Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances... Rantburg

Government
Who is Dina Habib, the Egyptian Trump appointed as his adviser
2017-01-14
[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] US president-elect Donald Trump
...New York real estate developer, described by Dems as illiterate, racist, misogynistic, and what ever other unpleasant descriptions they can think of, elected by the rest of us as 45th President of the United States...
named Dina Habib to serve as assistant to the president and senior counselor for economic initiatives.

Habib, who was born in 1973 in Cairo, Egypt, before her parents emigrated to the States, worked with the administration of the former president, George Bush, overseeing charities initiatives, prior joining Goldman Sachs as a managing director.

She Joined the State Department as an assistant for Cultural and Educational Affairs to the then Secretary of Department, Condoleeza Rice.

Habib as a president of the Goldman Sachs Foundation, has overseen one of the bank largest initiatives including the "10,000 Women" program, which helps female entrepreneurs around the world.

One of the success stories of the initiative is the case of Eudiji Mijboub, a Nigerian woman who was helped to launch her catering business with just $8 in seed capital in 2007, to become now one of the best restaurants in Lagos.

Later, Habib partnered with the World Bank to give 100,000 female-owned small and medium-sized business around the world access to some $600 million in capital
Ms Habib Powell's Wikipedia page. CNN describes her as, among other things, a graduate of the Ursaline Academy in Dallas -- an expensive Catholic college prep high school -- and a beautiful friend of Ivanka Trump.
Link


-Lurid Crime Tales-
Colin Powell Sez HRC 'People Have Been Trying to Pin' Email Scandal on Him
2016-08-22
[People Magazine] On Friday, the New York Times reported that Clinton told FBI officials former Secretary of State Colin Powell had advised her to use a personal email account while she held the Secretary of State office herself.

"Her people have been trying to pin it on me," Powell, 79, told PEOPLE Saturday night at the Apollo in the Hamptons 2016 Night of Legends fête in East Hampton, New York.

"The truth is, she was using [the private email server] for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did," Powell added.

Why does the former diplomat believe this to be the case?

"Why do you think?" he said. "It doesn't bother me. But it's okay; I'm free."

The email scandal has dogged presidential hopeful Clinton for more than a year. But federal officials decided not to pursue criminal charges after a three-and-a-half-hour interview, which was when the Democratic nominee disclosed her alleged conversation with Powell.

The reported conversation was first brought to light in journalist Joe Conason's upcoming Bill Clinton biography, Man of the World: The Further Endeavors of Bill Clinton, in which the writer details a dinner party held by Clinton and attended by Powell, Madeleine Albright, Henry Kissinger and Condoleeza Rice.

"Toward the end of the evening, over dessert, Albright asked all of the former secretaries to offer one salient bit of counsel to the nation's next top diplomat," Conason wrote. "Powell told her to use her own email, as he had done, except for classified communications, which he had sent and received via a State Department computer ... [Powell] confirmed a decision she had made months earlier ‐ to keep her personal account and use it for most messages."

Powell's office later released a statement to NBC News, saying he "has no recollection of the dinner conversation." However, "He did write former Secretary Clinton an email memo describing his use of his personal AOL email account for unclassified messages and how it vastly improved communications within the State Department."
Link


-Land of the Free
I’m A Black Texas Female College Professor. Should I Get a Gun?
2016-05-29
When I return to the University of North Texas for the fall semester, I’ll have no way of knowing who is carrying a firearm. As of August 1, students, faculty, and staff with concealed weapon permits may carry guns on public university campuses, under a law approved last year.

I’m a black female professor working in a Texas town with a prominent Confederate memorial.
Howdy. I'm a white male professor working in Chicago with a prominent BLM movement. Nice to meet you.
All the Confederates are dead now. They won't hurt you.
I teach journalism courses that spark debate about race, gender, and nationality. I have serious reservations about campus carry.
If you're so worried about it, get a gun.
Or don't. It's a choice, not a requirement.
Proponents of the new law claim that if more people are armed at institutions of higher learning, we will all be safer. Days after he signed the bill, Governor Greg Abbott declared that would-be shooters in Texas would now understand that “somebody is going to be watching them and have the ability to do something about it” if they open fire on a college campus.
Makes sense to me.
But I don’t feel safer. The idea of working in an environment where anyone may have a gun makes me feel perpetually under threat.
Why? If they were carrying knives, clubs, brass knuckles or flamethrowers would you feel less threatened? If they weren’t carrying weapons at all but had huge ham hands and hairy knuckles, would you feel less threatened?
I’m afraid of accidents, mostly, but also of misplaced anger and emotional distress.
But the gun carriers aren't progressives, so misplaced anger and emotional distress are a lot less likely...
I’m afraid that situations that occur every day on college campuses, like a classroom debate or an office visit about grades, will escalate into deadly shooting.
They could do that without a student with a concealed gun. The point is that a shooter with mayhem on his mind can be stopped much more quickly by another armed individual. Or does that make too much sense?
Classroom debates and office visits occur every day as you say, perfesser. Very, very, very few of these provoke violence. Why would that change now?
My mother wants me to quit. Friends send me job ads in other states. A few high-profile academics — including a University of Texas dean and a professor emeritus — have already made a public show of leaving.
They were attention whores. Do you wish to be an attention whore?
She wrote this. The answer is obvious.
She's making a fine show of pearl-clutching...
But the job market makes it hard for me to consider leaving my first tenure-track position. Even now, while guns are still technically banned from campus, they often show up in campus crime reports. It would be naive to think those incidents won’t increase when more permit holders can legally bring their guns to campus.
It would be naive, but for the fact that experience shows armed citizens are a factor in preventing shotings.
To be absolutely clear: I am not anti-gun.
No, no, certainly not!
I have never touched a firearm, though I’ve long been interested in obtaining a license to own and carry one. I live alone, and I’m often on the road. Having a tool that would allow me an extra measure of protection is attractive. I’ve also considered carrying a gun as matter of liberation — the kind preached by black militants like Malcolm X and Fred Hampton, who advocated for gun ownership as a means of protecting black bodies like mine from all types of threats.
You should so do that.
Harriet Tubman was also armed. Good example...
Not to mention Martin Luther King, Jr. and Condoleeza Rice's father. But notice which Black exemplars the perfessor chose for their shock value.
But I’m unsettled by the notion of entire university communities being motivated by fear to take up arms.
It's not fear that motivates them, nor hatred. When you understand that you'll get why they carry.
I also wonder how people will react to black students, staff, and faculty who choose to arm themselves.
Most likely the black faculty and students will be invited to the gun range for socials. It happens.
It’s clear not everyone is so keen on black folks using guns for self defense. I’m mindful of Marissa Alexander, a black woman who fired a warning shot in her own garage to ward off an attack from her abusive ex-husband. That shot – which injured no one – earned her a 20-year jail sentence in Florida, a state that allows people to “stand their ground” when they cannot escape imminent threat.
Not everyone will be armed. Those who do decide to "take up arms" will be forced to consider the notion that someone on the campus is willing and able to return fire. That has to help.

As for the warning shot: the law is clear. You can fire if you are under immediate threat, or if you are under fire. Warning shots are not regarded as a proper response to a physical threat.

The Marissa Alexander case was very odd, indeed, compounded by mandatory sentencing. But at any rate, she was released to house arrest after only three years in a plea deal, with two more years of semi-house arrest. (Wikipedia has the details here.) Our perfessor has not been keeping up.
The lesson I took from her case? Black women do not enjoy the same privilege of self defense as others.
Dumb conclusion.
Indeed, incorrect. If you're going to carry you have to know and follow the law. Prosecutors and police are pretty particular about that.
While I remain ambivalent about guns, I fear that gun violence on campus isn’t a matter of what if. It’s a matter of when.

Earlier this semester, I thought that day had come.

I’d stepped out of my office for a moment, and when I returned, a student I’d never seen before was perched in one of my chairs. She was a waif with lavender hair and headphones shaped like cat’s ears looped around her neck.
Must have been a Rethuglican right? It's the lavender hair, gives us away every time...
“Dr. Clark?” she said.

Her eyes struck me immediately. I can’t recall their color,
Lavender?
but I remember the jolt of panic I felt when I noticed that her pupils were huge. Dilated. At 8 in the morning.

“I’ve read about your work, and I wanted to ask you some questions,” she said.

She wanted to talk about “what the black community wants,” and the protests linked to Black Lives Matter.

I felt the familiar heart palpitations I’d had during my days as a newspaper columnist, when readers from God-knows-where would call and offer their critiques sweetly enough, only to devolve into screaming and swearing, threatening to stop me from writing about all that “black shit.”
Colleges today are wall to wall psychopaths. Guns are a potentially effective way of dealing with them, or failing that, putting them away.
Any time a stranger — from any background — seeks to engage me about my positions of black existence, I am on guard and prepared to defend myself.

I invited her to sit down.

She was hard to follow. At one point she asked me about racial inequalities then offered her thoughts before I could answer her question.

I began to worry that this young, erratic woman might become violent,
Why? How was she different than half two-thirds four-fifths almost any other Oberlin student?
and I scanned the room to see what I could grab to defend myself. A picture frame? My computer monitor? Then I felt silly. I was twice her size, but fear of what could happen kept me on edge. As I sat, cornered in my own office, I realized that I’d never been so glad to be unarmed. If I were, I’d have had one hand on my gun.

When she finally left, I felt relief, then a flood of guilt. Had I been carrying a weapon, and had she made too sudden a move, what would have happened? I am still unsure of her motivation for seeking me out, but it seems likely she was simply a confused young woman, under the influence of drugs. If I’d had a gun, I might have overreacted that day, brandishing it out of a heightened sense of fear. I might have caused irreparable harm, even if I never fired a shot.

And that’s what frightens me most.
Well no. What frightens you the most is that you still don't have a grip on your own emotions. Carrying a firearm won't help that. But the proper training to carry, followed by some range time, followed by some quiet discussions with a gruff but kindly former Marine at the range, followed by some introspection, will give you a certain, quiet confidence that will carry you when you don't have a weapon handy, and will teach you on the rare, rare moment that it is necessary to draw a weapon.
Next time lock the office door when you leave.
Link


Fifth Column
Obama's AfPak envoy may embrace Iran
2013-05-07

Warning - Asia Times so don't click link unless you have a totally secure browser.
Kerry made this clear while announcing the appointment. He said, "He [Dobbins] has deep and longstanding relationships in the region ... Jim will continue building on diplomatic efforts to bring the conflict to a peaceful conclusion, actively engaging with states in the region and the international community."

Interestingly, Kerry left it vague as to the regional states where Dobbins would have "deep and longstanding relationships". This is where Dobbins' 2007 congressional testimony becomes important; in it, he narrated at some length how closely he worked with the Iranian diplomats to bring about the difficult transition in 2001 and more important, how obliging and keen Tehran was in working with the US.

To quote Dobbins, "America's rapid success in toppling the Taliban and replacing it with a broadly based, moderate successor ... depended heavily upon the support American military and diplomatic efforts received from all the neighboring states, notably Iran."

Dobbins recounted specific instances when the Iranians helped out in Bonn, "without which the Karzai government might never have been formed". But soon afterward the George W Bush administration opted to include Iran in the "axis of evil" instead of building up on the critical mass that formed in Bonn.

In a stunning disclosure, Dobbins said that nonetheless, two months after president George W Bush trotted out the thesis of the "axis of evil", the Iranians approached Dobbins again on the sidelines of an international conference at Geneva with yet another proposal of collaboration.

This time it was about Iran participating in a program to train a new Afghan National Army under American leadership. Dobbins noted:
Iranian participation, under American leadership, in a joint program of this sort would be a breathtaking departure after more than 20 years mutual hostility. It also represented a significant step beyond the quiet diplomatic cooperation we had achieved so far. Clearly, despite having been relegated by President Bush to the 'axis of evil', the Khatami government wanted to deepen its cooperation with Washington, and was prepared to do so in a most overt and public manner.


But, Dobbins recalled that there were no takers in Washington for the Iranian proposal although he approached the then secretary of state, Colin Powell, and national security advisor Condoleeza Rice and was even briefed an inter-agency meeting attended by defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Without doubt, what Dobbins brings into Obama's team is an invaluable insight into where things began going haywire for the US in Afghanistan, by overlooking "the impossibility of holding together disintegrating societies without the cooperation of adjoining states".

Dobbins concluded his testimony with the following advice to the Bush administration: "It's time to speak to Iran, unconditionally, and comprehensively."
Link


Arabia
'Inept' US cannot fix Afghanistan: top Saudi prince
2010-05-16
RIYADH - An "inept" United States cannot fix Afghanistan's problems and should simply focus on "chasing the terrorists" there, former Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki al-Faisal said on Saturday.
For a pissant country that quails in fear of the Medes and Persians, they do a lot of scolding ...
This would be the intelligence chief that didn't realize homegrown terrorists were about to shoot up a compound full of foreign experts and their families a few years ago, without whom his country's economy would stop dead? The princeling might want to develop a bit of eptness of his own before engaging in conduct unbecoming to a high government official.
In a speech to a Riyadh audience which included numerous diplomats, Turki said the US-led NATO troop presence in Afghanistan has irrevocably alienated the Afghan people and has no hope of rebuilding the country.

"What Afghanistan needs now is a shift from nation-building to effectively countering terrorists," Turki said at the Arab News one-day media conference. US President Barack Obama "should not be misdirected into believing that he can fix Afghanistan's ills by military means."

"Hunt down the terrorists on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border, arrest them or kill them, and get out, and let the Afghan people deal with their problems. As long as GI boots remain on Afghan soil, they remain targets of resistance for the Afghan people and ideological mercenaries."
Wasn't it your government, O noble sir, that demanded the presence of those self-same American troops on your soil as janissaries to protect you against Saddam Hussein's Iraq? But that was Al Qaeda's primary complaint -- the presence of infidels on the holy soil of Arabia -- so perhaps you think you've learnt something from the experience.
I don't recall them ever saying 'thank you' for that, but perhaps that's because there's no such phrase in Arabic ...
Turki, who has long served a central role in Saudi-Afghan relations, scolded Washington's handling of relations with Kabul. "The inept way in which this administration has dealt with President (Hamid) Karzai beggars disbelief and amazement."
He's got a point there ...
"Both sides are now filled with resentment and a sour taste in their mouths," he said. "How can they both get out of that situation? I don't know."

The chairman of the King Faisal Center For Research and Islamic Studies, Turki has no official position but is believed to often reflect high level thinking in the Saudi government. He is the brother of Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, and analysts speculate he could become foreign minister when Saud retires.

Turki said Arab states have given Washington four months to show progress in US-guided Palestinian-Israeli peace talks. "The Arab world has given (US President Barack) Obama until September to get things done," said Turki.
Well done, President Obama. You've definitely changed our relationships with America's allies and enemies. How pleased you must be with yourself right now!
The suckers who voted for him never did understand the fine definition of 'change' ...
"It is not enough to talk the talk. He has to walk the walk," he said. "If he does not succeed... then I ask President Obama to do the morally decent gesture and recognise the Palestinian state that he so ardently wishes to exist.
Yes. Yes, he does. He learnt that wish from his dear friends in Chicago, Professor Khalidi and Reverend Wright.
"He can then pack up and leave us in peace and let the Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese negotiate directly with the Israelis. No more platitudes and good wishes and visions, please."
We can imagine those negotiations, and how the Saoodis would beg us to come back when the 'negotiations' ended with the Joooz occupying Damascus ...
Prince Turki also faulted the US and European approach in trying to halt Iran's alleged efforts to build a nuclear weapon,
A palpable point...
and he blasted Clinton for undermining efforts to create a Middle East nuclear-free zone.

"The discussions on Iran's nuclear ambitions started off on the wrong foot. The carrot and stick approach does not work," he said.
I agree. More stick, please ...
For one, he said, the US and Europe have had double-standards in dealing with Iran on the one hand, and other nuclear countries on the other.

"You cannot ask Iran to play on one level while you allow Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea to play on other levels."
We'd be happy to defang the Norks ...
Turki said a successful strategy toward Iran requires even-handedness, a "universal nuclear security umbrella" for the countries in the area,
He scolds us and then wants us to protect him ...
and "a good military option" against any regional country which does not cooperate in removing the threat of nuclear weapons in the region.
That's aimed at Israel ...
He said Clinton had undermined efforts to move toward a regional nuclear free zone, after the UN Security Council's five permanent members recently expressed support for the idea.

"Alas, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton then voided the issue of its value by stating that the conditions do not yet exist for establishing the zone," he said. "Why, then, did she join the other members of the P5 in issuing their statement?"

Turki said he hoped Obama "will find the way to correct his secretary of state's nullification of making our area free of weapons of mass destruction."
Except for the Muslim-owned ones ...
They never publicly said such things about Condoleeza Rice, when she was Secretary of State.
Link


India-Pakistan
Karzai to meet UN Commission probing Benazir murder
2010-04-14
[Dawn] On the request of President Asif Ali Zardari, Afghan President Hamid Karzai has shown willingness to meet the UN Commission probing the assassination of Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.
Why would they interview President Karzai? Wasn't the assassination of former PM Bhutto an internal Pakistani affair?
Karzai has agreed to meet the commission on any day before April 25 in Kabul.

Pakistan Permanent Representative in New York, Ambassador Hussain Haroon has been advised by the Foreign office to convey the willingness of the Afghan president to the Chairman of the Commission.

Diplomatic sources informed that President Zardari has written a letter to former US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice requesting her to meet the Commission for providing a perspective on the back ground and context of the assassination.
That would certainly prove to be an interesting meeting, should Dr. Rice agree to attend.
Sources told that the president wants the senior officials of Afghanistan, US, UAE and Saudi Arabia to cooperate with the UN Commission in preparing its report.

Officials of UAE and Saudi Arabia have already provided their information in this regard.
Link


Home Front: WoT
White House Sets Up Interrogation Unit Directly Under NSC
2009-08-24
President Barack Obama has moved more forcefully than ever to abandon Bush administration interrogation policies, approving creation of a special White House unit for questioning terrorism suspects, as Attorney General Eric Holder weighs whether to reopen and pursue prisoner abuse cases.

A senior administration official told The Associated Press Monday that Obama has approved establishment of the new unit, to be known as the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group, which will be overseen by the Naitonal Security Council. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the program has not yet been officially announced.

A U.S. intelligence official said Monday that the CIA welcomes the change, saying the agency does not want to be in the long-term detention business. The official spoke on grounds of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss it publicly.

Obama campaigned vigorously against President George W. Bush's interrogation policies in his successful run for the presidency. He has said more recently he didn't particularly favor prosecuting Bush administration officials in connection with instances of prisoner abuse. But the issue now before Holder for consideration would have the new administration do precisely that: reopen several such cases with an eye toward possible criminal prosecution.

A government official confirmed to The AP the recommendation of Justice's ethics office on grounds of anonymity, citing the internal legal deliberations and indicating they remain ongoing.

Obama created task forces to study U.S. policy and practices on handling terrorism captives shortly after taking office. Obama has vowed to close the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, military prison by next year, hoping to free those prisoners against whom there is no case, to transfer others to the custody of other countries and to put still others on trial, ending their condition of limbo in the U.S. brig.

While information on the new interrogation unit, known by the acronym HIG, will be made public later Monday, the task force working on questions about Guantanamo and prisoners still held there has not completed its work.

The new group and new directives to rely soley on the Army Field Manual when interrogating prisoners is an attempt by the administration to separate itself from allegation that the Bush administration tortured some prisoners. While the practice of waterboarding - simulated drowning - already has been banned, the directive to stick only to procedures in the field manual means other harsh tactics, such as subjecting prisoners to loud music for long periods and sleep deprivation, are also now a thing of the past.

The administration is announcing the new interrogation unit on the same day that the CIA inspector general was to unveil a report on Bush administration handling of suspects. Details were expected to show that highly questionable tactics were used.

Subjecting prisoner abuse cases to a new review and possible prosecution could expose CIA employees and agency contractors to criminal prosecution for the alleged mistreatment of terror suspects in the years after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Holder reportedly reacted with disgust when he first read accounts of prisoner abuse earlier this year in a classified version of the IG report.

The Justice report is said to reveal how interrogators conducted mock executions and threatened at least one man with a gun and a power drill. Threatening a prisoner with death violates U.S. anti-torture laws.

A federal judge has ordered the IG report made public Monday, in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

A CIA spokesman, Paul Gimigliano, told the Times that the recommendation to reopen the cases had not been sent to the agency.

The accounts of the White House-supervised interrogation unit and the ethics recommendation to Holder were first reported, respectively, by The Washington Post and The New York Times.

The recommendation by the Office of Professional Responsibility was recently presented to Holder, an official, speaking on grounds of anonymity, told The Associated Press.

The structure of the new unit the White House is creating would depart significantly from such work under the previous administration, when the CIA had the lead and sometimes exclusive role in questioning al-Qaida suspects.
Imagine if this had been done when Condoleeza Rice led the National Security Council?
Link


Fifth Column
Fisk of a NOW blurb
2008-10-16
forwarded to me by a relative, just begging to be fisked. here for your snarky entertainment...
Subject: N.O.W.
To:

FYI, The National Organization for Women has endorsed the Obamba-Biden ticket for just the reasons listed below. They usually do not endorse, but in this case believed it was absolutely necessary to take a stand.
Why, after that reckless L.A chapter brass sounded so darned sympathetic when she introduced Gov. Palin, why, they simply couldn't bear the thought of being even remotely associated with the idea that NOW might have actually lent its official stamp of approval! Sort of like the Democrats WRT Bush for the past 8 years...
If you agree, please pass this on.
And if you don't agree, pass this version on.
Subject: Women and Sarah Palin

Friends,

We are writing to you because of the fury
Because Hell hath no fury like a voting bloc scorned
and dread
Doom! DOOM!!!
we have felt since the announcement of Sarah Palin as the Vice-Presidential candidate for the Republican Party. We believe that this terrible decision has surpassed mere partisanship, and that it is a dangerous farce on the part of a pandering and rudderless Presidential candidate that has a real possibility of becoming fact.

Perhaps like us, as American women, you share the fear of what Ms. Palin and her professed beliefs and proven record could lead to for ourselves and for our present or future daughters.
Hmm... this'll be news to your opponents, ladies -- a lot of them they don't believe you intend for yourselves or anyone else on this planet to ever bear children again. Maybe you should spend more energy making that more widely known, instead of working yourselves into a bout of the vapors over Her Guvnership.
To date, she is against sex education, birth control, the pro-choice platform, environmental protection,
And what was John McCain's interview with the Nature Conservancy? Or was that the NWF? Excuse me while I fact-check my own arse -- but still, what was that -- chopped liver?
alternative energy development,
oil shale, tar sands... that's not alternative energy development? Somebody's invoking the Humpty Dumpty Rule again...
freedom of speech,
I must have missed that one -- when exactly did she come out against freedom of speech?
gun control,
No, she's very much FOR gun control. Being able to hit your target, that is.
the separation of church and state, and polar bears.

Oh dear Gaia, stop the presses! How could anyone with a HEART even POSSIBLY be against those cute cuddly POLAR BEARS!!
Oh effing please.

To say nothing of her complete lack of real preparation to become the second-(and possibly first)-most-powerful person on the planet.
Repeat that again: if being a mayor and sitting governor isn't qualifying for Veep, how the Eff does You Know Who's thin resume qualify HIM for CIC?
We want to clarify that we are not against Sarah Palin as a woman,
No, she's just a gyno-American who doesn't agree with our stance, ergo, she's not a "woman" in the political sense of the term. Thank you, H. Dumpty.
a mother, or, for that matter, a parent of a pregnant teenager, but solely as a rash, incompetent, and altogether devastating choice for Vice President.
As opposed to, say, Condoleeza Rice? You got a better suggestion in mind?
Ms. Palin's political views are in every way a slap in the face to the accomplishments that our mothers and grandmothers and great-grandmothers so fiercely fought for, and from which we've so demonstrably benefited.
What -- because "18 Million cracks in the glass ceiling" wasn't a big enough hat tip?
First and foremost, Ms. Palin does not represent us. She does not demonstrate or uphold our interests as American women. It is presumed that the inclusion of a woman on the Republican ticket could win over women voters.
Never mind that there is a whole Flyover Country of women whom she DOES represent -- but we won't mention them. Gosh, it's like they don't even count.
We want to disagree, publicly. If you agree that Palin is an irresponsible, even dangerous, choice for VP, please consider participating in this drive. Gentlemen, send this to the women you know and care for. I know it's tough to understand the way this choice is impacting women, but I have never seen so many women so outraged, angry and distraught in my entire life. We'd like our voices heard.
Trust me, ma'am, they are... It's those other gyno-Americans, whose votes ALSO count, if you hadn't noticed? Y'think maybe they might like to be heard too? I thought diversity was a good thing
If you agree, PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY! If you send this to 20 women in the next hour, you could be blessed with a country that takes your concerns seriously.
Assuming that this is your only concern.
Stranger things have happened.
Yeah, this could have been a Rudy / Hillary matchup. And where would you be then?
Link


India-Pakistan
US focused on wrapping up N-deal by Sept
2008-08-27
WASHINGTON - The US says the “principal focus” of its policy right now is how to get its civil nuclear deal with India through the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG) and then present it to the Congress early September. The India deal and not the one with Russia is the current focus of America’s nuclear commerce policy, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice told reporters on her way to Tel Aviv, according to a transcript released by the State Department.

“As you might imagine, our principal focus right now has been on the India civil nuclear deal, working through the NSG - or having worked through the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), now working through the NSG, and still trying to get into a position tomake the appropriate presidential determinations in early September,” she said. “So that’s our focus right now on the civil nuclear side,” Rice said when asked whether developments in Georgia will affect the US-Russia civilian nuclear deal.

The White House too made similar comments Monday about the agreement with India taking precedence over the one with Russia that was submitted to the US legislature last May. “I think, we have another civil nuclear agreement in the queue ahead of that, that we’re really focused on right now, and that’s the India civil nuclear agreement,” White House spokesman Tony Fratto told reporters at in Crawford, Texas, near President George W. Bush’s ranch. “And that’s generating a lot of work and time and energy on our part to get that done,” he said when asked if the administration will still press Congress for the agreement with Russia to go forward, or withdraw it in the wake of Russia’s action in Georgia.

“We were able to work that (the India deal) through the IAEA, and now working with the Nuclear Suppliers Group and trying to get that through the Nuclear Suppliers Group and eventually for presentation to our Congress,” he added. Asked if he anticipated the Russian agreement being completed this year, Fratto said: “I can’t speculate on when or how that would get done.

Like I said, we’re focused on the other civil nuclear agreement (with India) right now.” The comments from Rice and the White House came as Indian Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon wrapped up a day’s hectic diplomacy to save the deal in the face of objections from some nuclear suppliers.

There was no official word from either side on what transpired at Menon’s daylong meetings Monday first with his counterpart, US Undersecretary of State William Burns, and then with President Bush’s acting National Security Adviser James Geoffrey. But the focus of Menon-Burns talks was apparently fine-tuning the language of the exemption that will accommodate concerns of sceptical NSG countries as well as interests of India before it is discussed at the second NSG meeting next month.
Link


Home Front: WoT
Bush to Close Guantanamo?
2008-07-03
Bagram's nice this time of year ...
President Bush will soon decide whether to close Guantanamo Bay as a prison for al-Qaeda suspects, sources tell ABC News. High-level discussions among top advisers have escalated in the past week, with the most senior administration officials in continuous talks about the future of the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay--and how it will be dramatically changed and/or closed in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling that gave detainees there access to federal courts.

Sources have confirmed that President Bush is expected to be briefed on these pressing GTMO issues--and may reach a decision on the future of the naval base as a prison for al Qaeda suspects--before he leaves for the G8 on Saturday. An announcement, however, is not expected before he leaves the country.

High-level administration officials say the Court's decision dramatically changes the legal landscape--and raises questions about whether the government has solid evidence to present to federal judges to justify ongoing detentions. That evidence, much of it classified and obtained by military and CIA personnel on the battlefield, is not the standard kind of proof judges are accustomed to seeing in regular criminal cases here, administration officials say. The documents do not contain the kind of detail—or include sources of that information—that’s typical in criminal cases, sources say.

Late last month for example, a federal appeals court in Washington said the government failed to prove its case with one detainee from China. The administration fears that's a sign of things to come—in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling giving other detainees even broader habeas corpus rights to challenge their detentions in court, sources tell ABC News.
And since most Federal district court judges generally don't have a clue when it comes to understanding national security and the military, and since the USSC didn't exactly provide any specific guidance as to what would be proper, the Bush administration is right to be worried that these mooks will end up released.
Of course, there is generally wide agreement--from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and even Bush himself--that GTMO should eventually be closed. But the Court ruling could well hasten that move, since it undercuts the main reason to keep the detainees there. A key reason for imprisoning the detainees at GTMO in the first place was the belief that they would not have access to the courts, since they were not on U.S. soil.

The recent discussions---which have involved numerous meetings with the most senior advisers to the President--the Principals--are about how to handle the some 260 detainees still imprisoned at GTMO. Should they be brought to the United States, and where, of course, to put them if they are to be imprisoned in this country?

Bush has not decided whether he will announce that GTMO should be closed, sources say. But at the very least, sources say, he will soon announce a host of these legal and policy changes that will force Congress to come up with a solution--including where to imprison those detainees if GTMO does, in fact, shut its doors.
Ice Station Zebra is looking better and better ...
Link


China-Japan-Koreas
S Korean president supports six-party talks on nuke issue
2008-06-29
South Korean President Lee Myung-bak said Saturday that the six-party talks are the most effective framework to resolve the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula and he supports the mechanism. Lee made the remarks during a meeting with visiting U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice during which he expressed support for the six-party talks on the nuclear issue, reported the Yonhap news agency.

Lee reaffirmed Seoul's commitment to close cooperation with Washington in persuading the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) to abandon all of its nuclear programs, Yonhap said.

Rice briefed the president on the development in the denuclearization progress of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). At a press conference after talking with South Korean foreign minister Yu Myung-hwan on Saturday, Rice said she expected the DPRK to live up to the obligations set forth under the multilateral nuclear deal signed last year.
Link


Home Front: WoT
Yesterday's Article on Nat'l Defense University Study bogus
2008-04-20
Via Instapundit:
"The Miami Herald story ("Pentagon Study: War is a 'Debacle' ") distorts the nature of and intent of my personal research project. It was not an NDU study, nor was it a Pentagon study. Indeed, the implication of the Herald story was that this study was mostly about current events. Such is not the case. It was mainly about the period 2002-04. The story also hypes a number of paragraphs, many of which are quoted out of context. The study does not "lay much of the blame" on Secretary Rumsfeld for problems in the conduct of the war, nor does it say that he "bypassed the Joint Chiefs of Staff." It does not single out "Condoleeza Rice and Stephen Hadley" for criticism."

Link



Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More