Islamist-backed candidates triumphed in the final round of Saudi Arabia's first nationwide elections, results showed Saturday, stamping the authority of religious scholars on the kingdom's fledgling reforms.
From the commercial capital Jeddah to Islam's second holiest city of Medina, official figures showed a sweeping victory for candidates endorsed by conservative Muslim scholars, including government critics.
Thursday's elections marked the third and final round of voting for municipal councils in the absolute monarchy, which has come under pressure to reform after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, carried out by mainly Saudi hijackers.
Women were excluded from voting or standing in the elections and the councils will have half their members appointed by the state. The royal family is unlikely to see its powers eroded by the cautious step toward democracy.
In the Red Sea port of Jeddah the seven candidates on a "golden list" endorsed by Muslim scholars won all seven seats, defeating 500 rivals in a show of religious influence which defied the city's relatively liberal tradition.
The holy city of Medina returned six out of seven candidates supported by religious figures. Winners in the town of Buraida, heartland of Saudi Arabia's austere Wahhabi school of Islam, also appeared to have religious backing.
As in the capital Riyadh two months ago, defeated rivals complained before votes were even cast that endorsing blocs of candidates violated election rules banning parties or coalitions. But their appeals met little sympathy.
"We don't care about gold lists, silver lists or bronze lists," election official Abdullah al-Subail told Reuters. "What concerns us is the view of the voter."
Subail said it was wrong to label the victorious candidates as Islamists because "we are all Muslims, there is no question of Muslims and non-Muslims."
Saturday's results extend the earlier wins by Islamist-backed candidates in the capital Riyadh and the Gulf city of Dammam, demonstrating the dominance of religion -- at least in urban centers -- over tribal or business links.
In Riyadh at least one victorious candidates won more than six times as many votes as his nearest rival.
Despite the limited powers the councils are expected to wield, the elections still mark a significant milestone by giving Saudis a choice of their representatives and a platform during the campaign to air at least some local grievances.
They have also helped ease pressure on the royal family which is battling a two-year wave of violence by al Qaeda militants fighting to expel Westerners from Saudi Arabia and overthrow the House of Saud.
"They have created a channel through which people can express themselves," said one diplomat. "And the councils will be dealing with issues which affect people's daily lives."
Last month the Sunni kingdom's minority Shi'ites flocked to the polling booths in the eastern region, winning seats in their stronghold of Qatif and the mixed area of Hofuf, but losing to Sunni-backed candidates in the urban center of Dammam.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/24/2005 12:14:33 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
SECURITY chiefs fear Al-Qaeda terrorists trained as scuba divers could mount attacks against a royal review of the fleet being held to mark the 200th anniversary of the battle of Trafalgar.
A senior Ministry of Defence (MoD) police officer has disclosed that militants using techniques learnt in western diving schools to attack Royal Navy ships are considered the main threat to the event.
Officials fear Al-Qaeda divers could attach bombs to the hulls of the ships, detonate explosives strapped to their bodies in suicide attacks or even board vessels and kill some of those on board.
The Queen, in her office as Lord High Admiral, will review about 40 ships from the navies of nations including France and Spain. She will be on the deck of one of the Royal Navy ships.
In previous reviews, small boats and yachts have mingled with the naval vessels but this event, the first since the September 11 attacks, will be different.
The 3,000-5,000 private yachts and small boats expected to gather in the Solent to watch the review will be kept away from the naval vessels in the main channel.
There will be a 200m exclusion zone around the naval ships and strict rules preventing "fast planing boats" from sailing at anything above minimum speed. Although that rule was ostensibly imposed to reduce the danger from wash, security sources have said it is designed to prevent terrorists using fast boats to mount bomb attacks similar to those carried out by Al-Qaeda on a US ship off the coast of Yemen in October 2000.
Small boats taking part in the Spithead review will be kept back against the shore away from the main route by marshals. Privately, however, officials admit it will be almost impossible to control the number of small boats attending and there will be no attempt to impose a pass system.
The MoD police's marine units and Hampshire police, who are responsible for security at the review, will concentrate on maintaining the exclusion zone round the fleet, although all boats will have access to other parts of the Solent.
They believe the only way terrorists will be able to get through the security cordon would be underwater, which is why the threat from terrorist divers linked to Al-Qaeda is taken seriously.
One senior MoD police officer said: "It is something that really concerns us and has done for some time. The potential is obviously there. It presents a very difficult problem for the officers on patrol."
Bruce Jones, chairman of a Nato security policy group, said the use of sub-aqua techniques fitted the Al-Qaeda modus operandi.
"Scuba-diving is fairly user-friendly," he said. "It's not high-technology and it's not expensive. It is the type of thing a deep-cover Al-Qaeda cell could manage fairly easily."
A number of Royal Navy vessels now have machineguns mounted on their decks to defend ships against possible "swarm attacks" by terrorists in boats. That measure was taken in 2002 in the wake of the arrest, during a joint UK- Moroccan operation, of an Al-Qaeda cell based in Morocco that was planning to attack Royal Navy vessels in the Straight of Gibraltar.
Although any underwater diver could be picked up on the navy ships' sonar systems, they are not sophisticated enough to distinguish between a man and an ocean-going mammal such as a seal or a dolphin.
Even if they were picked up, the use of a swarming technique would hamper the authorities' efforts to prevent an attack. "The point of a swarm attack is that you might stop some of them but some of them will get through," said Jones.
The suggestion that Al-Qaeda might attempt swarm attacks using men trained in diving skills is not new. For the past three years, the FBI has been investigating reports of Middle Eastern suspects approaching scuba diving clubs in America and inquiring about training.
The bureau's investigation was widened after the Dutch security service, the AIVD, discovered suspected Islamist extremists had been trained at a diving school in the Netherlands.
Several of the 48 Arabs trained to dive at the Eindhoven club were among a dozen alleged militants later charged with trying to recruit Dutch Muslims to join Al-Qaeda. Although all those charged were freed when the case collapsed, the AIVD insists the file remains open.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/24/2005 12:13:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Something to think about certainly, but it might be worth getting the perspective of the resident SEAL blogger on this:
North and South Korea held a second high-level meeting in Jakarta on Saturday after their first such contact in five years the previous day. The second-ranked leaders of the two Koreas entered a conference room on the sidelines of an Asia-Africa summit, but made no immediate comments. The leaders had already met briefly and less formally on the sidelines of an Asia-Africa summit in Jakarta on Friday and discussed regional problems, but they did not talk about the North's nuclear programs. "Very good, very good," South Korean Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan told reporters through an interpreter when asked how Friday's meeting with the North's number two leader Kim Yong-nam went.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
SEVERAL hundred Muslims protested at a pentecostal church in Stockholm against a preacher who denigrated Islam's prophet Mohammed, calling him a "confused pedophile".
According to police, about 400 Muslim protesters, including women and children, gathered in front of the Philadelphia Church, the main site of the pentacostal movement in Sweden.
In March at this church, Runar Sogaard, a 37-year-old Norwegian preacher living in Sweden, had made comments about several religions including Islam.
"Mohammed, he is not God, he was a confused pedophile... Read the story of what Mohammed did. He married girls at age nine, 11," Sogaard said in a sermon which was sold on a CD by his followers.
A statement signed by "Muslims of Sweden" called Sogaard's remarks "immature and ridiculous," noting that at the time when the prophet lived girls were married at very young ages.
After Sogaard's sermon was reported in the Swedish press, the preacher has tried to justify his remarks.
"I made humorous descriptions of different religions, including Christianity," Sogaard said in a television interview last week.
Sogaard, who is not a member of the Philadelphia Church but has his own religious group, is under police protection having received threats, according to his followers.
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/24/2005 21:05 Comments ||
Top||
#3
noting that at the time when the prophet lived girls were married at very young ages.
Mohammed the pedophile (MERIH) married the child when she six years old and consumated (i.e. had full sexual intercourse with her) when she was 8 or 9 years old.
Any Doctors out there want to say a 9 year old is physically capable of even concentual consumation?
Interesting observation in Jim Hoagland's column today on the Global War on Extremism.
snip
In Bush's first term, bitter disputes -- based in personality clashes and a settling of old scores as much as in substance -- would have handicapped such an exercise.
But internal strife has largely subsided since the departure of Powell and his powerful deputy, Richard Armitage, who skillfully provided background information on the shortcomings of perceived enemies at the Pentagon and elsewhere to congressional and other allies. Here's an interesting coincidence: Armitage was a mentor to virtually all of the State Department personnel whose cases of mistreatment by U.N. ambassador-designate John Bolton were cited in Senate hearings last week, and Powell has pointedly declined to support Bolton.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
04/24/2005 12:34:53 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Gee, Mrs. D. - you think there's a pattern here?
Sticks to high heaven.
Posted by: too true ||
04/24/2005 13:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Richard Armitage's entire purpose of being is to be one of only a handful of the diplomatic equivalent of James Bond. He goes wherever there are the blackest of black ops, to do outrageous things and to start fights. For example, the US wanted out of the Phillipines, but not to pay a fortune in reparations for it. So Armitage went there, took over the treaty negotiations and started adding endless offensive demands. So the Phillipinos kicked the US out, and didn't demand one red cent. Before that, he was in charge of Reagan's POW/MIA office--tasked with the job of *covering up* any evidence that POWs or MIAs were still alive in SE Asia. He's been implicated in enormous drug smuggling operations, black budget money laundering, and any number of shadowy enterprises--all disavowed by the government. Even his Internet resume changes on an annual basis. He should have retired long ago, but his skills are so unique he's been shuttled between government agencies since mid-Vietnam. Think of him as the USs equivalent to 007, and be assured that anything he's involved with is underhanded.
#3
powell as sec-state was an abysmal failure. Humiliated by Villepin at the UN. Redused to make the case for pre-emption with any force or passion. Traveled less than any sec-state in recent history and achieved less. And throughout it all, he was continuously winking at his champions at the NYT and elsewhere in the MSM about his personal disapproval of Bush's policy.
A disgrace, really. A sorry end to the ultimate insider's career in beltway gamesmanship.
Withdraw or be pushed out by the White House. Survive the test of his professional life. Suffer a rejection by the Senate. That's about what it comes down to for John R. Bolton, President Bush's besieged nominee to be U.N. ambassador. Bolton could weather the indignity of further investigation into his personal and professional behavior and win confirmation by the Senate next month. He also could find his nomination scuttled. Or he could pull the plug before a scheduled May 12 vote by a Senate committee.
Only a week ago, Bolton seemed assured of moving on to New York to be the ambassador who works toward Bush's wishes for major changes at the United Nations. His new assignment, however, was thrown into jeopardy last week when moderate Republican senators said new allegations about Bolton gave them cause to reconsider whether he was the right person for the job. "This nomination is not doomed, but it's on life support and the plug may well be pulled any day," said Allan J. Lichtman, a political history professor at American University.
GOP support for Bolton cracked during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing early last week, so the chairman decided to postpone a vote that Bolton would have lost. Since then, the White House has defended Bolton daily and blamed Democrats for playing politics with the nomination. Yet each new day has brought fresh allegations that Bolton dressed down subordinates or behaved, as one former colleague claimed, "like a madman," when he was crossed.
The charges come on top of unease over Bolton's past hostility toward the United Nations and allegations that the political appointee tried to pressure career intelligence analysts into twisting the facts for political reasons.
Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., went to the full Senate on Thursday to decry what he called "death by a thousand cuts."
Later that day, word spread that former Secretary of State Colin Powell quietly was telling wavering Republican senators what he knows about Bolton, undersecretary of state for arms control and international security since May 2001. The two did not get along during Bush's first term. "My sense is that he's going down," said Thomas Mann, an expert on Congress and the presidency at the Brookings Institution in Washington. It is not clear, Mann said, whether Bolton would jump or be pushed by the White House.
Vice President Dick Cheney sounded as resolute as ever about Bolton's nomination when he spoke to Republican campaign lawyers on Friday. "If being occasionally tough and aggressive and abrasive were a problem," Cheney said, "a lot of members of the United States Senate wouldn't qualify."
Bolton has not commented publicly since he testified before the committee on April 11. Until the committee hearing on Tuesday, he appeared headed to a 10-8 party line approval, which would have sent the nomination to the GOP-controlled Senate.
Now the focus is on one committee member, Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio. Voinovich stunned the chairman, Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and his colleagues when he announced during the hearing that he had misgivings about Bolton. The White House is now lobbying Voinovich and two other GOP senators on the committee to support Bolton, although Bush has not gotten involved personally.
To salvage the nomination, the White House probably will have to offer some "exculpatory information" to counter the daily trickle of new allegations about Bolton's record, Lichtman said. In the end, however, he said it may depend on how badly the White House wants Bolton's confirmation. "If the White House wants to spend enough political chips they could save it," Lichtman said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/24/2005 12:08:54 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Cheney's right! I bet every one of those Senators has someone thet disagreed with and probably had words with them. Shame if Bolten gets Borked. Also the GOP and my wallet will do a little soul searching after that. Not sure I can support a party that has been in power this long and still can't get it's agenda moving forward. They are either incompetent, scared, or both. Either way they should stop trying to nice to the Democraps. Donât think for two seconds that they would consult or care what if the Republicans âlikedâ if they controlled the House, Senate, and President. I shake my head in disbelief, every time I hear another Democrap whine on Judges, Politicians, or legislation. Hastert should resign and let one of the other YOUNGER Senators take over.
#3
If they DO pull Bolton (or the Dems block him) then they ought to find the staunchest Republican in the White House Mail Room INTERN and send him/her (but no one over 25).
Message: if you're not going to let us FIX the U.N. (w/ Bolton), then we'll just IGNORE it (and here's our INTERN!!)
#4
I'm with CS. If the Republican leadership can't control fools like Voinovich, Hegel, Chaffee, et al, to get Bolton through committee, they can do without my financial backing. Personally, I've been in the "US out of UN, UN out of US" camp for a while now, but if the UN has any hope of survival, it lies with people like Bolton who would force it to honor its charter.
A common complaint is that revelations from the Gomery inquiry have brought the operation of the federal government effectively to a halt. One front that Ottawa seems to keep doggedly moving ahead on — regrettably — is our military integration with the U.S. Oh? You mean because the public finally knows that the ruling party was the most correct in the history of the nation? Or that the ruling party was exposed as trying to cover this up before the recent elections? Or that they had used the power of the state to censor news about the scandal? Or that they tried to renege on providing the opposition to call for a new election? This news is making the Candian public unhappy and that's BAD.
And the horror of working with the US Military. Oh, the humanity! As I recall, the US and Canada have a long military history together, especially the Navy. Why? because the Canadian has always been an extension of the Royal Navy. See Histories of WWI and WWII. The Canadians also fought with us in Korea, although they didn't attend out Soueast Asia wargame. Canadian sharpshooters from the Pricess Pats were renowed in Afghanistan for they accuracy. And now that the Chimperor Bushitler is the President, all of that it tossed overboard? I think the Canadian prople know better than that.
Indeed, while the Gomery issue built to a crescendo last week, hardly any attention was paid to the release of a defence policy review that signalled Ottawa's intention to make the Canadian military more part of the U.S. war machine — a change that would likely offend most Canadians if they were aware of it. U.S. war machine? You mean the fine members of the US Armed Services who have protected this nation, and our allies (including Canada), who defeated the Kaiser, Hitler, Tojo and Communism allowing the world to live in a better world? To use such a phrase would make many Americans consider whether Canada should be inside or outside our Defense perimeter.
Of course, it wasn't stated like that. Of course not! They probably used strange words like "mutual benefit" or "defend North America" or "Islamofascists want to kill us or make us dhimmis". Rather, the change was billed as part of our "new, more sophisticated approach to our relationship with the United States." US: We believe that Islamofascists exist in Canada who want to do us harm. We will do everything in our power to prevent that, including restricting access to the US. Canada: How can we help (knowing 70+% of Canada's economy is based on trade with the US)? US: That is very sophisticated of you.
In essence, this "more sophisticated" approach boils down to linking our military operations more with Washington's. "Today our ships integrate seamlessly with U.S. Navy formations," the review notes enthusiastically, holding up this model of "interoperability." Just the same as the Canadian Navy has done since WWII. And NATO. As I recall, Canada's special NATO role was ASW, which is just one of the roles the US Navy does.
Of course, Canada has a long history of military co-operation with the U.S., but the Bush administration's more aggressive military stance has threatened to change the nature of that relationship. Washington wants us to join their global war against "terror" — a murky, open-ended war that allows the U.S. to intervene anywhere in the world where they are Islamofascists intending to kill Americans. Oh, but for the old days of simple wars again nation-states. By the way, I just love the was there are quotes around the word terror, as if the war was about something other than Islamofascisits that declared war against all of us, even Canada. Of course they attack the US because they want to knock out the only real threat to them in the west, the US.
A report in the Wall Street Journal last month described a new top-level Pentagon planning document which calls for the U.S. military to become more "proactive" and "focused on changing the world instead of just responding to conflicts." Duh. It is a forward offensive strategy, as America has always fought. Where we can find Islamofascists, we will put them out of business, one way or another. You see, Americans are actually offended that these backward, hateful miscreants want to kill us and impose their pre-medeival laws and culture upon us. You know, the one that wouldn't allow you to write your drivel column? Anyway, our forward offensive strategy has freed 50 million people in two campaigns almost unparelled in the annals of warfare both for their devastating effectiveness and lack of collateral damage, has put Islamofascism on the defensive, and we are tring to establish some semblance of modern political culture in the most trying and backward are of the world so that these killers will no longer attenpt to kill Americans in mass quantities?
This is hair-raising sceery stuff that goes beyond even the frightening notion of pre-emptive war. Pre-emptive war has been around since the beginning of mankind. Think of it this way: Self-defense. Now Washington seems to be talking about using its unsurpassed military I salute the members of our Armed Services and the American people for this fact. If it were surpassed, I imagine Canada would be a much less nice place to live with, of, say the Chinese running the place. might to force nations to behave as it wants them to. Actually, our Military is no threat to anyone who isn't sponsoring or harboring Islamofascists who intend to cause mass American casualties. Only the most rabid pro-Washington zealot would fail to see the opportunities for abuse in such unchallenged power.Whoa. Rabid and zealot in the same sentence. Like negative numbers, do 2 negative words negate each other and become a positive? Opportunties for abuses like....deposing Saddam and the Taliban? Allowing Afghans to vote for the fist time and iraqis for the first time in generations? Unchallenged? WTF?? having observed the world since 9-11, I can say that pretty much everything the US tried to do was challenged by most of the world, most of the West, the MSM, most of the Dhims. Even by you, I am sure.
Canadians have no interest in being part of an aggressive force bent on remaking the world. remake the world=kill Islamofascists before they can kill us. But Ottawa's defence review, part of its overall foreign policy review, portrays our defence needs as essentially the same as Washington's: "(M)ost of the new dangers to the United States are no less risks to Canada." MUST.GET.STRONGER.CLUEBAT. Do you think the Caliphate will exempt Canada? Pshhhhaw.
In fact, our situations are very different. Few terrorists want to attack us, because we don't have a long history of intervening in other countries the way Washington has. For that matter, Washington exaggerates its own vulnerability in order to keep Americans willing to go to war. US: We had 3,000 dead, of which several hundred were Canadians murdered by islamofascists and we are determined to stop them from repeating this. We know they are still trying to kill us and we will do everything possible to prevent them from carrying out their designs. Linda: Oh, your just making this up.
Canadians are overwhelmingly resistant to the kind of military adventurism favoured by hawks in the Bush administration. Americans are also against military adventurism as every servicemember's life is valuable. However, our leadership is willing to pro-actively seek out the enemy and try to wipe them out in their dens, before they can get here. See, Americans don't want to die, nor do they want to be dhimmis. They want to be free and are willing to fight to preserve our freedom. Let's say the Islamofascists smuggled WMD into North American through Canada and used the US's tradional lax border controls at this border to get into the US and kill many Americans. The American people would demand the border be severely restricted. That would create severe economic problems for Canada. At the same time, we're willing to put money and manpower into maintaining peacekeeping forces around the world. Translation: Canadians are too wimpy to fight and can only be soldiers where there is no fighting.
If we associate our military with peacekeeping — as the government no doubt hopes we will — we'll be more inclined to accept the massive $13 billion increase in military spending Ottawa has proposed.
But, with Ottawa's emphasis on integrating Canada's defence policy with Washington's, it's not peacekeeping but war-making that's likely to be on the agenda. And let Chimperor Bushitler triumph in democratizing the most backward part of the world, draining the swamp and making modern 'liberals' look stoopid?
#1
Cheez, Brett, you're not supposed to leave welts and bruises :-)
Very nice fisking.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/24/2005 16:05 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I have nothing to add to that prolonged battering, but I am curious about this bit: ...Canadaâs special NATO role was ASW.... I hadn't heard that before.
I knew the Great Lakes were pretty much sub-free, but I figured that was due to the sea lamprey traps in the St. Lawrence.
#3
Ouch. Not only is she and the liberal party going down in flames, Brett kicks them in the teeth on the way down. Nice frisking of a corrupt and soon (hopefully) to be out of power party.
#4
This may be the zenith of support for Paul Martin.
What I find shocking is that she did not have a single word to say about the U. N., the true guarantor of Canadian security.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
04/24/2005 16:30 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Who is Linda McQuaig, and why do I care about this windbag?
Al
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
04/24/2005 16:50 Comments ||
Top||
#6
member of Canadian parliament IIRC
Posted by: too true ||
04/24/2005 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Thank you, Steve White.
SteveS, that is correct. The Canadians were the NATO ASW lead. This allowed the USN and Royal Navy to focus on other areas. Canada had been heavily involved in WWII ASW, and were involved from 1939, not 1942 like the US.
Al, I don't care about her either, but I just had to fisk this commentary in the Toronto Red Star. Brett
I'm a little curious about one thing I believe she's attributing to PM Martin (?):
"Today our ships integrate seamlessly with U.S. Navy formations..."
Um, hasn't the Canadian Navy substantively been reduced to a shadow of its former self? Run aground, so to speak, and unable to adequately offer even self-defense, much less serve to appreciably augment the US Navy in defending North America?
Unless the stories posted here on RB about these impressions were untrue, then something's amiss with this quote. My first thought when I read it was, "Huh? I thought the Missing Man formation was only used ceremonially to honor a lost comrade - and involved aircraft!"
#11
Her panties are bunched because the current budget on the table increases money to the Canadian defense forces who have been cut to nothing by the socialists and their anti military progrom.
She is also mad that this brings Canada close to the US defense establishment again. She misses the obvious. Canada's ground pounders can't currently get anywhere quickly without US support. This was brought home after the Tsunami. Canada's military was ready to render aid but had no way to get there. "All surplus US air support was already in use." Had the government of Canada been on better military terms with the US this might not have been a problem. Message sent, message recieved.
This dumb commie bitch didn't get CCed and is too stuipid to understand it anyway.
#12
Brett, You may be interested in the Reuben James on whom you apparently had no friends.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
04/24/2005 18:49 Comments ||
Top||
#13
.com, you can review the whole mighty fleet of canuck navy. linky
It approximates Croatian Navy in strenght. ;-)
Don't go to the link that says Navy Life. It notes 'world class vessels', telling ya right of the bat. Despite the sad state of affairs, though, seems that the canuck navy did not lose their sense of humor.
Ten years after the Oklahoma City bombing, the anti-government militia movement that spawned America's deadliest act of domestic terrorism apparently is a wisp of its former self.
After a spike in interest after the April 19, 1995, bombing, militias fell into decline, according to those who monitor such groups.
Today, anti-immigration vigilantes on the U.S.-Mexico border, environmental extremists, skinheads and neo-Nazis pose a greater threat of violence, former FBI officials and watchdog groups say.
Since the mid-1990s, more than four-fifths of the so-called patriot groups have disbanded, according to the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center. Those remaining bear little resemblance to the high-profile militants who inspired Timothy McVeigh to blow up a Ryder truck packed with racing fuel and farm fertilizer next to the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City, killing 149 adults and 19 children.
"It was a broad movement, much broader than the Klan or the neo-Nazis," said Mark Potok, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Project.
Potok and others who have studied the militias say they were spawned by resentments to new gun-control laws, the 1993 federal siege of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco and global free-trade policies such as the North American Free Trade Agreement. They either retreated from government's reach or openly confronted government power.
"What they had in common were conspiracy theories," Potok said. "Waco was very much seen as what the federal government was willing to do to crush the politically unorthodox, particularly people who were interested in guns."
McVeigh, who with co-conspirator Terry Nichols attempted to join a militia in Michigan, chose the second anniversary of the fiery end of the Waco episode for his attack in Oklahoma City.
Norm Olson, a founder of the Michigan Militia Corps who later disbanded the group, said that after the bombing, "about a third walked away from the militia altogether. They didn't want to be involved in it."
Danny Defenbaugh, a retired FBI agent who headed the Oklahoma City investigation, agreed that McVeigh's act was seen as so repugnant that many people severed their militia ties.
"I had discussions with a number of militia leaders who said McVeigh and Nichols did their cause a lot of harm," Defenbaugh said. "Because of the children being killed, they were being portrayed as baby killers."
However, as a result of a raft of publicity, the militia movement grew in the immediate months following Oklahoma City.
"It took a year for militia members to see through the haze of theories. Militia leaders immediately claimed the federal government set off the bomb to discredit them," said Daniel Levitas, author of The Terrorist Next Door.
Numbers crested in 1996, when, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, there were 858 groups attracting as many as 50,000 active members.
But the spike didn't last long.
Mark Pitcavage, director of fact-finding for the Anti-Defamation League, said several factors led to the movement's decline, starting with law enforcement's response.
"When hundreds of militia members started going to prison on weapons and conspiracy charges, a lot of members began backing away," he said. McVeigh, a Persian Gulf War veteran, was convicted on federal murder, conspiracy and weapons charges and executed in 2001. Nichols is serving a life sentence.
In Texas, Republic of Texas leader Richard McLaren was twice convicted and all but one of his five followers were also given prison time for their roles in a 1997 military-style raid that led to a seven-day siege in the Davis Mountains.
The FBI hired 570 new agents within a year of the bombing, assigning many to regional counterterrorism task forces, and Justice Department guidelines restricting investigations of suspicious groups were relaxed.
"We were allowed to range more widely," said Defenbaugh, who in the late 1990s headed the FBI's Dallas office, where the country's largest task force was based.
Meanwhile, federal agents rethought their approach to negotiations and standoffs and defused several potentially deadly and incendiary incidents without resorting to violence.
"Agents-in-charge went through management training in how to handle these situations and there was a considerable effort to meet with domestic groups," Defenbaugh said. "I talked with a lot of them. I'd tell them, 'You have a right to bear arms and join together. You have a right to discord with the U.S. government. But here is the line. Once you cross it, we'll investigate you and investigate you aggressively.' "
At the same time, states and local prosecutors began cracking down on so-called paper terrorists and tax resisters aligned with the militias.
In the late 1990s, more than 30 states, including Texas, passed laws outlawing the filing of unjustified property liens and simulating legal process.
Today, there are about 152 "patriot" groups scattered through 30 states, the Southern Poverty Law Center estimates.
Ten are in Texas, including the Republic of Texas in Overton and the Constitution Society in Austin, the center says. The numbers have been fairly stable for the past four years.
Levitas said militias have had a difficult time recruiting in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.
"When Americans are being killed, it's difficult casting the federal government as the problem," he said.
Still, last year in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Montana, militia members were arrested on weapons charges.
In Tyler, anti-government extremist William J. Krar received an 11-year sentence for possessing an arsenal that included more than 100,000 rounds of ammunition, machine guns, pipe bombs and a sodium cyanide bomb.
"Although they're small in size, there remain people who are hardcore and devoted and not averse to criminal action," Pitcavage said. "They're still causing crimes and causing problems."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/24/2005 12:24:36 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Too bad law enforcement isn't interested in illegal aliens who are "causing crimes and causing problems", hmmm?
In spite of what this article intimates, I remain a loyal member of a well-regulated militia.
#2
TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia areâ
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
#4
BTW Southern Poverty Law center is a front for a communist organization that only has the destruction of the US Constitution and Christianity as it's goal. It has little to do with ending real poverty or protecting the poor from abuse from the legal system. The have been helpful in getting rid of some KKKers and Proto and Neo-Nazi groups but the government is better suited to deal with such scum.
Person belonging to or supporting or even quoting the members of the Southern Poverty Law center should be treated like on treats venomous snakes in the wild, go around them if you can but don't ignore them or trust them.
#5
That's all well and good.
Stop the militia crap, it's insane and a dead cold loser of an issue. Anyone got a nice picture of him/herself with a bag over the head?
The locals who wanted to have an "organized" milita here were refered to as the Moron Milita (This towns name was originally Moron.) We tried to convince them that T-Shirts with a Bulls-Eye on them would be a good choice of uniform. Them being the first SOBs that would "get it" if the shit ever hit the fan. They were to a person, fucktards of the first water.
#8
There may be some mixed messages and crosstalk at work, here.
The only "militia" I respect are represented by the individuals who have banded together to protect their rights - and ours - and call themselves the Minutemen.
The ones running around in the Idaho forest with White Supremacy as their goal or pretending to give a shit about the Constitution by breaking the law do not serve anyone but the power-seekers who run them. Real American patriots are individuals first and always, not skinheads or haters or racists or freaks filled with fantasy bullshit who need to belong to some tough-talking asshat group because they're dysfunctional and have no identity without it.
When we are truly threatened, such as on our borders, the American individual stands up - just as the citizen-soldiers in our National Guard. Then, when the danger has passed or the politicians buy a clue and do their sworn Constitutional duty for a goddamned change, they disperse and return to their homes peaceably.
#9
Militias were the bete noir of the Clintonista and Janet Reno era, justifying their gun-grabbing nanny state (helllooo Elian!). They played it masterfully. Today's Minutemen are an American Neighborhood Watch and that's to be respected. Notice that the only criticism from the Border Patrol comes from bureaucrats and BP union spokesmen....
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/24/2005 16:37 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I actually do belong to a group that one could define as a militia, The Tennessee Defense Force that has as it's leader the Governer. We are nothing like what is portrayed on the news shows or whats in this article.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
04/24/2005 18:13 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Okay, okay, call it the Civil Air Patrol without planes.
I expect you're part of a mounted sherrif's posse Deacon? Got one of those here too.... but it's under the control of an elected official, the sherrif. Not Col JumpedOutOfAPlane Intheday.
#14
wrong side of the spectrum. Today it's the left that's into black-helicopter crackpot conspiracymongering. The FBI should be scrutinizing Kos and DU.
#15
"well-regulated militia = State Guard".
I see you have bought into the Soros funded anti-firearm BS. The truth is ALL males between 17 and 45, Regulating a firearm is being able to hit what you are intending to.
I repeat since you can't read:
TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311. Militia: composition and classes (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia areâ (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
#16
There is absolutely no reason for you to be rude, SPoD. I understand completely and I've not bought into any Soros-funded anything. Our State Code defines our State Guard as a 'well-regulated militia'.
#17
Your state code is not Federal law. Federal law and the constutition define the US Milita. Your sex is not relevant. What you wrote most certainly is from a Soros funded orginazation that even has had to change it's name it because it became so discredited. You may research whom funded the group that propagated that thought on your own.
#18
SPoD, on account of your repeating that part about 'males between 17 and 45' I thought you meant that gender was relevant. So sorry. I was trying to make a little joke. Guess that didn't work too well, huh? I dislike using Fred's bandwidth for meaningless argument, so this is the last post on this subject I plan to make.
Please read what I wrote again. I never mentioned anything about a US militia nor did I mention anything about Federal law. I mentioned a 'well-regulated militia' which, in these parts, is a light-hearted synonym for our State Guard and was such long before nanny-state gun-grabbers such as Kennedy-Kerry-Soros arrived on the scene. (Too many hyphens?)
Other than that, I have no idea what you are talking about. But please don't feel obligated to enlighten me as I really don't give a flying rat's ass.
The US should name a special prosecutor to look at Donald Rumsfeld's possible role in the abuse of US military prisoners, a human rights group says. Human Rights Watch says the US defence secretary may bear "command responsibility" for abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and elsewhere. The organisation says others, like former CIA director George Tenet, should also face investigation.
They want pretty much everyone investigated except Saddam.
The Pentagon says Mr Rumsfeld did not authorise or condone any abuse.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) released its report ahead of the first anniversary of the Abu Ghraib scandal, which broke in late April last year. Some guards have gone on trial but critics say there has been no full investigation into what senior defence figures knew about or even authorised. "The soldiers at the bottom of the chain are taking the heat for Abu Ghraib and torture around the world while the guys at the top who made the policies are going scot free," said Reed Brody, special counsel for HRW.
Ever consider the idea that the guys at the top didn't know?
HRW said Mr Rumsfeld could be liable for war crimes under the doctrine of "command responsibility" - the legal principle that holds a superior responsible for his subordinates' actions when he knows, or should know, that crimes are being committed but fails to stop them.
It said Mr Rumsfeld approved interrogation techniques - such as the use of guard dogs to frighten prisoners and painful "stress" positions - that they claim violated the Geneva Conventions. It said the investigation should not be carried out by justice department officials because Attorney General Alberto Gonzales himself had a role in approving interrogation techniques.
It called on Congress and the president to establish a special commission and appoint a special prosecutor.
Except that we no longer have a law to permit a special prosecutor.
HRW says it has "substantial evidence warranting criminal investigations" into Mr Rumsfeld, Mr Tenet, Lt Gen Ricardo Sanchez, the former senior commander in Iraq, and Gen Geoffrey Miller, former commander of the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay.
Which for some reason can't stand the light of day.
Mr Rumsfeld is already being sued by two civil liberties groups on behalf of eight men who claim to have been abused by US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. A Pentagon spokesman said HRW's allegations were "kookie, but nothing we haven't heard before" "frivolous and unsubstantiated".
Lt Cdr Flex Plexico said US policy requires that all detainees be treated humanely and that any credible allegations of illegal conduct are investigated. "There is nothing in the detention or interrogation policies established by Secretary Rumsfeld or the defence department that even remotely qualifies as torture," he told the BBC News website. "Secretary Rumsfeld has repeatedly condemned any abuse or mistreatment of detainees."
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...he told the BBC News website...
That's all you need to know more of the typical anti-US socialist crap passed of as news from the UK. Stuff it you pansies, I am totally sick of your "our shit doesn't stink" act.
HRW are enemies of human kind. Treat them as such.
If it was up to HRW and the BBC Saddam would still be filling graves.
#3
SPoD - totally agree with you. I can't *stand* the shite that comes out of the BBC, their latest stunt is to plant activists in a conservative rally and chant anti-Tory and pro-Labour slogans - in a General Election campaign. Outrageous!
As for HRW, it seems that some humans are more equal than others (ie the poor sods that died in the thousands under Saddams rule are as nothing compared to the few that were 'brutally mistreated' by the US). Bastards.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
04/24/2005 12:42 Comments ||
Top||
Following its admission that at least 40 suspected Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) terrorists are still operating in the country, the Philippine National Police (PNP) said it has contained the movements of these terrorists.
PNP Directorate for Intelligence chief Director Robert Delfin said the intensified intelligence buildup and targeting operations undertaken by the police and military have made it highly difficult for JI operatives to move around in the Philippines.
"There is still a threat, but (the terrorists) cannot move because they know we will catch them," Delfin said in Tagalog as he assured the public that the authorities are doing their best to neutralize the JI operatives.
PNP chief Director Arturo Lomibao, during a forum of the Manila Overseas Press Club in Makati City last Wednesday, revealed that at least 40 suspected foreign terrorists are still in the country, particularly in Mindanao.
"Terrorist threats remain because there are at least 40 suspected foreign terrorists in the country," he said.
Lomibao's admission came after a published report that the JI, despite its failure to carry out threatened Holy Week bombings, is still plotting to launch major attacks in the region.
The Holy Week bombing plot was uncovered and thwarted following the arrest of Rohmat, a 25-year-old Indonesian whom authorities said is a ranking JI member operating in Mindanao.
When interrogated, Rohmat, alias Zaki, said the Abu Sayyaf bandit group and renegade members of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) were tasked to carry out the attacks.
He also admitted there are still about 33 JI members who remained in the country after completing terrorist training in Lanao del Sur.
He said the training was supervised by one Abu Usman, a deputy of Quod Amir, alias Daud who heads the Wakalah Hudeibiyah group.
Rohmat's arrest also led military and police authorities to an apartment believed to be the terrorists' safe house along Lilac street in Fairview, Quezon City on March 23. Police seized 11 sacks of explosives allegedly intended to be used in Holy Week bombings.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/24/2005 12:18:57 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
not to mention the 600 lbs of TNT they found at the Havanna Cafe during Holy Week!
Posted by: bk ||
04/24/2005 11:44 Comments ||
Top||
With elections less than two months away, Iran's presidential hopefuls are scrambling to lure voters, promising everything from lowering the soaring prices of fruit and vegetables to normalizing relations with the country's longtime foe, the United States.
But much of the public is deeply apathetic. There is no real chance for a candidate who can spearhead the democratic changes once promised by the departing president, Mohammad Khatami, who proved unable to ward off the encroachment of the Guardian Council and its repressive agenda. Over the last eight years, the opposition has been marginalized as the judiciary has shut down more than 100 pro-change newspapers and journals and jailed dozens of advocates and intellectuals.
Candidates, will be on the June 17th ballot only if approved by the council, which consists of six judges and six clerics. Those who are deemed politically undesirable will be forced out of the race.
But the public seems ever less convinced that the council, created after the 1979 Iranian revolution to oversee all government decisions, should have such power. When it barred more than 2,000 candidates from parliamentary elections in 2004, widespread disillusionment followed. Recent freer elections in Afghanistan and Iraq have made election constraints harder to justify.
Last Sunday, President Khatami spoke to the council, against a backdrop of rising international pressure over Iran's nuclear program. The Bush administration has even suggested that Israel might act pre-emptively, as it did in 1981 when it bombed an Iraqi nuclear reactor.
"If people feel the candidates they want to vote for are banned from running, they will get disillusioned," he said. "The country is faced with very obvious foreign threats. Only a large turnout can give legitimacy to the regime and deter the threats."
Such a turnout appears unlikely.
The student movement, a driving force behind the landslide election of President Khatami in 1997, has been so alienated by his failure to accomplish real change that its leaders say students will boycott the election unless they find a candidate who will support amending the Constitution.
"It is obvious that reform within the framework of the current Constitution is not possible," said Mehdi Aminzadeh, a member of the Office for Consolidating Unity, the top student movement. "It is time to call for a referendum on the Constitution."
So far, about a dozen people are running, and they tend to use the word reform, without specifying any.
The most discussed possible candidate is former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, 70, a political heavyweight who has hinted that he might enter the race to steer the country away from crisis. Analysts say he is awaiting a go-ahead from the supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei - and for pre-election polls to forecast his chances. He suffered a humiliation in the parliamentary elections of 2001 when he failed to win enough votes.
Last week, he met with members of the Office for Consolidating Unity and said that if he ran, he would do so "with a new agenda that would be more compatible with the conditions and the needs of society." The students took this as a suggestion that he might opt for more moderate policies than his own in the past.
His supporters point to his international standing and flexibility with hardliners and advocates of change.
"We need somebody who has the authority to bring balance among the political factions in the country, and one who can ease relations with the outside world and the United States," said Saeed Leylaz, a journalist and political analyst in Tehran. "Mr. Rafsanjani cannot fix things overnight, but none of the other candidates can do these two tasks except for Mr. Rafsanjani."
The other candidates have lower profiles.
Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, 42, a former national police chief, portrays himself as a pragmatist and claims to have cut highway accidents. Tens of thousands die in Iran each year because of bad driving.
Ibrahim Asgharzadeh, 50, who was among the Iranians who stormed the American Embassy in Tehran in 1979, is running on a mandate to improve relations with the United States. "I am the one who had the courage to lock the gate of the U.S. embassy and put the key in my pocket," he said in an interview. "Only I can return it and fix relations."
Mehdi Karoubi, the former speaker of Parliament, is running as a moderate and has promised, if elected, to give about $60 a month, to every Iranian over the age of 18.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/24/2005 12:22:08 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[21 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Iran doesn't need election until and after they have played wack a Mullah/Imam/Schollar/Judge. Once they have cleaned out the vermin then they can go back to elections.The ones they are holding are worse than the farce of Cuban and Soviet elections.
#2
"It is time to call for a referendum on the Constitution." -Mehdi Aminzadeh
Mehdi, baby, what good would that do? Mullahs don't respect paper, unless it has the Qu'uran printed on it, and even then it's only for show. I recognize that this may be the strongest thing you could say to a reporter without being hauled in for a few hundred lashes, but it's obviously a lame response to the situation, not to mention pointless since you-know-who would count the votes.
I'm sure Mehdi & Co are more savvy and cognizant than this - and would welcome the chance to have an actual representative Republic, elected democratically and votes counted honestly. That's what they thought they were getting in '97 when they supported Khatami. Surely they "get it" now - it ain't gonna happen as long as Khomeini and the Mad Mullahs are in charge.
So. How badly do you want it, Mehdi? Enough to fight for it - in a concerted and coordinated manner, instead of being pummeled in individual little shows of defiance? Duh, bubba. Get your acts together - into one act - and coordinate with the nice men who drop by...
There will come a time when they will hand you a 24K Golden Opportunity, on a .999 Sterling Silver Platter, to take your country back from the Black Hats. Will you be ready? Since the MM's are so obviously determined to commit suicide, you should be able to see the writing on the wall, sonny... If you can't, then perhaps you don't deserve it, but since our security is at stake, it will happen, regardless. The train's a-commin'... Figure it out and make up your minds, Persians.
In the latest sign of the wave of reconciliation washing over politicians as of late, former army commander General Michel Aoun expressed his support Friday for calls that his archrival Samir Geagea be granted amnesty and set free. Commenting on a proposal to amend the amnesty law of 1991 to release the former head of the disbanded Lebanese Forces after 11 years in prison, Aoun said: "I hope they release him from prison before I arrive in Lebanon."
The draft proposal is being studied by the Administration and Justice Parliamentary Committee (AJPC). Speaking to The Daily Star from exile in Paris, Aoun noted Geagea was the only militia leader excluded from amnesty, tried and convicted for his actions during the 1975-90 civil war."If justice was not global then it would lead to injustice. Geagea's comrades in the Lebanese Forces and other militia leaders participated in the civil war, but only Geagea was singled out and tried. To me this is unjust." By the end of the war, Aoun and Geagea were fierce rivals, the former heading the Lebanese Army and the latter the leader of a Christian militia. But, according to Aoun, "We have crossed a long way where there were armed conflicts and everyone fought everyone else. That phase is behind us now."
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
if he's sincere, that kind of mending is what will save Lebanon - eventually the Lebanese will have to take care of Hezbollah and the Ein-el-hellhole Paleos
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/24/2005 12:22 Comments ||
Top||
Hizbullah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem refused to discuss the possibility of disarming the resistance Friday, arguing that the move would weaken Lebanon.
"Nope. Nope. Ain't gonna happen."
Qassem said Hizbullah's weapons are necessary to liberate the country and protect it from Israeli aggressions, criticizing UN Security Council Resolution 1559 as a "flagrant interference in Lebanese domestic affairs." He added: "We want a sovereign and independent country away from foreign fostering, especially by the United States."
In the event of serious hostilities between Israel and Lebanon, I'd guess it would take approximately an hour and a half for the Israeli army to roll over Hezbollah and the Lebanese army. Without Hezbollah, I'd guess it'd take an hour and 20 minutes. Hezbollah's armaments are a lot more of a threat to their fellow citizens than they are to Israel. And I think most reasonable people, which excludes the Medes, Persians, and Syrians, of course, would agree that without Hezbollah on the Lebanese-Israeli border, jumping up and down, making faces, and having periodic gun sex, the chances of hostilities between Israel and Lebanon are significantly reduced.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Spot n Fred. Hisbullah is nothing more than an armed gang. Take their guns away and even the people on't listen to them.
Fatah chief Farouk Qaddumi said yesterday that armed Palestinian groups in Lebanon would not give up their weapons until Israel complies with dozens of UN resolutions issued against it. "There are 28 resolutions that have not been implemented" by Israel, the head of the mainstream Palestinian Fatah movement told reporters after meeting Lebanese Foreign Minister Mahmoud Hammud. "Let Israel and the United States, which obstructs the implementation of these resolutions, implement them first, before asking us to implement other resolutions," said Qaddumi.
UN Security Council Resolution 1559, passed in September, calls for the pullout of all foreign forces from Lebanon as well as the disarming of all militias on its soil. Leaders of Palestinian militant groups in Lebanon have repeatedly rejected the idea of being disarmed, saying Israel continues to be a threat. Israel has been the object of numerous UN Security Council and General Assembly resolutions condemning its actions, which it ignores, usually dismissing the world body as biased.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
An outraged Iraqi National Assembly demanded an apology from the U.S. government Tuesday for the rough treatment one assembly member said he received from an American soldier at a military checkpoint.
Oh dear. Someone should investigate. Those awful Merkins are at it again.
The rhetorical confrontation was another sign that relations between the two countries are trickier now that Iraq has a government of elected representatives who aren't necessarily favored or influenced by U.S. authorities or interests.
Thanks for the lecture, Knight Ridder.
The 275-member assembly, which must pick government ministers and write a constitution, spent much of Tuesday expressing outrage over Fattah al-Sheikh's allegation and debating what demands to make of the U.S. government to redress the offense. Al-Sheikh was shaken and crying as he struggled to tell the assembly that a U.S. soldier had manhandled him. The incident occurred at a checkpoint leading into the heavily fortified Green Zone, the central Baghdad compound where the assembly meets, he said. "I was dragged to the ground," said al-Sheikh, a member of a small party sympathetic to rebel Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Yeah, I know. I was surprised too.
"There were cars beside mine at the checkpoint, but I was the only one who paid this price." Al-Sheikh and witnesses said a soldier kicked his car, pulled him from the vehicle, grabbed him by the neck and handcuffed him. When he protested that he was a member of the assembly, a soldier scoffed at the group, al-Sheikh said. The account ignited condemnations from a cross-section of the assembly. "Let's ask ourselves," said Falah Shnaishel, of the United Iraqi Alliance, which won the largest number of seats in the Jan. 30 election. "Is this the democracy we've been hoping for? Is this the sovereignty that we talk to the masses about?" The U.S. military said it was investigating the allegation. Meanwhile, Maj. Gen. William Webster, the commander of U.S. troops in Baghdad, "expressed his regret over the incident" to the assembly, said Robert Callahan, a spokesman for the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. Callahan said it was too early to know how the embassy would respond if Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari sought a formal apology. He also said it was unclear whether the incident would damage U.S.-Iraqi relations. "Let's wait and see what the results of the investigation say," he said, trying to keep a straight face.Tuesday's clash wasn't the first time that assembly meetings, which are broadcast live nationwide and covered extensively in Iraqi newspapers, have become forums for airing Iraqi grievances against the U.S. government.
Thanks for another lecture, Knight Ridder.
During an April 3 meeting, al-Sheikh and another assembly member, Salam al-Maliky, demanded that U.S. forces free all detainees, or at least women and children, from Abu Ghraib prison.
They should take a page from the Pak Parliament Rahim's Rules of Order and stage a walkout.
On Tuesday, assembly members portrayed the alleged mistreatment of al-Sheikh as an insult to national pride. "An assault against a member of the national assembly is considered an assault against all Iraqis," al-Maliky said.
Getting the hang of being an elected Top Turban already. Traffic checkpoints are for Little People.
At least one member urged moderation. Shiite Muslim cleric Hussein al-Sadr, a distant relative of Muqtada al-Sadr, rejected a proposal to stop meeting until the assembly's demands, which also included that the soldier allegedly involved be tried publicly, are met. "It won't do any good for us, and we are in a very critical time," al-Sadr said. "When are we going to start writing the constitution?"
Posted by: seafarious ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It's clear they're only reporting one side of the story. What's being omitted, naturally, is what Captain Asshat did to attract the guard's attention; best guesses are speeding and / or attempt to blow by the checkpoint.
#2
This guy's crying because some G.I. kicked his ride?? What a candy ass, in the words of my hero Don Vito, "be a man!!" These holy men are such pussies.
From the roof of a half-wrecked three-story home at the edge of the Gaza Strip, Palestinian policemen stand guard over Mahmoud Abbas' biggest achievement in 100 days as president: a truce with Israel.
But the makeshift observation post from which the officers try to prevent infiltrations into an Israeli no-go zone is as wobbly as the cease-fire.
And even if the truce survives repeated infractions on both sides, most Palestinians are likely to remain frustrated by poverty, joblessness and Israeli restrictions on their movements.
Abbas, who was sworn in Jan. 15, has also been slow to throw out corrupt politicians, or tame gunmen who have terrorized Palestinians with theft and extortion.
The Palestinian leader says Israel is stingy with confidence-boosting concessions such as lifting travel restrictions, and that the chaos he inherited from Yasser Arafat can't be untangled overnight.
While Israel says he has done little to meet its demand to disarm its enemies, Abbas complained last week that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is systematically trying to undercut him and not keeping promises made at a February summit.
"Israeli officials have not stopped inciting for a moment," Abbas told the Haaretz daily.
Meanwhile, the growing discontent at home could eventually cost Abbas his job, or at the least force him to accept Islamic Hamas as a partner in government.
Hamas is challenging Abbas' Fatah movement in July 17 parliamentary elections and scoring points by promising a clean government while playing down its ideology which calls for Israel's destruction. It also benefits from a perception that Fatah, which has controlled Palestinian politics since the 1960s, is arrogant and corrupt.
"I'm voting for Hamas," said a seething Ahmed Kishta, 46, a lifelong Fatah loyalist, sitting on a plastic garden chair in an alley in the Rafah refugee camp.
Kishta once owned a small brick factory and now survives on Hamas' food handouts. Nothing matters to him except that three of his four sons are college-educated and jobless.
Rafah, a shantytown of 125,000 on the Gaza-Egypt border, was among the hardest-hit in more than four years of fighting. Since 2000, Israeli troops have widened a buffer zone along the border to push back gunmen and block tunnels through which Palestinians were smuggling weapons from Egypt. In the process the Israelis demolished some 3,200 Rafah houses, leaving 15,360 people homeless.
Big changes are afoot in Gaza. Israel plans to withdraw from the 140-square-mile territory this summer, ending a 38-year occupation.
It has handed him control of two West Bank towns it seized during the fighting, and has released 500 prisoners. But Palestinians expect much more.
A test of Abbas' standing will come next month in local elections in Gaza and the West Bank. In Rafah, Hamas is confident it can depose the Fatah-appointed local council.
A measure of Fatah's desperation is an effort by some activists to postpone the parliamentary election until the fall, when the Israelis will have left and Abbas will be able to claim the credit even though Israel decided on it unilaterally long before he came to office.
A delay would also get Abbas past an Aug. 4 party conference, the first in 16 years, which could pick untainted candidates for parliament.
Hamas joined the truce after making Abbas promise to honor the July 17 election date, and Abbas has said he would hold the vote on time. He is now reviewing a new election law, and his quick approval would clear the bill for a final vote in parliament — and elections on time.
Hamas, meanwhile, knows the truce is popular, and breaking it could cost votes.
For his part, Abbas has tried to appease Hamas by letting it keep its weapons, albeit out of sight.
Sharon complained to President Bush at their meeting this month that Abbas is coddling the militants, and threatened to hold up further peace moves.
However, according to a senior Israeli official, Sharon also told Bush he had known Abbas for many years and that, "There is no doubt he represents a departure from Yasser Arafat's strategy of terror."
Hamas, meanwhile, is torn by bitter arguments over whether to abandon hard-line positions and appeal more to mainstream voters. Its secret councils, or shura, in Gaza, the West Bank and the Palestinian diaspora will eventually hold a vote that could shape future negotiations with Israel.
As the 70-year-old Abbas maneuvers among the Americans, the Israelis, Hamas, out-of-control gunmen and frustrated voters, his biggest concern is that a single violent incident could spark a chain reaction and bring down his prized cease-fire.
So far it hasn't happened. A suicide bombing in Tel Aviv killed four Israelis on Feb. 26, 18 days into the truce, and provoked no retaliation. On April 10, Israeli troops killed three Palestinian teens who entered the Rafah no-go area, and militants responded by shelling Israeli towns.
At his rooftop observation post on the edge of Rafah, Palestinian police Lt. Sharif Ghanem and his four men try to keep the peace, making sure children, shepherds — and militants — stay away from the no-go zone.
The Israeli soldiers behind the wall are invisible to the Palestinian officers. They only see the clouds of dust kicked up by jeeps or tanks, and hear occasional explosions set off by Israeli troops searching for smuggling tunnels.
Ghanem, 30, said he is increasingly skeptical the cease-fire will hold, but prays for a miracle. "We don't want to waste more blood of our martyrs," he said.
Palestinians are holding Abbas to unrealistic standards, says Yasser Najar, an economist and Fatah member. Abbas can't be expected to lower Gaza's 60 percent unemployment in such a short time, he says, and Israel's pullout will only yield economic fruit in months or years, with the planned creation of a port and free trade and industrial zones.
However, Najar acknowledged that his Fatah movement has much to answer for.
"We took too many things for granted. One of them is the public," he said. "For people to start believing us, those of us who wear Italian suits ... have to change the Italian suits and let go of the luxurious cars."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/24/2005 12:07:16 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[12 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"For people to start believing us, those of us who wear Italian suits ... have to change the Italian suits and let go of the luxurious cars."
You guys are going to start buying suits off the rack? How proletarian...
Oil prices rose more than $1 a barrel Friday as global supply concerns were stoked by a terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and refinery snags in the United States. Light, sweet crude for June delivery jumped $1.19 to settle at $55.39 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
Gasoline futures climbed 3.23 cents to $1.653 per gallon, reflecting pre-summer supply worries amid a rash of refinery shutdowns, including a decision by Valero Energy Corp. to reduce output at its St. Charles refinery in order to perform maintenance. Heating oil futures rose 1.11 cent to $1.5451 per gallon. In London, Brent crude for June delivery was up 96 cents at $54.97 per barrel on the International Petroleum Exchange.
"There is a general fear in the market that gasoline supplies will be very tight heading into the summer and glitches at U.S. refineries further exacerbate that issue," said Adam Sieminski, an oil price strategist at Deutsche Bank in London.
James Cordier, president of Liberty Trading Group in Tampa, Fla., disagreed. He said U.S. supplies of both oil and gasoline are "more than ample" and that the stubbornly high price of crude reflects broader concerns about demand growth in China and the ability of OPEC to keep up. "This is a global rally," he said. "If we were just to focus on U.S. inventories, we wouldn't be at $55."
Global demand is expected to average more than 84 million barrels a day in 2005, while spare output capacity is believed to be about 1.5 million barrels a day, most of it in Saudi Arabia.
The Department of Energy said in its weekly petroleum supply report Wednesday that the U.S. supply of crude oil stood last week at 318.9 million barrels, or 8 percent above year ago levels. Gasoline inventories stood at 211.6 million barrels, or 5 percent above year ago levels.
In Saudi Arabia on Thursday, suspected militants linked to al-Qaida clashed with security forces, prompting fresh fears of a supply disruption from the world's largest exporter. Two extremists and two policemen were killed. "Terrorism definitely factors into prices," said Tetsu Emori, energy analyst at Mitsui Bussan Futures in Tokyo.
The U.S. government's weekly supply report has been a major factor influencing prices. "People are looking at inventory data, especially gasoline. But if you compare the stocks with last year's levels, it remains quite healthy," Emori said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Global demand is expected to average more than 84 million barrels a day in 2005, while spare output capacity is believed to be about 1.5 million barrels a day, most of it in Saudi Arabia. This is a particularly ignorant piece of reporting. What is relevant to the spare capacity is the rate of increase in demand, not the average over some arbitrary period. The latest figures I could find shows production in February was 84.2 mbpd. Demand is increasing at between 2.5% and 3.5% per annum. So the increase in demand this year alone is around twice the spare capacity. We run out of supply before the end of 2005. What happens then? The oil price rockets and economies crash (bringing demand back down). There will no global economic growth until significant alternate energy sources are brought online, i.e. nuclear, at least 5 years. No growth for years or even worse growth concentrated in China and a few other places in Asia and prolonged contraction especially in Europe will bring severe social disruption. Terrorism causing supply disruptions merely makes it happen a few months sooner.
If anyone has an alternate scenario, I'd be interested in hearing it.
#2
Why would economic growth continue in China but not the US? Energy input per unit GNP is lower in the US isn't it? Meaning to say, the US is in a better position to buy 80 bucks a barrel oil than China is.
#3
You can think of oil as a tax on economic activity that is applied everywhere. Like any tax, its effect is to depress the level of whatever is taxed more or less equally. China is growing at 10%+ pa, the USA 3to4%. Europe 1to2%. So China's economic activity has to be depressed by much more than Europe's to go into recession. The USA is between the two. Although once a major and coordinated recession starts other factors come into play, like debt levels and quality, which may be more of a problem for China.
#6
Oil prices rose more than $1 a barrel Friday as global supply concerns were stoked by a terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and refinery snags in the United States.
So what is it? Increasing consumption by China/India, or terrorist attacks and refinery snags? It seems ther have been a hundred different reasons given, and each one rotated accordingly.
#7
Nuclear f---ing power, NOW. Let's get the projects underway asap and quit dithering over whether oil will drop again. We've wasted decades and have no more time to waste.
JERUSALEM - Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon plan to meet next month in what would be their first encounter in almost three months, sources on both sides said on Saturday. The meeting, likely to be in early May, is set to focus on Israel's planning withdrawal from the occupied Gaza Strip later this year, the sources said.
Abbas and Sharon first met at a peace summit in Egypt in February but the honeymoon period has faded in recent weeks after the Israeli leader accused his Palestinian counterpart of failing to crack down on militant groups such as Hamas. Abbas has also denounced an Israeli plan to keep its large settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank, a move that has also drawn US criticism.
The two leaders agreed in principle to meet at the start of next month during a phone call but did not fix a precise date, the sources said. The meeting is likely to be held before Abbas heads to Washington in mid-May for talks with US President George W. Bush, their first summit since Abbas succeeded the late Yasser Arafat at the head of the Palestinian Authority.
During their previous encounter in February in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, the two leaders agreed on a truce aimed at ending more than four years of deadly violence.
And we can see how well that's worked.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak could reveal whether or not he will seek a fifth mandate in this year's elections during a landmark seven-hour interview which public television will start airing on Sunday. According to the official Al-Ahram daily's Friday issue, the 76-year-old president, who has ruled Egypt for 24 years, will answer a question on his candidacy in the presidential polls, slated for September.
My guess is that he's gonna. He expects to die in office, probably from a stroke brought on by the buildup of Grecian Formula over the years...
The president will also "announce a big surprise," said the newspaper without further elaborating.
I love those subtle advertising gimmicks. They're almost subliminal, aren't they?
Political observers have speculated recently that Mubarak could appoint a vice president in response to international demands.
I dunno. Cheney's got an important vote coming up...
He will "reaffirm the role of the armed forces as the guarantors of legitimacy and defenders of the homeland," said Al-Ahram, adding that the president was also expected to express "his views on political and economic reform" in Egypt. The unprecedented marathon interview is to be aired over three days, but public television was maintaining the utmost secrecy over its contents.
The army seems to do a better job of guaranteeing legitimacy than it does of defending the homeland, but I guess one out of two ain't bad...
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
An Afghan man freed from the U.S. detention center for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay said Saturday he was stripped naked and photographed the day he arrived, but was not tortured during three years at the camp.
"Jones! Take a picture of his pee-pee! I need it for my collection!"
He said his interrogators asked over and over: "Do you know Osama?"
What were they supposed to ask him? "Do you like root beer?"
Abdul Rahim Muslim Dost, 42, told The Associated Press that he and his brother were arrested at their home on Nov. 17, 2001, by Pakistani intelligence agents and eventually taken to the U.S. military facility at Bagram, north of the Afghan capital, Kabul.
He was arrested at the same time as the siege of Konduz. Presumably he was sent to Bagram from Pakland later than that, since we didn't control the place when he was arrested.
After about 11 weeks there, he was flown to Guantanamo. "First I was questioned by Pakistani security men. Then American men and women also started to interrogate me. They had only one question: Do you know Osama?" Dost said, referring to al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden. "I told them that you have made Osama so popular that even children and mad people know him very well," he said.
That was a witty answer. I'd guess that might have had something to do with his Caribbean vacation.
The same line of questioning continued at Guantanamo Bay, with American interrogators also asking him whether he had anything to do with Taliban leaders. "I told them I had nothing to do with Osama or the Taliban," Dost insisted from the home he shares with his wife and eight children in this frontier city.
"I'm just a simple but very well armed shepherd. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a wife and eight children to feed. They haven't eaten in four years, y'know..."
Relatives stopped by to send their congratulations, and his children scurried around him.
"Eat! Eat! Daddy! Can we have something to eat?"
It was Dost's first interview since he and 16 other Afghan men were set free in neighboring Afghanistan on Tuesday. The next day he traveled by road to this city in northwestern Pakistan, where he and his family have lived for the past 30 years. Dost said before his arrest he had worked for three Afghan magazines, "Ahsan" (Justice), "Zeray" (Good News) and "Dawat" (Invitation), which were all sympathetic to the Taliban. He said he had once been a member of Afghan rebel leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's Hizb-e Islami party, but had severed ties to the group.
"When was that?"
"Shortly after I got arrested."
"I committed no crime against the Americans or anyone else," Dost said.
"That's assuming you have a fluid definition of 'crime,' of course."
Dost's brother, Badrul Zaman Badr, who was freed from Guantanamo in December 2004, sat at his side as he recounted his experiences at the prison. Dost said on the day he arrived his American jailers forced him to take off his clothes, then photographed him. After that he was taken to a doctor and then given an orange prison jump suit. "I was never tortured," Dost said. "But I was kept in solitary confinement and that was worse than torture."
"Oh, much worse than torture! You can't see 'em, but I have solitary confinement scars all over my body!"
None of the other Afghans freed Tuesday have been interviewed. But one claimed during impromptu comments at a news conference held in Kabul to mark their release that he had been abused. "There was a lot of bad treatment against us, but this is not the time to tell you," Abdul Rahman said before being whisked away by Afghan security agents. "Everybody in the world knows what kind of jail it is. I can't talk about it now."
"I'll think of something, though!"
Dost said he had heard stories of sexual humiliation, including an American female guard who allegedly threw menstrual blood at an inmate, and male and female guards having sex in front of an Arab detainee. Other former inmates have told stories with similar details. But Dost and his brother said nothing like that happened to them. After 14 months of daily interrogation, Dost says he was moved to a cage alongside other inmates who were no longer wanted for questioning.
That'd be Small Fry Row...
Finally he was taken to a courtroom at the prison where three people "who looked like judges" briefly heard his case. A few weeks later he was freed without an apology.
"Get the hell out and don't come back!"
"Does that mean you ain't gonna apologize?"
"Jones! Take another picture of his doinker!"
"I'm goin'! I'm goin'!"
The releases lowered the number of detainees classified as "enemy combatants" at the U.S. Navy base on the tip of Cuba to about 520 from about 40 countries. Dost said he was considering filing a lawsuit to seek compensation for his years behind bars, and that he was thinking of writing a book. "My business suffered because of my arrest, and my family suffered as well to have two members taken there. My mother is so depressed that she still thinks one day the Americans will come and arrest us again."
This article starring:
ABDUL RAHIM MUSLIM DOST
al-Qaeda
BADRUL ZAMAN BADR
Hizb e-Islami Afghanistan
GULBUDIN HEKMATYAR
Hizb e-Islami Afghanistan
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
None of the other Afghans freed Tuesday have been interviewed. But one claimed during impromptu comments at a news conference held in Kabul to mark their release that he had been abused.
I'm sure he would have preferred an Indonesian jail, right?
#4
Heh, these wankers who didn't get the memo or their free copy of Muzzy Press Taqiyya Techniques really screw up the litany of dogmatic bullshit. They "threw menstrual blood" at me! Lol! These one-step-from-the-cave guys will believe anything that fits their "world view", heh, no questions asked.
I wonder how long this AP guy Riaz Khan and his editor will be employed. Letting truth slip through the AP sieve is bound to be grounds for dismissal.
Militants are using bases in Pakistan to stage attacks in Afghanistan, an Afghan general said yesterday, intensifying a row between the two countries over operations in a border area where Osama Bin Laden is believed to be hiding. "All terrorists come from that side of the border. They fight in Afghanistan and when they face problems, they go back, get reinforced and equipped and come back for fighting," Afghan army Gen. Shir Mohammad Karimi told reporters.
Even given the news filtration system we contend with here, that's a fact that's pretty well inescapable. We've commented a number of times that the Talibs are a Pak phenomenon much more than they are Afghan.
"This issue is as clear as sun for all the world to see that fighting is in Afghanistan and armed terrorists and weapons come from other places here and are being used against Afghans," Karimi said.
The number of actual Afghans bumped off in clashes with the "Taliban" pales next to the Pak corpse count...
His comments came days after Pakistan protested to the US military over what it said was a recent spike in Al-Qaeda-linked militants sneaking across the rugged frontier from south and southeastern Afghanistan. Pakistani Lt. Gen. Safdar Hussain, whose 70,000 troops have fought pitched battles with rebels in Pakistan's restive tribal regions, said Wednesday he had voiced his concerns to the US and Afghan forces. Hussain also hit out at the chief of US forces in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. David Barno, after the American was quoted as saying that a new Pakistani-US operation was imminent in the tribal area of North Waziristan.
Maybe they have 70,000 troops including the tribal lashkars, and maybe they've fought some pitched battles, but they're not controlling their national territory.
But Karimi said: "In theory (Pakistani forces) show 100 percent commitment that they are fighting terrorism, but in actions it is clear that they do not have the control to abolish these hideouts totally."
It might have something to do with the drums...
"Possibly it is their policy that they don't want to do it or possibly they are afraid that their tribal people may rise up against them," he added.
My guess is yes, to both. I can see a day coming in the not too distant future where the Afghan side of the border is the quiet, orderly side.
Pakistan is a frontline ally of the United States in its so-called war on terrorism. It has captured or killed hundreds of militants who have moved back and forth across the porous border after the fall of the Taleban in late 2001.
And missed a lot more. And allowed the Taliban to maintain open enclaves on their soil. In fairness, they've been hobbled by the MMA, which is on the side of the Bad Guyz, but also in fairness, they've allowed the MMA to administer the hobble.
Meanwhile, members of a new Afghan border force backed by US troops have seized 479 kg of heroin and netted seven suspected smugglers, the US military said. Afghanistan is the world's major producer of heroin and drug trafficking is one of the country's most serious problems as it strives for stability after decades of conflict. "This is counternarcotics at its best. The entire operation was planned, led and executed by the Afghans," US Army Maj. Anthony W. Oliver said in a statement. "All we supplied was coaching, mentoring and some logistics," he said of US involvement in the seizure near the Iranian border last weekend.
As we've noted before, they're good troops, given proper leadership. I'm not surprised.
The street value of the seized heroin was about $2 million, the US military said. Most drugs from Afghanistan end up in Europe and Western countries have promised millions of dollars in aid to fight the drugs trade. The April 17 bust on the northwestern frontier with Iran also netted seven Afghans suspected of smuggling operations, the US military statement said, adding that the men were now being held by Afghan security forces.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Pakistan is a frontline ally of the United States in its so-called war on terrorism.
Nice - inline editorializing worthy of the NYT and the Boston Globe. Why not end the charade and label the article 'news analysis'?
Sudan's government and former rebels will allow other opposition parties a role in writing a new constitution, but the start of work has been delayed to allow for more talks, the ruling party said yesterday. The ruling National Congress Party and the former southern rebel Sudan People's Liberation Movement signed a peace deal in January to end more than two decades of civil war in Sudan's south. Under the deal a new government of national unity will be formed and wealth and power will be shared. The first task is to form a new interim constitution. The two parties had planned to hold at least a two-thirds majority in the constitutional commission, which is the percentage needed to make any decisions. But the NCP said they had compromised to give other parties a real say. "It will mean the two (parties) together will be less than two-thirds in the commission," Ibrahim Ahmed Omar, secretary-general of the NCP told Reuters.
The peace deal allows for power sharing in government, giving the NCP 52 percent and the SPLM 28 percent of all posts. Northern opposition parties get 14 percent and non-SPLM southern forces six percent. But a special compromise was being negotiated for the constitution, an important national issue. Omar said the SPLM and NCP had given up 10 seats between them to have only 38 of the 60 seats in the constitutional commission, a little over 63 percent. It will allow opposition parties some say, if small, in the shaping of the constitution. The compromise is likely to appease those opposition parties still undecided about joining the constitutional commission after weeks of talks. A joint NCP-SPLM delegation is leaving this evening for Egypt for two days of talks with Sudan's main umbrella opposition group, which is hesitant about joining.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
The two houses of Parliament spent the last week debating the amendment of the constitution to allow multicandidate presidential elections, leading some to wonder if the whole constitution shouldn't just be reworked completely. During the three sessions that began last week, MPs focused on the principle of Article 76, which stipulates that potential candidates must obtain the backing of the People's Assembly, Shoura Council and local councils. Despite a heated debate over how a potential candidate should be chosen, most members agreed that candidates should not be required to obtain the backing of members of the two houses of Parliament. "The Parliament backing is unfair as it is mainly composed of members of the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP)," said independent Abdel Monein Alimi. "The dilemma we have now is deciding the number of signatures of registered voters a candidate has to collect," he told Parliament.
NDP Assistant Secretary-General Kamal El-Shazli said presidential hopefuls should have to get the backing of 120 elected members in local councils in 12 governorates. "This means that a presidential hopeful will have to obtain the support of 10 elected members in each of the required 12 governorates," El-Shazli said. The NDP also strongly recommends that presidential hopefuls obtain the backing of "a reasonable number of elected MPs in the People's Assembly and Shoura Council." One MP said that despite the importance of President Hosni Mubarak's proposal for a single amendment, the current constitution has many flaws and it would be best to draft a new one soon. "During the past three sessions we figured out that amending one article of the constitution would not work," said independent MP Hamadine Sabahy. "For instance talking about multicandidate elections leads to issues like the limitation of the president's powers, canceling the emergency laws, the freedom of the press and the freedom to establish political parties," he told Arab News.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas has named three new leaders for the security forces and forced hundreds of their men into retirement, pushing aside top commanders in Yasser Arafat's old guard. The shake-up on Saturday brings Abbas closer to meeting Israeli and US demands for reform of corruption-plagued security forces, also criticised by ordinary Palestinians for failing to maintain law and order. Brigadier General Suleiman Helles was named national security forces commander to replace Moussa Arafat, a Gaza strongman who is a cousin of the late Palestinian leader.
Abbas replaced Palestinian intelligence chief Amin al-Hindi with his deputy, Tareq Abu Rajab. Ala Hosni was named as the new police chief. Hundreds of other security personnel were forced out under a new law requiring staff to retire at 60, including dozens of senior officers, among them 11 with the rank of major general. "Today they are giving a wonderful new example by the smooth and civilised transfer of responsibility and authority," said senior Abbas aide Tayeb Abdel-Rahim in a statement.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/24/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 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.
North and South Korea held a second high-level meeting in Jakarta on Saturday after their first such contact in five years the previous day. The second-ranked leaders of the two Koreas entered a conference room on the sidelines of an Asia-Africa summit, but made no immediate comments. The leaders had already met briefly and less formally on the sidelines of an Asia-Africa summit in Jakarta on Friday and discussed regional problems, but they did not talk about the North's nuclear programs. "Very good, very good," South Korean Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan told reporters through an interpreter when asked how Friday's meeting with the North's number two leader Kim Yong-nam went.
In the latest sign of the wave of reconciliation washing over politicians as of late, former army commander General 
Fatah chief 
An outraged Iraqi National Assembly demanded an apology from the U.S. government Tuesday for the rough treatment one assembly member said he received from an American soldier at a military checkpoint. 
Oil prices rose more than $1 a barrel Friday as global supply concerns were stoked by a terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and refinery snags in the United States. Light, sweet crude for June delivery jumped $1.19 to settle at $55.39 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
Egyptian President 
An Afghan man freed from the U.S. detention center for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay said Saturday he was stripped naked and photographed the day he arrived, but was not tortured during three years at the camp. 
Militants are using bases in Pakistan to stage attacks in Afghanistan, an Afghan general said yesterday, intensifying a row between the two countries over operations in a border area where 
Sudan's government and former rebels will allow other opposition parties a role in writing a new constitution, but the start of work has been delayed to allow for more talks, the ruling party said yesterday. The ruling National Congress Party and the former southern rebel 
Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas has named three new leaders for the security forces and forced hundreds of their men into retirement, pushing aside top commanders in Yasser Arafat's old guard. The shake-up on Saturday brings Abbas closer to meeting Israeli and US demands for reform of corruption-plagued security forces, also criticised by ordinary Palestinians for failing to maintain law and order. Brigadier General 
