegated to the Executive, not to diminish them.
As Alexander Hamilton famously wrote in Federalist No. 74, Of all the cares or concerns of government, the direction of war most peculiarly demands those qualities which distinguish the exercise of power by a single hand. The direction of war implies the direction of the common strength; and the power of directing and employing the common strength, forms a usual and essential part in the definition of the executive authority.
[97]The Supreme Court has long paid heed to Article IIs plenary grant of power to the Executive branch in its exclusive delegations.
[98] In addressing the Presidents foreign affairs powers in 1936 the Court reasoned the President has his confidential sources of information. He has his agents in the form of diplomatic, consular and other officials. Secrecy in respect of information gathered by them may be highly necessary, and the premature disclosure of it productive of harmful results.
******************
for instance, FISA is a statute of Congress
NOT a Constitutional article. The President is vested, by Article II, with an inherent authority to conduct war. The Founders took care in making this delegation plenary.
[plenary sic Complete in all respects; unlimited and full]
The Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, meeting in closed session, begin their hearings into the dismissal of Gen. Douglas MacArthur by President Harry S. Truman. The hearings served as a sounding board for MacArthur and his extremist views on how the Cold War should be fought.
General MacArthur served as commander of U.S. forces during the Korean War until 1951. In late 1950 he made a serious strategic blunder when he dismissed warnings that the People's Republic of China would enter the conflict on the side of its communist ally, North Korea. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese troops smashed into the American lines in November 1950, driving the U.S. troops back with heavy losses. MacArthur, who had earlier complained about President Truman's handling of the war, now went on an all-out public relations attack against the president and his Cold War policies. In numerous public statements and interviews, General MacArthur criticized Truman's timidity. He also asked for permission to carry out bombing attacks against China and to expand the war. President Truman flatly refused, believing that expanding the war would lead to a possible confrontation with the Soviet Union and World War III. On April 11, 1951, President Truman removed MacArthur from his command. Though Truman clearly did not appreciate MacArthur's approach, the American public liked his tough stance on communism, and he returned home to a hero's welcome.
On May 3, 1951, just a few days after MacArthur's return to the United States, the Senate Armed Forces and Foreign Relations Committees began hearings into his dismissal. Partisan politics played a significant role in the hearings, which were instigated by Republican senators eager to discredit the Democratic administration of Harry Truman. MacArthur was the featured witness, and he spoke for more than six hours at the opening session of the hearings. He condemned Truman's Cold War foreign policy, arguing that if the president's "inhibitions" about the war in Korea had been removed the conflict could have been "wound up" without a "very great additional complement of ground troops." He went on to suggest that only through a strategy of complete military destruction of the communist empire could the U.S. hope to win the Cold War. The hearings ended after seven weeks, with no definite conclusions reached about MacArthur's dismissal. However, the general's extremist stance and intemperate statements concerning the need for an expanded conflict against communism during the hearings soon eroded his popularity with the American public. MacArthur attempted to garner the Republican presidential nomination in 1952, but lost to the more moderate campaign of another famed military leader, Dwight D. Eisenhower."
#18
Correct me if I'm wrong, for I was born in the middle of the Vietnam War and was more obsessed with Sesame Street at the time.
I recall in my history classes that one of the "causes" of the American defeat was that the Executive Branch, specifically the President, micromanaged the war from the Oval Office. If this president isn't doing that, and is letting the Defense Department and the commanders on the ground run the show, isn't that a good thing, LH? (Of course, assuming that the President isn't ignoring it completely, which no one has accused him of doing.)
If the 100 generals in the Senate and 435 generals in the House are trying to micromanage the situation, I don't see how that can work out any better than it did in the late 60's - early 70's.
#19
LH is sorta right, Congress can cut funding and other things to make executive power hard, but if Congress gets to uppity then the president can start vetoeing everthing that comes out of Congress
#20
That is what I was getting at, DB. A lot of the current Congress (especially Democrats) are still living in the Vietnam era, where exactly what you said happened. I'm much happier with Dubya stepping back and letting the military call the shots (with some oversight, of course, but not micromanaging). Imagine if Dubya had to approve every single air strike, bombing campaign, ground intrusion, etc. in Iraq. Time is of the essenece, especially in this war, so I'm glad he lets the military handle the important details, and may only ask for briefings after the baddies are capped.
Posted by: BA ||
05/03/2006 16:13 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Yes, DB. Micromanagement from Washington was recognized as one of the 'lessons learned' from Vietnam. That is one of the reasons why reformers in Congress passed the Goldwater-Nichols Act. If you dig through it, you'll find that the man in charge on the ground, the Theater Commander, is the one in charge of operations. Now, the President or SecDef can always fire him or can deny requests for more resources, but the execution is his and his alone. He may coordinate, he may inform, he may operate as 'mother may I' if he chooses. Which gets us back to all this whining as to identifying which Theater Commander asked for more troops and was refused? Just ask the critics that one question. They seem to have a very hard time coming up with that specific answer concerning Iraq.
#25
It is hard for those of us born without common sense, 2b. But I struggle with it daily, and am grateful to those kind strangers who help me get across the street safely. ;-)
Prosecutors at the trial of a Pakistani immigrant accused of conspiring to bomb the Herald Square subway station in 2004 played a secretly recorded videotape for the jurors in the case today. The tape showed the man talking about the plan with a police informer and another man, who has since admitted to taking part in the plot.
The immigrant, Shahawar Matin Siraj, 23, agrees to guide a bomber into the Herald Square subway station at West 34th Street, which he has visited on a number of occasions as he developed the plot. He agrees to check the area in advance of the bomber's entry into the station and to point out to him where to place one or two back-pack bombs.
But speaking in disjointed English, he refuses to place the bombs himself, saying he does not want to be blamed for any deaths. He also says he needs to ask his mother.
"I will work with those brothers, that's it," he says, on the black and white video, which was projected on a large screen on the courtroom wall and lasted about 45 minutes. "As a planner or whatever. But to putting there? I'm not sure."
Later he explains to the informer, Osama Eldawoody, a 50-year-old Egyptian who was naturalized as a United States citizen: "I don't want to carry neither I want to put it, from my hands. What if that guy who will be going to come out of the train will be Muslim. Thing about every single thing."
He says several times that he wants only to cause economic damage, not to kill anyone.
The government has sought to portray Mr. Siraj as a dangerous man bent on carrying out a devastating attack. His lawyers, however, contend that the young man, who came to New York from Karachi, Pakistan, in 1999 to join his parents, was duped.
They have said that when a fuller picture is presented, it will be clear that Mr. Siraj was manipulated by the police informer, who they contend orchestrated the plot for money, nearly $100,000 that the Police Department paid him over two years and nine months, much of it while he was working on this case.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 07:25 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Send him back to Karachi. Clearly he isn't suited for the temptations of life in America.
ROCKVILLE, Md. (AP) - Lee Boyd Malvo was once so close to convicted Washington-area sniper John Allen Muhammad that he called him ``Dad.'' But more than three years after they were arrested for the shootings, any devotion appears to be gone. Malvo is negotiating a plea bargain in which he would testify for the prosecution at Muhammad's trial for six Maryland sniper shootings in 2002, a source familiar with the case said Tuesday.
After which he goes into a hole for the rest of his life.
Malvo is prepared to testify about the shootings and his relationship with Muhammad, said the source, who requested anonymity because the deal was not complete. Under the terms being considered, the source said Malvo would plead guilty in connection with the shootings and would be sentenced to life in prison without parole. Malvo's attorneys did not return calls, and Montgomery County prosecutors would not comment.
For a look into the mind of young Lee Malvo in October 2002, go here.
Muhammad, who is defending himself, was told of the development Tuesday morning by his standby attorney before the second day of jury selection began. J. Wyndal Gordon said Muhammad was not surprised, since Malvo is on both Muhammad's witness list and the prosecution's list. Muhammad is prepared to cross-examine Malvo if he is called to testify, Gordon said. ``Mr. Muhammad harbors no ill feelings for Mr. Malvo.'' Separately, Muhammad indicated to the judge that he probably will testify in his own defense.
Oh please, oh please, oh please, oh please ...
As jury selection continued, Muhammad asked Circuit Judge James Ryan to question prospective jurors more closely about their opinions about the case, which he said aren't likely to change during the trial. Almost all of the more than 90 individuals questioned by the judge through midday Tuesday said they already had formed an opinion. Those who said they could still render a fair and impartial verdict were chosen for a pool from which the 12 jurors and four alternates are to be selected Thursday. ``In my experience, I've learned a lot about human beings, and human beings just don't flip-flop like that on a moment's notice,'' Muhammad said.
We've learned from human experience about you, bubbo.
Ryan agreed to probe more deeply and excused several people who said their minds were made up.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Muhammad, who is defending himself
Well, we know he has a fool for a client.
Pakistan has no plans to act against two charities listed by the US last week as terrorist organisations, the foreign ministry said yesterday.
The State Department last Friday designated Jamaat ud-Dawa and one of its affiliates, Idara Khidmat-e-Khalq, as terrorist organisations, saying they were fronts for Lashkar-e-Taiba, one of the most feared Islamist groups fighting Indian rule in Kashmir.
The State Department said all assets held by the two charities in the US would be frozen.
Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam said Pakistan was under no obligation to comply with the US decision.
We are not required, and we do not put any entities on the terrorist lists, if action is taken under the domestic US law, she told her weekly news briefing.
However, if the UN Security Councils sanctions committee were to designate any organisation (as a terrorist group), then it becomes legal obligation to take action.
Typically, organisations anticipate that they will be sanctioned and shift their funds before they can be frozen, and change their names to escape the ban.
Jamaat ud-Dawa has been prominent in providing relief after an earthquake killed over 73,000 people and left around 3mn destitute in Kashmir and northwest Pakistan in October.
Lashkar was banned by Pakistan in January 2002 after a militant attack on the Indian parliament brought the two nuclear-armed South Asian neighbours to the brink of a war.
Lashkar, which grew out of an anti-US Sunni missionary group, was put on the US terrorist list in 2001.
It was also sanctioned by a UN committee on terrorism for its association with Al Qaeda, though security analysts say that Lashkar has maintained less strong linkages with Osama bin Ladens network than several other Pakistan jihadi movements.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:25 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
The Centre has decided to strengthen village defence committees in areas of Kashmir prone to militant attacks following the massacre of Hindus in Doda district.
We would soon be taking steps to make village defence committees stronger in such areas so that they can defend themselves, said home secretary V.K. Duggal.
Duggal said he was amazed to see the resilient spirit of people during his visit to Udhampur with home minister Shivraj Patil today. Despite the provocation, people of the minority community are not thinking of moving away and are being helped by their Muslim neighbours.
However, Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) chief Yasin Malik believes the Centres move will only make Hindus more vulnerable and even sow seeds of communal animosity.
The Centre should think of some creative possibilities to stop the communal division which may set in if steps are not taken, said Malik. The government and everybody else who has some concern for the ravaged state should take steps to strengthen confidence among people.
Malik demanded an inquiry into the massacre by an independent agency like Amnesty International as whenever civilians are killed, nobody takes the responsibility.
The JKLF chief, who attended the funeral of the slain villagers last night, took out a peace march in Doda today.
The Centre reiterated that the killings were aimed at hampering the initiatives taken by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for peace in Kashmir like talks with the Hurriyat Conference and the second roundtable with separatist leaders to be held in Srinagar tomorrow.
But some Kashmir watchers do not agree. Why would militants kill Hindus to jeopardise talks with the Hurriyat or the second roundtable? They have done such acts throughout the history of militancy in Kashmir, said Tapan Bose, a Kashmir observer.
Bose believes outfits like the Jaish-e-Mohammad, Lashkar-e-Toiba and the Hizb-ul Mujahideen are stepping up violence in the region because they are not happy with the softening of Pakistan President Pervez Musharrafs stand on Kashmir and the confidence-building measures between the neighbours.
He also does not see tomorrows talks making much headway. There has been no policy change on Kashmir on our side, while Pakistan has moved from its earlier position of plebiscite to maximum autonomy. It is high time for the government to come up with a proper policy on Kashmir in Parliament. Such non-agenda talks organised by retired policemen and bureaucrats are not going to take us anywhere, said Bose.
Posted by: john ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
Pakistan on Tuesday asked Afghanistan and coalition forces to fence and mine their side of the border with Pakistan to prevent cross-border movement.
Good idea. And dig a moat. And fill it with alligators. No, make that crocodiles.
Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri and his Dutch counterpart Bernard R Bot met in Islamabad and signed a memorandum of understanding on bilateral consultations. Later, addressing a joint news conference, Kasuri said Pakistan had deployed 80,000 troops on its border with Afghanistan, more than those of the US, NATO and Afghan National Army.
Though not nearly as effective...
He said that Pakistan had already proposed fencing of the border and now "we are asking the authorities on the other side to mine and fence their area while Pakistan is prepared to do so on its side".
And caltrops. I think they need caltrops, too...
The Dutch minister said his country would deploy up to 1,600 troops in Afghanistan and his visit was aimed at seeking Pakistan's cooperation in improving security conditions for them in the war-torn country. He said the aim of Dutch troops in Afghanistan was to provide stability and security.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Pakistan calls for fencing, mining of Afghan border
How about deploying Indian Special Forces along the Pak-Afghanistan border.
#2
A while back, I proposed a simpler solution. Fast, cheap and effective, to string concertina wire five rolls or better thick along their border.
Speaking from experience, I can tell you that the stuff is nightmarish in preventing movement. While it will not stop a concerted effort, that effort takes a LOT of time. So light patrols and observation can cover far more area.
Cutting through five strands with serious bolt cutters takes several men working together and a lot of cuts. You also cannot put the wire back together to make it look whole again, so later you know where they passed, and that is the pass you re-wire and watch.
The Afghan-Pakistan border is an excellent case of a marauder crossing. The marauders rely on speed in crossing the border to get in quick, raid, and get out quicker. If you can just slow them down, they are dead.
Using concertina, you can still use apers mines, but if done intelligently, you can use a lot fewer mines, with higher probability that the mines will take out bad boyz.
Posted by: ed ||
05/03/2006 11:33 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Sound like a wonderful idea for the US border.
Too damaging to the environment. Not only can people not move through concertina wire, but neither can animals, and we have a lot of migratory animals going back and forth across the border. Better to build a chain-link fence with tension devices imbedded, and regular, guarded openings for wildlife. Wildlife will learn to use the guarded openings. People may be a bit harder to train.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/03/2006 14:24 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I've not had to deal with concertina wire, but Of course I've seen it.
Seems to me that the best way to deal with it and still have rapid movement is a few sheets of plywood on the front of a large truck.
Think "Bailey Bridge" here, you run up to the fence, nose into the wire and the plywood is designed to flatten the fence and remain behind for the truck to roll over.
Slow as you reach the fence, low gear to flatten it, roll along,
Total elapsed time about 30 seconds.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
05/03/2006 21:39 Comments ||
Top||
#6
the answer is withering fire, mines, and tracking down for the successful to amountain grave. Cluster bombs are in season as well. This would work in Pakistan as well...
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/03/2006 22:18 Comments ||
Top||
The government will be stern in dealing with Baloch sardars who are against the province's development, Geo television quoted President Pervez Musharraf as saying on Tuesday. Musharraf chaired a high-level meeting in Rawalpindi and said the recommendations of the parliamentary committee on Balochistan must be implemented, reported Geo. He said that development projects should be completed on time, and the government was creating jobs in the province.
"Time has run out for those sardars who want to push the province backward," said the president. The Baloch people desired development and the government would empower them by resolving their economic and political problems, he said. Members of parliament have to play a major role in the development of Balochistan and its people, he added.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If there is a spat between the US and Iran, I can foresee Iranian Balochistan becoming part of Pakistan. This would considerably increase Musharraf's mojo, but only if his military was ready to firmly control all of Balochistan. This may be why they are currently sitting on the Balochs.
#2
I don't know, I think transferring all of Baluchistan to Afghanistan would be far better. That way, Afghanistan can develop an ocean port, has gas and oil for export, and it reduces the area the Taliban can use as a sanctuary. Of course, at the same time I think we should divide up the NWFP and give IT to Afghanistan (without the Pashtuns) also, plus transfer Jammu & Kashmir to India. What's left can be Perv's personal feifdom, with occasional hard smackdowns by the Afghanis and Indians to keep them in line.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/03/2006 14:27 Comments ||
Top||
Pakistan has plunged from 34th on a list of failed states last year to the ninth slot this year, according to a list drawn up by the US-based journal Foreign Policy. The ratings are based on tens of thousands of articles from global and regional sources from May to December 2005, examined by experts using special software. The top 10 failed states are:
Pakistan suffered one of the sharpest declines in the overall score of any country on the list, mainly because of its inability to police the tribal areas, the devastating earthquake of October 2005 and the rise in ethnic tensions. Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka are rated 19th, 20th and 25th respectively. India was ranked 93rd, Bhutan came 39th and the Maldives were not mentioned.
"The Maldives: We're not a failed state because we've never tried!"
The 12 factors which determined the listing were: mounting demographic pressures; massive movement of refugees and internally displaced peoples; legacy of vengeance-seeking group grievance; chronic and sustained human flight; uneven economic development along group lines; sharp and/or severe economic decline; criminalisation and delegitimisation of the state; progressive deterioration of public services; widespread violation of human rights; security apparatus as state within a state; rise of factionalised elites; and intervention of other states or external actors.
Yep. That's kind of Pakistan all over. Afghanistan and large parts of Iraq are trying to get off the list. The others are hardy perennials on the list.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The ratings are based on tens of thousands of articles from global and regional sources from May to December 2005, examined by experts using special software.
Mmm! what they may be analyzing is media focus and media bias. Pakistan gets a lot of press in the West and it's overwhelming negative. It's become a proxy for attacking the WoT.
In comparison hardly anyone outside Australia reports on the Solomon Islands, yet they are up there with Somalia IMO, a complete basket case run by regional warlords.
#2
Interesting list. Seems to neglect parts of thw world where becoming a failed state would be a step up. Iraq is certainly in transition and turmoil lately, but I'm not sure I'd write it off yet as a failed state.
#6
Where is the #1 failed state on this list? I don't see NORK listed anywhere. I'm sure it's in worse shape than Pakistan and Iraq. What about a few other perennial failures, such as Nigeria, Cuba, and soon-to-be-added Venezuela? The Solomons are another good candidate. The Ivory Coast and Chad are in bad shape because of externally-based threats and a huge refugee problem. Iraq is getting MUCH better, as General McCaffrey's article indicated.
The MSM needs to look at their methodology - it sucks!
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/03/2006 14:32 Comments ||
Top||
ISLAMABAD - US investigators probing nuclear proliferation would not be allowed to meet a Pakistan scientist recently released from detention, officials said on Tuesday. Authorities last month released Mohammad Farooq, a former director of procurement at a uranium enrichment laboratory set up by disgraced scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan.
Khan has been under house arrest since a probe was launched against him in late 2003 after his televised confession that he sold nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea. A dozen others were held for questioning, but all except Farooq, a close aide of Khan, had been released earlier.
Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam said Farooqs release showed the case was closed as far as Pakistan was concerned. I would presume that with Dr. Farooqs release, we are able to close that chapter, she told weekly news briefing.
Sure hope Mr. Farooq has bodyguards. Be a shame if some evil kidnappers got hold of him.
She said Pakistan would cooperate with any other investigation about the network, but again ruled out allowing US investigators to question its scientists. We have repeatedly said that whatever information is required, questions can be forwarded to the government of Pakistan. We would get the answer, we would do investigation and we would transmit this information, she said. (But) there is no question of direct access. We have repeatedly said.
"Now buzz off."
President Pervez Musharraf has described Khans confession as one of the embarassing events of his presidency. The government sacked Khan as special adviser after his confession but Musharraf pardoned him for his role in making Pakistan a nuclear state.
There's a true statement.
US officials have cited the Khan affair as one of the reasons why Pakistan will not be getting the same treatment as India when it comes to nuclear technology.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What? Is he radioactive?
Posted by: Captain America ||
05/03/2006 1:24 Comments ||
Top||
US efforts to form a new "coalition of the willing" that would impose sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme are running into objections from European and Asian allies who say the Bush administration must first exhaust all diplomatic options, including the United Nations process and direct talks with Tehran.
A senior US official said President George W. Bush would reaffirm US opposition to direct negotiations with Iran should Angela Merkel, German chancellor, raise the issue at their White House meeting today.
"We are very clear that we need to see some change in Iranian behaviour," the senior US official said just days after a 30-day UN Security Council deadline for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment expired. "They are moving in the opposite direction. This does not provide an incentive for talks."
A call for US-Iran dialogue was first raised in public last month by Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany's foreign minister. Mr Bush is also under pressure from some Republicans and Democrats in Congress to stop outsourcing negotiations on Iran's nuclear programme to Europe.
Whether Iran's leadership is prepared for wide-ranging talks with the US is a matter of debate. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, made an important statement on March 22 when he accepted a US offer of talks on the issue of Iraq. But he also warned that the US wanted to use negotiations to impose its will, not reach a mutual agreement on wider issues.
The history of US-Iranian relations since the 1979 Islamic revolution is littered with failed attempts to establish a serious dialogue.
But documents obtained by the Financial Times reveal that Iran was ready to enter comprehensive talks in May 2003, shortly after the fall of Baghdad. On the table then was a proposal to discuss issues, including weapons of mass destruction, a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the future of Lebanon's Hizbollah organisation and co-operation with the UN nuclear safeguards agency.
The proposed agenda, which the Iranian side claims was a result of earlier discussions with US officials, states that the two sides agree to a dialogue "in mutual respect". Issues put forward by Iran included US sanctions, frozen Iranian assets and withdrawal of the "axis of evil" label fixed on Tehran by Mr Bush in 2002.
The agenda suggested initial steps to stabilise Iraq, measures to be taken against anti-Iranian elements in Iraq and al-Qaeda militants in Iran and Iranian support for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Also proposed were three working groups to establish "three parallel road maps" on disarmament, terrorism and regional security, and economic co-operation.
The Iranian offer - first reported by the FT in March 2004 - was ignored by the Bush administration. Instead, Washington protested to the Swiss Foreign Ministry, upbraiding Tim Guldimann, the Swiss ambassador to Tehran, who had been involved in communicating the offer and gave his opinion that it was an authentic proposal by Iran's leadership.
Flynt Leverett, then in the National Security Council, said he saw the 2003 offer and Mr Guldimann's accompanying message - both were unclassified - and confirmed that the documents obtained by the FT last week were genuine.
The US rejected the Iranian offer in 2003 from a position of strength - Baghdad had just fallen and regime change in Tehran was in the sights of Washington's neoconservatives.
Three years later Iran is not in such a weak position, with the US bogged down in Iraq and oil prices at record highs.
But circumstances inside Iran have also changed dramatically, and it is again debatable whether Iran is ready for such a dialogue along the lines of a "grand bargain". Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad, the fundamentalist president elected last year, is believed to be against engagement.
Trita Parsi, a Middle East specialist at Johns Hopkins University, said Iran had been trying hard lately to get a dialogue with the US. But "stonewalling" by the US had strengthened the hand of Mr Ahmadi-Nejad.
"The non-response to the 2003 Iranian proposal left many in Tehran with the impression that no Iranian concession would be sufficient to please Washington, even if they changed their position on Israel," he said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:39 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Somalia Scorecard: Forty one incidents have been reported since March 15 2005. .
Recently reported incidents
May 01 2006 at 1140 UTC in position: 03:13N - 108:45E, Kumpulan Natuna Islands, Indonesia. Persons in several unlit boats followed a tanker underway and came close to her stern. Crew mustered, switched on deck lights and activated fire hoses. Boats aborted chase and moved away.
April 30 2006 at 1150 UTC in position 03:04.3S - 107:17.2E, Gelasa straits, Indonesia. Three pirates armed with long knives in a craft threw grapnel hooks at stern of a tanker underway and tried to board. Alert crew mustered and pirates aborted boarding. Description of craft, motorised banka [an outrigger boat], 5m long, colour - green/brown.
April 29 2006 at 2245 LT in position: 02:55S - 107:18E, Gelasa straits, Indonesia. Six pirates armed with long knives in a speedboat boarded a bulk carrier underway. They took hostage master, chief engineer, and two other engineers. They stole equipment and personal belongings of crew and escaped.
April 28 2006 at 0210 UTC in position: 06:01.3N - 003:17.4E, Lagos Roads, Nigeria. Three robbers in an eight metre boat attempted to board a tanker. Alert crew prevented boarding.
United Nations chief Kofi Annan on Tuesday unveiled a global counter-terrorism strategy that puts new emphasis on the need to address bioterrorism, counter terrorists growing use of the Internet and defending human rights. The 32-page strategy, responding to a call by world leaders at their summit last September for enhanced UN coordination of the global fight against terrorism, sidestepped the question of defining what terrorism is.
I've developed a strategy or two in my time. I've never developed a strategy for something that I couldn't define.
It is also essential that member states conclude, as soon as possible, a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism, Annan said as he outlined his proposals to the 191-member General Assembly. However, lack of progress in building consensus on a convention cannot be a reason for delay in agreeing on a strategy, he added.
Why not? It has been so far.
For nearly nine years, diplomats have been sweating over a draft convention that would encompass previous texts on the fight against terrorism, including bombings, financing and nuclear and biological threats. But they have so far stumbled over an acceptable definition of terrorism, particularly in the Middle East, where groups seen by some countries as terrorists are viewed by others as freedom fighters.
Mostly the countries that see boomers, murderers, kidnappers, and various other proponents of Armed Struggle as Freedumb Fighters are the very countries that support them.
Annans counter-terrorism strategy is articulated around what he called the five Ds: 1) Dissuading people from resorting to terrorism or supporting it. 2) Denying terrorists the means to carry out an attack. 3) Deterring states from supporting terrorism. 4) Developing state capacity to defeat terrorism. 5) Defending human rights.
1) If you kill enough people who are terrorists, whether defined or un-, that will dissuade others from joining up. That means not only bumping them off in shootouts, where they can feel like heroic martyrs, but also catching them, trying them quickly, and stringing the bastards up. 2) You can deny the terrs the means to carry out attacks by arresting their money men, trying them quickly, and stringing them up. This will dissuade other money men from joining the parade. 3) You can deter states from supporting terrorism by invading them and killing the leadership. That will never happen, given the current UN setup, except when the U.S. runs out of patience. Syria and Iran support terrorism outright, and the UN has done nothing to "deterr" them. 4) MOABs help a state have the capacity to defeat terrorism. Well-trained troops with tight integration of air and navy support help. 5) People have a right not to be murdered in their beds, blown up by suicide boomers, herded from their homes and shot down like dogs, or similar mayhem. The human rights of inhuman krazed killers fall somewhere down the list from those.
Annans report underscored the need for innovative solutions to prevent bioterrorism.
People always call for "innovative solutions" when they don't have the slightest idea what to do.
The approach to fighting the abuse of biotechnology for terrorist purposes will have more in common with measures against cybercrime than with the work to control nuclear proliferation, it noted.
If it's going to be effective, it should have more in common with an episode of C*O*P*S.
Annan also stressed that a prerequisite to an effective counter-terrorism strategy was defending the human rights of all of the victims of terrorism, of those, of those suspected of terrorism, of those affected by the consequences of terrorism.
When warm milk sentiments like that are expressed, we usually see the limp handshake set breezing right by the human rights of the victims of terrorism like in Darfur or southern Sudan and fixing on the human rights of those suspected of terrorism like at Guantanamo and never quite getting to the point of doing something about the violations of human rights of those affected by the consequences of terrorism, like in Kashmir.
States must ensure that any measures taken to combat terrorism comply with their obligation under international law, in particular human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law, Annan told UN member states. Any strategy that compromises human rights will play right into the hands of the terrorists. The General Assembly is to hold consultations on Annans recommendations on May 11.
Right, Kofi. That pretty much translates as saying that if we try to do anything about terrorism then the terrorists have won. That argument was stale before October, 2001. For this sort of stuff they give out half million dollar awards?
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
May 3, 2006: The media and anti-war politicians in the United States are putting pressure on the Department of Defense to change tactics American troops use in Iraq. The basic premise here is that American troops are too stupid to realize that their methods in Iraq are "unnecessarily rough" and only serve to anger many Iraqis, without providing any security or tactical advantage for U.S. troops. It's all about Rules of Engagement (ROE). These are the general instructions about what troops can, and cannot, do in combat zones. For example, in 1983, the ROE for the U.S. Marines sent to Lebanon (for peacekeeping during the 1975-90 civil war) restricted how aggressively the marines could defend themselves from the local militias and Islamic terrorists. As a result, a terrorist truck bomb got into troop housing area, killing over 200 marines. In contrast, Iraq has much less restrictive ROEs, which results in more civilians getting killed, but nothing like what happened to the marines in Lebanon. When a speeding car full of civilians refuses to stop, when ordered, by troops at a check point, the troops have the authority to open fire at will. Not knowing if the oncoming vehicles is full of civilians, or suicide bomber explosives, the troops often do fire. Each time civilians are killed in situations like this, there is media coverage. But there aren't many of these incidents (especially if you don't count those invented by anti-war zealots), and the lives of many American troops have been solved as a result.
The latest ROE campaign is based on the false premise that the tactics of British troops in southern Iraq are kinder and gentler, and should be adopted by the naive and brutish American troops, since this would result in fewer violent incidents with innocent Iraqis, and making fewer enemies of these innocent and otherwise pro-American (or at least neutral) Iraqis. In fact, the British troops are facing a quite different situation in the south, which is almost entirely Shia Arab, than the American troops up north, where most of the trouble is with a very hostile Sunni Arab population. In fact, the U.S. troops to adapt their ROE to reflect the attitudes of the local civilians. Everything is just fine in most of northern Iraq, where the Kurdish population really likes having the American soldiers around. But in many parts of central Iraq, the Sunni Arabs are not happy about their man Saddam being out of power, and do not like the Americans at all. They show this dislike in many ways, playing games at roadblocks and being uncooperative during searches being quite common. A typical "let's make peace" deal U.S. commanders offer to local Sunni Arab leaders is that we will cut you some slack in the ROE area if you get your people to settle down. This doesn't get reported much. Not very exciting. Besides, it makes the troops look good, and that isn't the kind of news that will win any awards or ratings races.
Whenever there is talk of ROEs,, there is a sharp backlash from the troops, including military lawyers. Restrictive ROEs make generals and politicians back in Washington feel more comfortable, but they get troops killed. Last year there was another such proposal, which got the troops up in arms (especially via the Internet). Interestingly, that proposed new ROE came in the form of an enormously complex and opaque document, which appears to have been created by a very large committee. The proposed new rules are, in theory, simply more complex, and not a danger to the troops. But these new ROEs were apparently developed by lawyers who never stood guard at a check point, or conducted raids into hostile territory. This sort of thing continues, with pundits and journalists, largely ignorant of history or actual operations in the combat zone, proposing changes that will get troops killed. American troops have been played this way too many times in the past. The memory is kept alive via the numerous Internet connections between the troops, and self-defense kicks in when the Armies of Ignorance once more come forward with new ideas, and the scary incantation, "we're here to help you."
Posted by: Steve ||
05/03/2006 10:07 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Lets let the lawyers and "experts" at the five sided puzzle palace first examine the ROE of the enemy. That might be a good place to begin.
#3
Hey N.S., That's the PROBLEM....Some of JACKASSES have served(looooooong time ago)and have absolutely "0" knowledge of todays tactics or have even studied what the enemy we're up against believes in.I wish someone in the pentagon would take the time and explain to these doddering old fools that these people want to KILL the non-beleivers.(sorry, ranting)
#4
This is a perennial problem for us. F#$&ing military lawyers. We need to get their sorry asses out on more combat patrols, so they will have a better idea of the environment we are in.
IIRC, when I arrived the 1st ROE card I was issued was a 3 x 5 with 5 or 6 10pt. font bullets on it. It kept getting longer with each edition. By the time I rotated back, it was 2 8.5 x 11 pages of single space text. The funny part was, it all boiled down to:
"Defend your self. Make sure you have a convincing story on why you shot Hajji if you are asked. God have mercy on you if you make the front pages of the NYT, 'cause we are going to make fried scape goat out of your ass. We are in no way to be held accountable for your decisions and actions."
Posted by: N guard ||
05/03/2006 12:48 Comments ||
Top||
#5
ROE.# 1IF THE MUTHERFUCKER HAS A GUN THEN SHOOT HIM
#6
"But in many parts of central Iraq, the Sunni Arabs are not happy about their man Saddam being out of power, and do not like the Americans at all. "
Is this up to date with the current political situation? Im not saying the ROEs should be tighter, maybe they SHOULD be looser, its just ive been reading Strategypage for a while, and they are not a helluvalot more reliable then say Debka. And I say that as someone who admires Jim Dunnigans work alot.
#8
Once again, I use the argument that changes in ROE is an inevitability the closer Iraq gets to peace and civilian rule. With a smaller and smaller percentage of the military actively fighting each day, the vast majority of soldiers have to behave themselves so as not to piss off "the grandmothers".
Remember that we hope to evolve the situation into something like post-WWII Germany, with a Status of Forces agreement, smiles all around, and some towns lucky enough to be near a military base getting an economic boom faster than the rest of the country. This is in our major strategic interest.
Eventually, our soldiers are going to be walking the streets of Iraq without weapons, and if something happens, their first inclination will be to call an Iraqi cop. It sure doesn't feel it, at first, but it is a good thing, assuming it is done carefully.
#9
When we ran convoys any hajji vehicle that got too close took a green star cluster to the wind shield. If that didn't slow them up then we opened fire on their engine block and then the driver's compartment. Unfortunately for them sometimes not in that order. I always told my Marines it's better to be judged by 12 then carried by 6. Nobody wants to whack a civilian by mistake but if some iraqi's are too stupid after 3 years of war not to stay the hell away from our vehicles then I say let the cleaning up of the gene pool begin. (plus, you have to remember each of our vehicles have placards across their tailgate's stating "stay back 50 meters deadly force authorized" in arabic)
Iraq's ambassador to Germany said on Wednesday he believed Berlin paid a hefty ransom to secure the release of two German engineers who were held hostage in Iraq for over three months.
"Regarding the payment of ransom, I don't know, but I assume it was a large amount of money," Iraq's ambassador to Germany Alaa Al-Hashimy told ARD public television.
The two men were due to arrive at Berlin's Tegel airport later on Wednesday but officials were tightlipped about the circumstances surrounding their kidnap and subsequent release after nearly 100 days in captivity.
Separately, Germany's foreign ministry criticized media reports that a ransom was paid to Iraqi kidnappers for the men, who were handed over to German authorities in Baghdad on Tuesday.
"Any indication in this direction could lead to imitators," deputy Foreign Minister Gernot Erler told Bayerischen Rundfunk on Wednesday, adding that such speculation could endanger future cases of hostage-taking.
German archaeologist Susanne Osthoff was freed in December after being held hostage in Iraq for three weeks. German media have quoted unidentified diplomats as saying Berlin paid the kidnappers $5 million for her release.
The German government is known to have paid ransoms for hostages in the past, but refused to comment on whether it did for Osthoff.
Erler said analysis of video footage of the two German hostages broadcast during their ordeal suggested that they were the victims of Iraq's hostage industry, rather than a terrorist organization.
The two men, Thomas Nitzschke und Rene Braeunlich from the eastern city of Leipzig, were abducted on January 24 outside their workplace in the industrial town of Baiji, 110 miles north of Baghdad.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 07:09 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
In the series of martyr biographies distributed amongst jihadist forums, akin in detail and structure to those distributed by al-Qaeda in Iraq, and now the Mujahideen Shura Council, the story of Abu Ahmad al-Ansari, a sniper, is told. Abu Ahmad is described a jovial man, fifty-years of age with two wives and eight children, and is said to have been a trainer and fighter in jihad before joining al-Qaeda in Iraq, in a cell in al-Qaim, western Iraq. Both of his wives were also involved in jihad, preparing food and medical service for the mujahideen.
The biography recounts Abu Ahmad as a superb sniper, showering bullets until the American soldiers lost their minds, and was adept in the use of camouflage for movement and confusing the enemy. In the battles of al-Qaim, his house was bombed and his car burned, but he was patient and thankful to Allah. He was involved in a reconnaissance mission in the city of Haseiba, accompanying a suicide car bomber as a guide to target the converters. As the forces confronted the pair, Abu Ahmad was told to flee the car, but the explosion of the vehicle and its shrapnel pierced his chest, killing him instantly. The author writes: Abu Ahmad went and took with him ten crusaders heads by himself. Allah rewarded him to snipe one of them with one shot. Abu Ahmad - you can go to the Paradise and may Allah take care of your family and sons after you.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:43 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Looks like those guys that got laid off when Jihad Unspun went under have found new gigs...
#2
When they publish the picture of some "martyr", there should be a concerted effort to photoshop his or her picture to show them burning in Hell, being eaten by pigs, being tortured by demons, etc. Then the photoshop art should be distributed on leaflets to the ignorant peasants from which he came.
Few westerners would guess that for most of the people of the world, seeing a picture is believing, and after seeing such a picture, it would be impossible to burn it out of their minds.
Reality and fantasy really get blurred. Most of the people who saw the US Moon landing around the world still think that it was just another Hollywood production--movies and television are fantasies.
But pictures are real. If a picture shows Abdul roasting in Hell, then he is roasting in Hell.
Brig. Gen. General Samon Talabani, commander of the 3rd Brigade of the New Iraqi Army's 5th Division, huddles with his senior officers over a map of the Baquba area, discussing their upcoming mission.
At 38, General Talabani is the youngest general in the history of the Iraqi army. He's a slight man, with a mischievous demeanor, silent determination and a way with words.
"I am an Iraqi Kurdish soldier in the New Iraqi Army," he said. "I am a soldier, I never work like general with my soldier, nothing is between me and my soldier." It's not bluster.
Last week Talabani was on his stomach shooting back at insurgents who were firing rocket-propelled grenades at the Buhritz police station, just south of the provincial capital Baquba. He also led a chase of attackers in Udaim, north of Baquba -- he was the first through the door of the house where the attackers fled. He wounded one insurgent in the ensuing firefight and captured another.
He likes to ride his motorcycle to checkpoints to check on his troops. Talabani is not a typical general.
"His personality drives the brigade," said U.S. Lt. Col. Frank Muggeo, the Military Transition Team commander. "But we worry if he runs around the front he's going to get himself killed."
American commanders say that Talabani is the face of the Iraqi army they want to put forward. One commander joked that "if there were more of him, we'd be home by Christmas."
Talabani's brigade has 80 percent of the troops it's authorized to have. At any given time 25 percent are on leave. Subtract the wounded, and the 3rd Brigade is fighting at 60 percent strength most of the time, according to U.S. military commanders.
Talabani is responsible for the security of eastern Diyala, north of Baghdad. The area is a cocktail of al Qaeda in Iraq, nationalist insurgents, leftovers from the Saddam Hussein regime and common criminals.
An aggressive commander, Talabani orders about 12 missions a week. He is used to strife.
In 1973 Talabani, his parents and five siblings fled their home outside Khanaqin, a small city near the Kurdish north close to the Iranian border. They lived in Iran for two years.
They returned to Iraq and settled in Samara, about 60 miles north of Baghdad. Talabani said that their new neighbors avoided them for four months because senior Ba'ath party members had warned that the mountain people were coming to kill them.
"But when they saw that we were normal people we had a wonderful relationship," Talabani said. The family eventually was able to move to the Kurdish north, living in Suleymaniye.
Talabani started fighting at a young age, joining the Peshmerga in 1991 and attending the Kurdish military college in 1992.
He was sent to the Australian Defence College after he joined the then fledgling New Iraqi Army to learn to train troops in Kirkush. In Australia, he juggled English-language and military classes.
"Australian people will learn you English whether you like it or not," he said with a laugh. "They will kill you with PowerPoint and talking. I said to them, 'In Iraq we use RPG-7.' "
His wife is a childhood crush, a cousin whom -- when they were kids -- he told, "You are mine, I will marry you." She is beautiful, he said wistfully.
"My son is just like me: crazy, and same face," he said, speaking of his 5-year-old who is nicknamed "Little Sniper." Talabani said his 9-year-old daughter takes after her mother.
He doesn't get home very often but says he makes up for it the way most men do. "Middle East women like gold. My wife has 1.5 kilograms," he said.
He is a soldier but says he won't be a pawn in anyone's game.
"I will not follow a government order if they try to use me like Saddam Hussein," he said. "I will quit and go home."
Talabani believes in the future of Iraq.
"This country needs time," he said after a long sigh. "We need to work not like before; we need to work for a new Iraq. By fighting nothing will be fixed. These are soldiers who were killing my people, I can lead them now because we forgive. If everyone can forgive his neighbor we can forget the problem. Day by day we see things getting better."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:42 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"They (Australians) will kill you with PowerPoint and talking. I said to them, 'In Iraq we use RPG-7.' "
#3
In "Whay Arab lose wars" the author (name escapes me) tells of Egyptian officers who ordered troops to form aline so they protected them (the officers) from the wind. But this guy is a Kurd, not an Arab.
#5
"They will kill you with PowerPoint and talking. I said to them, 'In Iraq we use RPG-7.' "
I notice this is a fairly common complaint by smaller militaries against the Anglo-sphere/US military. I recall the former warsaw pact officers saying similar things in the 90's...
Oh, well, we have to keep the echelons above reality entertained somehow while real work is getting done. Otherwise the silly twits might try to help us out in the field (shudders).
Posted by: N guard ||
05/03/2006 12:36 Comments ||
Top||
#6
*rueful smile* Thus it ever is, in large organizations, N Guard. At least you military guys always know what you are doing, and why. Can you imagine being an honourable Episcopalian priest, trying to keep the Archbishop of Canterbury from destroying your parish?
#8
Below the Martyr's Monument near the Jumhuriya Bridge over the Tigris in Bahgdad lies a subterrainian hall with huge stone tablets of Iraqi's killed during their conflict with Iran. In the center are single tablet "special commemorations." One in particular was dedicated to an Iraqi Air Force fighter pilot (as read by the translator) who, after running out of rockets and ammunition, used his MIG as an air-to-air missile, bringing down an Iranian jet. When I asked the guide how many names were inscribed, he curtly replied "count them" and walked away.
BAGHDAD - Following weeks of wrangling over government formation that has fuelled sectarian strife in Iraq, parliamentary blocs have never seemed closer to forming a fully-fledged cabinet.
In a bid to strike a power balance, they have agreed that the key ministries of interior and foreign affairs should not fall prey to an interfactional war and instead be given to independent political figures approved by all parties.
Now there's a sensible solution.
Prime Minister-designate Jawad Al Maliki was asked by Iraqi president Jalal Al Talebani last month to come up with a cabinet line-up, a task that was marred by sectarian-based disagreements amid Iraqs delicate sectarian political system. But now only less than a week away from the cabinet formation deadline, Iraqi top politicians engaged on Tuesday in negotiations over ministerial portfolios in the new cabinet.
One day before the countrys parliament is set to reconvene on Wednesday, observers and politicians believe the announcement of the ministerial posts is imminent. There is extensive flexibility and accord among all parties in a bid to expedite the appointment of the Cabinet in the coming few days, said Saad Jawad Qandil, MP in the Shiite United Iraqi Alliance (UIA). Negotiations are ongoing and now the focus is on the agreement on the distribution of the security ministries, Salam Al Zawbaawy of the United Iraqi Front said.
In fact, no government post has been competed over by the various political factions more than those of the security and foreign affairs. However UIA MP Bahaa Al Aaraji affirmed that all political blocs have agreed that those two portfolios should be given to two independent political figures, a Sunni and a Shiite.
The two figures should be endorsed by all political factions, he added, especially the UIA, being the largest bloc with 128 seats in the 275-parliament. Al Aaraji, nevertheless, denied that anyone has been named as candidate for the posts, adding that the blocs were anticipating Wednesdays parliament session for further negotiations. He stressed that the UIA is keen on the May 9 deadline for announcing the cabinet line-up.
Meanwhile, parliamentary blocs have almost agreed to appoint as secretary-general Iyad Allawi, whose bloc got 25 seats in parliament, to the independent council for national security that comprises of leaders of the major parliamentary blocs.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Gaza Strip - Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas said Wednesday that U.S. pressure foiled the latest attempt to pay 165,000 government workers by transferring money from abroad directly into their accounts. Evil Zionist Amerikkans!!
Haniyeh also appealed to Arab nations to counter the U.S. moves.
Reflecting frustration over empty coffers, Haniyeh told a news conference that the Hamas-led government has stolen raised money, but so far has not found a way to get it into the Palestinian areas.
Public sector salaries are two months late, largely because
Israel and the West have frozen the transfer of funds to the Hamas-led government, branding Hamas a terrorist organization. The Palestinians need $116 million a month to pay for bomb belts salaries.
"We have given alternative suggestions and plans, including what has been reported about sending the lists of the employees to the Arab League to have a direct transfer to their accounts," Haniyeh said. "We even faced American pressure to prevent the direct transfer." Oh you are soooo brave. Facing evil american diplomats!
Haniyeh appealed to Arab leaders to face up to the Americans "to stop the siege imposed on the Palestinian people and to stop the political blackmail against the government." He also called on Palestinian bankers to "show the necessary patriotism." You show us a real will to live in peace with Israel, we will show you the money.
Banks have been hesitant to handle funds for the
Palestinian Authority for fear of U.S. sanctions.
On Friday, French President Jacques Chirac proposed the creation of a World Bank Oil for Food II fund to pay Palestinian Authority employees. Hamas said it would consider the idea, and President Mahmoud Abbas welcomed it.
The government is the largest employer in the Palestinian areas, and the tardy salaries have caused widespread hardship. Salaries for March were not paid, and April payments are overdue. Boo Hoo. Widespread bombings have caused hardship for civilians in Israel.
In the past, the West has donated much of the $1 billion in annual foreign buyoff aid that makes up most of the Palestinian budget. The European Union is the Palestinians' largest donor, giving more than $600 million a year. Here is an idea. How about you stupid fucks build up your own economy instead of blowing up and pillaging everything so we don't have to support your retarded asses?
Now the West has said it will fund only covert suicide bombins humanitarian projects without going through the Palestinian government. Also, Israel has halted transfer of about $55 million a month in taxes it collects for the Palestinian government.
The Arab League which has a history of shortchanging the Palestinians on aid pledges has only committed to deliver $55 million a month. You collect billions in oil revenue a month and can only cough up 55 mil? Not like your people are already living in poverty, but where does the rest of the dough go?
Western governments have been looking for ways to turn control over their money to the slightly less insane moderate Abbas, who has been trying to curtail the power of the Hamas-led Cabinet. Haniyeh said it did not matter how the money reached the Palestinian government, as long as it would be administered by the Hamas-controlled Finance Ministry.
Haniyeh also spoke out against incoming Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's plan to draw the border between Israel and the
West Bank unilaterally if peace talks are unsuccessful. That plan includes completing a separation barrier, relocating tens of thousands of Jewish settlers and pulling out of large parts of the West Bank.
"We are in favor of any Israeli geonocide withdrawal," Haniyeh said. "If they are going to leave our land, we are not going to run after them and ask them to come back. This does not mean we are going to accept a de facto policy."
Haniyeh brushed aside questions about accepting an Arab League plan offering Israel peace in exchange for a complete withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza and an acceptable solution for Palestinian refugees.
"This era cannot take a new initiative," he said, blaming Israel for the impasse. Blame everyone but yourself, huh?
He also repeated Hamas demands for Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, the release of prisoners and the return of refugees to their original homes, all without offering peace to Israel. It is all take, take, take with you, isn't it? Cut 'em off and let 'em rot.
#1
Reflecting frustration over empty coffers, Haniyeh told a news conference that the Hamas-led government has raised money, but so far has not found a way to get it into the Palestinian areas.
So we'll...ummmmmmmmmmm...hold it for them. Until the times right...
Yes, it does, Liberalhawk. When it is actually used, not as an excuse to natter and avoid action of any sort. And when it is one of a sheaf of tools to deal with varying situations.
#8
It's simple. Transfer money to terrorists and have your banking system shut down. Nothing more nothing less. BFD. Real "international law" at work. Not some TRANZI/Leftist made up bull shit that doesn't exist.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/03/2006 14:35 Comments ||
Top||
#9
political blackmail against the government
Errrm ... Using sanctions and injunctions to deny uspport for a known criminal organization is not "blackmail." Threatening to blow up innocent women and children if your incessant and unreasonable demands are not met is.
Is there a danger that Hamas and al-Qaida could be linked? Warnings to such an effect could be heard last week, after the release of an Osama bin Laden tape expressing support for Hamas, which, he said, was defending itself against the "Zionist-Crusader offensive." Even C. David Welch, the U.S. assistant secretary for Near Eastern affairs, discussed such a danger. Hamas is very angry at these reports, and views them as attempts to muddy the organization's name, as part of the repeated efforts to topple the democratically elected government of Ismail Haniyeh.
The economic blockade of the Hamas government has yet to produce results. It is not at all clear whether such a siege has a chance, since it is difficult to draw a dividing line between the Hamas government and the services the government provides the residents. In the Gaza Strip, for instance, there are now reports of a serious shortage in medications. This punishes the patients, not the Hamas-controlled Health Ministry.
It appears that the Palestinian public understands this, and this is why there have not been outbreaks of protests against the government, even though it has still not paid last month's salaries.
Last week, Fatah initiated protests against Hamas leader Khaled Meshal, after he criticized Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), but participation was relatively low. The counter-protests organized by Hamas to support the government were more successful.
Hamas activists think their rivals from Fatah are now trying to spark riots in Gaza, and get the armed militias to run wild, in an effort to show that Hamas is unable to provide security to its residents. A few days ago, the members of one militia attacked the Health Ministry in Gaza after the health minister from Hamas refused to give a relative of the gang members permission to receive medical treatment in Egypt. Police officers arrived on the scene and exchanged fire with the gang members, who withdrew without getting their demand met. Hamas spokesmen said this was the first time in years in which an armed gang in Gaza had not managed to get what it wanted through violence.
Hamas is complaining that the campaign against the organization includes the spreading of lies, citing the report Jordan released about capturing a Hamas cell that had smuggled weapons and explosives. Citing the capture of the cell, the Jordanian government canceled a visit to Amman by Palestinian Foreign Minister Mahmoud Zahar of Hamas.
"We have never carried out any activity outside the borders of Palestine," a Hamas activist in Jerusalem said in a reference to terror attacks. "So why would we carry it out now, and while our foreign minister was visiting Jordan? It's total insanity."
Another recently published report that Hamas says is a lie concerns the discovery of a tunnel near Abu Mazen' office in Gaza. According to the report, this may not have been intended as a means to attack the chairman himself, but was planned as a way to assassinate Mohammed Dahlan, the Fatah strongman in Gaza who passes the area in his car every day.
Hamas officials have said they think a fair amount of the activity against them stems from the Fatah elite. Tayyib Abd al-Rahim, the former director general of the Palestinian Authority in the days when Yasser Arafat headed it, as well as former Palestinian minister Nabil Amro and others who are close to Abu Mazen, know that it is virtually impossible to topple the Hamas government completely, as it commands a strong position in Palestinian society. Instead, they are seeking ways to make the government fail, so as to set up in its place a national emergency government.
Hamas officials say this is also why the rumors of the ties with al-Qaida have been going around. Hamas completely denies these rumors, saying that Hamas' goal is national - a struggle against Israel - while al-Qaida has all-embracing religious goals.
But if Hamas is pushed into a corner and the distress and anarchy in the West Bank and Gaza intensify, a comfortable backdrop for al-Qaida activity in Palestine could develop - and then, the assertion that Hamas is tied to al-Qaida will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:59 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Funny how most articles that have a question mark in the headline usually endup with the money shot statement like this one.
"But if...and the...and...could develop...and then... will become."
#3
1. as a reminder, theyre ideologically different. AQ is qutbist, Hamas is old line Ikwani/Muslim Brotherhood. Not that that would make cooperation impossible, not at all, but Pal IJ is the more likely partner for AQ
2. The real problems are strategic. Hamas looks to Syria for support, to Saudi for money, and wants to be able to at least talk to the Egyptians. If they deal with AQ, and it comes out, they A. Become enemies of Egypt B. Become enemies if not of all the Saudis, at least of King Abdullah C. Probably imperil their relationship with Syria, though that may be debatable.
Hundreds of combat support items were found Tuesday morning in a shipping container sent from China to the Gaza Strip. Customs officers at the Ashdod Port made the discovery while scanning the container. The container's importers said their shipment includes sewing notions, hats and clocks. Customs officers however confiscated 300 telescopes, some of which have sights and infrared markers for long-range targets.
Security officials said the items are of good quality and had they reached the Gaza Strip they would have certainly improved terror groups' ability to hit IDF targets.
#1
When illegal items are found hidden in an otherwise legal shipment, confiscate the entire shipment. Publically destroy the illegal items, unless the government can use them, and sell the legal items on the open market to fund clearly necessary extra inspection efforts.
12 Palestinian business leaders are presenting a proposal in an effort to resolve the financial and political crisis in the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) The proposal will be handed to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, and Speaker of the Legislative Council Aziz Dweik in Ramallah today. The initiative will call on Haniyeh to "form a broad Palestinian government which would include all the factions, and also technocrats," according to former finance minister Mazin Sinokrot.
Among their suggestions, anything about rule of law, respect for free markets, small government, peace, political stability, rights for women, rights for religious minorities, and respect for private property? No? Oh well ...
The group represents Palestinian banks, trade unions, and private companies. It is also calling for the restructuring of the Palestine Liberation Organization in a way which would represent all sides, said Sinokrot.
"Don Yasser is dead. T'ings is different now. Youse gotta include the Barzini clan. An' da Tataglia family wantsa wet their beak. An' take Solozzo's offer. Nobody wantsa go to da mattresses..."
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
The Arab League, which has collected $70 million for the Palestinians, will pay the salaries of civil servants straight into their bank accounts. A Hamas government spokesman said on Monday: "We have given the list and bank account details of the civil servants to the Arab League so that the salaries can be paid to them directly. We have had a lot of contact with the Arab League and secretary general Amr Mussa to find a solution to the financial crisis as quickly as possible" Ghazi Hamas said.
He could not say when the money would be transferred. The money collected by the 22-member Arab League only covers a fraction of the needs of the cash-strapped Hamas-led government, which requires about $240 million to pay its 160,000 employees for March and April.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"...will pay the salaries of civil servants straight into their bank accounts."
"He could not say when the money would be transferred."
Sounds like they're still working out the terms for the "upfront" money.
#3
We have given the list and bank account details of the civil servants to the Arab League so that the salaries can be paid to them directly.
Boys, do I have a deal for you. I just got an email from a Nigerian guy that used to be Undersecretary of the Treasury there and he needs some of the very same assistance you seem able to provide. I'll forward it to you...
The Bush administration is seeking to develop a powerful ground-based laser weapon that would use beams of concentrated light to destroy enemy satellites in orbit.
The largely secret project, parts of which have been made public through Air Force budget documents submitted to Congress in February, is part of a wide-ranging effort to develop space weapons, both defensive and offensive. No treaty or law forbids such work.
The laser research was described by federal officials who would speak only on the condition of anonymity because of the topic's political sensitivity. The White House has recently sought to play down the issue of space arms, fearing it could become an election-year liability.
Indeed, last week Republicans and Democrats on a House Armed Services subcommittee moved unanimously to cut research money for the project in the administration's budget for the 2007 fiscal year. While Republicans on the panel would not discuss their reasons for the action, Congressional aides said it reflected a bipartisan consensus for moving cautiously on space weaponry, a potentially controversial issue that has yet to be much debated.
The full committee is expected to take up the budget issue today.
The laser research is far more ambitious than a previous effort by the Clinton administration nearly a decade ago to test an antisatellite laser. It would take advantage of an optical technique that uses sensors, computers and flexible mirrors to counteract the atmospheric turbulence that seems to make stars twinkle.
The weapon would essentially reverse that process, shooting focused beams of light upward with great clarity and force.
Though futuristic and technically challenging, the laser work is relatively inexpensive by government standards about $20 million in 2006, with planned increases to some $30 million by 2011 partly because no weapons are as yet being built and partly because the work is being done at an existing base, an unclassified government observatory called Starfire in the New Mexico desert.
In interviews, military officials defended the laser research as prudent, given the potential need for space arms to defend American satellites against attack in the years and decades ahead. "The White House wants us to do space defense," said a senior Pentagon official who oversees many space programs, including the laser effort. "We need that ability to protect our assets" in orbit.
But some Congressional Democrats and other experts fault the research as potential fuel for an antisatellite arms race that could ultimately hurt this nation more than others because the United States relies so heavily on military satellites, which aid navigation, reconnaissance and attack warning.
In a statement, Representative Loretta Sanchez, a California Democrat on the subcommittee who opposes the laser's development, thanked her Republican colleagues for agreeing to curb a program "with the potential to weaponize space."
Theresa Hitchens, director of the Center for Defense Information, a private group in Washington that tracks military programs, said the subcommittee's action last week was a significant break with the administration. "It's really the first time you've seen the Republican-led Congress acknowledge that these issues require public scrutiny," she said.
In a statement, the House panel, the Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, made no reference to such policy disagreements but simply said that "none of the funds authorized for this program shall be used for the development of laser space technologies with antisatellite purposes."
It is unclear whether the Republican-controlled Congress will sustain the subcommittee's proposed cut to the administration's request, even if the full House Armed Services Committee backs the reduction.
The Air Force has pursued the secret research for several years but discussed it in new detail in its February budget request. The documents stated that for the 2007 fiscal year, starting in October, the research will seek to "demonstrate fully compensated laser propagation to low earth orbit satellites."
The documents listed several potential uses of the laser research, the first being "antisatellite weapons."
The overall goal of the research, the documents said, is to assess unique technologies for "high-energy laser weapons," in what engineers call a proof of concept. Previously, the laser work resided in a budget category that paid for a wide variety of space efforts, the documents said. But for the new fiscal year, it has moved under the heading "Advanced Weapons Technology."
In interviews, Pentagon officials said the policy rationale for the arms research dated from a 1996 presidential directive in the Clinton administration that allows "countering, if necessary, space systems and services used for hostile purposes."
In 1997, the American military fired a ground-based laser in New Mexico at an American spacecraft, calling it a test of satellite vulnerability. Federal experts said recently that the laser had had no capability to do atmospheric compensation and that the test had failed to do any damage.
Little else happened until January 2001, when a commission led by Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the newly nominated defense secretary, warned that the American military faced a potential "Pearl Harbor" in space and called for a defensive arsenal of space weapons.
The Starfire research is part of that effort.
Federal officials and private experts said the antisatellite work drew on a body of unclassified advances that have made the Starfire researchers world-famous among astronomers. Their most important unclassified work centers on using small lasers to create artificial stars that act as beacons to guide the process of atmospheric compensation.
When astronomers use the method, they aim a small laser at a point in the sky close to a target star or galaxy, and the concentrated light excites molecules of air (or, at higher altitudes, sodium atoms in the upper atmosphere) to glow brightly.
Distortions in the image of the artificial star as it returns to Earth are measured continuously and used to deform the telescope's flexible mirror and rapidly correct for atmospheric turbulence. That sharpens images of both the artificial star and the astronomical target.
Unclassified pictures of Starfire in action show a pencil-thin laser beam shooting up from its hilltop observatory into the night sky.
The Starfire researchers are now investigating how to use guide stars and flexible mirrors in conjunction with powerful lasers that could flash their beams into space to knock out enemy satellites, according to federal officials and Air Force budget documents.
"These are really smart folks who are optimistic about their technology," said the senior Pentagon official. "We want those kind of people on our team."
But potential weapon applications, he added, if one day approved, "are out there years and years and years into the future."
The research centers on Starfire's largest telescope, which Air Force budget documents call a "weapon-class beam director." Its main mirror, 11.5 feet in diameter, can gather in faint starlight or, working in the opposite direction, direct powerful beams of laser light skyward.
Federal officials said Starfire's antisatellite work had grown out of one of the site's other military responsibilities: observing foreign satellites and assessing their potential threat to the United States. In 2000, the Air Force Research Laboratory, which runs Starfire, said the observatory's large telescope, by using adaptive optics, could distinguish objects in orbit the size of a basketball at a distance of 1,000 miles.
Another backdrop to the antisatellite work is Starfire's use of telescopes, adaptive optics and weak lasers to track and illuminate satellites. It is considered a baby step toward developing a laser powerful enough to cripple spacecraft.
Col. Gregory Vansuch, who oversees Starfire research for the Air Force Research Laboratory, said in an interview that the facility used weak lasers and the process of atmospheric compensation to illuminate satellites "all the time." Such tests, Colonel Vansuch emphasized, are always done with the written permission of the satellite's owner.
He said that about once a month, Starfire conducted weeklong experiments that illuminate satellites up to 20 times.
Though the House subcommittee recommended eliminating all financing next year for antisatellite laser research, it retained money for other laser development. Congressional aides said the proposed cut to the Air Force's $21.4 million budget request for such work would eliminate two of three areas of development, for a total reduction of $6.5 million.
At least one public-interest group has seized on the issue. Last week, the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, based in Brunswick, Me., said that if Congress approved the antisatellite money, "the barrier to weapons in space will have been destroyed."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 07:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Definately feasible. Rumor has it the Soviets started something like this. It would be nice to use against the "new" GPS systems the Chinese and EU are building.
#3
Space is the ultimate watchtower. Attacking the enemy C4I when the enemy is a control freak that is scared of independent thought in the trenches or the officer corps is the quickest way to dismantle those types of armies.
And ya gotta start someplace to get to laser weapons that can take out artillery shells, missiles, Qassams (hint, hint), and ICBMS. The Blunderbuss was a nightmare to use, but it was a start, and eventually led to the weapons we have today. Same here.
#5
BTW I remember reading about a ground-based laser idea, in the 70s, that was good for one great shot.
The idea was:
long tunnel
at one end of the tunnel a mirror pointed back into the tunnel
at the other end a 45 degree mirror pointed up to a steerable mirror with adaptive optics that would send the beam up to a cluster of sats that could bounce the beam between each other until sending it down to some target.
about 3/4s of the way down the tunnel an A-bomb.
The option of mirroring the tunnel walls or covering them with fiber or wire rods (wire for x-ray lasing). Another option would fill the tunnel with a liquid or gas that would provide a prefered lasing frequency.
This would make the tunnel a one shot nuke powered laser. (a massively powerful laser beam)
#6
What reason is there at present for such weapon technology?
Simple. Size the high ground before someone else does. If we can knock out commmunication and military satellites and our potential enemies cannot, it makes the prospect of a war more remote. Most sane (Iran excluded) countries don't take on the biggest kid in the schoolyard when they KNOW he can kick your ass.
Both China and the EU are developing their own GPS systems so they won't have to use the US one and will sell it to other countries. Countries that may very well end up trying to fight the US. Can you imagine what could happen if Chavez had GPS enabled cruise missles that used Chinese tech? The aircraft carrier task force in the area could be on the receiving end of several hundred missiles, all very, very accurate. Knock the satellites out, and you remove that threat and help blind your enemy.
#10
Adaptive or agile optics, anti-satellite lasers and guide stars are all ideas and technologies that are decades old. Efforts to reduce the form factor of such engines might be somewhat new, but 90% of this article is old news. I was working on primary laser optics for a multi-megawatt anti-sat FEL (Free Electron Laser) in the mid-1980s.
#11
Seems to me I've read dozens of stories about laser weapons, some being implemented, others in various stages of R&D. This is just one of many. I can see the Democrats being against it - the Democrats have been against every weapon development program since the F-100. As for the Republicans fighting this, those that voted against it need to be fired at the next election and replaced with someone who has a brain instead of a reflex circuit.
The Russians spent tens of billions of rubles on laser weaponry, knowing it was a winner for the guy that got there first. Failing to pursue laser weapons for any reason is insanity. There's nothing good about being "second" in any type of weapons program, especially with someone as paranoid as the Russians and Chinese.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/03/2006 16:06 Comments ||
Top||
#14
The Soviets reportedly tested an anti-satellite laser way back in the early '80s. In addition, they did extensive work with explosively-powered lasers and particle beam weapons (you detonate an explosive in a chamber, the chamber walls absorb some part of the detonation energy and transfer it to a power convertor, which stored the energy in a capacitor, which can be used to fire the laser - the basic principle is similar to the idea for bomb-pumped x-ray lasers, but the firing platform is not destroyed in the resulting explosion and laser discharge). In addition, as I recall, there was much to-do about a Soviet radar installation that was thought to be either intended for anti-ballistic missile systems or anto-satellite systems or, at least according to one report, was actually a cover for a ground-to-space laser.
LBNL has developed table-top particle beams using laser wakefield technology. This has some fairly obvious military implications and applications, potentially. It's even unclassified work. See Nature last year sometime.
My work was subcontracted by a company whose name rhymes with Huge Aircrash. There was talk of a 5 megawatt system the optics were going into. The primary optics consisted of a 12" diameter by 3" thick monocrystalline silicon blank worth about $10,000 each. Mind you, this was in the late 1980s, and only in the last few years have we economically grown 12" (1,000mm) silicon ingots. According to the visiting engineers, these blanks were hogged out of an 18" diameter ingot in order to eliminate any slip or dislocations in the crystal structure that are commonly found near an ingot's outer edge.
The blanks were then coated with a thin film of slicon dioxide and returned to the manufacturing facility for diffraction patterning. At this point the blanks suddenly grew in value to $40,000 a piece. The light table these blanks were exposed on was supposed to be one of the most massive on earth in its time. Based on a multi-ton slab of solid granite, it had a beam path of several feet and resolved down to 1/20th of a wavelength in the ultra-volet end of the spectrum.
To put things in perspective, a surface becomes a "mirror" when it is able to resolve better than 1/2 a wavelength of the highest frequency visible light (blue color) it is supposed to reflect.
As you can see, at 5% resolution, that well beyond an entire order of magnitude better performance than your regular mirror. This resolution was necessary to ensure that the optic's reflectivity was maximized. Likewise, this was the reason for selecting a monocrystalline substrate. As the mirror's surface heated during exposure to the live E-beam, power would tend to dissippate more evenly through a monolithic (consistently spaced crystal) lattice. Ergo, that is why they shaved off so much of the blank's outer circumference, in the pursuit of eliminating any irregularities in the crystal's structure. Similarly, the reflective coating had to be incredibly consistent so as to avoid anomalies or discontinuities in surface heating which (despite the water cooling journals bored through the optic's backside) would result in hotspots able to cause (as the military likes to put it) "spontaneous catastrophic disassembly."
#13 Probably not that big. Ionization trails, y'know.
Actually, the FEL remains the laser of choice for ground based antisatellite DEWs (Directed Energy Weapons). Issues of tunability, scalability and stability are all optimal for such a system. The beauty of a FEL is that the beam can be circulated in an oscillator cavity and then pumped via "wigglers". These smaller magnets interact with an E-beam to stimulate the release of powerful synchrotron radiation that is tunable over a very wide range of millimeter waves to X-rays. Newer versions have a straight path single-pass system that submits the beam to an "undulator" (basically a long path wiggler) to obtain extremely powerful emission via SASE (Self Amplified Spontaneous Emission).
Last Monday, just before he announced that Iran had gatecrashed "the nuclear club", President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad disappeared for several hours. He was having a khalvat (tête-à-tête) with the Hidden Imam, the 12th and last of the imams of Shiism who went into "grand occultation" in 941.
According to Shia lore, the Imam is a messianic figure who, although in hiding, remains the true Sovereign of the World. In every generation, the Imam chooses 36 men, (and, for obvious reasons, no women) naming them the owtad or "nails", whose presence, hammered into mankind's existence, prevents the universe from "falling off". Although the "nails" are not known to common mortals, it is, at times, possible to identify one thanks to his deeds. It is on that basis that some of Ahmad-inejad's more passionate admirers insist that he is a "nail", a claim he has not discouraged. For example, he has claimed that last September, as he addressed the United Nations' General Assembly in New York, the "Hidden Imam drenched the place in a sweet light".
Last year, it was after another khalvat that Ahmadinejad announced his intention to stand for president. Now, he boasts that the Imam gave him the presidency for a single task: provoking a "clash of civilisations" in which the Muslim world, led by Iran, takes on the "infidel" West, led by the United States, and defeats it in a slow but prolonged contest that, in military jargon, sounds like a low intensity, asymmetrical war.
In Ahmadinejad's analysis, the rising Islamic "superpower" has decisive advantages over the infidel. Islam has four times as many young men of fighting age as the West, with its ageing populations. Hundreds of millions of Muslim "ghazis" (holy raiders) are keen to become martyrs while the infidel youths, loving life and fearing death, hate to fight. Islam also has four-fifths of the world's oil reserves, and so controls the lifeblood of the infidel. More importantly, the US, the only infidel power still capable of fighting, is hated by most other nations.
According to this analysis, spelled out in commentaries by Ahmadinejad's strategic guru, Hassan Abassi, known as the "Dr Kissinger of Islam", President George W Bush is an aberration, an exception to a rule under which all American presidents since Truman, when faced with serious setbacks abroad, have "run away". Iran's current strategy, therefore, is to wait Bush out. And that, by "divine coincidence", corresponds to the time Iran needs to develop its nuclear arsenal, thus matching the only advantage that the infidel enjoys.
Moments after Ahmadinejad announced "the atomic miracle", the head of the Iranian nuclear project, Ghulamreza Aghazadeh, unveiled plans for manufacturing 54,000 centrifuges, to enrich enough uranium for hundreds of nuclear warheads. "We are going into mass production," he boasted.
The Iranian plan is simple: playing the diplomatic game for another two years until Bush becomes a "lame-duck", unable to take military action against the mullahs, while continuing to develop nuclear weapons.
Thus do not be surprised if, by the end of the 12 days still left of the United Nations' Security Council "deadline", Ahmadinejad announces a "temporary suspension" of uranium enrichment as a "confidence building measure". Also, don't be surprised if some time in June he agrees to ask the Majlis (the Islamic parliament) to consider signing the additional protocols of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Such manoeuvres would allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director, Muhammad El-Baradei, and Britain's Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, to congratulate Iran for its "positive gestures" and denounce talk of sanctions, let alone military action. The confidence building measures would never amount to anything, but their announcement would be enough to prevent the G8 summit, hosted by Russia in July, from moving against Iran.
While waiting Bush out, the Islamic Republic is intent on doing all it can to consolidate its gains in the region. Regime changes in Kabul and Baghdad have altered the status quo in the Middle East. While Bush is determined to create a Middle East that is democratic and pro-Western, Ahmadinejad is equally determined that the region should remain Islamic but pro-Iranian. Iran is now the strongest presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, after the US. It has turned Syria and Lebanon into its outer defences, which means that, for the first time since the 7th century, Iran is militarily present on the coast of the Mediterranean. In a massive political jamboree in Teheran last week, Ahmadinejad also assumed control of the "Jerusalem Cause", which includes annihilating Israel "in one storm", while launching a take-over bid for the cash-starved Hamas government in the West Bank and Gaza.
Ahmadinejad has also reactivated Iran's network of Shia organisations in Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Yemen, while resuming contact with Sunni fundamentalist groups in Turkey, Egypt, Algeria and Morocco. From childhood, Shia boys are told to cultivate two qualities. The first is entezar, the capacity patiently to wait for the Imam to return. The second is taajil, the actions needed to hasten the return. For the Imam's return will coincide with an apocalyptic battle between the forces of evil and righteousness, with evil ultimately routed. If the infidel loses its nuclear advantage, it could be worn down in a long, low-intensity war at the end of which surrender to Islam would appear the least bad of options. And that could be a signal for the Imam to reappear.
At the same time, not to forget the task of hastening the Mahdi's second coming, Ahamdinejad will pursue his provocations. On Monday, he was as candid as ever: "To those who are angry with us, we have one thing to say: be angry until you die of anger!"
His adviser, Hassan Abassi, is rather more eloquent. "The Americans are impatient," he says, "at the first sight of a setback, they run away. We, however, know how to be patient. We have been weaving carpets for thousands of years."
Short summary: Israel has effectively no choice but to annihilate the Muslim world if Iran gets the bomb. Here's a rather large quote;
Most importantly, if it became apparent that any Arab or Muslim nation were about to obtain a nuclear capability, and no other nation were going to stop that from happening, I would annihilate that capability no matter the cost, because the alternative would be the annihilation of Israel.
In the case of Iran, that poses some problems: because the Iranian capability is spread among a large number of sites, and is deeply buried, so it would be difficult to destroy or hinder. The upshot of this is that I would have to use nuclear weapons for attacks on at least several, though not all, Iranian targets.
But then I have another problem: Israel would be so roundly condemned for this use of nuclear weapons (witness the condemnation of the United States over Iraq when the US was almost immaculate in warfighting), and given that this is only the normal reaction to Israel existing, it is likely that a large number of nations would move towards sanctions against Israel. In addition to the economic damage, it would be likely that supplies of fuel and weapons from outside would almost completely dry up, and that would mean that in a relatively small amount of time - 18 months at most - Israel would be a shambles. It's also likely that Egypt and Jordan would be compelled to renounce their peace treaties, and it's not inconceivable that the Arab nations would launch an all-out war. If they did this 18 months after the strike, Israel might not be strong enough to withstand the assault.
Given these considerations, I would be strongly tempted to remove my enemies once and for all, so that they couldn't strike in my moment of weakness. The way to do that, of course, is to eliminate their armies, their political structures, and critical infrastructure that they could use to rebuild. This would have to be thorough enough to keep those enemies incapacitated for at least 10 years, because it could take that long to recover Israel's reputation and (more critically) economy and supply situation. So, if I were fairly convinced that Israel was in grave danger of attack in the aftermath of taking out Iran's nuclear capability, I would most likely hit at all of the Arab/Muslim world's military facilities and large units, industrial base, critical infrastructure (including any large cities), and so forth. Some of these attacks would be conventional, but most would be nuclear. And as part of that, I would have to strike Pakistan and eliminate their military and nuclear capability as well, because they are the only Muslim state with a declared nuclear capability, and even if they didn't want to strike directly, there's no guarantee that the ISI wouldn't give weapons to terrorists for revenge attacks.
Not good, not good at all - the Iranians are playing an extraordinarily dangerous game, and their leader appears to be driven by a religious zeal that the MSM usually applies to Bush.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
05/03/2006 17:46 Comments ||
Top||
#4
[Ernst Stavro Blofeld] Kill Bond Ahmadinejad, now! [/ESB]
#5
George Noory on C2CAM radio show was saying the USA neds to do everything it can to keep Israel on a tight leash - Noory like many others made it clear that it his belief that Radical Islamists and aligned extremists are out to destroy US-West utterly and completely, but that Israel per se needs to be restrained right now from taking any action against Iran and MadMoud lest Israel [andor America] get the blame for nuke explosions going off in the ME. I believe Noory quoted Shimon Peres? as warning that any enemy(s) of Israel had better watch out becuz Israel is "exceptionally strong".
Don't know if we talked about this article when it came out. EFL.
JERUSALEM -- Israel has told the Bush administration that Iran is closer to having a nuclear weapon than was previously thought, but acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says he is confident that the West will not allow that to happen.
By the West he means us; the Euros have already made clear that they'll do nothing (other than blabber, of course) to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.
The head of the Mossad intelligence service, Meir Dagan, traveled to Washington last week to meet with counterparts in the CIA and pass on Israel's latest findings on Iran's nuclear progress.
Interesting. When heads of intel services start hand-delivering data, things start to happen. And we haven't heard about what he said, so it's odds-on that it agrees with our own assessment -- otherwise a Clintonista within CIA would have leaked it already. But I think it's clear that the Israelis are running out of patience -- and perhaps time -- with the Y'urp-peon soft power approach.
An Israeli satellite launched last week from a Russian cosmodrome in Siberia began sending high-resolution photographs over the weekend. Israeli specialists termed the results "amazing." However, Mr. Dagan's report was based on earlier information that Israeli sources say indicates that Iran is closer to nuclear capability than is generally realized.
Mr. Olmert did not say what Mr. Dagan told his American counterparts last week. But the London Sunday Times quoted an Israeli source yesterday as saying that the Mossad had evidence of hidden uranium enrichment sites in Iran "which can shortcut their timetable in the race for their first bomb." The source said Mr. Dagan presented American officials with that evidence and told them: "This is what we know and this is what we'll do if you continue to do nothing."
I think we know what the Israelis will do; the issue is 1) the time-frame 2) whether they get active or only passive support from us 3) how much political fall-out they'll suffer from the Euros and 4) whether we can help mitigate that.
Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Knesset's foreign affairs and defense committee, also described his concern about the Israeli intelligence findings. "When I read the recent reports regarding Iran, I saw a monster in the making," said Mr. Steinitz, whose committee oversees the Mossad.
I think we're running out of non-violent options.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/03/2006 00:36 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
THE PLAN: Day one:
USA:
1) De-Cap Turbans, the Taxi-Cab driver, Mil-Hezbollah leadership.
2) Take Down Power Grids and Com Nodes.
3) Sustained Shock attacks on air defenses and missile sites.
4) Sink Iranian "Navy".
Israel simultaneously:
1) De-Cap and soften up Hezbollah strong holds and Syria leadership.
2) Armor thrust right over Hezbollah and up Bekka Valley all the way to Damascus.
3) Clean out Gaza and the West Bank.
#4
They always were on the shit list, which makes all kinds of verbal deterrents and threats by the Iranians sorta useless, as well as any promises of reform and hints of benefits down the line.
QOM, Iran (AP) - Iran said Tuesday it had found uranium ore at three new sites in the center of the country, an announcement that appeared designed as a fresh challenge to the drive by the United States and allies to curb Tehran's nuclear program.
Iran already has considerable uranium resources available for its nuclear program, a fact that called into question the importance of the new discoveries - beyond their propaganda value. "We have got good news: the discovery of new economically viable deposits of uranium in central Iran," Mohammad Ghannadi, deputy chief for nuclear research and technology, told a conference.
He said the deposits were found in the Khoshoomi region, Charchooleh and Narigan. Iran's principal source of uranium is the Saghand mine in the center of the country, which has the capacity to produce 132,000 tons of ore per year.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Iran's announcement showed "they are feeling increasingly uncomfortable" with their programs being reviewed by the U.N. Security Council. As a result, he said, "they are throwing up all sorts of chaff in the air right now to divert attention, to try to make threatening statements to the international community."
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Uranium is extremely common. And there are many places where Uranium is sufficiently concentrated to make extraction a viable proposition.
TEHERAN - Iran has managed to enrich uranium up to 4.8 per cent purity, the head of the countrys Atomic Energy Organization said on Tuesday, as envoys of the main world powers met in Paris to discuss how to halt the sensitive nuclear fuel work.
The latest level of enrichment carried out in Iran has been 4.8 per cent, Gholam Reza Aghazadeh told the ISNA student news agency. Enrichment of more than five per cent is not on Irans agenda and this level suffices for making nuclear fuel.
Until they decide to make a bomb, which they decided about ... ten years ago.
Aghazadeh reiterated that Iran plans to upgrade its enrichment facilities. Construction work and preparation of centrifuge machines are being done to create a 3,000-centrifuge cascade, he said. At present Iran is using a cascade of 164 centrifuges installed at a pilot plant in Natanz.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
The Lebanese government has decided to ask the United Nations to extend the mandate of an ongoing inquiry into the killing of Rafiq al-Hariri, the former prime minister. Official sources said the cabinet passed the decision at an emergency session on Tuesday to ask for a one-year extension. The mandate of the 11-month inquiry expires on June 15 but the investigation has run into difficulties, partly due to Syrian reluctance to cooperate and disputes over the veracity of witness statements.
The 15-member Security Council had already extended the mandate of the inquiry for six months in mid-December following an earlier request from the Lebanese government.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
Russia and China have told Tehran they will not support UN sanctions or military action over its nuclear programme, the Iranian foreign minister says. UN ambassadors from the United States, Britain and France are expected to introduce a resolution this week to legally oblige Iran to comply with UN Security Council demands that it halt all uranium enrichment work. But Manouchehr Mottaki told the Kayhan newspaper on Tuesday: "The thing these two countries [China and Russia] have officially told us and expressed in diplomatic negotiations is their opposition to sanctions and military attacks. At the current juncture, I personally believe no sanctions or anything like that will be on the agenda of the Security Council," he said.
Western diplomats say China and Russia - both veto-wielding permanent members of the council, will probably back a UN resolution demanding a halt to Iran's nuclear fuel work, but are not yet ready to back sanctions. Iran has been referred to the UN Security Council after failing to convince the International Atomic Energy Agency that its nuclear power station programme is not a front for building an atom bomb.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
SPACEWAR/SPACEDAILY.com has an article where US officials claim NORTH KOREA loses up to US$20.0Milyuhn in energy aid every four weeks becuz of its refusal to return to six-party talks, etc. over its nucprogs. I say time for Dubya and the IRS to give every American citizen a fair-sized tax rebate in the form of lump-sum checks - the longer the Norks [+Iran?]refuse, the larger the rebate checks.
TYRE, Lebanon - The United Nations peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon UNIFIL complained on Tuesday to the Israeli army about its violations of Lebanese airspace, UNIFIL spokesman Milos Strugel said. UNIFIL has complained to the Israeli army about Mondays violations, and we have informed the United Nations (headquarters) in New York, said the spokesman.
Apparently not much was said about Hezbollah's flight intrusions.
Six Israeli warplanes violated Lebanese airspace over several parts of the south on Monday, stirring Lebanese anti-aircraft gunners into ineffective action, Lebanese police said.
Beirut has repeatedly protested to the United Nations -- which has in turn called for Israel to halt the violations -- since the Israeli troop pullout from southern Lebanon in May 2000 after 22 years of occupation.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/03/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We're the UN. We're reliable, and consistent. Juden arhaus!!!
Arab reformists are constantly threatened by Islamists, who consider freethinkers to be guilty of the worst of crimes. [1] The most recent death threat against Arab intellectuals was issued by Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
In an audiocassette released April 23, 2006, bin Laden addressed the issue of the Danish cartoons and what he regards as the Arab countries' failure to show an appropriate response. He emphasized that anyone mocking the Prophet or making fun of Islam should be killed.
Likewise, bin Laden attacked Arab "freethinkers," several of whom he mentioned by name, and called for them to be killed as well. He cited the precedent of Ka'b ibn Al-Ashraf, whom the Prophet had killed for writing poems against him, as a model for proper conduct in such cases. According to bin Laden, there is no need to consult anyone on this matter; every loyal Muslim should see it as his duty to eliminate these heretics.
The following are excerpts from bin Laden's speech, as posted by the reformist website Middle East Transparent on April 27, 2006. [2]
Freethinkers and Heretics who Defame Islam Should Be Killed
"To the entire Islamic nation...: This speech comes to further urge you and prompt you to [come to] the aid of the Prophet and punish those responsible for the vile crime being committed by some journalists from amongst the Crusaders and the apostate heretics, who have insulted the Prophet Muhammad
"Imam Ahmad [3] said: 'Whoever reviles the Prophet or belittles him, be he Muslim or infidel, should be killed.' The freethinkers and heretics who defame Islam, and mock and scorn our noble Prophet - their case and the law concerning them have been clearly expounded by Imam Ibn Qayyim [Al-Jawziyya]. [4] He made it clear that the crime committed by a freethinker is the worst of crimes, that the damage caused by his staying alive among the Muslims is of the worst kind of damage, that he is to be killed, and that his repentance is not to be accepted...
"Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya said, commenting on [Koran 9:12]: 'Whoever defames our religion is a leader of disbelief.' Many are the leaders of disbelief in our days in the lands of Islam, and many are the followers of Ka'b ibn Al-Ashraf in the Arabian Peninsula. [5] Many of them are writers in newspapers, and many of them are actors and broadcasters in the media. We warn here that a Muslim is not allowed to listen to any program that includes discussion with heretics, or any show that makes fun of Islam and of religious Muslims, for this is one of the greatest sins.
"How numerous are the heretics who are [government] ministers! And the foremost among them is the minister of labor in the Land of the Two Holy Shrines [i.e. Saudi Arabia], Ghazi Al-Qusaybi. Whoever wants to see the official fatwa proclaiming him guilty of disbelief and apostasy - such a fatwa was issued by former chief mufti 'Abd Al-'Aziz bin Baz, just as he issued a fatwa on the disbelief and apostasy of the heretic Shamlan Al-'Issa in Kuwait. [6]
"Among these heretics is Ahmad Al-Baghdadi [7] in Kuwait, and Turki Al-Hamad [8] in the Land of the Two Holy Shrines - a fatwa concerning the latter was issued by Sheikh Hamud Al-'Uqala - and many others like them. The book Modernity in the Balance of Islam [9] contains many of their names. Sheikh Sa'id Al-Ghamidi has also warned against them in his audio tapes..."
Do Not Consult Anyone About the Killing of These Heretics
"Indeed, this is our Prophet's law regarding anyone who mocks him, and belittles Islam and scorns it... They should be killed... Take an example from Muhammad ibn Maslama and his companions [who assassinated the poet Ka'b ibn Al-Ashraf]. It is intolerable and outrageous that the heretics are among us, scorning our religion and our Prophet.
"Therefore, you must fear Allah and do His will. Do not consult anyone about the killing of these heretics. Be secretive in carrying out that which is required of you.
"So much for the apostate heretics."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:53 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Nothing new. The radicals have been killing the moderates in that part of the world ever since the early part of the 20th century, when being moderate meant being willing to live with the Jewish kibbutzniks draining the fever swamp next door.
The Global Islamic Media Front issued an analysis yesterday, May 1, 2006, which was distributed across several jihadist forums, providing a reading and analysis of the heroes tapes of al-Qaeda leadership: Usama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Its author, the deputy emir of the group, Ahmad al-Watheq Billah, traces the perceived route of the tapes from speaker to forum, even perhaps by mp3 recorder, chiding that a tape that costs a few dollars is capable to causing tremors and raising the emergency status. Though the document primarily elaborates upon the speeches from bin Laden and Zarqawi, al-Wateq writes that Zawahiris appearance with haughtiness in of important significance, as he marks the existence of psychological and information warfare and a challenge to the arrogant faces and lies.
Analysis of Usama bin Ladens speech focuses on his urging the mujahideen to prepare for jihad in Darfur, in western Sudan. Al-Watheq believes that bin Laden called upon the Muslims of the Arab Peninsula to travel to Sudan due to its proximity and the wealth of jihad knowledge and experience they may bring. In addition, he argues that there is a realization that the enemy seeks a presence in northern Africa for oil interests and states: It is a great opportunity for whoever has an opportunity to do jihad, for bin Laden gave good tidings to those who have not had any luck so far in jihad, and Darfur will be a battlefield for the mujahideen and the supporters.
Concerning Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the analysis notes that his video presence came as no surprise to the mujahideen and their supporters, as much as it did the Americans, and his appearance discredits allegations that Zarqawi is a fictional character conjured by the American military. Al-Watheq muses that since Zarqawi has proven his character as a mujahid and leader of several organizations, perhaps he will travel to Darfur to aid and conduct jihad. He also observes Zarqawis guards, likening them to the loyal guards of Usama bin Laden, and juxtaposing both to the guards of Arab leaders, who purportedly do their job for financial reward, rather getting good deeds with Allah.
The document, further, castigates Muslim scholars for being opposed to Usama bin Laden, al-Watheq citing his own personal experience with television personalities and acquaintances. He states: Bin Laden, Zawahiri and Zarqawi are truly the pride of the Ummah... they are the shining stars bearing the torch and the steadfastness towards truth. They are a fork in the throats of the enemies and the hypocrites and the traitors and have entered the annals of the honorable Muslim history in its largest chapter. History will immortalize them... they are an example... it is our right to provide them with assistance and advice. It is not our right to curse them and accuse them of unsuitable traits.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/03/2006 06:44 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
CHENGDU, April 28 (Xinhua) -- An advanced version of the China-developed new-generation fighter plane, the Xiaolong/FC-4, succeeded in its first flight on Friday in southwest China's Sichuan Province. Based on previous models, the Xiaolong/FC-1 and FC-3, the FC-4 is equipped with advanced electronics and weapons systems, which improve its combat capabilities, say experts.
The European Union's foreign policy chief said on Tuesday he had no proof U.S. intelligence agents had transferred al Qaeda suspects through Europe and that he had no powers to investigate the allegations.
COPENHAGEN: A Danish newspaper said on Tuesday it had filed a defamation lawsuit against a lawyer representing a group of Muslim organisations that sued the daily for publishing cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Pakistan on Tuesday asked Afghanistan and coalition forces to fence and mine their side of the border with Pakistan to prevent cross-border movement.
The government will be stern in dealing with Baloch sardars who are against the province's development, Geo television quoted President Pervez Musharraf as saying on Tuesday. Musharraf chaired a high-level meeting in Rawalpindi and said the recommendations of the parliamentary committee on Balochistan must be implemented, reported Geo. He said that development projects should be completed on time, and the government was creating jobs in the province. 
Pakistan has plunged from 34th on a list of failed states last year to the ninth slot this year, according to a list drawn up by the US-based journal Foreign Policy. The ratings are based on tens of thousands of articles from global and regional sources from May to December 2005, examined by experts using special software. The top 10 failed states are: 
ISLAMABAD - US investigators probing nuclear proliferation would not be allowed to meet a Pakistan scientist recently released from detention, officials said on Tuesday. Authorities last month released 
Somalia Scorecard: Forty one incidents have been reported since March 15 2005. .
United Nations chief Kofi Annan on Tuesday unveiled a global counter-terrorism strategy that puts new emphasis on the need to address bioterrorism, counter terrorists growing use of the Internet and defending human rights. The 32-page strategy, responding to a call by world leaders at their summit last September for enhanced UN coordination of the global fight against terrorism, sidestepped the question of defining what terrorism is.
Iraq's ambassador to Germany said on Wednesday he believed Berlin paid a hefty ransom to secure the release of two German engineers who were held hostage in Iraq for over three months.
BAGHDAD - Following weeks of wrangling over government formation that has fuelled sectarian strife in Iraq, parliamentary blocs have never seemed closer to forming a fully-fledged cabinet.
Gaza Strip - Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas said Wednesday that U.S. pressure foiled the latest attempt to pay 165,000 government workers by transferring money from abroad directly into their accounts.
12 Palestinian business leaders are presenting a proposal in an effort to resolve the financial and political crisis in the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) The proposal will be handed to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, and Speaker of the Legislative Council Aziz Dweik in Ramallah today. The initiative will call on Haniyeh to "form a broad Palestinian government which would include all the factions, and also technocrats," according to former finance minister Mazin Sinokrot. 
The Arab League, which has collected $70 million for the Palestinians, will pay the salaries of civil servants straight into their bank accounts. A Hamas government spokesman said on Monday: "We have given the list and bank account details of the civil servants to the Arab League so that the salaries can be paid to them directly. We have had a lot of contact with the Arab League and secretary general Amr Mussa to find a solution to the financial crisis as quickly as possible" Ghazi Hamas said.
QOM, Iran (AP) - Iran said Tuesday it had found uranium ore at three new sites in the center of the country, an announcement that appeared designed as a fresh challenge to the drive by the United States and allies to curb Tehran's nuclear program.
TEHERAN - Iran has managed to enrich uranium up to 4.8 per cent purity, the head of the countrys Atomic Energy Organization said on Tuesday, as envoys of the main world powers met in Paris to discuss how to halt the sensitive nuclear fuel work. 
The Lebanese government has decided to ask the United Nations to extend the mandate of an ongoing inquiry into the killing of Rafiq al-Hariri, the former prime minister. Official sources said the cabinet passed the decision at an emergency session on Tuesday to ask for a one-year extension. The mandate of the 11-month inquiry expires on June 15 but the investigation has run into difficulties, partly due to Syrian reluctance to cooperate and disputes over the veracity of witness statements.
TYRE, Lebanon - The United Nations peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon UNIFIL complained on Tuesday to the Israeli army about its violations of Lebanese airspace, UNIFIL spokesman Milos Strugel said. UNIFIL has complained to the Israeli army about Mondays violations, and we have informed the United Nations (headquarters) in New York, said the spokesman.
