Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
unhappycamper
unhappycamper's Journal
unhappycamper's Journal
December 13, 2013
Our data, our laws
Lisa M. Austin, Heather Black, Michael Geist, Avner Levin and Ian Kerr, National Post
12/12/13 | Last Updated: 11/12/13 3:15 PM ET
Over the past six months, the steady stream of disclosures from former U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden has revealed a massive surveillance infrastructure that seemingly touches all Internet and telephone communication across the globe.
While the issue has generated robust debates in many countries, the Canadian political response has been relatively quiet. In an effort to address the lack of oversight over Canadian surveillance activities, Liberal MP and former public safety minister Wayne Easter recently introduced Bill C-551, which would establish a National Security Committee of Parliamentarians.
The bill is a welcome move towards providing greater transparency and accountability for Canadian intelligence agencies, yet attention to oversight is not enough. We also need to address the legal framework under which these agencies operate, and the privacy protections granted to Canadians under the law.
This is true not only for Canada — our law’s 20th-century privacy protections are no match for 21st-century surveillance technologies — but also for U.S. law. The need for U.S. reforms may represent an enormous challenge, but Canadians find themselves between a proverbial rock and a hard place, as our communications data is increasingly stored on the servers of U.S. companies subject to U.S. law.
Canada: Our data, our laws
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/12/12/our-data-our-laws/Our data, our laws
Lisa M. Austin, Heather Black, Michael Geist, Avner Levin and Ian Kerr, National Post
12/12/13 | Last Updated: 11/12/13 3:15 PM ET
Over the past six months, the steady stream of disclosures from former U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden has revealed a massive surveillance infrastructure that seemingly touches all Internet and telephone communication across the globe.
While the issue has generated robust debates in many countries, the Canadian political response has been relatively quiet. In an effort to address the lack of oversight over Canadian surveillance activities, Liberal MP and former public safety minister Wayne Easter recently introduced Bill C-551, which would establish a National Security Committee of Parliamentarians.
The bill is a welcome move towards providing greater transparency and accountability for Canadian intelligence agencies, yet attention to oversight is not enough. We also need to address the legal framework under which these agencies operate, and the privacy protections granted to Canadians under the law.
This is true not only for Canada — our law’s 20th-century privacy protections are no match for 21st-century surveillance technologies — but also for U.S. law. The need for U.S. reforms may represent an enormous challenge, but Canadians find themselves between a proverbial rock and a hard place, as our communications data is increasingly stored on the servers of U.S. companies subject to U.S. law.
December 13, 2013
Honduras is the only, sorry country where maneuvers in Washington have actually succeeded in removing a president who had been elected and chosen by the people, as Manuel Zelaya had been. Thus in Honduras we see what the whole of Latin America risks becoming if servitude to the U.S. should continue.
Honduras Democracy, Washington Style
Il Fatto Quotidiano, Italy
By Fabio Marcelli
Translated By Emily Fiennes
27 November 2013
Edited by Laurence Bouvard
Uncle Sam is having a hard time of it. There was a time, up to the end of the ‘80s, when the whole of Latin America was a mirror image of U.S. administration, whether Republican or Democrat. Violent dictatorships and hungry neoliberal regimes came and went, as was the case in Chile. Argentines and Chileans disappeared in the tens of thousands and the democratic U.S. government did not bat an eyelid. On the contrary, the U.S. installed harsh dictatorial governments, riling the communist bogeyman and fostering the instability that would lead to the coup d’état. Only 40 full years have passed since the overthrow in Chile that had been so longed for, encouraged and enforced by the Nobel Prize winner Henry Kissinger through the use of Pinochet and other assassins.
Today, times have changed. From Cuba to Uruguay, a diverse host of popular coalitions, bound by a single ideal of a united Latin America and by the potential for a socialist future that is geared toward real achievements in human rights, have governing control of the majority of the continent. I recently returned to Cuba, where economic reform is advancing slowly but surely, under the watchful eye of popular democracy. They recently voted, for example, against the removal of the libreta (the food ration book); as a result, it was not abolished. This trend is seen in Venezuela, too, where Maduro and the Venezuelan population are determinedly facing the rumors encouraged by swathes of local municipal leaders who are ready to founder the country just in order to protect their own wretched interests. Coalitions in Ecuador and Bolivia are involved in making multinationals pay the price of their pollution and in freeing themselves from international finance. This last point is truly a great example for Europe, where bogus liberals Francois Hollande and Matteo Renzi bow slavishly to any economic power. Argentina is clamping down on excessive media powers with a law to eliminate all forms of control on public opinion — a law which we could do with adopting ourselves, in fact. In the behemoth that is Brazil, a popular struggle against the PT Worker’s Party government is back with a vengeance to demand that public sentiments are heard and their priorities acknowledged. In Chile, together with the comeback of Michelle Bachelet, there was the entry into parliament of determined young leaders such as the communist Camila Vallejo. In Uruguay, the current president is opposing the caste system there.
There are few true exceptions to this season of great popular progress. Among these countries, and together with Mexico — too far from God and too close to the U.S. to be a normal country, dominated by fierce families of drug traffickers — is little old Honduras. Honduras is the only, sorry country where maneuvers in Washington have actually succeeded in removing a president who had been elected and chosen by the people, as Manuel Zelaya had been. Thus in Honduras we see what the whole of Latin America risks becoming if servitude to the U.S. should continue. Marco Consolo recently sketched the scene:
“In 2012, Honduras had the miserable record of being the country with the highest homicide rate in the world — 86 per 100,000 inhabitants. Eighty percent of these go unpunished and only 20 percent are investigated. From the coup d’état to now, we’re talking about thousands of murders, many of which are political homicides that have been disguised as common criminality.
Honduras Democracy, Washington Style
http://watchingamerica.com/News/227972/honduras-democracy-washington-style/Honduras is the only, sorry country where maneuvers in Washington have actually succeeded in removing a president who had been elected and chosen by the people, as Manuel Zelaya had been. Thus in Honduras we see what the whole of Latin America risks becoming if servitude to the U.S. should continue.
Honduras Democracy, Washington Style
Il Fatto Quotidiano, Italy
By Fabio Marcelli
Translated By Emily Fiennes
27 November 2013
Edited by Laurence Bouvard
Uncle Sam is having a hard time of it. There was a time, up to the end of the ‘80s, when the whole of Latin America was a mirror image of U.S. administration, whether Republican or Democrat. Violent dictatorships and hungry neoliberal regimes came and went, as was the case in Chile. Argentines and Chileans disappeared in the tens of thousands and the democratic U.S. government did not bat an eyelid. On the contrary, the U.S. installed harsh dictatorial governments, riling the communist bogeyman and fostering the instability that would lead to the coup d’état. Only 40 full years have passed since the overthrow in Chile that had been so longed for, encouraged and enforced by the Nobel Prize winner Henry Kissinger through the use of Pinochet and other assassins.
Today, times have changed. From Cuba to Uruguay, a diverse host of popular coalitions, bound by a single ideal of a united Latin America and by the potential for a socialist future that is geared toward real achievements in human rights, have governing control of the majority of the continent. I recently returned to Cuba, where economic reform is advancing slowly but surely, under the watchful eye of popular democracy. They recently voted, for example, against the removal of the libreta (the food ration book); as a result, it was not abolished. This trend is seen in Venezuela, too, where Maduro and the Venezuelan population are determinedly facing the rumors encouraged by swathes of local municipal leaders who are ready to founder the country just in order to protect their own wretched interests. Coalitions in Ecuador and Bolivia are involved in making multinationals pay the price of their pollution and in freeing themselves from international finance. This last point is truly a great example for Europe, where bogus liberals Francois Hollande and Matteo Renzi bow slavishly to any economic power. Argentina is clamping down on excessive media powers with a law to eliminate all forms of control on public opinion — a law which we could do with adopting ourselves, in fact. In the behemoth that is Brazil, a popular struggle against the PT Worker’s Party government is back with a vengeance to demand that public sentiments are heard and their priorities acknowledged. In Chile, together with the comeback of Michelle Bachelet, there was the entry into parliament of determined young leaders such as the communist Camila Vallejo. In Uruguay, the current president is opposing the caste system there.
There are few true exceptions to this season of great popular progress. Among these countries, and together with Mexico — too far from God and too close to the U.S. to be a normal country, dominated by fierce families of drug traffickers — is little old Honduras. Honduras is the only, sorry country where maneuvers in Washington have actually succeeded in removing a president who had been elected and chosen by the people, as Manuel Zelaya had been. Thus in Honduras we see what the whole of Latin America risks becoming if servitude to the U.S. should continue. Marco Consolo recently sketched the scene:
“In 2012, Honduras had the miserable record of being the country with the highest homicide rate in the world — 86 per 100,000 inhabitants. Eighty percent of these go unpunished and only 20 percent are investigated. From the coup d’état to now, we’re talking about thousands of murders, many of which are political homicides that have been disguised as common criminality.
December 13, 2013
Nowadays, the U.S. acts in a manner inconsistent with Japan, which has dumbfounded the politicians in Japan, who seem confused about what happened.
Why Will the US Not Take Japan as a Sworn Friend?
Sina, China
By Lei Qiao
Translated By Jingwei Qian
3 December 2013
Edited by Kyrstie Lane
China set up the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone, which was aimed primarily at Japan. But it was like a shot of adrenaline for Japan when the U.S. B-52 bombers entered the new Chinese Air Defense Identification Zone. However, Japan was dumbfounded when the White House began to urge American airlines to give China their flight plans. Japan was completely confused about what tricks the United States, her big brother, was playing. There is no doubt that the U.S. allies itself with Japan in an effort to contain China, but never will the U.S. consider Japan as a sworn friend, or take Japan into her confidence.
The U.S. has quite a few allies. At first, they became friends for ideological reasons and strategic interests. Actually, neither the number of allies nor their convergence or divergence matters much to the United States. Therefore, it is not difficult to become an ally of the U.S., but it is never easy to be taken as sworn friends, who believe “blood is thicker than water.”
The U.S. and European Union members are nominal allies, but the U.S. still monitored the German chancellor’s phone. Distrust is the reason behind this. The same is true for the relationship between the U.S. and Japan. Actually, the U.S. distrusts Japan, though Japan could be savage and unreasonable in front of China. The U.S. believes that Japan was a vanquished country, defeated primarily by the United States. The U.S. pushed forward American-style reforms in Japan after the war to avoid instability in Asia due to the collapse of Japan. Despite the economic takeoff, Japan never outwitted her big brother. Likewise, the U.S. has always considered Japan to be like a little brother. Japan is allowed to behave in a spoiled manner, but under no circumstances can she be out of control. The U.S. needs the assistance of Japan for the “Pivot to Asia” strategy, and Japan is emboldened by the support of the United States. However confident Japan feels in herself, she has to take cues from her big brother before she acts. Nowadays, the U.S. acts in a manner inconsistent with Japan, which has dumbfounded the politicians in Japan, who seem confused about what happened.
After all, Japan will not be a sworn friend of the U.S., and the U.S. will not take Japan into her confidence. What are the reasons? Let us learn about how the U.S. defines “sworn friends.” The U.S. classifies nations into several types according to international relations. First, the opposing countries, like North Korea, Iran, etc. Second, neither enemies nor friends, like China, Russia, etc. Third, the countries with common strategic interests, also known as allies, such as Germany, France, etc. Fourth, the countries that are closely related and mutually dependent. These countries can be the sworn friends of the United States.
Why Will the US Not Take Japan as a Sworn Friend?
http://watchingamerica.com/News/227593/why-will-the-us-not-take-japan-as-a-sworn-friend/Nowadays, the U.S. acts in a manner inconsistent with Japan, which has dumbfounded the politicians in Japan, who seem confused about what happened.
Why Will the US Not Take Japan as a Sworn Friend?
Sina, China
By Lei Qiao
Translated By Jingwei Qian
3 December 2013
Edited by Kyrstie Lane
China set up the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone, which was aimed primarily at Japan. But it was like a shot of adrenaline for Japan when the U.S. B-52 bombers entered the new Chinese Air Defense Identification Zone. However, Japan was dumbfounded when the White House began to urge American airlines to give China their flight plans. Japan was completely confused about what tricks the United States, her big brother, was playing. There is no doubt that the U.S. allies itself with Japan in an effort to contain China, but never will the U.S. consider Japan as a sworn friend, or take Japan into her confidence.
The U.S. has quite a few allies. At first, they became friends for ideological reasons and strategic interests. Actually, neither the number of allies nor their convergence or divergence matters much to the United States. Therefore, it is not difficult to become an ally of the U.S., but it is never easy to be taken as sworn friends, who believe “blood is thicker than water.”
The U.S. and European Union members are nominal allies, but the U.S. still monitored the German chancellor’s phone. Distrust is the reason behind this. The same is true for the relationship between the U.S. and Japan. Actually, the U.S. distrusts Japan, though Japan could be savage and unreasonable in front of China. The U.S. believes that Japan was a vanquished country, defeated primarily by the United States. The U.S. pushed forward American-style reforms in Japan after the war to avoid instability in Asia due to the collapse of Japan. Despite the economic takeoff, Japan never outwitted her big brother. Likewise, the U.S. has always considered Japan to be like a little brother. Japan is allowed to behave in a spoiled manner, but under no circumstances can she be out of control. The U.S. needs the assistance of Japan for the “Pivot to Asia” strategy, and Japan is emboldened by the support of the United States. However confident Japan feels in herself, she has to take cues from her big brother before she acts. Nowadays, the U.S. acts in a manner inconsistent with Japan, which has dumbfounded the politicians in Japan, who seem confused about what happened.
After all, Japan will not be a sworn friend of the U.S., and the U.S. will not take Japan into her confidence. What are the reasons? Let us learn about how the U.S. defines “sworn friends.” The U.S. classifies nations into several types according to international relations. First, the opposing countries, like North Korea, Iran, etc. Second, neither enemies nor friends, like China, Russia, etc. Third, the countries with common strategic interests, also known as allies, such as Germany, France, etc. Fourth, the countries that are closely related and mutually dependent. These countries can be the sworn friends of the United States.
December 13, 2013
China steals a march on Russian arms
By Loro Horta
Dec 13, '13
In March 2013, Russian and Chinese media reported that Beijing was acquiring significant quantities of advanced military equipment from Russia. Among the multi-billion dollar systems to be bought by the Chinese military are six Lada-class attack submarines and 35 SU-35 fighter jets.
These acquisitions are significant because they are sophisticated systems and it has been more than a decade since China purchased any significant weapon systems from Moscow.
After making substantial purchases from Russia from the mid-1990s to the early-2000s, China began to reverse engineer weapons such as the SU-27 multi-role fighter, the NORINCO T-90 tank, and several components of its most advanced conventionally powered submarines. Occasionally, China legally purchased licensing rights to Russian systems. Achieving self-reliance in military technology has long been a major priority of China s defense policy.
From the late 1990s China invested significant resources to develop an indigenous submarine program. Consequently, the Chinese Navy (PLAN) has launched several types of submarines, including diesel- and nuclear-powered attack submarines and nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines. But while China's submarine program has made progress, the PLAN seems dissatisfied with the quality of the indigenous platforms, which has forced the turn back to Russia.
China steals a march on Russian arms
http://atimes.com/atimes/China/CHIN-02-131213.htmlChina steals a march on Russian arms
By Loro Horta
Dec 13, '13
In March 2013, Russian and Chinese media reported that Beijing was acquiring significant quantities of advanced military equipment from Russia. Among the multi-billion dollar systems to be bought by the Chinese military are six Lada-class attack submarines and 35 SU-35 fighter jets.
These acquisitions are significant because they are sophisticated systems and it has been more than a decade since China purchased any significant weapon systems from Moscow.
After making substantial purchases from Russia from the mid-1990s to the early-2000s, China began to reverse engineer weapons such as the SU-27 multi-role fighter, the NORINCO T-90 tank, and several components of its most advanced conventionally powered submarines. Occasionally, China legally purchased licensing rights to Russian systems. Achieving self-reliance in military technology has long been a major priority of China s defense policy.
From the late 1990s China invested significant resources to develop an indigenous submarine program. Consequently, the Chinese Navy (PLAN) has launched several types of submarines, including diesel- and nuclear-powered attack submarines and nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines. But while China's submarine program has made progress, the PLAN seems dissatisfied with the quality of the indigenous platforms, which has forced the turn back to Russia.
December 13, 2013
Turkey a battleground for Asia arms exports
By Peter Lee
Dec 13, '13
Expanding economies, growing tensions, incremental shifts away from the West and toward multipolar geopolitics, and the re-emergence of Japan as a full-fledged military power are contributing to a 21st century shift toward Asia as a major arms supplier, as illustrated by Turkey's recent interest in Japanese tank technology.
Unexpectedly, the peaceful island nation of Japan has a best-of-breed battle tank.
Apparently, the Type 10 project was announced in 2008, with the stated mission of protecting the Japanese homeland against North Korean invasion because, of course, Japan still operates under its pacifist constitution and any military-related activity is supposed to be strictly for the purposes of domestic defense.
The Type 10 Battle Tank is in the news, at least in China's state-affiliated Global Times, because Japan is in negotiations to supply its tank engine technology to Turkey for Istanbul's next generation "Altay" battle tank under the rubric of "joint development". [1]
Turkey a battleground for Asia arms exports
http://atimes.com/atimes/Japan/JAP-01-131213.htmlTurkey a battleground for Asia arms exports
By Peter Lee
Dec 13, '13
Expanding economies, growing tensions, incremental shifts away from the West and toward multipolar geopolitics, and the re-emergence of Japan as a full-fledged military power are contributing to a 21st century shift toward Asia as a major arms supplier, as illustrated by Turkey's recent interest in Japanese tank technology.
Unexpectedly, the peaceful island nation of Japan has a best-of-breed battle tank.
Apparently, the Type 10 project was announced in 2008, with the stated mission of protecting the Japanese homeland against North Korean invasion because, of course, Japan still operates under its pacifist constitution and any military-related activity is supposed to be strictly for the purposes of domestic defense.
The Type 10 Battle Tank is in the news, at least in China's state-affiliated Global Times, because Japan is in negotiations to supply its tank engine technology to Turkey for Istanbul's next generation "Altay" battle tank under the rubric of "joint development". [1]
December 13, 2013
Little Kim does Pulp Fiction
By Pepe Escobar
Dec 13, '13
"Despicable human scum." "Worse than a dog." A "traitor for all ages" who "perpetrated anti-party, counter-revolutionary factional acts in a bid to overthrow the leadership of our party and state and the socialist system." Fate: a swift military tribunal, and a swift execution "in the name of revolution and the people".
So that was the date with destiny for Jang Song-thaek, 67, uncle of North Korea's leader Kim Jong-eun (arguably 30), according to state news agency KCNA. In North Korea, the revolution is definitely not a bulgogi party.
KCNA maintains that Jang - married to Kim Kyong-hui, the very influential sister of the late Dear Leader Kim Jong-il - admitted he wanted to stage a military coup d'etat. The inevitable follow-up is - what else - a purge (at the Central Committee's administrative department). Who said all that Cold War shtick was over?
Jang was, in theory, young Kim's Cardinal Richelieu. And then, out of the blue, he is shown on state TV dragged out of a meeting, publicly humiliated, demonized as a drug addict and womanizer, stripped of all posts and titles (chief of the Party's administrative department, vice chairman of the National Defense Commission), accused of corruption, tried and whacked, as if this was a North Korean Pulp Fiction remake. What gives?
Pepe Escobar: Little Kim does Pulp Fiction
http://atimes.com/atimes/Korea/KOR-02-131213.htmlLittle Kim does Pulp Fiction
By Pepe Escobar
Dec 13, '13
"Despicable human scum." "Worse than a dog." A "traitor for all ages" who "perpetrated anti-party, counter-revolutionary factional acts in a bid to overthrow the leadership of our party and state and the socialist system." Fate: a swift military tribunal, and a swift execution "in the name of revolution and the people".
So that was the date with destiny for Jang Song-thaek, 67, uncle of North Korea's leader Kim Jong-eun (arguably 30), according to state news agency KCNA. In North Korea, the revolution is definitely not a bulgogi party.
KCNA maintains that Jang - married to Kim Kyong-hui, the very influential sister of the late Dear Leader Kim Jong-il - admitted he wanted to stage a military coup d'etat. The inevitable follow-up is - what else - a purge (at the Central Committee's administrative department). Who said all that Cold War shtick was over?
Jang was, in theory, young Kim's Cardinal Richelieu. And then, out of the blue, he is shown on state TV dragged out of a meeting, publicly humiliated, demonized as a drug addict and womanizer, stripped of all posts and titles (chief of the Party's administrative department, vice chairman of the National Defense Commission), accused of corruption, tried and whacked, as if this was a North Korean Pulp Fiction remake. What gives?
December 13, 2013
A Government of the Billionaires, for the Billionaires, by the Billionaires
By csstester | Dec. 13, 2013
(By Bill Moyers)
I met Supreme Court Justice William Brennan in 1987 when I was creating a series for public television called In Search of the Constitution, celebrating the bicentennial of our founding document. By then, he had served on the court longer than any of his colleagues and had written close to 500 majority opinions, many of them addressing fundamental questions of equality, voting rights, school segregation, and — in New York Times v. Sullivan in particular — the defense of a free press.
Those decisions brought a storm of protest from across the country. He claimed that he never took personally the resentment and anger directed at him. He did, however, subsequently reveal that his own mother told him she had always liked his opinions when he was on the New Jersey court, but wondered now that he was on the Supreme Court, “Why can’t you do it the same way?” His answer: “We have to discharge our responsibility to enforce the rights in favor of minorities, whatever the majority reaction may be.”
Although a liberal, he worried about the looming size of government. When he mentioned that modern science might be creating “a Frankenstein,” I asked, “How so?” He looked around his chambers and replied, “The very conversation we’re now having can be overheard. Science has done things that, as I understand it, makes it possible through these drapes and those windows to get something in here that takes down what we’re talking about.”
That was long before the era of cyberspace and the maximum surveillance state that grows topsy-turvy with every administration. How I wish he were here now — and still on the Court!
A Government of the Billionaires, for the Billionaires, by the Billionaires
http://www.juancole.com/2013/12/government-billionaires-for.htmlA Government of the Billionaires, for the Billionaires, by the Billionaires
By csstester | Dec. 13, 2013
(By Bill Moyers)
I met Supreme Court Justice William Brennan in 1987 when I was creating a series for public television called In Search of the Constitution, celebrating the bicentennial of our founding document. By then, he had served on the court longer than any of his colleagues and had written close to 500 majority opinions, many of them addressing fundamental questions of equality, voting rights, school segregation, and — in New York Times v. Sullivan in particular — the defense of a free press.
Those decisions brought a storm of protest from across the country. He claimed that he never took personally the resentment and anger directed at him. He did, however, subsequently reveal that his own mother told him she had always liked his opinions when he was on the New Jersey court, but wondered now that he was on the Supreme Court, “Why can’t you do it the same way?” His answer: “We have to discharge our responsibility to enforce the rights in favor of minorities, whatever the majority reaction may be.”
Although a liberal, he worried about the looming size of government. When he mentioned that modern science might be creating “a Frankenstein,” I asked, “How so?” He looked around his chambers and replied, “The very conversation we’re now having can be overheard. Science has done things that, as I understand it, makes it possible through these drapes and those windows to get something in here that takes down what we’re talking about.”
That was long before the era of cyberspace and the maximum surveillance state that grows topsy-turvy with every administration. How I wish he were here now — and still on the Court!
December 13, 2013
US Drones Kill 15 in Yemen Wedding Convoy, mistaking them for al-Qaeda
By Juan Cole | Dec. 13, 2013
CIA operators of US drones in Yemen mistook a wedding convoy for al-Qaeda on Friday, killing 15 persons and wounding many others. Some 10 were killed immediately and 5 more died from their wounds.
Al-Quds al-`Arabi, a London-based daily, talked to a member of the wedding party, who said that it is impossible that the wedding party contained al-Qaeda operatives.
South Yemen has witnessed an intractable al-Qaeda presence.
US Drones Kill 15 in Yemen Wedding Convoy, mistaking them for al-Qaeda
http://www.juancole.com/2013/12/drones-wedding-mistaking.htmlUS Drones Kill 15 in Yemen Wedding Convoy, mistaking them for al-Qaeda
By Juan Cole | Dec. 13, 2013
CIA operators of US drones in Yemen mistook a wedding convoy for al-Qaeda on Friday, killing 15 persons and wounding many others. Some 10 were killed immediately and 5 more died from their wounds.
Al-Quds al-`Arabi, a London-based daily, talked to a member of the wedding party, who said that it is impossible that the wedding party contained al-Qaeda operatives.
South Yemen has witnessed an intractable al-Qaeda presence.
December 13, 2013
US, UK suspend Aid to Syrian “Moderates” as Fundamentalists Grab Western Supplies
By Juan Cole | Dec. 13, 2013
The United States and the United Kingdom have suspended aid to the Syrian National Council and its Free Syrian Army, headed by Gen. Salim Idriss, after FSA warehouses of arms were raided by the Islamic Front. It also captured a key border crossing with Turkey. The Islamic Front, a coalition of fundamentalist groups, has emerged as much more important than the fading Free Syrian Army. While the Islamic Front excludes the two major al-Qaeda affiliates in northern Syria, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and the Jabhat al-Nusra (The Succor Front), the fact that it was able to grab materiel intended for the coalition the US and UK dub “moderates” has raised alarms that further aid shipments at this time could fall into the hands of extremists.
Wasi al-Zaman, a Qatar-based Syrian site, wrote, according to BBC Monitoring, on Dec. 10:
The collapse of the Syrian National Council is awkward for the negotiations scheduled for Jan. 22 with the ruling Baath regime, since the SNC was supposed to represent the rebel side. Most of the guerrillas have by now withdrawn from it.
US, UK suspend Aid to Syrian “Moderates” as Fundamentalists Grab Western Supplies
http://www.juancole.com/2013/12/moderates-fundamentalists-supplies.htmlUS, UK suspend Aid to Syrian “Moderates” as Fundamentalists Grab Western Supplies
By Juan Cole | Dec. 13, 2013
The United States and the United Kingdom have suspended aid to the Syrian National Council and its Free Syrian Army, headed by Gen. Salim Idriss, after FSA warehouses of arms were raided by the Islamic Front. It also captured a key border crossing with Turkey. The Islamic Front, a coalition of fundamentalist groups, has emerged as much more important than the fading Free Syrian Army. While the Islamic Front excludes the two major al-Qaeda affiliates in northern Syria, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and the Jabhat al-Nusra (The Succor Front), the fact that it was able to grab materiel intended for the coalition the US and UK dub “moderates” has raised alarms that further aid shipments at this time could fall into the hands of extremists.
Wasi al-Zaman, a Qatar-based Syrian site, wrote, according to BBC Monitoring, on Dec. 10:
“The Islamic Front takes over management of Bab al-Hawa border crossing with Turkey… A source in the Islamic Front told Zaman al-Wasl that the front asserted full control of the Bab al-Hawa border crossing yesterday [9 December]. The source pointed out that the Islamic Front elements are in charge of managing the border crossing in terms of the entry and departure of passengers and goods. In a statement to Zaman al-Wasl, the source pledged to improve the security situation and services at the border crossing over the next period of time…”
The collapse of the Syrian National Council is awkward for the negotiations scheduled for Jan. 22 with the ruling Baath regime, since the SNC was supposed to represent the rebel side. Most of the guerrillas have by now withdrawn from it.
December 13, 2013
New Iran sanctions that threatened negotiations stall on Senate floor
By Agence France-Presse
Thursday, December 12, 2013 12:58 EST
Two top US senators agreed with the White House Thursday that Washington should not introduce new sanctions against Iran, warning they could “rupture” international unity against Tehran’s nuclear program.
The comments by the top Democrat and Republican on the Senate Banking Committee virtually assured that no new sanctions legislation would pass Congress before the year-end break, although lawmakers could controversially introduce a new sanctions bill within the next week.
Senate Banking Committee chairman Tim Johnson and the committee’s top Republican Michael Crapo appeared to support the current diplomatic pause sought by President Barack Obama to allow an interim agreement with Iran that halts its nuclear program to take hold.
“Let me be clear. I support strong sanctions, and authored many of the US sanctions currently in place,” said Johnson, who has been in the spotlight over whether he would introduce a new sanctions regime this year, as several senators have sought.
New Iran sanctions that threatened negotiations stall on Senate floor
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/12/new-iran-sanctions-that-threatened-negotiations-stall-on-senate-floor/New Iran sanctions that threatened negotiations stall on Senate floor
By Agence France-Presse
Thursday, December 12, 2013 12:58 EST
Two top US senators agreed with the White House Thursday that Washington should not introduce new sanctions against Iran, warning they could “rupture” international unity against Tehran’s nuclear program.
The comments by the top Democrat and Republican on the Senate Banking Committee virtually assured that no new sanctions legislation would pass Congress before the year-end break, although lawmakers could controversially introduce a new sanctions bill within the next week.
Senate Banking Committee chairman Tim Johnson and the committee’s top Republican Michael Crapo appeared to support the current diplomatic pause sought by President Barack Obama to allow an interim agreement with Iran that halts its nuclear program to take hold.
“Let me be clear. I support strong sanctions, and authored many of the US sanctions currently in place,” said Johnson, who has been in the spotlight over whether he would introduce a new sanctions regime this year, as several senators have sought.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Mar 16, 2005, 10:12 AMNumber of posts: 60,364