Condi Says Democrat Congress Shouldn't Interfere In Conduct Of Iraq War

  Condi Rice is once again talking the GOP line if crap as far as the war in Iraq goes.

Yahoo News   February 25,2007

WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urged the Democratic-controlled Congress not to interfere in the conduct of the Iraq war and suggested President Bush would defy troop withdrawal legislation.

Rice said proposals being drafted by Senate Democrats to limit the war amounted to "the worst of micromanagement of military affairs." She said military leaders such as Gen. David Petraeus, the new U.S. commander in Iraq, believe the president's plan to send more troops is necessary.

"I can't imagine a circumstance in which it's a good thing that their flexibility is constrained by people sitting here in Washington, sitting in the Congress," Rice said. She was asked in a broadcast interview whether Bush would feel bound by legislation seeking to withdraw combat troops within 120 days.

"The president is going to, as commander in chief, need to do what the country needs done," she said.

   First off Condi, the country wants the United States out of Iraq. that would mean our troops back in their American homes and not some tent in the desert.

   Miss Rice, have you become just as dense and stupid as the rest of the Bush Crime Family has become, or have you always been this way from birth?

  Secondly, our Constitution, you know what that is I'm sure, gives the congress all of the right in the world to micro-manage any war as they see fit. It also gives our congress the right to tell Bush to go to hell if the congress so desires to do so. It also gives our congress the right to stop this war in no uncertain terms if they grow the balls to do so. Our Constitution also gives our congress the right to stop the funding of any war if they choose to do so!

  What part of this do you idiots up in the White house not understand? It is not up to Bush or you or Cheney or anyone to make the decisions concerning this sham of a war. Congress has the final authority whether you and the rest of the Crime Family like it or not!

 

Technorati tags: Condi Rice, President Bush, War in Iraq, Combat Troops, Democratic Congress

 

George W. Bush Likes Those Drug Dealers When It Comes To Pardons

      A big deal is being made in some circles about all of the presidential pardons that were issued by Bill Clinton before he left office. He did issue quite a few that he maybe should not have even looked at. So anyway, I checked up on our fearless leader to see what he has done in the pardoning arena and it would seem that Bush likes to pardon drug dealers.  Did the United States stop it's war on drugs policy and not bother to tell anyone?

    Out of 113 presidential pardons, 14 were pardons or commuted sentences for drug dealers.

Wikipedia

As of December 21, 2006, President George W. Bush had issued 113 presidential pardons to people who have served their entire sentence, and has commuted in addition the sentences of three people.

I am not going to bore you with the entire list. You can click the Wikipedia link for that.

    The order is alphabetical, the year is the date of conviction.

1) William Sidney Baldwin Sr. (1981 conspiracy to possess marijuana)

2) Marie Georgette Ginette Briere (1982 possession of cocaine with intent to distribute)

3) Harper James Finucan (1980 marijuana possession with intent to distribute)

4) George Thomas Harley (1984 aiding and abetting the distribution of cocaine)

5) Patricia Ann Hultman (1985 conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute cocaine and other controlled substance

6) Eric William Olson (1984 military conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, possession with intent to distribute, possession, and use of hashish)

7) James Edward Reed (1975 marijuana possession with intent to distribute)

8) John Louis Ribando (1976 and 1978 marijuana dealing)

9) John Gregory Schillace (1988 conspiracy to possess cocaine for distribution)

10) Wendy St. Charles (1984 conspiracy to trade narcotics and cocaine distribution)

11) Jerry Dean Walker (1989 cocaine distribution)

Two commutations of sentence were granted on May 20, 2004.

1) Geraldine Gordon (1989 distribution of phencyclidine) (sentenced to 20 years plus 10 years supervised release; sentence commuted after 15 years, term of supervised release left intact)

2) Bobby Mac Berry (1997 conspiracy to manufacture and possess with intent to distribute marijuana, money laundering) (sentenced to 9 years imprisonment plus 5 years supervised release; sentence reduced to 6 and a half years, terms of supervised release left intact)

A commutation of sentence was granted on December 21, 2006

1) Phillip Anthony Emmert (1992 conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine) (sentenced to 21 years and 10 months plus 5 years supervised release; sentence reduced Feb. 21, 1996; sentence commuted to 15 years and 1 month plus 5 years supervised release)

 

Technorati tags: George Bush, Presidential Pardons, Drug DealersCocaine, Meth

 

Is the Army Ripping Off Our Troops?

       If the Army is shortchanging our troops on their disability retirement ratings to save a few bucks, then the Army should be charged with treason for doing such a thing. The Army says that they aren't doing such things but anyone who reads the Inspector General's report will see many problems with the way that the soldiers are being treated and ripped off after serving this country in that sham war in Iraq!   MORE BELOW

                                                                               

Army Times 

The Army is deliberately shortchanging troops on their disability retirement ratings to hold down costs, according to veterans’ advocates, lawyers and services members, and the Inspector General has identified 87 problems in the system that need fixing.

The numbers of people approved for permanent or temporary disability retirement in the Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force have stayed relatively stable since 2001.

But in the Army — in the midst of a war — the number of soldiers approved for permanent disability retirement has plunged by more than two-thirds, from 642 in 2001 to 209 in 2005, according to a Government Accountability Office report last year. That decline has come even as the war in Iraq has intensified and the total number of soldiers wounded or injured there has soared above 15,000.

Along with paying them reduced wages during that time, the eventual reevaluation often leads to downward revisions in their disability ratings — and lower disability payments.

   From Daily Kos

...what about that Inspector General's report that identified 87 problems that needed to be fixed? It was from a year long probe that found, "inconsistent training for counselors helping soldiers through the system, inadequate record keeping and a failure to follow policy pushed down from the Defense Department," and yet two days ago, Secretary of Defense Gates was:

...dismayed to learn this past week that some of our injured troops were not getting the best possible treatment at all stages of their recovery, in particular the outpatient care. This is unacceptable and it will not continue.

I'm grateful to reporters for bringing this problem to our attention, but very disappointed we did not identify it ourselves.

Yes, Secretary Gates was shocked, simply shocked, at the problems at Walter Reed, and so he sprang into action, sending an army of workers to paint and patch up Building 18 before giving reporters a tour, and naming a review group to "inspect the current situation."  And after much study and expressions of support for the troops, with a few more case workers assigned to the ever-increasing number of wounded men and women, what will happen to Cpl. McLeod and the thousands like him across the country?  After the outrage and news coverage dies down, will the issue of shortchanging wounded veterans on their disability ratings continue to be ignored?  

 

Technorati tags: US Army, Secretary Gates, Walter Reed, GAO

Democrats Soft On Terror?

   We all know that I am leaning towards thinking that the Democrats still need to grow some balls to get with the program as they seem to have gotten lost somewhat since the election passed.

   Are the Democrats soft on terror?  I do not think so. They just aren't used to playing the role of adult yet.

                                   

 

Published on Saturday, February 24, 2007 by CommonDreams.org

Are Democrats Soft on Terror?

by Susan Lenfestey

A few days ago, the PBS News Hour, which deserves, well -- a medal, for honoring the war dead each evening, was followed by a program on the Marines which I found unexpectedly compelling for many reasons, including the haunting faces I'd just seen

In it, several retired Marines spoke of the reality of war vs. the romance, and said that anyone who has been to war will do everything to avoid sending someone else off to war.

This brought to mind our current Commander-in-Chief and his blackguard Vice-Chief, who both cut-and-run when they were called to serve. And, by contrast, the Democrats such as George McGovern, Wes Clark, John Kerry and Max Cleland, who are all anti-war, but "warriors" in the lexicon of the Marines.

So how is it that these Democrats who fought the wars have come to be seen as the ones who are soft on terror, and the ones who ducked the war have come to be seen as the ones to fight it, at least long enough to bamboozle a nation into re-electing them?

Just as we allowed Karl Rove and the “base” to paint us into the corner of being anti-family (while many of them are single with no children or, like Newt Gingrich, working on their third marriages), we've allowed them to portray us as "not getting" the threat of terrorism.

Well, we do get it.

• We get it that George Bush's biggest foreign policy blunder in history has increased the rage towards America and made us more at risk.

• We get it that the instability he's created in Iraq and the Mideast makes the consequences of pulling out of Iraq almost certainly catastrophic, matched only by the catastrophe of staying in.

• We get it that bin Laden is flourishing - somewhere -- and that new Al-Qaeda training camps are sprouting up in Pakistan and Somalia and who-knows-where else.

• We get it that we are still woefully weak at home, with efforts at Homeland security floundering and under funded.

• We get it that we have stretched our troops so thin in Iraq that we have put our capacity to respond on any other front, including the home front, at risk.

• We get it that by miring us in Iraq, by keeping detainees in Gitmo with no recourse, by allowing torture and suspending Constitutional guarantees, George Bush and Dick Cheney have stripped us of the moral authority to lead by example.

• We get it that we need to be vigilant and defend ourselves from future attacks, even if it requires military action.

It's not the war on terror we oppose; it's the stupids who are running the war on terror we could do without. We'd rather listen to those who have been to war than those who are delusional about it.

Are Democrats “soft on terror?” Do we tuck tail and run in times of war? For better or worse, think FDR, Truman, and LBJ.

What we do want is for our leaders to be smart on terror, to use all the diplomatic, political and economic firepower they can muster before (and after) sending a few good men - and women - into the killing fields of war. And if they've already blundered into a disastrous unwinnable war, to have the smarts to see that there's no correlation between the number of dead bodies in Iraq and our national security -- and the humility to admit it.

Susan Lenfestey lives in Minneapolis and writes at the Clotheslineblog.com

 

Technorati tags: Democrats, War on terror, Homeland security, Bush Administration

Iran Says they Are Ready for War, Will Not Stop Nuclear Ambitions

    Iran is saying that they are still going ahead with their plans for nuclear power for energy and that they have no intention of backing down from the pursuit no matter how much the United States and it's allies flap their lips about stopping the development process.

                                                                          

Al Jazeera

SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2007

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Sunday that Iran has "no reverse gear" on its programme to develop nuclear technology.

But Ahmadinejad was quoted by Iran's student news agency ISNA as saying: "Iran has obtained the technology to produce nuclear fuel and Iran's move is like a train ... which has no brake and no reverse gear".
"We dismantled the rear gear and brakes of the train and threw them away sometime ago," Ahmadinejad was quoted as telling a gathering of Islamic clerics.
An Iranian deputy foreign minister echoed Ahmadinejad, saying the Islamic Republic, which is accused by the West of trying to build nuclear weapons, was ready for any possible scenario "even for war".
Manouchehr Mohammadi, one of the deputies to the foreign minister, was quoted by ISNA as saying at a conference in the central city of Isfahan:
"We have prepared ourselves for any situation, even for war."

 

Technorati tags: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran, Nuclear power, War, ISNA

Are The Democrats Just Totally Ignorant?

    Once again the Democrats are showing the Republicans and the rest of the nation that they still have a small dose of incompetence on the blood stream as they can't seem to agree on Murtha's plan to withhold funds from the Bush Crime Family unless the troops are trained correctly and have the right equipment to perform their duties.

   Murtha messed up this entire idea by going on a liberal website and discussing his plan which seems to have shocked the Democrats and it most certainly has giving the Republicans ammunition to use against the plan. Even a few Democrats have spoken out on the plan, saying that they do not like the idea of cutting off any funds for any reason and that cutting funds would hurt the troops. They sound more like Republicans than Democrats. Maybe we should insist they get a blood test for DNA analysis.

                                                                             

Washington Post

"If this is going to be legislation that's crafted in such a way that holds back resources from our troops, that is a non-starter, an absolute non-starter," declared Rep. Jim Matheson (Utah), a leader of the conservative Blue Dog Democrats.

Tom Andrews, a former House member and antiwar activist who helped Murtha with his Internet rollout, fumed: "The issue to me is, what is the state of the backbone of the Democratic Party? How will they respond to this counterattack? Republicans are throwing touchdown passes on this because the Democrats aren't even on the field."

Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, a Florida Democrat and deputy whip, said party leaders are working on several Iraq proposals and that Murtha's may survive. Finding consensus will be difficult but not impossible, she said. "This is a multi-step process," she cautioned. "At least we're debating the topic, not blindly following the president."

   Yes Rep. Wasserman, you are blindly following the president, only in a different way. The GOP has led you and your friends around in a circle and have thus far beaten the Democrats at anything that is of major importance.  Wake the hell up!

 

Technorati tags: Demmocratic Party, John Murtha, Tom Andrews, Bush, Republican Party, Nancy Pelosi

U.S. Generals To Resign If Bush Orders Iran Attack

   Forget Yahoo, back to the goodie's!

   The word from The Sunday Times in London is that a few of America's senior military commanders are ready to resign if Bush orders an attack on Iran. This is according to defense and intelligence sources. 

                                       

      The Sunday Times

February 25, 2007    Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter, Washington

The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.

“There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,” a source with close ties to British intelligence said. “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”

A British defence source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them.

“There are enough people who feel this would be an error of judgment too far for there to be resignations.”

A generals’ revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented. “American generals usually stay and fight until they get fired,” said a Pentagon source. Robert Gates, the defence secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders.

 

Technorati tags: Robert Gates defence secretary, U.S. Generals, Iran, Bush

Yahoo Needs To Lose A Few More Million

      I have quite a  few visitors that have requested email notifications whenever a new post comes up. I've had no problem with this for 6 months up until this past Friday.

  The fine assholes at Yahoo have somehow decided that I am spamming the email requesters so they have blocked delivery. I guess that on those days when I post alot, the Yahoo system thinks that all of the emails are spam.

   These dumbfucks at Yahoo need to get with the fucking program and  fix my shit before I get really pissed! If there was anything out there other MSN and Google, I'd be off of Yahoo for good.

   After the nasty letter that I sent this morning to their customer service, I may be!

 

Technorati tags: Yahoo, email

Will Bush's Iraq Plan Work?

  This was the question that Al Jazeera posed to its readers today after Tony Blair said British troops would be scaling back in their Iraqi presence.

An announcement by Tony Blair, the British prime minister, that the UK is to reduce its troops in Iraq has been hailed as a rejection of US military strategy by political opponents of George Bush. Will Bush's Iraq plan still work?

 

Added: Saturday, 24 February 2007

Blair took those troops out of Iraq only to send them to Afghanistan to help with the insurgence of the Taliban. It was not an altruistic move but a calculated one. We all know the Taliban is regrouping and about to mount attacks on whoever is in their way. I have become completely cynical with all things coming out the mouths of the two, Blair or Bush.

bainatluc, Kitchener, Canada

          * * * *

Added: Saturday, 24 February 2007

No need for the use of the future tense, the plan has worked and works perfectly. The proof? A one piece Iraq is already history. Thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians are no more of this world, Iraqi women are 'free' for rape. Please complete the list.

al_morro, Mexico, Mexico

          * * * *

Added: Saturday, 24 February 2007

NEVER - because it was not a democratic action.

Helmut, Simpang Ampat-Penang, Malaysia

          * * * *

Added: Saturday, 24 February 2007

Tony Blair has announced British troop withdrawls not because the war has been won, but because it cannot be won, Basra is not a stable and democratic city but a war-torn hell, ruled by Muslim militias. Blair is a true soldier of fortune, young men do the soldiering and he gets the fortune. After he steps down as PM watch out for him on the US lecture circuit at 50,000 dollors a throw, he should be ashamed of himself.

Verity, Liverpool, United Kingdom

          * * * *

Added: Saturday, 24 February 2007

To the person from Iraq who posted. Great. Can more people post? Or are you posting from a US or an Iraqi base camp which has satellite internet? I know and met Iraqi civilians in university and they all speak excellent English, so I hope they will post from Iraq. You know, we get our news from CNN, which shows us spectacular fireworks, the pride of the US army. What CNN and FOX didn't show us were the thousands of Iraqi women, men, fathers, mothers, grandmothers, grandfathers and children killed. It doesn't show the orphans on the Syrian border. But...here in Quebec, we get TV5 and the European coverage is very different, it does provide us with a reality check about what is going on Iraq, about what the fireworks have done in terms of destructions, where the Sunni intellectuals have gone, the repression, the searches in the homes with no warning which terrify the children. We do get to see some of that on TV5, so I hope real Iraqi civilians will post, if they are capable, I mean those not associated to the US armny.

Evie, Montreal, Canada

          * * * *

Added: Saturday, 24 February 2007

Yes, Bush's plan can work. First, Iraqis must recognize that it is really a plan developed by their own prime minister to unite their country. Bush is not responsible for a man strapping a bomb to his chest in hopes of blowing up innocent people. That is that man's responsibility. Peace in Iraq will happen when citizens of that country realize that they can express their ideas and views more effectively through their elected officials than with violence. Peace starts with tolerance, and not just of the West, but of your neighbour's faith. God loves, He doesn't hate.

jbernar5, Toledo, USA     

          * * * *

Added: Saturday, 24 February 2007

This is Bush's baby which has failed. He started all this and now he is instigating the word Shia' and 'Sunnis' to add to the violence. I think once the US is out of Iraq only then can peace be returned.

huzaiffa, JUbail, Saudi Arabia

 

Technorati tags: Bush, Iraq Plan, Al Jazeera

Former Ambassador to The U.N. Richard Holbrooke On U.S. Withdrawal From Iraq

Transcript From IraqSlogger  February 24,2007

    Richard Holbrooke speaking  in the Democratic radio address on Saturday:

Hello, my name is Richard Holbrooke and I served as ambassador to the United Nations under President Clinton.

This week, one of our closest allies, Prime Minister Tony Blair, announced that Great Britain will remove some of their troops from Iraq. After five years of unwavering support for this mismanaged war, Blair's announcement is a clear sign that now even our closest ally has broken with President Bush over his plan to escalate the war.

As Americans, we should ask, "Why are thousands more of our troops being sent to Iraq just as British troops are planning to leave?"

Like our allies, the Bush White House needs to acknowledge some unavoidable, if unpleasant facts on the ground. Plain and simple, there are not and never have been enough troops in Iraq to accomplish the mission, as stated by President Bush.

As all the world now knows, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's initial mistake was catastrophic. Even the Pentagon says the all volunteer army is stretched to the breaking point.

We need a new strategy in Iraq and, at the same time, we must find ways to limit the consequences of a policy that is failing in the larger region that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Himalayas.

This administration has severely damaged relations with our indispensable NATO ally, Turkey. It has left our close friend, Israel, more isolated.

The other war, the vital war in Afghanistan against Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban is going so poorly that even the president finally admitted it last week and he is belatedly adding new troops to the effort in Afghanistan.

And who is the major beneficiary of U.S. policy in the last five years? Iran, the most dangerous country in the region.

Why has President Bush ignored the advice of the bipartisan Iraq study group mission, which called for, and I quote, "new and enhanced diplomatic and political efforts in Iraq and the region and a change in the primary mission of the U.S. forces in Iraq, which will enable the U.S. to begin to move its combat forces out of Iraq responsibly," end quote?

Both Democrats and Republicans have long called on President Bush to make a political resolution in Iraq his top priority. His own generals have made this point repeatedly in public, only to be ignored.

We owe this effort to the many Iraqis who welcomed the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and who put their trust in us only to find their lives in mortal danger as a result and, above all, we owe this to our brave troops who risk their lives every day in Iraq.

By a political solution, I mean something far more ambitious than the current American efforts aimed at strengthening Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, our primary objective should be to encourage Iraqi leaders to make political compromises that will foster national reconciliation.

We need to begin a careful phased redeployment of U.S. troops, as the British are doing. Redeploying American troops will give the U.S. greater flexibility in combating terrorist networks and pursuing its interests in the Middle East.

It will also encourage the Iraqi government to take greater responsibility for its own affairs.

We also need to embark on a new diplomatic offensive in the Gulf region to help stabilize Iraq. All countries in the region with a stake in the future of Iraq, including Syria and Iran, should be involved in the diplomatic effort, if possible.

Engaging in a broad-based diplomatic offensive and beginning the redeployment of U.S. forces in Iraq represents the best way to secure America's interests in the region hreat of terrorist networks.

The president needs to demonstrate that these difficult problems will not be handed off to future administrations. If we are still at war next year, as seems highly probable, it will benefit neither party, but it will leave the next president and our nation with the same choices under far worse circumstances.

President Bush should not presume he has a blank check to deal with Iran. We should not make the same mistake twice, especially after the administration's false claims about the intelligence leading up to the Iraq war.

This administration should not continue to ignore the lessons of history. They should not continue to ignore the American people, our military leaders and our Congress, all of whom have rejected the president's escalation plan.

Thank you for listening.

 

Technorati tags: Richard Holbrooke, Democratic Radio Address, Iran, Iraq Plan, Syria

 

" We Love Jesus " Chanted At Basketball Game Draws Ire Of Jewish Students.

   I just could not pass this story up on a principal  who got a little mad because students at a basketball game shouted out "We love Jesus" to the visiting school which just happens to have Jewish students.

   they also painted the word " Jew " on the gym wall behind the  seats of Bishop Sullivan Catholic High School students who were at the game. the home team bleachers, in other words.

    Dennis W. Price, principal of the  school said, "It was obviously in reference to the Jewish population of Norfolk Academy; that's the only way you can take that."

   Price did send an apology letter to the Norfolk Academy.

   Anyway, since the students were so " disrespectful ' they now are going to get classes on diversity training. What a crock of shit this is! Every time that either Jesus or something to do with being a Christian is mentioned, the Christians ( such as they are ) have to put up with junk like diversity training or intolerance training or some other crap.

   Principal Price even called up the anti-defamation league to make sure that the school and the Jewish community could work together so that the students will become more understanding.

   I guess that freedom of speech and freedom of expression are fine until you speak of the Bible or Jesus or of being a Christian ( so far as that goes ), don't hurt anyone's feeling now, or the Muslims, or the Jews or some other group will go crying to somebody for re-course.

 

Technorati tags: We Love Jesus, Jewish Students, Catholic Students, Diversity training

 

Virginia's Slavery Apology

   It was bound to happen sooner or later with all of the crying that various groups in the country tend to do. Eventually, it will get so bad with the apologies that we will be having to say sorry to the homeless man on the street that we didn't give a dollar to one morning.

    Virginia General Assembly, in a unanimous vote, passed a measure today expressing "profound regret"  for Virginia's role in slavery back in the day.

   Missouri also has the same kind of measure on the table but Virginia is the only state to do this, thus far. Those who supported this idea says that it carries a symbolic message.

A. Donald McEachin (D), "This session will be remembered for a lot of things, but 20 years hence I suspect one of those things will be the fact that we came together and passed this resolution."

The resolution passed the House 96-0 and cleared the 40-member Senate on a unanimous voice vote. It does not require Gov. Timothy M. Kaine's approval.

   One of the better things that happened, so far as that goes, is that the resolution also express regret over the " the exploitation of Native Americans."

   Part of the resolution say that government-sanctioned slavery "ranks as the most horrendous of all depredations of human rights and violations of our founding ideals in our nation's history, and the abolition of slavery was followed by systematic discrimination, enforced segregation, and other insidious institutions and practices toward Americans of African descent that were rooted in racism, racial bias, and racial misunderstanding."

Among those voting for the measure was Delegate Frank D. Hargrove, an 80-year-old Republican who infuriated black leaders last month by saying "black citizens should get over" slavery.

After enduring a barrage of criticism, Hargrove successfully co-sponsored a resolution calling on Virginia to celebrate "Juneteenth," a holiday commemorating the end of slavery in the United States.

 

Technorati tags: Virginia, Slavery Apology, Frank D. Hargrove

 

America's War on Terrorism-Arms Transfers

   While browsing through some of the website's that I use for various kinds of research, I came across a report on the U.S. arms sales policy in regards to counter terrorism dealing with near east. south Asia.

   I must say that the Bush administration did waste no time in removing some countries off of the ' no arms sold to '  list that the government keeps.

   The following report concerns sales and restrictions which were lifted off of countries back in 2002. It makes for some interesting browsing.

From Federation of American Scientist

U.S. Arms Sales Policy Related to Counter-Terrorism and 
Near East / South Asia

Resources

The "War on Terrorism" Security Assistance Tables
The "War on Terrorism" and Human Rights:
Aid to Abusers
Arms Export Control Act
Foreign Assistance Act
Anti-Terrorism Legislation

Shortly after the terrorist attacks, the Bush administration lifted those sanctions on Pakistan and India that had been imposed after both countries tested nuclear weapons.  Additional sanctions remained in place for Pakistan, as well as other countries the Bush Administration wanted to coax into playing a key role in the anti-terrorism coalition.  The administration therefore included in a draft anti-terrorism bill sent to Congress a provision that would have lifted all restrictions on military aid and arms transfers for the next five years in cases where doing so would help fight terrorism or other threats to international peace and security.  The provision also specifically lifted bans on counter-terrorism and non-proliferation aid for states with gross and consistent human rights abuses or a history of non-cooperation on counter-terrorism. After strong criticism from Congress and NGOs, the proposal was scaled back to a request to lift remaining sanctions on Pakistan for two years.

The Pakistan-only waiver was put into a separate bill (S. 1465, sponsored by Sen. Brownback), which became law on 27 October 2001. This law waives the military coup provision (no arms or aid to countries that have undergone a military coup until democracy is restored) from Foreign Operations Appropriations bills for FY 2002 and 2003; allows for greater flexibility on sanctions related to MTCR or Export Administration Act violations; and exempts Pakistan from restrictions on aid relating to loan defaults. It also shortens the congressional notification period for transfers of weapons from current U.S. stocks (drawdowns) from 15 to 5 days and transfers of excess U.S. weapons from 30 to 15 days for all countries if the transfers would respond to or prevent international acts of terrorism. In June 2003, the State Department formally ended the ban on arms transfers to India and Pakistan, announcing that henceforth all requests would be considered on a standard case-by-case basis.

Technorati tags: Senator Brownback, Philippines, Turkey, Georgia, al-Qaeda, State Department

also sponsored an amendment to the FY02 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill that would waive sanctions on Azerbaijan (Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act) in order to support U.S. counter-terrorism efforts.  The final version of the bill , which was approved by the House-Senate Conference Committee on December 19, includes a renewable one-year waiver with a proviso that military aid or arms cannot undermine the peace process with hostile neighbor Armenia. In March 2002, Congress made these temporary waivers permanent by amending the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). With this notice, Armenia and Azerbaijan were officially removed from a list of proscribed destinations for the exports and imports of defense articles and defense services

In response to the Philippines support for U.S. anti-terrorism efforts - including offers of use of bases, airspace, and law enforcement aid - the U.S. government offered $92.3 million worth of excess military equipment, including a C-130 transport plane, 8 UH-1H utility helicopters, a naval patrol boat, and 30,000 M-16 rifles plus ammunition.  The aid is also intended to help Manila fight its various insurgencies, including the Abu Sayyef, which has allegedly had ties to Al Qaeda.  U.S. Special Operations Forces are also providing on-site training for Filipino soldiers fighting the Abu Sayyef. The Bush administration has also reportedly offered excess defense articles (EDA) to Turkey in the name of combating terrorism in all its forms (i.e., counter-insurgency).

Georgia is the most recent recipient of U.S. weapons and aid, receiving 10 UH-1H Huey helicopters (four for spare parts only) and $64 million in military aid and training to fight Arab soldiers with alleged ties to Al Qaeda that have been participating in the Chechen war and are now taking refuge in the Pankisi Gorge region in northern Georgia. Like many of the recent aid recipients, claims that Georgia has become an al Qaeda sanctuary are dubious at best. Even the Georgian Defense Minister, whose troops stand to benefit handsomely from the alleged al Qaeda presence in his country, has publically challenged the Bush administration's claims. "For me personally, it is very difficult to believe in that [al Qaeda is in the Gorge]," commented Tevzadze, "because to come from Afghanistan to that part of Georgia, they need to [cross] at least six or seven countries, including [the] Caspian Sea... No, al Qaeda influence can't be in the country." ^[1]
Also in the name of helping other states fight terrorism, the State Department announced on January 9, 2002, that Tajikistan - which has been cooperating with the U.S. counter-terrorism efforts - was removed from the ITAR list of states prohibited from receiving U.S. military goods and services.  The State Department is also planning to begin combat and weapons training for Kenyan soldiers as part of the African Crisis Response Initiative, which had previously been limited to non-lethal peacekeeping training.  The shift in training could help clear the way for U.S. forces to use Kenyan bases in an eventual attack on terrorist camps in Somalia. President Bush's March 21, 2002 Emergency Supplemental Budget Request includes greatly increased levels of foreign military financing for Kenya, as well as Djibouti and Ethiopia, the three countries which share borders with Somalia.

This Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Request also includes a $50 million request under the Foreign Military Financing Program for Afghanistan, and contains provisions for the arming and training of an Afghan army. The $373 million Foreign Military Financing request for "the fight against terrorism" also names Pakistan, Nepal, Jordan, Bahrain, Oman, Yemen, Uzbekistan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Turkey, Georgia, the Philippines, Colombia and Ecuador as intended recipients of U.S. military equipment and aid.

In one demonstration of restraint, the State Department decided to suspend the export of long-range .50 caliber sniper rifles to individuals or commercial dealers because of the special risk they pose to U.S. security.  The State Department seemed to be responding to a request from Rep. Henry Hyde, ranking minority member on the House Committee on Governmental Reform, and a report from the Violence Policy Center  showing that U.S. arms makers had previously transferred these high-powered weapons to foreign terrorists, including Osama bin Laden. These weapons can shoot accurately from almost 2,000 yards, and can take down aircraft and pierce armored vehicles.  The State Department had already approved the export of 75 such weapons this year, though only 16 had already been delivered before the decision to suspend further exports.

 

Technorati tags: State Department, al-Qaeda, Georgia, Turkey, Bush Administration, U.S. military, Jordan

Should The Death Penalty Be Banned?

   Al Jazeera on many occasions will pose a question to its readers and then post their comments.

   Here's a question which was asked after Saddam Hussein was hanged in December of last year.

Do you think the death penalty should be banned?

Added: Friday, 23 February 2007

I as a human being believe that killing others is not making justice, but being vengeful, and that is wrong. I am against the death penalty. Jail is better. Everyone deserves the opportunity to change, and to have a second chance to correct what they did wrong. We must be merciful as our creator is merciful.

fimime, Chicago, USA

          * * * *

Added: Wednesday, 21 February 2007

Well, you have to admit that the death penalty had deterred the executed from murdering again. I think this principle was valid for Saddam the man.' Unquote; My take on this is, that, then this principle is also valid for Bush/Blair and their zionist collaborators both in America/Europe and the illegal zionist entity in the ME, for cheating and lying to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent muslims. I challenge you to answer what punishment you propose for these war criminals, enough to deter them from committing murder again?

azzi, mumbai, India

          * * * *

Added: Tuesday, 20 February 2007

The death penalty was a perfect form of punishment that held up justice high in the past. But in todays world it has been subjected to extreme misuse, especially in corrupt countries. The time is right to ban the death penalty which may accidentally silence a victim of todays corruption forever.

S.H. Raja, Rawalpindi, Pakistan

          * * * *

 

Added: Tuesday, 20 February 2007, 11:19 AM Mecca time, 08:19 AM GMT

I firmly believe the death penalty should be banned. The Almighty, who was, is, and will be until eternity, created the earth and all that is in it. Since human beings can't create life, so we have no right to destroy it. When it comes to ex-president Saddam Hussein and his friends who were found guilty of crimes against the Iraqi people they should have got life sentence, combined with hard labour.

Ricardo-Germany, Cologne, Germany

 

Technorati tags: Death penalty, Saddam Hussein, Bush Administration, Tony Blair

TSA's ' No-Fly List ' Problem Is Still A Problem

   As you know, many people has been refused seating on an airline flight because their name happened to come up on the Transportation Security Administrations (TSA) no-fly list. This has included members of congress such as Representative Don Young and Senator Edward Kennedy.

   This was supposed to have been fixed by the TSA with their newest webpage that citizens could go to so that they could prove that the names on the list were not the people who where denied flight seating.

   But as is usual with anything that this administration does, there are a few serious flaws with the program.

As soon as the site was launched, several web security experts alleged that this site lacked basic security measures to ensure that the submitted personal information would not end up in the hands of third parties. For example, these experts claimed that the site was not protected with a “secure sockets layer” (SSL), which would have ensured the secure transfer of the data to TSA. They also claimed that this failure to encrypt the data could have allowed a third party — including a terrorist — to obtain this sensitive personal information.

According to these experts, the site was not operating out of the TSA web domain, but instead was operating out of the following commercial domain: http://rms.desyne.com. This domain appears to belong to Desyne Web Services, Inc., a web design company whose mailing address is a post office box located in Boston, Virginia. In addition, security experts pointed out that the website text had numerous spelling errors and that the attached form did not have an OMB number, which all federal government forms are required to have. In fact, the overall appearance of the site was so poor that web experts first assumed it was a so-called “phishing” site, a site internet hackers had created to look like a TSA website page.

The site also appears to have been launched prematurely. A notice in the Federal Register on January 18, 2007, announced that, in compliance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of Homeland Security would be creating a new system of records. This system, called the Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (TRIP) would support travelers’ ability to redress complaints that they have been incorrectly placed on no-fly lists. The comment submission period for this notice was open until February 20, 2007. If TSA’s traveler identity verification website is part of the TRIP system, it was launched while the comment period for this notice was still open.   Nancy Pelosi's Blog for more info.

 

Technorati tags: Transportation Security Administration, Nancy Pelosi, No-Fly List, DHS, TRIP system

 

16 Million Americans In Severe Poverty

   Did you know that almost 16 million Americans now live in severe poverty?  Included in this category are individuals who earn less than $5,080 per year and a family of four who earns less than $9,903 per year the poverty  numbers have been going up since 2000. This data is based on 2005 statistics, the most recent year available.

    A  McClatchy Newspapers analysis  found that the number of severely poor Americans grew by 26 percent from 2000 to 2005. That's 56 percent faster than the overall poverty population grew in the same period.

   For enquiring minds who want to know, there's more below.

                                    

McClatchy Newspaper

The plight of the severely poor is a distressing sidebar to an unusual economic expansion. Worker productivity has increased dramatically since the brief recession of 2001, but wages and job growth have lagged behind and the share of national income going to corporate profits has dwarfed the amount going to wages and salaries.

That helps explain why the median household income of working-age families, adjusted for inflation, has fallen for five straight years.

These and other factors have helped push 43 percent of the nation's 37 million poor people into deep poverty - the highest rate since at least 1975.

About one in three severely poor people are under age 17, and nearly two out of three are female. Female-headed families with children account for a large share of the severely poor.

Nearly two out of three people (10.3 million) in severe poverty are white, but blacks (4.3 million) and Hispanics of any race (3.7 million) make up disproportionate shares. Blacks are nearly three times as likely as non-Hispanic whites to be in deep poverty, while Hispanics are roughly twice as likely.

Washington, D.C., the nation's capital, has a higher concentration of severely poor people - 10.8 percent in 2005 - than any of the 50 states, topping even hurricane-ravaged Mississippi and Louisiana, with 9.3 percent and 8.3 percent, respectively. Nearly six of 10 poor District residents are in extreme poverty.

   Maybe instead of just the No Child Left Behind program, Bush should consider adding a new program called No Family's Left Behind. Wait, that'll never happen because he has no family members that can profit from such a program, yet.

   Those stats are disgusting for a nation of our wealth and resources.

 

Technorati tags: Americans, severe poverty, washington, dc, median household income

Iran Says the United States In No Position To Start A War

       Iran said  today that the United States isn't in any position to start a war against it and said that Washington and its friend's  should engage in more dialogue.

    Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki  told  reporters that, "We do not see America in a position to impose another crisis on its tax payers inside America by starting another war in the region."

Bill Richardson ( D Governor NM ) and 2008 presidential candidate wrote in an op-ed piece in the Washington Post  that, "Saber-rattling is not a good way to get the Iranians to cooperate, But it is a good way to start a new war."   He also said that Iran, "will not end their nuclear program because we threaten them and call them names."

   You know what? Governor Richardson is right on this point as it would seem that Iran's leaders are not to worried about the United States. Though our allies would like to see this happen, especially Israel, I think that many other countries would very harshly condemn Bush on the act even though his head is to think to hear what anyone says unless it suits his purpose.

   The only way that the United States can attack Iran is by air as we certainly do not have enough troops on the ground to do to much of anything. I point to Iraq as an example.

   We do already have the carriers and missile ships and all of those other goodies out in the straits just waiting for a fly over and bombing run but the United States would be screwing itself if it did so. Israel would be stepping into a corner that they could never get out of if the U.S. attacks Iran.

    Talk is cheap from both the U.S. and Iran but until a better solution comes along, it is the only way at this point in time.

 

Technorati tags: Iran, United States, Bush, Military, Mottaki, Bill Richardson

 

 

 

Bombs kill 35 and Injure 60

   A truck blast blew up in Iraq while worshippers were leaving a Sunni mosque killing 35 people and injuring 60 or more.

   There were also massive protest over the detention of Amar al-Hakim on Friday by around 8,000 people near the Imam Ali mosque in Najaf.

   I often wonder if Bush orders the U.S. military to do these stupid things just so he can incite the Iraqis to more violence. It would be in George's favor, after all.

AP 

"The detention of al-Hakim represents an insult to the Iraqi people," said Hassan al-Shebli, a 45-year-old store owner who was among the protesters. "The Americans should avoid such irresponsible acts if they want to establish stability in the country."

Hundreds also took to the streets in Baghdad's main Shiite district of Sadr City and the southern Shiite cities of Karbala and Basra to protest the detention and call for an investigation.

But the protests were relatively small considering the influence of the al-Hakim family, indicating they were mainly aimed at sending a warning to the Americans.

"What happened is unacceptable," Shiite lawmaker Hamid Majid Moussa told Al-Forat television. "The Iraqi government and the American forces must put an end to such transgressions," Shiite lawmaker Hamid Majid Moussa told Al-Forat television.

 

Technorati tags: truck blast, 35 dead, Nnajaf, iraqi protestors, americans

 

U.S. Attorney Resignation Number Eight From Michigan

U.S. attorney resignation number eight has come upon us this week as Margaret M. Chiara, 63, the first female U.S. attorney in the state of Michigan, has handed in her resignation effective March 16,2007. she did not specify as to why she was stepping down but we all know that this is more of George Bush changing people in an attempt to cover his ass with the criminal activities that this administration has taken part in.

Yahoo News 

Seven other U.S. attorneys have been forced to resign in recent months. Democrats have accused the Bush administration of forcing the resignations to make way for political allies.

Sen. Charles Schumer ( voting record), D-N.Y., said Chiara's resignation "could well be one of them. Now that this shoe has dropped, we'll be continuing to seek better explanations than those we've been given."

Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty told senators earlier this month that one of the seven prosecutors was forced out to give his post to a former aide to presidential adviser Karl Rove. The others were fired for "performance-related" reasons, he said.

Federal prosecutors serve at the pleasure of the president, subject to Senate confirmation. U.S. attorneys can be fired for any reason.

   The Justice Department didn't answer to whether she was forced from her post. to me, that pretty much says that she was indeed.

   It's funny how all of these attorney's have spectacular records an most were appointed by Bush in the first place. Bush is definitely up to something with these firings.

 

Technorati tags: us attorney, michigan, bush, justice department

 

Do Something Good

      I guess that the right to a peaceful protest doesn't apply to this country anymore. Not in the state of Alaska anyway.

                                                                              

Published on Friday, February 23, 2007 by CommonDreams.org

Do Something Good

by Kathy Kelly

This past Tuesday, in Fairbanks, Alaska, nine people entered the office of Senator Ted Stevens to deliver their "emphatic request" that the Senator vote against supplemental funding for the war and then began reading the names of Iraqis and U.S. people who had died because of this war. They separated the names of U.S. troops by age. When ordered to leave, they were only half way through the commemoration of the twenty-one year old U.S. troops who died in Iraq. They began by reading the ages of the younger troops.

Seth Warncke, a University student, was issued a citation; Rob Mulford and Don Muller were taken to the Fairbanks Correctional Unit. They were released after being in jail for 23 hours.

Senator Steven's staff worker in the Fairbanks office assured the nine peace activists occupying the office that their efforts were worthless. "The Senator's aide told us that our action wouldn't do any good," said Rob Mulford, "but when we were locked up I knew we'd done something good because a woman jailer spotted us in our cells and she said, 'Oh! You guys are my heroes!'"

On a more somber note, Rob Mulford and Don Muller told me of a fellow prisoner whom they encountered in the correctional center. He was an Iraq war veteran, age 21. The guards were kind to him, but the young man was very disturbed and ended up fracturing his hand and fist, pounding a wall. After falling asleep, he repeatedly woke up, shouting and cursing, "You killed my friend, - I'm gonna' kill you," and intermittently sobbing, "It doesn't change. It never goes away."

Rob Mulford, himself an Air Force veteran and the local contact for Veterans for Peace, was watching from his cell.

Rob and Don are two of the several dozen people who've been arrested in the first two weeks of "the Occupation Project," a campaign to end U.S. funding for war in Iraq .

The same day, in Chicago, four women were kneeling in front of the Federal Building, chanting the names of Iraqis and U.S. service people killed in Iraq. Their statement read: "We are a poet, a doctor, a pregnant woman, and a grandmother. We are risking arrest today to publicly protest Senator Durbin's refusal to vote NO on the president's $93 Billion dollar supplemental appropriations request to continue funding the immoral and unjust war in Iraq. If Senator Durbin is against this war, he must stop funding it. We will occupy the lobby of the federal building until removed because we strongly believe that this war must end." These women will go to trial insisting that Senators Durbin and Obama have "the power of the purse," --the power to end this war not by submitting resolutions almost certain to be vetoed by President Bush, but rather by simply refusing to fund it.

The Occupation Project is developing, nationally, into a sustained campaign. We welcome participation, (see www.vcnv.org ), and encourage further nonviolent efforts to resist appropriations for military action in Iraq, or against Iran, other than funds to withdraw troops from Iraq. It's wrong to fund killing and destruction in another country because people in that country oppose the Bush administration's political agenda for their country. What is more, U.S. soldiers will be killed in carrying out this agenda, and thousands of Iraqi civilians will be killed in "collateral damage," people who may or may not be opposed to the Bush administration's political agenda for their country.

The following day, Ash Wednesday, 25 Chicagoans held an ecumenical prayer service and then attempted to deliver a letter to Senators Durbin and Obama. Many in the group were clergy, vested in their clerical garb. They had gathered to pray for forgiveness, as a nation, for the times we all had not spoken out against the war. They wanted to assure that the Senators of Illinois heard their remorse and understood their opposition to the war and its ongoing funding.

But when they approached the Federal Building, security officials quickly locked all entrances to the Federal Building. A member of Senator Obama's office staff told the assembled group that all staff members were in a meeting, but that they definitely wanted to receive their letter. Unfortunately, security officials at the Federal Building said nobody could enter. When a high school student who had joined the prayer service placed a cell phone call to Senator Durbin's office, he was disappointed that the staff member there hung up the phone after a very brief exchange. Eventually, three of Senator Durbin's staff members emerged from the Federal Building to receive the letter.

The constitution insists that congress shall make no law abridging the right of people to assemble peaceably for redress of grievance. We bear a terrible grievance as we exercise our responsibility to end the "war of choice" waged by the Bush administration.

As the Occupation Project develops, we carry, shoulder to shoulder, the responsibility that comes with hearing an agonized cry, epitomizing the horror of the consequences of war: "It doesn't go away."

Until the U.S. stops funding war in Iraq, we cannot go away either.

Kathy Kelly (Kathy@vcnv.org) co-coordinates Voices for Creative Nonviolence

Technorati tags: Senator Ted Stevens, Alaska, Bush Administration, US Troops

John McCain: What's Wrong With Sucking Up?

   John McCain says that British Prime Minister Tony Blair has sacrificed his career to support the Iraq war. McCain would know about sacrificing one's career as he is doing it to his own political well-being by aligning himself with the Bush Crime Family war rhetoric. I'm not sure if John McCain is just plain brave or if he is really just plain stupid to continue to rant about needing more troops in Iraq when everyone on the planet knows that the citizens of the United States wants our people back home and not stuck in the middle of Iraq's civil war.

   The only reason Tony Blair is withdrawing troops is because Blair has somewhat seen the light and realized that Iraq is a no-win proposition the way that Bush and company continue to do things. Bush/Cheney will not take our people out of Iraq because they and others in this administration are to beholden to the war profiteers and like I stated before, there is to much cash at stake!

    Anyway,while McCain was doing his roundup of support in Seattle, a member of the audience asked him if he was "sucking up to the religious right." He got some laughs when he responded with "What's wrong with sucking up to everybody?"

   When it comes to the religious right, McCain is trying to do the same scam that Bush did to get into the White House. I think it is called ' use em and lose em."

   By the way. I am seeking donations for the John McCain Geritol Fund & Old Timers Cure so that we can help Mr. McCain get his memory and common sense back.  

 

Technorati tags: John McCain, Tony Blair, Religious Right

  

Body Scanners Land At Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport

Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport is the first airport to use the new new body scanning machine which can see under a passengers clothes. Phoenix began the testing of these new machines on Friday and soon they will be at airports in Los Angeles and New York. The only passengers who go through these things will be those who volunteer, at least, in the beginning.

Transportation Security Administration people want to see if these things are a quicker alternative to the pat- downs which are the usual way to check passengers and they want to see how much of a problem protesters will be.

    For those of you thinking about the view that the people running these things may get of your body parts, rest assured that your image will be intentionally blurred.

   So what do people think of the new tool?

                                                                              

NYTimes

Kenneth Johnson, 64, of Mesa, was the first passenger screened on Friday in Phoenix. He said he had titanium implants in both shoulders and one knee that set off alarms at checkpoint metal detectors.

“I’ve been all over the world; I’ve been strip-searched,” Mr. Johnson, who was traveling to Florida, told an Associated Press reporter. “This was very easy.”

“I think that is a violation of people’s personal rights,” said Kara Neal, 36, a mental health counselor on her way to Philadelphia. She was not asked to undergo the screening, but said she would have refused. “I would rather take a pat-down than go through this,” she said.

The vending-machine-size device, which costs about $110,000, will be used only when passengers are pulled aside for a more thorough check, known as secondary screening, after passing through a metal detector.

 

Technorati tags: Body Scanners, Sky Harbor, Airport, TSA

Sunni Woman Speaking Of The US-Led Coalition

"They promised us freedom and now we find ourselves like slaves: no rights, no homes, no freedom, no democracy, and not enough strength to say a word." Like many Sunni she believed the US had deliberately fomented sectarian hatred in Iraq to keep control of the country.  AlterNet

  

Technorati tags: U.S., Sunnis, Coalition

 

Saddam Hussein, " Iraq Without Me Is Nothing "

‘I Saw Fear, He Was Afraid’

In a NEWSWEEK exclusive, the man hired to videotape Saddam Hussein’s execution recalls the brutal dictator’s humble final moments.

By Michael Hastings    Dec 30, 2006

"He was saying things about injustice, about resistance, about how these guys are terrorists," he says. On the way to the gallows, according to Ali, "Saddam said, ‘Iraq without me is nothing.’"

  It would seem that at this point in time, Hussein may have been right.

 

Technorati tags: Iraq, Saddam Hussein, Execution

 

Chopper Losses Limit American Troop movement

Iraq Slogger

Iraqi Papers Saturday: Challenges to Plan Baghdad
Increasing Losses Of US Choppers Limit The Movement Of American Troops
By AMER MOHSEN  02/24/2007
Az-Zaman- Iraq
In Iraqi papers today, Az-Zaman (international) reports that American air support to the Baghdad security plan has diminished recently, due to the increased downing of US helicopters in the past weeks, which is placing added strain on the task of securing the Iraqi capital. Al-Mada reports on an American air raid in Ramadi that has left dozens of Iraqi civilians dead; and Az-Zaman (Iraq) headlines with a new U.N. financial scandal pertaining to the disbursement of “war compensation” funds following the Second Gulf War.

In the International edition of Az-Zaman, the newspaper relayed that two novel challenges are facing the troops charged with establishing order in the Iraqi capital.

On the one hand, Iraqi insurgents have been increasingly successful in shooting down US helicopters, which according to Az-Zaman’s report, hinders the efficacy of the American Army, which relies extensively on choppers to move its troops and supplies. Quoting American Military sources, Az-Zaman said that Iraqi fighters had been trying for years to perfect “ambushes” against American helicopters, but that, lately, “a cell seems to have found an effective way” to set up such ambushes. It is still unclear whether the recent rise in American air losses is due to the use of novel tactics by the Iraqi resistance, the insurgents’ obtaining advanced anti-aircraft weapons, or a mixture of both.

On the other hand, the use of trucks filled with chlorine gas and other chemicals to target the city’s neighborhoods is raising worries among the troops charged with executing the security plan. Az-Zaman quoted an American officer who said that the objective of such tactics is “to wage attacks in which the insurgents do not appear, but that are capable of inciting fear and division among Iraqis.”

In another front-page item, Az-Zaman wrote on the arrest of `Ammar al-Hakim, son of the powerful Shi`a leader `Abdul-`Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). According to Al-Hakim, he was arrested for 11 hours upon his return from a visit in Iran, during which time he was “roughly treated” by the American troops. Other reports said that his convoy was actually fired upon by the American Army, which led to the death and injury of some of his bodyguards, Az-Zaman said. “Security sources” told the newspaper that Al-Hakim’s cell phone will be closely examined to retrieve information on the phone calls that he may have made while in Iran.

 

Technorati tags: Iraq Civil War, Us Troops, Helicopters

Israel Seeks Flyover Permission Through Iraq To Iran From U.S.

   It looks like Israel is asking the U.S. for permission to form an ' Air corridor ' over Iraq just in case it becomes necessary to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Shouldn't this kind of permission be coming from Iraq!

    Israel went into their usual state of denial over the story and said that negotiations were not happening.

Haaretz

Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh (Labor):

"International authorities, particularly in the West, who want to avoid direct involvement with Iran are anxious to spread the story that we will strike Iran," Sneh told Israel Radio.
"Those who do not want to work politically, diplomatically and economically are diverting attention to the operation that we are said to be conducting," he said.

"We are planning for every eventuality, and sorting out issues such as these are crucially important," said the official, speaking under condition of anonymity.
"The only way to do this is to fly through U.S.-controlled air space. If we don't sort these issues out now we could have a situation where American and Israeli war planes start shooting at each other," he said.

 

Technorati tags: Israel, Air Corridor, U.S. Iranians, Iraq