Sections on today's Signs Page:
Signs Editorials
Editorial: Discourse of the Mean Spirits: False Mantras, Euphemisms and Naked Hypocrisy
by Paul de Rooij
www.dissidentvoice.org
August 14, 2006
In the face of a major Israeli war of aggression against Lebanon many politicians and pundits have sought to justify the Israeli actions, throwing in an occasional lame rebuke. It is instructive to dissect some of the commonly heard mantras that have been repeated ad nauseam, before being replaced by others.
When Defense is Offensive
"Israel has the right to defend herself" has certainly been one of the most often repeated insufferable mantras. In recent weeks, nearly all US Congressmen and Senators are on record stating this, and none did so in a more craven fashion than US Senator Hillary Clinton. [1] A bit of context may be useful to interpret this mantra. What these Congressmen and Senators are justifying is not the "defense" of Israel, but an obscene Israeli war of aggression that may actually destroy an entire country. When General Dan Halutz, the Israeli military supremo, states that Israeli bombing is going to turn back the clock twenty years on Lebanon, then it is very clear what this war is about: terrorizing the civilian population (a.k.a, "draining the swamp"), destroying villages, creating hundreds of thousands of refugees, demolishing the infrastructure (electricity generators, telephone exchanges, water filtration and pumps), demolishing key industrial plants (milk factories, pharmaceutical plants), bombing refugee camps, dropping 24 tons of explosives on a populated area [2]... this constitutes war crimes (or worse), and the generals and politicians responsible for this belong in a war crimes tribunal. The United States politicians who proffered the "green light" and expedited the delivery of more bombs also belong in the same dock, because they are abetting Israeli war crimes. The leaders of the Jewish-American organizations lobbying to stretch out Israel's carte blanche period also deserve to be indicted for serious crimes. [3]
It is important to note that aggressors don't have a right to "self-defense." [4] Israel is not entitled to "defense" when it has invaded Palestinian, Lebanese or Syrian land and has dispossessed the native Palestinian population. Any violence used to perpetuate Israeli conquests is at best illegitimate, but most likely a serious crime.
The corollary to Israel's "right to defend herself" (which really means that Israel is allowed to attack others) is that Israel's victims are not granted the right to defend themselves (this is portrayed as attacking Israel). Using the pervasive racist language, there are calls to "defang" Hezbollah since it is intolerable for ziocons and their media surrogates to consider any Lebanese or Palestinian groups having any weapons, let alone missiles that can land on the other side of the border. And to boot, any act of resistance is labeled "terrorism", and an entire people are branded likewise. The ziocon/Israeli insistence on labeling Hezbollah or Hamas "terrorist" organizations is massively hypocritical, yet both the United States and Europe have played along with this charade.
The Shallow Dip
The only US or European official admonishment against Israeli depredations is that they aren't "proportionate". Politicians and some of the principal human rights organizations prefer this type of language because it enables them to support the main transgression, yet appear to utter some criticism. [5] However, a simple analogy may elucidate Western ("our") hypocrisy. The calls for proportionality are akin to cautioning a rapist not to penetrate too deep. The rape as such isn't denounced, but a suggestion is made that maybe the rapist should engage in a shallow f***. If the rapist does transgress, then there will be polite calls to pull it out a bit; this is known in the parlance as "calls for restraint". Again, the "proportionate" admonishment grants the right for the principal crimes to be perpetrated; it just urges Israel to be more circumspect about its depredations in order not to embarrass its American and zionist cheerleaders.
The calls for proportionality are actually even more hypocritical because they are often paired with calls for the resistance forces to stop fighting back. [6] In terms of the rape analogy, the victim is told to shut up and cooperate.
Did Anyone Say "War Crimes"?
It is almost impossible to find any US or European official commentator willing to suggest that the Israeli actions amount to war crimes. When Jan Egeland, UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, toured Southern Beirut he could only state that what he witnessed suggested that Israeli actions had "violated humanitarian law". This is a common euphemism to avoid the use of the term "war crimes". The contrast with how Serbian transgressions were dealt with is instructive; here without an investigation or confirmation, the "war crimes" accusation was readily used. A different standard applies when it comes to Israel.
Not only did Egeland use euphemisms to describe the destruction he saw, but he then stated that an investigation was necessary to determine if there were military targets under the rubble. Rows of apartment buildings were flattened but Egeland still manages to utter this type of nonsense. Again, this is a simple ruse used to avoid issuing a clear accusation against Israel. One explanation for Egeland's unwillingness to be more categorical may be that if he manages to avert any serious criticism of Israel, then maybe he will be in contention for the UN Secretary General position. [7]
Admonishing "Both Sides"
Amnesty International, the Mother Theresa of human rights, issued a few press releases about the Israeli attacks on Gaza and Lebanon. With ample evidence of Israeli crimes, any meaningful criticism of Israel should include clear references to specific war crimes. However, true to form, AI avoids accusing Israel by issuing a legalistic paper on the laws of war, and then stating that a prohibition for a given act applies to "both sides"! Even though Israelis have virtually destroyed Lebanon and caused massive damage to the entire infrastructure on which civilian life depends, AI issues a generic list of possible war crimes without direct references to actual deeds. [8] AI is not an anti-war organization, and in these press releases it doesn't oppose the war per se or condemn the Israeli acts of aggression, instead it pontificates on how the belligerents should conduct war. AI's statements are not much different from those urging proportionality.
Amnesty International is a lame organization with a curious propensity for remaining virtually silent when confronted with crimes perpetrated by the United States, Britain or Israel. Despite occasional posturing, AI has virtually ignored the crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians. [9] Furthermore, AI's stance pertaining to Lebanon or Iraq is also muddled: it doesn't condemn and oppose the acts of aggression against these countries; instead it simply seeks to circumscribe the means of war.
Pinpoint vs. Indiscriminate Hypocrisy
Both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have condemned Hezbollah's use of Katyusha missiles. These are considered "indiscriminate" in effect due to the nature of the weapon and the fact that it can't be aimed accurately; AI has gone so far as to state that the use of Katyushas constitutes a war crime. [10] On the other hand, Israel demonstrates that its weaponry is very precise, to the extent that two ambulances were hit with missiles through the center of the Red Cross symbol. [11] It is clear that even with accurate weapons one can commit indiscriminate destruction -- and certainly this has been on display in Lebanon. However, because Israelis use precision weapons some observers aren't willing to condemn Israeli bombing attacks and hide behind suggestions that military targets may have been in the vicinity -- the victims are portrayed as "collateral damage". Thus the massacre in Qana was not immediately condemned because the various pundits appearing on CNN or BBC suggested that Hezbollah targets may have been nearby. In other words, one can easily find categorical denunciations of "indiscriminate" weaponry (i.e., Hezbollah's Katyushas) while one will only hear very cautious statements about Israeli "precision" weapons.
They are Hiding! Now Blame the Victim
An often-heard absolution of the Israeli bombing of civilians is that Hezbollah or Hamas "hide among civilians". It is very easy to determine what would happen to Palestinian or Lebanese resistance groups if they were exposed, and thus suggestions that any group should fight the Israelis while standing in an open field are hypocritical. The mantra "hiding among civilians" is all about justifying Israeli bombing of civilians. It also blames the victim -- because they should never have allowed the "militants" to stand next to them, etc. We have witnessed this type of justification for the murder of civilians before: during the intifada when Israeli soldiers started to kill many Palestinian children there were similar suggestions that "militants" were using children as shields, or that the children had been ordered to confront the soldiers. Presto! In Israeli eyes and those of their apologists it was now justified to murder children.
Amnesty International weighs in by categorically stating that Hezbollah military presence in civilian areas amounts to a war crime. [12] Yet AI's pontificating ignores the fact that current Israeli (and US) military tactics require the widespread use of terror against the population. This was certainly confirmed when Gen. Dan Halutz stated that "no one will be safe in Lebanon." [13] While AI considers the presence of resistance fighters in Lebanese, Palestinian or Iraqi cities a war crime, it has yet to issue a pixel of criticism of the overall Israeli policy of terrorizing the Lebanese or Palestinian population. AI "understands" war; it only seeks the aggressors to comply with its silly list of restrictions.
Juicy Ironies: Where was the Weasel?
The current war against Lebanon has given rise to a series of amusing ironies. When Elie Wiesel, the professional holocaust survivor, discusses the holocaust, he often admonishes Europeans' failure to intervene when it became evident that the holocaust was taking place. There is a collective responsibility for preventing crimes -- fine, point well taken. However, in late June 2006 the Israeli military attacked Gaza, killing many, demolishing the infrastructure, imposing a siege, etc. Here in plain view were crimes perpetrated against 1.5 million Palestinians, and yet "we" didn't move to do something about it. At the same time, it is highly likely that the Hezbollah action against some Israeli soldiers was a response to the Israeli crimes against Palestinians. While the Wiesel-stripe moralizers didn't have anything to say about Israeli crimes, it was Hezbollah that responded -- they acted against the crimes perpetrated against their Palestinian brothers. [14] Applying the weasel logic about the holocaust, maybe we should be applauding the Hezbollah actions; instead, Wiesel and his ilk's response have been mostly silent about Israeli crimes. A perusal of statements issued by various Holocaust Studies centers reveals virtually no statements about Israeli crimes; the only statements in evidence are about the crimes in Darfur. If one were to shut down all the Holocaust Studies centers, one wouldn't notice the difference -- they are irrelevant.
Cruel Irony: No More Prisoners
Israelis justify their attacks against Gaza and Lebanon on the basis of a few soldiers who were captured. It quickly became apparent that this was a propaganda ruse used to justify its attacks, and soon afterwards mention of the captured soldiers was dropped. However, one of the ironies of the Israeli reaction to the capture of its soldiers is that it encourages others to kill Israeli soldiers instead of taking them prisoner. From now on the best course of action for resistance fighters is to simply shoot the soldiers they manage to vanquish. But, then, Hezbollah or Hamas will be demonized for "not taking any prisoners"...
It is the Premises, Stupid!
Western media and political discourse have demonstrated an avoidance of responsibility for crimes by hiding behind euphemisms, false mantras, or naked hypocrisy; there is ample evidence of this during the recent Israeli attacks against Gaza and Lebanon. In order to stop the war of aggression against the Palestinians and the Lebanese, it is important to highlight the hypocrisy, replace euphemisms with clear words and to debunk the false mantras. The demolition of the latter requires overturning the premises of the commentary about the war and about Israel itself.
One often finds American or British politicians reciting false mantras, and this is a major part of the problem; they operate on the basis of illegitimate premises. Possibly the most pernicious false mantra -- recited almost as in a trance-inducing ritual -- is that "Israel has a right to exist". American, British and other Western politicians have rubbed Palestinian noses in the dirt because their politicians haven't swallowed the pernicious demand that they also accept "Israel's right to exist". However, it is curious that Israel is the only country for which "a right to exist" is an issue and it reveals a well founded sense of insecurity. Israel has simultaneously ethnically cleansed the native population (the Palestinians) and threatened or attacked its neighbors. What Israeli depredations make evident is that it is a colonial state that doesn't belong to the area; Israel is a cruel historical aberration in the 21st century. It is high time that the key false mantra, "Israel has a right to exist", be replaced with "Israel has a right to exist only if it addresses the injustices it has perpetrated and stops attacking its neighbors". If Israel fails to do this and continues on its present path, then the only decent solution is to dissolve that state. Pariah states don't deserve to exist.
Paul de Rooij can be reached at: proox@hotmail.com. (NB: all e-mails with attachments will be automatically deleted.) Copyright © 2006 Paul de Rooij
ENDNOTES
[1] Hillary Clinton's support for Israel knows no bounds -- it must be interpreted by her as a requirement to stand for office and "become presidential material".
[2] The initial report about major blasts in South Beirut stated that 25 tons of explosives had been dropped... subsequent reports reduced this number, and one can now find accounts of 24, 23, and 22 tons of explosives.
[3] Ori Nir, "Bush Urged To Give Israel More Time for Attacks", Forward, 21 July 2006. What the Jewish leaders are lobbying for is for the period of unrestrained terror against the Lebanese population to be extended. And then they worry that someone might hate them, but this is then called "anti-semitism".
[4] Michael Mandel, How America gets away with Murder: Illegal wars, collateral damage, and Crimes against humanity, Pluto Press 2004.
[5] Kim Howell, a British diplomat, was featured for his emotional outburst and disgust at the Israeli demolition of Lebanon. However, in the same passage he stated that "Israel has a right to defend herself". Howell may express his disgust, but then he should be consistent -- he should be against Israeli aggression, and then not justify any level of aggression by suggesting it is "defense". A few days later Jack Straw, the former British Foreign Secretary, made similar remarks. NB: the man who was co-responsible to launch the war of aggression against Iraq in 2003 was now adding his lame protestations against Tony Blair. What makes Straw special is that he doesn't seem to notice his own hypocrisy.
[6] See for example MDE 15/064/2006, where AI states: "... Israel must also respect the principle of proportionality when targeting any military objectives or civilian objectives that may be used for military purposes," said Malcolm Smart, Director of Amnesty International's Middle East Programme. "Hizbullah must stop launching attacks against Israeli civilians and it must treat humanely the two Israeli soldiers it captured on 12 July and grant them immediate access to the International Committee of the Red Cross."
[7] NB: The leading contender is Terje Roed-Larsen who is known for his outspoken pro-Israeli stance. See: Azmi Bishara, "Blackmail by Bombs," Al Ahram, 20 July 2006.
"Roed-Larsen's visit was not a fact-finding mission. Sending Roed-Larsen was in itself a political statement. He is not only the Israeli Labour Party's man on the conflict with the Palestinians, he is also the spokesman of the Israeli position with respect to the Lebanese resistance. He is the one who is after blood-money to compensate for Barak's loss of honour after withdrawing from Lebanon and the one who was called in to supervise the implementation of Resolution 1559. Larsen has not only drawn a red line at crossing the blue line, he regards the Lebanese resistance as a local militia. He is also a foremost exponent of that now old term, 'the New Middle East', by which is meant, at best, the normalisation of Arab relations, i.e. according inter-Arab relations no more priority than bilateral relations between individual Arab states and Israel."
And then Roed-Larsen is the principal UN operator to arrive in Beirut for shuttle diplomacy with the Israelis. While meeting the Israelis Roed-Larsen was in a jovial all-smiles mood -- just the attitude needed to stop a war of aggression.
[8] AI, Israel and Hezbollah must spare civilians, MDE 15/070/2006, 26 July 2006. There is also a summary issued by Irene Khan, the AI supremo.
[9] To verify this statement one can read these articles:
-
Dennis Bernstein and Francis Boyle, "Amnesty on Jenin: an interview," CovertAction Quarterly, Summer 2002, pp. 9 -- 12, 27. (important article).
-
Paul de Rooij, "Amnesty International & Israel: Say it isn't so!," CounterPunch, 31 Oct. 2002.
-
Paul de Rooij, "Amnesty International: The Case of a Rape Foretold," Dissident Voice, 23 Nov. 2006.
-
Paul de Rooij, "Amnesty International: A False Beacon?," Dissident Voice, 22 Oct. 2004.
[10] Amnesty is utilizing a wrong description for the Katyushas; they are not very accurate -- but that is very different from "indiscriminate". Precision weapons can also be "indiscriminate". Thus areas can be blanketed with cluster bombs, yet these could have been delivered with pinpoint accuracy. Unfortunately, AI and HRW's use of the word "indiscriminate" is meant to convey an emotive reaction to the use of Hezbollah weapons; Israeli weapons are seldom described in this fashion. For example, many Lebanese were killed by landmines planted by Israel in Southern Lebanon -- it is estimated that there are 300,000 of them. However, one seldom finds reports on the landmine fields, and the language used to describe them is factual, not emotive.
[11] The reason the ICRC (Red Cross) had for many years rejected the Israeli application for the membership of its Magen David Adom (MDA) society was the frequent destruction and obstruction of the Palestinian ambulances, and general interference with the delivery of emergency medical attention. Although in Lebanon Israel has demonstrated that it is still willing to target ambulances and demolish hospitals, the ICRC has yet to issue a peep about this -- there is nothing about reviewing or reconsidering the MDA's ICRC membership.
[12] AI, Israel and Hezbollah must spare civilians, MDE 15/070/2006, 26 July 2006. See section under "Human shields".
[13] NB: this is the same terminology used at the beginning of the "Shock and Awe" campaign against Iraq in 2003.
[14] Note that Hezbollah has in the past responded to Israeli depredations against Palestinians. For example, Sharon's provocation at the Al Aqsa mosque also elicited a response from Hezbollah. See here: George Monbiot, "Israel responded to an unprovoked attack by Hizbullah, right? Wrong,"
The Guardian, 8 August 2006.
Comment on this Editorial
Editorial: Desert of trapped corpses testifies to Israel's failure
By Robert Fisk
The Independent
08/15/06
They made a desert and called it peace. Srifa - or what was once the village of Srifa - is a place of pancaked homes, blasted walls, rubble, starving cats and trapped corpses. But it is also a place of victory for the Hizbollah, whose fighters walked amid the destruction yesterday with the air of conquering heroes. So who is to blame for this desert? The Shia militia which provoked this war - or the Israeli air force and army which has laid waste to southern Lebanon and killed so many of its people?
There was no doubt what the village mukhtar thought. As three Hizbollah men - one wounded in the arm, the other carrying two ammunition clips and a two-way radio - passed us amid the piles of broken concrete, Hussein Kamel el-Din yelled to them: "Hallo, heroes!" Then he turned to me. "You know why they are angry? Because God didn't give them the opportunity of dying."
You have to be down here with the Hizbollah amid this terrifying destruction - way south of the Litani river, in the territory from which Israel once vowed to expel them - to realise the nature of the past month of war and of its enormous political significance to the Middle East. Israel's mighty army has already retreated from the neighbouring village of Ghandoutiya after losing 40 men in just over 36 hours of fighting. It has not even managed to penetrate the smashed town of Khiam where the Hizbollah were celebrating yesterday afternoon. In Srifa, I stood with Hizbollah men looking at the empty roads to the south and could see all the way to Israel and the settlement of Mizgav Am on the other side of the frontier. This is not the way the war was supposed to have ended for Israel.
Far from humiliating Iran and Syria - which was the Israeli-American plan - these two supposedly pariah states have been left untouched and the Hizbollah's reputation lionised across the Arab world. The "opportunity" which President George Bush and his Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, apparently saw in the Lebanon war has turned out to be an opportunity for America's enemies to show the weakness of Israel's army. Indeed, last night, scarcely any Israeli armour was to be seen inside Lebanon - just one solitary tank could be glimpsed outside Bint Jbeil and the Israelis had retreated even from the "safe" Christian town of Marjayoun. It is now clear that the 30,000-strong Israeli army reported to be racing north to the Litani river never existed. In fact, it is unlikely that there were yesterday more than 1,000 Israeli soldiers left in all of southern Lebanon, although they did become involved in two fire-fights during the morning, hours after the UN-ceasefire went into effect.
Down the coast road from Beirut, meanwhile, came a massive exodus of tens of thousands of Shia families, bedding piled on the roofs of their cars , many of them sporting Hizbollah flags and pictures of Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, Hizbollah's chairman, on their windscreens. At the massive traffic jams around the broken motorway bridges and craters which litter the landscape, the Hizbollah was even handing out yellow and green "victory" flags, along with official notices urging parents not to allow children to play with the thousands of unexploded bombs that now lie across the landscape. At least one Lebanese child was killed by unexploded ordnance and another 15 were wounded yesterday.
But to what are these people returning? Haj Ali Dakroub, a 42-year old construction manager, lost part of his home in Israel's 1996 bombardment of Srifa. Now his entire house has been flattened. "What is here that Israel should destroy all this?" he asked. "We don't deny that the resistance was in Srifa. It was here before and it will be here in the future. But in this house lived only my family. So why would Israel bomb it?"
Well, I did happen to notice what appeared to be the casing of a missile hanging from the balcony of a much-damaged house facing the rubble of Ali Dakroub's home. And a group of Hizbollah militiamen, one of them with a pistol tucked into his trousers, walked past us nonchalantly and disappeared into an orchard. Was this, perhaps, where they kept some of their rockets?
Mr Dakroub wasn't saying. "I am going to rebuild my home with my two sons," he insisted. "Israel may come back in 10 years and destroy it all over again and then I'll just rebuild it all over again. This was a Hizbollah victory. The Israelis were able to defeat all the Arab countries in six days in 1967 but here they could not defeat the resistance in a month. These resistance men would come out of the ground and shoot back. They are still here."
"Come out of the ground" is an expression I have heard several times these past four weeks and I am beginning to suspect that many of the thousands of guerrillas did indeed shelter in caves and basements and tunnels, only to emerge to fire their missiles or to use their infra-red rockets on the Israeli army once it made the mistake of sending troops into Lebanon on the ground. And does anyone believe that the Hizbollah will submit to their own disarmament by a new international force of UN and Lebanese troops once - if - it arrives? There was a symbolic moment yesterday when Lebanese soldiers already based in southern Lebanon joined Hizbollah men in Srifa to clear the rubble of a house in which the bodies of an entire family were believed buried. Lebanese Red Cross and civil defence personnel - representatives of the civil power which is supposed to claw back its sovereignty from the Hizbollah - joined in the search. The mukhtar, who so blatantly regarded the Hizbollah as heroes, is also a government representative. And at the entrance to this shattered village still stands a poster of Nasrallah and the Iranian President Ali Khamenei.
Far from driving the Hizbollah north across the Litani river, Israel has entrenched them in their Lebanese villages as never before.
Comment on this Editorial
Editorial: Apologists with evil minds
By James J. Zogby, Special to Gulf News
08/14/2006 12:00 AM (UAE)
There appears to be a direct relationship between the increasing ugliness and immorality of this war and the extreme lengths to which Israel's supporters will go to justify it.
This was brought home to me recently in three separate debates, one in print, two on television. What I clearly saw at work in these exchanges was how Israel's apologists use verbal overkill paralleling Israel's use of overwhelming military force. They will admit no wrong. They attempt to bully opponents into submission. They deny history and morality. And, maybe most disturbing of all, they seek to present this war (as they have sought to present many of Israel's previous wars) in exaggerated and near apocalyptical terms.
One of my antagonists, Abe Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League, objected to a piece I had written charging the Bush administration with "criminal negligence", for not acting quickly and decisively to end the carnage in Lebanon. I went further in my piece noting that this administration's policies and/or neglect had made a mess of much of the Middle East, resulting not only in catastrophe for the Arab world, but in a deepening of anti-American sentiments throughout the region.
Ignoring my point, Foxman deliberately miscast my views, accusing me of standing by while Hezbollah and Iran armed themselves and became a threat to the entire Middle East. After absolving Israel from all blame in the killing of hundreds of Lebanese civilians, Foxman weirdly concluded that, "[i]n the end, though Zogby won't admit it, the Arab world needs an Israeli victory over Hezbollah and Iran as much as Israel and the US. Maybe then, Lebanon can truly become one nation and be rebuilt and the region can begin to change for the better."
In my rebuttal, I noted that it was not I who stood by while Iran and extremists were strengthened in the Middle East. It was the policies pursued by the Bush administration that are responsible for the nightmare unfolding before us. It was the disastrous war in Iraq that empowered and emboldened Iran, creating a new haven for terrorists and the dangers of civil war. And it was the US's abandonment of Lebanon and the Palestinians, followed by support for the Israeli onslaught against both that is making the Middle East more dangerous and more anti-American with Iran sitting on the sidelines "licking its chops". Unlike Foxman's apocalyptical fantasy, I see no cheering in the Arab world for Israel's behaviour and I do not see how any compassionate or sane person can argue that the outcome of an Israeli "victory" will leave Lebanon better or whole.
My two televised exchanges, one with noted criminal attorney Alan Dershowitz and the other with magazine publisher Mort Zuckerman, were debates that focused on issues of morality and war. Both of my antagonists claimed that Israel always fought its wars using moral means. When Arab civilians were killed, it was because: these civilians forfeited their rights by not fleeing as they had been told to; or because they were terrorist supporters; or because they were deliberately used as shields; or because ... and on and on. The point being that Israel is never guilty, someone else always is.
This is such madness. Denying history and morality in the defence of atrocities is, however, par for the course for Israel's apologists. It took Israeli historians four decades to admit that they deliberately falsified the history of the 1948 war and to acknowledge that it was their ethnic cleansing campaign in 1948 that produced the first wave of Palestinian refugees.
Now only four weeks into the Lebanon war and they want us to forget that from the first days of this conflict Israeli military leaders were warning that they would "turn Lebanon's clock back 20 years", or that nothing and no one south of the Litani river would be safe. And this is precisely what they have done. Not only have entire swaths of the southern suburbs of Beirut and much of Tyre and Bint Jbail and other smaller communities been reduced to rubble, but the airport and oil depot and ports, north and south, and much of the infrastructure of the country have been destroyed as well. In the process, thousands of homes have been levelled and hundreds have been killed, by "smart bombs" that "repeatedly miss" their targets. The moral justification? "Hezbollah made us do it."
What is galling is that the Israelis said what they were going to do, they did it, and now they send forth their minions to deny their responsibility for their actions.
Hyperbole
In the end, my opponents fall back on hyperbole to buttress their defence. For Zuckerman the argument becomes Israel fighting for its survival this, presumably, justifying any and all atrocities. More disturbing, Dershowitz argues, "[t]his is the beginning of a world war in which this kind of terrorism will be used against democracies. And the question is are democracies going to be impotent in the face of this or will the international community finally say to Hezbollah and others 'You cannot hide behind civilians. You cannot use civilians as a shield. If you do, you are responsible for every death ..."
I grew up in an environment where I was taught that "you reap what you sow". For that reason, while I have supported Palestinian rights and opposed the occupations of Palestine and Lebanon, I have never been an uncritical apologist when terrorist acts against civilians were used in the name of resistance. I, therefore, am outraged by the immoral apologetics of those who uncritically excuse all of Israel's behaviour. It is a dangerous game.
When my antagonists see only their history and deny that of their adversaries, and when they insist that morality and humanity are defined exclusively by their needs and behaviour, they become dangerously solipsistic. Defending a guilty client only serves to legitimate bad behaviour, guaranteeing that it will continue. Worse still is attempting to fantasise some larger good coming out of evil the consequences of all this denial will haunt us for generations to come.
Dr James Zogby is the president of the Arab American Institute in Washington, DC.
Comment on this Editorial
Editorial: Mad Dog On A Leash
By Sheila Samples
08/15/06 "Information Clearing House"
"We should prepare to go on the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai."~~David Ben-Gurion, May 1948
I have been stunned by many things on the US political scene since I was jerked violently awake on Nov. 22, 1963. However, one thing that simply flew under the cuckoo's nest of my awareness was the total influence on our Congress; the control of our media, our courts, our universities, our entire society -- even our religion -- by the state of Israel. I had no idea.
I've learned a lot about both Israel and the United States in the last five years -- most of which I fervently wish I didn't know. I learned very quickly in the wake of 9-11 that the neoconservatives in the US claim an ideological right -- the Zionists in Israel a theological right -- to do whatever they want to whomever they want whenever they want, and those who question their increasingly bloody aggression are labeled "anti-American" or "anti-Semitic." Those who protest are ostracized from both religious and patriotic society (not to be confused with "civilized" society) and are immediately bombarded with ridicule and vicious ad hominems. Some receive death threats. Some receive death.
I learned that there is a vast difference between Jews, or people of Israel, and the warmongering Zionists who control the state of Israel, just as there is between most American citizens and the cowardly neo-fascist chickenhawks who control the United States. The people of both regimes cry out against the barbaric genocide and ethnic cleansing perpetrated in their name -- they shriek, they march in protest, but the world media pushed the "mute" button long ago, and no sound emerges from the weeping masses. As these two "democracies" force their way across the Middle East, it's as if Charles Manson is stalking the innocent with a mad dog on a leash. Neither can be reasoned with, and no living creature in their path is safe. But it is easy to tell where they've been, because the landscape is littered with rotting corpses of innocent men, women and children, with mass graves and displaced millions fleeing for their lives.
From the Frying Pan...
The current conflict raging in Lebanon and Palestine has less to do with self-defense or protecting the homeland than with zionist politics, Christo-fascist talking points and corporate media spin. It is a war of extermination -- a carefully planned crusade for world dominion, and it has been simmering on US and Israeli back burners for decades.
Every writer addressing this subject since George Bush was fraudently installed in the White House has pleaded with Americans to pay attention to the plan,
"Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century" penned by Dick Cheney while he was defense secretary, by Donald Rumsfeld, Scooter Libby, Paul Wolfowitz and Jeb Bush, which calls for seizing the world's resources and establishing permanent military bases throughout the Middle East. That plan was immediately put in place and is being relentlessly carried out.
Ninety pages too formidable? Okay, try the September 2002 "National Security Strategy of the United States of America," whose 35 pages puts in place a barbaric pre-emptive war policy that destroys 230 years of honor, dignity, decency -- and democracy. This manifesto was also written by Cheney and Wolfowitz, and is a direct result of behind-the-scenes input from then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Colin Powell.
In his article, "DickCheney's Song of America," David Armstrong writes, "In early 1992, as Powell and Cheney campaigned to win congressional support for their augmented Base Force plan, a new logic entered into their appeals. The United States, Powell told members of the House Armed Services Committee, required "sufficient power" to "deter any challenger from ever dreaming of challenging us on the world stage." To emphasize the point he (Powell) cast the United States in the role of street thug. "I want to be the bully on the block," he said, implanting in the mind of potential opponents that "there is no future in trying to challenge the armed forces of the United States."
Armstrong's article is 11 easy-to-read, eye-opening pages and was entered into the Congressional Record by Rep. John Larson (D-CT) in Oct. 10, 2002 -- one month after Cheney's National Security Strategy was released.
If you're wondering what these homework assignments have to do with what's going on in Lebanon, Israel and Gaza today, take a look at
"A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," a document written in 1996 by neoconservatives Douglas Feith, Richard Perle and David Wurmser, among others, for incoming Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. No more Mr. Good Guy when dealing with the Palestinians, "A Clean Break" calls for a hot pursuit policy -- in effect, a familiar smoke 'em out, get 'em on the run and chase 'em clean out of the realm. Those who choose to stay and fight for their land will die. It's their choice.
"Clean Break," although the Likudnik game plan, was written by American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) power-mad neocons, who fantasized that Israel could seize the "strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon," and suggested that after these wars, which would all be successful, of course -- Israel could reshape "the strategic balance in the Middle East" by attacking Saudi Arabia and Egypt. "Clean Break" is a mere six pages, and is a Zionist's wet dream...
Into The Fire...
They can't stop now. They wouldn't, even if they could. The neo-cons' thirst for blood has reached unquenchable proportions. No one has worked more feverishly for total Middle East war than the Weekly Standard's ghoulishly grinning editor, Bill Kristol, who wrote in his July 24 "It's Our War" that Hezbollah is intent on wiping Israel off the map for Iran, and now is the time to strike Iran's nuclear facilities. "Why wait?" Kristol asked. "Does anyone think a nuclear Iran can be contained? That the current regime will negotiate in good faith? It would be easier to act sooner rather than later. Yes, there would be repercussions-and they would be healthy ones, showing a strong America that has rejected further appeasement."
Then there's Dick Cheney, the madman who pulls the levers, who is chillingly indifferent to suffering and -- being bloodless himself -- doesn't see what all the fuss is about. Cheney's plans go beyond just controlling the world's resources; he knows he won't be here much longer, so he's desperate to seize all the riches, if you will, and take them with him. In this administration, Cheney is the "go to" guy for arrogant, barbaric murder.
According to journalist Seymour Hersh, whose article,
"Watching Lebanon," will be published in the Aug. 21 issue of the New Yorker, Israeli officials came to Washington earlier this summer "to get a green light for the bombing operation and to find out how much the United States would bear."
Hersh writes that "Israel began with Cheney. It wanted to be sure that it had his support and the support of his office and the Middle East desk of the National Security Council." After getting Cheney's blessing, Hersh said he was told, "persuading Bush was never a problem, and Condi Rice was on board."
And evangelical Zionists, such as Pat Robertson, who are lusting for Armeggedan, at last see an opportunity to rid the Holy Land of the Palestinians. Only after a crusade wherein the entire Middle East explodes in a tsunami of blood -- only then will Robertson be swept up in glory, leaving the rest of us below to choke to death on depleted uranium dust and to drown in the blood of the innocent.
Those of you who don't know Robertson are, well, damn lucky. Robertson makes Charles Manson look like a pussy. As far back as 1985, Robertson told his brain-dead followers that God wants all Palestinians exterminated. "God told the Israelites to kill them all -- men, women and children -- to destroy them," Robertson said.
What are we to think of that? Robertson, God's most vocal confidant, says Palestinians are an abomination -- a contagion for which there is no cure and whose only function is to "cause trouble for the Israelites, and pull the Israelites away from God, and prevent the truth of God from reaching the Earth." He explained it was "more merciful" to kill Palestinians sooner rather than later because if they continue to reproduce, Israel will be burdened with having more to kill in the future. According to Robertson, the only way to look at such mass extinction is, "God, in love, took away a small number so that He might not have to take away a large number."
Last, but not least, we have Israel's militant leaders -- and America's Decider, George Bush. The Zionists are very good at what they do, whether blowing things apart with US bombs and missiles or crushing everything in their path with US bulldozers. But don't take my word for it. In his book, "You Gentiles," Maurice Samuels (p.155) wrote, "We Jews, we are the destroyers and will remain the destroyers. Nothing you can do will meet our demands and needs. We will forever destroy because we want a world of our own."
One has only to stumble through the ruins of Sabra, Shatilla, Jenin, Gaza and Qana -- recall the torture, assassinations, collective punishment of civilians, destruction of infrastructure, denying sustenance to those dying of thirst and hunger -- to realize that Israel is the cod piece of the Middle East. The Zionists who control it make Charles Manson's mad dog look like a pussy.
And, what of George Bush -- what part is he playing in all of this? It is incomprehensible to believe he is in charge of, even aware of, anything. In recent weeks, I have watched Bush, the man at the helm of the most powerful nation on earth, run and hide, blather and bumble his way thorugh fund-raising speeches, make an ass of himself at the G8 Summit gathering in Russia, crudely grope another world leader, and refuse to discuss anything more serious than "slicing the pig."
Two weeks into the Lebanon crisis, wherein "Condi," as he crudely calls this nation's Secretary of State, lurched around the Middle East and was sent home empty-handed -- twice -- Bush was finally backed into a corner and asked about the bombs dropping on Lebanon and the Hezbollah rockets raining down on Israel. He responded inanely that Israel was merely exercising its right to defend itself," before launching into a familiar, Texas-style "Remember the 9-11 Alamo..."
Are We Done Yet?
These widely different factions have divergent goals but they need each other to achieve them, and their eyes are riveted on the prize -- Iran. This oil-rich nation must be brought to its knees before the neo-cons can have their New World Order, before Cheney can control the world's resources, before Israel can have its final solution in the Holy Land, before Bush can spread freedom and democracy and death and rid the world of yet another safe haven for plotters and planners and evil terrorists.... Iran is all that is standing between true believers and their ascension into Heaven. The same people who lied us into the Iraq war are telling the same lies about Iran -- the WMDs are now nuclear bombs, and no UN resolution, no US Congress, no US media will stop the madness.
They will have their war, knowing full well that an assault on a nation fully capable of retaliation will sign the death warrants of millions of innocents as well as of every US service member on the ground in the Middle East. Unfortunately, such losses carry little weight with all but a handful of the members of the US Congress and the majority of the American people who blindly support Zionist Israel and who advocate ethnic cleansing as a final solution to the problems of the Middle East.
Edward Said, the late Palestinian-American theorist, wrote one month before the Iraq invasion, "We cannot in any way lend our silence to a policy of war that the White House has openly announced will include three to five hundred cruise missiles a day (800 of them during the first 48 hours of the war) raining down on the civilian population of Baghdad in order to produce "Shock and Awe", or even a human cataclysm that will produce ... a Hiroshima-style effect on the Iraqi people... What sort of God would want this to be a formulated and announced policy for His people? And what sort of God would claim that this was going to bring democracy and freedom to the people not only of Iraq but to the rest of the Middle East?"
Said pleaded with the American people to speak out before it's too late. "Who knows what more evil will be done in the name of Good?" Said asked. "Every one of us must raise our voices, and march in protest, now and again and again. We need creative thinking and bold action to stave off the nightmares planned by a docile, professionalised staff in places like Washington and Tel Aviv and Baghdad. For if what they have in mind is what they call "greater security" then words have no meaning at all in the ordinary sense...The question is, how long can they keep getting away with it?"
How long, indeed. Look around. They have come for the others. Only we the people remain, and most of us are blind to our shame, our national disgrace. If we do not raise our voices now and again and again, we will be done. Then, God help us, we will realize -- too late -- that we are all Charles Mansons now.
Sheila Samples is an Oklahoma writer and a former civilian US Army Public Information Officer. She is a regular contributor for a variety of Internet sites. Contact her at: rsamples@sirinet.net. © 2006 Sheila Samples
Original
Comment on this Editorial
Editorial: Hezbollah's Victory and the Coming Shock and Awe of Iran
Tuesday August 15th 2006, 9:39 am
Kurt Nimmo
Another Day in the Empire
It is said the United States has "scaled-back" its "expectations" now that the United Nations has declared a "ceasefire" in Lebanon. "The U.N. agreement is only the most recent example in which Bush's second-term doctrine of spreading freedom has run into the realities of international and domestic politics," notes the Baltimore Sun.
Actually, Bush's doctrine, which has nothing to do with democracy as most people understand the word, ran into the reality of Hezbollah, the most effective resistance movement in the world. Israel's defeat at the hands of the Shia resistance group, forged and tempered into steel hard resolve over many years by the experience of a brutal Israeli occupation, has dashed the "expectations" of the neocons, who are cut from the same cloth as the Jabotinksyite fascists in Israel. Consumed with racist hubris, both the Israelis and the American neocons expected a decisive victory over Hezbollah. But it didn't work out that way.
As the Baltimore Sun writes, "many analysts said the U.N. resolution is vague about how Hezbollah would be tamed. The agreement also is vague, they said, about how Iran and Syria would be prevented from continuing to send weapons, including rockets, to Hezbollah. And though the pact calls for Hezbollah to leave southern Lebanon, it remains unclear how the group would be stopped from operating north of the Litani River, about 20 miles from the Israeli border."
Flip this around. How will the United States be prevented from sending high-tech armaments to Israel, including cluster bombs and DU-tipped bunkerbusters? Does the U.N. "pact" call for Olmert and his gang of war criminals to leave Israel? Hezbollah will not leave southern Lebanon-or as the above seems to indicate, leave Lebanon, period-because the people of southern Lebanon, primarily Shia Muslims, are Hezbollah. The U.N. "agreement" is vague because it is sincerely absurd to believe Hezbollah will leave their country.
"Some analysts said the truce, with its lack of clarity on key points, could turn out to be exactly what Bush said he did not want. And many said Israel's failure to gain an outright victory has strengthened the political clout of Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah.... As it became clear that the Israelis were not going to wipe out Hezbollah, support in the White House shifted from the hard-liners, typically led by Vice President Dick Cheney, to the advocates for more diplomacy."
Of course, this was to be expected, as it is impossible to defeat a resistance movement short of killing every last one of its members and those who support it, that is to say just about everybody in southern Lebanon and a good deal of people in the rest of the country. Israel would like to finish the job of killing large numbers of Lebanese, all considered members of Hezbollah, but for the moment the "hard-liners" (Israel First fanatics in the Pentagon and White House) have lost out to "the advocates for more diplomacy," that is to say the neolib faction more accustomed to subverting national resistance and liberation movements in less dramatic ways.
In reality, the neocons have a few tricks up their sleeves.
In essence, the U.N.-brokered "ceasefire" is little more than a public relations stunt, as Israel fully intends to continue targeting Hezbollah, that is to say the Shia of Lebanon. "We will continue to pursue the leaders of Hezbollah everywhere and at all times," Ehud Olmert told a special Knesset session. "This is our moral duty to ourselves, and we have no intention of apologizing or asking anyone's permission." Likudite Benjamin Netanyahu threw in his two cents. "There is a danger that threatens our people. Not only us, our soldiers and our economy.... Since Hitler, there has not been an enemy like Ahmedinejad.... He has Hamas in the south, and Hezbollah in the north. This is an existential peril."
In the world of Jabotinsky fanaticism, up is down and black is white. Ahmedinejad is no Hitler, although the ancestors of Olmert and Netanyahu attempted to snuggle up to the Nazis. In 1941, Avraham Stern, the founder of the Zionist terrorist group Lohamei Herut Israel, proposed intervening in the Second World War on the side of Nazi Germany. Lehi's partner in terrorism, Irgun, eventually became Herut, and Herut Likud, and now Likud has mutated into Olmert's Kadima.
It is said, in the wake of the shock and awe invasion of Lebanon, Olmert will soon be history. However, the failure of Olmert will not lead to a reassessment, but rather renewed fanaticism and warmongering, echoed on the "civilian," that is to say neocon, side of the Pentagon. "A new Israeli regime will not withdraw from any more land, nor shut down any more settlements, nor vacate any part of Jerusalem, nor negotiate with a Palestinian Authority led by Hamas, or by a PLO that is unable to disarm Hamas," writes Patrick Buchanan.
Where does this leave us? With Israel's failure to achieve its strategic objectives in Lebanon and America having failed to attain its strategic objectives in Iraq, Nasrallah emerges triumphant, and Syria and Iran emerge unscathed and gloating.
What comes next? That is obvious.
With our War Party discredited by the failed policies it cheered on in Lebanon and Iraq, there will come a clamor that Bush must "go to the source" of all our difficulty-Iran. Only thus can the War Party redeem itself for having pushed us and Israel into two unnecessary and ruinous wars. And the drumbeat for war on Iran has already begun.
"[T]he dangers continue to mount abroad," wails The Weekly Standard in its lead editorial. "How Bush deals with Ahmadinejad's terror-supporting and nuclear-weapons pursuing Iran will be the test" of his administration. Yes, the supreme test.
Bush is on notice from the neocons and War Party that have all but destroyed his presidency: Either you take down Iran, Mr. Bush, or you are a failed president.
For a psychological basket case such as Bush, this taunting may be too much to endure. Regardless of the "realities of international and domestic politics," Bush may heed his neocon taskmasters and push for a shock and awe invasion of Iran.
At this point, the question is: will the neocon free side of the Pentagon be able hold off Bush's ruinous push for an invasion against Iran?
Probably not.
Comment on this Editorial
Lebanon in Tears
Hizbollah says disarmament not an option
Reuters
16 Aug 06
TYRE, Lebanon - Hizbollah said on Wednesday the idea of disarming its guerrillas "was not on the table" -- especially with Israeli forces still in south Lebanon.
Sheikh Nabil Kaouk, the group's top official in the south, reiterated Hizbollah's right to fight Israeli troops remaining in Lebanon before the deployment of the Lebanese army and U.N. peacekeepers, expected in the coming days and weeks.
"Today, the issue of Hizbollah relinquishing its weapons is not on the table. There are priorities and obligations that the state should do first before that," Kaouk told reporters in the port city of Tyre.
"The presence of Israeli tanks in the south is an aggression and the resistance reserves its right to face such aggression if it persisted," he said.
The Shi'ite Muslim group has cast doubts on the Lebanese army's ability to defend the country against Israel, saying its guerrillas are better placed to fight any aggression.
A U.N.-brokered truce on Monday halted a 34-day war between the Jewish state and the Iranian-backed group in which more than 1,100 people in Lebanon, mostly civilians, were killed.
At least 157 Israelis died in the conflict, which was ignited by Hizbollah's kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid.
Kaouk said Hizbollah welcomed the Lebanese army's deployment south of the Litani river. He also said Hizbollah would not keep a visible armed presence in the border area.
Israeli troops have begun preparations to make way for U.N. peacekeepers, who are expected to help the Lebanese army enforce the truce.
However, Israeli army chief Dan Halutz said on Wednesday his troops would stay in southern Lebanon for months if that was how long it took for a bigger U.N. force to be deployed.
© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.
Comment on this Article
Israeli troops could stay in Lebanon for months: army chief
www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-16 16:51:35
JERUSALEM, Aug. 16 (Xinhua) -- Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Dan Halutz said on Wednesday that his troops would remain in southern Lebanon for months, Israel Radio reported.
Halutz made the remarks as reacting to an observation presented by an army intelligence officer who told parliament's foreign affairs and defense committee that it would take months for a large contingent of the U.N. force to arrive in southern Lebanon, according to the radio.
"Israel will leave forces in Lebanon until the multinational force arrives, even if it takes months," Halutz said.
A UN-brokered cease-fire in Lebanon took into force at 0500 GMT on Monday morning following both Israeli and Lebanese approval.
On Friday, UN Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution calling for Israel's withdrawal and authorizing an increase of the existing UN force in Lebanon to 15,000 troops to help Lebanese government troops take control of south Lebanon as Israel withdraws.
Comment: Israeli forces have never left Lebanon since the invasion in 1982. When they talk about "leaving", it means to those positions they have been holding since 2000.
Comment on this Article
World backs off disarming Hezbollah
Allan Woods, CanWest News Service
Published: Wednesday, August 16, 2006
WASHINGTON - The countries tasked with upholding the shaky truce in Lebanon appeared unwilling on Tuesday to force the disarmament of Hezbollah, a development that has threatened to add delays to the assembly of a massive United Nations peacekeeping force and that could ultimately set off fresh conflict in the region.
France, the United States, the UN and Lebanon itself have all refused to accept responsibility for stripping the fighters of their weapons, despite a key element of the UN resolution that calls for the group to give up its firepower and vacate southern areas of Lebanon.
Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said Monday his force will not been intimidated and pressured into disarming, and he gained key support on Tuesday from Lebanon's defence minister, Elian Murr, who has refused to take up the task of disarmament.
The Lebanese cabinet agreed to the UN resolution on Saturday, but Murr explained his job is not disarmament, but rather to "ensure the security of the (Islamic) Resistance and citizens, to protect the victory of the resistance."
The Islamic Resistance is the armed wing of Hezbollah, and London's al-Hayat newspaper reported Tuesday the Lebanese government was considering allowing fighters to keep their weapons in the southern border zone, in violation of the UN resolution.
The about-face is giving the rest of the world cold feet as well, particularly France, who lost 58 French soldiers to Hezbollah suicide attacks the last time it was on patrol in Beirut, in 1983.
Phillipe Douste-Blazy, the foreign minister of the country that is expected to contribute 4,000 troops and lead the UN mission, warned Tuesday France will stay out of Lebanon until receiving guarantees Hezbollah has disarmed. He is expected to further discuss security issues at meetings in Beirut Wednesday.
Similarly, both the U.S., who does not plan to send troops to Lebanon, and Maj.-Gen. Alain Pellegrini, the French commander of the UN peacekeeping force currently on the ground, said it is up to the Lebanese government to strip Hezbollah of its weapons.
"It is Lebanon that is responsible for determining its own future in this regard," David Welch, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, told reporters in Washington on Tuesday. "By passing this resolution 15 to 0, unanimously in the Security Council, the world's voice has been made crystal clear."
A spokesman for UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said in New York it is up to Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah, but that the UN would offer help to enforce the process.
The latest crisis in the Israel-Lebanon conflict comes as the international community scrambles to determine which countries will contribute to the promised 15,000-troop UN peacekeeping force, and how soon they can get there.
A senior UN official told the BBC it is aiming to get an advance force of peacekeepers in to Lebanon within two weeks that could include up to 3,500 troops.
Lebanon plans to start moving 15,000 of its own soldiers into the southern part of the country this week, and Israel said it could pull out of Lebanon within 10 days.
But Pellegrini told France's Le Monde newspaper Tuesday that it could take up to one year to get the full force in place in southern Lebanon.
However, Sean McCormack, a U.S. State Department spokesman said "this needs to be done on a much more urgent basis than that."
"Nobody believes that deploying the force in months is acceptable," he said.
The question of how quickly the UN force can be in place is vital because last Friday's resolution calls for the withdrawal of the Israeli forces in southern Lebanon at the same time as the international force moves to takes up its positions.
For the time being, both Hezbollah fighters and Israeli soldiers remain on high alert in the area, a situation that led to the shooting of five Hezbollah members Tuesday because they were reportedly acting in a threatening manner.
Formal offers of troop contributions are expected to start coming in on Thursday from nations, although the bulk of the force is expected to be made up of French, Italian soldiers, along with other European countries.
Yet as much of the world watches the slow diplomatic process of cleaning up after a war, Israel has already set its sights on what it considers the larger threat to Middle East peace - Iran.
Shimon Peres, the country's deputy prime minister, said in Washington Tuesday that his country welcomes the UN resolution because it was supported by Arab countries, condemned Hezbollah and agreed to an embargo on weapons shipments into Lebanon.
But he warned that Iran is intent on dominating the unstable region, and he called on Israel's Arab neighbours to help put a stop to Iranian aggression.
"Whether we are partners in full or partners by need, I know that most Arab countries wouldn't like to convert the Middle East from an Arab space to an Iranian domination," he said.
Both Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad delivered speeches Tuesday celebrating what they called Hezbollah's victory over the Israeli army, and warning of "constant instability" unless Israel gives way to the Arab countries surrounding it.
Peres said Israel looks upon Hezbollah as an "Iranian armed division" or its "foreign legion" because it receives training, weapons and $100-million annually from Iran. Syria, which borders on Lebanon, has acted as an arms conduit for Hezbollah.
Asked why Israel did not set its considerable strength at Iran and Syria rather than Lebanon, he said that those two countries are a "world problem."
"We are not running the world," he said.
Peres was meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to discuss the situation in the Middle East ahead of a North American tour to raise what is expected to be hundreds of millions of dollars for reconstructions efforts in northern Israel.
U.S. President George W. Bush has been equally strident about what he calls the destabilizing role that Iran plays in the Middle East, particularly since the Israel-Lebanon conflict began last month. Earlier this week, he warned that it would have been much worse had Iran possessed "the nuclear weapon it seeks."
Comment: Among a media that is completely uncritical of Israel, CanWest has a place of honour. No one spouts the Israeli line with more vigour.
One question to Mr Peres: if the US and its "coalition of the willing" head on for war with Syria and Iran, in order to protect Israel, will that not show that, if Israel isn't running the world, they are certainly weilding an awfully large amount of power?
Syria and Iran are threats to no one except Israel. And they are only threats to Israel because Israel wants to invade them both, preferably using other nations to do it for them. That is, Syria and Iran need to protect themselves from a neighbour that is an aggressor: Israel, the country that just invaded Lebanon and has been stealing land from the Palestinians for the last century.
Comment on this Article
US gave green light to Israel: Attack on Lebanon essential precursor for military options against Iran
Craig Murray
August 15, 2006
From Democracy Now
"In this week's issue of the New Yorker, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reports Israeli officials visited the White House earlier this summer to get a "green light" for an attack on Lebanon. The Bush administration approved, Hersh says, in part to remove Hezbollah as a deterrent to a potential US bombing of Iran. A government consultant said the Bush administration also saw the attack on Lebanon as a "demo" for what it could expect to face in Iran."
From the New Yorker
"The Middle East expert said that the Administration had several reasons for supporting the Israeli bombing campaign. Within the State Department, it was seen as a way to strengthen the Lebanese government so that it could assert its authority over the south of the country, much of which is controlled by Hezbollah. He went on, "The White House was more focussed on stripping Hezbollah of its missiles, because, if there was to be a military option against Iran's nuclear facilities, it had to get rid of the weapons that Hezbollah could use in a potential retaliation at Israel. Bush wanted both. Bush was going after Iran, as part of the Axis of Evil, and its nuclear sites, and he was interested in going after Hezbollah as part of his interest in democratization, with Lebanon as one of the crown jewels of Middle East democracy."
Comment on this Article
Diplomats head to Lebanon to discuss peacekeeping plan
Last Updated Wed, 16 Aug 2006 05:46:54 EDT
CBC News
Foreign ministers from several countries are arriving in Beirut Wednesday to work out details of an international peacekeeping force that will oversee the fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah.
French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy and his Turkish counterpart, Abdullah Gul, arrived in Beirut Wednesday for talks. The foreign ministers of Pakistan and Malaysia were also expected.
There are currently 2,000 UN peacekeepers in southern Lebanon. Although putting together a UN peacekeeping force can take at least three months, the UN hopes 3,500 international troops can reinforce the UN contingent within 10 to 14 days.
Israel is due to gradually evacuate southern Lebanon upon the arrival of 15,000 Lebanese troops supported by up to 15,000 UN peacekeepers as part of the ceasefire plan that put an end to 34 days of fighting.
France, Italy, Turkey, Malaysia and Indonesia have indicated they will contribute troops, but the UN has not yet received any formal offers.
France was expected to lead the international force.
Those soldiers will patrol a 30-kilometre buffer zone in southern Lebanon from the Litani River to the Israeli border. But Israel wants a Hezbollah-free zone created quickly.
Some Israeli troops began pulling out of southern Lebanon Tuesday and Lebanese troops prepared to move across the Litani River to take control of the region from Hezbollah guerrillas. That move is expected Thursday.
Hezbollah has warned of more attacks as long as Israeli forces remain in Lebanon. The Lebanese government, with support from international troops, is expected to implement a September 2004 UN resolution calling for the disarmament of all militias, including Hezbollah.
But Hezbollah has indicated it will not give up its weapons and some countries including France have said they will not disarm Hezbollah fighters.
Comment on this Article
Lebanese army prepares to move south
Wednesday 16 August 2006, 11:57 Makka Time, 8:57 GMT
Lebanon's army is preparing to move into south Lebanon as the United Nations plans to send an initial force of 3,500 troops to the region to enforce the truce between Israel and Hezbollah.
The Lebanese army will begin moving 15,000 troops south of the Litani river on Thursday in line with a UN resolution to end the fighting, a senior Lebanese political source said on Wednesday.
"As we speak, the army is readying the force," the source said, adding that Lebanese units would stay out of areas occupied by Israeli troops until UN peacekeepers move in.
In New York, the UN has pressed ahead with plans to send troops from France, Turkey, Malaysia and Germany to southern Lebanon.
Hedi Annabi, an assistant secretary-general for peacekeeping, told reporters on Tuesday: "It is our hope that there can be a deployment of up to 3,500 troops within 10 days to two weeks.
"That would be ideal to help consolidate the cessation of hostilities and start the process of withdrawal and of deployment of the Lebanese forces as foreseen in the resolution."
A French general and colonel are scheduled to meet with UN peacekeeping officials on Wednesday to discuss a "concept of operations" - how the force's mandate, set by the UN security council last Friday, would be implemented.
Rules of engagement
While several European Union nations have expressed interest in contributing troops, they are waiting to see what France - which is expected to provide the backbone of the contingent - will do before making any firm commitments.
In addition to the Europeans, Turkey, Indonesia and Malaysia are potential troop contributors.
"The French would like to know what others are prepared to do and the others would like to know what the French are prepared to do," a UN official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the talks.
About 40 nations interested in contributing soldiers to the new UN force are meeting on Thursday to hear the rules of engagement.
Israeli officials said that the Israeli army plans to withdraw from southern Lebanon in seven to 10 days and to hand over some of its forward positions to UN troops within 48 hours.
However on Wednesday Dan Halutz, chief of staff of Israel's army, reportedly said Israel would stay in the border zone until an international force deployed, "even if it takes months".
The mission
The first step for UN troops is to consolidate the current shaky truce and help set up the phased withdrawal of Israeli troops as the Lebanese army deploys some of its 15,000 soldiers, with the support of the 2,000 member UN observation force known as UNIFIL.
A UN official said that the next step is to try to create a demilitarised zone between the Israeli border and the Litani river, some 20km north, after the Lebanese government deploys its troops in the south.
Once the Lebanese army controls most of the south, the aim is to implement a September 2004 resolution, which calls for the disarmament of Hezbollah.
This is to be done by the Lebanese army, assisted by UN troops. But Elias al-Murr, the defence minister of Lebanon, said the army would not disarm Hezbollah.
Comment on this Article
Hezbollah Fighters Better Trained, Equipped Than Chechens - Russian-born Israeli Soldiers
Created: 16.08.2006 15:26 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 15:26 MSK
MosNews
The 20 soldiers from Israel's elite Golani Brigade moved through the darkness over the rocky hills of Lebanon until they arrived at the outskirts of this Shi'ite town that until last month contained 35,000 residents. The unit entered an unfinished house to prepare for combat within a few hours.
The troops, however, never advanced beyond their two-story hideout. Hezbollah gunners, believed to have been hiding in the ruins of Bint Jbail, spotted the Israeli force and directed mortar, anti-tank and machine gun fire that trapped the elite Israeli unit for 36 hours in an area thought to have been cleared of the enemy.
Russian-born Israeli soldiers said Hezbollah fighters were better trained and equipped than the Chechens. They added that Hezbollah's tactics reminded them of Chechen rebels, The World Tribune daily reported.
"Hezbollah is tougher," Vladi, an infantry sniper, said.
On Tuesday, Hezbollah escalated ceasefire violations and fired artillery shells toward retreating Israeli soldiers, Middle East Newsline reported. At the same time, parliamentarians called for the resignation of Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, who acknowledged that he sold his investment portfolio hours after the Hezbollah abduction of two Israeli soldiers on July 12.
Military sources said numerous Israeli combat units, without effective air or armor support, spent most of their time in Lebanon paralyzed by Hezbollah fire. They said hundreds of soldiers were often overwhelmed by as few as a dozen Hezbollah mortar and anti-tank gunners within sight of the Israeli border.
In all, Israel sent 30,000 soldiers to Lebanon. At least 118 soldiers were killed in the 33-day fighting. The military said 530 Hezbollah operatives were killed.
"From the point of view of the individual soldier, they are better than the Arab armies that surround us," Col. Omri Bar-David, a reserve battalion commander, said.
In several cases, Israeli commanders, citing Hezbollah squads, dismissed orders to advance. The military reported the detention of five Engineering Corps soldiers, including a reserve company commander, for refusing to embark on a mission in Lebanon.
"There is a lot of confusion," Anon, a soldier not involved in the courtmartial, said. "We go in, we come out. We go in, we come out."
The 20-man unit from the Golani Brigade's 51st Battalion arrived in Bint Jbail on Aug. 10. Hezbollah first disabled a Merkava Mk-3 main battle tank with an AT-14 Kornet anti-tank missile.
Then, Hezbollah gunners directed anti-tank fire toward the building that contained the Israeli force. The unit, which sustained eight casualties in Bint Jbail on July 26, huddled in a first floor bathroom, deemed the most secure part of the building.
"It's been ugly," Dudi Levisohn, a member of the Golani squad, said. "But it's our job. We have to do it. We suffer so the people in Tel Aviv can enjoy themselves."
Military sources said Hezbollah also forced Israeli units to turn off their communications and tracking equipment. They said Hezbollah deployed systems designed to identify a range of signals, including those of cell phones.
"During the day, Hezbollah sees us perfectly and we can't see them," another officer said. "The only time we conducted operations were at night because we believed our night vision systems were better than theirs."
In another battle, an infantry battalion fought 24 hours to advance three houses in a Shi'ite village. The soldiers were pinned down by heavy Hezbollah anti-tank fire from a network of tunnels and bunkers.
"You don't have to worry about bullets," an officer, identified only as Eyal, said. "It's the anti-tank missiles."
Military sources said Hezbollah has been trained in guerrilla tactics by Iranian and Syrian instructors. They said the tactics were developed from lessons learned by the Vietcong in the war with the United States. "They have studied Western armies to see how we make war and they have prepared themselves for six years," Yossi, an officer, said.
With the onset of the United Nations-arranged ceasefire, Israeli soldiers, particularly reservists, have expressed increasing criticism of senior commanders. On Monday, reservists were angered when Northern Command chief Maj. Gen. Udi Adam termed Hezbollah a terrorist group.
"They are professionals," a soldier who returned from Lebanon said. "They have new weapons. There have been no improvement in our tanks in 10 years. Their mission is clear - to hurt us. And they can do this very well. Don't say they are not soldiers. They are soldiers."
Comment on this Article
Seymour Hersh: U.S. Helped Plan Israeli Attack, Cheney "Convinced" Assault on Lebanon Could Serve as Prelude to Preemptive Attack on Iran
Monday, August 14th, 2006
Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reports in this week's issue of the New Yorker that Israeli officials visited the White House earlier this summer to get a "green light" for an attack on Lebanon. The Bush administration approved, Hersh says, in part to remove Hezbollah as a deterrent to a potential US bombing of Iran. [includes rush transcript]
Israel and Lebanon saw continued violence on the last day before a UN ceasefire. South Lebanon continued to come under intense Israeli bombardment Sunday. In the most lethal attack, fifteen Lebanese were reported killed after Israel bombed the village of Rachat. Meanwhile, Hezbollah launched more than 250 rockets into Northern Israel. It was the highest number of rockets Hezbollah has fired into Israel since fighting began. At least one Israeli was killed.
The past month's violence broke out after Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers and killed eight others. Israel rejected Hezbollah's demand for a prisoner exchange, and launched a full-on attack targeting Lebanon's vital infrastructure, including a power station, the main airport and scores of roads and bridges. An estimated 1,000 Lebanese have been killed and more than one million displaced. At least forty Israeli civilians have been killed and hundreds of thousands displaced under a daily barrage of Hezbollah rockets.
The Bush administration has openly backed Israel's campaign. The administration resisted international efforts for a ceasefire and rushed arms to the Israeli military.
A major new article says U.S. support for the invasion of Lebanon has gone even further than we already know. That in fact, White House support for the massive bombing of Lebanon even predates the day those two Israeli soldiers were seized.
In this week's issue of the New Yorker, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reports Israeli officials visited the White House earlier this summer to get a "green light" for an attack on Lebanon. The Bush administration approved, Hersh says, in part to remove Hezbollah as a deterrent to a potential US bombing of Iran. A government consultant said the Bush administration also saw the attack on Lebanon as a "demo" for what it could expect to face in Iran.
RUSH TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25,
$50, $100,
more...
AMY GOODMAN: Seymour Hersh is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist. He joins us in Washington, D.C. His latest piece is called "Watching Lebanon: Washington's Interests in Israel's War." We welcome you to Democracy Now!, Seymour Hersh.
SEYMOUR HERSH: Hi.
AMY GOODMAN: Hi. Can you just start off by telling us what you know at this point of what Washington's interests in Israel's war are?
SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, when you say Washington, you have to talk about Dick Cheney. I can tell you pretty firmly that it's his office. I guess you could say it's sort of the home of the neoconservative thinking in Washington -- some of his aides and the people close to him in the White House: Elliott Abrams, David Wurmser, others.
What I understand is this: our military, our Air Force has been trying for a year to get plans for a major massive bombing assault on Iran pushed through the Pentagon, pushed through the process. And there's been sort of an internecine fight inside the Pentagon over just basically the idea of strategic war against Iran. They're very dug in Iran. The Persians have been digging in for -- what? -- centuries and centuries. And the Marines and the Navy and the Army have said, No way we're going to start bombing, because it will end up with troops on the ground. So there's been a stalemate. I've written a lot about it.
And in this spring, as part of the stalemate, the American Air Force approached the Israeli Air Force, which as you know is headed by General Dan Halutz, who is an Air Force -- I think the first IDF commander, the commander of the Israeli Defense Forces, to be an Air Force guy, and another believer of strategic war, and the two had a lot of interests. And so, out of these meetings in the spring became an agreement, you know, sort of we'll help you, you help us, and it got to Cheney's attention, this idea of Israel planning a major, major strategic bombing campaign against Hezbollah. And for -- I can't tell you where Bush is, but you have to assume he's right with him. Obviously everything he's done makes that clear.
Cheney's idea was this, that we sort of -- it's like a three-for. We get three for one with this. One, here we're having this war about the value of strategic bombing, and the Israeli Air Force, whose pilots are superb, can go in and -- if they could go in and blast Hezbollah out of their foxholes or whatever they are, their underground facilities, and roll over them, as everybody in the White House and I'm sure everybody in the Israeli Air Force thought they could do, that would be a big plus for the ambitions that I think the President and Cheney have for Iran. I don't think this president, our president, is going to leave office with Iran being, as he sees it, a nuclear threat.
The second great argument you have, of course, is if you are going to do Iran, you're going to need -- you can't attack Iran without taking care of the Hezbollah missiles or rockets. They're really rockets. They're not independently guided. Even their long-range rockets that go a few hundred kilometers, you cannot attack Iran without taking them out, because obviously that's the deterrent. You hit Iran, Hezbollah then bombs Tel Aviv and Haifa. So that's something you have to clean out first.
And thirdly, of course, is if you get rid of Hezbollah and Nasrallah, why, you get rid of a terror -- a man who's considered to be, as somebody famously said, Richard Armitage, the "A-Team of terrorism."
So on that basis, there was a tremendous interest in Israel going ahead. There were meetings. There were an enormous amount of contacts. I should add, Amy, that of course -- and this is reflected in the story -- Israel doesn't need the United States to know they have a problem with Hezbollah. And so, they were going to do something anyway. But it's a question of timing, and that's one of the big issues.
This summer, earlier this summer, there was -- and late, I guess after the Israelis began their reoccupation -- occupation of Gaza, after the first Israeli soldier was captured, a soldier named Shalit, I think, June 28th, after he was captured, the traffic, the signals traffic that the Israeli signals community gets showed an enormous amount of talk about doing something on the northern border. That is, on the border between Syria -- I mean between Lebanon and Israel.
And so, on that basis, it was clear this summer, the next time Hezbollah made a move, and there's been a cat-and-mouse game between Israel and Hezbollah for about six years, since the Israelis were kicked out or driven out by Nasrallah in 2000. It's been cat-and-mouse. Both sides have been going against each other, nickel-dime stuff. And the next time Hezbollah made a move, the Israeli Air Force was going to bomb, the plan was going to go in effect. The move came very quick. It came about ten days after or twelve days after the first Israeli soldier was captured.
AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Seymour Hersh, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, his latest piece appears in this week's issue of the New Yorker magazine. You say the Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits, quoting a U.S. government consultant with close ties to Israel.
SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, sure. I mean, believe me, Israel thought, you know -- I guess the only other time in history where you can look back on such misguided optimism or one of the more recent times was, of course, us going into Iraq. Shades of Iraq, deja-vu or however you want to put it. Israel was convinced it would be easy. The Air Force was going to go and clean them out.
There was another element, and you mentioned that in your intro and also in your news report. One of the things that struck me right away, as soon as I saw how Israel was bombing, and my instinct told me there was something there, because in one of the Air Force plans that I knew about but didn't write about, one of the Air Force options for taking out Iran was, of course, shock and awe, a massive, massive bombing well beyond any of the nuclear facilities. Go hit the country hard for 36 hours, drive people into underground bunkers. Don't target civilians, necessarily, but hit their infrastructure, hit the roads, hit the power plants, hit the water facilities.
And so, when they come out of their bunkers after 36 hours, they look around. In the American neo-con view, they were going to say to each other, "Oh, my god, the mullahs did this to us, the religious mullahs who run the country. We're going to overthrow them and install a secular government." That was the thinking for the last year. That is the thinking for the last year inside some elements of the Pentagon, the civilian side, and also in Cheney's shop.
So when you watch what Israel did in its opening salvo, the first targets, I remember vividly, was -- and everybody should -- they took out the civilian airstrip. They took away civilian -- the ability to use aircraft to travel. They took out highways. They took out roads. They took out petrol stations. They basically isolated Southern Lebanon. But I think part of the reason they did so much damage to the infrastructure was they believed -- and I think the Israelis have been very clear about it -- that the Christian population and the Sunni population -- don't forget Hezbollah is Shia -- would rise up against Hezbollah, and it would be a great feather in the cap, etc., etc., etc.
AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Seymour Hersh, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist. His latest piece is called "Watching Lebanon: Washington's Interests in Israel's War." We'll come back with him in a minute.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We continue our conversation with Seymour Hersh. His piece in the latest New Yorker is called "Watching Lebanon: Washington's Interests in Israel's War." So, can you take us through the timeline, as you understand it, that started before the capture of the two Israeli soldiers, the meetings that were taking place?
SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, I don't know an awful lot about it, because, obviously, this is secrecy cubed here in this town, Washington, this White House. I don't even know how much Bush was involved in the direct planning. Certainly he's carrying out the policy. The best guess I have is that this spring there was a tremendous fight in the Pentagon over a nuclear option for Iran, with the generals standing up, standing up quite a bit against this White House. And I think it's a sign, I guess, of the perceived weakness, political weakness, of the Bush administration at this point. And nuclear option was taken off the table for Iran.
Iran's underground. The nuclear facilities, the alleged nuclear facilities, I've also written, we can't find any evidence of a significant weapons program. But in any case, they're certainly doing research in Iran, and they may indeed have intentions, but they're deep underground, buried under a lot of rock, 75 feet, etc. etc. We've all heard that. And at that point in the spring, when the nuclear option was gone and there was a lot of concern about how do you drive down 75 feet and guarantee knocking out a potential weapons system, it was then that our Air Force began to talk with the Israeli Air Force, because the Israelis have been shipped -- we have sent them an awful lot of large 5,000-pound bunker busters. And they've done a lot of research into the idea of using two or three bombs on top of each other, etc.
And so, spring is when I began -- I think you can really trace the American military involvement with the Israeli military. And the way it was described to me, eventually this talk, the planning between the two of them, the sharing of intelligence, which is sort of normal -- we and Israel are very close, a lot of stuff is shared with their military and their intelligence service -- eventually it bubbled up, is the way it came to me, into the Pentagon, into the top leadership, Donald Rumsfeld, and eventually got to Cheney, whose idea was, "Let's push this. This is a great idea."
I'm not suggesting that Washington forced Israel to go more quickly than it wanted to, but I don't think there's any question that the Israeli Defense Force, the Air Force, was surprised by how quickly Nasrallah, Hezbollah moved into the business of capturing. As I said, the first Israeli soldier was captured in Gaza on June 28. There was traffic about going, heating up the north. But for Nasrallah to move on 12th of July was very quick. But it was agreed that the next step he made, whenever, and I think the best guess people had is it could have been as late as fall, September or October, that they would go. They went quickly. And people I talked with in Israel -- I spent a lot of time in this story talking to people in Israel -- one of the things that everybody remarked on was the quickness with which the Air Force moved, not that they didn't have plans in effect, but it was very quickly.
AMY GOODMAN: You also talk about Elliott Abrams, and you talk about Donald Rumsfeld's role.
SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, what's interesting about Rumsfeld, because for the first time -- and not everybody agreed, but people that -- you know, I'm long of tooth, Amy, and I've been around this town a long time, and obviously, since 9/11, a lot of people talk to me. And for the first time, Rummy doesn't seem to be on board, is what I'm hearing. Actually, somebody even suggested he's getting a little bit like Robert McNamara. If you remember, McNamara, the Secretary of Defense who, under both Kennedy and Johnson, was a great advocate of the Vietnam War and its chief salesman, basically, one of its chief salesmen all during the '60s, and by '67, he decided it wasn't winnable and ended up being shoved out and put in the World Bank.
Rumsfeld is very concerned about the 150,000 American troops on the ground in Iraq, who are potentially in a very untenable position. There's no question Iraq's lost. There's a lot of question about what we're doing in Afghanistan. We're sort of 0-for-2 in those two. And so, Rumsfeld was not happy about this policy, about going in in a protracted war in Southern Lebanon with Nasrallah, because, of course -- I think Nasrallah is his own man. None of us really know. I think he decides what he wants to do. I don't think Syria and Iran control him the way Washington, this White House seems to believe everything comes from Iran. You know, anybody who meets Nasrallah, as I have a couple of times, he's rather formidable. In any case --
AMY GOODMAN: Seymour Hersh, when did you meet him?
SEYMOUR HERSH: Oh, I've met him a lot. I mean, I've interviewed him. I've interviewed him in the New Yorker. And I just spent time with him over this winter.
AMY GOODMAN: In Lebanon?
SEYMOUR HERSH: Yeah, sure.
AMY GOODMAN: And can you describe your sense of him?
SEYMOUR HERSH: I think he believes in -- he's religious, in the sense that -- I've met religious leaders, Archbishop O'Connell here in New York. One of these people who you really, you know -- for an agnostic like me, you come away from a meeting with those people believing that there is something to this business of religion, because these people are so devout. He is very much a believer, Nasrallah, in his own religion, and he doesn't have dead eyes. He's got alive eyes, and he's got humor.
The reason I started seeing him, I see intelligence people around the world and some of the intelligence people in the Middle East, when the Iraqi war began to start, they encouraged me to see him, on grounds that this guy has a better feel for what's going on in Iraq, as a Shia -- he's very close to the Shia leadership, to Sistani, also to the Iranians, who have a lot of juice inside Iran. So just as a reporter, I would go see him, and we'd talk about mostly Iraq in the beginning, and obviously.
In any case, the whole point here is, Rumsfeld -- to get back to Rumsfeld, there's no question that Iran has enormous influence inside Iraq, dominated now by the Shia, Shia Iran, and I think Rumsfeld's concern, I was told, is that a protracted war against Nasrallah will only cause the Iranians, in support of Hezbollah, to start squeezing our troops in Iraq.
And we're -- you know, as I say, it's an untenable position in Iraq. And nobody quite knows -- this government has no idea on how to get out, just like I don't think the Israelis -- you know, the same pattern you saw in Israel as you saw with this Bush White House going into Iraq: they were so sure of victory that they never looked at the downside. Actually, I quote somebody in this article in the New Yorker, a really high-level guy in one of the military services, saying, "You can't get this White House to think about the downside of anything." And you saw that with the Israelis. They had no idea, once they got into the quagmire, of how to extract, except to add more forces and increase the death toll to themselves, too.
AMY GOODMAN: Seymour Hersh, you've also written about the U.S. rejecting overtures from Syria in dealing with the war on terror. Can you talk about that, as, of course, you can't talk about Lebanon or Iraq with this administration without talking about Syria and Iran?
SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, look, this is an administration that still refuses to deal with people it doesn't like. You know, I don't know. When my children were in pre-nursery, you know, little boys will get into a fight, and the nursery school teacher would take the two little boys who were fighting and say, "You two shake hands and go back to the sandbox," and they would. And so we have a president that won't talk to the Iranians, although they've wanted to, and there's been a lot of stories written about that. And they won't talk to the Syrians.
And I've obviously -- maybe not so obviously, but I've interviewed the President of Syria, Bashar al-Asad, a couple of times. And one of the last times, with great pain he told me -- I think he showed me, even showed me, he was -- this was in 2005. He's written letters to George Bush, saying, "Let's get together. Let's talk. We have a lot in common. We can help you. We and Iran basically both have more -- we can do more for you in Iraq than any other country. Why aren't you using us? We don't need a Somalia on our borders. We're not interested in chaos there." And this White House doesn't believe it. And the letters weren't answered, he told me. His ambassador here in Washington, Imad Mustafa, is absolutely isolated. All this talk that the White House has made, Condoleezza Rice, about having openings to Iran, to Syria, are just, you know -- they're not worth much. There's been some low-level talk. Nobody has made any efforts.
Syria has, as I've written in the New Yorker years ago, was one of the biggest helpers we had after al-Qaeda struck us, because Syria is -- the old man Asad, the father of the current president, hated Jihadism. He did not like the Muslim Brotherhood. They were his opponents. And he kept the best books going on the Muslim Brotherhood, which is very closely connected to al-Qaeda. In fact, we learned more about al-Qaeda from Syria after 9/11 than from any other country. Asad, the president, gave us thousands access -- agreed to give us access to thousands of files. And I wrote a story, I think in '02 or '03 for the New Yorker, in which I quoted a senior intelligence official of Syria saying, "We're willing to even talk about our support for Hezbollah with you. We want to see you win the war on terror."
So it's been an amazingly horrific performance by this White House, which is of par. You know, I don't think any of us -- I certainly won't breathe easy until we get to 2009, inauguration of a new president. But there's just no question that if we were to approach Syria right now, something else I didn't write at the time -- that's because I wasn't writing about it -- I don't think there's any question that Israel was interested in talking to Syria in '03, even about the Golan Heights, which is a tough issue for them, and --
AMY GOODMAN: In fact, Sy --
SEYMOUR HERSH: Let me finish this. And we discouraged Israel from doing it.
AMY GOODMAN: Why?
SEYMOUR HERSH: I don't know. I guess we didn't want our friends to talk to our enemies.
AMY GOODMAN: You wrote in 2003 about the U.S. bombing of a convoy inside Syria that once and for all smashed the attempts of Syria to communicate with Washington.
SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, it didn't really. At the time, it did. But there he is again, the President of Syria, Mr. Asad, tried again and certainly in '05, the letter he sent me, I saw, had just been written. He was still trying to make contact with Washington, because, obviously, in his view, he had a lot to offer us about resolving the crisis in Iraq. And it's a crisis for Syria, too, in Iraq, because there's now 400,000 or 500,000 Iraqi refugees living in Damascus and elsewhere, a couple hundred thousand now of Lebanese. And so real estate property has gone out of sight there.
The irony is that as much as we can't stand Syria, for the first time in their life, the Syrians are getting an awful lot of foreign investment, because, you know, with the oil at $75 a barrel, all of the Gulf countries, which are -- they're just washed with money. They don't know what to do with the money they're making every day. And they don't want to invest anymore in America, because some of them have contributed money to charities that have been put on a watch list by the United States. So there's a fear in some of the Gulf countries that if they invest the hundreds of billions of dollars they've collected in Washington or real estate here, they might have the property seized for being aiders and abetters of terrorism, so they're dumping money into Syria right now. They were dumping a lot of money into Lebanon, too, but not any more.
AMY GOODMAN: Bob Parry writes at "Consortium News," that it was U.S. neo-cons who pushed Israel even further than Israel wanted to go around this issue of the attack of Hezbollah. Do you agree with that?
SEYMOUR HERSH: The Israelis I talked to said, "Look, you know, there might have been a question being pushed on timing, but Israel certainly wanted to go." I just don't -- Bob Parry was right in so many things back in Iran-Contra. I just don't have the same information he does on that. But that there was certainly a decision that -- I quote somebody as saying, we told them basically, "You know, guys" -- in this article I quote somebody as saying in effect -- the Americans telling the Israelis, "Sooner than later, we want this to happen before this president is out of office," -- that is, taking out Hezbollah so you can take out Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: Just a few months ago, you wrote the piece, "The Iran Plans: How Far Will the White House Go?" talking about the U.S. plans to bomb Iran. Where do you think the current situation now leaves the United States and the Middle East?
SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, you can't apply rationality to it, because I think it's simply something Bush and Cheney want to do. As I said earlier, they want to take out Iran. They don't want to talk to it. They believe it's, you know, the axis of evil cubed. And so, frankly, my real worry is what's going to happen -- I think nothing's going to happen before this election. That's impossible. My real worry is what's going to happen when George Bush is a lame duck. He's talking about, privately now, so I'm told and so I've written, about Winston Churchill. If you remember, after leading England to war in World War II, he was turned out by the voters, and he wasn't fully appreciated until years later. So I think he sees himself in the position of "I know I'm right. They don't quite believe me. But I'm going to do the thing I think is right, the right thing. And maybe in 30 or 50 years, they'll come to accept me for the great president I think I am." And so, that's what we really have as leadership right now.
AMY GOODMAN: And where does Condoleezza Rice fit into this picture?
SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, you know, my guess is that she was smart enough to know this going -- this last trip she made to the Middle East, I've written that she didn't want to go, because she knew she had nothing to offer anybody. And I think there was a story the other week in the New York Times that was, clearly she inspired to her people about how Cheney is plotting against her, and Elliott Abrams, when he was on the trip with her, he was constantly calling up the White House behind her back and filling them in.
You mention Abrams. Abrams is sort of the key intellectual player, I think, of this policy that Cheney's involved in. He's not in Cheney's office. He works directly for the President as a Special Assistant in the National Security Council office, but there's no question, his influence is enormous on this.
AMY GOODMAN: And Seymour Hersh, for young people who don't remember Iran-Contra, can you just fill people in on who Elliott Abrams is, his history?
SEYMOUR HERSH: Elliott Abrams was one of the key players in this incredibly wacky scheme we had in the Iran-Iraq war of two decades ago. Between 1980 and 1988, Iran and Iraq fought each other, and we supported Iraq. We supported Saddam Hussein, the United States did, with a lot of secret arms, secret intelligence, even shipping him secret formulas that could be used to make biological weapons and chemical stuff and intelligence, etc, etc. And that was because of course, Khomeini -- we had been kicked out of Iran, when our Shah, the Shah was overthrown.
We were terrified of the Shiite leadership there. And so, one of the plans, one of the schemes was, in the middle of all of this hostility, Ronald Reagan was so committed to the Contra War in Latin America, that is, defeating what he thought was a communist-led insurgency in Nicaragua in an election there, that he cut a deal to ship arms -- let's see. It's complicated. They sold arms to Israel, which they were shipped, I think, into Iran. You help me out on this.
Anyway, the bottom line was that it was a policy that brought us into contact with Iran, secret trading. We were going to get weapons that were going to -- the Israelis were going to buy weapons. Money was -- they were going to sell weapons to Iran. Money was going to be generated from that sale to support covertly, outside of Congress's knowledge, to support aid for the opposition in Nicaragua that we favored --
AMY GOODMAN: For the Contras.
SEYMOUR HERSH: The Contras, yes, and so there we are. It was totally a crazy policy. When it unraveled, it should have probably led to, in a normal process, an impeachment proceeding for Ronald Reagan, but by that time, he was -- everybody understood he was -- he wasn't well with Alzheimer's or whatever.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think that some of the weapons Hezbollah is using today could have come from that sale from the United States?
SEYMOUR HERSH: No. I think what's happened is, if you really want to know, I think the best guess is, and again, this is -- I quoted somebody to this effect, Vali Nasr, who is a professor at one of the Navy post-graduate schools, very competent guy. What really probably happened is this: once we made our move, the Bush administration and the French, to drive the Syrians out of Lebanon, that famous 1559 you always hear about -- we always hear about 1559. We never hear much about UN Resolution 242, which called for Israel to go back to its original borders. Anyway, 1559 called for Syria to get out of Lebanon and Lebanon to take control, a civilian government come in and also take -- disarm Hezbollah. That was what it called for. Well, of course, it's impossible in Syria, because the Lebanese army is probably 50% Shia and very close to Hezbollah. It was -- that's an impossibility. And so -- wait, I've lost my track of thought. What was I saying?
AMY GOODMAN: You were just saying that after --
SEYMOUR HERSH: Oh, yes, I remember. I'm sorry, Amy. So what happened is, once it was clear that the White House and French were getting our way with the UN, and Syria was going to get out, which only could only be interpreted by Iran and by Syria and by Hezbollah, as the pressure was going to be on them to be disarmed -- at that point, Iran really began to step up its support for Hezbollah, not so much in terms -- yes, there's always been close support of aid and arms, but they sent a lot of technicians into Hezbollah to help them dig and help them to improve their ability to mask what they were doing, hide their weapons, their launchers for their rockets, go deeper underground, build command and control bunkers, build a lot of facilities that fooled the Israeli's intelligence.
The Israelis -- some commando units did go into the war early on and hunter-killer teams, and they were completely bamboozled and hurt hard, because everything they thought would be in place was not. The intelligence stunk, and I think Iran, in the last 18 months, probably played a role in improving Hezbollah's intelligence or its capability to withstand a bombing attack.
AMY GOODMAN: Seymour Hersh, I want to thank you very much for joining us. His latest piece, "Watching Lebanon: Washington's Interests in Israel's War" is in this week's issue of the New Yorker magazine.
Comment on this Article
Israel to halt pullout unless Lebanon army deploys
By Alistair Lyon
Reuters
16 Aug 06
BEIRUT - Israel said on Wednesday it would stop withdrawing from south Lebanon unless Lebanese troops moved there within days, as diplomats worked on plans for a stronger U.N. force to bolster the truce with Hizbollah guerrillas.
The Lebanese cabinet will order an immediate army deployment in the south when it meets later in the day, a senior political source said, adding that a 15,000-strong force would start taking up positions south of the Litani River, about 20 km (13 miles) from the Israeli border, on Thursday.
French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy, holding talks in Beirut, urged Lebanon to send the army south rapidly to move alongside U.N. peacekeepers into areas vacated by the Israelis.
"The withdrawal of the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) within 10 days is dependent upon the deployment of the Lebanese army," Israel's army chief Dan Halutz told parliament's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, according to a spokesman.
"If the Lebanese army does not move down within a number of days to the south ... the way I see it, we must stop our withdrawal," Halutz said.
The U.N. Security Council last week adopted a resolution calling for a truce. It authorized up to 13,000 well-armed troops to augment the 2,000-strong UNIFIL force now in Lebanon.
The United Nations said on Tuesday it wanted to deploy up to 3,500 new soldiers in south Lebanon within two weeks.
"It seems to me vital that the deployment of the Lebanese army takes place as quickly as possible," Douste-Blazy said after meeting Lebanese Foreign Minister Fawzi Salloukh.
Hizbollah, which fought an Israeli onslaught for 34 days until a U.N. truce took hold on Monday, has said it has the right to attack Israeli forces remaining on Lebanese soil.
"The presence of Israeli tanks in the south is an aggression and the resistance reserves its right to face such aggression if it persisted," Sheikh Nabil Kaouk, Hizbollah's top official in south Lebanon, told reporters in the port city of Tyre.
He said the idea of disarming Hizbollah guerrillas "was not on the table" -- especially with the Israelis still in Lebanon.
Hizbollah has shown no willingness to vacate the area south of the Litani, where its guerrillas have roamed for two decades.
The group has promised to cooperate with Lebanese and U.N. forces, but has made clear it will keep its weapons -- although political sources say it has offered to keep them out of sight.
Douste-Blazy said France, which might lead the strengthened UNIFIL, was ready to play an important role in the force, but said it was vital that many other countries contributed.
"LIFT THE BLOCKADE"
Douste-Blazy also urged Israel to end an air and sea blockade imposed on Lebanon at the start of the war.
Israel has indicated it will keep up the blockade until measures are in place to prevent Hizbollah from rearming.
Two tankers carrying fuel were due to arrive in Lebanon, where the blockade has caused shortages and power cuts.
"Two ships have got permission and guarantees to dock today and one should be coming in tomorrow," said Bahij Abu Hamze, head of Lebanon's Association of Fuel Importers.
Prime Minister Fouad Siniora hosted a lunch for Douste-Blazy and his counterparts from Turkey, Malaysia and Pakistan, some of which may also contribute troops to UNIFIL.
Germany could contribute to the force but will not decide whether to participate until the exact nature of the operation is known, a government spokesman said in Berlin.
Indonesia is ready to send 1,000 troops as part of the U.N. force for Lebanon, officials in Jakarta said.
At least 1,110 people in Lebanon and 157 Israelis were killed in the conflict that erupted after Hizbollah captured two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid on July 12.
In Tyre, hospital workers struggled to deal with an overflowing morgue, as more bodies were found in the ruins of buildings and other corpses remained unclaimed.
A temporary mass grave was dug in the city for more than 100 unclaimed bodies, but the burial was postponed.
"There are names which are not clear," said Dr Moustafa Jradeh. "There are people who want to bury them in their villages. If we bury them here it will cause a lot of problems."
The hospital had been planning a mass burial of 126 bodies in a grave near an army barracks unless relatives claimed them. Seventy-two corpses were buried there on July 21.
Israel may have ended its Lebanon offensive, but it continues to attack Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip, where an air strike killed one militant and his father on Wednesday, witnesses and medics said.
(Additional reporting by Jerusalem and United Nations bureaus)
Comment on this Article
What happened during the last battle? Israeli Troops Killed by "Friendly Fire"?
By ANSHEL PFEFFER
15 Aug 06
During the last few hours of daylight on Sunday, the last day of fighting in Lebanon, a reserve paratroop battalion took up positions in Kantara.
The battalion's medical company set up its equipment on the ground floor of one of the houses. The company, commanded by the battalion's doctor, was comprised of about 20 soldiers, half of them medics and the other half the evacuation platoon, whose job it is to stretcher out the wounded and dead. Two other platoons from the support company occupied the second floor.
The battalion had seen its first action on Friday, when two of its soldiers were badly wounded. It was taken out for a short rest of 10 hours on Shabbat and went back in again that night. According to the procedure designed not to expose the troops to anti-tank missile fire, they went in on foot, the medics carrying 40-kilo loads on a 15-km. night march to the advanced position in Kantara.
They were not short of work. A short while after they had taken up their position, an anti-tank missile hit a D9 bulldozer operating near the building. Its heavy armor didn't stand up and its two-man team was immediately killed. Soldiers of the medical company rushed to the D9, despite the heavy fire, but were unable to extricate the bodies of St.-Sgt. Yevgeny Timofeyev, 20, and another soldier whose name hasn't yet been released.
"We had to restrain our doctor from rushing out to the D9," one of the medics said on Monday. "It's not his job to evacuate and we have to protect him. If something happens to him, we're lost."
The soldiers returned to the building, and at about 4:30 p.m., an explosion hit the building, and then two others. The team whose job it was to tend to the battalion's wounded suddenly had to treat itself.
"It was an awful feeling," he said. "We didn't know even where to shoot back. Suddenly the radio was full of shouting, 'Don't shoot, it's our own forces.'"
Two soldiers were killed and nine others wounded in the explosions. Warr. Ofc. Amitai Yaron, 44, of Zichron Ya'acov was the registry-medic of the company. A father of three, Yuri, as the other soldiers called him, was the oldest medic in the battalion. He was already exempt from reserve duty but had volunteered. St.-Sgt. Peter Ohatosky, 24, from the evacuation platoon, was also killed.
"One of our company commanders told us that it was one of our tanks which had fired at us," said the medic.
Reporters who had spoken with the division command had been told that it was probably a case of "friendly fire" from IDF tanks. But on Monday morning, Deputy Chief of General Staff Maj.-Gen. Moshe Kaplinsky said that it had been a Hizbullah anti-tank missile, and the IDF Spokesman's Office told the press that battle debriefings had determined that it was not friendly fire.
The soldiers of the medical company were angry at what they saw as a whitewashing of the circumstances of their comrades' deaths.
Attempts by The Jerusalem Post to obtain a more comprehensive account of the battle from the IDF were unsuccessful.
IDF experts have said in the past that during wars, up to 20 percent of casualties are caused by friendly fire. In this war, there has been at least one confirmed death of a soldier from friendly fire and at least a dozen wounded. A number of other cases are still under investigation.
The deputy commander of the Herev Battalion told the Post on Monday that in at least two cases, his soldiers narrowly escaped mistaken fire from IDF tanks.
Comment on this Article
Israel's Other Aggressions
Assad defends the resistance to Israel
by Roueida Mabardi
AFP
Tue Aug 15, 2006
DAMASCUS - Syrian President Bashar al-Assad hailed Hezbollah in its fight against Israel, describing resistance against the "enemy" as legitimate even as Israel said it should prepare for talks.
"I say to all those who accuse Syria of taking the side of the resistance that this is, for the Syrian people, an honor," he said in a wide-ranging speech that also took aim at Washington and anti-Damascus figures in Lebanon.
Assad, whose government the United States accuses of sponsoring Hezbollah, paid tribute to the "men of the resistance" in a reference to the Shiite guerrillas who fought Israeli soldiers on the ground in Lebanon and fired daily barrages of rocket fire over the border during the conflict.
"This resistance is a medal to pin on the chest of every Arab citizen, not only Syria," he said, adding that the Lebanese guerrillas had "shattered the myth of an invincible army."
A total of 160 Israelis have been killed since July 12, most of them soldiers who lost their lives in combat with Hezbollah.
Assad's speech led German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier to cancel a planned visit to Syria, saying his words were "a negative contribution which did no justice to the current challenges and opportunities in the Middle East."
However, a Syrian foreign ministry source told AFP the cancellation was due to "a difference in interpretation" on UN Security Council Resolution 1701 that ended hostilities but also calls for Hezbollah to be disarmed.
The source did not elaborate.
In the hard-hitting address at the opening of a journalists' conference in Damascus, punctuated by cheers and chanting from the audience, Assad accused the Jewish state of not wanting peace.
He said there was now a "new Middle East" after Israel's month-long war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, which he described as a "planned aggression" by the Jewish state.
Assad accused Israel of using the capture of two soldiers in a Hezbollah raid on July 12 as a pretext for launching its massive assault against Lebanon, which came to a halt after a UN-brokered ceasefire took hold on Monday.
"Peace would involve Israel returning occupied lands to their owners and restoring their rights," he said. "Israel is an enemy founded on the basis of aggression and hegemony."
"The peace process has failed. It has failed since its inception."
"We do not expect peace in the near future," Assad said, adding that in the absence of negotiations resistance against the Jewish state was legitimate.
But Israeli Defence Minister Amir Peretz said his country should prepare for talks with Syria, saying military action created political opportunities.
"Every war creates opportunities for a broadened political process ... We must establish talks with Lebanon and prepare the conditions for a dialogue with Syria," Peretz said.
Besides Hezbollah, the main sticking point between Syria and Israel are the Golan Heights, invaded and occupied by Israel in 1967. Talks on the territory, which has been all-but annexed by Israel, broke off in 2000.
During talks in 2000, then Israeli premier
Ehud Barak agreed to an almost total withdrawal from the Golan Heights, save for a narrow strip of land bordering the eastern bank of the Sea of Galilee.
But Damascus rejected the proposal, wanting the return of all of the plateau. Subsequent attempts by Syria to restart the talks have been rebuffed by Israel.
Tuesday's was Assad's first major public speech since the start of the war in Lebanon, where Syria held political and military sway for years until it pulled out its troops in April 2005 undr massive pressure following the murder of former Lebanese premier Rafiq Hariri.
Assad also lashed out at US policies in the region, accusing
President George W. Bush of adopting "the principle of preventative war, which is in complete contradiction to the principle of peace."
Comment on this Article
Robert Fisk: In the face of Bush's lies, it's left to Assad to tell the truth
Robert Fisk
The Independent
16 August 2006
In the sparse Baathist drawing rooms of Damascus, reality often seems a long way away. But it was a sign of the times that President Bashar al-Assad was able to bring the great and the good of Damascus to their feet by the simple token of telling the truth - which no other Arab leader has chosen to do these past five weeks: that the Lebanese Hizbollah guerrilla army has, in effect, won this round of their war with Israel.
There was plenty of hyperbole in the Assad speech. A conflict that has cost 1,000 Lebanese civilian lives can hardly be called a "glorious battle" but he did at least reflect more reality than his opposite number in Washington who, driven by self-delusion or his love of Israel, claimed that Hizbollah had been defeated in Lebanon.
Israel's "victory" in Lebanon presumably has to be added to our own famous "victories" in Iraq and Afghanistan. Syria and Iran, according to Mr Bush, were responsible for the "suffering" of Lebanon - which contains the seeds of truth since Hizbollah provoked this war by capturing two Israeli soldiers and killing three others on 12 July - although it wasn't the Syrian or Iranian air force that was slaughtering the convoys of innocent refugee civilians in Lebanon. So it was that President Assad must have enjoyed his little peroration in Damascus yesterday.
"This is a [American] administration that adopts the principle of pre-emptive war that is absolutely contradictory to the principle of peace," he said. "Consequently, we don't accept peace soon or in the foreseeable future."
Mr Assad can say that again. Indeed, there is no more sign that Hizbollah intends to "disarm" under the terms of UN Security Council resolutions 1559 and 1701 than Israel is prepared to abide by UN Security Council Resolution 242 and withdraw from Arab territories it occupied in 1967.
However, it is clear that President Assad now sees himself back at the centre of Arab power after his army's humiliating retreat from Lebanon last year. There was no more need for defeatism among Arabs, he said - a sentiment widely held in the real Arab world but quite absent from President Bush's fantasy Middle East.
That it should be Syria, of all nations, which can state this to so much applause probably says more about Washington than it does about Damascus. And it is, of course, the return of the Israeli-occupied Syrian Golan Heights - see UN Resolution 242 - that lies behind this whole disastrous war.
The truth is Israel opened its attack on Lebanon by claiming the Lebanese government was responsible for Hizbollah's attack - which it clearly was not - and that its military actions would achieve the liberation of the captured soldiers.
This, the Israelis have signally failed to do. The loss of 40 soldiers in just 36 hours and the successful Hizbollah attacks against Israeli armour in Lebanon were a disaster for the Israeli army.
The fact that Syria could bellow about the "achievements" of Hizbollah while avoiding the destruction of a blade of grass inside Syria suggests a cynicism that has yet to be grasped inside the Arab world. But for now, Syria has won.
Iran, as Hizbollah's principal supporter, clearly thinks so too. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who usually talks far more than he thinks, condemned the US for supplying Israel with the weapons it used on Lebanese civilians - perfectly true. But he did not say Hizbollah's missiles come from a new-generation Iranian arsenal that did not even exist during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. While the US will be keen to assess the effectiveness of its weapons - albeit largely used on civilians - no one should doubt that Iran will also be assessing the success of its new Fajr missiles - and their effect on the Israeli army.
Comment on this Article
Syria warns Israel over Golan
From correspondents in Damascus
August 16, 2006
SYRIA has warned Israel that the occupation of the Golan Heights "cannot last forever" and said Syrians will emulate Hizbollah to recover their land.
"We say to the forces occupying our land that our people warn you that they will not allow our land to be occupied forever," the government's daily Ath-Thawra said.
"You must understand that our people will fight the way the Lebanese resistance (Hizbollah) fought you," it added.
"Our people will fight you ... on every inch of the Golan," it said.
However, the newspaper urged decision-makers in Israel "to open up to new perspectives", noting that some in the Jewish state were in favour of making peace with Syria.
"The leaders of this expansionist entity have a choice: either they heed the voice of reason that prohibits them from violating other people's rights or they will face action similar to that carried out by the Lebanese resistance."
Syria has repeatedly demanded the return of the Golan Heights which Israel conquered in the June 1967 Arab-Israeli war and annexed in 1981.
Peace negotiations between the two neighbours broke off in January 2000 amid disagreement over the strategic heights, which overlooks Israel's northern Galilee region and command approaches to the Syrian capital, Damascus.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad gave a hard-hitting speech to the Syrian parliament on Tuesday describing Israel as the "enemy" and stressing that he did not expect peace any time soon with his arch-rival.
"Peace would involve Israel returning occupied lands to their owners and restoring their rights," President Assad said. "Israel is an enemy founded on the basis of aggression and hegemony."
Comment on this Article
Hamas: Mossad assassination bid fails
Wednesday 16 August 2006, 12:46 Makka Time, 9:46 GMT
Israeli intelligence services planned to assassinate Khalid Mishaal, the head of the political wing of Hamas, last month sources in the group say.
Israel's intelligence and special operations force, Mossad, sent a team to the Syrian capital in July to carry out the killing, Hamas sources said on Wednesday quoting "Western intelligence sources".
Khalid Mishaal is living in exile in Damascus.
Mossad agents allegedly posed as volunteers for relief organisations visiting Syria to help refugees from the war in Lebanon, the sources added.
Aljazeera has learnt that Mishaal has stepped up his personal security since the plot.
Shimon Peres, the Israeli vice-prime minister, has accused the exiled Hamas leader of ordering the raid during which an Israeli army reservist was captured.
The capture of Gilad Shalit on June 25 lead to Israeli forces moving back into the Gaza Strip.
Travel restrictions
Mishaal cannot visit Gaza or the West Bank but he is also not subject to Israel's travel restrictions on Hamas members and has played an important role in representing the government at meetings with foreign governments.
In 1997, Mishaal survived a botched assassination attempt while he was living in Jordan. Mossad agents disguised as Canadians injected poison into his ear in the street, but two of the agents were caught.
King Hussein of Jordan demanded the antidote to the poison in exchange for the return of the Israeli agents.
Mishaal became the leader of Hamas after Israel killed the group's founder, Sheikh Ahmad Yasin, in March 2004.
Comment on this Article
Two killed in Gaza airstrike
Wednesday 16 August 2006, 3:36 Makka Time, 0:36 GMT
Two people have been killed and at least ten wounded in an Israeli airstrike on a house in Gaza early on Wednesday.
The strike blew up a house in the southern Gaza city of Khan Younis.
The attack completely destroyed the two-storey house, killing two men who were inside and wounding at least ten, some in the house and some from neighbouring homes damaged by the explosion, medics said.
Residents identified the dead as a member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, and his father, who they said was not a member of the group.
The Israeli army said that the house was used to store weapons and that the residents were warned to leave before the attack.
Late on Tuesday, Israeli soldiers fired at two Palestinian men, believed to be members of the Al-Qods Brigades - the armed branch of the Islamic Jihad movement - but it was not immediately known if the men were dead or wounded, Palestinian security officials said.
An Israeli military official said that soldiers had fired after seeing two men crawling towards the barrier which separates Israel and the Gaza strip at the Kissufim border crossing.
At least 177 Palestinians and one Israeli soldier have been killed since June 28, when Israel launched operations to rescue a soldier captured three days earlier.
Comment on this Article
Abbas, Haneya meet in Gaza amid demands to form coalition cabinet
www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-15 21:24:42
GAZA, Aug. 15 (Xinhua) -- Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Ismail Haneya held talks in Gaza City on Tuesday amid mounting Palestinian demands to form a new coalition government.
The two leaders refused to speak to reporters after the three-hour-long closed-door meeting ended.
Nabil Abu Rudaina, the spokesman for Abbas, told reporters that Abbas briefed Haneya about his recent regional Arab tour, adding that the two leaders discussed the situation in the Palestinian territories and a number of internal issues.
They also talked about the situation in Lebanon after Israel and Lebanon both approved a ceasefire called by the UN Security Council, the spokesman said.
Earlier in the day, the spokesman for the Hamas-led government Ghazi Hamad said that "many issues, including the complicated situation in Palestine and the security, political and economic problems" would be handled in the meeting.
Hamad asserted that the "outstanding problems" between the government and Abbas as well as the issue of forming a national-unity government would be present at the meeting.
Comment on this Article
Israeli military chief draws fire for selling shares after soldiers' kidnap
By Donald Macintyre in Metulla, Israel
16 August 2006
The chief of staff of Israel's military was under pressure yesterday after a disclosure that he sold about £14,500 of stocks within three hours of the Hizbollah border raid that triggered the Lebanon conflict.
Dan Halutz, head of the Israel Defence Force (IDF), was reported by the Israeli newspaper, Maariv, to have instructed his investment manager on 12 July to sell his personal portfolio, just as senior military and political figures were discussing the military response to the raid, in which two soldiers were abducted.
There is no suggestion General Halutz did anything illegal and the newspaper quoted him responding to what he called the "malicious and tendentious" report that the sale could not be linked to the war. He said he had made the decision because of previous losses and added: "At the time I did not expect or think that there would be a war."
But the report added a new element to an already mounting post-war debate in the wake of the admission by Ehud Olmert, Israel's Prime Minister, that there had been "deficiencies" in the management of the war. General Halutz, the former commander of the air force, had been criticised earlier in the campaign for relying too heavily on aerial bombardment in Lebanon.
Collette Avital, a Labour member of the Knesset, told the Ynet news service: "There is a serious problem here in his priorities when the security of Israel hangs in the balance... The country burnt and all that interested him was his investment portfolio."
The IDF said: "The chief of staff works day and night to protect the lives of the citizens of the State of Israel and the soldiers of the IDF and any attempt to connect his private matters to the event of the kidnapped soldiers is absurd."
The row came as General Halutz told Army Radio that the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon would take about a week to 10 days to complete. An estimated 2,000 soldiers were withdrawn yesterday, though Israeli troops shot dead five Hizbollah guerrillas said to have advanced against them.
As soldiers and civilians in the Galilee panhandle which juts into southern Lebanon continued to acknowledge Israel had not won a clear victory against Hizbollah, in Kyriat Shmona, shops opened and buses began returning with residents who had fled south to escape Katyusha rockets.
The Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, told a meeting of activists in the dominant Kadima party that the international community had a responsibility to implement the UN Security Council decision aimed at keeping armed Hizbollah groups out of southern Lebanon.
Alison Touval, 49, originally from Southgate, north London, who has been a resident in a local kibbutz for the past 18 years, said there were a lot of unanswered questions. She said she hoped the peace would last 10 years until her sons had been through the army but she added: "It's not clear how the peace agreement will work and whether it's a peace."
Marat, 29, a Russian-born Israeli signalman returning from the border, said: "I don't think it was a victory. It seems that Hizbollah was left with the upper hand."
Unicef said relief workers were hastening to follow a stream of about 6,000 Lebanese refugees returning home. In the border village of Kila, the first signs of life could be seen as a few cars drove through the seemingly deserted streets and at least half a dozen yellow flags of the sort flown by Hizbollah fluttered above buildings.
Sam Echadif, the manager of a supermarket in Metulla, said he hoped "next time" the army would prepare a full-scale war to clear Hizbollah out of southern Lebanon completely. "No matter what the politicians say, we have lost," he said.
Comment on this Article
Record immigration to Israel in spite of crisis
Ynetnews
August 15, 2006
Almost 550 new immigrants to arrive on Wednesday morning, August 16th on three special Jewish Agency / Nefesh B'Nefesh El-Al Flights which will land simultaneously from New York, Toronto and London.
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Jewish Agency Chairman Zeev Bielski will greet the new arrivals.
Over 4,000 new immigrants from all over the world will have arrived in Israel from the beginning of July until the end of August.
According to Jewish Agency estimates, 24,000 people from countries around the world will immigrate to Israel in the course of the year 2006, up from the 22,657 people who made aliyah in 2005.
During the summer months, six EL AL flights will land in Israel carrying 1,500 new immigrants from North America. By the end of the year, it is estimated that there will be a total of 3,400 new immigrants from North America (U.S.A. and Canada), up from 2,987 in 2005.
Record number of European immigrants
In parallel, two special ISRAIR flights - from Paris and Marseille - landed in Israel on July 25 bringing 650 new immigrants from France. This is the first time in decades that such a large number of new immigrants from France have landed in one day.
The expectation is that there will be 3,500 new immigrants from France this year, as opposed to 3005 in 2005.
For the first time, there will be a special EL AL flight this summer from Great Britain bringing 150 new immigrants. Since the beginning of the year, there has been a marked rise in immigration from Great Britain.
By the end of July, the number of new immigrants from Britain was 328, up from 215 over the same period last year. By the end of the year 2006, 500 new immigrants are expected to have arrived from Britain.
Comment on this Article
Phony Terror Threat of the Week
Blair's Folly: New offences, created for the same old reasons
Editorial
The Independent
16 August 2006
It is astonishing how many of these new laws and regulations relate to trivial or bizarre matters. For instance, how many of us are aware that it is now illegal to import Polish potatoes? Or that it is an offence for a ship's captain to be carrying grain unless he has a copy of the International Grain Code on board? Selling grey squirrels has been banned by this Government, as has the impersonation of a traffic warden. One wonders how widespread such practices were to demand the creation of their very own offence category. Was it really necessary, for instance, to create a specific crime of "creating a nuclear explosion"?
This newspaper has long been a critic of New Labour's habit of coming up with new legislation at the drop of a hat. But only now is the true scale of the Government's frenzied lawmaking over the past nine years becoming clear. The Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Nick Clegg has discovered that more than 3,000 new offences have been created since 1997. That works out at a new offence for almost every day Labour has been in power. Such legislative productivity is quite unprecedented. Offences are being created at twice the rate seen under the two previous Tory administrations.
It is astonishing how many of these new laws and regulations relate to trivial or bizarre matters. For instance, how many of us are aware that it is now illegal to import Polish potatoes? Or that it is an offence for a ship's captain to be carrying grain unless he has a copy of the International Grain Code on board? Selling grey squirrels has been banned by this Government, as has the impersonation of a traffic warden. One wonders how widespread such practices were to demand the creation of their very own offence category. Was it really necessary, for instance, to create a specific crime of "creating a nuclear explosion"?
Yet the malignancy of this trend lies less in the nature of any individual offences created than the ethos of government this groaning pile of legislation represents. More often than not, a new piece of legislation from this Government reflects a desire by ministers to be seen to be doing something, rather than a concerted attempt to get to grips with a given problem. The instinct comes from the very top. A private memo from the Prime Minister to his inner circle that came to light six years ago gives us a startling insight into what Mr Blair regards as the true function of government. Fearing that he was being seen as "out of touch" by the public, the Prime Minister wrote of the urgent need for his ministers to come up with some "eye-catching initiatives". He also stressed that "I should be personally associated with as much of this as possible." This sums up perfectly the ethos of New Labour. At every turn a greater emphasis has been placed on appearance than on the actual business of government. This explains why we have been subjected to so much pointless, knee-jerk legislation over the years.
All these questionable new laws are having an adverse effect on our society. This is especially true of those dealing with criminal justice. The Home Office has been one of the worst offenders in terms of rushing through new laws. Yet few of these have actually made us substantially safer. The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies warned last week that the tougher penalties that have been introduced by the Government for carrying knives are, if anything, liable to exacerbate the problem of knife crime. The think tank argues that ministers should be conducting proper research into why more young people are using knives, rather than pandering to the moral panic whipped up by the right-wing media. The same criticism could be made of almost all of the 60 Bills and 430 offences introduced by the Home Office since 1997.
One of the greatest failings of New Labour in power has been its willingness to push through ill-thought through and badly drafted legislation for the sake of a few favourable headlines in the populist press. Ministers - and in particular the Prime Minister - seem to have convinced themselves that it is somehow a sign of strength to be constantly issuing new legislation. In fact, what it shows is weakness. And this heap of unnecessary and often damaging new laws will be a sorry legacy indeed of Mr Blair's years in power.
Comment on this Article
Blair's 'frenzied law making': a new offence for every day spent in office
By Nigel Morris, Home Affairs Correspondent
16 August 2006
Tony Blair's government has created more than 3,000 new criminal offences during its nine-year tenure, one for almost every day it has been in power.
The astonishing tally brought accusations last night of a "frenzied approach to law-making" that contrasts with falling detection rates and climbing levels of violent crime.
The figures emerged as police chiefs disclosed they were considering asking ministers for a set of new measures to allow them to impose "instant justice" for antisocial behaviour.
The 3,000-plus offences have been driven on to the statute book by an administration that has faced repeated charges of meddling in the everyday lives of citizens, from restricting freedom of speech to planning to issue identity cards to all adults.
In total, the Government has brought in 3,023 offences since May 1997. They comprise 1,169 introduced by primary legislation - debated in Parliament - and 1,854 by secondary legislation such as statutory instruments and orders in council.
Remarkably, Labour is creating offences at twice the rate of the previous Tory administration. During its last nine years in office, under Margaret Thatcher and John Major, fewer than 500 new crimes reached the statute book via primary legislation.
And the rate at which offences are being created is accelerating the longer that Tony Blair remains in Downing Street. In 1998, Labour's first full year in power, 160 new offences passed into legislation, rising to 346 in 2000 and 527 in 2005.
Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, who uncovered the figures, said: "Nothing can justify the step change in the number of criminal offences invented by this Government. This provides a devastating insight into the real legacy of nine years of New Labour government - a frenzied approach to law-making, thousands of new offences, an illiberal belief in heavy-handed regulation, an obsession with controlling the minutiae of everyday life.
"The result? A country less free than before, and a marked erosion of the trust which should exist between the Government and the governed."
He said ministers had failed to grasp the simple truth that "weighing down the statute book" with new laws was "no substitute for good government".
Many offences are uncontroversial and will have widespread support, such as tougher penalties for selling contaminated food or against violent crime. But the Government has still managed to produce a surreal list of new offences.
It is now illegal to sell grey squirrels, impersonate a traffic warden or offer Air Traffic Control services without a licence. Creating a nuclear explosion was outlawed in 1998.
Householders who fail to nominate a neighbour to turn off their alarm while they are away from home can be breaking the law. And it is an offence for a ship's captain to be carrying grain unless he has a copy of the International Grain Code on board.
The Home Office, which has produced 60 Bills over a hyperactive nine-year period, is responsible for 430 of the new offences.
The flood of Bills compares with one criminal justice Bill per decade for much of the 20th century and has brought pleas for a period of calm from the department.
Terry Grange, Chief Constable of Dyfed-Powys, has accused the past two home secretaries, Charles Clarke and John Reid, of making policies "on the hoof" in response to media pressure over serious crime problems, foreign offenders and the immigration service.
Lord Ramsbotham, the former chief inspector of prisons, has urged Tony Blair to "shut up" for the sake of stability in the criminal system.
Almost every other part of Whitehall has also found things to outlaw. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has brought in 640 new offences, the vast majority through secondary legislation. The Department for Trade and Industry has produced another 592, and the Foreign Office and the Office for the Deputy Prime Minister 277 each.
Each addition swells the enormous number of offences already on the statute book, some dating back to medieval times. Even the Attorney General's office said it had no idea how many existed. A spokeswoman said: "There are thousands and thousands."
Downing Street argued last night that much of the legislation it had inherited needed to be updated. A spokesman said: "Crime has fallen by 35 per cent since Labour came to power precisely because we have given the police and criminal justice system the modern laws they have asked for to tackle crime effectively.
"Among the offences we've modernised are new laws to tackle sex offences, domestic violence, antisocial behaviour and knife and gun crime. Are the Liberal Democrats saying these were a mistake?"
Mr Blair has made clear that he favours an extension of summary justice, and fresh proposals are expected in the autumn.
The Association of Chief Police Officers disclosed yesterday that it was considering asking ministers for powers of instant justice, including the authority to exclude unruly youngsters from town centres and to break up teenage gangs.
Condemning the idea, David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said: "We cannot bypass the court system. It is up to the justice system to scrutinise and take judicial decisions, not the police."
Shami Chakrabarti, the director of human rights group Liberty, said the figures demonstrated that politicians were becoming "addicted to law making". She said: "The next time the cry goes up to legislate our way out of a crisis, a deep breath from the Home Office might just be more inspiring than further statutory graffiti."
Enver Solomon, deputy director of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London, said: "It has become a New Labour trademark to criminalise a range of social harms which would be more effectively dealt with away from the clutches of the criminal justice agencies."
Twenty activities outlawed by Labour
Nuclear Explosions (Prohibition and Inspections) Act 1998
Causing a nuclear explosion.
Scallop Fishing Order 2004
If a boat breaches the restrictions in articles 3, 4 or 5, the master, owner and charterer are each guilty of an offence.
Measuring Instruments (Automatic Rail-weighbridges) Regulations 2006
A person shall be guilty of an offence if he uses for trade an automatic rail-weighbridge to which there is affixed a disqualification sticker.
Scotland Act 1998 (Border Rivers) Order 1999
Unauthorised fishing in the Lower Esk.
Apple and Pear Orchard Grubbing Up Regulations 1998
Any person who (a) intentionally obstructs an authorised person in the exercise of the powers conferred on him by regulation 10 above, or a person accompanying him and acting under his instructions or (b) without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with a requirement under regulation 10 above, shall be guilty of an offence.
Protection of Wrecks (RMS Titanic) Order 2003
A person shall not enter the hull of the Titanic without permission from the Secretary of State.
Merchant Shipping (Crew Accommodation) Regulations 1997
Failure to provide adequate facilities for crew members.
Transport Act 2003
A person commits an offence if he provides air traffic services in respect of a managed area.
Polish Potatoes (Notification) (England) Order 2004
No person shall, in the course of business, import into England potatoes which he knows to be or has reasonable cause to suspect to be Polish potatoes.
Learning and Skills Act 2000
Obstructing an inspection by the Adult Learning Inspectorate.
Care Standards Act 2000
Obstructing the work of the Children's Commissioner for Wales.
Vehicles (Crime) Act 2001
Knowingly etc selling plates which are not vehicle registration plates.
London Underground (East London Line Extension) (No 2) Order 2001
Any person who, without reasonable excuse, obstructs any person acting under the authority of the Company in setting out the lines of the scheduled works, or in constructing any authorised work or who interferes with, moves or removes any apparatus belonging to any such person shall be guilty of an offence.
Courts Act 2003
Assaulting and obstructing court security officers.
Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005
Part seven of the Act created offences of failing to nominate a key-holder where an audible intruder alarm is present.
Merchant Shipping (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2002
If any officer appointed in accordance with regulation 30(1) reports to the master or other officer in charge of the bridge a door to be closed and locked when it is not in fact closed and locked he shall be guilty of an offence.
Bus Lane Contraventions (Penalty Charges, Adjudication and Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2005
Failing without reasonable excuse to attend a hearing held by an adjudicator, or to produce any document to an adjudicator.
Vehicle Excise Duty (Immobilisation, Removal and Disposal of Vehicles) Regulations 1997
Failure to rigorously separate the accounts of ground-handling activities from the accounts of other activities in accordance with current commercial practice.
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006
In relation to certain invasive non-native species such as the grey squirrel, ruddy duck or Japanese knotweed, selling any animal or plant, or eggs or seeds.
Comment on this Article
Al-Qaida No.3 behind major UK air terror plot
www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-16 12:25:11
ISLAMABAD, Aug. 16 (Xinhua) -- "Al-Qaida's No. 3" was the mastermind behind the plot to blow up transatlantic flights, local newspaper Dawn Wednesday quoted an intelligence source as saying.
"It is not Osama bin Laden and it's not Aiman Al Zawahiri, but someone close to the rank of Abu Faraj Al-Libbi," the source said.
It is an al-Qaida connection, the source said with anonymity.
"It is the top hierarchy," he said.
Abu Faraj Al-Libbi, a third-tier al-Qaida operative, was believed involved in an attempt to assassinate President Gen Pervez Musharraf and was arrested from Mardan in May 2005.
The intelligence source said the plot to blow up U.S.-bound planes was similar in pattern to the one hatched to kill President Musharraf.
"There was a mastermind, there was a planner and there were the executioners," he said.
The source said that al-Qaida's link to the London airline bombing plot was established.
Stressing the importance of key person Rashid Rauf's arrest, the source said that without his capture the plot would not have been foiled.
He acknowledged that there had been some hype about the bombing plots but said the plotters were in the planning stage and were procuring chemicals and equipment. They were not in the execution stage, he said.
The source said that Rauf had gone to the United Kingdom in 1981 when he was less than one year old. He returned to Pakistan in 2002 and had since been living here.
He had been living in Pakistan, the source clarified but declined to say when and where he had been arrested.
The source said that Pakistan was withholding the information due to British legal sensitivities and that a team of their legal experts was in Pakistan to discuss the case.
He said that Pakistani security agencies had arrested six to seven suspects, including Rashid Rauf.
This is an ongoing operation and there could be more arrests, he said. "Certainly, there will be more arrests as the investigation proceeds," he said.
The source agreed that some of the London plotters might have come to Pakistan but said that Islamabad was awaiting information, including antecedents and passport details of the plotters to ascertain facts.
Comment: Libbi, known to his friend's as "Scooter" for his ability to move quickly from cave to cave in the cellars of Britain MI5 headquarters, was unavailable for comment.
Comment on this Article
UK: Cameron accused of playing politics with terrorist threat
By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor
16 August 2006
David Cameron was accused by ministers of "playing politics with the terrorist threat" after criticising the Government for failing to do enough to protect the public from home-grown Islamic extremists.
The Tory leader abandoned the cross-party consensus that had existed after John Reid, the Home Secretary, revealed last week the foiled terror plot to blow up transatlantic airliners. Mr Cameron, who has just returned from holiday, attacked ministers for a series of security failures and accused Mr Reid of grabbing headlines while failing to take tougher action with Muslim extremists. He insisted that the Conservatives wanted to work with ministers but said: "I do not believe the Government is doing enough to fight Islamist extremism."
He also questioned why so few "preachers of hate" had been prosecuted or expelled. Existing laws had not been used to deal with the radicalisation "that is rife within our shores," he said. And he accused the Government of funding conferences addressed by Yusuf Qaradawi, a preacher who he claimed had said: "We must plant the love of death in the Islamic nation."
He also protested that little was done to minimise the impact of imams "who come to Britain and preach, often with little knowledge or appreciation of British values".
Mr Cameron said: "A year ago, we were promised tough and concerted action to deal with the community crisis in our midst, but precious little has actually been done."
In a clear signal that he intends to target Gordon Brown, the Tory leader accused the Chancellor of sabotaging the anti-terror campaign by freezing the Home Office budget for three years.
John Prescott called Mr Cameron's remarks "almost beyond belief".
The Deputy Prime Minister said: "At a time when we should all stand united in the face of alleged terrorist threats, he seeks to undermine that unity."
A Labour Party spokes-man said: "David Cameron may be desperate to play politics with the terrorist threat, but his facts are as wrong as his judgement."
Mr Prescott hinted yesterday that some of the 22 suspects arrested last week will be released without charge, but others will face, "very serious" charges.
The Deputy Prime Minister made his comments after a private meeting in his office with the four Muslim Labour MPs and two other MPs who represent constituencies where last week's arrests were made.
The Tory leader also called for telephone tapping evidence against terror suspects to be made admissible in courts. And he made clear that the Tories would not drop their opposition to the extension of detention of suspected terrorists from 28 days to 90 days.
The strength of Mr Cameron's attack may be linked to criticism by grassroots Tory supporters that he was "too nice" to the Government. Responding to a Tory document, called Built to Last, one party member said: "Opportunity after opportunity has been there for attack on the policies of this dreadful Government but Cameron is silent. We are being too silent, too nice to those in power and seemingly afraid to show our arm."
Tories also complained about the failure to offer explicit tax cuts.
Comment on this Article
What a Racket! British Airways says 10,000 bags are missing
By Geneviève Roberts
16 August 2006
Around 10,000 bags checked in by British Airways passengers have gone astray during the travel disruption over the last week, the airline said.
A BA spokesman said the problem affected people returning to the UK as well as those flying overseas.
Yesterday, airlines renewed their attack on the airport operator BAA after the Government eased anti-terror procedures at airports.
The carriers had already expressed their unhappiness with BAA's instruction for Heathrow airlines to cut flights to ease congestion. Today, 46 flights BA flights from Heathrow and Gatwick are cancelled.
Yesterday, when the Government said small bags would be allowed to be taken on flights again, BAA said the hand baggage ban would stay in place at Heathrow airport until 4.30am today.
Comment on this Article
BAA is accused of 'paralysing' Stansted with "nonsensical" extra security measures in wake of terror plot
By Gary Parkinson, City Editor
16 August 2006
BAA's response to the alleged terrorist plot aimed at downing transatlantic flights drew a fresh barrage of criticism yesterday from one of the airlines that uses its airports.
The no-frills carrier Ryanair accused the country's largest airports operator of "paralysing" Stansted by failing to provide sufficient staff to administer "nonsensical" extra security measures.
Meanwhile, British Airways continued to consider whether to seek recompense from BAA for the hundreds of flights that it has been forced to cancel from Heathrow.
As passengers braved a sixth day of delays and cancellations, Ryanair attacked BAA, now owned by the Spanish construction group Ferrovial, for compounding disruption.
The airline claimed on its website that by 4am, BAA Stansted had opened just four of the 14 security points at the airport and by 5am, an hour before the first wave of scheduled departures, only half of the security points were open.
Ryanair said: "As a result of BAA's chronic inability to staff their Stansted security facilities, combined with nonsensical hand baggage restrictions, security queues are now stretching dramatically through the Stansted terminal, paralysing the operation there."
The Dublin-based airline, led by its chief executive Michael O'Leary, called on the Government to bring in the Army or police to support BAA staff while heightened security checks remain in place.
In response, BAA said it had deployed extra staff. "There can be no short cuts in security and if this means that there is continued disruption we apologise to all our customers," a spokesman for the airports operator said.
Some eight of the 267 departures scheduled from Stansted yesterday were cancelled. Those that flew were delayed by up to an hour.
At Heathrow, BA cancelled 41 flights, 18 per cent of those scheduled. An improvement is expected today, with three long-haul and 32 European and domestic flights cancelled. BA hopes to restore a normal service by the end of the week.
There was no news of likely disruptions at Stansted today but BAA urged passengers to arrive three hours before scheduled departure.
Passengers can carry on one item of cabin luggage, equivalent in size to a small laptop bag or rucksack, and no larger than 45cm x 35cm x 16cm. Cosmetics and toiletries, liquids and sharp objects are prohibited. Passengers not travelling to the US can buy drinks after passing through airport security checks.
With the crisis tipped to cost airlines about £50m, shares in the sector have fallen sharply. Yesterday, BA shares edged 1p lower to 376p while Ryanair rallied 6 cents to €7.19.
But hotels around airports are reporting a jump in room occupancy and rates since Thursday, according to the consultant Deloitte.
Comment on this Article
Probably True: Suspect held by police is innocent, claims brother
By Jason Bennetto, Crime Correspondent
16 August 2006
Amjad Sarwar said his brother had no link to terrorism. "They've got it all wrong," he told Channel 4 News. "He is an innocent guy. He's been helping the youth out considerably in the area. He condemns terrorism." He said his brother had become more religious recently and dropped out of university, attending Tablighi Jamaat weekend study groups. " He was at Tablighi Jamaat, which is a sect in Islam that encourages the youth to grow beards and pray five times a day," Mr Sarwar said.
The brother of Assad Sarwar, one of the suspects arrested on suspicion of plotting to blow up transatlantic airlines, said Mr Sarwar had attended study groups run by an Islamic sect linked to terrorism by western intelligence.
But Amjad Sarwar said his brother had no link to terrorism. "They've got it all wrong," he told Channel 4 News. "He is an innocent guy. He's been helping the youth out considerably in the area. He condemns terrorism." He said his brother had become more religious recently and dropped out of university, attending Tablighi Jamaat weekend study groups. " He was at Tablighi Jamaat, which is a sect in Islam that encourages the youth to grow beards and pray five times a day," Mr Sarwar said.
He also handed out leaflets outside his mosque, but they were only urging people to "propagate" Islam, according to Mr Sarwar, who said his brother wanted to "get married, and get himself a decent job".
A new suspect was arrested yesterday as part of the investigations. The suspect was detained after police obtained information from a series of raids in High Wycombe. The Buckinghamshire town remains the focus of the current inquiry. Anti-terrorist officers are continuing to search 22 homes and businesses in the area as well as woods nearby.
The significance of the latest arrest, which took place at just after 1pm in the Thames Valley area, is unclear, although anti-terrorist sources have said that the "main players" were among 19 suspects named last week after a series of arrests on Wednesday night and Thursday morning.
A further five people, including two women, were arrested, although one has been released without charge. The raids took place in east London, Birmingham and Buckinghamshire.
Scotland Yard revealed further details yesterday of the scale of the hunt for evidence of the alleged bomb plot. As well as searching 46 homes and businesses, they have examined 20 vehicles.
The Charity Commission and police are looking into the possible misuse of funds from the Crescent Relief fund. The father of two of the terror suspects arrested has been registered as a charity director. Abdul Rauf, father of Rashid and Tayib, is a former director of Crescent Relief (London). No evidence has been found to suggest that Abdul Rauf or any of the charity's organisers are implicated in any alleged plot.
Comment on this Article
Propaganda: Investigation widens as police probe link with September 11
By Jason Bennetto and Kim Sengupta
15 August 2006
Two of the terror suspects being questioned over the alleged plot to blow up transatlantic airliners are being investigated for links with the 9/11 attacks on the United States.
The two suspects may have had contacts with a man accused of helping to organise the al-Qa'ida attacks on America in 2001.
The possible connection came as British and international intelligence services continued to investigate the backgrounds of the 23 British men and women being held in custody on suspicion of plotting to destroy up to 10 US-bound aircraft.
As part of the inquiry British and German intelligence are tracing possible contacts between two of the suspects and a man named Said Bahaji, who is wanted for allegedly being part of an al-Qa'ida cell that included Mohammed Atta, the lead pilot of the two planes that rammed into the World Trade Centre. Mr Bahaji was based in Germany prior to the strikes on New York and Washington, which he is accused of helping organise, but is believed to have fled to Pakistan.
Uncorroborated reports state that the suspected bombers had contacted Mr Bahaji through his wife who still lives in Hamburg. It is believed that calls from the bombing suspects were traced to a telephone number associated with Mr Bahaji.
The German interior minister Wolfgang Schäuble said yesterday: "There have been some contacts but we don't know for sure how concrete they have been. It would have been surprising if there wasn't any contacts to Germany considering the international network of terrorism."
Mr Bahaji's name gained prominence after Mounir el-Motassadeq, a 28-year-old Moroccan, was jailed for 15 years after pleading guilty to terrorism charges relating to 9/11. A court in Hamburg was told how he had provided logistical support to an al-Qa'ida cell which allegedly included Mr Bahaji.
In Britain police are continuing to search for evidence of a plot by suspected suicide bombers to blow up airliners with liquid explosive smuggled through security checks.
Forensic specialists were searching woodland at King's Wood, near High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, close to the scene of one of last Thursday's raids. There were unconfirmed reports that officers had found a rifle and a handgun during searches at two addresses linked to the inquiry. Counter-terrorist sources have also said that bomb-making components had been recovered.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair stressed the seriousness of the threat still facing the country. Referring to the alleged airliner bomb plot, he said: "We have been behind this group of people for some time. What we always have to do is balance waiting to gather more evidence and make sure you get all the people, against the risk to the public by not moving in earlier.
"That's the decision that was reached last Wednesday evening. There's a point where the information reaches a level of concern that means if you don't take action it is indefensible."
He added that many other alleged plots were being investigated. "What is so concerning is that those operations can turn from being what we think is preparatory to what is clearly active in a very short time."
In Pakistan up to 17 suspects are believed to be in custody, including a Briton, Rashid Rauf, who has been officially described as a "key" suspect and is the brother of Tayib Rauf, 22, one of those arrested in Birmingham last week. The Home Office refused to confirm or deny whether the Government had formally requested his extradition. There is no extradition treaty between Britain and Pakistan, but an ad-hoc request can be made under international convention.
Sources have also suggested that the authorities in Pakistan may be looking at a connection with Matiur Rehman, a senior figure in the Pakistani terrorist group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi.
But British Security sources have dismissed claims by Pakistani officials that the trans-Atlantic bombing plot originated in Afghanistan. They said the Pakistani allegations appeared to be an attempt by Pakistan to retaliate against repeated charges made publicly by the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, and privately by British and US diplomats and military commanders, that Pakistan was harbouring Taliban fighters carrying out attacks in Afghanistan.
Security sources said close links between Islamist extremists and the Pakistani secret police had helped in providing information. But the same links, said a senior official, meant that some of the statements from Pakistani officials "had to be treated with circumspection".
British and Pakistani investigators, however, are investigating whether money raised by appeals following the earthquakes in Pakistan last year were used to fund the alleged plot.
A charity, Jumaat ud Dawa, which is active in mosques in the UK, raised large sums in London, Manchester and Birmingham. The group is the charitable arm of a Kashmiri terrorist group, Lashkar-e-Taiba, which has been banned by the Pakistani government after pressure from the US government.
Security sources said several transactions had taken place between Pakistan and the bomb suspects, but refused to specify where they originated.
Comment: Since by now, it is pretty much an established fact that the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon were "inside jobs," based on the evidence of controlled demolition, you'd think they would give up this "Al-Qaeda" nonsense... Sheesh, how stupid do we look?
Comment on this Article
Sources claim latest "terror plot" a hoax cooked up to divert attention from Blair's and Bush's woes
By Wayne Madsen
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Aug 12, 2006, 00:18
According to knowledgeable sources in the UK and other countries, the Tony Blair government, under siege by a Labor Party revolt, cleverly cooked up a new "terror" scare to avert the public's eyes away from Blair's increasing political woes. British law enforcement; neocon and intelligence operatives in the United States, Israel, and Britain; and Rupert Murdoch's global media empire cooked up the terrorist plot, liberally borrowing from the failed 1995 "Oplan Bojinka" plot by Pakistan- and Philippines-based terrorist Ramzi Ahmad Yousef to crash 11 trans-Pacific airliners bound from Asia to the United States. In the latest plot, it is reported that liquid bombs were to be detonated on 10 trans-Atlantic planes outbound from Britain to the United States.
The London terror plan was "known" last Sunday by British and American authorities, according to the Indian press. American Airlines flight 109 from London Heathrow to Boston boarded a family of five, however, after the plane left Heathrow authorities determined that the father appeared on a British suspect list drawn up after the 7/7 London transit attacks. At first, the pilot was instructed to fly all the way to Boston where U.S. authorities could claim credit for apprehending the suspect. However, the pilot, fearing for the safety of his passengers and crew, refused and quickly returned to Heathrow without informing the passengers. Once on the ground, it was discovered that the male had in his carry-on baggage the type of combination liquid explosive and electronic device now being hyped by the British and American media.
British sources report that the reason for the delay in informing the airlines and traveling public about the liquid bomb on the American flight was to maximize the beneficial political impact for Blair and George W. Bush, both plummeting in the polls from the situations in Iraq and Lebanon.
Earlier this week, two employees of Murdoch's London tabloid, News of the World, were charged with hacking into the voice and text cell phone messages of three members of the staff of Clarence House, the residence of Princes Charles, William, and Harry. One of those charged with the wiretapping was Clive Goodman, the Royals editor of the News of the World.
The same paper earlier tried to politically damage two anti-Iraq war British politicians -- Scottish Socialist Tommy Sheridan and Respect Party MP George Galloway. The paper charged that Sheridan was unfaithful to his wife by going to swinger's clubs. He won a quarter million dollar lawsuit against the paper. Galloway was confronted by Mazher Mahmood, an individual who uses the moniker "Fake Sheik," who posed as a wealthy Arab businessman and tried unsuccessfully to get Galloway to accept cash and make anti-Semitic remarks. In fact, Mahmood was and continues to be a reporter for News of the World, his continued employment approved by Murdoch. Goodman has merely been suspended by Murdoch but he has not been fired.
However, what prompted Murdoch and Blair to hype a new global "terror" threat was what Murdoch learned from eavesdropping on the phone calls of Prince Charles' staff at the future king's office, home, and limousine. The eavesdropping revealed that Charles was working with Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown, who is to the left of Blair, to conduct the same type of political maneuver that John Major used to oust Margaret Thatcher from office. London's left-wing Mayor, Ken Livingston, was also in on the Charles-Brown plan and it was expected that in return for his support, Livingston would get a senior position in a Brown cabinet -- a development that sent shock waves through the neocon circles in London, Washington, and Jerusalem, including British Home Secretary John Reid and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.
The Charles-Brown plan was briefed by Blair to Bush during the former's recent visit to Washington. However, because the phony terror plot was known to both leaders -- they decided to be away on vacation when the terror plot was "uncovered." Bush is vacationing at his Crawford, Texas "ranch," while Blair is on vacation in Barbados, staying at Sir Cliff Richard's luxurious villa.
After Blair met with Bush in Washington, he flew to California where on July 30 he attended Murdoch's News Corporation private corporate executive conference at the posh Inn at Spanish Bay golf resort in Pebble Beach. Blair met with Murdoch, Israeli former Prime Minister Shimon Peres, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Newt Gingrich, and various Fox, Star, and Sky News executives. The final touches were agreed to by Blair and Murdoch on how the fake terror plot would play out in Murdoch's media empire.
Blair told Bush that a Brown government would move to withdraw British troops from Iraq, break the "special relationship" with the Bush White House, and move closer to the European Union and the United Nations.
The Israeli attack on Lebanon created a rift within Blair's Cabinet with some former Blair loyalists signaling their support for the political coup against Blair. As a result, a suspect passenger was permitted to board an American aircraft at Heathrow with a liquid bomb to lay the groundwork for the media and travel hysteria five days later.
The wiretapping of Charles' messages also indicated that he has weighed in with various European royal families to discourage them from inviting Bush on state visits to their nations. This reportedly upset the Bush and Blair regimes, who were working together to improve Bush's image in Europe. The White House's displeasure with the monarchies in Spain, Belgium, Sweden, Luxembourg, and Norway are a direct result of the Murdoch eavesdropping on Charles' staff.
Not surprisingly, after Galloway tore into a Sky News reporter on a recent televised interview, The Sun, a Murdoch paper, is now reporting that one of the 24 British aircraft liquid bomber suspects now under arrest, Waheed Zaman, met with Galloway "many times." The paper quotes the sister of the suspect. A Galloway spokesman denies that Galloway knows the suspect. What is suspect is the Murdoch media empire that makes up news and commits illegal acts to provide cover for the false flag operations being conducted by Britain, the U.S., and Israel.
Pakistan's Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) agency has helped provide the cover story for the alleged liquid bombers. Working with British and U.S. intelligence, the ISI says it broke up the plot after arresting terrorist suspects in Lahore and Karachi. However, the ISI claims that the men were affiliated with the Kashmiri terrorist group Lashkar-e-Toiba, a group that is run and funded by the ISI itself.
The disclosure of the Charles-Brown plot has already created a backlash from the neocons. The Murdoch media is already floating the rumor that Home Secretary Reid is now Blair's chosen successor, while there will be an effort to scandalize Charles in an effort to convince the British public that it would be best to skip over him and have Prince William assume the throne upon Queen Elizabeth's death or abdication.
British commentators are noting that it is Reid, a noted neocon, who is chairing national security "Cobra" meetings in Blair's absence. Blair bypassed Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott and many political observers believe that Prescott was passed over because of evidence that he was involved in supporting the Charles-Brown coup. Prescott chaired Cobra meetings in the wake of the July 7, 2005 (7/7) London transit bombings.
Meanwhile, Republican governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Mitt Romney used the occasion to boost their sagging popularity by placing their states' National Guardsmen at major airports in their states.
Comment on this Article
British police make new arrest in airline bomb plot
Last Updated Tue, 15 Aug 2006 11:22:33 EDT
CBC News
Police in London arrested a new suspect on Tuesday in connection to the alleged airline bombing plot foiled last week.
Police provided few details of the arrest, saying only that they apprehended the person in the Thames Valley area, west of London.
Officials have not charged any of the 24 people now in custody, but will provide some details of the evidence gathered so far to a judge at a custody hearing Wednesday.
Police arrested 24 people last Thursday after investigators uncovered an alleged plot to blow up as many as 10 commercial airliners with liquid explosives smuggled aboard in hand luggage. One person has been released without being charged.
On Tuesday, for the third day in a row, police cordoned off and combed the King's Wood in High Wycombe, 55 kilometres west of London, for evidence. The BBC reported that investigators found several firearms in the woods but it is not clear if they are connected to the alleged plot.
Police also confirmed Tuesday that they raided an internet café last Thursday in central Slough, 40 kilometres west of London. They did not say what their investigation found.
London newspapers have reported that investigators have uncovered bomb-making materials and weapons. Other unconfirmed reports have suggested that one of the suspects may have had ties with an accused conspirator in the Sept. 11 attacks.
The Times reported that authorities are exploring a possible relationship between a suspect in Britain and Said Bahaji, a computer expert connected to the al-Qaeda cell in Hamburg, Germany, that included three of the men who piloted the hijacked airliners.
Earthquake relief might have provided networking opportunity
Meanwhile, a British House of Lords member has suggested that some of the 23 suspects might have met in Pakistan last year while providing relief following an earthquake that killed nearly 80,000 people.
"It may be that out of 22, there may be a number of them who have met someone from extremist groups in Pakistan or Kashmir," Nasir Ahmed told the Associated Press.
"Some may have met them without knowing that they were meeting [extremists] because they were helping out in the aftermath of the earthquake."
The New York Times has reported that the Pakistan-based charity Jamaat al-Dawat raised money for the survivors of the earthquake but channelled the organization's money to the alleged airline bomb plotters.
Jamaat al-Dawat has denied the charges.
Restrictions eased at London airports
Travellers at London's airports were allowed to bring one piece of carry-on luggage aboard flights on Tuesday while electronics and liquids and gels were still banned. Passengers waited in long lines as rigorous security checks continued. British Airways cancelled 20 per cent of its flights from London on Tuesday.
A report by the Times newspapers said officials were considering introducing new security measures that would include racial profiling. The suggestion has provoked a heated discussion.
Philip Baum, an aviation security consultant, says that profiling is a necessary reality.
"We must apply profiling to the entire population but we must accept that given the current world we live in, young males are likely to be targeted more than others and I think the Muslim community just has to accept this," he said.
But others, including Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council of Britain, say that officials should base their security checks on intelligence, not appearance.
"Already, many Muslims do believe that they are being unfairly targeted," he said.
British Defence Secretary Des Browne said new security requirements for airports were being explored but he said it would inappropriate for him to discuss precisely what those new measures might be.
Comment on this Article
UK police seek extra time to quiz bomb suspects
Reuters
16 Aug 06
LONDON - Police will seek more time on Wednesday to question suspects in the alleged plot to blow up transatlantic airliners, as it emerged a 12-year-old boy with no documents had managed to board a plane at UK's Gatwick Airport.
Detectives must apply to extend the detention warrants for 23 of the 24 suspects arrested since police said they had foiled a plan to carry out suicide bombings on planes bound for the United States using liquid explosives disguised as drinks.
The 23 people are all British-born Muslims, mainly of Pakistani descent. Police can hold suspects for up to 28 days before either charging or releasing them.
Also on Wednesday, Home Secretary John Reid is due to meet EU counterparts to discuss the plot and ongoing operations.
One of those attending the meeting in London is French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy who has said the threat of terrorism remained "high and permanent."
"There is absolutely no question of lowering our guard," said Sarkozy.
Meanwhile the massive police investigation in Britain continues. Detectives said they had already executed 46 search warrants, with 22 of those searches continuing and another 20 vehicles examined.
Officers are still combing woodland around the town of High Wycombe in Buckinghamshire for evidence. One house in the town, according to British media, may have been used by the suspected plotters to mix chemicals to blow up as many as 10 U.S.-bound aircraft.
The chaos at Britain's major airports has begun to ease slightly after the ban on all airline cabin baggage was relaxed to allow passengers to carry a small bag on board, although it is still forbidden to take liquids on board planes.
However passengers continued to suffer major delays and airlines were still being forced to cancel some of their flights because of the extra security measures.
British Airways said it planned to operate 90 percent of its schedule on Wednesday but will cancel 46 flights from Heathrow and Gatwick.
It is also trying to deal with a backlog of 5,000 bags which are waiting to be returned to their owners.
However, despite the high level of alert, airport operator BAA said a 12-year-old boy with no documents had managed to get on board a plane at Gatwick.
The boy had run away from a care home in Merseyside and boarded a plane for Lisbon at 6 a.m. on Monday before the other passengers, according to media reports.
However, he was spotted by cabin crew who alerted the police.
"The boy had passed through our full security screening process so he had passed through the search process and I'm confident there was no threat at any stage to passengers and staff or to the aircraft," a BAA spokesman told BBC radio.
He added a full investigation was under way.
Comment on this Article
Der Leader Will Protect You!
Bush Should Know: Bush Says U.S. Will Face Terrorism Threat for 'Years'
Aug. 15 (Bloomberg)
President George W. Bush said the unraveling of a plot to blow up airliners flying out of London last week demonstrates the U.S. faces a years-long battle against terrorism.
"America is safer than it has been, yet it is not yet safe,'' Bush said today after a series of briefings at the National Counterterrorism Center in McLean, Virginia. The work at the center is "indicative of the challenge we face not only this week, but this year and the years to come.''
The American public is refocused on the threat of terrorism following the arrests in the U.K. of 24 people -- including one today -- suspected of plotting to smuggle liquid explosives aboard U.S.-bound airliners. Passengers in the U.S. and U.K. are undergoing more stringent security checks. Delays caused by screening prompted British airlines to cancel some flights for the sixth day.
The counterterrorism center Bush visited today is the primary facility for integrating and analyzing intelligence about terrorism and includes personnel from the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Departments of State, Defense and Homeland Security.
The president lauded the officials and analysts for their work and for their cooperation with agencies overseas.
"Recently we saw the fruits of their labor in conjunction with their counterparts in Britain,'' Bush said. "Our solemn duty in the federal government is to protect the American people. I will assure the American people we're doing everything in our power to protect them.''
Investigation Continuing
Among those participating in the meetings with Bush are Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and CIA Director Michael Hayden.
Bush got "a sense of the kinds of improvements and the kinds of innovations we have been taking to try to make sure that we can stop terrorists before they hit us,'' White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said later.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who also is participating in the meetings today, said this week that the investigation into the U.K. plot isn't finished and authorities are concerned that other terrorist groups might "think we are distracted'' and try to take advantage.
Restrictions
The U.K. plot involved using liquid explosives disguised as drinks and other seemingly benign objects. The Transportation Security Administration is prohibiting passengers from bringing liquids or gels aboard planes in carry-on luggage. Exceptions are made for small amounts of medications or food for infants.
An Aug. 11-13 CBS News poll found that terrorism jumped to the second biggest concern of U.S. adults from a survey taken last month. Iraq remains the top concern, cited by 28 percent of those polled. Seventeen percent cited terrorism, up from 7 percent who cited it in July. That moved terrorism ahead of the economy and fuel prices.
As part of a series of annual meetings, Bush yesterday spent the day at the Pentagon and State Department to discuss Lebanon, Iraq, Iran and other issues. Friday he'll meet with his economic advisers at Camp David, where he'll spend the weekend.
Comment on this Article
Bush vows to protect American people
www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-16 07:33:27
WASHINGTON, Aug. 15 (Xinhua) -- U.S. President George W. Bush said on Tuesday that the administration would do everything "in our power" to protect the American people.
"Our most solemn duty in the federal government is to protect the American people," Bush said at the National Counterterrorism Center on the western outskirts of the nation's capital.
"I will assure the American people that we're doing everything in our power to protect you," he said.
The Untied States was safer than it had been because of the work by different government agencies, but "it not yet safe," said the president.
He said terrorists had an advantage when it came to attacking the country: "they got to be right one time. And we've got to be right 100 percent of the time to protect the American people."
Bush praised those working at the counterterrorism center, saying it was their work that had helped foil the plot by terrorists to blow up U.S.-bound flights from London last week.
"Recently we saw the fruits of their labor, in conjunction with their counterparts in Great Britain," he said.
The United States was engaged a war against an extremist group of people bound together by an ideology who were willing to "use terror to achieve their objectives," and the plot and the work going at the center were indicative of the challenges, he said.
Comment: Well that last remark describes the situation quite well. The US is in a war against a small group of extremists who have taken power in the US and who "use terror to achieve their objectives". Americans are so scared or subdued that they are willing to do whatever they are told to be "safe".
And they call it "the freest country on earth"!
Comment on this Article
Karl Called
James Moore
August 15, 2006
When the book "Bush's Brain" was published, my co-author Wayne Slater and I assumed we were done with Karl Rove. We had exercised what we believed was a journalistic responsibility to inform the public about Karl and, of course, made a few dollars selling books. We both had other projects and ideas we wanted to explore.
Karl, though, was influencing much of what was taking place in our country and in the wider world. Interest in him increased. We knew him better than others and felt inclined to write a sequel to our first book. "The Architect: Karl Rove and the Master Plan for Absolute Power" will be published in a few weeks by Random House/Crown.
And Karl is not happy.
Mr. Rove does not deign to call me. I am beneath contempt. When FOX News and Brit Hume ran an excerpt of an interview with me in the film based on the original book, Rove responded by describing me as a "far left wing liberal who has been drinking too much swamp water." The president's big brain advisor, therefore, calls my co-author when he has a peeve with our work. Last week, Rove called Slater several times to begin his ritual dissembling about information in "The Architect." He wants his lawyer to talk to our publisher's lawyers. He wants to pretend like he has been cooperative and we are obstinate and did not listen to his side of any story. He is, as always, beginning his spin in advance of any public interest the book may generate.
Just as he did with "Bush's Brain," Rove managed to acquire an early galley version of the new book. He is disturbed about several matters but appears most deeply troubled about how the narrative proves he has had a complex relationship with convicted felon Jack Abramoff. Information provided to us for the book by an eyewitness and participant in Rove and Abramoff meetings gives lie to Rove and the White House's claims that Abramoff was barely known by the administration. Karl has always known who has money to spend on politics and how to use those people. Our witness, who also told the same story to federal investigators, details meetings between Rove and Abramoff that show the two were using each other for their own political ends.
After reading the galley, Rove called Slater and denied the meetings ever occurred. He wants us to believe that our source simply made up the events and also lied to federal investigators. Of course, Karl Rove is the same man who claimed he did not speak to reporters about Valerie Plame's identity until her name was published by Robert Novak and he is the same person who told the world Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. I do not believe anything he says nor should anyone in our country. Nonetheless, he wants us to provide him with dates that these meetings allegedly happened so that he can check them against his calendar to see if he was in Kuala Lumpur or Washington. Is there anyone left in America who might believe any document provided by Karl Rove? I will not. Nor will I provide him any material or other information for him to use in the building of his spin.
Karl is pathological and has spent so much of his life distorting the truth that he presently has difficulty discerning the difference between what he believes is real and what actually is true. His goal, obviously, is to be able to tell other journalists and pundits that he tried to cooperate with us and show us that we had bad information. He wants to raise doubt and claim good faith communications. He has done nothing but consistently refuse to speak to us since "Bush's Brain" was published. Regardless, he has called Slater constantly wanting to put his lawyer in touch with our publisher's counsel. Rove is too smart to complain publicly about our book because he knows it will drive attention and possibly sales so he calls Slater and demands to talk off the record so he can file his grievances.
Rove is also upset about information in "The Architect" that explores his family history. Ordinarily, a political reporter will ignore a subject's background when writing about issues being promoted by a particular political operative. Their personal life is not relevant unless it contradicts a public posture on a relevant issue. Rove's zealous approach to promoting the anti-gay marriage amendment, however, prompted curiosity during the course of researching for the book. We will leave it to students of Freud to deconstruct what we discovered through on the record interviews, but it will be clear that Mr. Rove's motivations for promoting anti gay marriage legislation has as much to do with his own background as it does the political utility of motivating the conservative and fundamentalist base for the GOP.
But what I will not leave to Karl Rove is the freedom to frame this story in a way that suits his interests. He has already begun to call his political operatives in Texas and elsewhere to suggest that Slater and I, who have about 70 years of journalistic background between us, have simply resorted to making up material to sell books. We did not, of course. Karl is the expert at creating information to serve a purpose.
And there are thousands of dead Americans and Iraqis whose ghosts bear witness to Rove's ability to lie and spin for political ends.
Comment on this Article
Stunned, Scared and Silent - The Bush administration's reliance on scare tactics -- to beat Americans into stunned submission -- is becoming outright laughable
By Molly Ivins
AlterNet
August 15, 2006
We have nothing to fear but fear itself, especially since fear is now being fomented and manipulated for political purposes by a bunch of shameless hacks. Who is trying to make you afraid and why? This Karl Rove tactic is getting quite threadbare, in fact, and so much so that it is getting dangerously close to comedy.
My favorite episode, of course, was the Miami terrorists, a fearsome horde of seven described by the FBI's deputy director as, "More inspirational that operational." That means wanna-bes. An FBI informant posing as a member of al-Qaida offered to supply the plotters with material for the jihad, so they asked for boots and uniforms. Every terrorist needs a uniform.
Of course, even a nincompoop can succeed occasionally -- but the list of wanna-bes keeps growing. Seventeen people were arrested in Canada for intending to behead the prime minister. Has anyone in all of history ever cared that much about a Canadian prime minister? Their national motto is, "Now, let's not get excited."
Of the hundreds of prisoners, alleged terrorists all, who have been held at Guantanamo on the grounds that they were the worst of the worst, only 10 have ever been charged with anything. In the latest episode, shortly after announcement of a British-based plot to blow up airliners, Britain and the United States were already airing their differences over when the perpetrators should have been arrested. The administration has put itself in the position of the Boy Who Cried Wolf. If, God forbid, a serious terrorist conspiracy is uncovered, there will be a tendency to dismiss it as a backlash to these over-hyped "plots."
I personally have been sleeping more soundly at night knowing that Michael Chertoff is secretary of homeland security. Ever since Chertoff's agency brought us the stunning news that there are more terrorist targets in Indiana than in New York or Washington, I've realized this guy could find a terrorist plot anywhere. Watch out for the Amish -- they'll run right over you with those buggies, and they all have pitchforks, too. I hear they're connected to al-Qaida through Saddam Hussein.
Should you be suffering a fear shortage despite the administration's best efforts, consider the paralyzing news of the defeat of Joe Lieberman. According to none other than our very own Veep Dick Cheney, Lieberman's defeat helps the terrorists. Yes! How can this be, you ask? Well, you know Joe Lieberman has been supporting Bush's war in Iraq, and we are at war with Iraq because Saddam Hussein was allied to al-Qaida and had weapons of mass destruction, see? He wasn't? He didn't? Gee, maybe that's why the Democrats were upset with Lieberman!
Lieberman's unhappy fall in electoral battle touched off a volcano of drivel in the media. Some of it should be written off as the incurable Establishment tendency to defend its own. People who have known Joe Lieberman for 18 years are naturally predisposed in his favor -- always happens. On the other had, what a bunch of codswallop from people who should know better. They're behaving as though no one had a right to challenge Lieberman, whereas given his record, I can't think of anyone who deserved challenge more.
The pusillanimous punditry announce that these fools in the Democratic Party may make the war in Iraq a major issue! Horrors! I hate to pull the old advantages-of-provincialism trick, but I do think the D.C. press corps and political establishment are painfully out of touch and need to get out into the country more. Indiana, anyone?
Molly Ivins writes about politics, Texas and other bizarre happenings.
Comment on this Article
War! Yes, Sir!
Jay Leno - Iran announced today that it cloned a sheep. They plan to use the sheep to pull the wool over the U.N.'s eyes.
Jay Leno
August 13, 2006
Jay Leno
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says that people marching in the streets of Baghdad shows that democracy is working and that the Iraqis will be our allies in the war against terrorism - as soon as they're done chanting "Death to America."
President Bush ruled out sending troops to Lebanon. You know what that means - they don't have oil.
Latin American foreign policy experts say that when Fidel Castro dies, hundreds of thousands of Cuban immigrants will come to Florida. They said waves of people will come in, depending on the waves.
Conan O'Brien
While on vacation, President Bush is reportedly reading a book about Abraham Lincoln. Or as President Bush calls him, "the guy from the pennies."
Earlier today a former intern at the N.F.L. was hired to be the N.F.L.'s new commissioner. Not surprisingly, the new commissioner celebrated by running downstairs to get everyone coffee.
Comment on this Article
110 Iraqi civilians killed in violence per day in July
www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-16 13:50:02
BEIJING, Aug. 16 (Xinhuanet) -- An average of more than 110 Iraqis were killed each day in July, the deadliest month of the war for Iraqi civilians, according to figures from Iraq's Health Ministry and the Baghdad morgue.
A total of 3,438 civilians were killed in July, which is a 9 percent increase over the tally in June and nearly double the toll in January, media reports reported on Tuesday.
Iraqi government's numbers showed that 3,149 violent deaths occurred in June, or an average of more than 100 per day.
The Baghdad morgue reported receiving 1,855 bodies in July, more than half of the total deaths recorded in the country. The morgue tally for July was an 18 percent increase over June.
The rising numbers suggested that sectarian violence is spiraling out of control. Many senior Iraqi officials and American military analysts have asserted in recent months that Iraq is already embroiled in a civil war, not just slipping toward one.
United Nations officials and military analysts say the official numbers almost certainly reflect severe undercounting caused by the haphazard nature of information in a war zone.
At least 17,776 Iraqi civilians died in violence in the first seven months of 2006, or an average of 2,539 per month, according to New York Times.
Comment: The so-called "civil war" in Iraq is a war led by black ops from within the Green Zone. The goal of the US and Israel has always been the division of Iraq into three parts, and to accomplish this, they are fomenting "sectarian violence" themselves in order to provoke the Iraqis into killing each other rather than fighting against the occupier.
Counter-intelligence 101.
Comment on this Article
General to rule on Iraq rape case in September
Reuters
16 Aug 06
BAGHDAD - A U.S. general will decide next month whether to court-martial four U.S. soldiers for the rape and murder of a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and the killing of her family in March, a U.S. military spokeswoman said on Wednesday.
A U.S. military court in Baghdad that heard the rape case this month is reviewing the court documents and will submit its recommendations to Major General James Thurman, commander of the Army's 4th Infantry Division, the spokeswoman said.
"The investigative officers are reviewing the case and have 30 days to put forward their recommendations to General Thurman," Major Josslyn Aberle told Reuters.
The Article 32 hearing -- the military's equivalent of a U.S. grand jury -- finished on August 10.
The rape case, the fifth involving serious crimes being investigated by the U.S. military in Iraq, has outraged Iraqis and led Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to call for a review of foreign troops' immunity from Iraqi prosecution.
If court-martialled and found guilty Private First Class Jesse Spielman, Specialist James Barker, Sergeant Paul Cortez and Private First Class Bryan Howard could face the death penalty.
Former private Steven Green, 21, faces the same charges in a U.S. federal court in Kentucky. Green, who has pleaded not guilty, was discharged from the army for "personality disorder."
A fifth soldier, Sergeant Anthony Yribe, is charged with dereliction of duty and making a false statement.
In a separate case, Thurman will also decide whether to court-martial four U.S. soldiers accused of murdering three detainees on May 9 during a raid on a suspected insurgent camp near Thar Thar Lake, southwest of Tikrit.
The defendants have been charged with premeditated murder, attempted murder, conspiracy, communicating a threat and obstructing justice -- the latter two charges for threatening to kill another soldier if he informed on them.
Comment on this Article
Cuban Exiles Wage War of Terror - Anti-Castro terrorists based in Florida have carried out thousands of attacks against civilians, often with the full knowledge and support of the U.S. government
By Frank Joyce
AlterNet
August 16, 2006
It wasn't Libya, Afghanistan, or any other Arab-based group that first blew up a commercial airplane. Al Qaida had nothing to do with it. That first attack, on Oct. 6, 1976, came when Cuban-American terrorists and mercenaries blew up a Cuban civilian airliner. All 73 on board went down to a fiery and gruesome death, including the teenage members of the Cuban fencing team returning from a competition in Venezuela.
This tacitly U.S.-supported terrorist crime never appears on the "history" list of incidents involving civilian airliners, at least not in the U.S. media. Why?
Cognitive dissonance is one explanation. The syllogism goes like this: The United States is a good country. Terrorism is bad. The United States funds and protects terrorists. Uh-oh -- we certainly can't talk about that.
In Barbados, where the bomb was placed on the Cuban airliner, the mercenaries were tried and convicted for the crime and served time. But the planners and instigators of the plot, Luis Posada Carriles and Orlando Bosch, got away clean. Posada is today being protected by the U.S. government from an extradition demand by Venezuela, where the crime was planned. (In a delicious irony, the U.S. government's position is that he can't be extradited to Venezuela because he would be tortured there.) Over the objections of his own justice department, George H. W. Bush in effect pardoned Orlando Bosch. He is today a free man living in Miami where he gives gloating TV interviews about his role in blowing up the plane.
The Cuban airline bombing was anything but an isolated incident. On Sept. 4, 1997, as on other occasions, U.S.-sponsored terrorists set off bombs in Havana hotels and restaurants. This time, one killed a tourist from Italy, Fabio de Celmo. Over the years death and injury to civilians has come from thousands of other attacks carried out in Cuba and elsewhere by land, air and sea against villagers, fisherman, children, tourists and diplomats by terrorists based in Florida.
The Al Qaida-like network -- which includes Alpha 66, Omega 7, Brothers To The Rescue, and Commandos L and others -- is as active today as ever. Just last month, Commandos F-4 held a press conference in Miami to announce they had successfully carried out sabotage raids in Cuba in four different provinces. A few weeks earlier police raided the California home of Robert Ferro, a self-proclaimed member of Alpha 66. Police and federal agents seized 35 machine guns, 13 silencers, two short-barreled rifles, a live hand grenade, a rocket launcher tube and 89,000 rounds of ammunition. Santiago Alvarez and Osvaldo Mitat were busted about a year ago with a similar stash in Fort Lauderdale. The defense claimed by all three is that they were acting as members of organizations working with the full knowledge and support of the U.S. government.
These arrests, by the way, do not mean that the U.S. government is aggressively trying to contain these terrorists. The raids are about window-dressing and deniability. They are not about a genuine effort to stop the Cuban exile terrorists. On July 10 of this year the "Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba," headed by Condoleezza Rice, issued a long-promised report. It sets out U.S. plans to increase and intensify support for those trying to overthrow the government of Cuba. The version posted on the website is 93 pages long; the entire report is 450 pages. Most of it is "classified." The secrecy is not about protecting aid to dissidents in Cuba -- it's about protecting terrorists in Florida.
Enter the Cuban Five
Someone should make a movie about the Cuban Five -- Rene Gonzalez, Antonio Guerro, Fernando Gonzalez, Gerrardo Hernandez and Ramon Labinino. They are poets, pilots, engineers, artists, college graduates, husbands, sons, brothers, fathers, Cubans, Americans. But that's not why the movie.
The movie is about why they are in five different maximum security prisons in the United States. Two of them are American citizens by virtue of having been born in the United States. Their parents were refugees from a Cuban dictator: Fulgencio Batista. When Batista was deposed by the Castro-led Cuban revolution, they returned to Cuba to live and raise their children.
The Cuban Five volunteered to come to Florida in the mid-'90s for the purpose of becoming "eyes and ears" into the plans and activities of the Florida-based terrorist groups. The escalation of efforts by groups like Alpha 66 and Commandos L drove the timing of their mission. The terrorists were openly targeting Cuba's growing tourism industry, which was being expanded to offset the loss of aid to the Cuban economy from the former Soviet Union.
The Five succeeded in infiltrating some of the most dangerous groups, but in September of 1998 they were arrested by the FBI. In a harbinger of post-9/11 civil liberties erosions to come, they were denied bail. They were placed in solitary confinement, separated from each other and their families. Their attorneys were prevented from gaining access to the evidence to be used against them at their trial. They were charged with a raft of crimes, including allegations of "conspiracy."
None of the accusations alleged any violent acts on their part. The Five's monitoring activities had nothing to do with threatening the United States in any way. Their mission was to protect Cuba. The only way you could argue otherwise would be to concede that the terrorists were carrying out the official foreign policy of the United States.
In 2001, 33 months after their arrest, their trial began in Miami, Florida. Before and several times during the trial, their court-appointed attorneys requested a change of venue on the grounds that the pro-Cuban defendants could not get a fair trial in Miami. The attorneys proposed Fort Lauderdale, just 25 miles away. Their change of venue motions were repeatedly denied.
The trial lasted six months. It included testimony from Cuban exile terrorists, a high-ranking assistant to the president of the United States, and generals and admirals from the U.S. and Cuba. On numerous occasions there were rowdy demonstrations outside the court room by anti-Castro Cuban exiles. Some of the demonstrations specifically targeted members of the jury. The trial got zero media coverage outside of Miami.
Despite incredible holes and contradictions in the government's case, the Cuban Five were found guilty on every count that had been brought against them. The jury even convicted the Five on charges the judge instructed them did not meet the burden of proof. Rene Gonzalez was sentenced to 15 years. Antonio Guerro to life imprisonment plus 10 years, Fernando Gonzalez was sentenced to 19 years, Gerrardo Hernandez was given two life sentences plus 80 months, and Ramon Labinino was sentenced to life imprisonment plus 18 years.
The conditions of their incarceration have been cruel, unusual and in violation of many rights and privileges accorded to other prisoners. Of the eight years total each has already been incarcerated, much of their jail time has been in solitary confinement -- even though they are model prisoners without a single blemish on their record. Two of the five have never been permitted visits from their wives.
In 2005 the convictions were overturned because a three-judge panel ordered a new trial because Miami was such a demonstrably unfair place to try them. But on Aug. 9, the full Appeals bench overturned that decision. Nine other grounds for reversing the convictions now await decisions by the three-judge panel. It is also possible that lawyers for the Five will appeal the 11th Circuit Court decision on the venue issue to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Why the Cuban Five matter
Ignore what you think about Cuba, pro, con or indifferent. Consider instead what kind of country you think the United States should be in the 21st century.
As a nation, are we truly against terrorism, or is it just a term we use to demonize those whose goals we oppose? Does not the mistreatment of the Five reveal that the underpinnings of the mindset that has brought us to Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo runs deeper than the presidency of George Bush?
And as long as the U.S. government supports the terrorists in Florida, by what moral authority does the United States tell Iran and Syria they have no right to support Hezbollah? If Israel has the right to defend itself from terrorist attack, why doesn't Cuba? Why doesn't the media ever raise these questions?
Doesn't the disproportionate influence of the Cuban exile community have an enormous impact on our political destiny? For all the ruckus about whether the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC has too much influence on U.S. foreign policy -- viewed in proportion to the size of the Cuban exile population, AIPAC's clout would be tiny.
Could Florida play the "super-state" role it does in U.S. politics without the part played by the Cuban exiles whose first loyalty is not to the United States? All of the Bushes -- George I, George II, Jeb -- are up to their eyeballs in these activities. In addition to his terrorist activities against Cuba, Cuban-American Luis Posada Carriles was also a major player in the Iran-Contra affair. As some may recall, that whole operation was run out of George Herbert Walker Bush's office when he was Ronald Reagan's vice president. Jeb Bush recently appointed the son of former Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista to the Florida Supreme Court. Janet Reno, then U.S. attorney general, was already contemplating her run for the U.S. Senate from Florida when she sanctioned the trial of the Cuban Five in the first place.
Aren't we all at risk if the right to a trial away from a lynch mob atmosphere is diluted, if the most basic rule of evidence can be ignored because "the end justifies the means"? What does that kind of reasoning do to the rule of law?
The Cuban Five have already been in jail for eight years. Even if one were to grant that they committed technical violations of U.S. law, such as failure to register as foreign agents -- something the defense does not concede -- the time they have already served would constitute excessive punishment. Doesn't our own sense of justice argue that they should be released, or at the very least be given a fair trial?
Author's note: Up-to-date information on the Five is available at FreeTheFive.org.
Frank Joyce is a journalist and labor communications consultant.
Comment on this Article
The War on Humanity
61 schoolgirls killed, 129 wounded in Sri Lankan airstrike - Bombed compound, a well-known humanitarian zone
TamilNet
August 14, 2006
At least 61 schoolgirls were killed and 129 were wounded when Sri Lankan Kfir jets bombed a children's home compound in Mullaithivu district Monday morning where schoolgirls were attending a residential course on first aid, reports said. Ambulances were rushing the wounded, many of whom are bleeding badly, to hospitals, sources said. Officials of the Liberation Tigers' Peace Secretariat, briefing reporters in Kilinochchi, described the attack as "a horrible act of terror" by the Sri Lankan armed forces. UN's child agency, UNICEF, and international truce monitors have visited the scene of the carnage.
our Kfir jet bombers of the Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAF) dropped 16 bombs on the premises of the Sencholai children's home in Vallipunam on Paranthan-Mullaithivu road, killing at least 61 schoolgirls who were attending
33 bodies have been taken to Puthukudiyiruppu hospital. Other bodies, in severely damaged state, were being identified.
More than 400 schoolgirls were staying in Chencholai. Kfir bombers were flown to the target without circling over the attack site, civilian sources said.
52 wounded girls were rushed to Mullaithivu hospital. 13 were admitted at Puthukudiyiruppu hospital. At least 64 wounded were taken to Kilinochchi hospital.
Girls from various schools in the Mullaitivu district were staying overnight at the compound, attending a course in first-aid, LTTE officials in Kilinochchi said.
The officials at the LTTE Peace Secretariat denounced the Sri Lankan airstrike as "a horrible act of terror."
They condemned the "deliberate, cold-blooded and inhumane" targeting of the schoolgirls compound by the daylight air raid.
The LTTE Peace Secretariat urged representatives of international agencies in Kilinochchi, including UNICEF, to visit the site of the bombing.
They also urged the international Sri Lankan Monitoring Mission (SLMM), overseeing the 2002 Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) to attend the site.
In September 1999, SLAF jets killed 21 people in a similar daylight raid.
Commenting at the time, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said: "We can confirm that 21 civilians were killed consequent to the air strike at Manthuvil junction ...The ICRC deplores the fact that the air strikes were carried out in a civilian area."
Comment on this Article
Sri Lankan army warns children can be targets - considered "combatants" or "terrorists"
By Justin Huggler, Asia Correspondent
16 August 2006
The Sri Lankan government has defied growing condemnation and declared that it considered children and young people killed in an air strike to be combatants and legitimate targets.
"If the children are terrorists, what can we do?" said a military spokesman, Brigadier Athula Jayawardana.
The government claimed that children killed and injured in the bombing on Monday were child soldiers conscripted by the Tamil Tiger rebels.
The United Nations children's organisation, Unicef, condemned the air strike as "shocking" in a statement issued in Geneva and New York. Unicef's head, Ann Veneman, said: "These children are innocent victims of violence."
The Tamil Tigers are known to use conscripted child soldiers. But Unicef said its information indicated that those killed in the air strike were schoolchildren attending a first aid course. And there was international concern yesterday at the government's statement that it was prepared to target and kill child soldiers.
The full details of what happened in Monday's air strike near Mullaitivu remain confused. The area where it took place is largely cut off from the rest of Sri Lanka by the fighting. But what is clear is that a large number of children and young people were hit. Unicef staff who were allowed to reach the site saw more than 100 people between the ages of 16 and 18 being treated in hospital, many of them critical.
It is also clear that there were deaths. Members of the European ceasefire monitoring mission were also allowed to visit the site, and they saw 19 bodies aged between 17 and 20, according to Thorfinnur Omarsson, the monitor's spokesman.
"Even it is a 17-year-old child in terms of age, they are soldiers who are prepared to kill whoever comes in front of them," Keheliya Rambukwella, a Sri Lankan government defence spokesman, said yesterday. " Therefore the age or the gender is not what is important."
The Tamil Tigers said that 61 schoolgirls were killed in the air strike, but no one has been able to confirm that figure.
The Tigers initially claimed that the air strike had targeted an orphanage, but it has emerged that all the orphans had earlier been moved to another site.
The Sri Lankan government yesterday said that what it hit was a Tiger military base, showing journalists what it said were aerial photographs of firing ranges and weapons stores at the site.
The European monitors said they saw "no evidence of a military installation" during their visit. Unicef says its information is that the compound was being used for a first aid course, and that children from schools nearby were staying overnight for the two-day course.
Unicef estimates that the Tigers currently have 1,300 child soldiers in their ranks, with an average age of 16 a practice Unicef has been working to make the Tigers end. "For us it's not a question of intention," says Dr Haque of Unicef. "What matters is that children are being affected. A child soldier can be any child with a military, whether he or she is peeling potatoes for the soldiers to eat or carrying arms. The responsibility is with both sides to take measures to ensure children are not affected."
Schools were ordered to be closed in government-controlled areas for two weeks for fear of retaliatory attacks on children after a known Tiger front group threatened to target civilians in revenge for the air strike. Fighting continued around the Jaffna peninsula in the north yesterday.
Norwegian mediators have been working without success to persuade both sides to return to a 2002 ceasefire.
The current fighting began when the government launched a ground offensive near Trincomalee, saying it was intended to force the Tigers to reopen a vital water supply they had closed.
But the Tigers have succeeded in spreading the fighting to the Jaffna area, scene of some of the worst battles of the civil war.
Comment on this Article
Singer arrested by US forces in Haiti freed after two years
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
16 August 2006
So Anne, 65, was one of several high-profile supporters of the former Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide rounded up and imprisoned with the barest of evidence after he was forced from power in 2004. Her case was highlighted by Amnesty International, which said she had been seized by US Marines - part of an international force deployed to Haiti - who said she had been arrested on suspicion of "possessing information that could pose a threat to the US military force".
Even though the US military admitted it found no weapons or evidence to support the allegations against her, she was taken into custody and held by the interim government of Gerard Latortue, imposed by the US, France and Canada, on suspicion of incitement to violence, though Amnesty said she was never charged with a recognisable offence.
A popular Haitian folk singer and political activist has been released from jail more than two years after she was seized by US Marines and incarcerated without charge.
Annette Auguste, better known as So Anne (Sister Anne), was released after her lawyer persuaded a judge in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, that there was no evidence to hold her. Yesterday, freed after 826 days in a Haitian jail, she spoke of her incarceration, telling Democracy Now radio in the US: "The conditions in prison were very bad for everyone. Everybody was suffering." She added: "They had no evidence to condemn me - that is why I'm free."
So Anne, 65, was one of several high-profile supporters of the former Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide rounded up and imprisoned with the barest of evidence after he was forced from power in 2004. Her case was highlighted by Amnesty International, which said she had been seized by US Marines - part of an international force deployed to Haiti - who said she had been arrested on suspicion of "possessing information that could pose a threat to the US military force".
Even though the US military admitted it found no weapons or evidence to support the allegations against her, she was taken into custody and held by the interim government of Gerard Latortue, imposed by the US, France and Canada, on suspicion of incitement to violence, though Amnesty said she was never charged with a recognisable offence.
The Latortue government was widely criticised for its suppression of pro-Aristide supporters and his Lavalas political party. Other high-profile figures imprisoned were the former prime minister Yvonne Neptune, freed on appeal last month.
The release of So Anne comes five months after the election of President Rene Preval, who has vowed to release all political prisoners. "This is an important step," said Brian Concannon, director of the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti. "The struggle continues to release prisoners being held for political reasons who do not have such a high profile."
Comment on this Article
Asians 'will be alienated by plan for profiling' - New Offense: Traveling While Asian
By Jonathan Brown
16 August 2006
Plans to introduce passenger profiling techniques at Britain's airports were condemned by religious groups yesterday amid fears they would further fuel alienation among Muslims.
As the Government indicated that the new heightened security arrangements were here to stay, one of Britain's most senior Muslim police officers said that profiling threatened to create a new offence of "travelling while Asian".
Chief Superintendent Ali Dizaei of the Metropolitan Police was responding to reports that airport security staff could in future select people for searches and questioning based on their ethnicity. Opponents believe it could mean longer waits for non-white travellers.
It follows nearly a week of chaos at airports which has seen passengers miss flights because of the long queues at the security desks.
Pressure to implement the new system grew when David Cameron, the Conservative leader, warned against "making politically correct judgements in Whitehall or Westminster" on passenger profiling. He said: "We have got to be guided by what is right in terms of intelligence and policing and we have got to be guided by the evidence of what would work."
But the Muslim Council of Britain said profiling would lead to "an extreme form of stereotyping". A spokesman said: "Muslims are not an ethnic group and come from many different backgrounds, including from the black community and increasingly from the white community."
Ch Supt Dizaei warned that the police were reliant on the co-operation of Asian communities. "What you are suggesting is that we should have a new offence in this country called 'travelling whilst Asian'," he told BBC's Newsnight.
"That's unpalatable to everyone. It is communities that defeat terrorism, and what we don't want to do is actually alienate the very communities who are going to help us catch terrorists."
Chris Yates of Jane's Airport Review, a security consultant, said passenger profiling was the "cheapest option" available.
More public cash would be necessary if new anti-explosives technology was introduced and the number of security personnel increased at Britain's airports, he said. "The airline industry cannot sustain the sort of costs that we are talking about if we go down the road of profiling plus new technology."
Douglas Alexander, the Secretary of State for Transport, warned that air passengers must be prepared for more stringent security precautions.
However, airports have relaxed some restrictions on hand luggage. Passengers are now allowed to take on board a bag the size of a laptop computer, although liquids, with the exception of baby milk and medicines, are still banned. The easing of restrictions meant that only 45 flights at Heathrow and 11 at Gatwick were cancelled yesterday, as other airports returned to normal.
Meanwhile, Thames Valley Police said it had deployed extra officers to reassure Muslim communities against a "misguided backlash" following raids in Slough and an alleged arson attack on a mosque in Basingstoke last Saturday.
Comment on this Article
Russian patrol fatally shoots Japanese fisherman in disputed waters
Last Updated Wed, 16 Aug 2006 01:01:38 EDT
The Associated Press
A Russian patrol boat fired on a Japanese fishing vessel near disputed islands Wednesday, killing a fisherman, the Japanese Coast Guard said.
Japan called the shooting "unacceptable" and demanded compensation.
In a statement, Japan's Foreign Ministry also demanded the immediate release of the surviving crew and the boat, which was seized by Russian authorities after the shooting. Russia claimed the boat had defied orders to stop, Kyodo News agency reported.
The crab fisherman was shot and killed near Kaigara island, one of several islands off the northeast tip of Hokkaido that are administered by Russia but claimed by Japan, Japanese Coast Guard official Kazuhiro Nakaya said. The Foreign Ministry did not immediately confirm the death.
The Japanese boat's crew of four was being taken to nearby Kunashiri island, which is also in the southern Kuril chain, for further investigation, Nakaya said. The remaining three crew members were believed to be uninjured.
Japan dispatched two coast guard vessels to the shooting scene for investigation.
The sparsely populated Kuril islands were seized by the Soviet army in the closing days of the Second World War. Tokyo has called the seizure illegal and wants them returned. The territorial dispute has kept the two countries from signing a formal treaty ending wartime hostilities.
The islands are surrounded by rich fishing waters and are believed to have promising offshore oil and natural gas reserves, as well as gold and silver deposits.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has offered to revive a 1956 Soviet-Japanese declaration under which Moscow had agreed to return two of the islands, but Tokyo rejected the proposal as insufficient and talks on the issue are deadlocked.
Comment on this Article
Who's Gonna Pay?
Dell recall may cost Sony up to $430 mln: analysts
Reuters
August 16, 2006
TOKYO - Dell Inc.'s recall of 4.1 million notebook computer batteries could cost Sony Corp. anywhere from 10 billion yen to 50 billion yen ($85-$430 million), hurting the Japanese electronics maker's short-term earnings and its brand image, analysts said.
"As the batteries were made by Sony, the possible impact of the news on Sony's earnings is a concern," said Eiichi Katayama, an analyst at Nomura Securities Co. Ltd. "Until management discloses details of the cause, the risk of a larger impact remains."
The recall comes just as Sony tries to revamp its electronics business with its Bravia-brand LCD TVs and Cybershot digital cameras, as it faces fierce competition from rivals Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Sharp Corp.
Dell, the world's largest personal computer maker, announced on Tuesday its biggest recall in its 22-year history, saying the lithium-ion batteries made by Sony could smoke and catch fire.
The news sent Sony's shares down 0.4 percent the same day, and pushed the stock down a further 1.15 percent on Wednesday to 5,150 yen, going against Tokyo's electrical machinery subindex IELEC which gained 1.73 percent.
But while analysts gave a wide range of cost estimates related to the recall, most noted that Sony's battery-supply business is small compared with its overall operations, even if the company eventually loses its battery-supply business with Dell and others.
Macquarie analyst David Gibson estimates Sony's battery operations account for roughly 3 percent of Sony's total electronics sales and 6 percent of the company's operating profits.
Gibson reckoned the recall would mean a one-off cost of 20 to 30 billion yen, or 15 to 23 percent of Sony's full-year net profit forecast of 130 billion yen.
A Sony spokesman said the company is still assessing the possible financial impact of the recall.
He added that nothing had been decided on whether Sony would pay for all the recall costs involved. The overheating problem is believed to be specific to the batteries supplied to Dell, he said.
U.S. consumer safety officials said on Tuesday they were reviewing all Sony-made lithium-ion batteries in laptop computers for fire hazards.
The Sony batteries are also used in laptops made by Hewlett-Packard Co., Apple Computer Inc. and Lenovo Group Ltd.
Comment on this Article
Northeast states to act on CO2 where Bush won't
By Timothy Gardner
Reuters
Tue Aug 15, 2006
NEW YORK - Seven northeastern U.S. states said on Tuesday they had agreed on a model rule that would create the country's first market for heat-trapping carbon dioxide by curbing emissions at power plants.
The agreement, called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, is relatively weak compared to the European Trading Scheme, the emissions trading program set up by the European Union to meet its obligations under the Kyoto Protocol on global warming.
But one expert said it was a landmark agreement that may help force the federal government to take action on reducing greenhouse gases.
"It's a good first step, but the road is pretty long, and we are going to need substantive greenhouse gas reductions," said Peter Fusaro, a carbon markets expert and the CEO of Energy & Environment Capital Management LLC in New York. "The limits are mild, pretty negligible," he added.
States in the western U.S. such as California are also trying to form regional regulations on greenhouse gas emissions. Fusaro said both regions hope that companies that could face emissions reductions on each coast would lobby for national regulation.
The RGGI would cap carbon dioxide emissions at about current levels at power plants from 2009 until 2015. Emissions at the plants would then be gradually reduced by 10 percent by 2019.
The first round of the Kyoto pact requires developed countries to cut greenhouse emissions by 5.2 percent of 1990 levels from 2008 to 2012.
REGULATION VACUUM
The northeastern states have been working to regulate emissions because the U.S. federal government places no mandatory limits on the gases most scientists believe cause global warming.
In 2001, President George W. Bush withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, saying that it would hurt the economy and unfairly left rapidly developing countries without emissions limits in its first round.
Most scientists believe greenhouse gases are causing global warming that could lead to catastrophic consequences such as stronger storms, heat waves and flooding as warmer temperatures melt glaciers.
The RGGI was initiated in 2003 by fellow Republican New York Gov. George Pataki.
Massachusetts and Rhode Island dropped out of the group late last year, saying the agreement could boost electricity rates. The RGGI said in a statement on Tuesday that homeowners would pay at most an additional $21 annually and would eventually save money as the plan helps power plants become more efficient.
Many Massachusetts legislators expect the state will rejoin the pact when Gov. Mitt Romney, also a Republican, leaves office. Romney is not seeking reelection in 2006.
The states participating in RGGI are Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York and Vermont. Maryland recently adopted legislation requiring the state to join RGGI by June 2007. The states now each have to approve the model rule.
Several bills in the U.S. Congress seek to create a national greenhouse emissions market.
Comment on this Article
NY mayor to give his own cash to stop world smoking
Reuters
Tue Aug 15, 2006
NEW YORK - Billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an ex-smoker, on Tuesday announced plans to donate $125 million to help the world stop smoking.
Bloomberg -- ranked by Forbes magazine as the 40th richest American with an estimated wealth of more than $5 billion -- banned smoking in New York bars and restaurants in 2003 and now wants to take his anti-smoking campaign worldwide.
"Tobacco is the world's leading killer," Bloomberg, first elected mayor in 2001, said in a statement. "Smoking doesn't just hurt smokers, it also harms and can kill people around them."
The personal donation aims to make the world tobacco-free by improving programs that help smokers stop and preventing children from starting, Bloomberg said. The key partners will be existing organizations, but they are still being finalized.
Bloomberg, 64, who said he quit smoking almost 30 years ago, said he undertook his personal crusade against the habit because he could not stand to see people dying when he knew they could be saved from early death if they stopped smoking.
Comment on this Article
Mediterranean oil spill prompts crisis meeting
AFP
Tue Aug 15, 2006
ATHENS - Officials from the United Nations, European Union and a maritime organization are set to meet in Greece Thursday to map out a strategy for containing a massive Mediterranean oil spill caused by the conflict in Lebanon.
Nearly 15,000 tons of leaked oil from the Jiyyeh electric plant, bombed by Israel last month, has polluted some 140 kilometers (87 miles) of the Lebanese coast and spread north into Syrian waters, according to the United Nations Environment Programme.
If all the oil from the damaged facility, 30 miles south of Beruit, were to seep into the sea, officials said, the environmental fallout could rival the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill that devastated Alaska's Prince William Sound.
"The objective of the meeting is to coordinate a common strategy to confront the pollution and to devise actions to prevent the possible expansion of the oil spill," said a communique released by the UNEP and the International Maritime Organization, which are jointly hosting the meeting in Piraeus.
UNEP head Achim Steiner and IMO secretary general Efthymios Mitropoulos will chair the meeting, also to be attended by EU Commissioner for the environment Stavros Dimas. Representatives from Cyprus, Lebanon, Syria and Turkey will also participate, the Greek Merchant Marine said.
Environmental officials and inspectors have said that the spill poses a direct threat to marine life and could also be hazardous to human health, including a heightened risk of cancer.
More oil has already spilled from the Jiyyeh plant than leaked from the Erika oil tanker into the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of France in 1999.
"In the worst-case scenario, if all the oil contained in the bombed power plant at Jiyyeh leaked into the Mediterranean Sea the Lebanese oil spill could well rival the Exxon Valdez disaster of 1989," the UNEP said.
The Exxon Valdez spilled 37,000 tons of oil into Alaska's Prince William Sound after running aground on a reef on March 24, 1989, causing massive damage from which some scientists argue the area has yet to completely recover.
UNEP said two environmental experts had arrived in Syria to begin assessing the impact of the Jiyyeh spill, which it said it feared had already affected marine life, particularly tuna and turtles, in the Mediterranean.
Comment on this Article
Home sales decline in 28 states, D.C.
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
AP Economics Writer
Tue Aug 15, 2006
WASHINGTON - The slowdown in the once-sizzling housing market is spreading, with 28 states and the District of Columbia reporting spring sales declines, led by big drops in former boom areas of Arizona, Florida and California.
Nationally, sales were down 7 percent in the April-June quarter this year compared with the same period in 2005, the National Association of Realtors said Tuesday in its latest state-by-state look at housing conditions around the country.
The Realtors survey showed that the biggest declines occurred in states that had been enjoying red-hot sales during the five-year housing boom.
The five biggest declines this spring compared to the April-June period of 2005 were Arizona, down 26.9 percent; Florida, down 26.7 percent; California, down 25.3 percent; Virginia, down 23.9 percent, and Nevada, down 23.5 percent.
The Realtors report depicted a tale of two housing markets, with former boom areas experiencing declines and other areas of moderate sales gains during the boom years experiencing strong growth.
In all, 20 states had sales gains in the spring, led by Alaska, which enjoyed a 48.6 percent jump in sales; followed by Arkansas, up 17.9 percent; Texas, up 11.3 percent; North Carolina, up 11 percent, and Vermont, up 9.1 percent compared to the spring of 2005.
"States with moderately priced areas that have experienced healthy job creation are seeing sales gains," said David Lereah, chief economist for the Realtors. "The economic backdrop remains favorable for the housing market, which is helping home sales level out."
In a separate survey of price changes in 151 metropolitan areas, the Realtors reported that 26 metro areas experienced outright price declines while 37 areas were still enjoying double-digit price increases.
The biggest price drops in percentage terms were in Danville, Ill., where home prices fell by 11.2 percent in the spring compared with the spring of 2005, and the Detroit area, where home prices were down 8 percent.
At the other end of the scale, prices rose the most in Baton Rouge, La., reflecting a 27.3 percent increase, followed by Ocala, Fla., where prices rose by 25.3 percent, and the Virginia Beach, Va., area, where prices were up 23.6 percent compared with the spring of 2005.
Comment on this Article
The Melting Pot
Ohio voting problems deemed severe
By CONNIE MABIN
Associated Press
Tue Aug 15, 2006
CLEVELAND - Problems with elections in Ohio's most populous county are so severe that it's unlikely they can be completely fixed by November, or even by the 2008 presidential election, a report commissioned by Cuyahoga County and released Tuesday says.
A nonprofit group hired to review the county's first election with new electronic voting machines found several problems with the May 2 primary, the results of which were delayed six days because roughly 18,000 absentee ballots had to be hand counted.
The absentee ballots had been improperly formatted for new optical scan voting machines. Poll workers also had problems operating the machines, some poll workers didn't show up, vote memory cards disappeared and one precinct opened hours late. Researchers also found that the four sources used to keep track of vote totals on machines did not always add up.
"The election system in its entirety exhibits shortcomings with extremely serious consequences, especially in the event of a close election," wrote Steven Hertzberg, director of the study by the San Francisco-based Election Science Institute.
The report, part of a $341,000 review ordered by county commissioners, suggests that the county revamp poll worker training, develop a plan to ensure all electronic votes are counted in the case of a manual count and consider adding machines to avoid long lines that might scare voters away.
An official with the maker of the voting machines, North Canton-based Diebold Inc., said the report was flawed because the researchers did not properly review electronic votes in some cases.
Mark Radke, director of marketing for Diebold subsidiary Diebold Election Systems, also blamed inadequately trained poll workers, saying the totals didn't always add up because some changed memory cards without also changing the paper receipt rolls.
County elections chief Michael Vu said he could not comment on the report until Diebold and ESI worked out any issues. Then he wants ESI to present its findings to the elections board "so that we can make an informed decision to the report as a whole."
Comment on this Article
McKinney Criticizes Electronic Voting
By KATE BRUMBACK
Associated Press
Aug 15, 2006
AUGUSTA, Ga. - Rep. Cynthia McKinney, in her first public appearance since losing her re-election bid last week, said Tuesday that the black community needs to oppose electronic voting machines, which she warned can be used to steal elections.
McKinney also said the state of Georgia should prohibit crossover voting among political parties in primary elections and end its system of runoff elections.
The fiery Democratic congresswoman, who scuffled with a Capitol Hill police officer earlier this year and has accused the Bush administration of having advance knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks, said she considers herself a "black political paramedic," and the "black body politic is near comatose."
McKinney made the remarks during the National Dialogue and Revival for Social Justice in the Black Church, sponsored by the Rev. Al Sharpton's group, the National Action Network. The Augusta crowd, estimated at fewer than 200 people, gave her a standing ovation when she was introduced and again when she finished speaking.
Last week McKinney lost her bid for a seventh term in Congress. Hank Johnson, a former DeKalb County commissioner, defeated her 59 percent to 41 percent in the Democratic runoff. Johnson, like McKinney, is black, and so are most people in the suburban Atlanta district.
In her concession speech on election night, McKinney blamed her defeat on the news media and electronic voting machines. She continued to criticize both Tuesday.
"You won't know who won as long as we have those electronic voting machines, with the problems that have been manifested by them," she said, criticizing Georgia officials for not requiring that paper records be kept of all votes.
She also blamed her loss in part on Republican crossover voting. She said open primaries - where voters can choose to vote in either party's primary election, regardless of how they are registered - should not be allowed.
McKinney also charged that Georgia's system of runoff elections, where winners must always receive more than 50 percent of the vote, violates the Voting Rights Act.
As for the media, she said: "What I have learned from the corporate media is that they are there to protect the status quo. They are there to protect the powers that be, and anyone who becomes a threat in any kind of way by providing information that will go directly to the survival of the community, to the uplifting of the people, will become an enemy."
Black churches, she said, need to act as an alternative source of information.
She refused to answer reporters' questions after her speech. A woman in McKinney's entourage got between the representative and a reporter. A male bodyguard said McKinney would not take questions.
Comment: We would agree with Ms. McKinney, except for one little detail: The entire body politic is already comatose, and has been for some time.
Comment on this Article
Terror charge dropped in cell phone case
By ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS
Associated Press
August 16, 2006
MARIETTA, Ohio - The families of two men originally charged with supporting terrorism after buying large numbers of cell phones say they've lost a sense of belonging to the country they've long called home.
Ali Houssaiky and Osama Sabhi Abulhassan, both of Dearborn, Mich., headed home from jail Tuesday after prosecutors in southeast Ohio dropped the terror charges, saying they couldn't prove a terrorism link.
"I just wish that when I go onto Google and I Google my brother's name I won't see terrorist when his name pops up," said Houssaiky's sister, Diana Houssaiky.
The men still face misdemeanor counts of falsification stemming from allegations that they initially gave deputies different names than the names that appeared on their IDs. The men also initially said they were buying phones for a relative's construction business, then changed the story when deputies asked for contact information, Washington County Prosecutor James Schneider said.
The FBI and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security sent bulletins early this year warning police departments nationwide to be alert for bulk purchases of prepaid TracFones, which could be used to finance terrorism.
Washington County Sheriff Larry Mincks said Tuesday that officers had been watching for cars with Michigan, Virginia and Florida license plates after receiving numerous calls from store merchants in recent weeks about men of Middle Eastern descent buying large numbers of prepaid cell phones.
Within days of the Ohio arrests, three Palestinian-American men from Texas were charged in Michigan after nearly 1,000 cell phones were found in a van they were driving. In the Michigan case, the FBI said Monday that it had no indication that the men had any ties to known terrorist groups. Local prosecutors, however, were standing by the charges.
In Ohio, Houssaiky and Abulhassan acknowledged buying about 600 phones in recent months at stores in southeast Ohio, according to an affidavit filed to support the arrest. On the current trip, they said they planned to buy up to 300 phones at $25 each. The two said the phones were for the owner of a Dearborn gas station, the affidavit said. Officials also said they found $11,000 cash, airplane passenger lists and information on airport security checkpoints in their car.
Prosecutors have not provided details about the passenger lists. Houssaiky's mother, Nada Houssaiky, said Tuesday the security information consisted of training notes for her job as an airport passenger service agent at Detroit Metro Airport.
Abulhassan said he believes the men were targeted because they are Arab-Americans. He referred to a comment by Mincks, who said last week the department did not profile based on ethnicity but said the suspects' background "caused a bit of a stir."
"If that's not profiling, I don't know what is," Abulhassan said.
Mincks said Tuesday his department profiles people based on behavior, not background.
Schneider said his office and federal authorities don't believe "the defendants pose an imminent threat at this time."
Comment: Once someone is falsely branded a terrorist, how do you give them their life back? But then, Bush doesn't care about that - the whole point was to instill more fear in the population, and it worked.
Comment on this Article
NYC to Release 911 Calls From Sept. 11
By AMY WESTFELDT
Associated Press
Aug 15, 2006
NEW YORK - The city planned Wednesday to release more than 1,600 undisclosed Sept. 11 emergency calls - several by rescuers who later were killed - after fire department officials said they discovered the internal dispatches of firefighters who went to rescue people from the burning World Trade Center.
The New York Times and families of Sept. 11 victims had sued the city for access to firefighters' oral histories and 911 calls made from and around the site on the day of the terrorist attacks in 2001.
The fire department said that when it first turned over its emergency calls, officials "misinterpreted instructions they were given on what kinds of calls to copy" and "failed to capture" other 911 calls they knew had to be made public.
"The department regrets the delay," it said in a statement Tuesday evening.
The transcripts of about 130 emergency calls from people trapped in the twin towers were released earlier this year, only including the voices of the city operators, emergency responders and other public employees. The callers' voices were cut out after city attorneys argued that their pleas for help were too emotional and intense to be publicized without families' consent. Thousands of pages of emergency workers' oral histories, as well as radio transmissions, were released last August.
Fire Commissioner Nicholas Scoppetta ordered the department to search for previously undisclosed recordings earlier this year.
Attorney Norman Siegel, who represents Sept. 11 families, called on Mayor Michael Bloomberg to pledge that no more emergency recordings from that day exist.
"We need the mayor to assure the family members that this is it, that this is everything we have," Siegel said. "If it was 10 or 20 tapes, one could understand that they overlooked some. But if you're talking hundreds, and possibly as many as 2,000 tapes, the serious substantial question is how did this happen?"
A spokesman for the mayor declined to comment Tuesday.
The 1,613 calls expected to be released Wednesday include 10 new 911 calls that people made from the trade center, again with only the operators' voices included.
They include two calls that were withheld in March to be used as evidence at the trial of Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui. Jurors in the Moussaoui case heard excerpts of calls made by Melissa Doi, who spent more than 20 minutes on the phone with a 911 operator from the 83rd floor of the south tower, and Kevin Cosgrove. Both were killed in the attack.
"I'm going to die, aren't I? Please God, it's so hot, I'm burning up," Doi told the dispatcher. The remainder of the call not played at trial - with only the 911 operator's voice - would be released.
Other calls include 911 calls made from outside the trade center, and hundreds of calls made by firefighters and other department employees to an internal dispatch system. Several firefighters were asking where they should report for duty, while other department employees were asking about the available services at local hospitals, officials said.
Nineteen firefighters and two emergency medical technicians who died are identified by name on the new tapes, and their families have been notified, the department said. Because they are public employees, their entire recordings will be released on Wednesday.
Comment: It's curious how the government and its agencies have delayed the release of this material over a couple of years. While claiming to want to prevent additional emotional harm to the families of the victims, it is clear that the delays are only prolonging the emotional turmoil for all Americans. Coincidence? We think not.
Comment on this Article
Landing system failure unsolved at LAX
By GILLIAN FLACCUS
Associated Press
Tue Aug 15, 2006
LOS ANGELES - Federal officials said Tuesday they do not know what is causing a critical instrument landing system to fail at Los Angeles International Airport.
The system, a beacon that guides planes to one of the airport's runways, has shut off twice within a week, most recently for about 40 minutes Monday. That created delays of up to 45 minutes as controllers kept planes circling.
"We haven't found the cause of the problem," said Steven Zaidman, vice president of technical operations for the FAA's Air Traffic Organization. "At this point, we're maintaining technicians 24-7, full-time, to reservice the instrument landing system and reset it" whenever it shuts itself off.
The Federal Aviation Administration, which owns and maintains the equipment, has drawn fire from the head of the city airports department, politicians and the air traffic controllers' union.
"This is clearly a systemic problem with the equipment," Lydia Kennard, executive director of Los Angeles World Airports, said Monday. "We believe there's something fundamentally wrong with the equipment. It has to be fixed or replaced."
The malfunctioning equipment, called a localizer, is most crucial when it's foggy or hazy, as it was on Aug. 7 when the equipment flickered off for several hours, creating 90-minute arrival delays.
Zaidman, speaking in a conference call with reporters Tuesday, said 46 flights were delayed during last week's outage, and 13 delays were attributed to Monday's problem. The airport averages 1,800 daily flights.
In some cases when the instrument landing system isn't working, pilots can land by relying on their own vision, FAA spokesman Ian Gregor said. Other times, he said, they will pull up and circle until the system is functioning.
Zaidman said technicians have not been able to tell whether the problem lies with the localizer antenna array at the end of the runway, the computerized system next to the runway or the cables running between them.
Zaidman said any number of things could be causing the outage, including corrosion, dust or problems with the circuit board or cable pins. He said the technician that reset the localizer on Monday found one of the cable pins was pushed in too far, but added that officials do not believe that was the cause of the repeated outages.
The malfunctioning system is one of eight localizers placed at each end of the airport's four parallel runways, one of which is closed for construction.
On July 26, a system designed to alert controllers at the airport tower to potential collisions on the ground was partially disabled minutes before a turboprop plane narrowly missed a jet that had strayed onto its runway.
Comment on this Article
A Split In the Racist Right - A rift has opened between those who see blacks, Hispanics and Muslims as the primary enemy, and those who blame Jews for every evil
By Heidi Beirich and Mark Potok
Intelligence Report
August 16, 2006.
For a gathering of people devoted to denouncing the inferiority of blacks and sounding the alarm about civilization-threatening Muslims, the biannual conferences thrown by the New Century Foundation, publisher of the racist newsletter American Renaissance, are decidedly genteel affairs. Men dress in suits and ties, women in formal business attire, and there are no uniformed skinheads or Klansmen to be seen. Large plasma television screens, Starbucks coffee spreads and fancy linens adorn the hotel meeting hall. Epithets have no place here.
Or at least they didn't. At the latest edition of the conferences that began in 1994, held this February at the Hyatt Dulles hotel, a nasty spat broke out that upset the gathering's decorum -- and may even shape the future of the radical right.
It began when David Duke, the former Klan leader and author of Jewish Supremacism, strode to a microphone after French author Guillaume Faye wrapped up a talk vilifying Muslims entitled "The Threat to the West." Duke thanked Faye for remarks that "touched my genes." But then he went one further.
"There is a power in the world that dominates our media, influences our government and that has led to the internal destruction of our will and spirit," Duke said, according to an undisputed account in The Forward newspaper.
"Tell us, tell us," someone in the back yelled.
"I'm not going to say it," Duke replied. Laughter began to fill the room, until a short, angry man leaped from his seat, walked up to Duke and began to curse.
"You fucking Nazi, you've disgraced this meeting!" he said.
And with that, Michael Hart, a Jewish astrophysicist and long-time attendee at American Renaissance conferences, headed for the door. As many as 50 people at the conference began to jeer and point at the rapidly disappearing Hart.
This extraordinary incident marked the beginning of an open rift between those on the radical right who see blacks, Hispanics and Muslims as the primary enemy, and those who say "the Jews" are ultimately behind every evil -- a split that has usually stayed just below the surface but now threatens a leading institution of American extremism. While in the past he has managed to bridge this divide mainly by ignoring it, American Renaissance founder Jared Taylor now must finally come to terms with the split. His dilemma boils down to this: Throw out the anti-Semites and try to build a larger movement with electoral possibilities like those increasingly seen in Britain and Germany; or openly join hands with the very energetic neo-Nazis, even though that means the loss of any remaining shred of respectability.
"These are the makings of a major schism," wrote Shawn Mercer, co-founder and moderator of American Renaissance's AR List, an E-mail group. "If American Renaissance ultimately fails as a result of this donnybrook at the convention, it will be a sad, possibly fatal turn of events for the future of whites."
Jews and the radical right
The traditional enemy of the American radical right, going back to the Civil War and even before, has been the black man. Given the numbers of voters who would be created by enfranchising former slaves -- and the historical fact that blacks outnumbered whites in many southern counties -- that is no surprise. But radical anger also has been directed throughout U.S. history at each new wave of foreign immigrants, and, in both the 19th century and the 20th, that included Jews.
European anti-Semitism made its way across the ocean as well, infecting Americans with ideas about secret Jewish plans for world domination and alleged ritual practices like the murder of Christian children. Increasingly, hatred of Jews filtered into groups like the Klan -- most famously, in 1915, when the group was reborn on the strength of the lynching of Jewish businessman Leo Frank of Atlanta. (Frank was falsely accused of the rape and murder of a 12-year-old girl.)
In the 1920s, auto tycoon Henry Ford published anti-Semitic treatises culminating in the book, The International Jew. In the following decade, Father Charles Coughlin, a radical Catholic, railed against Jews in radio broadcasts heard by millions. There followed a brief lull in anti-Semitism due to revelations about the Nazi genocide, but it wasn't long before Jew-hatred came roaring back.
This was partly due to the spread of Christian Identity, a radical theology that claims that Jews are biologically descended from Satan and are the chief enemy of the white man. This ideology, which increasingly crept into traditionally Christian groups like the Klan, helped to start the broad-based change that has occurred over the last half century or so -- the Nazification of the American radical right. Growing anti-Semitism also reflected the view of many segregationists that Jews were behind the black civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. The bombings of several Southern synagogues by white supremacists underlined this conviction.
In recent decades, however, mainstream American society has rejected anti-Semitism, to the point where it is generally seen as more acceptable to voice ugly views of blacks than Jews. And this has not been lost on certain sectors of the radical right that have become increasingly interested in gaining real political power. Given recent developments in the United States -- especially large-scale Latin American immigration and the threat of radical Islamist terror -- these sectors have wondered if it wasn't better to direct their hate at people of color, rather than Jews who are seen by most Americans as white. Seeing the electoral success of neofascists in Germany and Britain who aim their wrath at dark-skinned immigrants and Muslims generally, many American radical leaders have sought to dispense with anti-Semitism.
Black attack
In 1990, Jared Taylor, a Yale graduate who had spent 17 years working in Japan, joined the active white supremacist scene with his launching of American Renaissance, a magazine focusing on the alleged links between race and intelligence and on eugenics, the discredited "science" of breeding better human beings. The magazine scrupulously avoided racist epithets, employed the language of academic journals, and sought to put a palatable face on hate (though that didn't stop Taylor from describing blacks as "deviant," dissipated" and "pathological," or later writing a booklet that claimed that blacks are far more "crime-prone" than whites).
At the same time, Taylor made it clear that he had no problem with Jews. At the group's very first conference, held in Atlanta in 1994, the dinner speaker was a rabbi named Mayer Schiller, and the meal was kosher. Taylor banned discussion of the so-called "Jewish question" from American Renaissance venues, and, by 1997, had kicked Holocaust deniers and neo-Nazis off his E-mail list. In recent years, a growing number of Jews have attended Taylor's conferences.
But Taylor, who operates in a world that is peopled with anti-Semites as well as black-bashing "white nationalists," also tried to have it both ways. Atlanta lawyer Sam Dickson, for instance, has been invited to speak at every one of Taylor's biannual conferences -- despite a long history of Holocaust denial that includes membership on the editorial board of The Barnes Review, a journal that specializes in that topic. Joe Sobran, a columnist fired from the National Review for his anti-Semitism and repeat author for the Holocaust-denying Journal of Historical Review, gave a speech on Jewish power at Taylor's 2004 conference. Don Black, the former Klan leader who runs the neo-Nazi Stormfront web forum, has attended many conferences and visited Taylor's home. Another attendee and old Taylor pal, Mark Weber, heads up the Holocaust-denying Institute for Historical Review.
Taylor, whose journal and conferences were fast becoming key institutions of the American radical right, tried to keep internal peace. But that was not to be.
In 2003, a remarkable E-mail debate between the late racist writer Sam Francis and neo-Nazi lawyer Victor Gerhard was made public by Gerhard. In it, Francis, widely regarded as the leading white nationalist intellectual in America, lambasted Gerhard, who had been an official of the neo-Nazi National Alliance, for his views of the Jews. He denounced what he saw as "a monomaniacal obsession with the omnipotent Jew" and instead discussed the threat of blacks and Hispanics. The E-mail exchange was widely circulated on the American radical right.
The same period saw several groups -- the Social Contract Press, the Charles Martel Society (publisher of The Occidental Quarterly), the Pioneer Fund, the Council of Conservative Citizens and the recently formed National Policy Institute -- focus in on the perceived ills of blacks, Hispanics and Muslims. Joining them was a new crop of racist intellectuals with no interest in the Jews.
Taylor, it seemed, could not stop the inevitable. The split between those who saw Jews as the primary enemy and the others was bubbling to the surface.
Battle of words
The biggest threat to Jared Taylor's balancing act has always been David Duke, the former leader of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan who has also been a convinced neo-Nazi since his teens. Duke, who came close to winning a campaign for Louisiana governor in 1992, was for years a celebrity on the radical right. Still, Taylor has sought to discourage Duke from attending his American Renaissance conferences ever since Duke crashed the first one in 1994. But even in years when he didn't enter the hall, Duke was often found outside, talking to participants.
It wasn't just Duke, either. Over the years, more and more participants at Taylor's conferences were Duke allies -- most notably, Don Black and supporters of Black's Stormfront website, including Stormfront moderator Jamie Kelso.
This year, the Duke/Black/Kelso crew was larger than ever. In an interview with the Intelligence Report, Kelso said that he had organized a contingent of some 75 Stormfront supporters to come to the conference. And these supporters were the most enthusiastic members of the 300-strong audience, standing and applauding each speaker after receiving the signal to do so from Kelso. They were also not the only anti-Semites present. Others, not affiliated with Stormfront, included Kevin Alfred Strom of Virginia, leader of the neo-Nazi National Vanguard group; Hal Turner, a neo-Nazi radio host from New Jersey; and David Pringle of Alaska, the former membership coordinator of the neo-Nazi National Alliance.
As a result, the Duke-Hart clash, which occurred on the last day of the conference, rapidly assumed epic proportions, spinning out across the entire radical right. Just days later, Duke published an essay on the conference, expressing deep admiration for Taylor as a man with the courage to tell the truth on race. But he went on to say that non-white immigration and a host of other ills "all have been driven by Jewish extremists in their relentless search for supremacy." Hart, Duke added tartly, had risen "in an almost perfect Jewish caricature and started to scream at me."
That set off an often testy back-and-forth between the two sides.
From London, Nick Griffin, a conference speaker who also heads the whites-only British National Party, denounced those who see behind every evil some kind of "world-Jewish conspiracy." Griffin's BNP, which harshly attacks Muslims and other British minorities, made major electoral gains this May -- a success that Griffin thinks would be undermined by neo-Nazi attacks on Jews. In his essay, Griffin suggested that Jews are a natural ally in the battle against Islam.
Black, on the other hand, threatened to pull his anti-Semitic supporters out of Taylor's conferences. "I guess that would solve the overcrowding problem," Black wrote. "Not only would he cut loose the ... Stormfronters, but, should he apply such an ideological filter [barring anti-Semites], about 90% of his other attendees."
Lawrence Auster, a former American Renaissance speaker who also is a Christian convert with Jewish ancestry, chimed in on his own blog, describing Duke as "a major Jew-hater and an attention hog" and asking Taylor how he could be so "naïve as to allow Duke to attend at all." Another poster to Auster's site added, "It is imperative that neo-Nazis be asked to leave AR. ... European-Americans need to be assured they can affirm themselves and still be decent human beings."
In the end, nearly every "intellectual" on the white nationalist scene was pulled into the debate. So hot was the months-long exchange, in fact, that more than half a dozen major racist thinkers agreed to speak to be interviewed for this article.
Rejecting the Nazis
Virtually all those who denounced anti-Semitism and "Nazis" had no such compunctions when it came to people of color, particularly blacks. Herschel Elias, for instance, said that as a Jewish substitute teacher in public schools near Philadelphia, "I'm very disappointed with black people. Black kids are the worst kids." But he added that he now saw the conference as a "Nazi front."
Another Jew, retired University of Illinois political science professor Robert Weissberg, was a long-time supporter of American Renaissance who spoke at two conferences. In 2000, he argued that Jews and blacks despise one another, but that Jews are even more afraid of white nationalists and so had tended to support policies that empower minorities. Weissberg told the Report that he considered Taylor a friend and had been to his house "on several occasions." But he went on to say that Duke was a "tax evader" (Duke recently served time in federal prison for mail fraud and tax violations) and "provocateur," and that his Stormfront allies were "losers." He said that both Duke and the Stormfronters should be "disinvited" by Taylor.
The list goes on. In separate interviews, numerous "academic racists" complained of the neo-Nazi element at the conference:
* Michael Levin, a Jewish philosophy professor at the City University of New York who has spoken four times at American Renaissance conferences, said that there was "anti-Semitism among members of AR" and that this was part of the reason he did not attend the 2006 edition. (However, Levin still plugs his black-bashing book, Race Matters, in ads in American Renaissance.)
* Paul Gottfried, a humanities professor with Jewish ancestry at Elizabethtown (Penn.) College, spoke to the conference in 1998 and has published in American Renaissance. But he said he is dismayed at the current situation. "I cannot imagine any advantage to anyone to have these people there," he said.
* William Regnery, the extreme-right publisher who also founded and financially backs the Charles Martel Society and the National Policy Institute, dismissed Duke's anti-Semitism, saying simply, "We don't sanction it."
* Gordon Baum, the St. Louis-based CEO of the racist Council of Conservative Citizens, has Taylor on his editorial board and fights to preserve the "racial integrity" of white people. But, he said, the CCC welcomes Jews. And, adding that the CCC has no interest in "skinheads," Baum rapped Duke for believing that "race isn't even important, all that is important is the Jewish issue."
* Baum's new editor for the CCC's publication, Citizens Informer, seconded his boss' opinions. "Attacking people with Jewish lines of descent is complete nonsense," Joel LeFevre told the Report, adding that he was "very put off by Mr. Duke's behavior" at the conference. Separately, LeFevre wrote on the AR List that Duke and his "puerile loser" followers should be banned. "Duke has his own conference where he can rant about the Jews all he wants," he said.
* Jared Taylor, also said, "European Jews are certainly welcome" at American Renaissance conferences. "I don't think that Jews are the enemy in the way that some people do." As a matter of fact, Taylor came out against Nazism as early as 1983, in his book, Shadows of the Rising Sun: A Critical View of the 'Japanese Miracle', where Germany was praised for outlawing national socialism. In addition, Jews write regularly in American Renaissance and have spoken at every one of its conferences.
At the crossroads
Two months after the conference, on April 14, Jared Taylor went public. Responding to a letter from a group of supporters including several Jews, he posted a statement to his website that seemed to take clear sides. Under the title, "Jews and American Renaissance," Taylor said that Jews "have a valuable role" to play, and told those who didn't agree that they had the choice of "staying home" or of keeping their anti-Semitism private. He wrote that American Renaissance's role is to rescue white civilization, not dig up a "Jewish conspiracy." And Taylor explicitly rebuked Duke, saying his "disgraceful behavior" would not be tolerated in the future.
Within 48 hours, Taylor's statement had generated 168 responses. Two days later, there were more than 300. The reaction from anti-Semites was harsh, with many claiming that their erstwhile ally was actually in the pay of "the Jews."
Cal Rogers, an American Renaissance staffer who headed up an E-mail list of Taylor critics, quit the group, saying he was "diametrically opposed" to Taylor's views. Jess David Peterson wrote in to say that Taylor's writings had been removed from Peterson's Nationalist Party USA website. On Stormfront, Elena Haskins, a hate website proprietress, scoffed at those "who require their friend the rabbi to pat them on their heads and tushies." Ron Doggett, a Duke factotum, suggested Taylor was unfortunately sending America's anti-Semites packing. Don Black called Taylor's statement "disastrous." Another neo-Nazi said it was "a devastating miscalculation."
At the same time, Taylor was being lobbied by Jews and others who argued that the only way forward for American Renaissance was to drop those with neo-Nazi leanings entirely. Members of this group included many of the brighter minds -- or better educated ones, anyway -- that have come into the white nationalist world in recent years, and their relative prestige would be hard for Taylor to give up.
It's not clear how the situation will wind up. Taylor has now publicly rejected anti-Semitic views, but he hasn't banned anti-Semites from his conferences.
What is certain is that it will be painful for Taylor to definitively eject the anti-Semites -- Duke, Black and their neo-Nazi allies are among the most committed and serious workers in the American radical right, people who have arguably done far more for "the movement" than all the racist professors who travel to American Renaissance conferences put together. But he seems to be personally uninterested in conspiracy theories about the Jews, and in any case sees clearly that anti-Semitism will likely destroy any faint hope that American Renaissance has to gain mainstream respectability. Taylor could try to pursue a middle road - espousing, for instance, the anti-Semitic teachings of Kevin MacDonald, which avoid neo-Nazi language in favor of the academic veneer of "evolutionary biology." Or he could break with the neo-Nazis and their allies, even though Taylor is connected to many of them through dense ties of friendship and organizational alliances.
The outcome may be critical to the future of the American radical right. American Renaissance has become increasingly important over the years, bringing a measure of intellectualism and seriousness to the typically thug-dominated world of white supremacy. Today, it may be the closest thing the extreme right has to a real think tank. Whether or not it survives, and in what form, genuinely matters.
Comment: It is truly tragic that it is coming to this. The REAL enemy are psychologically deviant humans - most of the elite rulers of our world - and they exist in ALL groups, Jews, Gentiles, Blacks, Whites, and so on.
Comment on this Article
Christians 'addicted to pornography'
RAW STORY
August 14, 2006
A poll conducted by what bills itself as "the world's most visited Christian website" indicates a surprising number of Christians are addicted to pornography, RAW STORY has learned.
"The poll results indicate that 50% of all Christian men and 20% of all Christian women are addicted to pornography," said Clay Jones, founder and President of Second Glance Ministries.
The group defines "addicted" as applied to pornography as use on an ongoing basis.
"We are seeing an escalation to the problem in both men and women who regularly attend church," said Bill Cooper, President of ChristiaNet.com.
The poll, conducted at ChristiaNet.com, used a self-selected sample, and is therefore not a scientific study. Over 1,000 users responded to the survey.
Additionally, 60% of the women who answered the survey confessed having "significant struggles with lust." 40% admitted to being "involved in sexual sin" in the past year.
"No one is immunized against the vice-grip clutches of sexual addictive behaviors," reads a release issued by the site. "The people who struggle with the repeated pursuit of sexual gratification include church members, deacons, staff, and yes, even clergy."
"There have been dynamic paradigm shifts in the behavior of Christians over the last four years," explained Jones. "Technology has allowed pornography to flood the market place beyond a controllable level." Jones' ministry provides intervention programs for churches and individuals.
Comment on this Article
That Whacky Weather
Magnitude 6.1 quake rocks southern Tonga
Aug. 15, 2006, 8:43PM
The Associated Press
NUKU'ALOFA, Tonga - A strong earthquake shook the Pacific island nation of Tonga on Wednesday, rocking the capital for several seconds but causing no injuries or damage, police said.
The magnitude 6.1 quake was centered 65 miles west of the capital and about 100 miles below the earth's surface, the U.S. Geological Survey said. There were no reports of a tsunami warning being issued,
"It was felt all over Nuku'alofa," said journalist Pesi Fonua, adding the tremblor shook buildings in the city's downtown area.
Tonga has been rocked by scores of quakes recently, including a 7.8-magnitude temblor on May 4 that damaged some buildings.
Tonga, located halfway between Australia and Tahiti _ has a population of around 108,000 and an economy dependent on pumpkin and vanilla exports, fishing, foreign aid and remittances from Tongans abroad.
Comment on this Article
Wyoming homes evacuated as fire spreads
By BEN NEARY
Associated Press
Wed Aug 16, 2006
CHEYENNE, Wyo. - A wind-whipped wildfire threatened hundreds of homes under an evacuation order south of Casper, and firefighters wearily eyed a Wednesday forecast that could create conditions for the fire to spread.
Gov. Dave Freudenthal declared a state of emergency as the blaze covered 7,000 acres, or 11 square miles. Officials said winds forced firefighters to pull back in places because embers were blowing across fire lines and creating spot fires behind firefighters.
"The weather report isn't favorable for tomorrow," said State Forester Bill Crasper Tuesday night. Temperatures were predicted in the 90s again Wednesday, and isolated thunderstorms were possible.
The fire was about five miles south of Casper - Wyoming's second-largest city, near the center of the state. But it was moving southeast, away from the city, toward scattered rural subdivisions.
Crapser estimated about 225 firefighters were on the fire, but said he expected numbers to go up significantly as more crews are pulled from other fires elsewhere.
"We're still calling for resources all around the country. With the fire activity going on about the country, resources are hard to come by," Crapser said.
Elsewhere, cooler air helped firefighters in southern California advance on a blaze that charred about 7 1/2 square miles and temporarily cut power in northern Los Angeles County on Sunday. Germain Aguilara, spokesman for the Los Angeles County Fire Department, said they hoped to have the fire fully contained by Wednesday night.
"The crew keeps advancing on it," Aguilara said. "As long as the wind out there is not erratic, that will help us make progress."
In Washington state, about 550 Army soldiers were undergoing basic fire training before being dispatched in 20-person crews to help on a 141-square-mile wildfire in the Okanogan and Wenatchee national forests.
In Idaho, a blaze in the Salmon-Challis National Forest, 7 miles north of Stanley, had grown to more than 25 square miles and was threatening vacation cabins.
In Montana, a 50-square-mile fire in the northwestern part of the state near the Canadian border showed little activity, and was 75 percent contained. Meanwhile, residents of nine homes in Ravalli County were asked to be prepared to leave as a fire southeast of Lewis and Clark Caverns State Park grew to less than a square mile.
Lightning in northern Nevada also started 10 brush fires in Elko County along a 100-mile stretch from Interstate 80 to near the Idaho line, authorities said Tuesday. Five firefighters were treated after their truck overturned, but the most serious injury was a broken arm, authorities said.
Comment on this Article
Residents flee flooding in N.M.
AP
Tue Aug 15, 2006
HATCH, N.M. - Residents fled their homes Tuesday after another day of heavy rain breached an arroyo, causing waist-deep flooding in this southern New Mexico town famous for its chile peppers.
Authorities ordered residents living in areas from Hatch to Rincon, about five miles south, to evacuate. Many were soaked when they arrived at an evacuation center set up at Hatch Valley High School.
State police closed all highways and feeder roads into Hatch, though nearby Interstate 25 remained open. A command center was moved out of town to nearby Las Cruces because of the high water, and schools were ordered closed through Thursday.
Police and rescue workers helped people navigate the high water as they waded from their homes Tuesday evening. No injuries were reported.
Hatch, home to about 1,700 residents, is one of the nation's leading chili producers and proclaims itself the Chili Capital of the World. An annual chili festival over Labor Day draws tens of thousands of tourists.
It wasn't immediately known what effect the flooding would have on this year's crop, which had been expected to be a strong one. Chili farmer Joe Paul Lack said heavy rain has hurt his crops in Rincon.
"There is definitely going to be a (chili) shortage if this rain keeps up, but I'm more concerned about the town - our churches and our schools - than the crops," said.
He tried to work his way around the flooded area in his pickup truck to find his workers and family members who might need a place to stay, but found all roads into the village closed.
Tuesday's rain was the latest in a series of storms that have rolled throughout New Mexico in recent weeks, damaging roads, homes, canals and other infrastructure.
To the north in Socorro County, residents also were asked to evacuate due to flooding brought on by Tuesday's heavy rains.
More flooding was possible east of the Hatch Valley along the Rio Grande, which was expected to rise at least a foot overnight due to runoff.
Residents who live along or near the river were urged to be prepared for evacuation on short notice, said Dona Ana County spokesman Jess Williams.
Comment on this Article
India's flood-hit Gujarat state evacuates thousands after heavy rains
AFP
August 16, 2006
AHMEDABAD, India - Authorities in India's flood-hit western state of Gujarat have moved tens of thousands of people to higher ground as more heavy rain caused rivers to rise, officials have said.
The new alert comes days after a first wave of flooding killed at least 65 people and caused widespread damage in Gujarat's Surat city.
"Fifty thousand people have been evacuated in the past 72 hours," said Rajesh Bhatt, deputy chief fire officer who was supervising relief work in Gujarat's commercial capital Ahmedabad, on Wednesday.
A state irrigation department official said levels at the Dharoi dam, 150 kilometres (93 miles) north of Ahmedabad on the Sabarmati River, were near the danger mark.
"At present it is less than three feet (0.91 metres) below the danger mark," said the official who wished to remain unidentified.
He said the department was planning to release 100,000 cubic metres (3.5 million cubic feet) of water per second in phases on Wednesday.
"So people living along the riverbanks have been asked to move out to safer places," he said.
Reports said heavy rain in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan -- all bordering Gujarat -- had caused the Sardar Sarovar reservoir on the Narmada River to overflow.
The Press Trust of India news agency said residents of some central and southern districts of Gujarat had also been warned following the release of water from the Kadana dam on the Mahi River.
Comment on this Article
'More disasters' for warmer world
Monday, 14 August 2006, 22:02 GMT 23:02 UK
Rising temperatures will increase the risk of forest fires, droughts and flooding over the next two centuries, UK climate scientists have warned.
Even if harmful emissions were cut now, many parts of the world would face a greater risk of natural disasters, a team from Bristol University said.
The projections are based on data from more than 50 climate models looking at the impact of greenhouse gas emissions.
The study appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The researchers gathered results from 52 computer simulations to calculate the risks from climate-induced changes to the world's key ecosystems.
They then grouped the results according to the amount of global warming: less than 2C (3.6F); 2-3C (3.6F-5.4F); and more than 3C (5.4F).
For each of the temperature ranges, the team assessed the probability of changes in forest cover, the frequency of wildfires and changes to freshwater supplies over the next 200 years.
'Dangerous climate change'
Marko Scholze, from the University of Bristol's Department of Earth Sciences, and the paper's lead author, said the findings revealed a direct link between rises in global temperature and damage to ecosystems.
"We show the steeply increasing risks, and increasingly large areas affected, associated with higher warming levels," he said.
"The United Nations says we should limit greenhouse gas emissions so we do not have dangerous climate change. So the question is 'what is dangerous climate change?'.
"In this paper we define the level we think is dangerous and see how likely it will come true," Dr Scholze told BBC News.
Richard Betts, manager of Climate Impacts at the Met Office's Hadley Centre, welcomed the findings.
"This makes an important new contribution to the debate on the effects of climate change," he said.
"We already knew that we cannot rely on just one model, as different models give different answers.
"This work helps us go beyond that vague statement, as it shows how much the models agree on particular levels of impact and how much they disagree."
He said the research was an important first step towards quantifying the risks of damaging impacts associated with particular levels of global warming.
The findings showed areas that would experience the worst forest loss would include Eurasia, eastern China, Canada and the Amazon.
Areas of western Africa, southern Europe and eastern US states were at most risk from dwindling freshwater supplies and droughts as a result of rising temperatures.
The data also showed that any temperature increase of more than 3C (5.4F) could result in land "carbon sinks" releasing their stored carbon into the atmosphere, exacerbating the problem of global warming.
Dr Scholze hoped the collated data would answer some of the concerns among more sceptical members of the scientific community who questioned the accuracy of climatic modelling.
"That is exactly why we did this study," he said. "We used as many models as we could and did not rely on any one study.
"We looked at 52 simulations and the probabilities of dangerous climate change these models showed."
Dr Betts agreed: "Of course it is risky to make these projections when models are continuously being changed, but we do have to make decisions on climate change now so if we wait for the perfect model we will be too late.
"The models give the best encapsulation of current understanding of the climate system, and are the only way of assessing physically plausible futures."
Dr Scholze said he hoped the findings would be used in debates on dangerous climate change and the measures needed to avoid it.
Comment on this Article
Losing the Moon, Finding a Planet
Planets plan boosts tally to 12
Wednesday, 16 August 2006, 06:05 GMT 07:05 UK
The number of planets around the Sun could rise from nine to 12 - with more on the way - if experts approve a radical new vision of our Solar System.
An endorsement by astronomers meeting in Prague would require school and university textbooks to be rewritten.
The proposal recognises eight classical planets, three planets belonging to a new category called "plutons" and the largest asteroid Ceres.
Pluto remains a planet, but becomes the basis for the new pluton category.
The plan has been drawn up by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) with the aim of settling the question of what does and does not count as a planet.
Some 2,500 astronomers gathered at the IAU General Assembly in Prague will vote on the plan next Thursday.
New era
"For the first time in more than 75 years, we will be able to discover new planets in our Solar System. This is a fascinating prospect," said Richard Binzel, a member of the IAU planet definition committee which put together the proposal.
Dr Andrew Coates of the Mullard Space Science Laboratory in Dorking said he thought the plan was "a good compromise".
He explained: "It keeps the idea of eight classical planets, while Pluto is allowed to retain its status. But other objects are allowed in, which I suppose makes life more interesting."
Experts have been divided over whether Pluto - further away and considerably smaller than the eight other planets in our Solar System - deserves the title.
Since the early 1990s, astronomers have found several other objects of comparable size to Pluto in an outer region of the Solar System called the Kuiper Belt.
Some astronomers believe Pluto belongs with this population of "icy dwarfs", not with the objects we call planets.
Allowances could once be made for Pluto on account of its size. At just 2,360km (1,467 miles) across, Pluto is significantly smaller than the other planets. But until recently, it was still the biggest known object in the Kuiper Belt.
That changed with the discovery of 2003 UB313 by Professor Mike Brown and colleagues at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech). After being measured with the Hubble Space Telescope, it was shown to be some 3,000km (1,864 miles) in diameter, making it larger than the ninth planet.
Kicked upstairs?
The IAU draft resolution recognises eight "classical" planets - Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune - three "plutons" - Pluto, Charon and UB313 - and the asteroid Ceres.
Charon is currently described as a moon of Pluto, but because of its size some experts consider it a twin planet.
Professor Owen Gingerich, who chairs the IAU planet definition committee, said: "In a sense we're demoting Pluto by taking it off the list of classical planets. But we're promoting it by making it the prototype of this new category of plutons."
Dr Coates commented: "Something had to be done about the definition. It does change the textbooks somewhat, but it also demonstrates that this is a vibrant area of research.
"The surprise is Ceres, because most people thought of it as an asteroid."
Ceres is the largest object in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, and like a planet is spherical in shape.
Seeking endorsement
The basis for this re-evaluation is a new scientific definition of a planet which uses gravity as the determining factor.
According to this definition, two conditions must be satisfied for an object to qualify as a planet:
* The object must be in orbit around a star, but must not itself be a star
* It must have enough mass for the body's own gravity to pull it into a nearly spherical shape
On whether he was confident the resolution would be passed, Professor Gingerich told the BBC News website: "It will be a very awkward situation if they don't.
"On Sunday afternoon, we proposed it out of the blue for the division chairmen and they voted unanimously that they would be prepared to back it. That's a good cross-section of astronomers.
"I'm sure it will be controversial to those with a stake in some other solution, but I hope we will get an overwhelming endorsement."
More objects are likely to be announced as planets in the future. The IAU has a "watchlist" of at least a dozen other potential candidates that could become planets once more is known about their sizes and orbits.
These include the distant objects Sedna, Orcus, Quaoar and 2003 EL61 and the asteroids Vesta, Pallas and Hygiea.
The IAU spent two years debating the matter among its membership. A seven-member committee was set up to consider the findings and produce a draft proposal.
The body has been responsible for the naming of planets and moons since 1919.
Comment on this Article
US space commander predicts satellite attacks
By Jim Wolf
Reuters
Aug 15, 2006
HUNTSVILLE, Alabama - The Air Force's new top commander for space predicted on Tuesday future attacks on U.S. satellites and called for greatly expanded tracking and identification of payloads launched by other countries.
Currently, U.S. efforts are focused on determining if an overseas launch is a ballistic missile or designed to put an object in orbit, then cataloging it over a period that can take weeks, said Air Force Gen. Kevin Chilton, who heads the Air Force Space Command at Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado.
"I say those days are over," he told an annual conference here on the fledgling, multibillion-dollar U.S. anti-missile shield. "If it's a space launch, we can't afford to relax."
"We need to know what the intent of that launch is," he said, including whether an object could jam or otherwise harm satellites or spread micro-satellites that could do so.
Chilton said his goal was to learn all this in the object's first orbit of the Earth so the United States could take unspecified actions "before an adversary can cripple us."
The increased "situational awareness" he had in mind could be achieved largely through improved computer work that would present information in easy-to-understand displays, he said.
Foes would be foolish not to be thinking of how to deny the United States the advantages of space, on which it relies heavily for military and commercial purposes, said Chilton, who took over the space command a month and a half ago.
"And in the future, I'm convinced they'll strike at these capabilities, if nothing else to attempt to level the playing field," he said.
Chilton said the United States had a duty to secure "the entire space domain not just for our own military but for our allies and for the benefit of the free world."
In other remarks to the missile-defense conference, Gil Nolte of the code-making Information Assurance Directorate at the Pentagon's National Security Agency said his agency believed unspecified foreign intelligence agencies had been behind attacks on U.S. computer networks.
He said there had been insufficient investment in cyber security at all levels of the U.S. government while attackers were very well financed and used "a wide range of tradecraft."
Comment: "And in the future, I'm convinced they'll strike at these capabilities, if nothing else to attempt to level the playing field," he said.
Who is "they"??
Comment on this Article
One giant blunder for mankind: how NASA lost moon pictures
Richard Macey
August 5, 2006
THE heart-stopping moments when Neil Armstrong took his first tentative steps onto another world are defining images of the 20th century: grainy, fuzzy, unforgettable.
But just 37 years after Apollo 11, it is feared the magnetic tapes that recorded the first moon walk - beamed to the world via three tracking stations, including Parkes's famous "Dish" - have gone missing at NASA's Goddard Space Centre in Maryland.
A desperate search has begun amid concerns the tapes will disintegrate to dust before they can be found.
It is not widely known that the Apollo 11 television broadcast from the moon was a high-quality transmission, far sharper than the blurry version relayed instantly to the world on that July day in 1969.
Among those battling to unscramble the mystery is John Sarkissian, a CSIRO scientist stationed at Parkes for a decade. "We are working on the assumption they still exist," Mr Sarkissian told the Herald.
"Your guess is a good as mine as to where they are."
Mr Sarkissian began researching the role of Parkes in Apollo 11's mission in 1997, before the movie The Dish was made. However, when he later contacted NASA colleagues to ask about the tapes, they could not be found.
"People may have thought 'we have tapes of the moon walk, we don't need these'," said the scientist who hopes a new, intensive hunt will locate them.
If they can be found, he proposes making digitalised copies to treat the world to a very different view of history.
But the searchers may be running out of time. The only known equipment on which the original analogue tapes can be decoded is at a Goddard centre set to close in October, raising fears that even if they are found before they deteriorate, copying them may be impossible.
"We want the public to see it the way the moon walk was meant to be seen," Mr Sarkissian said.
"There will only ever be one first moon walk."
Originally stored at Goddard, the tapes were moved in 1970 to the US National Archives. No one knows why, but in 1984 about 700 boxes of space flight tapes there were returned to Goddard.
"We have the documents to say they were withdrawn, but no one knows exactly where they went," Mr Sarkissian said.
Many people involved had retired or died.
Also among tapes feared missing are the original recordings of the other five Apollo moon landings. The format used by the original pictures beamed from the moon was not compatible with commercial technology used by television networks. So the images received at Parkes, and at tracking stations near Canberra and in California, were played on screens mounted in front of conventional television cameras.
"The quality of what you saw on TV at home was substantially degraded" in the process, Mr Sarkissian said, creating the ghostly images of Armstrong and Aldrin that strained the eyes of hundreds of millions of people watching around the world.
Even Polaroid photographs of the screen that showed the original images received by Parkes are significantly sharper than what the public saw. While the technique looks primitive today, Mr Sarkissian said it was the best solution that 1969 technology offered.
Among the few who saw the original high-quality broadcast was David Cooke, a Parkes control room engineer in 1969.
"I can still see the screen," Mr Cook, 74, said. "I was amazed, the quality was fairly good."
Comment on this Article
Odds 'n Ends
'Three continents' formed Australia
August 16, 2006
A UNIVERSITY researcher say she's found evidence of a collision between northern and central Australia more than 1.6 billion years ago.
The University of Adelaide researcher, Kate Selway, says Australia as we know it today was in three bits some two billion years ago.
"Northern, western and central Australia all belong to different continents," said Ms Selway, a PhD student in the university's School of Earth and Environmental Sciences.
"Research is shedding light on how these pieces may have come together."
Ms Selway said her research used a geophysical technique called magnetotellurics - measuring the electrical conductivity of the earth to depths of hundreds of kilometres.
Probing the earth beneath central Australia, Ms Selway said she found northern Australia is more conducive than central Australia, and that the boundary between them extends to at least 150km in depth.
The results were evidence of a collision between northern and central Australia, she said.
"If you looked south from Alice Springs before 1.64 billion years ago, you would have seen an ocean," Ms Selway said.
"The huge forces involved in this collision produced volcanoes which actually helped create the crust of central Australia."
Ms Selway said many ancient structures, such as the collision zone, were hidden to traditional geographical probes by thick layers of younger sediment.
Comment on this Article
Russian Genius Solves Most Complicated Math Problem, Refuses $1 mln. Prize
Created: 16.08.2006 14:28 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 14:41 MSK
MosNews
Dr. Grigory Perelman, who has solved one of the most complicated math problems, is going to refuse the $1 million reward from a U.S. institute next Tuesday, claiming the prize was the solution of the problem. The Russian genius has found a solution to the century-old problem set by the French mathematician, physicist and philosopher Jules Henri Poincare in 2002. The conjecture, which is difficult for most non-mathematicians even to understand, exercised some of the greatest minds of the 20th century. No one has been able to find a mistake in Perelman's solution and there is a growing consensus that he has cracked the problem.
Next Tuesday Perelman is tipped to win a Fields medal. But even by the standards of troubled maths virtuosos such as John Nash, portrayed in the film A Beautiful Mind, Dr. Perelman is described as "unconventional".
According to the Guardian daily, Perelman has said he will refuse a $1 million prize offered by a private math research institute in the U.S. which would be his if his solution is proven correct. And the upper echelons of the math world are buzzing with rumours that even if he is offered the award he will not accept it. The medals are open to mathematicians under 40 years old at the beginning of the prize year. Dr. Perelman turned 40 in June so this is the last year that he can win.
He has also refused a major European math prize, supposedly on the grounds that he did not believe the committee awarding the prize was sufficiently qualified to judge his work.
"I just don't see him turning up in a stretch limo with four over-endowed women and waving his cheque in the air. It's not his style," said Jeremy Gray, a math historian at the University of Oxford.
"I think he's a very unconventional person. He's against being involved in pageantry and idolatry," said Arthur Jaffe at Harvard University. "But he carries it to extreme which people might describe as a little crazy."
Little is known about Perelman, who refuses to talk to the media. He was born on June 13, 1966 and his prodigious talent led to his early enrolment at a St. Petersburg school specializing in advanced mathematics and physics. At the age of 16, he won a gold medal with a perfect score at the 1982 International Mathematical Olympiad, a competition for gifted schoolchildren.
After receiving his Ph.D from the St. Petersburg State University, he worked at the Steklov Institute of Mathematics before moving to the U.S. in the late 80s to take posts at various universities. He returned to Steklov about 10 years ago to work on his proof of the universe's shape.
The problem Perelman solved concerns the geometry of multidimensional spaces and is key to the field of topology. He claims to have solved a more general version of the problem called Thurston's geometrization conjecture, of which the Poincare conjecture is a special case.
"It's a central problem both in math and physics because it seeks to understand what the shape of the universe can be," said Marcus Du Sautoy at Oxford University, who will be giving this year's Royal Institution Christmas Lectures. "It is very tricky to pin down. A lot of people have announced false proofs of this thing."
The obsession with the problem, shared by several great mathematicians, has been dubbed Poincaritis.
But Perelman seems to have succeeded where so many failed. "I think for many months or even years now people have been saying they were convinced by the argument," said Nigel Hitchin, professor of mathematics at Oxford University. "I think it's a done deal."
Even the way he announced his proof - which took eight years to complete - was unusual. Rather than publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, he posted three manuscripts in an online archive of math and physics papers.
"He placed the papers on the web archive and basically said 'that's it'," Prof. Hitchin said. "A lot of details needed to be filled in. And there's a bit of squabbling in the background actually about who was first to fill in the details." The most recent of the papers fleshing out his proof runs to a mind-numbing 473 pages.
There is more than just professional acclaim at stake. In 2000, the Clay Institute in Boston, a private math research organization, established seven "millennium problems", each with a million-dollar reward for a solution. The Poincare conjecture is one, but Dr. Perelman has said he is not interested in the money. "There are all sorts of jokes going round the community that having a million dollars in St. Petersburg is quite dangerous," Prof. Hitchin said.
No one is quite sure what will happen if the Russian spurns the medal. "If he were to win it and turn it down it would be slightly insulting," said Prof. Du Sautoy. But it seems unlikely that Dr. Perelman, who recently relinquished his academic position, will care much about offending his peers. "He has sort of alienated himself from the math community," Prof. Du Sautoy added. "He has become disillusioned with mathematics, which is quite sad. He's not interested in money. The big prize for him is proving his theorem."
Comment on this Article
Fun with the AOL Data Leak - Last week, AOL revealed three months' worth of people's web searches -- and the data is oddly fascinating
By Annalee Newitz
AlterNet
August 15, 2006
After public outcry reached a crescendo, AOL apologized and took the data down. Of course, privacy advocates like the Electronic Privacy Information Center's Marc Rotenberg and the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Kurt Opsahl remain pissed off. Why? Because this is the Interweb, folks. Data never dies here. In fact, you can search the records yourself via DontDelete.com.
Last week AOL did another stupid thing, but at least it was in the name of science. The giant Web portal released a data chunk containing three months' worth of queries to its search engine taken from roughly half a million users. Gathered during the months of March, April, and May, the data shows queries, their date and time, and which Web sites the user ultimately visited. The idea was that this information might be of some use to researchers.
To protect user privacy, AOL replaced the log-in names of searchers with numbers. So you could still see everything that searcher #4356 looked for, but you wouldn't know who #4356 was, except for one problem: it's incredibly easy to figure out who people are based on their searches, because they tend to look for themselves, family members, and things in their immediate geographical vicinity. The New York Times did a great story in which reporters examined searches done by user #4417749 and within hours managed to locate their author, a nice old lady in Georgia who now plans to cancel her AOL subscription.
Bloggers and privacy advocates have pointed out that the information AOL released contains more than just the online search patterns of innocent Georgia ladies. It's unclear what law enforcement might do with the thousands of searches for illegal drugs and pornography. It's equally unclear what the feds will make of the handful of searches for "Muslim death rituals," "Muslim brotherhood," and "Islamic militant web forums." In a nation where the government is seriously contemplating blanket warrants for online surveillance, it's hard to imagine there aren't law enforcement types combing this treasure trove of prepackaged personal data. Imagine getting enough dirt on somebody to haul him or her in for questioning just by downloading 400 megabytes of stuff from AOL! That's like free candy.
After public outcry reached a crescendo, AOL apologized and took the data down. Of course, privacy advocates like the Electronic Privacy Information Center's Marc Rotenberg and the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Kurt Opsahl remain pissed off. Why? Because this is the Interweb, folks. Data never dies here. In fact, you can search the records yourself via DontDelete.com.
Once I visited Don't Delete, I couldn't leave. There's a button you can click to get the search terms from a random user, and every time I hit it, I got another gem. My favorite was user #4206444, obviously a college student trying to cheat quickly on his or her exams in order to get around to the more important things in life. Search phrases like "does social darwinism persist in social welfare policies and in the attitudes of the general public about social welfare" were followed by "free essays on adolescent depression and suicide risks" and "free essays on Charles Dickens Hard Times." In between these queries were hundreds for "sailor moon pictures," "pokemon pictures," "sonic x," and "selena pictures."
As blogger Thomas Claburn points out, there's a kind of poetry to some of the queries. He excerpts a dozen lines from the 8,200 queries made by user #23187425, all of which seem to be a sort of conversation this person was having with the search engine -- he or she never actually clicked on any links but just kept querying with plaintive phrases like "i have had trouble," "i want to change," and "i know who i am."
I'm torn. I love having access to this data, both for its touching human qualities and for the kinds of anthropological information it could yield. But as someone who believes strongly in digital privacy, I simply can't sanction what AOL did. It would be different if I had faith that discovering all those porn searches would somehow inspire people to accept that sexual curiosity is normal. And it would be different if I thought that law enforcement would consider that the people searching for "Islamic militant web forums" might simply be trying to understand the world. But I don't. This data will be used to "prove" that the Internet is crawling with child pornographers and terrorists.
Someday AOL's information should be put into the public domain for anthropologists and cultural researchers of the future. That future, however, is probably decades if not a century away. The data is too close to us now -- too easily weaponized. Nevertheless, I hold out hope that one day our search queries will illuminate us and provide for another generation a digital outline of our daily desires.
Annalee Newitz is a surly media nerd whose search history is known only to Google, which isn't exactly comforting.
Comment on this Article
CBS commits to exorcism pilot
By Kimberly Nordyke and Nellie Andreeva
Reuters
16 Aug 06
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - CBS has given a pilot commitment to an exorcism-themed drama from "Joan of Arcadia" creator Barbara Hall and producer Joe Roth.
The project, from CBS Paramount Network Television and studio-based Joe Roth Television, is inspired by the real-life experiences of Bob Larson, an expert on cults, the occult and supernatural phenomena.
Through his ministry and what he calls Spiritual Freedom Conferences, Larson teaches "the principles of spiritual freedom" and the "many ways that demons attack human beings," according to his Web site. Larson is the founder of an international fellowship of churches and has written 30 books, including such titles as "Larson's Book of Spiritual Warfare," an encyclopedia reference of demons, the devil and deliverance, and "Larson's Book of Cults."
Hall, who is under an overall deal at CBS Paramount TV, is writing the script and is executive producing the project with Roth.
This is the first major commitment for Joe Roth TV, which launched in late 2004 with a three-year deal at CBS Par TV and an initial focus on comedy development.
Roth is not a stranger to the subject of exorcism, having executive produced the 1990 feature film "The Exorcist III."
The Revolution Studios founder most recently executive produced the summer comedy "Little Man" and directed the drama "Freedomland."
Former "Judging Amy" executive producer/showrunner Hall most recently created and executive produced the CBS drama pilot "Ultra" this past development season. The project, from CBS Par TV, centered on a city-girl superhero.
Larson hosted the syndicated radio program "Talk Back With Bob Larson," which featured such topics as Satanism and exorcisms, and now hosts a radio and a TV show, both titled "Bob Larson Presents: Spiritual Freedom," that air on selected stations and on the Internet.
Reuters/Hollywood Reporter
Comment on this Article
Doing Something
US soldier who blew whistle on Abu Ghraib has no regrets
AFP
Tue Aug 15, 2006
WASHINGTON - US soldier Joseph Darby, who revealed to investigators the abuse committed by US troops at the
Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, said he was denounced by relatives as a "traitor" but that he did not regret his decision to expose the scandal.
In his first public interview, Darby told CNN television he was shunned by many in his hometown of Cumberland, Maryland, after they learned his role in exposing the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners at the hand of US soldiers.
"When I first got home I was told that I couldn't (return home)," Darby said. "A lot of the people in my hometown didn't understand and they didn't see right and wrong. They saw Americans going to prison for Iraqis. And they didn't agree with it."
"I've had a few family members who have called me a traitor and I just don't associate with them anymore," Darby added.
But the US soldier, who has two weeks left in the military and plans to work in the private sector as a contractor, said he had no regrets.
"Ultimately, it was the right thing to do," he said.
Darby said he stumbled onto pictures of prisoners being mistreated in a computer disc given to him by Corporal Charles Graner, who was handed the harshest sentence -- 10 years in prison -- for his role in the scandal.
Darby said he had asked Graner to give him pictures of places they had traveled to in Iraq, but that the discs also contained pictures showing prisoners being abused by US soldiers, including infamous photos of naked Iraqis stacked in a human pyramid.
Darby said he did not believe Graner knew he had given him the incriminating pictures.
After mulling over what steps he should take, Darby said he decided to give the images to military investigators in January 2004.
"I had made the right decision that something needed to be done after I first found them," he told CNN.
The scandal emerged publicly months later after US media obtained the pictures.
Eleven soldiers have been convicted in connection with the case, but senior military and civilians officials have not been charged in the scandal.
"They all got what they deserved," Darby said.
Comment: The people in Darby's home town would rather have had US soldiers torturing Iraqi prisoners than to be told the truth. No wonder Bush is still in power.
Comment on this Article
Venezuelan National Assembly appoints new president
www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-16 12:57:43
CARACAS, Aug. 15 (Xinhua) -- Venezuela's National Assembly on Tuesday appointed Cilia Flores of the ruling Fifth Republic Movement, as the new president of the Assembly, parliamentary officials said.
Flores, former president of the Domestic Policy Commission of the National Assembly, is the first woman to hold the post, replacing Nicolas Maduro who was appointed foreign minister last Tuesday.
Flores told the legislature that she would work hard to speed up the passage of bills currently awaiting parliamentary approval.
The president of the unicameral Assembly serves a one-year termand can be reappointed twice. After serving a one-year presidency from January 2005 to January 2006, Maduro was ratified in the post for 2006.
Comment on this Article
Remember, we need your help to collect information on what is going on in your part of the world!
Send your article suggestions to: sott(at)signs-of-the-times.org