Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Monday, July 24, 2006
Monday, July 17, 2006
About our wonderful President...
Mideast crisis drives Bush to colorful language
ST PETERSBURG, Russia (Reuters) - A microphone picked up an unaware
President Bush saying on Monday Syria should press Hezbollah to "stop
doing this shit" and that his secretary of state may go to the Middle
East soon.
Bush was talking privately to British Prime Minister
Tony Blair during a lunch at the Group of Eight summit in St Petersburg
about an upsurge of violence in the Middle East, not realizing a
microphone was recording what he said.
"I think Condi (Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice) is going to go pretty soon," Bush said.
Blair replied: "Right, that's all that matters, it will take some time to get that together."
The two leaders also referred to an offer by Blair to help. Blair said Rice has "got to succeed" if she goes out to the region.
Bush
replied: "What they need to do it to get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop
doing this shit." Shortly afterwards Blair noticed the microphone and
hastily switched it off, but not before the recording had reached news
media.
Much of the G8 summit has been devoted to discussing the
Middle East crisis centering on Lebanese Hezbollah militant attacks on
Israel and Israeli bombing of Lebanon. Washington and its allies say
Hezbollah is backed by Syria.
© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.
Sunday, July 16, 2006
About the MIddle East
The Road to War
We could all be in deep, deep trouble
Jason Burke and Julie Flint in Bierut, Inigo Gilmore in Nahariya, Conal Urquhart in Gaza and Patrick Wintour in St Petersburg
Sunday July 16, 2006
The Observer
Beirut
was silent yesterday morning. Smoke still hung in the blue sky like a
vague threat, but after a night of violence - physical and verbal - the
port city waited. A few shops in the centre warily raised their steel
shutters, but the Shia Muslim areas in the south of the city were
empty. Occasional cars worked their way around the rubble left by the
air strikes of the evening before, some packed with families leaving,
others filled with families going to funerals. Then came the blasts in
the middle of the day, loud enough to rattle windows across the entire
city. Plumes of flame and smoke spouted once more above the tattered
buildings. And everyone knew that there would soon be more cars full of
refugees, and more cars heading to funerals.
was silent yesterday morning. Smoke still hung in the blue sky like a
vague threat, but after a night of violence - physical and verbal - the
port city waited. A few shops in the centre warily raised their steel
shutters, but the Shia Muslim areas in the south of the city were
empty. Occasional cars worked their way around the rubble left by the
air strikes of the evening before, some packed with families leaving,
others filled with families going to funerals. Then came the blasts in
the middle of the day, loud enough to rattle windows across the entire
city. Plumes of flame and smoke spouted once more above the tattered
buildings. And everyone knew that there would soon be more cars full of
refugees, and more cars heading to funerals.
There
were many funerals last week, and this weekend there were more. At
least 13 Lebanese villagers, including women and children, were killed
yesterday in an Israeli air strike on a convoy of vehicles evacuating a
village near the southern border. And few expect the funerals to stop
soon. Yesterday Israeli and Hizbollah leaders declared 'open war';
bodies of four Israeli sailors were retrieved from a warship struck by
a Hizbollah drone; beyond Beirut, bombing continued in the Hizbollah
heartland of southern Lebanon and even reached the Syrian border; and
dozens of Hizbollah rockets continued to fall randomly on civilian
areas in northern Israel, reaching as far south as Tiberias, some 40km
inside Israel's borders, causing minor injuries and provoking panic.
Further south, though the worst violence of the week had ebbed, the
Gaza Strip, from where rockets have been fired into Israeli towns,
remained tense, with reports of an Israeli air strike and two dead.
And
as the violence continued, so the shock waves around the region and the
world grew deeper. The crisis, which has pushed oil prices to a
historic high of $78 per barrel and weakened stock markets around the
world, dominated the agenda of the G8 summit of rich nations in St
Petersburg, dividing international leaders. In the Middle East itself,
Syria and Iran, deeply implicated in the events of the past week, are
on high alert. The Egyptians, Jordanians, Turks, Saudis - and, of
course, the Iraqis - are all very nervous. America is increasingly
involved. Diplomats are frantically formulating plans to defuse what
one described to The Observer as 'a powder keg that could blow out all
the lights'. And all this in just five days.
The questions are
now manifold and evident; answers less so. How and why did the crisis
explode so powerfully and so quickly? What are the regional
ramifications? And what happens next?
As ever in the Middle East,
the crisis can be traced back to a variety of causes. The timeline can
start a few days ago - with a daring cross-border raid by Hizbollah
militants on Tuesday that led to the capture of two Israeli soldiers
and the deaths of eight more. Or it can start two weeks ago - with the
kidnapping of another Israeli soldier by hardline Palestinian militants
from the Hamas organisation in the Gaza Strip. Or it can start months,
years or decades ago in the myriad interwoven causes that link Israel's
withdrawal from south Lebanon in 2000, the development (with Iranian
assistance) of the Hizbollah militia in response to Israel's invasion
of Lebanon 18 years earlier, and even the Iranian revolution of 1979,
or the Arab-Israeli wars of 1973 and 1967.
For Ehud Olmert, the
recently elected Prime Minister of Israel, the crisis started on
Wednesday with Hizbollah's cross-border attack. It should have been
expected. The militia's leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, has repeatedly
said that it would seek to capture Israeli soldiers on or near the
border, and has been trying to do so since moving back into the
frontier zone following the Israeli withdrawal six years ago. The army
was 'caught with its pants down', said one Israeli commentator last
week.
As soon as Olmert - said by associates to be 'incandescent'
with rage - heard of the incident, he called an emergency meeting of
the inner security cabinet. Around the table with the right-wing Prime
Minister, who leads the Kadima party, were his senior ministers and
leaders of the other parties, including the profoundly orthodox Shas,
who comprise the ruling coalition. The politicians were briefed by the
head of the army, Lieutenant-General Dan Halutz, the head of the
internal security service, the head of Mossad, and a series of other
military advisers.
Halutz's plan mixed various aims. There was
little real hope that the pressure on Hizbollah might force the
immediate return of the soldiers. But a land, air and sea blockade
would prevent Hizbollah receiving supplies and prevent the militia
evacuating the hostages to Syria. A tight cordon coupled with air
strikes would allow the destruction of Hizbollah's military capacity.
In addition, the physical damage wreaked by the bombing would force the
government of Lebanon (and the international community) to act against
the Islamic militia, hopefully implementing a recent UN Security
Council resolution calling for Hizbollah's disarmament and the
positioning of Lebanese troops on the southern border. Civilian
suffering leading to anger against Hizbollah would, the politicians and
military men knew, force the Lebanese, or the international community,
or both, to act rapidly. The plan was accepted unanimously. 'If our
security and economy is being hit,' said one minister, 'so shall
Lebanon's.'
Their responses were, given Israel's history,
relatively predictable. The Jewish state's strategic doctrine has
always relied, along with massive foreign aid, on a powerful, ruthless
and immediate response to any threat. As a final bonus, the Hizbollah
attack offered an opportunity to restore the 'deterrence factor' - a
key aim of the hawkish chief of staff who has a significant influence
on a government that contains fewer former soldiers than almost any
other previous Israeli administration. 'There has been a progressive
decline in deterrence over the past six years and the defence
establishment want to re-establish it,' said Jonathan Spyer, a former
adviser on international relations to the Israeli government and a
research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Centre
in Hertzeliya. 'They see it as a very serious big boy's game.'
Crucially,
Halutz's plan was not new. Indeed, according to Gerald Steinberg,
professor of political studies at Bar Ilan University, it had been
sitting 'on the shelf' for some time. 'The scenario that has been
followed has been worked on by the military for several years,'
Steinberg said. 'Sharon was briefed on it when he was Prime Minister
and it is probable that Olmert knew about it.' Yet the more hardline
Israelis were not the only ones acting according to a script. Indeed,
the script may well have been written elsewhere: in Beirut, Gaza,
Damascus and Tehran.
On Thursday morning, the people of the
village of al-Dweir, a few miles from the Israel-Lebanon border,
gathered at the mosque for a family funeral. Rockets launched by
Hizbollah fighters could be heard echoing off the low hills of the
border area. Overhead, Israeli jets and drones circled unheeded by a
crowd full of Hizbollah members and supporters. Before long, the yellow
and green flag of the Shia group was fluttering.
Dr Yousef Akkash
was among the mourners. His brother, killed along with his wife and
eight children earlier in the day when Israeli planes obliterated their
home, was possibly a member of Hizbollah, but Akkash was not sure. 'I
hope he was,' Akkash said. 'If he was engaged in Hizbollah activities,
then it was his fate.' But it was a fate that lay in the hands of
shadowy men in different countries.
Israeli diplomats last week
insisted on an 'axis of evil' linking Hamas in the Gaza Strip,
Hizbollah, Damascus and Tehran. 'They are united to destabilise the
situation and act against the wills of most people and governments in
the region to progress a peace process,' said Barnea Hassid, an Israeli
spokesman.
The argument here is simple. The past few months have
seen several developments that have displeased those who stand to
benefit from continued strife. There has been an improvement in
relations between moderate Palestinian leaders and Olmert, who is
committed to a disengagement of Israeli forces and settlers from the
West Bank and hints that even elements of Hamas might be shifting
towards a more pragmatic position. In addition, the Syrians, forced to
leave Lebanon last year, have become marginalised and Hizbollah has
begun to lose credibility. In addition, Tehran is under huge
international pressure because of its nuclear programme. Nothing would
benefit hardliners in Gaza, Lebanon, Damascus and Tehran more than a
nasty and bloody war. 'It is a good thing for Damascus and Tehran,'
said Spyer. 'They are largely behind what we are now seeing..'
However,
experts point out that there is little history of contact between
Hizbollah and the Sunni Muslim Hamas. And though a senior Hamas
militant in Damascus is suspected of running the kidnapping of the
Israeli soldier in Gaza, that does not mean, says one Western
intelligence source, that the Hizbollah strike last week was part of a
co-ordinated strategy. And the relationship between Iran and Hizbollah
may be more nuanced than often thought. 'The Iranians are in trouble
over the nuclear programme, and the Syrians are under pressure, too,
and chaos and diversions benefit both,' said Nadim Shehadi, of London's
Chatham House think tank. 'But Hizbollah is more linked to Tehran than
Damascus.'
An axis may exist, but in a rougher, more informal
form than the tight-knit institutional connections seen by the Israelis
and their allies. 'If you ignore state borders, you can see a broad
anti-American and anti-Israeli front, with Iran leading it. They are
playing a clever game. The Iranians are playing chess: their opponents
are playing poker.'
One critical question is the degree of
support that Hizbollah, which has a well-armed militia and a large
social programme, has among Lebanon's poor Shias. The consensus is that
the militia had been losing support before the crisis. That may be one
reason for Wednesday's attack, even if the reaction of the Israelis was
greater than foreseen. 'Hizbollah was being squeezed,' said Steinberg.
'It was "use-it-or-lose-it" time.'
Initially, it looked as if
those tactics might have worked. On Wednesday night, as news of the
kidnapping broke, teenagers on motorbikes rode up and down Beirut
seafront waving the party's yellow flag and honking horns. Even after
bombardment chewed up the highway to Damascus and put the airport out
of action, celebrants were setting off firecrackers. But as the extent
of Israel's onslaught on Lebanon's infrastructure became clear, the
atmosphere changed.
'In 1982, I was anti-Israel,' presidential
candidate Chibli Mallat told The Observer. 'But this offensive has been
provoked by a blatant violation of the demarcation line and the
abduction of soldiers. I cannot put the blame on the Israelis. They did
not start it.'
Few Lebanese accept Hizbollah's claim that its aim
was to barter the release of the handful of Lebanese still held in
Israeli jails: they blame Hizbollah for plunging Lebanon back into war.
Everywhere there is widespread recognition that, even if the Lebanese
government, with its pro-Syrian President and predominantly anti-Syrian
administration and parliament, wanted to rein in Hizbollah, it could
not. 'The Israelis blame the Lebanese government for not controlling
Hizbollah,' said architect Simone Kosremelli. 'Is Italy able to control
the Mafia? Could England control the IRA? Israel must know that 50
years of conflict have not brought a solution. There must be another
way.'
If there is, it will almost certainly involve the
international community. Vladimir Putin, Russia's leader, had hoped to
use this weekend's G8 summit to showcase the economic progress in his
nation. Officially, education and the fight against HIV head the
agenda, but attention has focused on the Middle East - and divisions
between the summiteers. The splits echoed those over Iraq three years
ago, with France's Jacques Chirac leading condemnation of the Israelis,
European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso saying that the use
of force by Israel was 'disproportionate', Putin calling for the
Israeli response to be more 'balanced' and President Bush avoiding any
condemnation of Israel, saying 'the best way to stop the violence is
for Hizbollah to lay down its arms and to stop attacking.'
However,
with a meeting this weekend of Arab foreign ministers in Cairo
disintegrating in mutual recriminations, the EU lacking a clear
strategy and the UN lacking credibility, the Americans may hold the
real key. 'The Israelis tend to go as far as they can, as quickly as
they can, to make their point and strengthen their negotiating position
before the international pressure on them gets too much to bear,' said
one Western diplomat. 'The US can bring 10 times as much pressure to
bear as anyone else.'
Bush has so far largely left discussions
with Israeli leaders to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and
National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. Rice, after conversations
with UN secretary-general Kofi Annan, has backed the dispatch of a UN
team to the region to attempt to negotiate a truce, but few believe it
has much chance of immediate success.
A key question is whether
Israel will escalate its military response to Hizbollah's continued
provocation - yesterday rockets fell deeper and deeper inside Israel. A
spokesman refused to rule out a ground offensive, though casualties
would be high and the political fall-out of a botched operation
potentially devastating. However it may be that a negotiated settlement
- exchanging prisoners in Israeli jails as part of a more general
agreement that would see the return of the captured Israeli troops and
Hizbollah pulling back from the frontier - is possible. Though Israeli
demands for the disarmament of Hizbollah may be unrealistic in the
short term, they may not be in the long term.
However, it may be
that a fuse has been lit. 'The nightmare scenario is war in Gaza,
widespread war against the Israelis in Lebanon and between factions,
Syria and Iran being dragged into the conflict and a steady escalation
from there to who knows where, widespread conflict, oil prices through
the ceiling, bombs going off all over the place' said the diplomat.
'You don't usually see the nightmare scenario evolve in the Middle East
but, if it does, we are all in deep, deep trouble.'
Perhaps the
most hopeful sign is that the vast bulk of the Lebanese and Israeli
populations still do not wish harm on one another, though tensions have
heightened antagonisms and, in Israel at least, provoked a strong
pro-war solidarity.
During a rocket barrage on Friday afternoon,
a missile landed in a kibbutz on the edge of the northern Israeli town
of Nahariya. As the community had already been almost entirely
evacuated, there were no casualties.
Avi Hever, a long-time
resident, was one of just four men who chose to stay behind after the
first missiles landed last week. 'I was watching TV when I heard the
missile go over the house and explode,' he said. 'I went into a safe
place between the two walls and the house was shaking all over. Its
unpleasant, shocking; it makes you freeze.'
Pointing to empty
rooms, he explained that he has sent his wife and two children to his
family in Tel Aviv, an exodus mirroring that of Lebanese civilians
further north. The Observer asked if he sympathised with those caught
up in the same conflict living just a few miles away over the border.
'It's
quite hard to feel empathy at the moment, when just 10 minutes ago a
rocket hit here and I was in danger. But empathy will come,' he said,
glancing across the neat houses, with their groomed front lawns, the
Star of David flags flapping defiantly from the rooftops. 'We do want
peace and the Lebanese want the same as us. But it's up to them now;
they have to choose which way they want to organise their life, with
Hizbollah or without it.'
Outside the village of Damour on
Lebanon's coast, holes that are dozens of feet wide have shattered a
key highway overpass that connects Beirut to the south of the country.
It is also the only way out of the war zone for many of south Lebanon's
residents, who have been clambering over the piles of rubble and around
the craters on their way to Beirut or the northern Bekaa Valley and
safety.
'This is a fight between Hizbollah and Israel,' said Umm
Mohammed, 36, a Shia woman from outside Tyre. 'Why must they hurt
civilians? I have small children.' And she looked nervously to the sky.
Key Players of the Conflict
Sheik Hassan Nasrallah: Chief of Hizbollah in Lebanon
Has close links to Syria and Iran. Told Israel: 'You wanted an open war and we are heading for an open war'.
Bashar Assad: President of Syria
Denied being behind the Hizbollah attack. Syria's relations with
Lebanon strained since last year's killing of former Lebanese premier
Rafif Hariri that led to withdrawal of Syrian troops.
Fouad Siniora: Lebanese Prime Minister Critic of Syria
but he has been so far unable to disarm Hizbollah, a group he calls
'legitimate resistance'. In a difficult position with two Hizbollah
ministers in his cabinet.
Ehud Olmert: Israeli Prime Minister
Said he would agree to a ceasefire if Hizbollah returned the two
captured soldiers and stopped firing rockets but has rejected calls for
restraint from UN's Kofi Annan.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: President of Iran
Iran was where Hizbollah was founded and it retains close links. Tehran
warns of a 'fierce response' if Israel strikes at Syria.
Countdown to Crisis
25 January: Hamas defeats moderate Fatah in Palestinian elections.
10 April: EU severs political contact and suspends direct aid to Palestinian government.
9 June:
Hamas calls off 16- month military truce after seven members of a
Palestinian family are killed on a Gaza beach by Israel shell. Four
days later a family of nine die in Israeli missile strike in Gaza.
25 June: Palestinian militants launch raid into Israel, killing two Israeli soldiers and kidnapping Cpl Gilad Shalit.
29 June: Israel troops, having pushed into Gaza, detain Hamas lawmakers and cabinet members. Air strikes.
12 July:
Hizbolla captures two Israeli soldiers and kills eight. Israel calls it
'act of war' and widens Gaza offensive, killing 24 civilians. Air
strikes destroy 10 bridges in Lebanon, and hit power stations and a
water facility.
13 July: Israel bombs Palestinian Foreign Ministry and Bierut airport. Navy blockades Lebanese ports. The US
14 July:
Israel bombs Beirut-Damascus road and Shia suburbs of Bierut: 67
Lebanese civilians dead. Hizbollah launches 130 missiles at Israel,
killing at least two civilians. Israeli ship is hit by an explosives-
filled drone, four dead.
15 July: In the village of Marwaheen - 500 yards from the Israeli border, an air strike kills up to 13.
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
About the Government...
I believe this little gem sums it up...
"Hoekstra didn't spell it out in his note. But what he was saying was that he believed a CIA cabal has tried to undercut Bush regarding the war in Iraq--that CIA officials opposed to the war plotted against the president and sought to undercut his case for war by leaking stories indicating that the intelligence cited by Bush and his aides on Iraq's WMDs and purported connections to al Qaeda was not that strong. (Joe Wilson's trip to Niger and subsequent op-ed piece declaring there had been nothing to the charge Iraq was seeking uranium there, the rightwing theory goes, was part of a deliberate CIA conspiracy against the White House.) Hoekstra also is probably thinking of the leaks about CIA secret prisons and the agency's clandestine renditions of detainees to nations where abusive interrogation occurs."
-http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=100520
Monday, July 10, 2006
About Fraud...
From <li><a href="http://www.newnetworks.com/ShortSCANDALSummary.htm"></a></li> The case is simple: Do you have a 45 Mbps, The Commitment: The Harms and Outcome The Truth: This is a Fraud Case 20 Year Analysis of Revenues, Profits, Teletruth has filed a complaint with the Federal Trade
bi-directional service to your home, paying around $40? Do
you have 500+ channels and can choose any competitive
service? You paid an estimated $2000 for this product even
though you did not receive it and it may never be available.
Do you want your money back and the companies held
accountable?
Background: Starting in the early 1990's, the
Clinton-Gore Administration had aggressive plans to create
the "National Infrastructure Initiative" to rewire ALL of
America with fiber optic wiring, replacing the 100 year old
copper wire. The Bell companies — SBC,
Verizon, BellSouth and Qwest, claimed that they would step
up to the plate and rewire homes, schools, libraries,
government agencies, businesses and hospitals, etc. if they
received financial incentives.
should have already been wired with a fiber (and coax),
wire, capable of at least 45 Mbps in both directions, and
could handle 500+ channels.
to be done in rich and poor neighborhoods, in rural,
urban and suburban areas equally.
networks were to be open to ALL competitors, not a
closed-in network or deployed only where the phone
company desired.
state of New Jersey was to be wired, Pennsylvania was to
have 50% of households by 2004, California to have 5
million households by 2000, Texas claimed all schools,
libraries, hospitals.…Virtually every state had
commitments.
exchange for building these networks, the Bell companies
ALL received changes in state laws that gave these them
excessive profits, tax savings, and other perks to be
used in building these networks.
the old copper wiring and did not require new
regulations.
SBC’s Lightspeed fiber optics,
which are slower, can't handle 500 channels, are not open
to competition, and are not being deployed
equitably.
ether, but directly to homes.
estimate that $206 billion dollars in excess profits and
tax deductions were collected —
over $2000 per household. (This is the low
estimate.)
dollars to the economy. America lost a decade of
technological innovation and economic growth, about $500
billion annually.
16th in the world in broadband. While Korea and
Japan have 40-100 Mbps at cheap prices, America is still
at kilobyte speeds.
— The phone companies current plans
are to pick and choose where and when they want to deploy
fiber services, if at all.
— SBC, BellSouth and
Verizon now claim that they can control who uses the
networks and at what price, impacting everything from
VOIP and municipality roll outs to new services from Ebay
and Google.
the networks couldn't be built at the time the
commitments were made and are still not available. If
someone pays thousands of dollars for a service and
doesn't get it, isn't that fraud?
Americast, the Bell companies' fiber optic front groups,
spent about $1 billion and were designed to make America
believe these deployments were real in order to pass the
Telecom Act of 1996 and enter long distance. How did
every major phone company in America not know that these
fiber-based services couldn't be built and were able to
defraud over 40 states?
over 26 states and harmed competition. With
every merger, the phone companies simply dropped all
state commitments and harmed every state they merged
with. Case in point: Verizon cut deployments to 13 states
during the NYNEX-Bell Atlantic merger, not to mention
GTE's 28 state deployments. SBC did the same in all 13 of
its states, from California to Illinois. Worse, the
mergers were based on the companies competing with each
other and there is NO evidence they ever did any serious
wireline residential competition.
Broadband. Over the last 4 years, instead of
continuing competition as ordered by the Telecom Act of
1996, the FCC has rewritten the laws close down Internet
Service Providers (ISPs) that brought America to the
Internet, as well as virtually all local competition.
AT&T and MCI couldn't compete because they were
regulated out of business and thus were sold off.
Virtually every piece of documentation presented in this
work is missing from the FCC's Advanced Network Reports.
The FCC defines broadband as 200 kilobytes per second in
one direction — 225 times slower than what was
promised in 1992.
of spending the money on these networks, the Bell
companies used the money to enter long distance, rollout
wireless and the inferior DSL services. The Bells also
lost over $20 billion overseas and paid executives over a
billion in stock options during the mergers.
paid for a fiber optic wire and got DSL over the old
copper wiring — it's like ordering a Ferrari and
getting a bicycle.
Expenditures: This book is based on a 20 year
analysis of Bell-supplied data, Census Data and Business
Week. Since 1984::
60%.
compared to other utilities.
Commission, (FTC) to investigate the claims presented; the
book is the data for our complaint.
Sunday, July 09, 2006
About that time again...
This blog is almost a year old!
Though it hasn't maintained the most stringent of update cycles it still has served my ends dutifully and with loyalty. In fact this blog has sacrificed a lot just to keep me happy. For instance those links on the right are a pestilence of Romanized English script, each character a locust in a hyperlink wave of desolation. But has Fiat Lux ever woken me up with an electrostatic shock in the middle of the night to complain about the hordes of characters cluttering its otherwise unblemished face? well, yes, but im pretty sure it was just his old age that made him do it. You know how old things get, senile and lost. Well that about wraps up what i meant to say, Happy Days!
(^)
|
|
((=###
Can anyone see that birthday candle?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
