National driver’s license protested - U.S. Security - MSNBC.com

National driver’s license protested - U.S. Security - MSNBC.com

Officials: ‘Flat out impossible’ to comply with Real ID Act’s 2008 deadline
The Associated Press
Updated: 7:59 p.m. ET Jan 12, 2006
An anti-terrorism law creating a national standard for all driver’s licenses by 2008 isn’t upsetting just civil libertarians and immigration rights activists.

State motor vehicle officials nationwide who will have to carry out the Real ID Act say its authors grossly underestimated its logistical, technological and financial demands.

In a comprehensive survey obtained by The Associated Press and in follow-up interviews, officials cast doubt on the states’ ability to comply with the law on time and fretted that it will be a budget buster.

“It is just flat out impossible and unrealistic to meet the prescriptive provisions of this law by 2008,” Betty Serian, a deputy secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, said in an interview.

Nebraska’s motor vehicles director, responding to the survey by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, said that to comply with Real ID her state “may have to consider extreme measures and possibly a complete reorganization.”

‘A nightmare for all states’
And a new record-sharing provision of Real ID was described by an Illinois official as “a nightmare for all states.”


“Can we go home now??” the official wrote.

States use a hodgepodge of systems and standards in granting driver’s licenses and identification cards. In some places, a high school yearbook may be enough to prove identity.

A major goal of Real ID — which was motivated by the Sept. 11 attacks, whose perpetrators had legitimate driver’s licenses — is to unify the disparate licensing rules and make it harder to fraudulently obtain a card.

The law also demands that states link their record-keeping systems to national databases so duplicate applications can be detected, illegal immigrants caught and driving histories shared.

State licenses that fail to meet Real ID’s standards will not be able to be used to board an airplane or enter a federal building.

The law, which was attached to a funding measure for the Iraq war last May, has been criticized by civil libertarians who contend it will create a de facto national ID card and new centralized databases, inhibiting privacy.

State organizations such as the National Governors Association have blasted the law as well. Many states will have to amend laws in order to comply.

Spokesman: Law will not be pushed back
Jeff Lungren, a spokesman for Real ID’s principal backer, House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said there is no chance states might win a delay of the 2008 deadline.

“We gave three years for this process,” he said. “Every day that we continue to have security loopholes, we’re at greater risk.”

The August survey by the motor vehicle administrators’ group, which has not been made public, asked licensing officials nationwide for detailed reports on what it will take to meet Real ID’s demands.

It was not meant to produce an overall estimate of the cost of complying with Real ID. But detailed estimates produced by a few states indicate the price will blow past a February 2005 analysis by the Congressional Budget Office, which estimated Congress would need to spend $100 million reimbursing states.

Pennsylvania alone estimated a hit of up to $85 million. Washington state projected at least $46 million annually in the first several years.

Separately, a December report to Virginia’s governor pegged the potential price tag for that state as high as $169 million, with $63 million annually in successive years. Of the initial cost, $33 million would be just to redesign computing systems.

It remains unclear how much funding will come from the federal government and how much the states will shoulder by raising fees on driver’s licenses.

“If you begin to look at the full ramifications of this, we are talking about billions and billions of dollars. Congress simply passed an unfunded mandate,” said Barry Steinhardt, director of the technology and liberty project at the American Civil Liberties Union. “Every motorist in America is going to pay the price of this, of the Congress’ failure to do a serious exploration of the cost, the complexity, of the difficulty.”


Existing licenses may still be acceptable
The survey respondents and officials interviewed by the AP noted that many concerns might be resolved as the Department of Homeland Security clarifies its expectations for the law — such as whether existing licenses can be grandfathered in — before it takes effect May 11, 2008.

As of now, however, it appears little has changed since the survey described a multitude of hurdles.

Some examples:

- The law demands that states mine multiple databases to check the accuracy of documents submitted by license applicants. Several states questioned how that will work, especially with confirming birth certificates. Iowa said it didn’t think the states would be able to make the required vital-records upgrades within three years.
Some states’ ancient computing systems will have to be overhauled in order to link to other networks. Minnesota runs a 1980s-era mainframe system; Rhode Island says its “circa 1979” COBOL-based network will require a $20 million upgrade.
- Many states don’t make drivers prove they are legally in the country, but the law will now demand such documentation. It also calls for states to run license applications through a federal database known as SAVE that was launched by a 1986 law aimed at preventing illegal immigrants from receiving federal benefits. One problem, though, is that the “SAVE database is notoriously unreliable ... months behind,” said South Carolina’s response to the survey.
- After drivers submit documents to prove their identities, states will have to retain paper copies of those documents for at least seven years or digital images for 10 years. Some states fretted about the storage costs; others worried about how to capture images of all those files. Alabama’s survey response called the project “massive,” saying that while the state had the proper equipment at six licensing centers, “we do not have the resources to equip all of our 79 offices.” Added Massachusetts: “This equipment is very expensive!”
- Real ID requires that a license show someone’s principal residence. But state officials object that a mailing address makes more sense for many people — for “snowbirds” who spend time in two states, for example or for public officials who want to protect their privacy. “What should the procedure be for a person who lives in a RV?” asks South Dakota’s report.
- The law calls for a person’s “full legal name,” no nickname or abbreviations, on licenses. Cards have to be redesigned and databases must be reprogrammed to make room for extremely long names, likely up to 125 characters. That’s not an easy process. By itself it accounts for $4 million of North Dakota’s $5.9 million estimated impact.
Motor-vehicle employees will be subject to background checks, but several officials said it was unclear what would disqualify someone from being able to process licenses. Maryland’s response said waiting for security clearances “could cause staffing shortage.”
- Real ID demands that all driver’s licenses or ID cards have pictures that can be read by facial-recognition technology. That would end many states’ practice of letting people with certain religious beliefs request not to have a picture. Tennessee, meanwhile, allows anyone older than 60 to get a “valid without photo” license.

“If you take any one of these things individually, you see a significant problem,” Steinhardt said. “There are literally hundreds of these problems embedded in Real ID, and the statute doesn’t give you a way out. It’s black and white. No exceptions, no reality check.

“In many respects it’s a statute that ignores reality.”

© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10826523/

Keeping all eyes focused on Iraq while Bush and Israel plot attack on Iran

online journal

Even a cursory review of Bush’s speech shows that the president is less concerned with "security" in Baghdad than he is with plans to attack Iran. Paul Craig Roberts was correct in his article Wednesday when he questioned whether all the hoopla over a surge was just "an orchestrated distraction" to draw attention away from the real war plan. ("Distracting Congress from the Real War Plan")

Apparently, it is.

As Roberts noted, "The US Congress and the media are focused on President Bush’s proposal for an increase of 20,000 US troops in Iraq, while Israel and its American neoconservative allies prepare an assault on Iran."

Roberts’ analysis is further supported by yesterday’s news that American troops stormed the "Iranian consulate in the northern Iraqi city of Arbil and arrested 5 employees." (Reuters)

Iran had set up the embassy at the request of the Kurdish governor-general who was not informed of US intentions to raid the facility and kidnap its employees. The American soldiers confiscated computers and documents just five hours after Bush had threatened Iran in his address to the nation.

Clearly, Bush is looking for a way to provoke a military confrontation with Iran. Now he has five Iranian hostages at his disposal to help him achieve that goal.

Will the mullahs overreact or will they show restraint and try to prevent a larger conflict?

Bush’s hostility towards Iran was evident in comments he made in Wednesday night’s speech:

"Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq."

"Seek and destroy"? Is that the plan?

A region-wide conflagration with results as uncertain as they are in Iraq?

So far, there’s no solid evidence that Iran is "providing material support for attacks on American troops." All the same, the administration has consistently used "material support" as the basis for preemptive war. In fact, the so-called Bush Doctrine is predicated on the assumption that the US is free to attack whomever it chooses if it perceives a threat to its national security. The normal rules of self-defense or "imminent danger" no longer apply.

Bush knows that if Iran were seriously involved in arming the Iraqi resistance, we’d be seeing the Russian-made, armor-piercing rocket launchers that were used so effectively by Hezbollah during their 34 day war with Israel. That hasn’t been the case. Iran is undoubtedly active in Iraq, but in ways that are much subtler than Bush claims. In fact, Bush’s great ally, Abdel Aziz al-Hakim, who runs the feared Badr Brigade out of the Iraqi Interior Ministry, has strong ties to Iran (having lived there for 20 years.) He is probably using the US military to remove his enemies (the Sunni-backed resistance and al Sadr’s Mehdi Army) before he turns his attention to his US benefactors.

Iran clearly has interests in Iraq, but it is the Bush administration’s reckless war that has assured that Iran will be the "default" superpower in the entire region. Bush has shattered the fragile balance of power between Sunnis and Shiites while eliminating Iran’s main adversaries in Afghanistan (Sunni-Taliban) and Iraq (Saddam-Ba’athist Party). Bush now seems to think that the only way he can challenge Tehran’s ascendancy is by launching a Lebanon-type assault on military and civilian infrastructure in Iran.

If Iran is set back 20 years, Bush assumes, then our trusted-friend Israel will be the prevailing power in the Middle East. That, of course, was the plan from the get-go.

To that end, Bush averred: "We’re taking steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence sharing and deploy Patriot Air Defense Systems to reassure our friends and allies . . . And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region."

All the pieces are being put in place for a much larger and more destructive conflict.

It’s an ambitious plan, but it has no chance of succeeding. The United States is hopelessly bogged down in Iraq and its actions in Somalia, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Palestine have only ensured that the US's days in the Middle East are quickly drawing to a close.

As for Iraq, Bush’s speech provided few details of how the miniscule and incremental increase in troop-strength (only 17,000 to Baghdad over a four-month period) was expected to quell the raging violence that has gripped the capital since the last major operation in August. Operation "Forward Together" turned out to be a complete disaster, precipitating a sharp boost in attacks on US troops as well as an increase in sectarian violence.

Bush has enlisted some support for his "escalation" plan by committing to the "clear-hold-build" strategy promoted by the Council on Foreign Relations. The CFR has been pushing their "model for counterinsurgency" for three years, but have been largely ignored by the Bush administration.

Despite Bush’s feeble defense of the policy, he has no intention of putting it into practice. He is merely pacifying other members of the political establishment who are demanding that their voices be heard.

The reality of the present strategy is manifest in military operations currently underway in Baghdad. These operations are being conducted in a way that is reminiscent of Rumsfeld’s activities in Falluja two years ago. The attacks on alleged "insurgent strongholds" on Haifa Street, (which is just a few hundred yards from the Green Zone) show that the military has returned to the policy of using overwhelming force to subdue the resistance. In this case, the US pounded the area with helicopter gun-ships and F-16s, while ground troops went rampaging door to door. The civilian casualties in these scattershot operations invariably skyrocket and further alienate the local population. In one day alone, US forces killed an estimated 50 Iraqis in the predominantly Sunni "residential" area.

Another catastrophic "hearts and minds" operation.

Sunni leaders are now accusing the US military of carrying out ethnic cleansing operations at the request of the Shiite militias.

Is that the plan, purging Baghdad of the Sunnis?

It appears so.

Certainly, the lynching of Saddam was intended to send a message to the Ba’athist-led resistance that there would be no more efforts at negotiations or compromise. The US is now pursuing Cheney’s "80-20" plan -- a strategy to throw their support behind the Shiites while eradicating the Sunnis (20 percent of the population).

Bush hinted at this new approach in his speech when he said, "Our efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principle reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure the neighborhoods that have been cleared of terrorists and insurgents AND THERE WERE TOO MANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE TROOPS WE DID HAVE."

"Too many restrictions"? (The respected British medical journal Lancet reported 650,000 casualties in the conflict so far with over 2 million Iraqi refugees. Is that "Too many restrictions"? )

Bush’s comments suggest that the "gloves are coming off" and we can expect a return to the scorched earth policy that was so savagely applied in Falluja and other parts of the Sunni Triangle.

Bush also intimated that he would strike out at other "armed militias" in Iraq; an indication that US forces are planning an offensive against Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mehdi Army. The Shiite cleric, al Sadr, is despised by the Washington Warlords and is described by the Pentagon as "the biggest threat to Iraq’s security." Even so, al-Sadr has operatives placed strategically throughout the al-Maliki government (and within the Green Zone) and attacking him now would only make the occupation more perilous. In fact, an attack on the Mehdi Army could create a situation where Shiite militias cut off vital supply lines from the south making occupation virtually untenable.

Bush has decided to abandon all sense of caution and blunder ahead taking on all adversaries without concern for the consequences. It is a prescription for disaster.

Bush’s "Victory Strategy": more force, but no political solution

Bush's speech invoked none of the flashy slogans that he typically uses and which normally appear in headlines the next day. Nor did he make any attempt to elicit support for his planned "escalation" of troops. That idea has already been thoroughly rejected by the Iraq Study Group, the Congress, and the American people. Instead, he reiterated the same worn bromides (of "ideological" warfare, 9-11, and terrorism) that have long since lost their power to move public opinion.

The Bush administration has run out of gas. They have no plan for "pacification," security, reconstruction, or regional stability. Their "one-size-fits-all" solution requires ever-increasing levels of violence for an intractable Iraqi Resistance and which is now fated to spread mayhem throughout the entire Middle East.

Carl von Clausewitz said, "War is not a mere act of policy, but a true political instrument, a continuation of political activity by other means."

Bush and his fellow-neocons are incapable of thinking politically, so America’s decline in Iraq is likely to be precipitous. The crackdown in Baghdad and the anticipated bombing of Iran will have no significant affect on the war’s outcome. America has lost its ability to influence events positively or to arbitrarily assert its will. We’re now facing "death by a thousand cuts" and the steady erosion of US power.

Brute force alone will not produce a political solution in Iraq. Those who think it will are bound to fail.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Rice denies US 'escalating Iraq'

BBC NEWS Rice denies US 'escalating Iraq'

Ms Rice insists the US must stand firm over Iraqi security
Rice on Iraq
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has denied that the US intends to escalate the war in Iraq by confronting Iranian groups operating there.
Ms Rice backed a pledge by President Bush to run search and destroy missions against groups suspected of building bombs for use within Iraq.

"That's not an escalation, that's good policy," Ms Rice told the BBC.

Ms Rice spoke ahead of a visit to the Middle East, a visit that will focus on Iraq and the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

The week-long tour will take in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, as well as Israel and the Palestinian territories.

'Not escalation'

Speaking before leaving the US, Ms Rice insisted that the United States was not going to let either Iran or Syria continue activities that endangered US soldiers in Iraq.


"I don't think there is a government in the world that would sit by and let the Iranians in particular run networks inside Iraq that are building explosive devices of a very high quality that are being used to kill their soldiers.
"That's not an escalation, that's just good policy."

Earlier this week the US raided the Iranian consulate in Irbil, northern Iraq, detaining five people.

Both President George W Bush and Ms Rice have said this week that they intend to step up measures against those threatening to destabilise Iraq.

The president announced 21,500 extra troops for Iraq in an effort to dampen violence across the country, especially in the capital, Baghdad.

Last year an influential report led by former Secretary of State James Baker urged the Bush administration to begin negotiations with Iran and Syria in a bid to find a solution in Iraq.

Reasonable voices

As well as Iraq, Ms Rice will also discuss the Israel-Palestinian conflict during her stay in the Middle East.


I think anything that is an American plan is bound to fail
Condoleezza Rice
US Secretary of State

However, she admitted she was not travelling to the region with a plan to end the conflict.

"I think anything that is an American plan is bound to fail," she said.

"The United States is not going to succeed in this alone. This has to have an Arab voice - Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia.

"It certainly has to have the voice of the reasonable factions among the Palestinians, like Abu Mazen [Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas]. And it has to have an Israeli voice."



Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/6258027.stm

Published: 2007/01/13 01:45:13 GMT

Scientists prepare to move Doomsday Clock forward | Top News | Reuters.com

Scientists prepare to move Doomsday Clock forward - Reuters.com

Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:22 PM ET



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The keepers of the "Doomsday Clock" plan to move its hands forward next Wednesday to reflect what they call worsening nuclear and climate threats to the world.

The symbolic clock, maintained by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, currently is set at seven minutes to midnight, with midnight marking global catastrophe.

The group did not say in which direction the hands would move. But in a news release previewing an event next Wednesday, they said the change was based on "worsening nuclear, climate threats" to the world.

"The major new step reflects growing concerns about a 'Second Nuclear Age' marked by grave threats, including: nuclear ambitions in Iran and North Korea, unsecured nuclear materials in Russia and elsewhere, the continuing 'launch-ready' status of 2,000 of the 25,000 nuclear weapons held by the U.S. and Russia, escalating terrorism, and new pressure from climate change for expanded civilian nuclear power that could increase proliferation risks," the release reads.

The clock was last pushed forward by two minutes to seven minutes to midnight in 2002 amid concerns about the proliferation of nuclear, biological and other weapons and the threat of terrorism.

When it was created by the magazine's staff in 1947, it was initially set at seven minutes to midnight and has moved 17 times since then.

It was as close as two minutes to midnight in 1953 following U.S. and Soviet hydrogen bomb tests, and as far away as 17 minutes to midnight in 1991 after the superpowers reached agreement on a nuclear arms reductions.

U.S. denies military plans against Iran, Syria | Top News | Reuters.com

U.S. denies military plans against Iran, Syria - Reuters.com

Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:43 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States denied on Friday it was preparing for military action against Iran and Syria, after President George W. Bush issued a stern warning to them, raising concerns of a spillover from the Iraq war.

Bush, in his speech on Wednesday unveiling his revised Iraq strategy, accused Tehran and Damascus of allowing use of their territory for launching attacks inside Iraq, and vowed "we will interrupt the flow of support."

U.S. lawmakers voiced concern on Thursday the Iraq war could spread to neighboring Iran and Syria if U.S. troops were to chase militants across the border. But U.S. officials insisted the plan was to disrupt supply lines from inside Iraq.

White House spokesman Tony Snow said he wanted to knock down an "urban legend" that Bush was "trying to prepare the way for war with either country and that there were war preparations under way."

"There are not," he told reporters. "What the president was talking about is defending American forces within Iraq."

"There's lots of war gaming," he added. "This notion that somehow the president was announcing as a precursor to planned military action, a planned war against Iran, that's just not the case."

Snow reiterated that Washington was focusing on diplomatic means against Iran over its nuclear program. Western powers say Tehran is trying to develop nuclear weapons. Iran says it wants nuclear technology for civilian power generation.

The United States has repeatedly accused Shi'ite Iran of meddling in Iraq, where the long-oppressed Shi'ite majority is now in power and sectarian violence is raging. Tehran denies U.S. charges that it supplies Shi'ite militias with weapons.

Bush also said he had ordered an additional aircraft carrier strike group to the region and would deploy Patriot missile defense systems to "reassure our friends and allies" -- steps widely seen as a warning to Iran and Syria.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden bluntly told U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Thursday he did not think Bush had the authority to launch attacks against militant networks in Iran and Syria.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | US blacklists Iranian state bank

BBC NEWS | Middle East | US blacklists Iranian state bank

The United States has blacklisted one of Iran's largest banks, accusing it of a key role in financing the development of weapons of mass destruction.
A US treasury official said state-owned Bank Sepah was the "financial lynchpin" in Iran's missile procurement network.

The move freezes its assets in the US and bars any US companies or citizens from doing business with the bank.

The US says Iran is working to acquire nuclear weapons. Iran says its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.

"Bank Sepah is the financial lynchpin of Iran's missile procurement network and has actively assisted Iran's pursuit of missiles capable of carrying weapons of mass destruction," Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey said.

He said the bank had facilitated Iran's international purchases of material for its missile programme.

Bank Sepah, he said, had been the conduit for a deal with Komid, a North Korean organisation which the US says gave missile technology to Iran.

The blacklisting extends to Bank Sepah's UK-based subsidiary, Bank Sepah International Plc.

In December, the United Nations Security Council unanimously voted to impose sanctions against Iran over its failure to halt uranium enrichment.

The sanctions ban the supply of nuclear-related technology and materials and impose an asset freeze on key individuals and companies.



Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/6246665.stm

Published: 2007/01/09 21:59:18 GMT

BBC NEWS | Europe | Rocket hits US embassy in Athens

BBC NEWS Europe Rocket hits US embassy in Athens

Attackers have fired a rocket at the US embassy compound in the centre of the Greek capital, Athens.
The rocket, fired from street level into the front of the embassy, caused minor damage to the building but no-one was injured.

The US envoy condemned the "very serious attack", as fire engines and police cordoned off the area.

Greece's Public Order Minister Vyron Polydoras said it was "very likely" a domestic group was behind the attack.

He said police were investigating claims that a left-wing radical group, Revolutionary Struggle, was responsible.

'Windows shattered'

The blast was reported in the early morning at the embassy, which is on one of the main boulevards in Athens.

Police said a rocket was fired at the US eagle emblem at the front of the building.

"A self-propelled explosive was fired at 0558 (0358 GMT) from the surrounding area, causing minor damage to the front windows and the roof," a statement from the Greek public order ministry said.

The rocket landed in a toilet on the third floor of the building, which also houses Ambassador Charles Ries's office.

"I am treating this as a very serious attack," Mr Ries said. "The embassy was attacked in a senseless act of violence."

Mr Ries said the reliability of any claims of responsibility would have to be assessed.

Television pictures showed a mass of emergency vehicles and stationary traffic outside the embassy as the area was sealed off.

Left-wing groups

The US embassy is one of the most fortified and tightly guarded buildings in the region and is frequently the target of protests in a country brimming with potent anti-Americanism, says the BBC's Malcolm Brabant in Athens.

In February 1996, it suffered minor damage when unknown attackers - thought to be leftist radicals - fired a rocket at it.

In the past, the far-left November 17 group - now disbanded and whose leaders were jailed in 2003 - attacked Greek, US and other foreign targets, killing more than 20 people.

Revolutionary Struggle - a group which emerged after November 17 disintegrated - is regarded by security experts as Greece's most active terrorist group, our correspondent says.

It has broadly the same left-wing, anarchic anti-capitalist agenda as November 17 and vigorously opposes America's intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the economic and social policies of the current conservative Greek government.

It has carried out a number of bombings and attacks in recent years.


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/6254399.stm

Blast at U.S. embassy in Greece called ‘terrorism’

AP

The U.S. Embassy in Athens came under fire early Friday from a rocket that exploded inside the modern glass-front building but caused no casualties in an attack police suspect was the work of Greek leftists.

Narrowly missing the embassy emblem, the anti-tank shell pierced the building near the front entrance shortly before 6 a.m., damaging a bathroom on the third room, which houses the ambassador’s office, and shattering windows in nearby buildings.

“We’re treating it as a very serious attack,” U.S. Ambassador Charles Ries said.

Greece’s Public Order Minister said police were examining the authenticity of anonymous phone calls to a private security company claiming responsibility on behalf of Revolutionary Struggle, a militant left-wing group.

“It is very likely that this is the work of a domestic group,” Minister Vyron Polydoras said. “We believe this effort to revive terrorism is deplorable and will not succeed.”

Revolutionary Struggle claimed responsibility for a May 2006 bomb attack on Culture Minister Giorgos Voulgarakis, in which nobody was injured.

U.S.-owned banks and companies have often been targeted in small bomb attacks by groups in Greece. But Friday’s incident was the most serious since the 2002 break-up of the far-left November 17 group, which was blamed for several attacks against foreign diplomats and military personnel, including the assassination of a CIA station chief in Athens.

Polydoras said Greece “strongly condemns” the attack.

“We believe it is a symbolic act,” he said. “It is an attempt to disrupt our country’s international relations.”

Police cordoned off streets around the heavily guarded building after the explosion, stopping traffic in much of central Athens for more than three hours. Emergency services scrambled to the embassy building, which is a frequent destination for protest groups.

Investigators were examining what they believed was the device used to fire the rocket shell from a construction site near the embassy.

“This is an act of terrorism,” Police Chief Asimakis Golfis said. “There was a shell that exploded in the toilets of the building … It was fired from street level.”

Ambassador Ries said the building was not occupied at the time and the damage was minimal. The embassy is now a crime scene and will remain closed until further notice, he said.

“There can be no justification for such a senseless act of violence,” said Ries, who added that there had been no warning.

Authorities were searching nearby apartment buildings and a nearby hospital for evidence.

Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis visited the embassy after the blast.

“I came here to express the solidarity of the Greek people following this deplorable action,” she said.

“Such actions in the past have had a very heavy cost for the country. … The Greek government is determined to undertake every effort to not allow such phenomena to be repeated in the future.”

Giorgos Yiannoulis runs a kiosk near the embassy. “I heard a loud bang; I didn’t realize what was going on,” he said.

It was the most serious attack on the mission since 1996, when November 17 carried out a rocket attack against the embassy that caused minor damage and no injuries.

Polydoras said police would set up a special task force, headed by a former counterterrorism chief who eradicated the November 17 group in 2002. The group was blamed for killing 23 people — including U.S., British and Turkish officials — and dozens of bomb attacks.

Several obscure militant groups have appeared since the November 17 members were arrested. Radical groups Revolutionary Struggle and Popular Revolutionary Action have been blamed for the bombings of three government ministries in 2005.

In 2003, a special court gave multiple life sentences to November 17’s leader, chief assassin and three other members. Lesser sentences were given to 10 others.

Iranians captured inside Iraq

Bush strategy aims at insurgent support

By Robin Wright and Nancy Trejos
The Washington Post

ARTICLE


U.S. troops launched two raids on Iranian targets in Iraq yesterday, following through on President Bush's vow to confront and break up Tehran's networks inside Iraq. Five Iranians were detained, and vast amounts of documents and computer data were confiscated, according to U.S., Iraqi and Iranian officials.

The two raids are part of a new U.S. intelligence and military operation launched last month against Iran, U.S. officials said. The United States is trying to identify and detain top officials of the Revolutionary Guards' al-Quds Brigade operating in Iraq. The al-Quds Brigade is active in arming, training and funding militant movements, such as Lebanon's Hezbollah, throughout the Middle East.

"Throughout Iraq, operations are currently ongoing against individuals suspected of being closely tied to activities targeting Iraqi and Coalition forces," the headquarters of the U.S.-led Multinational Force said yesterday.

While the public focus is on Iraq, the administration is now devoting as much time on plans to contain Iran as on a strategy to end Iraq's violence, U.S. officials said.

Last month, U.S. forces nabbed two senior Iranians - Brig. Gen. Mohsen Chirazi and Col. Abu Amad Davari - in the first round of raids. Chirazi is the No. 3 in the al-Quds Brigade and the highest-ranking Iranian ever held by the United States.

Both of yesterday's raids were in Irbil, a northern Kurdish city. One was carried out at 3 a.m. on the Iranian Liaison Office, which is used by Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a local headquarters, U.S. officials said. Kurdish officials said U.S. troops landed by helicopters. Then they disarmed the security guards, broke through the gate, entered the building and detained six men, Iranian officials told the Iranian News Agency. One was later released.

The other raid was at the Irbil airport, where U.S. forces tried to detain people until local Kurdish troops intervened - and almost ended up in a confrontation with U.S. troops, said Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari.

"A massacre was avoided at the last minute," he said. A U.S. official confirmed that the incident nearly resulted in U.S. and Kurdish allies firing at one another.

The Irbil raid reflects one of the genuinely new additions to the U.S. strategy in Iraq. Bush said Wednesday that the United States will now "seek out and destroy the networks" arming and training U.S. enemies. He also announced that he is ordering another aircraft carrier and supporting ships to the Persian Gulf bordering Iran, in a show of naval force.

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace charged yesterday that Iran was "complicit" in providing weapons designed to kill American troops. "We will do all we need to do to defend our troops in Iraq by going after the entire network, regardless of where those people come from," he said at a press conference with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Rice outlined a carrot-and-stick strategy, offering to meet with her Iranian counterpart "anytime, anywhere" to discuss "every facet" of U.S.-Iran relations - with the condition that Tehran suspend its program for enriching uranium, which can be used for nuclear weapons as well as energy. Until that time, she said, the United States will "use all our power to limit and counter the activities of Iranian agents who are attacking our people and innocent civilians in Iraq."

Rice effectively dismissed a key recommendation of the Iraq Study Group, the bipartisan panel that last month called for the administration to launch a dialogue with both Iran and Syria to help stabilize Iraq. She told reporters that Tehran and Damascus should not "be paid" to end their "destabilizing behavior," and that such a move would both demoralize friends and embolden enemies across the Middle East.

But the new U.S. policy to confront Iranians in Iraq has already sparked divisions within the administration. The Pentagon wanted to hold the two top al-Quds officials for questioning, but the State Department backed an Iraqi request to deport them. They were sent home in a week.

The Kurdish government had approved the Iranian Liaison Office,which provided consular services, and which Iran wants to upgrade to a formal consulate, the Iraqi foreign minister said. U.S. forces did not consult in advance with the Iraqi government, which is now trying to establish procedures and agreements for future operations, he said. "This is a very, very dangerous thing," he said.

Iran's foreign ministry summoned Iraqi and Swiss diplomats to protest and demand an explanation, according to Iran's mission to the United Nations. Switzerland represents U.S. interests in Iran. Tehran claims the five men detained are all diplomats, which both Iraq's foreign minister and U.S. officials deny

FBI Hosting Hollywood Writers, Encouraging Counter-Terrorism Propaganda Films

FBI seminar hosts H'wood scribes

hollywood reporter

FBI memo to Hollywood: If it's not too much trouble, could you please portray our counterterrorism efforts with a bit more realism?

Hoping for an answer in the affirmative, the FBI hosted its first workshop for screenwriters Wednesday at the Federal Building in Westwood.

"FBI -- Crime Essential for Writers" played well with the standing-room-only audience of executives and writers from several major and minor studios. Enthusiastic attendees had more questions than time allowed answers for, and few if any left the four-hour event early.

The FBI, more so than even the Department of Homeland Security, is the primary agency designated to investigate terrorism in the U.S., and the terrorist threat it is most focused on comes from radical Islam, FBI special agent Greg Wing said.

With that in mind, Wing, along with an undercover agent who asked that his identity not be revealed, presented a whirlwind history of Islam, beginning with Sunni-Shiite hostilities in 682 AD.

The major terrorist group aligned with Sunni Muslims is al-Qaida, while Hezbollah, "the best terrorist organization there is," are Shiite Muslims, the undercover agent said.

He showed flags and logos of terrorist groups and explained that the colors of turbans worn by terrorism suspects could have significance. He also showed photos and video of al-Qaida training camps and torture rooms and pictures of unfortunate Americans who had been captives there. He showed photos of the suicide bombers who killed 17 U.S. sailors aboard the USS Cole in 2000 and pictures of the house where they built their bombs.

The undercover agent played phone messages from passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93, which went down in a Pennsylvania field on Sept. 11, 2001, and inspired the film "United 93." He also played audio from the cockpit of American Airlines Flight 11, the airplane Mohamed Atta flew into the World Trade Center that day.

"Amazing," attendee Dave DiGilio said after the event.

DiGilio wrote the film "Eight Below" and created the upcoming ABC series "Traveler," about a couple of graduate students who might have been framed for a terrorist attack. He said his show portrays both "the good and the bad" about the FBI.

"Seeing the extent of the organization, and the passion and intellect of the agents, was impressive," he said after the event. "They're very creative. It's not the way they're usually portrayed."

Quite the point, which is why FBI public affairs specialist Betsy Glick helped create the workshop. She said that last year the FBI helped lend authenticity to 649 projects, usually films, TV shows and books.

Michael Kortan, section chief for the office of public affairs, gave attendees a brief lesson in the history of the FBI in film and TV, beginning with the 1935 James Cagney movie " 'G' Men," which he said was one of the first gangster movies to tell a story from the FBI's perspective.

Shortly thereafter, J. Edgar Hoover conceived of something he called "The Dillinger Rule" -- the FBI had great stories to tell, so Hollywood ought to tell them, and make sure that the FBI were the good guys. And he wanted to know about anything FBI-related that Hollywood had in the works.

The 1965 Disney film "That Darn Cat!" really had Hoover on edge, Kortan said, because he feared that a film about an allergic agent assigned to follow around a cat would make the FBI look a tad silly, a reputation the bureau didn't need during the tumultuous 1960s.

Too often, Kortan said, the FBI is seen on film, unrealistically, as heavy-handed, bumbling and antagonistic toward other law-enforcement agencies. Of course, Hollywood isn't always unfriendly to the bureau.

Witness "The Silence of the Lambs," for example. The 1991 film earned Jodie Foster the best actress Oscar for her portrayal of FBI agent Clarice Starling, and Kortan credited the movie for some of the FBI's success in recruiting women.

"This is half the reason people get in writing -- to live vicariously and absorb the details," said attendee Luke McMullen, who wrote an episode of "Alias" and is developing a project called "Samurai Girl."

FBI agents also showed off a map of the 779 real investigations of potential terrorist activity ongoing in Los Angeles and photos of a list of possible targets that included Grauman's Chinese Theatre, the Hollywood sign and Disneyland. They also showed photos of some of the equipment the FBI will have on hand as they stake out the 64th annual Golden Globe Awards on Monday.

Hollywood has been considered a potential target of Islamic terrorists since shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, when the FBI warned that a major film studio might be next.

Special agent George Steuer recalled Wednesday how FBI agents met with studio heads back then to tell them, "Hey, you're in this fight on terrorism."

He said the threat emanated from telephone and e-mail intercepts between suspected terrorists. Although the FBI sifts through about 300 terrorism leads a day, the one against film studios was initially deemed credible after some corroboration and background checks. Details, though, remain classified.

"Eventually we vetted it and decided that there were no links here, just overseas chatter," he said.

Nevertheless, the studios were encouraged then to beef up their security measures. Some, including Disney and Warner Bros., quickly hired FBI agents on their security staffs.

Steuer, who has been helping Hollywood with FBI requests for five years, said he was in Baghdad in 2005, witnessing the locals buying and selling pirated copies of "Star Wars: Episode III -- Revenge of the Sith" the day it was released theatrically, making the point that the FBI is uniquely aware of Hollywood's influence even in a war zone.

Speaking after the symposium, the undercover FBI agent whose identity is protected said he purposely avoids Hollywood's treatment of modern terrorism, staying away from such movies as "World Trade Center" and "United 93" as well as TV programs like "The Path to 9/11."

"Movies don't come close," he said. "We lived a very traumatic event. It's never far from my heart."

His primary message to screenwriters? "Keep the FBI out of politics," he said. "Don't tag me Republican or Democrat. Don't suggest the FBI was better or worse under this president or that one. What we care about is protecting American lives."

Bill O'Reilly Gets Crazy

O'Reilly uses textbook prapaganda techniques. Sunsara Taylor has alot of guts to get on his show, and tell the truth.

Somalia terror 'funded in Britain'

Guardian UK

The Foreign Office is investigating reports of British casualties in US air strikes on al Qaida suspects in Somalia.

The attacks came amid claims that support for the Islamic militant movement had come from the UK.

Meanwhile, the United Nations' new secretary general Ban Ki-moon voiced fears on Wednesday that the air strikes could increase hostilities and harm civilians.

Following days of fierce fighting in the African country, the United States launched a series of air strikes against Islamic extremists it suspects of having links to al Qaida.

Ethiopia's prime minister has said that many international terrorists had been killed, injured or captured in the fighting - including Britons.

"Notwithstanding the motives for this reported military action," Ban's spokeswoman Michele Montas said, "the secretary general is concerned about the new dimension this kind of action could introduce to the conflict and the possible escalation of hostilities that may result."

Somalia's deputy prime minister has claimed that much of the funding for the Islamist militants was coming from Britain and that some of their fighters were British and American passport holders.

There was also condemnation from British-based Islamic groups of the US intervention in the conflict.

Ethiopian forces invaded Somalia, a largely Muslim country, last month to prevent an Islamic movement from ousting the weak, internationally recognised government from its lone stronghold in the west of the country.

Leaders of the Islamic movement have vowed to launch an Iraq-style guerrilla war in Somalia, and al Qaida chief Osama bin Laden's deputy has called on militants to carry out suicide attacks on the Ethiopian troops. There were reports at the weekend that British passport holders were involved in the fighting, which has claimed scores of lives.

Gates calls for buildup in troops

boston globe

Asks Bush for 92,000 more by 2012



WASHINGTON -- Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates said yesterday that he wants President Bush to increase overall US ground forces by nearly 100,000 over the next five years, the largest military build up since the end of the Cold War.


At a White House press conference, Gates laid out a broad blueprint for a larger Army and Marine Corps to bolster an American force the Pentagon says is stretched thin by repeated deployments to war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the wider war against Islamic extremists.

"I am recommending to [the president] a total increase in the two services of 92,000 soldiers and Marines over the next five years -- 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines," Gates said, with Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, beside him.

But the expansion will not be cheap, quick, or easy. Recruiting, training, and equipping new soldiers and Marines will cost tens of billions of dollars, and it will take years before they will have an effect on current military operations, senior Pentagon officials said yesterday.

And perhaps the biggest challenge will be finding enough volunteers.

To meet its current recruiting goals, the Army has relaxed some standards, accepting more recruits who don't have a high school diploma or general equivalency degree, and allowing older men and women to join. Meanwhile, the Pentagon has also substantially increased enlistment bonuses and launched a multi million-dollar advertising campaign to draw more young people to the recruitment office.

"I think it will be a hell of a challenge" to find 92,000 recruits, said Alan Gropman , a retired Air Force colonel who teaches at the National Defense University in Washington. "That's a very large number. It will be impossible if you don't raise pay and other benefits. But if we are going to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan, then we are going to need a bigger Army."

Gates said yesterday that the expansion plan will begin with permanently adding 30,000 soldiers to the active-duty Army, currently numbering about 480,000, and adding 5,000 Marines, which currently number about 175,000.

"Then we propose to build up from that base in annual increments of 7,000 troops a year for the Army and 5,000 for the Marine Corps until the Marine Corps reaches a level of 202,000, and the Army would be at 547,000," Gates said.

Officials said Bush is on board with the proposal, which is expected to draw widespread support in Congress. Both Democrats and Republicans have tried to persuade the White House for years that the military needs to grow.

The plan was seen yesterday as a repudiation of the vision of former secretary of defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, who for years resisted calls by members of both parties and the advice of retired generals to expand the military to handle missions in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as anti terrorism operations around the world.

"I just wish it would have been done a lot sooner," said Representative Jo Ann Davis , a Virginia Republican and ranking member of the House Armed Service Committee's military readiness panel. " I believe that we're asking our military to do much more now than we've ever asked of them. And for that reason, I think that growing the force is very necessary."

The plan was also well received among the troops at Fort Benning, Ga., where Bush spoke after the White House meeting yesterday. Soldiers applauded when the president told them he believes "it's important to increase the end strength of the United States Army so it can remain engaged."

A senior military official who briefed reporters at the Pentagon yesterday said the expanded force probably wouldn't be ready for overseas missions until at least early 2009. He said that more ground forces would "set us up for the long fight" in Iraq and elsewhere.

While the expansion will take time, Gates said, "it is important that our men and women in uniform know that additional manpower and resources are on the way."

The Army currently recruits an average of 80,000 new soldiers every year to maintain its troop levels, and military officials were confident they could meet higher recruiting goals.

The Army estimates that it spends about $1.2 billion to train and equip 10,000 soldiers. Expanding the Army and Marine Corps will also require more recruiters, who have struggled recently to attract enlistees.

Even Gates, who left his presidency of Texas A&M University to take the helm of the Pentagon last month, told senators that the prospect of serving repeated tours in Iraq had turned off many of the quality high school and college students the Pentagon wants.

Donald Vandergriff , a retired Army major and Georgetown University professor, said yesterday that any expansion must feature a clarion call from the commander in chief urging young people to serve -- a tough sell when polls show popular support for both the Iraq war and Bush are low.

"He has never asked the public to sacrifice and serve in the military," Vandergriff said.

Vandergriff, who specializes in military personnel and manpower issues, also questioned whether the military would sacrifice quality for quantity when filling the ranks of a larger ground force.

"I am really concerned that we have this PowerPoint mentality that numbers equals success," Vandergriff said. Even if the Army and Marine Corps can meet the new goal, he added, soldiers "have to be competent."

Still, one Pentagon adviser who asked not to be named said the country has to make the plan work. "The more you learn about the current [military] readiness the more your stomach turns," the adviser said.

For now, the Pentagon will have to rely on more frequent deployments of current troops and its new authority to order part-time National Guard soldiers to active duty more often.

"The faster they can get these new units in place the better they will be," the Pentagon adviser said. "Constant deployments have brought the Army to near collapse."

Arrests during Gitmo protest inside courthouse

They had federal judge's permission — until they waved signs

The Associated Press
Updated: 3:24 p.m. ET Jan 11, 2007

WASHINGTON - Cindy Sheehan and other peace activists marched to the Cuban military zone wrapping around the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay on Thursday, demanding the United States close its prison for terror suspects five years after the first detainees arrived.

A dozen protesters walked along a lonely highway connecting the Cuban city of Guantanamo to the military zone. The women in the group tied pink and yellow flowers to the barbed-wire fence marking the start of the zone, a Cuban minefield with 4½-mile road leading to the entrance of the U.S. base. The protesters were not allowed past the fence.

“What I’ve read happens in this prison makes me sick to my stomach,” said Sheehan, who became an anti-war activist after her 24-year-old son Casey died in Iraq. “I’m calling for the cycle of violence to stop now, to close this prison.”

Also among the marchers was Asif Iqbal, a British Muslim who spent 2½ years at the prison. He expressed support for those still inside.

“Every day, every minute, they are in our thoughts,” the 25-year-old said. “These are human beings, they have some right to justice, too.”

Abuse allegations fuel outrage
The U.S. military is holding about 395 men on suspicion of links to al-Qaida or the Taliban, including about 85 who have been cleared to be released or transferred to other countries. The military says it wants to charge 60 to 80 detainees and bring them to trial.

Critics say the camp, where most of the prisoners face indefinite incarceration, is an affront to democratic values. Allegations of abuse have fueled worldwide outrage.

The military says the detention center is vital to the fight against terrorism and that instances of abuse have been investigated and the perpetrators disciplined. The detention camp commander, Adm. Harry B. Harris, says aggressive interrogation tactics are no longer used.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called on the United States to close the prison, echoing an appeal made last year by his predecessor, Kofi Annan.

“I understand that today is the fifth anniversary of Guantanamo’s prison,” Ban said a news conference. “Like my predecessor, I believe that prison at Guantanamo should be closed.”

Demonstrations in several cities around the world marked the fifth anniversary of the arrival of the first detainees at Guantanamo.

In Washington, about 100 protesters were arrested inside a federal courthouse. The group — which had a permit for a demonstration outside the courthouse — sang and chanted as they were led away.

About 100 people protested outside the U.S. Embassy in London, wearing orange inmate outfits. Three “guards” wearing green camouflage shouted orders for them to stand up or kneel down. Similar demonstrations took place in Greece, Hungary and Italy.

Woman travels from Mideast for protest
U.S. Army Col. Lora Tucker, a spokeswoman for the detention center, said the military had no plans to acknowledge the Cuban protest Thursday or increase security at the gate, which is located at a distance from the prison camp on the other side of a hill.

“Nothing changes for us based on a demonstration being held somewhere in Cuba,” she said, adding that Thursday was “a normal work day” at the naval base.

Zohra Zewawi, the mother of British detainee Omar Deghayes, traveled from the United Arab Emirates with another son, Taher Deghayes, to join the protest. She says her son had been tortured and blinded in one eye since he was imprisoned in September 2002 and still has not been charged.

Taher Deghayes carried a large color photograph of Omar that said “justice for my brother.” One American protester wore an orange jumpsuit and a black hood.

Adele Welty, whose firefighter son, Timothy, was killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, said she empathized with the prisoners’ mothers. She called on Americans to urge Congress to demand “an end to the unjust incarceration of your fellow human beings.”
© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16580352/

Technology giving police more power to spy on us

azstarnet

Tucson police have a new law-enforcement tool: a car-mounted license-plate scanner. Similar to a radar gun, it reads the license plates of moving or parked cars — 250 or more per hour — and links with remote police databases, immediately providing information about the car and owner.

On the face of it, this is nothing new. Police have always been able to run a license plate. The difference is they would do it manually, and that limited its use. It simply wasn't feasible for police to run the plates of every car in a parking garage or every car that passed through an intersection. What's different isn't the police tactic, but the efficiency of the process.

Technology is fundamentally changing the nature of surveillance. Years ago, surveillance meant trench-coated detectives following people down streets. It was laborious and expensive and was used only when there was reasonable suspicion of a crime. Modern surveillance is the policeman with a license-plate scanner, or even a remote license-plate scanner mounted on a traffic light and a policeman sitting at a computer in the station.

It's the same, but it's completely different. It's wholesale surveillance. And it disrupts the balance between the powers of the police and the rights of the people.
Wholesale surveillance is fast becoming the norm. Automatic toll-collection systems record when individual cars pass through toll booths. We can all be tracked by our cell phones. Our purchases are tracked by banks and credit-card companies, our telephone calls by phone companies, our Internet surfing habits by Web site operators.

The effects of wholesale surveillance on privacy and civil liberties are profound; but, unfortunately, the debate often gets mischaracterized as a question about how much privacy we need to give up in order to be secure. This is wrong. It's obvious that we are all safer when the police can use all techniques at their disposal. What we need are corresponding mechanisms to prevent abuse and that don't place an unreasonable burden on the innocent.

Throughout our nation's history, we have maintained a balance between the necessary interests of the police and the civil rights of the people.

The search-warrant process, as prescribed in the Fourth Amendment, is such a balancing method. So is the minimization requirement for telephone eavesdropping: The police must stop listening to a phone line if the suspect under investigation is not talking.

For license-plate scanners, one obvious protection is to require the police to erase data collected on innocent car owners immediately and not save it. The police have no legitimate need to collect data on everyone's driving habits. Another is to allow car owners access to the information about them used in these automated searches and to allow them to challenge inaccuracies.

We need to go further. Criminal penalties are severe in order to create a deterrent, because it is hard to catch wrongdoers. As they become easier to catch, a realignment is necessary. When the police can automate the detection of a wrongdoing, perhaps there should no longer be any criminal penalty attached. For example, both red-light cameras and speed-trap cameras should issue citations without any "points" assessed against the driver.

Wholesale surveillance is not simply a more efficient way for the police to do what they've always done. It's a new police power, one made possible with today's technology and one that will be made easier with tomorrow's.

And with any new police power, we as a society need to take an active role in establishing rules governing its use. To do otherwise is to cede ever more authority to the police.

The Real Agenda Of The Global Elite In Somalia

steve watson infowars.net

Neocons are backing the same warlords that slaughtered US troops in 1993



This week has seen the latest example of the US power elite bombing a broken-backed country in the name of the global 'war on terror'. The phantom menace of 'Al Qaeda' has again provided a pretext for the further destruction and destabilization of struggling state, this time Somalia, in order that the Western elite power-mongers can move in and control its valuable resources.

The Bush Administration is essentially asking us to expect to believe that it is bombing a country in an attempt to kill three terrorists– Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, the alleged mastermind behind the 1998 attacks on the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, that killed 225 people, and accomplices Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan and Abu Talha al-Sudani.

The Somali government has today claimed that four more airstrikes have been carried out, killing more innocent people. The US has denied this. Also today, a senior Somali politician said US troops were needed on the ground to fight a Muslim extremist threat.

Monday's strike reportedly killed around 200 people, including Canadian and British citizens.

Critics of the action have said it could misfire by creating strong Somali resentment and feeding Islamist militancy. Analysts fear that US interfering and backing of one Somali faction against another could ignite an Iraqi-style insurgency across a swath of East Africa.

There is no doubt that this is a part of the escalation of the wider war of aggression planned and executed by the neoconservatives who published their Project For the New American Century before they came to power.

"Before this, it was just tacit support for Ethiopia. Now the U.S. has fingerprints on the intervention and is going to be held more accountable," said Horn of Africa expert Ken Menkhaus. "This has the potential for a backlash both in Somalia and the region."



The truth is that, once again, the terror myth is being promulgated as an excuse to unleash violence against a largely innocent Muslim population, and one that has struggled for a peaceful existence for decades.

As prominent blogger Kurt Nimmo has stated:

"In other words, it was a turkey shoot, and the targets were not necessarily “al-Qaeda” but rather members of the Islamic Courts Union (ICU), Muslims who not long ago ruled Somalia under the Shariah, or Islamic law. CBS does not bother to mention the fact ICU was popular in Somalia, a Muslim nation."

Last December, the popular ICU lost control of the country after a short lived form of peace. The UIC had controlled Mogadishu and other areas of the country after defeating several local warlords who held Somalia in the grip of terror since the collapse of central rule in 1991. The Islamists had succeeded in defeating the warlords primarily through rallying people to their side by creating law and order through the application of Shariah law, which Somalis universally practice.

15,000 Ethiopian troops, with U.S. backing, invaded in an illegal war of aggression and ousted the IUC leaders who fled to the southern-most tip of the country.

Many Somalis in areas controlled by the UIC welcomed the security and order that the Islamists brought to the country. The Bush Administration is playing on reports that the Islamists are 'Taliban like' and is lumping them in with 'Al Qaeda' terrorists.

But the UIC does not appear to be a monolithic organization and seems split between moderates who want peace and dialogue and more right wing Muslims who want to impose Muslim Sharia law. In any case neither have the means or the desire to commit an almighty Jihad against the West, they are simply concerned with creating some kind of law and order within Somalia.

The US response has been to provide major funding to the warlord groupings, via the Ethiopian army, that are opposed to the UIC. Before bombing the hell out of villages on Monday, the Bush Administration has long been providing backing to ruthless killers intent on keeping Somalia in civil strife because it benefits each warlord's plundering rule to keep the nation carved up.

These are the same marauding warlords who drove out American forces in 1993, killing and maiming 18 US troops in the streets then dragging their bodies around in celebration.



Many of these warlords were part of the puppet regime transitional "government" that had been organized in Kenya in 2004. But the "government" was so devoid of internal support that it had to turn to Somalia's arch enemy, Ethiopia, to maintain control.

So why are the US power elite funding sectarian warlords in Somalia and now bombing Islamist areas of the country?

Because the control of Somalia via puppet government, just like in Iraq, is a key factor in the Neocon plan to "shrink the non-integrating gap" of the new world order, as Thomas Barnett's 'New Map' of the world has it.

As with Iraq, the real agenda is to obtain a direct foothold in a highly strategic region. The Horn of Africa is newly oil-rich, and lies just miles from Saudi Arabia, overlooking the daily passage of large numbers of oil tankers and warships through the Red Sea.

link to full map

Not surprising then that multiple US warships and Ticonderoga-class cruisers are now stalking the coastline off Somalia and routinely sending intelligence-gathering flights over the country. The location is also prime in order to be able to instantly mobilize forces for any conflict with Iran at the drop of a hat.

The American oil giants Conoco, Amoco, Chevron and Phillips also hold concession rights in Somalia. According to the Los Angeles Times, “corporate and scientific documents disclosed that the American companies are well positioned to pursue Somalia’s most promising potential oil reserves the moment the nation is pacified,” - i.e. kill the "Islamofascists" and install a weak and pandering government that could never control its own resources well enough to compete with the Western global elite.

“Somalia is of geostrategic interest to the Bush administration, and the focus of operations and policy since 2001,” writes Larry Chin. “This focus is a continuation of long-term policies of both the Clinton administration and the George H.W. Bush administrations. Somalia’s resources have been eyed by Western powers since the days of the British Empire.”

“A new US cleansing of Somalian ‘tyranny’ would open the door for these US oil companies to map and develop the possibly huge oil potential in Somalia,” notes F. William Engdahl. “Yemen and Somalia are two flanks of the same geological configuration, which holds large potential petroleum deposits, as well as being the flanks of the oil chokepoint from the Red Sea.”

Of course the American public will simply be told that we're after 'Al Qaeda' because of 9/11, and they will buy it again. No matter that operatives involved in the African bombings at the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were admittedly working for the CIA. Nah, that's a side issue, LOOK AMERICA, Al Zawahiri said Somalia is Islamofascist, so we gotta bomb the hell out of it and control it's oil - just get used to it.

Defense Dept. warns about Canadian spy coins

Tiny transmitters found on contractors with classified security clearances

The Associated Press
Updated: 5:45 a.m. ET Jan 11, 2007

WASHINGTON - Money talks, but can it also follow your movements?

In a U.S. government warning high on the creepiness scale, the Defense Department cautioned its American contractors over what it described as a new espionage threat: Canadian coins with tiny radio frequency transmitters hidden inside.

The government said the mysterious coins were found planted on U.S. contractors with classified security clearances on at least three separate occasions between October 2005 and January 2006 as the contractors traveled through Canada.

Intelligence and technology experts said such transmitters, if they exist, could be used to surreptitiously track the movements of people carrying the spy coins.

The U.S. report doesn’t suggest who might be tracking American defense contractors or why. It also doesn’t describe how the Pentagon discovered the ruse, how the transmitters might function or even which Canadian currency contained them.

Further details were secret, according to the U.S. Defense Security Service, which issued the warning to the Pentagon’s classified contractors. The government insists the incidents happened, and the risk was genuine.

“What’s in the report is true,” said Martha Deutscher, a spokeswoman for the security service. “This is indeed a sanitized version, which leaves a lot of questions.”

'A lot of mysterious aspects'
Top suspects, according to outside experts: China, Russia or even France — all said to actively run espionage operations inside Canada with enough sophistication to produce such technology.

The Canadian Security Intelligence Service said it knew nothing about the coins.

“This issue has just come to our attention,” CSIS spokeswoman Barbara Campion said. “At this point, we don’t know of any basis for these claims.” She said Canada’s intelligence service works closely with its U.S. counterparts and will seek more information if necessary.

Experts were astonished about the disclosure and the novel tracking technique, but they rejected suggestions Canada’s government might be spying on American contractors. The intelligence services of the two countries are extraordinarily close and routinely share sensitive secrets.

“It would seem unthinkable,” said David Harris, former chief of strategic planning for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. “I wouldn’t expect to see any offensive operation against the Americans.”

Harris said likely candidates include foreign spies who targeted Americans abroad or businesses engaged in corporate espionage. “There are certainly a lot of mysterious aspects to this,” Harris said.

'Pretty advanced technology'
Experts said such tiny transmitters would almost certainly have limited range to communicate with sensors no more than a few feet away, such as ones hidden inside a doorway. The metal in the coins also could interfere with any signals emitted.

“I’m not aware of any (transmitter) that would fit inside a coin and broadcast for kilometers,” said Katherine Albrecht, an activist who believes such technology carries serious privacy risks. “Whoever did this obviously has access to some pretty advanced technology.”

Experts said hiding tracking technology inside coins is fraught with risks because the spy’s target might inadvertently give away the coin or spend it buying coffee or a newspaper. They agreed, however, that a coin with a hidden tracking device might not arouse suspicion if it were discovered in a pocket or briefcase.

“It wouldn’t seem to be the best place to put something like that; you’d want to put it in something that wouldn’t be left behind or spent,” said Jeff Richelson, a researcher and author of books about the CIA and its gadgets. “It doesn’t seem to make a whole lot of sense.”

Canada’s largest coins include its $2 “Toonie,” which is more than 1-inch across and thick enough to hide a tiny transmitter. The CIA has acknowledged its own spies have used hollow, U.S. silver-dollar coins to hide messages and film.

The government’s 29-page report was filled with other espionage warnings. It described unrelated hacker attacks, eavesdropping with miniature pen recorders and the case of a female foreign spy who seduced her American boyfriend to steal his computer passwords.

In another case, a film processing company called the FBI after it developed pictures for a contractor that contained classified images of U.S. satellites and their blueprints. The photo was taken from an adjoining office window.
© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16572783/

Interview with Bush Senior from 30 Sept 2001

War on terrorism

George Bush Snr, former President of the United States
George Bush discussed war on terrorism

BBC Breakfast With Frost Interview with George Bush Snr, former President of the United States, 30 September 2001

Excerpt:

FROST: And in terms of your phrase: "a new world order", now we have a situation where President Putin of Russia is being very helpful, they're even talking about joining Nato, could this be, in fact, the beginning of that new world order?

GEORGE BUSH SNR: Well I think - I think we ought to clarify what new world order is. I think there is a better world without potential superpower conflict and that new order has permitted a lot of countries to begin to make their democracies more effective, indeed you look around instead of one monolithic Soviet Union you have a lot of countries who have free elections and free markets. So I think we're seeing - saw the beginning, after Desert Storm of a new world order. But today that order is being challenged by this scourge of terrorism. And I think that we are saying a new world order, you made the key point on it because Russia is working with us, indeed in Desert Storm they, for the first time, we were together in the United Nations on resolutions but it's hard to say hey things are better, we've got a new world order when you've seen the horrible attack that took place in New York the other day, it affects every single country. And so it's going to take a while to perfect a new world order but I'm very hopeful that 20 years from now we're going to say - look there is a lot more peace, a lot more democracies, a lot more free trade, a lot more market, you know, open markets.

Bush To Try To “Bring The Public Back” To The War

KWTX CBS


(January 10, 2007)--President Bush's overriding goal in his speech to the nation Wednesday night is to "bring the public back" to the war in Iraq, The White House says.

The speech will be carried live at 8 p.m. Wednesday on CBS and News Ten.

The crux of the president’s plan is a fresh infusion of US troops at a time when most Americans want those troops to start coming home.

White House spokesman Tony Snow says the president knows he must overcome widespread doubt and restore public confidence and support for the mission.

The president is expected to call for up to 20,000 additional troops to be sent into Iraq to bolster forces in the still volatile Anbar Province and in Baghdad, where thousands of soldiers from Fort Hood’s 1st Cavalry Division are serving as part of Multinational Division Baghdad.

He'll also call for reconstruction aid, diplomacy and benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet.

Many Democrats oppose sending in more troops.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promises a vote on any proposed troop increase, while Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he's hoping for a bipartisan measure that would declare, "We don't support this escalation of the war."

Mr. Bush is also expected to acknowledge mistakes in Iraq.

White House counselor Dan Bartlett says the president will say that it was a mistake not to have more US or Iraqi troops fighting the war at the beginning.

The president also will say that the terms under which US troops carried out earlier operations "were flawed."

Bartlett made the rounds of the morning talk shows ahead of Mr. Bush's prime-time address from the White House.

Bartlett says Mr. Bush agrees with the "vast majority" of Americans who are not satisfied with the progress being made in Iraq, so he will spell out what he intends to do about it.

The president's plans include pumping a billion dollars into Iraq's economy.

It's all Iran's fault afterall....

US forces storm Iranian consulate

US forces have stormed an Iranian consulate in the northern Iraqi town of Irbil and seized five members of staff.

The troops raided the building at about 0300 (0001GMT), taking away computers and papers, according to Kurdish media and senior local officials.

The US military had no immediate comment on the raid, which comes amid high tension between Iran and the US.

The Bush administration accuses Iran of helping fuel violence in Iraq, as well as trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran strenuously denies both charges, countering that US military involvement in the Middle East endangers the whole region.

A local TV station said Kurdish security forces had taken over the building after the Americans had left.

Irbil lies in Iraq's Kurdish-controlled north, about 350 kilometres (220 miles) from the capital Baghdad.

Reports say the Iranian consulate there was set up last year under an agreement with the Kurdish regional government to facilitate cross-border visits.

Pressure

Iranian media said the country's embassy in Baghdad had sent a letter of protest about the raid to the Iraqi foreign ministry.

One Iranian news agency with a correspondent in Irbil says five US helicopters were used to land troops on the roof of the Iranian consulate.

It reports that a number of vehicles cordoned off the streets around the building, while US soldiers warned the occupants in three different languages that they should surrender or be killed.

In December, US troops detained a number of Iranians in Iraq, including two with diplomatic immunity who were later released.

Thursday's raid came as US President George W Bush unveiled his new strategy in Iraq, which included increasing troop numbers and a commitment to stop Iranian support for "our enemies in Iraq".

BBC Diplomatic Correspondent Jonathan Marcus says the raid could signal a ratcheting-up of pressure on the Iranians, in line with the rhetorical thrust of his speech.

Meanwhile in the Iraqi capital, the five off-duty policemen were killed in an ambush in the western al-Khadra neighbourhood, hospital officials said

Security sources said another man was killed wounded in an attack on a money changer in downtown Baghdad.

In the restive Anbar province, the US military said that one of its troops was killed on Tuesday by a roadside bombing.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/6251167.stm

Published: 2007/01/11 11:46:24 GMT