|
P
I C T U R E O F T H E D
A Y
|
A
picture is worth a thousand words. Bush offers Sharon
some American government made chocolates wrapped in
Israeli flags during their meeting at Bush's ranch yesterday. |
Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan
Shalom said settlement expansions "need not be
done with drums and cymbals," but made clear that
the Israeli government had no
plans to reverse its plans to expand the Jerusalem satellite
city of Ma'aleh Adumim.
"Essentially Israel views the settlement blocs
as parts of Israel and therefore we stand by our opinion
on this matter and I would say that our opinion is represented
by most of the political streams in this country,"
he told Israel Radio.
"I'm sure that if this issue is
brought up [by U.S. President George W. Bush], [Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon] will make his position clear,
which is that the settlement blocs are a part of Israel.
Between friends you can agree to disagree," Shalom
said.
Bush said Friday he will tell Israeli Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon he should adhere to obligations of a Mideast
peace plan that calls for a construction freeze on Jewish
settlements in the West Bank.
Bush and Sharon will meet Monday at the president's
ranch in Crawford, Texas, quickening the pace of U.S.
involvement. The president will meet with Saudi Crown
Prince Abdullah at the ranch on April 25 and will see
Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas when he visits the
United States next month, an administration official
said.
Bush dampened speculation in Israel that he would avoid
raising the sensitive settlement issue with Sharon.
"What I say publicly, I say privately. And that
is (that) the road map (peace plan) has clear obligations
on settlements and that we expect the prime minister
to adhere to those road map obligations." The president
made his comments to reporters on Air Force One as he
flew back to the United States from Rome after the funeral
of Pope John Paul II.
The settlement issue is an area
of dispute between Washington and Jerusalem. Israel
insists it has the right to strengthen settlements,
and plans to build 3,650 homes in the largest West Bank
settlement, Maaleh Adumim. The United States says settlement
expansion threatens peace with the Palestinians.
The planned Maaleh Adumim expansion
is especially contentious because it would link the
settlement to east Jerusalem, separating Arab neighborhoods
of the city from the rest of the West Bank.
Israel's housing minister, Isaac Herzog,
said in Washington on Monday his government had no immediate
plans to go ahead with the new homes.
Bush and Sharon will meet a year after the prime minister
announced plans for withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.
Bush said he would talk with Sharon "about the
need to work with the Palestinian government, President
Abbas, to facilitate success, to enhance success"
as Israel turns the area over to the Palestinians.
"Success in the Gaza will make success on the
West Bank easier," Bush said. [...] |
US
President George Bush has told Israeli Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon the Jewish state can maintain its settlements
but must freeze their expansion in the West Bank.
Palestinian officials welcomed the statement on Monday
but voiced disappointment at comments by Bush that it
was unrealistic to expect a full Israeli departure from
the occupied territory.
Nevertheless, they welcomed calls by the US leader for
Israel to dismantle unauthorised settlement outposts and
not to proceed with plans to expand a large settlement
called Maale Adumim on the outskirts of occupied Jerusalem.
"We hope that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will hear
the appeal of President Bush to halt settlement activity
because to continue would mean destroying the vision of
two states," chief Palestinian negotiator Saib Uraiqat
said.
Bush made clear in his meeting with Sharon at his Texas
ranch that he saw the recently approved plan for 3500
new homes at Maale Adumim as a violation of the US-backed
road map peace plan.
Outposts opposed
The US president also expressed continued frustration
of Washington that Israel has torn down few of the dozens
of "wildcat" settlements that are dotted across
the West Bank, nearly two years after agreeing to do so
when the road map was launched.
"I told the prime minister of my concern that Israel
not undertake any activity that contravenes road map obligations
or prejudices final status negotiations.
"Therefore, Israel should remove unauthorised outposts
and meet its road map obligations regarding settlements
in the West Bank," Bush said at a joint press conference
with Sharon.
Palestinian Deputy Prime Minister Nabil Shaath said Bush's
comments showed he understood that settlement expansion
undermined the prospects of a "viable Palestinian
state".
"I think that the president was quite positive and
I think that he has a real feeling of what's important
to keep this process going," Shaath told CNN.
The expansion of Maale Adumim and the continued presence
of the settlement outposts was "a real threat to
getting back to the peace process", Shaath added.
Support reaffirmed
Bush used the summit as an opportunity to reaffirm his
support for Sharon's so-called disengagement plan which
will see Israel leave the Gaza Strip this summer.
Sharon is hoping that the pullout from the lesser half
of a future Palestinian state will ease some of the pressure
for a more complete Israeli withdrawal from parts of the
West Bank.
He will likely be grateful that Bush repeated earlier
assertions that it was "unrealistic" for Israeli
to make a "full and complete" departure from
the West Bank.
Nabil Abu Rudaina, a spokesman for the Palestinian Authority,
criticised any move which he said would legitimise settlement
activity.
"What is needed now is to start to apply the road
map. There is no need to legitimise settlement activity,
of whatever kind," Abu Rudaina told AFP.
Responding to a call from Bush to work with Israel to
ensure the success of the Gaza pullout, Shaath said that
"talks are going on", without giving further
details.
"We are going to do everything possible so that
once the Israelis withdraw, we will run it properly with
security for all," Shaath said. |
The AP headline gets
it right: Sharon
dismisses Bush Warning on Settlement Expansion.
I would have called it "large-scale land theft" rather
than "settlement expansion," but it comes to the same
thing.
Wait a second. Isn't that Ariel Sharon, whose government
gets billions of dollars a year from the United States
(who even gets some from your household if you are an
American, whether you like it or not)? Doesn't he owe
us anything?
He doesn't think so.
On September 11, the United States was struck a grievous
and unexpected blow by a handful of fanatics. Their stated
purpose was to punish the U.S. for its support of Israel's
crackdown on the Palestinians. Khalid Shaik Muhammad,
among the masterminds of the operation, had wanted it
moved up to April of 2001 to make the point that Israel's
actions of that spring were being punished.
What was the reaction of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon to this horrific attack on the US? Was it at least
caution, given the price Americans had paid for supporting
his colonization and theft of land in the Occupied Territories?
Was it a cooling-off period while we dug the bodies out
of the rubble and assessed the likelihood of a further
attack? Was it any show of respect at all for the needs
of the United States at that parlous moment?
No.
It was a "stepping up" of Israeli attacks on Palestinians!
The Advertiser, September 14, 2001
"Three die as tank raids stepped up"
ISRAELI tanks and bulldozers rolled into Jenin and Jericho
in the West Bank early yesterday, shelling buildings and
triggering gunfights that killed three Palestinians and
wounded 18 . . . Amid the tensions, US Secretary of State
Colin Powell called Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat late on Wednesday.
Mr Arafat agreed to Mr Powell's request that he meet Israeli
Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, but no date was set for
a meeting.
Well, then, you might think, at least Sharon would agree
to talk and show some flexibility if he insisted on killing
more Palestinians just days after the US was attacked?
No. September 15, 2001, The Washington
Post:
HEADLINE: Sharon Defies Bush's Request for Peace Talks;
Foreign Minister Is Ordered Not to Meet With Arafat as
Planned on Sunday
Defying a request from the Bush administration, Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon today forbade his foreign minister,
Shimon Peres, to meet Sunday with Palestinian leader Yasser
Arafat. President Bush had telephoned Sharon earlier today
urging him to renew talks with the Palestinians to end
the year-long Middle East violence. Secretary of State
Colin L. Powell also had called with a similar message.
But Sharon, under pressure from hard-liners in his government,
ruled out the meeting that Peres has been trying for weeks
to arrange to discuss a cease-fire with Arafat.
But what would happen if Bush continued to press Sharon
to cool it? What if Bush swung around and declared for a
Palestinian state, in an attempt to outflank al-Qaeda in
the Muslim world? Surely Sharon would see the light and
accommodate an old ally, which had transferred tens of billions
of dollars and lots of high-tech weaponry to Israel over
the years?
No. The Scotsman, October 5, 2001
SHARON IN OUTBURST OVER US 'APPEASING' OF ARABS
THE Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, last night fired
an angry broadside at the United States, likening its
efforts to enlist moderate Arab countries in Washington's
war on terrorism to appeasement of Nazi Germany in 1938.
In caustic language seldom heard between the two allies,
Mr Sharon charged that Washington, which has pressed his
government to adhere to a ceasefire with the Palestinian
leader, Yasser Arafat, was being soft on Palestinian terrorism,
which he defines as including attacks in the occupied
territories, even as it pursues Osama bin Laden.
"We can only rely on ourselves and from now on we will
only rely on ourselves," Mr Sharon said, adding security
forces would "take all necessary steps" to defend Israeli
citizens and implying that US pressure for army restraint
would be of no consequence.
"I turn to the United States and say don't go back on
the same mistakes as the democracies made in 1938. That
is when Czechoslovakia was sacrificed for a convenient,
temporary solution.
"Do not appease the Arabs on our account. Israel will
not be Czechoslovakia. We will defend ourselves."
So Sharon branded Bush a Chamberlain and the United States
an appeaser because it pressured him to make peace with
the Palestinians. You see, he didn't think that his grabbiness
had caused enough trouble in the world yet. He wanted to
go on grabbing other people's land and he wasn't going to
let the mere fact that he had helped drag the United States
into a hot war with terrorists give him pause.
I remind you that Sharon bad-mouthed the United States just
after September 11. It wasn't any old time. The country
was reeling. We were trying to understand what had happened.
We were reaching out to Muslims who would be allies, like
Pakistan and Egypt and Jordan. They were all telling us
that the Muslim rank and file was angry about the Israeli
predations in Palestine. Sharon in essence accused the 9/11
families who argued for the need to seek Middle East peace
of being Chamberlains and appeasers. Ariel
Sharon must be among the most odious elected prime ministers
now serving in the world. Guilty of numerous war crimes,
from the 1982 invasion of Lebanon (which killed nearly 20,000),
to ultimate responsibility for the massacre of unarmed Palestinian
civilians by his Phalangist allies at Sabra and Shatila,
to his recent policy of simply murdering persons he suspected
of crimes, such as Sheikh Ahmad Yasin, the wheelchair-riding
old clerical leader of Hamas. (Yasin may have deserved
the death penalty, but there is no reason he could not have
been arrested and tried. Just murdering people sets a bad
example, aside from being illegal and a capital crime.)
Asking him nicely to abide
by the US-backed road map for peace is not enough, obviously.
Congress should cut him off without a dime until he stops
stabbing the United States of America in the back with his
aggressive expansionism.
And he should stop making enemies for the US among one billion
Muslims who care about the fate of the Palestinians, just
as 19th-century Americans cared about the fate of the Texans
at the Alamo. |
For more than fifty
years the Palestinians have endured the duplicitous
Zionists who have no intention of ever allowing them
to form their own state. Ariel Sharon, the international
war criminal—most notably for his actions resulting
in the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps
in Lebanon and more recently the Jenin refugee camp
in the West Bank—has told the world from Bush’s
fake ranch in Texas the Israelis have no intention of
ever giving an inch to the Palestinians.
“President Bush cautioned Israeli Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon on Monday against West Bank settlement
growth but Sharon gave no commitments and pressured
Palestinians to act on terrorism,” reports Reuters.
In other words, Bush mouthed a few useless words and
Sharon said what Sharon always says—the Palestinians
will never realize a state, no matter what happens.
In the meantime, the Israelis will continue building
illegal “settlements” on stolen land, actions
most civilized people consider criminal behavior.
“Looking ahead to prospects for peace after the
July pullout, Sharon also said at a news conference
with Bush that negotiations on a Palestinian state could
begin only after President Mahmoud Abbas mounted a ‘real
war’ against militants.” Translation: so
long as Palestinians insist on self respect and harbor
dreams of their own state and maintaining a cultural
heritage—in other words, so long as they refuse
to pack up and leave or remain behind as “hewers
of wood and drawers of water” for the racist Israelis
(as predicted by Lord
Curzon), they will be engaging in terrorism. In
essence, what Sharon is asking for is a civil war—his
capo Mahmoud Abbas and his CIA-trained paramilitaries
against Palestinian nationalists, or those not yet rubbed
out in targeted assassinations—a cataclysmic event
that would put a smile on the face of every Jabotinsky
Zionist in Israel.
Sharon’s vision for the Arabs is Ma’ale
Adumim, the largest Israeli settlement in the West
Bank. “Ma’aleh Adumim was established on
lands taken from Palestinians, from the villages of
Abu Dis, Al Izriyyeh, Al Issawiyyeh, Al Tur and Anata.
Other lands had been inhabited for dozen of years by
the Jahalin and Sawahareh Bedouin tribes,” explains
Eitan
Felner of Le Monde diplomatique.
But to fully appreciate the cumulative, staggering
consequences that Ma’aleh Adumim and the other
settlements have had on the Palestinians, one cannot
simply count those directly affected, those whose
land was confiscated or house demolished for the construction
of this or that settlement or by-pass road. Each dispossession
cannot be properly appraised unless it is considered
in the broader context of the national dispossession
these policies brought about.
Reuters reports: “[Sharon] went a step too far
for Washington earlier this month by pledging to pursue
a plan for the construction of 3,500 homes for Israelis
in a narrow corridor between the West Bank settlement
of Maale Adumim and Jerusalem…. Seeking to assure
the United States no new building work was imminent,
Sharon said it ‘might take many years’ before
contiguity is achieved between the settlement and the
holy city.” In other words, the Zionists will
continue to dispossess—that is to say kill Palestinians
(as three
young Palestinians were killed in Gaza the other day
for playing football in an "unauthorized zone")
or at minimum demolish their homes—and continue
to do what they do best: make worthless promises (i.e.,
tell lies and obfuscate their sincere intentions) and
build “settlements” on stolen land.
As if to dispel any doubt, Sharon declaimed: “It
is the Israeli position that the major Israeli population
centers will remain in Israel’s hands under any
future final status agreement,” in other words
when the Israelis finally get around to making a deal
with the Palestinians—in ten, twenty, or fifty
years, if ever—they will keep all the land they
have stolen, including the outrage Ma’aleh Adumim,
the very crown jewel of Israeli apartheid scheme and
grand theft larceny.
“Bush applauded Sharon’s ‘courageous
initiative to disengage from Gaza and part of the West
Bank’ and urged the Palestinian leadership to
accept the prime minister’s offer to coordinate
the withdrawal,” reports Reuters. In Bushzarro
world, the steady and unrelenting theft of Palestinian
land—as teenagers are killed for playing football
on “unauthorized” (stolen) land—is
not an outrage and a slap in the face but a “courageous
initiative” of the sort that has in the past inspired
Izz el-Deen al-Qassam (the armed wing of Hamas) to send
home-made Qassam rockets screaming into Sderot or a
kibbutz or two in the western Negev.
As usual, whatever the Zionists want, the Zionists
get, and Bush really has no choice but to play along,
not that he would actually do otherwise, being a good
Christian Zionist or at least pretending to be one for
the sake of his “base,” that is to say crackpot
far right religious fruitcakes who believe they will
sail out of their cars and clothes at any minute, float
right up to heaven, leaving the rest of us behind to
suffer their demented vision of Armageddon. Even the
Zionists and Israeli apartheid settlers believe these
guys are nuts, but then nut cases are often put to good
use, especially if the (unelected twice in a row) president
of the United States agrees with them.
Sharon’s visit to Dubya’s fake ranch in
Crawford, Texas, was simply the latest insult directed
not only against the Palestinians, but the American
people who are now beginning to suffer the economic
after effects of the invasion and occupation of Iraq—spawned
by a brood of Zionists in the White House and the Pentagon
at the behest of the Likudites in Israel—and who
are paying billions to maintain the Zionist kleptocracy
in the Middle East. One would hope that sooner or later
the average American will wake up, smell the coffee,
and see this for what it is and demand that the tiny
outlaw state of Israel either cut a sincere deal with
the Palestinians or short of that demand Congress sever
the sugar daddy umbilical cord once and for all.
Addendum
Incidentally, the latest Israeli outrage, emanating
from Bush’s private property in probably the most
regressive state in America, is especially outrageous
since April 9 was anniversary of the Deir Yassin massacre,
an event completely ignored by the corporate media in
the United States. “Early in the morning of Friday,
April 9, 1948, commandos of the Irgun, headed by Menachem
Begin, and the Stern Gang attacked Deir Yassin, a village
with about 750 Palestinian residents,” explains
the Deir Yassin
Remembered web site. As if to explain the mentality
of the average Israeli, the murderous and excessively
racist Menachem Begin was elected to lead Israel, same
as the serial killer Ariel Sharon was later elected
by the “only democracy in the Middle East,”
as the corporate press in the United States likes to
muse. Of course, much the same can be said about the
mentality of the average American who "elected"
Bush.
Deir Yassin had a peaceful reputation and was even
said by a Jewish newspaper to have driven out some
Arab militants. But it was located on high ground
in the corridor between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and
one plan, kept secret until years afterwards, called
for it to be destroyed and the residents evacuated
to make way for a small airfield that would supply
the beleaguered Jewish residents of Jerusalem….
By noon over 100 people, half of them women and children,
had been systematically murdered…. Of about
144 houses, 10 were dynamited. The cemetery was later
bulldozed and, like hundreds of other Palestinian
villages to follow, Deir Yassin was wiped off the
map. By September, Orthodox Jewish immigrants from
Poland, Rumania, and Slovakia were settled there over
the objections of Martin Buber, Cecil Roth and other
Jewish leaders, who believed that the site of the
massacre should be left uninhabited. The center of
the village was renamed Givat Shaul Bet. As Jerusalem
expanded, the land of Deir Yassin became part of the
city and is now known simply as the area between Givat
Shaul and the settlement of Har Nof on the western
slopes of the mountain…. The massacre of Palestinians
at Deir Yassin is one of the most significant events
in 20th-century Palestinian and Israeli history. This
is not because of its size or its brutality, but because
it stands as the starkest early warning of a calculated
depopulation of over 400 Arab villages and cities
and the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinian inhabitants
to make room for survivors of the Holocaust and other
Jews from the rest of the world.
In other words, Deir Yassin served as a template of
things to come—massive and unrelenting ethnic
cleansing and brutality directed against a mostly defenseless
people “to make room” for other people who
either claimed a religious right to land they never
personally owned (let alone set eyes upon) or felt they
had no other choice but to steal, considering Hitler
and the Holocaust (an excuse used to this day to blackmail
Germans out of billions of deutschmarks, Germans who
were not alive during the Holocaust and have no responsibility
for it).
Is it possible Sharon steered the
date of his meeting with Bush the Lesser as close to
the anniversary of Deir Yassin as possible? It sure
looks that way and considering the macabre nature of
Likudite Zionists it certainly should not be ruled out.
|
GUSH KATIF, Gaza Strip
- When the Israeli government comes calling for the Jewish
settlers of Gaza this summer, it isn't just the living
it will have to contend with.
The painful details of disengagement
extend also to the dead, whose bodies are to be
exhumed by an Israeli army unit specializing in religious
affairs.
That there are only 47 graves to relocate is a testament
to the relative youth of these 21 mostly agrarian settler
communities, which comprise nearly 8,000 Israelis. But
however small their number, disengaging the dead is an
issue so sensitive that those in line for the coming upheaval,
scheduled to begin July 20, are only beginning to confront
it.
None feel the angst more than the grief-stricken family
of Gideon Rivlin, 50, who died three months ago when the
jeep he was riding in passed over a Palestinian bomb planted
at the margins of the southernmost Jewish settlement of
Morag.
Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the killing.
Later that day, hundreds of settlers gathered at the nearby
Jewish cemetery of Neve Dekalim, as Rivlin became the
most recent body laid to rest under sandy soil soon to
be handed back to Palestinians.
For Rivlin's widow Simha, 50, the battle to save her
home was lost that morning, supplanted by the sorrow of
sudden loss and the daunting crisis of fending for five
children, the youngest of whom is 11, just as her community
begins to melt away.
"The fight to stay here is more or less over. But
now I'm frightened. I'm concerned. And I'm scared. I don't
know where I will be the day after," Simha Rivlin
told the Toronto Star.
"It's too much. When you have tough times but you
have a stable foundation, there is a way to get through
it. But my children lost their father, and there is no
stable foundation.
"They will lose everything, their friends, their
community, their home."
Simha Rivlin knows not what to do about her husband's
body. "When I look at his grave now, I don't even
feel that he is there," she said. Rabbi Beryl Wein,
a Jerusalem-based authority on Jewish law, describes the
coming exhumations from Gaza as the most painful dimension
of the Israeli government plan.
"Moving the bodies will be the most traumatic of
all the events of the disengagement," said Wein.
"It's so sensitive, even more than the issue of moving
the living. It releases such emotion. It's gruesome."
Judaic law, according to Wein, forbids exhumation on
the grounds that it constitutes an act of disrespect for
the dead and because, "in the Kabbalistic sense,
the sleep of the dead is disturbed."
But there are exceptions. It is permitted to exhume and
transfer a body buried abroad to the biblical land of
Israel as an act of spiritual homecoming, said Wein. The
bodies buried in Gaza, meanwhile, are eligible for reburial
under religious law because of widespread Israeli fears
the graves might be subject to desecration after withdrawal.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon addressed the subject
last week, announcing that along with the bodies buried
in Gaza his government is also planning to relocate every
synagogue in the settlements targeted for withdrawal.
But sources close to the Israeli government agency in
charge of the Gaza disengagement acknowledge the issue
of reburials already has ignited family quarrels, as relatives
of the dead grapple over where the new graves should be.
A branch of the Israeli army dedicated to rabbinical
issues is expected to handle the exhumations, according
to Haim Altman, an official with Israel's disengagement
commission.
"All we can say is that we promise to let the families
decide, because it is so very sensitive that is the right
thing to do," said Altman.
"We are giving each family full authority about
what they want to do with their beloved. We will support
and act on those wishes exactly as they direct us."
For the Rivlins, such a promise provides little comfort
since they have no idea where they will go.
The Sharon government warmed last week to a settler-led
proposal to relocate all 21 settlements in Gaza en masse
to Nitzanim, a picturesque stretch of environmentally
sensitive sand dunes that flanks the Mediterranean a short
distance north of the Gaza Strip, in Israel proper.
But the relocation proposal faces staunch resistance
from Israeli government planners and environmentalists
alike, who argue that the Nitzanim area is too fragile
to endure any such residential development.
"Even if we were to go to Nitzanim, it wouldn't
be ready for us for another three years," said Sihma
Rivlin. "I want my husband's body to be as close
to us as possible, but how many times can you move someone?"
The Rivlins came to Gaza in 1978, co-founding the enclave
of Ganei Tal, one of the 10 Jewish communities that comprise
the southern settlement bloc known as Gush Katif. They
built a home and greenhouses.
Sihma now works in the Gush Katif agricultural office,
as a liaison between the Israeli government and the area
farmers. Gideon took a second job
as well, working as contractor overseeing the construction
of the electrified fences that fortify the Israeli settlements
against Gaza's 1.3 million Palestinians.
It was the making of the fence that
cost Gideon his life Jan. 12, when he accompanied three
Israeli soldiers on a journey to survey lines for the
last links still to be built, on the edge of Morag settlement.
The Rivlin's eldest son, Nir, 25, wishes it to be known
that the family is not especially religious. He cringes
at what he describes as the "typical media portrayal"
of the movement.
"Ask people in Tel Aviv what is a settler and they
will say, `Someone with a kippa, jumping on hills, fighting
soldiers and burning tires on the Ayalon (highway),"
Nir said.
"But my father was not super-Orthodox. When he came
in the 1970s, he just wanted to be a pioneer, which was
not a bad word at the time. My father just loved the land."
The dedication on his headstone describes how he "loved,
lived and breathed the land of Israel."
Sihma has no intention of staying to see the bitter end
of Gush Katif. But Nir, an Israeli army reservist, insists
on staying put. Not to battle the Israeli withdrawal forces
but to bear witness out of respect for his father. |
"Some 3,000 men,
women and children were crammed into a parking lot about
half the size of a soccer field.."
GAZA, Gaza Strip - Israeli occupation forces said they
would limit the use of a controversial “radioactive”
screening room at Rafah border checkpoint after medical
experts warned of its life-threatening impact on Palestinian
travelers.
“The Israelis told us on Wednesday, April 7,
that they would use the radioactive machine to check
suspects only,” Emad Mikhamer, the public relations
office at the checkpoint, told reporters.
Mikhamer gave no further details on the Israeli decision.
Walid Al-Salhi, the director of preventive security
at the Rafah crossing, said the room is made of lead-coated
glass and is holding inside it a one-meter high cylinder-shaped
device.
Palestinian medics said that potential
diseases include thrombocytopenic, sterility, congenital
anomalies, cancer, leukemia, mental retardation and
ductless glands disorder, warning that Palestinians
are slipping toward slow death.
The Gaza Community Mental Health Program has launched
a campaign against the Israeli use of the radiation
inspection system.
It threatened to file a compliant to the Israeli Supreme
Court if Israel did not respond to the complaints.
'Collective Punishment'
Meanwhile, a workshop was organized by Woman Medical
and Information Center in Gaza, on the Israeli practice
on Wednesday.
The participants, Palestinian experts and specialists,
described the use of such machine as a “war crime”
and “a breach of international law,” according
to the Palestinian News Agency (WAFA).
A radiology expert at Al-Shifa Hospital, Dr. Fatima
Al Hindi, highlighted the risks of radiation on pregnant
women, warning the practice is the most dangerous during
the first three months of pregnancy.
He affirmed that such radiation may cause “fetal
mutations” and “physical deformations”.
“Israeli occupation forces
have no exceptions, as pregnant women, children and
cardiac diseases patients are also subjected by the
said machine,” said Anwar Atallah, a physicist
specialized in radiological protection.
Director of Public Relation at Al-Shifa Hospital, Dr.
Jum'a Al-Saqqa, posted the participants on his experience
with the machine.
He said the passengers enter the small room, raise
their hands and stand up on a specific point spreading
legs.
The operation is repeated twice in different positions,
according to Al-Saqqa.
He added that a woman suffered abortion
and several others suffered vomiting and nausea from
the screening.
A radiation specialist, Dr. Anwar Diab, said that unlike
the X-Ray machines in hospitals - that produce a high
energy radiation that penetrates the body and does not
remain inside - the radiation produced by the Israeli
machine produces a very intensive low energy, and tends
to remain inside the body, causing various side effects.
On the legal consequences, representative of Al-Mizan
Center for Human Rights, lawyer Jamil Sarhan, said that
in the case of assuring the harmful affects on human
health, it means that Israel implements “organized
killing” of the Palestinian people.
International laws, he added, state that the occupying
power must protect the occupied people and provide them
with health care and treatment.
He said the Israeli machine is a “war crime”
in the case of assuring its affect on human health,
affirming that such procedure is a “humiliation”
to the Palestinian people.
Israel usually shuts down the Rafah crossing under
security pretexts.
The suffering of Palestinian travelers swelled in August
when the occupation army closed the checkpoint for up
to 17 consecutive days.
Some 3,000 men, women and children of all ages were
crammed into a parking lot about half the size of a
soccer field with only two doors for ventilation and
straw mats serving as beds. |
John Tamihere will face his caucus
colleagues and apologise today despite earlier being
sent on indefinite stress leave.
Labour president Mike Williams announced the change
of plan last night after Mr Tamihere's Tamaki Makaurau
electorate committee had met.
It is understood Mr Tamihere is trying to force the
party's hand – to either accept his promise of
loyalty or force him out.
Earlier, sources said he might have to agree to an
extended period of psychiatric counselling if he wanted
to stay in Labour, after further revelations were made
of his views on the Holocaust, women in power and his
closest ally, MP Clayton Cosgrove.
But those close to Mr Tamihere said it was part of
a smear campaign and he was unlikely to bow to those
conditions.
A Sunday newspaper reported that in
an interview with Investigate magazine, Mr Tamihere
said he was "sick and tired of hearing how many
Jews got gassed", not because he was not revolted
or violated by it, but because he already knew.
"How many times do I have to
be told and made to feel guilty?" he said.
A
director of Jewish human rights organisation the Simon
Wiesenthal Centre suggested he seek psychological assistance
to help him empathise with the victims of genocide.
"Holocaust fatigue is simply a
new form of mental illness, which is a condition which
should disqualify him from public service," Efraim
Zuroff said from Jerusalem.
A Labour source said psychiatric counselling was an
option. "But it would have to be an extended period
because he's got some very bloody serious issues going."
There was nothing shameful about cracking under stress
in a job such as politics.
Some caucus members, however, were too angry to accept
that solution.
Other options facing Mr Tamihere were to accept that
politics was not for him and to step down at the election,
or to fight, whereupon the party would start moves for
his expulsion.
Former MP Willie Jackson said it was
"just bullshit" that Mr Tamihere needed counselling.
"If you go down that track he should have had
counselling years ago, because the Tamihere I see is
still the Tamihere I've known for years. He's always
been a bit of a crazy man, but that's his appeal."
He said Mr Tamihere was under stress, but was not "losing
it as the (Beehive) ninth floor are trying to paint
it".
Mr Tamihere should be given another chance for "redemption".
He would not go easily and he had strong backing among
ordinary Maori. Mr Jackson said Mr Tamihere would most
likely end up as an independent.
Mr Tamihere's electorate secretary, Honey Heemi, also
rejected suggestions he needed counselling. He had called
the meeting of his electorate organisation to seek a
motion of confidence. She did
not know of anyone who wanted Mr Tamihere to stand down.
Prime Minister Helen Clark said Mr Tamihere had not
set out to cause offence and had been given "space
to reflect on issues around this most unfortunate interview".
His comments had shattered his colleagues' confidence,
and it would be "futile" for him to seek election
to the Cabinet.
"The decision for Mr Tamihere is whether to embark
on the long, slow and difficult road to redemption and
a political career that leads somewhere, or whether
to say, 'This looks too tough for me'." |
John Tamihere will go to Wellington
today with the full backing of his
Tamaki Makaurau Labour Party members.
A meeting of electorate strategists,
rank-and-file Labour supporters, kaumatua and kuia passed
a motion unanimously backing Mr Tamihere. "We continue
to have faith in our MP," it said.
The hour-long meeting, which was punctuated by the
singing of waiata and laughter, also pledged its support
for the Labour Party.
Whether the two can be reconciled will be revealed
today when Mr Tamihere faces the Labour Party caucus
and some colleagues he has called "queer",
"a tosser" and "smarmy".
Speakers at Mangere's Nga Tapuwae Community Facility
said Labour needed an MP like Mr Tamihere in Parliament.
Labour Party president Mike Williams
was told that Mr Tamihere had grass-roots support in
the electorate, which he holds with a 9444-vote majority.
Supporter Chris Wilson said: "He's got a bit of
work to do but we still
support him 100 per cent."
He said that support stretched outside Auckland to
Mr Tamihere's own tribal area, Ngati Porou, on the East
Coast.
Afterwards, Mr Tamihere left by the back door to avoid
the waiting media. |
The United States has
no exit strategy from Iraq and any pullout depends on
the readiness of Iraqi forces to ensure security, Defence
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said on a surprise visit
to Iraq.
"We
don't really have an exit strategy. We have a victory
strategy. We are here for a mission to set the country
on the path of democracy, freedom and representative government,"
Rumsfeld said on Tuesday.
"We have to see the institutional capacity developed
so that they can take over the security responsibility
and as that takes place the responsibility of the coalition
forces will decline and they will be able to move away
and leave this country with the full responsibility for
its own country."
Permanent bases
Iraq's new leaders have said the local security forces,
which are being trained by the US military, are weak and
not yet ready to take over full responsibility for security
in a country still battling fighters opposed to the presence
of foreign troops.
But there have been a number of street demonstrations
in recent days with Iraqis calling for the 140,000 US
soldiers to leave immediately.
Asked if the US planned to have permanent bases in Iraq,
Rumsfeld said the issue would have to be discussed with
the government that emerges after a permanent constitution
is in place and new elections are held in December.
"We do not currently have any plans
for any permanent presence in this country," he said,
adding: "It wouldn't be proper for us to discuss
[this issue] with the transition government."
Rumsfeld urged new interim President Jalal Talabani and
interim Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jafari to stick to a
timetable set in transition laws passed under the previous
US-led occupation authority which call for the constitution
to be put to a referendum in October.
"I sure hope no delay occurs. Some may say we cannot
do this, let's delay it," he said. "I think
the Iraqi people deserve to have a constitution." |
The
United States has devoted a sum of $3 million to promote
democracy in Iran, and says the initiative does not violate
the Algeria non-interference agreement.
US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said non-governmental
educational and other groups inside Iran, which are willing
to work towards achieving democracy in Iran, are eligible
to compete for the money.
Iran's ambassador to the United Nations, Muhammad Javad
Zarif, called the plan a clear violation of a US-Iranian
agreement which was signed in Algeria in 1981 following
the release of 52 US embassy employees held hostage in
Tehran for 444 days.
No violation
Boucher denied that the initiative violates
the agreement, under which the US pledged "not to
intervene directly or indirectly, politically or militarily
in Iran's internal affairs".
The US has consistently maintained that
its pro-democracy activities abroad are non-partisan and
do not constitute intervention.
Hostility between the two countries has not abated since
the hostage crisis of 1979.
US suspicions that Iran is developing nuclear weapons
is just one of many sources of friction.
Aside from Cuba, Iran is the only country with which
the US does not maintain a political dialogue. |
Iran's nuclear projects,
alleged WMD's, or its supposed support of "terrorist
organisations" as the Bush administration claims
does not pose a threat to Washington. What does pose
as a threat is Iran's attempt to re-shape the global
economical system by converting it from a petro-dollar
to a petro-euro system.
Such a conversion is looked upon as a flagrant declaration
of economical war against the U.S. which would flatten
the revenues of the American corporations and could
eventually cause an economic collapse.
In June 2004, Iran declared its intention in setting
up an international oil exchange (a bourse) denominated
in the Euro currency. Many oil-producing as well as
oil-consuming countries had expressed their welcome
to such petro-euro bourse.
According to Iranian reports this bourse is due to
start trading in early 2006. Naturally such an oil exchange
would compete against London's International Petroleum
Exchange (IPE), as well as against the New York Mercantile
Exchange (NYMEX), both owned by American corporations.
Oil consuming countries have no choice but to use the
American Dollar in order to purchase their oil, since
the dollar has so far been the global standard monetary
fund for oil exchange. This in turn requires these countries
to keep the dollar in their central banks as their reserve
fund, therefore 'helping' in strengthening the American
economy.
However, if Iran, followed by other oil-producing countries,
begins to accept the Euro as another choice for oil
exchange the American economy would suffer greatly,
what many would call 'a real crisis'.
A 'crisis' such as this could be witnessed as early
as the end of 2005 and beginning of 2006 when oil investors
would have the choice to pay $57 a barrel of oil at
the American (NYMEX) and at London's (IPE), or pay 37
Euros a barrel at the Iranian oil bourse.
Such a choice would reduce trade volumes at both the
Dollar-dependent NYMEX and the IPE.
Many countries have studied the conversion from the
ever weakening petro-dollar to the gradually strengthening
petro-euro system. The de-valuation of the dollar was
caused by the American economy shying away from manufacturing
local products, except those of the military, by outsourcing
American jobs to cheaper developing countries and depending
only on the general service sector, and by the huge
cost of two major wars that are still going on.
What's more, foreign investors have started to withdraw
their money from the shaky American market causing further
devaluation of the dollar.
Any keen follower of financial markets would not have
failed to notice that the devaluation of the U.S. dollar
began since November 2002, while the purchasing power
of the Euro has slowly, but surely crept upward. The
U.S. dollar has also dropped in value in comparison
to the Japanese Yen while the British pound climbed
another notch.
Economic reports published early March pointed at the
nose-dive the American economy has taken and to the
quick rise of the deficit, up to $665.90 billion at
the end of 2004. The worst is still to come.
These numbers worried international banks, who'd warned
the Bush administration of something like this would
happen.
Iran is treading the same economical
war path Saddam Hussein started when in 2000 he converted
all of the Iraq's reserve from the dollar to the Euro,
and demanded payments in Euro for Iraqi oil.
Many economists then mocked Saddam
because he had lost a lot of money in this conversion.
Yet they were very surprised when he recuperated his
losses in less than a year due to the valuation of the
Euro.
The American administration became aware of the threat
when central banks of many countries started keeping
Euros alongside dollars as their monetary reserve and
as an exchange fund for oil.
In order to avoid an economical collapse the Bush administration
hastened to invade and destroy Iraq under false excuses
so as to set it as an example for any country who may
contemplate dropping the dollar. It was also an attempt
to manipulate OPEC's decisions by controlling the second
largest oil resource - sale of Iraqi oil has since been
reverted back to the petro-dollar standard.
There is only one technical obstacle concerning the
use of a euro-based oil exchange system, which is the
lack of a euro-denominated oil pricing standard, or
oil 'marker' as it's referred to in the industry. The
three current oil markers are U.S. dollar denominated,
which include the West Texas Intermediate crude (WTI),
Norway Brent crude, and the UAE Dubai crude. Yet this
did not stop Iran from requiring payments in the Euro
currency for its European and Asian oil exports since
spring 2003.
Iran's determination in using the
petro-euro is inviting in other countries such as Russia
and Latin American countries, and even some Saudi investors.
This determination has led to the aggressive American
political campaign in using the same excuses applied
against Iraq: WMD in the form of nuclear bomb, support
to "terrorist" Lebanese Hezbollah organization,
and threat to the peace process in the Middle East.
The question now is what will the Bush administration
do? Will it invade Iran as it did Iraq?
The American military is already involved knee-deep
in Iraq and the global community, with the exception
of Britain and Italy, isn't offering any military relief
to the U.S.
Hence an American strike against Iran
is highly unlikely.
Iran is not Iraq; it has a more robust military power,
has anti-ship missiles based in the "Abu Mousa"
island which sits in the strait of Hermuz at the entrance
of the Persian Gulf. Iran could easily close the strait
and block all naval traffic carrying Gulf oil to the
rest of the world causing a global crisis ratcheting
the price of an oil barrel to $100. The U.S. cannot
topple the regime by spreading chaos the same way it
did to Mussadaq's regime in 1953 since the Iranians
are now more aware of such a trick.
Besides Iranians have a patriotic pride of what they
call "their bomb".
What Washington has resorted to is
the instigation and encouragement of Israel, to strike
Iran's nuclear reactors the way it did to Iraq. Leaked
reports have revealed that Israeli forces are training
for such an attack expected to take place next June.
Israel is afraid of an Iranian bomb which would threaten
its military hegemony in the Middle East; would extract
Israeli concessions and create an arms race which would
gobble a lot of Israeli defense expenditure. Furthermore
the bomb would force the U.S. to enter into negotiations
with Iran further limiting Israeli expansion ambitions. |
NEW DELHI (AP) - India
and China agreed Monday to form a "strategic partnership,"
creating a diplomatic bond between Asia's two emerging
powers that would tie together nearly one-third of the
world's population.
The agreement, announced during a South Asia tour by
Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, reflects a major shift
in relations between the two nuclear countries, whose
ties have long been defined by mutual suspicion. It also
is another step in a charm offensive by Beijing, which
is trying to build ties with its neighbours and ensure
regional stability for economic growth.
The United States, which also has courted warmer ties
with India, welcomed efforts by New Delhi and Beijing
to find ways of co-operating.
"This is an important visit. We are working to promote
friendly ties of co-operation between our two countries,"
Wen said after a ceremonial welcome by Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh at New Delhi's presidential palace.
Wen also has been to Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka
in recent days, hoping to reassure its neighbours that
increasing clout does not make it a regional danger.
"Some people are worried that a stronger and more
developed China would pose a threat to other countries.
Such worry is completely misplaced," Wen told a meeting
of Asian officials in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad,
last week.
But the agreement with India also underscored
the power the two countries are increasingly comfortable
about wielding.
"India and China can together reshape
the world order," Singh said Monday.
Left out of the equation, for now, was
the United States, which announced last month it wanted
to help India become a world power. However, India and
China, which together have a population of more than 2.3
billion, took care not to offend the United States on
Monday.
Chinese leaders insist they're not worried about the
warming U.S.-India ties, despite Washington's apparent
attempts to counter China's power in Asia by boosting
India's economic and political profile.
Last month, U.S. officials announced the sale of F-16
jet fighters to Pakistan and signalled that India could
move ahead with its own weapon buys. India expressed "great
disappointment" over the sale and said doing so would
tilt the military balance in the region and could harm
India-Pakistan peace talks that began last year. The sale
will likely be discussed Thursday on a visit to Washington
by Indian External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh.
In Washington, a State Department official said the United
States welcomed the meetings between India and China,
especially if they can lead to peace, prosperity and security,
not only in the region but also globally.
Analysts said the agreement would not be a major concern
for Washington.
"I think the U.S. doesn't have a problem" with
China and India growing closer, said Teresita Schaffer,
a former State Department expert on South Asia now with
the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International
Studies. "The U.S. should see this as a stabilizing
factor in the region. . . . I realize some people will
interpret this in a classic balance-of-power sense, but
I don't think that's how the United States is looking
at it right now."
China and India, which fought a brief war in 1962 over
border disagreements, sealed their agreement with the
joint statement and a set of accords aimed at ending one
longstanding border dispute and boosting economic ties.
"The leaders of the two countries have therefore
agreed to establish an India-China strategic and co-operative
partnership for peace and prosperity," the statement
said.
The partnership would promote diplomatic relations, economic
ties and contribute to the two countries "jointly
addressing global challenges and threats," it said.
Under the agreement, China has recognized the Himalayan
territory of Sikkim as a part of India, and the two reached
consensus on principles leading to an overall settlement
of their decades-old boundary disputes, said Shyam Saran,
a top official in the External Affairs Ministry.
"A new map which the Chinese have published shows
Sikkim as part of India. This is no longer an issue between
us," he told reporters.
Sikkim, located between Nepal and the kingdom of Bhutan,
was an independent principality before being annexed by
India in 1975. China never recognized Sikkim as an Indian
possession and has claimed part of the territory as its
own. But in 2003, China removed Sikkim from a government
website that showed it to be a part of China, a sign it
was moving toward officially recognizing the area as part
of India
India says China still holds about 41,000 square kilometres
of its territory in the Kashmir region, while Beijing
lays claim to a wide swath of territory in India's northeastern
state of Arunachal Pradesh, which shares a 1,045-kilometre
border with China's Tibet region.
Monday's talks also resulted in a raft of agreements
for co-operation in such diverse areas as civil aviation,
finance, education, science and technology, tourism and
cultural exchanges.
China, which is one of five members
of the 15-member United Nations Security Council with
veto power, also signalled its support for India's quest
for a seat in an expanded version of the powerful body.
Both countries have been seeking to expand their influence
as their economic power has grown. But Beijing, in particular,
has been on a diplomatic initiative.
In the last week, Wen signed a co-operation treaty with
Pakistan promising to help it resolve disputes with India.
China is already Pakistan's main trading partner and a
major military backer.
A day later, Wen was in Bangladesh, signing accords to
help the poverty-ridden country. From there he flew to
Colombo, offering to help Sri Lanka rebuild harbours,
roads and other infrastructure destroyed by the December
tsunami.
The diplomatic offensive is rooted in
two things China desperately wants abroad: resources and
tranquility.
China is already the world's No. 2 oil
importer, and its appetite for all sorts of industrial
raw materials is growing, sparking such agreements as
oil and gas deals with Venezuela, Kazakhstan, Qatar, Australia
and Russia. On Monday, Indian officials suggested the
two countries co-operate for the world's shrinking energy
resources.
"A bidding war does not help either India or China,"
Saran said. In oil-rich Central Asia or Africa, "Indian
and Chinese oil consortiums could work in tandem."
In Asia, though, what matters most to Beijing is stability.
Despite its galloping economy, the vast majority of Chinese
have missed out on the economic boom, and China wants
a stable region, allowing it to focus its energy inward.
|
Let's face the facts.
The game is over and we -- the "reality-based community,"
the believers in genuine democracy and law, the heirs
of Jefferson and Madison, Emerson and Thoreau, the toilers
and dreamers, all those who seek to rise above the beast
within and shape the brutal chaos of existence into something
higher, richer and imbued with meaning -- have lost. The
better world we thought had been won out of the blood
and horror of history -- a realm of enlightenment that
often found its best embodiment in the ideals and aspirations
of the American Republic -- is gone. It's been swallowed
by darkness, by ravening greed, by bestial spirits and
by willful primitives who now possess overwhelming instruments
of power and dominion.
A gang of such spirits seized control of the U.S. government
by illicit means in 2000 and maintained that control through
rampant electoral corruption in 2004. The re-election
of President George W. Bush last November was a deliberately
shambolic process that saw massive lockouts of opposition
voters; unverifiable returns compiled by easily hackable
machines operated by avowed corporate partisans of the
ruling party; and vast discrepancies between exit polls
and final results – gaps much larger than those
that led elections in Ukraine and Georgia to be condemned
as manipulated frauds. Indeed, a panel of statisticians
said last week that the odds of such a discrepancy occurring
naturally were 959,000 to 1, the Akron Beacon-Journal
reported.
The copious documentation of the Bush fraud keeps growing.
Last month, experts using actual machines and returns
from the 2004 election showed Congress how a lone hacker
could skew a precinct's results by 100,000 votes without
leaving a trace. More than 40 million votes in 30 states
were cast on such computer systems, BlackBoxVoting noted.
Late last year, Congress heard sworn testimony from Florida
programmer Clint Curtis, who created vote-rigging software
in 2000 at the request of Tom Feeny, a Bush Family factotum.
Feeny wanted Curtis (a fellow Republican) and his employer,
Yang Enterprises, to produce untraceable programs that
could "control the vote" as needed, investigator
Brad Friedman reported. Feeny also told Curtis of Bush
plans to "suppress the black vote" with "exclusion
lists." This is exactly what happened. BBC investigator
Greg Palast has shown that tens of thousands of legitimate
African-American voters were deliberately "purged"
from the rolls by a private Republican-controlled corporation
hired by Florida Governor Jeb Bush. Afterwards, Feeny
-- who had been Jeb's running mate in his first gubernatorial
campaign -- was rewarded for his dutiful service with
a plum congressional seat.
In 2002, Raymond Lemme, a Florida state
government inspector, took up Curtis' charges, which included
other corruption allegations involving Feeny, Yang Enterprises
and a Yang employee charged with peddling military technology
to the Chinese. In June 2003, Lemme told Curtis he had
"tracked the corruption all the way to the top"
and that "the story would break in a few weeks."
On July 1, 2003, Lemme was found dead in a Georgia hotel
room, just across the Florida border.
Local police ruled that Lemme, a happily married man
eagerly planning his daughter's wedding, had suddenly
decided to slash his wrists. At first they said there
were no photos of the death scene; but then the pictures
turned up on the Internet and were confirmed as authentic
by the embarrassed police. The photos clearly contradicted
the original suicide report on several points -- presenting
evidence, for example, that Lemme had been beaten before
his death. The investigation was reopened after Curtis'
Congressional testimony -- and then abruptly shut down
after local police spoke to a never-identified "someone"
in the Florida state government.
Needless to say, nothing has been done to clarify the
murk surrounding Lemme's convenient death. Nor has there
been any action toward rectifying the highly profitable
degradation of the American electoral process -- beyond
the appointment of yet another "blue-ribbon panel"
of Establishment worthies to oversee "election reform."
The seriousness of this endeavor can be seen in the man
appointed to co-chair the effort: James Baker, the notorious
Bush family fixer (and Saudi bagman) who spearheaded the
sabotage of the 2000 vote in Florida. Baker's presence
on the panel ensures that nothing will be done to lessen
the ruling clique's chokehold on power.
So let's have no illusions about where
we are. Gangsters are in charge, and nothing and no one
will be allowed to challenge their dominion. They are
waging aggressive war to cement their position and that
of their allies: the energy barons, the arms merchants,
the construction and services cartels, the investment
bankers. These power blocs now command monstrous resources
and unfathomable profits; they can buy out, buy off or
bury any force that opposes them. Meanwhile, they use
the loot of the stolen Republic -- its blood and treasure
-- as fuel for their ever-expanding war machine: Bush
now has a "secret watch-list" of 25 more countries
ripe for military intervention, the Financial Times reported.
With more war crimes afoot, last month
Bush issued an official "National Defense Strategy"
that openly declares "judicial processes" as
one of the enemies confronting the United States, actually
equating them with terrorism, The Associated Press reported.
Law is "a strategy of the weak," says the Bush
Doctrine, in a chilling echo of Hitlerian machtpolitik:
Might makes right. The judicial process must not be allowed
to "constrain or shape" American behavior in
any way, the gangsters declared.
Think of it: Law is now the enemy. Democracy,
as we've seen above, is the enemy. This, the demented
code of criminals and tyrants, has become the ruling doctrine
of the United States -- replacing the Constitution, replacing
the noble struggle for liberty and enlightenment with
the howl of the beast, with a freak show of avarice and
death. |
The
legality of holding terrorist suspects in Guantanamo
Bay is once again before the US courts.
Lawyers for an inmate at Guantanamo Bay, Salim Ahmed
Hamdan, are arguing that his trial by military commission
violates international law.
The case is part of a wrenching battle in the US courts
that goes to the heart of the war on terrorism and its
legality.
The Bush administration has argued that holding detainees
without trial is imperative for national security, but
lawyers for the Guantanamo Bay inmates argue that the
detentions have no basis in law.
And they label as unconstitutional the procedures put
in place in Guantanamo Bay to review the detentions
and charge some detainees.
Some 540 detainees remain at Guantanamo Bay.
There they go through three procedures
which the Bush administration and the US military argue
provide them with sufficient protection of their rights.
A Combatant Status Review Tribunal decides if the
detainee is an 'enemy combatant'.
An Administrative Review Board, or ARB, decides if
a detainee should be released because they pose no threat
to the US, or whether they should be detained for another
year.
And a military commission will try those who are deemed
to have committed crimes.
Different standards
The BBC observed an ARB - the first time journalists
had been allowed to do so. We
saw only the unclassified part of the proceedings.
Our military escorts took us into Camp Delta - where
the detainees are held - to a prefabricated building.
Before the proceedings began, they briefed us on what
we would see. One officer likened
the proceedings to a parole hearing - even though the
detainees have not been found guilty of any crime.
He stressed that this was not a legal
hearing, and standards of proof and evidence normal
for a civilian court would not apply.
The detainee whose review we would witness was a young
man from Saudi Arabia, we were told.
Under no circumstances were we to publish his name,
said our escorts, and we had to sign a piece of paper
to that effect.
But the detainee was suffering from a stomach upset.
We watched, on camera, as he was examined in an adjoining
room.
A doctor questioned him gently through an interpreter,
and decreed he was too ill to go ahead with the review
board. The proceedings were postponed.
'Non-compliant'
The following day we returned. The detainee was apparently
feeling better and the proceedings went ahead.
Three military officers sat on the board. None
of them were lawyers.
Military hearings do not work to the same standards
as courtrooms
Their job, as they described it, was to review the evidence
and come to a recommendation as to whether the detainee
constituted a continued threat to the US and should
be further detained, or whether he should be transferred
to his home country, or released.
The detainee was already sat when we entered the room.
He wore an orange jumpsuit, signalling that he was a
"non-compliant" prisoner.
His hands and feet were shackled to the floor. At a
guess he was in his late 20s, a rangy young man with
a thin beard and a shock of curly hair.
He looked rigidly at the floor, apparently to avoid
any eye contact.
At the detainee's side was an "Assisting
Military Officer". His role was to assist the detainee
in presenting his case, but he appeared well short of
legal representation.
Also present was a "Designated Military Officer",
whose role was to present the evidence. He
did not resemble a prosecutor. There was no adversarial
argument.
After the board had been sworn in, they listened to
a litany of allegations against the detainee.
'Rifles and trenches'
We were not permitted to record the proceedings, so
the following is reconstructed from my notes.
We heard that he had travelled to Pakistan and Afghanistan.
He had allegedly received weapons training in a camp
in Afghanistan run by Lashkar e-Tayyiba, a group listed
by the state department as a terrorist organisation.
In 2001, we heard, the detainee had fought on the
front line in Afghanistan, alongside the Taleban during
the retreat from Bagram, and there he had fired his
Kalashnikov rifle. He then fled to a location near Jalalabad,
where he "dug trenches and waited".
His name was found, the board heard, on the hard drives
of computers seized during raids on al-Qaeda safe houses
in Pakistan.
The sources of these allegations were
never revealed. It was unclear to us if they came from
his own testimony, or intelligence, or elsewhere.
No witnesses were called,
and the detainee sat silent throughout the hearing.
During the interrogations that followed his capture,
we heard, he had stated that he would follow any religious
decree; that an attack on the US was necessary; that
infidels should either convert to Islam, or pay a fee,
or be killed.
He had also threatened to kill prison
guards and their families.
In mitigation
The board then heard a list of "mitigating factors".
The detainee had told his captors that he had gone to
Afghanistan for sightseeing. He had gone to Pakistan
to buy hashish. On hearing this, in his only visible
show of emotion, a broad smile spread across the detainee's
face.
He had said he had never picked up
a weapon. And he had no knowledge of terrorist attacks
against the US, nor did he have anything against the
US.
Much of what came under "mitigating factors"
stood in direct contradiction to what had gone before.
It was unclear to us what criteria the board intended
to use to weigh these contradictory accounts of the
young man's past.
Finally it was time for the detainee to speak (translated
through an interpreter, a young Arab-American woman
who appeared extremely competent).
"I don't have hostility to any person and I want
the whole world to live in peace," he said.
He said he had gone to Pakistan "for a change
of weather", and to get to know the country.
He was quietly spoken, calm, and brief.
The Assisting Military Officer weighed in. He went
through the evidence against the detainee point by point
and detailed which elements the detainee rejected as
false.
True or false?
Next came questioning by three officers
on the board. A good 10 minutes was taken up with the
board trying to establish the correct spelling of the
detainee's name.
The chairman asked what the detainee would do if he
were released.
Detainee: "I would go back to my country. I don't
know what I would do. I would live with my family."
Question: "Who did you
fire your rifle at?"
Detainee: "I never fired
a rifle."
Question: "Why were you
firing?"
Detainee: "I never fired."
Question: "Why were you in Afghanistan?"
Detainee: "For a visit."
Question: "How do you explain
the differences in the evidence?"
Detainee: "I can't."
Question: "How would you describe your behaviour
with the guards here [at Guantanamo Bay]?
Answer: "If the guards treat me well and respect
me, I will treat them well and respect them. If they
are different from that, I will give them my back and
not talk to them, because it will cause me problems
and I don't want problems.
"The soldiers [the camp guards]
lie about us a lot. They say an incident happened and
it did not. They say we spit at them when we did not.
They lie a lot."
Cursory questioning
There were questions regarding the detainee's health,
and with that, it was over. The
officers went into a classified session during which
they would hear secret evidence.
And the detainee would never know what
secret evidence against him existed.
Question: "How
do you explain the differences in the evidence?"
Detainee: "I can't."
We were struck by the cursory nature
of the questioning, and the absence of an attempt to
reconcile conflicting claims as to what the young, sullen
detainee had actually done.
More than 60 of these boards have now
taken place.
And on the basis of their recommendations, senior Pentagon
officials decide if detainees remain in captivity or
go free.
But the legal challenges to the procedures in place
in Guantanamo Bay are mounting, and some judges are
proving sympathetic to those challenges. |
Bush's
Poll Position Is Worst on Record
Second Terms are Tough, and No President Has Banked
Less Political Capital for the Fights Ahead |
By Terry M. Neal
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Monday, April 11, 2005; 8:29 AM |
With apologies to George Tenet,
the first 100 days of President Bush's second term have
been no slam-dunk.
How rough has it been? Bush has
the lowest approval rating of any president at this
point in his second term, according to Gallup polls
going back to World War II.
Bush's erosion of support among independents in particular
has helped bring his overall approval rating down to
45 percent. Forty-nine percent disapprove of his performance.
Compare Bush's Gallup numbers taken in late March to
poll numbers taken at the same point in the presidencies
of the six previous men who served two terms:
Clinton: 59 percent approval versus 35 percent disapproval
Reagan: 56 percent versus 37 percent disapproval
Nixon: 57 percent versus 34 percent
Johnson: 69 percent versus 21 percent
Eisenhower: 65 percent versus 20 percent
Truman: 57 percent versus 24 percent
True enough, Bush's numbers
weren't all that high to begin with. In the last Gallup
poll before the election, he was at 48 percent approval
to 47 percent disapproval -- yet he still won and helped
his party in the process. [...]
Only 38 percent of respondents said they believed Bush
had done an excellent or good job in his first 100 days,
compared to 58 percent who believed he had done a fair
or poor job, according to a poll conducted March 31
to April 1 by Westhill Partners and the National Journal's
Hotline.
People will analyze the data differently. But here
are a few things that I believe have hurt the administration
in the last few months:
• Overconfidence:
The president beamed with confidence after his November
defeat of John Kerry. After the election, Bush told
a news conference, "I earned capital in the campaign,
political capital, and now I intend to spend it. It
is my style." This statement was certainly no surprise,
given that Bush governed as though he had a clear mandate
even after losing the popular vote by a half-million
to Al Gore in 2000. But the reality of Bush's victory
in 2004 was that he won with 50.7 percent of the popular
vote to Sen. John F. Kerry's 48.2 percent. You'd have
to back to at least the early 1800s to find a president
who has been re-elected by a closer margin.
The nation remains nearly evenly divided,
yet Bush came out of the blocks as if he'd won by a
Reaganesque landslide.
• Social Security:
[...] By the time Bush took the nation to war in March
2003, he had been building his case, piece-by-piece,
for months. But during his reelection campaign, he said
little about Social Security. Had he made it a major
issue, Kerry might be sitting in the White House today,
a point that is reinforced by the reluctance of voters
to accept Bush's proposal today. Democrats certainly
would have been able to use the issue to bludgeon Bush
among older voters, who also comprise the most reliable
block of voters.
After the election, Bush signaled clearly that Social
Security reform would be the first domestic priority
of his second term, putting the issue on the table before
clearly laying out the case for the need to make changes.
[...] Meanwhile, most polls show the public is strongly
opposed to private accounts.
• Terri Schiavo:
Bush declined to cut short his vacation after the southeast
Asian Tsunami disaster, even as it became clear that
it would be of epic proportions. Then, months later,
he interrupted another vacation in Texas to fly back
to Washington in the middle of the night to sign legislation,
pushed through in a rare weekend session, designed to
keep a severely brain-damaged Florida woman alive. The
actions of Bush and his party appeared to deviate from
their stated principles supporting states' rights and
the sanctity of marriage and their opposition to judge
shopping. Most polls have shown widespread disapproval
of the president's handling of the issue, even among
Republicans.
• Iraq: [...] The
administration has long maintained, essentially, that
everyone in the world believed that Hussein was building
WMD. But there was never anything close to unanimity
within the intelligence community about Hussein's stockpiles
or capability to deliver them. Whatever the case, the
public remains dissatisfied about the president's handling
of Iraq, with 41 percent approving and 54 percent disapproving,
according to the Westhill Journal poll.
• The economy:
A majority of Americans -- 56 percent according to the
Westhill poll -- oppose the president's handling of
the economy. [...]
The signature economic achievements of Bush's first
months of his second term -- new laws restricting class
action lawsuits and bankruptcy protections -- could
be two issues that resonate little with Joe and Jane
Sixpack. [...]
One of the enduring realities of the American presidency
is that second terms are often politically tougher than
first terms.
What's unusual in Bush's case
is that the public's typical second-term disillusionment
began so early. In one sense, this matters little
because Bush will never run for another election. But
it could be an early sign of trouble for his party,
especially when you consider that the Republican-run
Congress's approval rating has dropped to its lowest
point in nearly a decade, with only 40 percent or fewer
approving of the job it is doing, according to several
recent polls.
Among political professionals, the campaign season
runs continuously. So even though there's little news
about it in the nation's papers and broadcasts, both
parties are already in the thick of candidate recruitment
for the 2006 midterm congressional elections. [...]
"There have been six of these elections in the
post-World War II era (1950, 1958, 1966, 1974, 1986,
and 1998). The average loss for the White House in these
sixth year elections has been six Senate seats -- double
the overall midterm average loss of three seats,"
wrote Larry J. Sabato, the director of the University
of Virginia's Center for Politics, in a recent analysis.
A loss of six seats for Republicans would put Democrats
back in control of the Senate. [...]
"[Bush] got no real bounce out of the election,"
said nonpartisan election analyst Stuart Rothenberg.
"He has had an ambitious but controversial agenda
and doesn't start off with widespread support. And I
think it's relevant a couple ways, both down the road
and over the next six months. First it will affect candidate
recruitment. And it will also impact his ability to
intimidate the Hill."
Some left-wing activists are becoming increasing engaged
in an effort to defeat the bankruptcy bill in the House.
They appear to be energized not only by the president's
troubles on the economy, but by their anger at the 18
Democrats who broke ranks to support the bill in the
Senate.
And the Schiavo case may complicate the GOP's efforts
on other parts of its domestic agenda, particularly
the nomination of conservative Bush appointees to the
bench. Democrats are planning to use the Schiavo case
-- and the disparaging comments made by congressional
Republican leaders about the judges in that case --
to argue against the elimination of the filibuster in
judicial nominations, which some Republicans are advocating.
Of course, none of Bush's problem matters if the Democrats
can't get on the same page. Already the party has shown
deep fissures on the Schiavo case as well as the class-action
lawsuit and bankruptcy bills. Nearly as many Democrats
voted for the Schiavo bill as voted against it, which
will complicate the party's efforts to make a sustained
case about GOP extremism in coming months.
The Republican triumph of 2004 was less about the electorate's
overwhelming love for the Bush agenda than it was about
the failure of Kerry and the Democrats to present an
enticing and viable alternative and a cohesive vision
for the future.
As it stands today, there's little evidence -- outside
of the Social Security issue -- that the Democrats have
changed all that much since Kerry's defeat in November.
They don't appear positioned
to take advantage of Bush's dropping poll numbers any
more than Republicans are queuing up behind the president
as a strong leader of the party.
It seems in some ways that both parties are doing their
best to lose. |
Twenty
Iraqis have been killed and 22 injured after US helicopters
and heavy artillery bombed houses in al-Rummana village
north of al-Qaim city.
Seven children, six women and
three old men were among the dead, witnesses
said, while the injured included 13 children, seven
women and two old men.
The witnesses added that the shelling started after
US forces, who landed near al-Qaim on Monday night,
came under several attacks.
Early reports indicated one house was completely destroyed
and three others partially damaged in the bombing, Aljazeera
learned.
On Monday, five car bombs hit US military targets in
the western Iraqi city of al-Qaim near the border with
Syria, wounding at least two US soldiers.
Iraqi journalist Ahmed Khalid told Aljazeera that two
of Monday's attacks were simultaneous. Three bombs hit
a building used as a US military headquarters, while
a fourth targeted a US military convoy.
Clashes erupted later between fighters and US troops
in the city, damaging a number of houses, the journalist
said.
However, no civilians were injured in those clashes
as they had fled.
A spokesperson for the US marines said on Monday three
of their soldiers were wounded in the attack, which
occurred outside Camp Gannon, a base in al-Qaim, about
300km west of Baghdad in al-Anbar province.
Kirkuk attack
Late on Monday, armed men opened fire on a police patrol
in the northeastern Iraq city of Kirkuk, injuring two
members of the security service, police Brigadier Sarhat
Kadier said.
Attackers also placed a bomb in the undercarriage of
a doctor's car, but the device exploded as the physician
entered a Kirkuk store to buy bread, sparing him but
wounding two nearby civilians, Kadir said.
It was not known why attackers targeted the doctor.
Also on Monday, the US embassy in Iraq announced that
an American contractor working on a reconstruction project
had been captured.
Polish troop withdrawal
Meanwhile, Poland's defence minister said the government
wants its troops to leave Iraq in the first weeks of
2006 after the authorising United Nations resolution
expires.
"It is the government's opinion that, together
with the end of the UN mandate for the stabilisation
mission, all the activity of the Polish stabilisation
mission should also end," said Defence Minister
Jerzy Smajdzinski.
Poland, one of Washington's closest allies in Europe,
runs a multi-national stabilisation force in south-central
Iraq, where it has about 1700 soldiers. |
Let
them eat bombs
The doubling of child malnutrition in Iraq is baffling |
Terry Jones
Tuesday April 12, 2005
The Guardian |
A report to the UN human
rights commission in Geneva has concluded that Iraqi children
were actually better off under Saddam Hussein than they
are now.
This, of course, comes as a bitter blow for all those
of us who, like George Bush and Tony Blair, honestly believe
that children thrive best when we drop bombs on them from
a great height, destroy their cities and blow up hospitals,
schools and power stations.
It now appears that, far from improving the quality of
life for Iraqi youngsters, the US-led military assault
on Iraq has inexplicably doubled the number of children
under five suffering from malnutrition. Under Saddam,
about 4% of children under five were going hungry, whereas
by the end of last year almost 8% were suffering.
These results are even more disheartening for those of
us in the Department of Making Things Better for Children
in the Middle East By Military Force, since the previous
attempts by Britain and America to improve the lot of
Iraqi children also proved disappointing. For example,
the policy of applying the most draconian sanctions in
living memory totally failed to improve conditions. After
they were imposed in 1990, the number of children under
five who died increased by a factor of six. By 1995 something
like half a million Iraqi children were dead as a result
of our efforts to help them.
A year later, Madeleine Albright, then the US ambassador
to the United Nations, tried to put a brave face on it.
When a TV interviewer remarked that more children had
died in Iraq through sanctions than were killed in Hiroshima,
Mrs Albright famously replied: "We think the price
is worth it."
But clearly George Bush didn't. So he hit on the idea
of bombing them instead. And not just bombing, but capturing
and torturing their fathers, humiliating their mothers,
shooting at them from road blocks - but none of it seems
to do any good. Iraqi children simply refuse to be better
nourished, healthier and less inclined to die. It is truly
baffling.
And this is why we at the department are appealing to
you - the general public - for ideas. If you can think
of any other military techniques that we have so far failed
to apply to the children of Iraq, please let us know as
a matter of urgency. We assure you that, under our present
leadership, there is no limit to the amount of money we
are prepared to invest in a military solution to the problems
of Iraqi children.
In the UK there may now be 3.6 million children living
below the poverty line, and 12.9 million in the US, with
no prospect of either government finding any cash to change
that. But surely this is a price worth paying, if it means
that George Bush and Tony Blair can make any amount of
money available for bombs, shells and bullets to improve
the lives of Iraqi kids. You know it makes sense. |
The media coverage
during the past three weeks has been spent mainly on
the dying and deaths of two individuals than they have
on the Iraqi civilian casualties since the start of
the war.
One of the deaths, Pope John Paul II, certainly deserved
coverage, but the other death coverage, Terri Schiavo's,
focused on a woman with fewer accomplishments -- the
chief one being losing a lot of weight in a fairly short
period of time, a leading cause of the calamity that
befell her.
Before heading off to the Vatican to attend the Pope's
funeral, President Bush awarded the first Medal of Honor
of the Iraq war, posthumously, to Sgt. 1st Class Paul
Smith, for valor above and beyond the call of duty.
The award was made on the anniversary of Smith's death.
Given the description of the incident that led to the
honor, the medal could be dispensed more frequently
than once, given the nature of the Iraq conflict.
The award was given for a firefight incident which
came about when Smith's men were creating a temporary
jail for captured Iraqis. They were set upon by 100
members of Saddam's Republican Guard whom Smith held
off with a .50 caliber machine gun till he was killed.
Building a temporary prison was certainly putting the
cart before the horse, given the circumstances, but
a single soldier got some attention in the midst of
the avalanche of coverage afforded Schiavo and the pope.
But ordinary Iraqis have been, and are, paying a high
price for their liberation. And the Bush administration
is more than willing for them to pay that price.
The hope of 24/7 television news is that there is so
much time to fill that every once in a while something
of substance will be uttered or revealed. But as experience
has shown that's not always the case. A viewer of the
Schiavo and pope's coverage must leave the surface and
go to print. The television age has paradoxically left
people more informed and more ignorant at the same time.
During this period of selective mourning, the White
House oversaw the release of yet another not-so-independent
commission's report, one reviewing the intelligence
failures of all the pre-9/11 spy organisations.
It went out of its way to claim -- a point the White
House emphasized -- that no political pressure was exercised
to gain the faulty intelligence the Bush administration
was so eager to spread about and act upon.
Most of that scandal was buried under the two death
watches on TV, and administration spin was hardly necessary.
It isn't an intelligence failure that the number of
Iraqi civilian deaths still remains either contested
or unknown -- pick your own figure: 10,000 or more than
100,000 -- but a more troubling failure: that so few
Americans even want to know.
|
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan
- In the photograph, 12-year-old Mohammed Tahir looks
barely conscious. A bloodied rag covers his left hand,
where the kidnappers hacked off his finger and sent it,
along with the picture, to his family.
“We are not Muslims. We don’t know God,
so don’t ask us for sympathy. Just send us money,”
the ransom note read.
His family begged and borrowed the 10,000 dollars the
kidnappers asked for, but two days after they left the
money in an abandoned school in the southern city of
Kandahar, his battered body was found nearby.
In another incident blamed on the same gang, 13-year-old
Nakibullah’s body was unrecognisable when he was
found nine days after his family paid kidnappers the
same amount for a ransom.
Wild animals had destroyed his face and right arm,
and only the missing finger on his left hand showed
who he was.
“When we went there and I saw my son, whatever
my feelings only I know, my heart knows and my God knows,”
said the boy’s father Haji Bismillah, sitting
in a room he has barely left since his son was found
dead last month.
The boys were among six children kidnapped since the
New Year in Kandahar, once the spiritual heartland of
the fundamentalist Taleban regime, according to the
Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC).
Low confidence on law and order
The disappearances have sparked a political firestorm
in the deeply conservative city.
Many people have begun to feel life was better under
the harsh Islamic law of the Taleban, because they could
at least guarantee the safety of their children.
On March 7 more than 3,000 people took to the streets
of Kandahar demanding the resignation of the governor
and the police chief, accusing police of collusion with
the kidnappers and demanding a restoration of law and
order.
The protest turned violent. Three people were shot
and another 15 were injured according to security sources
and hospital doctors in the city.
Demonstrators have in part achieved their ends. On
March 16, President Hamid Karzai ordered a sweeping
shake-up of provincial police leaders and sent Kandahar’s
police chief Khan Mohammed to the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif.
Karzai is right to be worried. The Taleban came to
power in Kandahar after a similar spate of child kidnappings,
when the now fugitive leader of the movement intervened
to stop a fight between two militia commanders who were
battling in the streets over a boy they wanted to sodomise.
According to one of the many urban legends surrounding
the regime, the Taleban soldiers freed the boy and were
welcomed by residents of the city.
But now people are worried about their children again.
“Three of the boys were abused and then murdered
in the most violent ways. Two of them had been raped,”
Shamsuddin Tanrir, director of the Children’s
Rights Section at the AIHRC said about the latest spree
of abductions.
According to Tanrir’s records a further nine
boys were kidnapped last year, and he suspects many
more children were snatched but their parents have kept
quiet after their offspring were returned once they
had paid a ransom.
Corruption
“A lot of children go missing. And Kuchi or Baluchi
children whose parents are nomads and not part of the
system are probably never traced,” a western security
source in Kandahar told AFP.
Afghan Independent Radio, which broadcasts a program
in Kandahar city, reports that missing children declarations
are the most commonly placed adverts on the show.
“We get about four or five missing children a
month. About 20 percent of them are found before we
hit the air,” said Ismael Tahir, director of radio
programming at the station.
However, others are taken for child labour, or abuse,
or are runaways, Tahir said, adding that the station
is planning to log their names and addresses to help
with investigations.
The radio station is at the front line of the search
for missing children because public confidence in the
police has sunk so low. Even the newly appointed police
chief, Lieutenant General Mohammed Ayoub Salangi, concedes
that there was probably official corruption behind the
kidnappings.
“It seems as if local militia or tribal commanders
were involved,” he told AFP.
For Mohammed Tahir’s family their nightmare had
only just begun when they lost their son. Police arrested
two of the child’s uncles, keeping one of them,
Abdul Zahir, for 18 days and torturing him to try and
force him to admit to the crime.
“I couldn’t admit it because I haven’t
done anything, but now our whole family wants to leave
Kandahar because we think there were powerful people
involved,” he said.
No police investigators have been to look at the pictures
the kidnappers sent to try to find out who might be
behind the killings, he added.
“It should be possible to work out where this
was developed and try to trace the kidnappers that way,”
he said holding out a picture of his dead nephew.
Salangi said that police were still investigating the
case, but while a handful of people were arrested and
later released, no one has been charged.
“One of the biggest problems
we face here is police corruption and judicial corruption.
If the police can’t find the real killer they
will often arrest an innocent man and try and get him
to confess,” said AIHRC’s Tanrir.
Abdul Zahir said he hopes things will improve under
the new police chief Salangi, who is a Tajik from northern
Afghanistan, rather than an ethnic Pashtun like the
majority in Kandahar.
“We don’t care if he’s Pashtun, Tajik
or an animal. We just want him to bring security,”
he said. |
WASHINGTON - The Pentagon said
Monday it will use lasers to warn pilots when they've
flown into restricted airspace near the Capitol, even
though federal officials have warned that terrorists
might use the beams of light to blind pilots as they
approach airports.
There have been more than 100 incidents nationwide
since November in which laser beams have been flashed
into cockpits. The aircraft all landed safely, but federal
aviation officials are concerned that a laser could
be used to blind pilots and cause a crash.
The FBI has investigated many of the incidents, and
last month a New Jersey man was indicted for allegedly
pointing a powerful green laser beam at a small passenger
jet.
The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD,
said its laser warning system will start in 30 to 45
days. The low-intensity lights are less powerful than
the ones that prompted warnings, and tests have shown
they are safe for the eyes, according to NORAD.
NORAD spokesman Michael Kucharek said the laser-based
warning system someday could replace fighter jets as
a way to warn pilots to stay away from the Capitol and
the White House.
Hundreds of small private planes have strayed into
the restricted airspace in Washington, a 15-3/4-mile
radius around the Washington Monument.
In some cases, NORAD has had to divert or scramble
fighter jets to escort them away from the area at a
cost of $30,000 to $50,000 each time, Kucharek said.
The challenge for NORAD will be to educate pilots that
the red-red-green flashing laser beams mean they're
flying in restricted airspace. [...] |
NEW YORK/AMSTERDAM - Data broker
LexisNexis said Tuesday that personal information may
have been stolen on 310,000 U.S. citizens, or nearly
10 times the number found in a data breach announced
last month.
An investigation by the firm's Anglo-Dutch parent Reed
Elsevier determined that its databases had been fraudulently
breached 59 times using stolen passwords, leading to
the possible theft of personal information such as addresses
and Social Security numbers.
LexisNexis, which said in March that 32,000 people
had been potentially affected by the breaches, will
notify an additional 278,000 individuals whose data
may have been stolen.
Of the initial group contacted, only 2 percent asked
the company to conduct an investigation of their credit
records. LexisNexis has found no cases of identity theft,
such as using a stolen Social Security number to apply
for a credit card. [...] |
In what could be an ominous sign
for the U.S. tech industry, American universities slipped
lower in an international programming contest.
The University of Illinois tied
for 17th place in the world finals of the Association
for Computing Machinery International Collegiate Programming
Contest, which concluded Thursday. That's
the lowest ranking for the top-performing U.S. school
in the 29-year history of the competition.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University
of China took top honors this year, followed by Moscow
State University and the St. Petersburg Institute of
Fine Mechanics and Optics. Those results continued
a gradual ascendance of Asian and East European schools
during the past decade or so. A U.S. school hasn't won
the world championship since 1997, when students at
Harvey Mudd College achieved the honor.
"The U.S. used to dominate these kinds of programming
Olympics," said David Patterson, president of the
Association for Computing Machinery and a computer science
professor at the University of California, Berkeley.
"Now we're sort of falling behind."
The relatively poor showing
of American students is a red flag about how well the
United States in general is doing in technology,
compared with its global rivals, said Jim Foley, chairman
of the Computing Research Association, a group made
up of academic departments, research centers and professional
societies.
"This confirms concerns expressed by the Computing
Research Association about the U.S.'s status in the
worldwide race for technological leadership," said
Foley, who is also a professor in the College of Computing
at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
A number of developments in recent years suggest the
world's tech leadership could shift from Silicon Valley
and other U.S. locales to Asian nations such as China,
Korea and India. One sign is the way American technology
companies are conducting some of their research and
development activities in Asia.
The U.S. educational system is another area of concern.
Technology leaders, including Intel's Craig Barrett,
have pointed to education woes as a major problem for
the U.S. tech industry. Student
interest in computer science departments in the United
States has waned in the wake of the dot-com collapse
and amid reports that companies are shipping some of
their technology work to low-wage countries like India.
Also alarming to some is a dip in applications from
international students to U.S. graduate schools. [...]
While those in the United States
may be fretting over their tech future, some in China
are celebrating. A photo on the Web site of the
programming contest seems to show students from Shanghai
Jiao Tong University tossing someone into the air in
the wake of the school's victory. |
Jakarta - A volcano
on the Indonesian island of Sumatra spewed ash on Tuesday,
sparking panic among a population that has yet to recover
from a recent earthquake, officials said.
A meteorology and geophysics official in the west Sumatran
town of Padang Panjang said that nearby Mount Talang had
erupted at 20:42 GMT on Monday, coughing volcanic ash
about one kilometre around the peak.
The 2 599 metre Mount Talang is just some 40 kilometres
east of the coastal capital of West Sumatra province,
Padang. |
NOUMEA - A severe earthquake
estimated at 6.6 on the Richter scale struck the French
Pacific territory of New Caledonia early Tuesday, but
without causing major structural damage or casualties.
The epicentre of the quake, which struck at 4:09 am (1709
GMT Monday), was under the seabed some 425 kilometres
(260 miles) east of Noumea, Bernard Pelletier from the
local seismology institute said.
The quake was felt both by residents of the nearby Loyalty
islands and those living in Noumea and its surrounding
areas, but without causing any reported damage.
The tremor struck a so-called subduction zone where one
tectonic plate is pushed under another, creating friction.
The region is frequently hit by seismic activity. A quake
measuring 5.8 on the Richter scale hit the same region
last Friday, but without being felt in Noumea. |
JAMUL, Calif. - An
earthquake rattled southern San Diego County early Tuesday
but no damage or injuries were reported.
The magnitude-4.0 quake struck at 4:06 a.m. and was centered
three miles east of Jamul and about 18 miles north of
the U.S.-Mexico border, according to a preliminary report
from the U.S. Geological Survey.
A magnitude-2.4 aftershock was recorded four minutes
later.
There were no reports of damage or injury, said county
sheriff's Lt. Edna Ito, whose office is about 25 miles
east of town.
"I did feel it," she said. "It sounded
like somebody jarred my floor." |
Indianapolis
News Channel 8 released a video taken Thursday evening
of St. Peter's Basilica in Vatican City showing what
appears to be an unidentified flying object moving across
the upper left portion of the screen. The video, taken
from a network feed camera at around 6:00 am Roman time,
was filmed as Pope John Paul II lay in state.
24 Hour News 8 meteorologists said the white object
seen passing on a diagonal trajectory from the upper
middle part of the screen to the left could possibly
be a bird. Others were not so sure. |
Readers
who wish to know more about who we are and what we do may visit
our portal site Quantum
Future
Remember,
we need your help to collect information on what is going on in
your part of the world!
We also need help to keep
the Signs of the Times online.
Send
your comments and article suggestions to us
Fair Use Policy Contact Webmaster at signs-of-the-times.org Cassiopaean materials Copyright ©1994-2014 Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk. All rights reserved. "Cassiopaea, Cassiopaean, Cassiopaeans," is a registered trademark of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk. Letters addressed to Cassiopaea, Quantum Future School, Ark or Laura, become the property of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk Republication and re-dissemination of our copyrighted material in any manner is expressly prohibited without prior written consent.
|