Fri, Apr. 27, 2007 | Terror attacks up 29%, report says | By Warren P. Strobel and Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON - A State Department report on terrorism due out next week will show a nearly 30 percent increase in terrorist attacks worldwide in 2006 to more than 14,000, almost all of the boost due to growing violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. officials said Friday.
The annual report's release comes amid a bitter feud between the White House and Congress over funding for U.S. troops in Iraq and a deadline favored by Democrats to begin a U.S. troop withdrawal.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her top aides earlier this week had considered postponing or downplaying the release of this year's edition of the terrorism report, officials in several agencies and on Capitol Hill said.
Ultimately, they decided to issue the report on or near the congressionally mandated deadline of Monday, the officials said. ...
Friday, April 27, 2007
Sunday, April 22, 2007
1 Islamist terrorist incident in Europe out of 498 ... but half of those arrested on suspicion of terrorism are Muslims ... disproportionate?
April 21 / 22, 2007 | A Neglected Report from Europol | The Islamic Threat to Europe: By the Numbers | By KRISTOFFER LARSSON
...
Over the last number of years the "Islamic threat" has become one of the favourite issues for media coverage. It's all over the news--Muslims leaders pronouncing threats against the countries participating in occupying Muslim land.
While America is the Western country most succumbed to the fear of Islamism, things aren't much better in Europe. ...
...
Following this, you might think the journalists would be beside themselves with joy when the European Police Office (Europol) releases its first report on terrorism in the EU. I can assure you they weren't. ... The report is namely a grave disappointment for the anti-Islamic campaigners.
There were 498 incidents in eleven EU countries last year labelled as "terrorist attacks." The Basque separatist group ETA did best (136 terrorist attacks) and was responsible for the only deadly attack, killing two in Madrid. The remaining 497 fortunately cost no human lives.
How about the Islamic terrorists then? Considering the perpetual warnings in our daily papers, the findings in the Europol report is, to say the least, surprising. The truth is that Islamists only carried out one out of the 498 terrorist attacks in the European Union in 2006. Don't believe me? The entire report is available on Europol's website. ...
...
If we look at the people arrested on suspicion of terrorism offences, the figures are rather disproportionate; about half of them arrested were Muslim. In plain English: Muslims are a group causing very little terrorism in Europe, while at the same time much more likely to be arrested on suspicion of it. The constant media coverage of Muslims being arrested creates the false image of a serious threat in order to benefit the imperialist world-view Washington wants us to adopt. ...
...
Over the last number of years the "Islamic threat" has become one of the favourite issues for media coverage. It's all over the news--Muslims leaders pronouncing threats against the countries participating in occupying Muslim land.
While America is the Western country most succumbed to the fear of Islamism, things aren't much better in Europe. ...
...
Following this, you might think the journalists would be beside themselves with joy when the European Police Office (Europol) releases its first report on terrorism in the EU. I can assure you they weren't. ... The report is namely a grave disappointment for the anti-Islamic campaigners.
There were 498 incidents in eleven EU countries last year labelled as "terrorist attacks." The Basque separatist group ETA did best (136 terrorist attacks) and was responsible for the only deadly attack, killing two in Madrid. The remaining 497 fortunately cost no human lives.
How about the Islamic terrorists then? Considering the perpetual warnings in our daily papers, the findings in the Europol report is, to say the least, surprising. The truth is that Islamists only carried out one out of the 498 terrorist attacks in the European Union in 2006. Don't believe me? The entire report is available on Europol's website. ...
...
If we look at the people arrested on suspicion of terrorism offences, the figures are rather disproportionate; about half of them arrested were Muslim. In plain English: Muslims are a group causing very little terrorism in Europe, while at the same time much more likely to be arrested on suspicion of it. The constant media coverage of Muslims being arrested creates the false image of a serious threat in order to benefit the imperialist world-view Washington wants us to adopt. ...
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
US military leaders ... global warming poses a serious threat to national security, as the US could be drawn into wars over water
Sunday, 15 April 2007, | US generals urge climate action
Former US military leaders have called on the Bush administration to make major cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.
In a report, they say global warming poses a serious threat to national security, as the US could be drawn into wars over water and other conflicts.
Former US military leaders have called on the Bush administration to make major cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.
In a report, they say global warming poses a serious threat to national security, as the US could be drawn into wars over water and other conflicts.
'We could not have anticipated' 911: but French told CIA about hijacking plans in 2001 ...
UPDATED: France told CIA about hijacking plans pre-9/11by another American | Mon Apr 16, 2007 at 06:39:32 AM PDT
French secret services produced nine reports between September 2000 and August 2001 looking at the Al-Qaida threat to the United States, and knew it planned to hijack an aircraft, the French daily Le Monde said on Monday. (Reuters via Ha'aretz).
According to Le Monde:
Hundreds of pages of notes and analyses of the General Directorate for External Security [DGSE, the French agency responsible for military intelligence as well as for strategic information, electronic intelligence, and counterespionage outside the borders of the national territory] show that the Sauudi billionaire Usama Bin Laden and his organization, Al-Qaida, were infiltrated by French spies. According a person close to Pierre Brochand, current director of the DGSE, a cell had been devoted to Ben Laden since 1995. A note of January 5, 2001, transmitted to the chief of the CIA station in Paris provided an alert about "a project to hijack a plane".
* another American's diary :: ::
*
The incompetence and mendacity of the Bush administration is limitless.
As Keith Olbermann has said: "It appears now that the operative word in the phrase 'We could not have anticipated' was the word 'we.' . . . During the transition, President Clinton and his national security adviser, Sandy Berger, say they told Bush and his team of the urgency of getting al Qaeda. Three days before President Bush took office, Berger spoke at a passing-the-baton event, which Rice attended."
I'll update as and when I learn more.
UPDATE: According to AP:
Uzbek officials apparently tipped off the French about the plot. Alain Chouet, a former top anti-terrorism official within the DGSE, said that an Afghan warlord from the Uzbek community who was fighting the Taliban at the time had sent men to infiltrate al-Qaida camps — and their information was passed down the chain to Western intelligence officials.
Confirming information in Le Monde, Chouet said such intelligence was likely checked out before it was put into a note. He also said that to the best of his knowledge, "all identified threats, even indirect and minimal ones, were passed in both directions" between the CIA and the CGSE. ...
French secret services produced nine reports between September 2000 and August 2001 looking at the Al-Qaida threat to the United States, and knew it planned to hijack an aircraft, the French daily Le Monde said on Monday. (Reuters via Ha'aretz).
According to Le Monde:
Hundreds of pages of notes and analyses of the General Directorate for External Security [DGSE, the French agency responsible for military intelligence as well as for strategic information, electronic intelligence, and counterespionage outside the borders of the national territory] show that the Sauudi billionaire Usama Bin Laden and his organization, Al-Qaida, were infiltrated by French spies. According a person close to Pierre Brochand, current director of the DGSE, a cell had been devoted to Ben Laden since 1995. A note of January 5, 2001, transmitted to the chief of the CIA station in Paris provided an alert about "a project to hijack a plane".
* another American's diary :: ::
*
The incompetence and mendacity of the Bush administration is limitless.
As Keith Olbermann has said: "It appears now that the operative word in the phrase 'We could not have anticipated' was the word 'we.' . . . During the transition, President Clinton and his national security adviser, Sandy Berger, say they told Bush and his team of the urgency of getting al Qaeda. Three days before President Bush took office, Berger spoke at a passing-the-baton event, which Rice attended."
I'll update as and when I learn more.
UPDATE: According to AP:
Uzbek officials apparently tipped off the French about the plot. Alain Chouet, a former top anti-terrorism official within the DGSE, said that an Afghan warlord from the Uzbek community who was fighting the Taliban at the time had sent men to infiltrate al-Qaida camps — and their information was passed down the chain to Western intelligence officials.
Confirming information in Le Monde, Chouet said such intelligence was likely checked out before it was put into a note. He also said that to the best of his knowledge, "all identified threats, even indirect and minimal ones, were passed in both directions" between the CIA and the CGSE. ...
Thursday, April 12, 2007
US is never mentioned, and yet we all know who is responsible for the suffering inflicted on those troubled lands ... UK keeps US out of Iran conflict
April 11, 2007 | Benedict vs. the War Party | Neocon 'theologian': Benedict XVI is pope of the 'American Left' | by Justin Raimondo
Pope Benedict XVI, in his annual "Urbi et Orbi" declamation, has drawn a picture of the global landscape that bodes ill for the cause of peace, exclaiming: "How many wounds, how much suffering there is in the world!" From the Solomon Islands to Somalia, from Latin America to the volatile Middle East, it's bad news all the way – and it's especially this last that draws the pontiff's anguished attention:
"Afghanistan is marked by growing unrest and instability; in the Middle East, besides some signs of hope in the dialogue between Israel and the Palestinian authority, nothing positive comes from Iraq, torn apart by continual slaughter as the civil population flees. In Lebanon the paralysis of the country's political institutions threatens the role that the country is called to play in the Middle East and puts its future seriously in jeopardy. Finally, I cannot forget the difficulties faced daily by the Christian communities and the exodus of Christians from that blessed Land which is the cradle of our faith."
The United States is never mentioned, and yet we all know who is responsible for the suffering inflicted on those troubled lands – and what is the source of the trouble. And there's more trouble on the horizon, with Iran in this administration's sights and the Democrats complicit before the fact. The recent dustup over the 15 British sailors and marines caught poaching in Iranian waters prefigures a Gulf-of-Tonkin-style incident that sparks a major new conflict. As the Guardian reports:
"The U.S. offered to take military action on behalf of the 15 British sailors and marines held by Iran, including buzzing Iranian Revolutionary Guard positions with warplanes, the Guardian has learned. In the first few days after the captives were seized and British diplomats were getting no news from Tehran on their whereabouts, Pentagon officials asked their British counterparts: what do you want us to do? They offered a series of military options, a list which remains top secret given the mounting risk of war between the U.S. and Iran. But one of the options was for U.S. combat aircraft to mount aggressive patrols over Iranian Revolutionary Guard bases in Iran, to underline the seriousness of the situation. The British declined the offer and said the U.S. could calm the situation by staying out of it." ...
Pope Benedict XVI, in his annual "Urbi et Orbi" declamation, has drawn a picture of the global landscape that bodes ill for the cause of peace, exclaiming: "How many wounds, how much suffering there is in the world!" From the Solomon Islands to Somalia, from Latin America to the volatile Middle East, it's bad news all the way – and it's especially this last that draws the pontiff's anguished attention:
"Afghanistan is marked by growing unrest and instability; in the Middle East, besides some signs of hope in the dialogue between Israel and the Palestinian authority, nothing positive comes from Iraq, torn apart by continual slaughter as the civil population flees. In Lebanon the paralysis of the country's political institutions threatens the role that the country is called to play in the Middle East and puts its future seriously in jeopardy. Finally, I cannot forget the difficulties faced daily by the Christian communities and the exodus of Christians from that blessed Land which is the cradle of our faith."
The United States is never mentioned, and yet we all know who is responsible for the suffering inflicted on those troubled lands – and what is the source of the trouble. And there's more trouble on the horizon, with Iran in this administration's sights and the Democrats complicit before the fact. The recent dustup over the 15 British sailors and marines caught poaching in Iranian waters prefigures a Gulf-of-Tonkin-style incident that sparks a major new conflict. As the Guardian reports:
"The U.S. offered to take military action on behalf of the 15 British sailors and marines held by Iran, including buzzing Iranian Revolutionary Guard positions with warplanes, the Guardian has learned. In the first few days after the captives were seized and British diplomats were getting no news from Tehran on their whereabouts, Pentagon officials asked their British counterparts: what do you want us to do? They offered a series of military options, a list which remains top secret given the mounting risk of war between the U.S. and Iran. But one of the options was for U.S. combat aircraft to mount aggressive patrols over Iranian Revolutionary Guard bases in Iran, to underline the seriousness of the situation. The British declined the offer and said the U.S. could calm the situation by staying out of it." ...
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
The captain in charge of the 15 marines detained in Iran has said they were gathering intelligence on the Iranians
Captain Chris Air | 'We Gathered Intelligence' | Updated: 20:07, Thursday April 05, 2007
The captain in charge of the 15 marines detained in Iran has said they were gathering intelligence on the Iranians.
Sky News went on patrol with Captain Chris Air and his team in Iraqi waters close to the area where they were arrested - just five days before the crisis began.
We withheld the interview until now so it would not jeopardise their safety.
And today, former Iranian diplomat Dr Mehrdad Khonsari said if the Iranians had known about it, they would have used it to "justify taking the marines captive and put them on trial".
Captain Air and his team were on an 'Interaction Patrol' where their patrol boats came alongside fishing dhows.
The operation was mainly to investigate arms smuggling and terrorism but Captain Air said it was also to gain intelligence on Iranian activity. ...
The captain in charge of the 15 marines detained in Iran has said they were gathering intelligence on the Iranians.
Sky News went on patrol with Captain Chris Air and his team in Iraqi waters close to the area where they were arrested - just five days before the crisis began.
We withheld the interview until now so it would not jeopardise their safety.
And today, former Iranian diplomat Dr Mehrdad Khonsari said if the Iranians had known about it, they would have used it to "justify taking the marines captive and put them on trial".
Captain Air and his team were on an 'Interaction Patrol' where their patrol boats came alongside fishing dhows.
The operation was mainly to investigate arms smuggling and terrorism but Captain Air said it was also to gain intelligence on Iranian activity. ...
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Te underhand way in which the Iranians have got her "unhappy and stressed". She shows no signs of electrocution or burn marks and there are no signs o
Call that humiliation? No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly are a very uncivilised bunch | Terry Jones | Saturday March 31, 2007 | The Guardian
I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head? That's what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their heads, so it's hard to breathe. Then it's perfectly acceptable to take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the captives can't be recognised and humiliated in the way these unfortunate British service people are.
t is also unacceptable that these British captives should be made to talk on television and say things that they may regret later. If the Iranians put duct tape over their mouths, like we do to our captives, they wouldn't be able to talk at all. Of course they'd probably find it even harder to breathe - especially with a bag over their head - but at least they wouldn't be humiliated.
And what's all this about allowing the captives to write letters home saying they are all right? It's time the Iranians fell into line with the rest of the civilised world: they should allow their captives the privacy of solitary confinement. That's one of the many privileges the US grants to its captives in Guantánamo Bay.
The true mark of a civilised country is that it doesn't rush into charging people whom it has arbitrarily arrested in places it's just invaded. The inmates of Guantánamo, for example, have been enjoying all the privacy they want for almost five years, and the first inmate has only just been charged. What a contrast to the disgraceful Iranian rush to parade their captives before the cameras!
What's more, it is clear that the Iranians are not giving their British prisoners any decent physical exercise. The US military make sure that their Iraqi captives enjoy PT. This takes the form of exciting "stress positions", which the captives are expected to hold for hours on end so as to improve their stomach and calf muscles. A common exercise is where they are made to stand on the balls of their feet and then squat so that their thighs are parallel to the ground. This creates intense pain and, finally, muscle failure. It's all good healthy fun and has the bonus that the captives will confess to anything to get out of it.
And this brings me to my final point. It is clear from her TV appearance that servicewoman Turney has been put under pressure. The newspapers have persuaded behavioural psychologists to examine the footage and they all conclude that she is "unhappy and stressed".
What is so appalling is the underhand way in which the Iranians have got her "unhappy and stressed". She shows no signs of electrocution or burn marks and there are no signs of beating on her face. This is unacceptable. If captives are to be put under duress, such as by forcing them into compromising sexual positions, or having electric shocks to their genitals, they should be photographed, as they were in Abu Ghraib. The photographs should then be circulated around the civilised world so that everyone can see exactly what has been going on.
As Stephen Glover pointed out in the Daily Mail, perhaps it would not be right to bomb Iran in retaliation for the humiliation of our servicemen, but clearly the Iranian people must be made to suffer - whether by beefing up sanctions, as the Mail suggests, or simply by getting President Bush to hurry up and invade, as he intends to anyway, and bring democracy and western values to the country, as he has in Iraq. ...
I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head? That's what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their heads, so it's hard to breathe. Then it's perfectly acceptable to take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the captives can't be recognised and humiliated in the way these unfortunate British service people are.
t is also unacceptable that these British captives should be made to talk on television and say things that they may regret later. If the Iranians put duct tape over their mouths, like we do to our captives, they wouldn't be able to talk at all. Of course they'd probably find it even harder to breathe - especially with a bag over their head - but at least they wouldn't be humiliated.
And what's all this about allowing the captives to write letters home saying they are all right? It's time the Iranians fell into line with the rest of the civilised world: they should allow their captives the privacy of solitary confinement. That's one of the many privileges the US grants to its captives in Guantánamo Bay.
The true mark of a civilised country is that it doesn't rush into charging people whom it has arbitrarily arrested in places it's just invaded. The inmates of Guantánamo, for example, have been enjoying all the privacy they want for almost five years, and the first inmate has only just been charged. What a contrast to the disgraceful Iranian rush to parade their captives before the cameras!
What's more, it is clear that the Iranians are not giving their British prisoners any decent physical exercise. The US military make sure that their Iraqi captives enjoy PT. This takes the form of exciting "stress positions", which the captives are expected to hold for hours on end so as to improve their stomach and calf muscles. A common exercise is where they are made to stand on the balls of their feet and then squat so that their thighs are parallel to the ground. This creates intense pain and, finally, muscle failure. It's all good healthy fun and has the bonus that the captives will confess to anything to get out of it.
And this brings me to my final point. It is clear from her TV appearance that servicewoman Turney has been put under pressure. The newspapers have persuaded behavioural psychologists to examine the footage and they all conclude that she is "unhappy and stressed".
What is so appalling is the underhand way in which the Iranians have got her "unhappy and stressed". She shows no signs of electrocution or burn marks and there are no signs of beating on her face. This is unacceptable. If captives are to be put under duress, such as by forcing them into compromising sexual positions, or having electric shocks to their genitals, they should be photographed, as they were in Abu Ghraib. The photographs should then be circulated around the civilised world so that everyone can see exactly what has been going on.
As Stephen Glover pointed out in the Daily Mail, perhaps it would not be right to bomb Iran in retaliation for the humiliation of our servicemen, but clearly the Iranian people must be made to suffer - whether by beefing up sanctions, as the Mail suggests, or simply by getting President Bush to hurry up and invade, as he intends to anyway, and bring democracy and western values to the country, as he has in Iraq. ...
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
The botched US raid that led to the [Iran] hostage crisis
2 April 2007 20:36 | The botched US raid that led to the hostage crisis | By Patrick Cockburn | Published: 03 April 2007
A failed American attempt to abduct two senior Iranian security officers on an official visit to northern Iraq was the starting pistol for a crisis that 10 weeks later led to Iranians seizing 15 British sailors and Marines.
Early on the morning of 11 January, helicopter-born US forces launched a surprise raid on a long-established Iranian liaison office in the city of Arbil in Iraqi Kurdistan. They captured five relatively junior Iranian officials whom the US accuses of being intelligence agents and still holds.
In reality the US attack had a far more ambitious objective, The Independent has learned. The aim of the raid, launched without informing the Kurdish authorities, was to seize two men at the very heart of the Iranian security establishment.
Better understanding of the seriousness of the US action in Arbil - and the angry Iranian response to it - should have led Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence to realise that Iran was likely to retaliate against American or British forces such as highly vulnerable Navy search parties in the Gulf. The two senior Iranian officers the US sought to capture were Mohammed Jafari, the powerful deputy head of the Iranian National Security Council, and General Minojahar Frouzanda, the chief of intelligence of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, according to Kurdish officials.
The two men were in Kurdistan on an official visit during which they met the Iraqi President, Jalal Talabani, and later saw Massoud Barzani, the President of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), at his mountain headquarters overlooking Arbil....
A failed American attempt to abduct two senior Iranian security officers on an official visit to northern Iraq was the starting pistol for a crisis that 10 weeks later led to Iranians seizing 15 British sailors and Marines.
Early on the morning of 11 January, helicopter-born US forces launched a surprise raid on a long-established Iranian liaison office in the city of Arbil in Iraqi Kurdistan. They captured five relatively junior Iranian officials whom the US accuses of being intelligence agents and still holds.
In reality the US attack had a far more ambitious objective, The Independent has learned. The aim of the raid, launched without informing the Kurdish authorities, was to seize two men at the very heart of the Iranian security establishment.
Better understanding of the seriousness of the US action in Arbil - and the angry Iranian response to it - should have led Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence to realise that Iran was likely to retaliate against American or British forces such as highly vulnerable Navy search parties in the Gulf. The two senior Iranian officers the US sought to capture were Mohammed Jafari, the powerful deputy head of the Iranian National Security Council, and General Minojahar Frouzanda, the chief of intelligence of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, according to Kurdish officials.
The two men were in Kurdistan on an official visit during which they met the Iraqi President, Jalal Talabani, and later saw Massoud Barzani, the President of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), at his mountain headquarters overlooking Arbil....
48% of Germans think the United States is more dangerous than Iran ...
04.02.2007 Why Europe Dislikes America (16 comments )
Forty-eight percent of Germans think the United States is more dangerous than Iran while only 31 percent believe the opposite according to a new survey conducted by the respected Forsa Institute for the widely-read magazine Stern. Even more than the German average, young people in particular - 57 percent of 18-to-29-year olds - held this to be the case.
This survey merely confirms the findings of others in Germany and Europe that were conducted over the past few years and that demonstrate unmistakably that the United States is massively distrusted and disliked by a majority of (at least West ) European publics. America's legitimacy and attractiveness in the eyes of West Europeans has sunk often below those "enjoyed" by Iran, North Korea and - not surprisingly - Israel. In the words of The New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, America has become "radioactive" to many in the world, West Europe included.
There can be no doubt that many disastrous, irresponsible -- indeed criminal -- policies by the Bush administration, as well as its haughty demeanor and arrogant tone, have contributed massively to this unprecedented vocal animosity on the part of Europeans toward Americans and America. Indeed, they bear responsibility for having created a situation in which anti-Americanism has mutated into a sort of global antinomy, a mutually shared language of opposition to and resistance against the real and perceived ills of modernity that are now inextricably identified with America. ...
Forty-eight percent of Germans think the United States is more dangerous than Iran while only 31 percent believe the opposite according to a new survey conducted by the respected Forsa Institute for the widely-read magazine Stern. Even more than the German average, young people in particular - 57 percent of 18-to-29-year olds - held this to be the case.
This survey merely confirms the findings of others in Germany and Europe that were conducted over the past few years and that demonstrate unmistakably that the United States is massively distrusted and disliked by a majority of (at least West ) European publics. America's legitimacy and attractiveness in the eyes of West Europeans has sunk often below those "enjoyed" by Iran, North Korea and - not surprisingly - Israel. In the words of The New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, America has become "radioactive" to many in the world, West Europe included.
There can be no doubt that many disastrous, irresponsible -- indeed criminal -- policies by the Bush administration, as well as its haughty demeanor and arrogant tone, have contributed massively to this unprecedented vocal animosity on the part of Europeans toward Americans and America. Indeed, they bear responsibility for having created a situation in which anti-Americanism has mutated into a sort of global antinomy, a mutually shared language of opposition to and resistance against the real and perceived ills of modernity that are now inextricably identified with America. ...