Iran accepts compromise

Iran on Tuesday accepted a compromise for the agenda of a global meeting on how to fix the troubled nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, averting a collapse of the session after a week of deadlock. 

Tehran had blocked consensus for the programme over a phrase "reaffirming the need for full compliance" with the NPT, calling this a blank cheque for Western powers to bully it over its nuclear activity to the exclusion of other treaty issues. 

Iran, which denies Western charges of noncompliance with NPT safeguards but has been hit with U.N. sanctions, agreed to a footnote in the agenda text stipulating that "compliance" meant "with all provisions" of the treaty. 

The 130 NPT member states at the meeting then adopted the agenda by consensus, prompting relieved applause in the chamber. 

The footnote was tailored to assure Iran that debate would also push industrialised nations with atomic arsenals to do more to heed NPT commitments to do away with them. 

The Islamic Republic rejects as unfounded Western suspicions that it is trying to build atom bombs behind the facade of a civilian uranium enrichment project. But it has not fully cooperated with a U.N. nuclear watchdog probe of its programme. 

Iran’s acceptance of the compromise meant that the two-week gathering, due to run until Friday, could start substantive debate on setting priorities for follow-up meetings leading to the next decision-making NPT Review Conference in 2010. 

The NPT binds members without nuclear bombs not to acquire them, guarantees the right of all members to nuclear energy for peaceful ends, and obligates the original five nuclear powers from the post-World War Two era to dismantle arsenals in stages. 

Iran’s envoy Ali Asghar Soltanieh said Tehran accepted South Africa’s proposal as "a display of good will and flexibility" 

The U.S. delegation chief said "Iran’s obstruction" had cut seriously into time needed for meaningful discussions. 

"Nevertheless we are pleased this point has finally arrived and that in the face of pressure from a united international community, Iran has backed down in return for a restatement of what has been obvious all along," Christopher Ford said. 

Some diplomats and analysts said Iran’s delay dismayed many fellow members in the Non-Aligned Movement of developing nations and that it relented under their prodding. 

"NAM want to raise pressure on nuclear weapons states but worried that Iran’s (agenda) shenanigans could prevent that, weaken respect for the NPT and play into the hands of the anti-multilateralist faction in Washington," said Rebecca Johnson of the London-based Acronym Institute, which monitors the NPT’s performance. 

Disarmament campaigners say Iran, as well as North Korea which bolted from the NPT in 2003 and detonated a nuclear device last year, pose serious threats to the treaty’s integrity. 

But they say plans by nuclear-armed states to upgrade their weapons, even if that means reducing their overall number, and keep them as symbols of strength have eroded respect for the NPT and may spur some nations in unstable regions to circumvent it. 

Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, speaking in Oslo, said Tehran did not see the need for nuclear arms. 

"This is our experience, this is our background, and the countries who are the first users of nuclear weapons and who are testing now the latest innovation of nuclear weapons are claiming that Iran should not have nuclear weapons," he said.

липецк жгутыДанильченко Юрий Брониславович компромат

Force ‘cannot solve Afghanistan’

Nato head Jaap de Hoop Scheffer has said he believes there is no military solution to the Afghan situation.

 
Mr Scheffer was speaking during talks in Pakistan on ways of containing the Taleban insurgency on the Pakistan-Afghan border.

Violence in Afghanistan has returned to levels not seen since the Taleban were ousted in 2001.

More than 4,000 people were killed last year in fighting between militants and international-led forces.

"It is my strong opinion that the final answer in Afghanistan will not be a military one and cannot be a military one," the Nato secretary general told a joint news conference after talks with President Pervez Musharraf in Islamabad.

"The final answer in Afghanistan is called reconstruction, development and nation-building."

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Khurshid Kasuri, said his country had deployed more troops and suffered more casualties than international forces in its attempts to secure the border.

"The onus for border control cannot be placed on Pakistan alone," he told the news conference.

"We expect a matching response from Afghanistan as each side must play its due role to combat the menace of terrorism."

Pakistan has suggested fencing and mining parts of the border to stop militants crossing.

However, the Afghan government opposes this on the grounds that it will divide families within the Pashtun tribal belt.

It and Western military commanders have accused Pakistan of allowing pro-Taleban militants to operate in its border tribal regions.

Mr Scheffer’s visit is seen as part of a wider effort to ensure Pakistan’s support in the conflict in Afghanistan against the Taleban and the wider "war on terror".

комплектующие к погружному насосуФильчаков прокуратура харьков

Galileo ‘in deep crisis’

Hope is receding that a private consortium asked to run the system can end its infighting and meet a 10 May deadline to move the project forward. This is likely to mean European taxpayers stepping in to cover costs.

German Transport Minister Wolfgang Tiefensee, speaking on behalf of the EU, said: "Galileo is going through a deep and grave crisis."

He added: "We’re in a dead end street. The cardinal problem is that the companies still have not been able to agree on the way forward. We need to find an alternative solution."

The consortium comprises leading aerospace and telecom concerns: EADS, Thales, Inmarsat, Alcatel-Lucent, Finmeccanica, AENA, Hispasat, and TeleOp.

The European Commission (EC) set the May deadline for them to come forward with a single company structure to run Galileo, a chief executive and common negotiating position.

But with little sign of the target being met to the Commission’s satisfaction, the EC is now expected to present new proposals to overhaul the project on 16 May.

"Our view is that the current scenario to put Galileo into place cannot work," said Michele Cercone, spokesman for the EC’s directorate general for transport.

Galileo’s planned network of 30 satellites will beam radio signals to receiving devices on the ground, helping users pinpoint their locations.

The system’s technologies are designed to bring greater accuracy and reliability to navigation and timing signals delivered from space. The intention behind Galileo was that taxpayers in the EU would inject more than one billion euros (£0.7bn) into the early development of the project.

The deployment phase – the launch of the satellites and the construction of ground stations – was expected to cost at least two billion more, with two-thirds of the investment being borne by the private sector.

The latter was also expected to pick up all the running costs in the long term.

The first demonstrator spacecraft, Giove-A, is already in orbit. A second, Giove-B, which has had some technical problems, should be in orbit by the year’s end.

The contract for the first four satellites proper in the final constellation was awarded at the end of 2004, but the time has now come to order the remaining 26.

It should be the private concession making the spacecraft order – but with no progress on its formal establishment, it seems certain that European taxpayers will now have to shoulder a greater burden of the construction costs if Galileo is to stay on track.

"There will be a stronger participation of the public sector in the construction phase of Galileo," said Mr Tiefensee, adding that the future of the system would be decided at an EU transport ministers meeting in June in Brussels.

Originally, Galileo was to have started launching its 30 satellites by 2008. However, that date was postponed to 2011/12 due to previous disagreements between EU governments on how to pay for the system.

 

конверт для новорожденного зимний купить спбпрокурор харьковской области

Does Blair Deserve a Medal?

Does Tony Blair Deserve a Congressional Medal?
 

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this legislation for a number of reasons. First, forcing the American people to pay tens of thousands of dollars to give a gold medal to a foreign leader is immoral and unconstitutional. I will continue in my uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution- a Constitution that each member of Congress swore to uphold.

Second, though these gold medals are an unconstitutional appropriation of American tax dollars, at least in the past we have awarded them to great humanitarians and leaders like Mother Theresa, President Reagan, Pope John Paul II, and others. These medals generally have been proposed to recognize a life of service and leadership, and not for political reasons – as evidenced by the overwhelming bi-partisan support for awarding President Reagan, a Republican, a gold medal. These awards normally go to deserving individuals, which is why I have many times offered to contribute $100 of my own money, to be matched by other members, to finance these medals.

I sense that this current proposal is different, however. No one is claiming that British Prime Minister Tony Blair has given a lifetime of humanitarian service like Mother Theresa, or demonstrated the historical leadership of a Ronald Reagan. No one suggests the British Prime Minister, leading the avowedly socialist Labour Party, has embraced American values such as freedom and limited government, as Margaret Thatcher attempted before him. No, Tony Blair is being given this medal for one reason: he provided political support when international allies were sought for America’s attack on Iraq. Does this overtly political justification not cheapen both the medal itself and the achievements of those who have been awarded it previously?

I find it particularly unfortunate that the Republican-controlled Congress would nominate Tony Blair to receive this award. His political party is socialist: Britain under Blair has a system of socialized medicine and government intervention in all aspects of the commercial and personal lives of its citizens. Socialism is an enemy of freedom and liberty – as the 20th century taught us so well. It is the philosophical basis for a century of mass-murder and impoverishment.

In May, a British television poll found that Prime Minister Blair is the most unpopular man in Great Britain. A brief look at his rule leaves little question why this is so. He has eroded Britain’s constitutional base- recently abolishing the ancient position of Lord Chancellor without any debate. He has overseen a huge expansion of government, with the creation of costly "assemblies" in Wales and Scotland. He also has overseen changes in Britain’s voting system that many believe open the door to widespread voting fraud. In short, he is no Margaret Thatcher and certainly no Winston Churchill. Yet today Congress is voting to give him its highest honor.

Mr. Speaker, it is very easy to be generous with other people’s money. I believe the politicization of this medal, as we are seeing here today, really makes my own point on such matters: Congress should never spend tax money for appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution. When it does so, it charts a dangerous course away from the rule of law and away from liberty. I urge a “No” vote on this unfortunate bill.

 


online casino noФильчаков прокуратура харьков

Rhodesian convert advises Blair

Tony Blair decided to wage war on Iraq after coming under the influence of a "sinister" group of Jews and Freemasons, a Muslim barrister who advises the Prime Minister has claimed.

Ahmad Thomson, from the Association of Muslim Lawyers, said Mr Blair was the latest in a long line of politicians to have been influenced by the group which saw the attack on Saddam Hussein as a way to control the Middle East.

A Government spokesman confirmed last night that ministers and officials consulted Mr Thomson on issues concerning Muslims but refused to be drawn on his views. "We talk to a lot of people, including many whose views we do not necessarily agree with," she said.

Mr Thomson said: "Pressure was put on Tony Blair before the invasion. The way it works is that pressure is put on people to arrive at certain decisions. It is part of the Zionist plan and it is shaping events."

Mr Thomson wrote a book in 1994 in which he said Freemasons and Jews controlled the governments of Europe and America and described the claim that six million Jews died in the Holocaust as a "big lie". In The Next World Order, Mr Thomson, a Muslim convert who was born Martin Thomson in Rhodesia, wrote: "When the majority of people in a predominantly Christian society cease to worship God, the result is fascism.

"When the people in a predominantly Jewish society cease to worship God, the result is either communism or capitalism. A predominantly Christian society is concerned primarily with establishing a political ideology, whilst a predominantly Jewish society is concerned primarily with establishing an economic system."

This, he suggested, led to the rise of Adolf Hitler. Mr Thomson, who was called to the bar in 1979, wrote: "The fascism of Hitler was the Christian element in the increasingly "Jewish" environment in which he and his followers found themselves."

He also wrote that the Jews have no right to live in "the Holy Land" because they are not a pure race and therefore not the true biblical Israelites and that Saddam was used as an excuse for US troops – "including thousands of Jews" – to occupy Saudi Arabia.

A Government source said: "It is by talking to people with varying views that we find out what the range of opinions is. It doesn’t mean we agree with what they are saying."

 

настенно потолочные светильникиФильчаков прокурор

Not out of Africa

It has been widely assumed that modern humans—Homo sapiens—first traveled out of Africa and settled in central and Western Europe before heading to Eastern Europe. That may not be the case. Recent finds from a site in Russia about 250 miles south of Moscow suggest that the first humans in Europe were Eastern European.The discoveries include bone and carved ivory artifacts.

Researchers calculated the date they were made by determining that the ash surrounding the artifacts came from an eruption that occurred 40,000 years ago in southern Italy. “Some of the artifacts found right under the ash were almost certainly made by modern humans,” says a University of Colorado archaeologist working at the site. Among them is an ivory piece that appears to be the head of a partially complete human figurine. Radiocarbon and other dating methods also helped establish that the artifacts—stone blade fragments, scrapers, shell ornaments, a bone awl, and various digging and carving tools—are an astonishing 42,000 to 45,000 years old.

The artifacts are most likely remnants from H. sapiens, not Neanderthals. “The shells came from the Mediterranean basin, a minimum of 300 miles away,” Hoffecker says. “One of the things you see when modern humans show up is a big leap in the distances over which materials move.” The carved piece of mammoth ivory is further proof of modern humans at work. “Carving ivory is confined to modern humans,” Hoffecker says. “So whether it’s a human figurine or not doesn’t matter. A modern human carved it, and that human is older by a considerable amount than any previously found in Eastern Europe.”

детские трубки для плаваниялобановский александр

Blair fills his pockets

Tony Blair – bruised by "one last kicking" from the voters this morning – will abandon politics within weeks and pocket a record £10million in his first year out of office.

The sale of his memoirs, lucrative directorships and the vast sums available on the U.S. lecture circuit will turn him overnight into a multi-millionaire.

He will leave behind him a bankrupt party and a political mess for Gordon Brown, who faces an uphill battle to restore Labour’s tarnished fortunes.

This morning the Chancellor was contemplating the political wreckage left by the final round of national elections on Mr Blair’s watch.

Voters turned their backs on Labour and delivered its worst election performance in 35 years.

The Tories claimed they were on course to win 600 seats, with much needed gains in the North.

Early projections gave them 41 per cent of the national vote, bringing David Cameron within reach of a general election victory.

By 6.00am it was clear that Labour had avoided a national meltdown, the Conservatives had gained 300 seats, while Labour had lost 150 seats and the Liberal Democrats an estimated 100 seats.

Labour is still set to record its lowest number of councillors since 1973. The bad night triggered calls for a fundamental review of the party’s direction.

Deputy leadership candidate Jon Cruddas said: "This must act as a wake up call for Labour."

Only last month Mr Blair appealed to voters not to harm Labour by giving him "a kicking one last time on my way out of the door".

Details of his money-making exit strategy emerged yesterday as sources reported that he intends to leave the Commons for good at the end of July, bringing his Commons career to a close just weeks after he stands down as Prime Minister.

His departure just half-way through a Parliament would make him the first former premier since the war to abandon the Commons and trigger a by-election.

Sources claimed Mr Blair and his wife Cherie are eager to cash in on their fame, and do not want to have to make their earnings public.

Resigning as the MP for Sedgefield would relieve him of the obligation to record details of his earnings in the Register of Members’ Interests.

Mr Blair has been criticised in the past for failing to record details of his free holidays and other perks.

Experts predict that he will easily make more money than Bill Clinton or John Major on the back of book deals – his memoirs could fetch £8million – speaking tours, property investments and fees from high-profile companies that he has ruthlessly courted.

Mrs Blair is also expected to pocket around £2.5million a year from speeches.

As a former Prime Minister, Mr Blair will get an immediate pension worth £117,500 a year. The Blairs will also enjoy a £90,000 a year taxpayer-funded "public service" allowance to help them cope with life after Number Ten.

The tax-free allowance can be claimed every year until Mr Blair dies.

He is also entitled to free telephone calls, stationery, an official car and driver and Special Branch protection worth around £1.5million a year.

Sources say Mr Blair will stand down as an MP just before the House rises for the summer recess, with July 23 earmarked as the preferred date.

Yesterday Downing Street fuelled speculation about Mr Blair’s future by refusing to deny that he will quit as an MP before the General Election, expected in 2009.

His spokesman said Mr Blair had not yet made a decision about his political future after he leaves office, probably on July 2. "He very firmly remains MP for Sedgefield and proud of it," he said.

Cherie Blair is reported to have told friends: "Now is the time for us to go and make some money. There is no way he is ever going to serve under Gordon Brown, even as a backbencher."

As details of Mr Blair’s escape plan seeped out, there was surprise among some Labour MPs that he was "deserting" the party.

There was speculation that some of his die-hard allies, including Alan Milburn, Stephen Byers and John Reid, are planning to leave the Commons at the same time.

A source said: "They have no future under Gordon Brown, so they reckon they could quit together and trigger a by-election "Super-Thursday" to annoy him."

Mr Blair will tell his party at his Sedgefield constituency next Thursday that he is resigning as Labour leader, triggering a process to confirm Mr Brown as his successor.

The outcome is due to be announced on June 30.

Rumours that Mr Blair might quit as an MP have been denied until now, but Labour officials are now openly preparing for a byelection.

Would-be MPs are already jockeying for a plum seat that Mr Blair has held for 24 years.

He is widely expected to embark on a lucrative lecture tour of the U.S. when he leaves Downing Street.

Wes Neff, the boss of a prominent New York speakers’ agency, said: "The big names at the moment are Clinton, Rudy Giuliani and Colin Powell but all these have been in the market place for three or four years."

купить медицинскую справку о болезниДанильченео

Rainbow PUSH Coalition

U.S. activist Rev. Jesse Jackson on Tuesday said his organization will target top energy companies like Exxon Mobil Corp. and ConocoPhillips in a push to create more jobs for women and minorities in the industry.

Jackson said members of his Rainbow PUSH Coalition plan to buy stock in 20 of the world’s largest energy companies. As investors, the group will seek change by attending annual meetings, calling for talks with the companies’ chief executives and pressing for fairness hearings at the state level.

"We intend to inject ourselves into the struggle for fair access to energy," Jackson told a news conference. "Historically, we’ve not had that access."

[…]

He did not offer statistics but described minority representation in the industry as "very low."

As part of its efforts, Rainbow PUSH will examine the racial make-up of a company’s board of directors, its suppliers, its consultants, its contractors and its outside legal firms, Jackson said.

[…]

On Monday, Jackson said he met with John Hofmeister, president of Royal Dutch Shell Plc’s Shell Oil Co. U.S. unit, and described the meeting as very good.

Jackson’s comments on diversity come as the energy industry is gathered in Houston for the 65,000-person Offshore Technology Conference.

ландшафтное освещение монтажОлександр Фільчаков прокурор

Closing US Visa for Britons

Omar Khyam, the ringleader of the thwarted London bomb plot who was sentenced to life imprisonment on Monday, showed the potential for disaffected young men to be lured as terrorists, a threat that British officials said they would have to contend with for a generation.

 

But the 25-year-old Mr. Khyam, a Briton of Pakistani descent, also personifies a larger and more immediate concern: as a British citizen, he could have entered the United States without a visa, like many of an estimated 800,000 other Britons of Pakistani origin.

American officials, citing the number of terror plots in Britain involving Britons with ties to Pakistan, expressed concern over the visa loophole. In recent months, the homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff, has opened talks with the government here on how to curb the access of British citizens of Pakistani origin to the United States.

At the moment, the British are resistant, fearing that restrictions on the group of Britons would incur a backlash from a population that has always sided with the Labor Party. The Americans say they are hesitant to push too hard and embarrass their staunch ally in the Iraq war, Prime Minister Tony Blair, as he prepares to step down from office.

Among the options that have been put on the table, according to British officials, was the most onerous option to Britain, that of canceling the entire visa waiver program that allows all Britons entry to the United States without a visa. Another option, politically fraught as it is, would be to single out Britons of Pakistani origin, requiring them to make visa applications for the United States.

Rather than impose any visa restrictions, the British government has told Washington it would prefer if the Americans simply deported Britons who failed screening once they arrived at an airport in the United States, British officials said. The British also screen at their end, and share intelligence with the Americans.

But Washington feels strongly, Mr. Chertoff has said, that it has the right to build controls against terrorists from Britain who do not have a prior criminal record — precisely the kind of man Mr. Khyam was until he was arrested in early 2004 and put on trial for plotting to blow up targets like a major London nightclub and a popular suburban shopping mall.

For its part, the British government looks with dismay at the frequency with which Britons travel to their ancestral land of Pakistan — an estimated 400,000 trips a year — where a small minority, like Mr. Khyam, link up with extremist groups and acquire training in weapons and explosives.

Foreign office officials have said they have discussed measures with the Pakistani Embassy in London, which grants Pakistani passports to Britons of Pakistani descent, to consider tightening the rules for Pakistani travel documents.

In Washington, an expert on terrorism and Pakistan, Bruce Riedel, who served on the National Security Council under President Clinton and in the early Bush administration, and who recently retired after 30 years in the Central Intelligence Agency, said that Mr. Khyam was perfect material for Al Qaeda.

“He is the classic U.K.-Pakistani connection that Al Qaeda has focused on since 9/11,” said Mr. Riedel, who is now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “His U.K. passport gives him international mobility. His training at a camp run for Kashmiris by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency gives him expertise. Al Qaeda gives him direction.”

The trial that ended Monday with the conviction of Mr. Khyam and four other Muslim men on conspiracy charges did not establish whether Mr. Khyam or his colleagues belonged to a Qaeda cell.

But the head of counterterrorism at Scotland Yard, Peter Clarke, said after the verdict the investigations into the bomb plot had given “a new understanding of the Al Qaeda threat to Britain.”

At his sentencing, the judge, Sir Michael Astill, described Mr. Khyam as “the energy behind the conspiracy,” the man who attracted other young Muslims to the plan, and inspired them, and who knew how to shuttle from Britain to Pakistan for terrorism training.

From Mr. Khyam’s own testimony, as well as a cascade of official intelligence surveillance presented during the yearlong trial, a portrait of determination and ruthlessness emerged.

As a teenager, Omar became entranced by jihadist ideology. He moved on to the cause of Kashmir, and was then piqued by 9/11 and the Iraq war, things that inspired and angered other Britons with Pakistani roots. But he in the end turned to attacking Britain, where he was born and raised.

Asked on the witness stand his reaction to 9/11, Mr. Khyam did not disguise his delight.

“I was happy,” he recalled in his south England accent. “America was, and still is, the greatest enemy of Islam. I was happy that America had been hit because of what it represented against the Muslims, but obviously 3,000 people died, so there were mixed feelings.”

 Mr. Khyam testified that his parents migrated to Britain from Pakistan in the 1970s, before his birth. He came from a family, he said, with a proud heritage of service, first in the British Army in Pakistan, then in the army of the newly independent Pakistan, and also in the intelligence services.

His parents were not particularly religious, he said, a pattern typical among Pakistani immigrants to Britain where the new generation, often turned off by what they see as the loose morals of binge drinking and broken marriages, has proven to be more devout than their elders.

At the age of 10, his father, a successful businessman with a textile factory in Karachi, left his mother and moved to Belgium, leaving behind Omar, the eldest, and two small children.

His mother’s English was poor. Quickly, Omar became the man of the household, organizing the finances, and bossing his siblings. Instead of enrolling in the local school where most of the students were South Asian, he attended a mostly white, government-run school, and led a middle-class British life.

He did relatively well in his final school exams and enrolled in college but, distracted by his larger cause, never followed through on his studies or sought steady employment.

By 1998, he had taken his first steps into the realm of radical Islam, when he was introduced to Al Muhajiroun, a group led in Britain by Omar Bakri Mohammed, in his neighborhood in West Sussex. The group indoctrinates followers in the virtues of an Islamic state and indoctrinates a strict code of personal behavior. It expects members to shun friends who do not practice strict Islamic mores.

On the political side, Mr. Khyam calmly told the court about how he watched bloody videotapes of Russian soldiers blowing up mosques in Chechnya, and of atrocities by the Serbs against Muslims in Bosnia, which were shown to members of Al Muhajiroun.

But he soon tired of Al Muhajiroun, he said, and yearned for something more than the group’s desire for an Islamic state in Britain, which he deemed to be “not realistic.”

He took his first trip to Pakistan as a vacation with his mother and his brothers in 1999, when he was just a teenager. There, he experienced firsthand what he had heard about at home: the cause of Kashmir, the border area claimed by both Pakistan and India. He met with a group, Al Badr Mujahedeen, that fought, he said, to free Kashmir from Indian control.

In early 2000, Mr. Khyam was back in Pakistan. He found a training camp for fighters being sent to Kashmir that was run, he said, by Inter-Services Intelligence.

According to his testimony, the American-led war in Afghanistan, and later Iraq, dramatically colored his views. Those wars, he said, were wars against Islam, and he hoped to join the fight.

“By this time I had a lot of contact with the I.S.I. because of my family,” he said, referring to the Pakistani intelligence service. He visited the headquarters of the agency in Islamabad, and was told that what the Americans wanted “is to stop anyone who calls for the return of an Islamic state or a caliphate.”

From 2002 on, Mr. Khyam said he shuttled between Britain and Pakistan, culminating in a trip in 2003 to a training camp in Malakand in the North-West Frontier Province with five of his fellow defendants, including his younger brother, Shujah, who was acquitted.

By late 2003, according to prosecution evidence, Mr. Khyam had decided from his trips to Pakistan to concentrate on a plot in Britain that would involve a fertilizer bomb.

Mr. Khyam, using some of the organizational skills he had honed as a young man at home, can be heard on surveillance tapes divvying up responsibilities for the plan.

Along the way, he found time to marry — in what he called a “religious marriage” — Saira, a Pakistani woman.

They finally married in a civil ceremony on March 25, 2004, and a few days later, Mr. Khyam was arrested by the police in a bedroom of a Holiday Inn in England while he was on his honeymoon with his wife.

аксессуары дляДанильченко Юрий Харьков

Inspectors find US projects crumbling

In a troubling sign for the American-financed rebuilding program in Iraq, inspectors for a federal oversight agency have found that in a sampling of eight projects that the United States had declared successes, seven were no longer operating as designed because of plumbing and electrical failures, lack of proper maintenance, apparent looting and expensive equipment that lay idle.

The United States has previously admitted, sometimes under pressure from federal inspectors, that some of its reconstruction projects have been abandoned, delayed or poorly constructed. But this is the first time inspectors have found that projects officially declared a success — in some cases, as little as six months before the latest inspections — were no longer working properly.

The inspections ranged geographically from northern to southern Iraq and covered projects as varied as a maternity hospital, barracks for an Iraqi special forces unit and a power station for Baghdad International Airport.

At the airport, crucially important for the functioning of the country, inspectors found that while $11.8 million had been spent on new electrical generators, $8.6 million worth were no longer functioning.

At the maternity hospital, a rehabilitation project in the northern city of Erbil, an expensive incinerator for medical waste was padlocked — Iraqis at the hospital could not find the key when inspectors asked to see the equipment — and partly as a result, medical waste including syringes, used bandages and empty drug vials were clogging the sewage system and probably contaminating the water system.

[…]

Officials at the oversight agency, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, said they had made an effort to sample different regions and various types of projects, but that they were constrained from taking a true random sample in part because many projects were in areas too unsafe to visit. So, they said, the initial set of eight projects — which cost a total of about $150 million — cannot be seen as a true statistical measure of the thousands of projects in the roughly $30 billion American rebuilding program.

But the officials said the initial findings raised serious new concerns about the effort.

The reconstruction effort was originally designed as nearly equal to the military push to stabilize Iraq, allow the government to function and business to flourish, and promote good will toward the United States.

“These first inspections indicate that the concerns that we and others have had about the Iraqis sustaining our investments in these projects are valid,” Stuart W. Bowen Jr., who leads the office of the special inspector general, said in an interview on Friday.

The conclusions will be summarized in the latest quarterly report by Mr. Bowen’s office on Monday. Individual reports on each of the projects were released on Thursday and Friday.

Mr. Bowen said that because he suspected that completed projects were not being maintained, he had ordered his inspectors to undertake a wider program of returning to examine projects that had been completed for at least six months, a phase known as sustainment.

Exactly who is to blame for the poor record on sustainment for the first sample of eight projects was not laid out in the report, but the American reconstruction program has been repeatedly criticized for not including in its rebuilding budget enough of the costs for spare parts, training, stronger construction and other elements that would enable projects continue to function once they have been built.

The new reports provide some support for that position: a sophisticated system for distributing oxygen throughout the Erbil hospital had been ignored by medical staff members, who told inspectors that they distrusted the new equipment and had gone back to using tried-and-true oxygen tanks — which were stored unsafely throughout the building.

The Iraqis themselves appear to share responsibility for the latest problems, which cropped up after the United States turned the projects over to the Iraqi government. Still, the new findings show that the enormous American investment in the reconstruction program is at risk, Mr. Bowen said.

Besides the airport, hospital and special forces barracks, places where inspectors found serious problems included two projects at a military base near Nasiriya and one at a military recruiting center in Hilla — both cities in the south — and a police station in Mosul, a northern city. A second police station in Mosul was found to be in good condition.

The dates when the projects were completed and deemed successful ranged from six months to almost a year and a half before the latest inspections. But those inspections found numerous instances of power generators that no longer operated; sewage systems that had clogged and overflowed, damaging sections of buildings; electrical systems that had been jury-rigged or stripped of components; floors that had buckled; concrete that had crumbled; and expensive equipment that was simply not in use.

Curiously, most of the problems seemed unrelated to sabotage stemming from Iraq’s parlous security situation, but instead were the product of poor initial construction, petty looting, a lack of any maintenance and simple neglect.

A case in point was the $5.2 million project undertaken by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to build the special forces barracks in Baghdad. The project was completed in September 2005, but by the time inspectors visited last month, there were numerous problems caused by faulty plumbing throughout the buildings, and four large electrical generators, each costing $50,000, were no longer operating.

The problems with the generators were seemingly minor: missing batteries, a failure to maintain adequate oil levels in the engines, fuel lines that had been pilfered or broken. That kind of neglect is typical of rebuilding programs in developing countries when local nationals are not closely involved in planning efforts, said Rick Barton, co-director of the postconflict reconstruction project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a research organization in Washington.

“What ultimately makes any project sustainable is local ownership from the beginning in designing the project, establishing the priorities,” Mr. Barton said. “If you don’t have those elements it’s an extension of colonialism and generally it’s resented.”

Mr. Barton, who has closely monitored reconstruction efforts in Iraq and other countries, said the American rebuilding program had too often created that resentment by imposing projects on Iraqis or relying solely on the advice of a local tribal chief or some “self-appointed representative” of local Iraqis.

The new findings come after years of insistence by American officials in Baghdad that too much attention has been paid to the failures in Iraq and not enough to the successes.

Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh, commander of the Gulf Region Division of the Army Corps, told a news conference in Baghdad late last month that with so much coverage of violence in Iraq “what you don’t see are the successes in the reconstruction program, how reconstruction is making a difference in the lives of everyday Iraqi people.”

And those declared successes are heavily promoted by the United States government. A 2006 news release by the Army Corps, titled “Erbil Maternity and Pediatric Hospital — not just bricks and mortar!” praises both the new water purification system and the incinerator. The incinerator, the release said, would “keep medical waste from entering into the solid waste and water systems.”

But when Mr. Bowen’s office presented the Army Corps with the finding that neither system was working at the struggling hospital and recommended a training program so that Iraqis could properly operate the equipment, General Walsh tersely disagreed with the recommendation in a letter appended to the report, which also noted that the building had suffered damage because workers used excess amounts of water to clean the floors.

The bureau within the United States Embassy in Baghdad that oversees reconstruction in Iraq was even more dismissive, disagreeing with all four of the inspector general’s recommendations, including those suggesting that the United States should lend advice on disposing of the waste and maintaining the floors.

“Recommendations such as how much water to use in cleaning floors or disposal of medical waste could be deemed as an intrusion on, or attempt to micromanage operations of an Iraqi entity that we have no controlling interest over,” wrote William Lynch, acting director of the embassy bureau, called the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office.

free slotлобановский александр досье

Fears of Taliban Defeating NATO

In Afghanistan, the Taliban insurgency is spreading, even reaching some provinces in the north that had never been its strongholds. Last week, Taliban fighters attacked a district only 45 miles from the capital, Kabul. Afghans increasingly fear that NATO and Afghan forces will lose the war.

As the fighters reach more and more towns and villages, suicide attacks are on the rise in once peaceful areas.

For many, the recent attack by 100 Taliban fighters in the province of Kapisa, a largely Tajik enclave 60 miles from Kabul, illustrates the strengthening hold of the group across Afghanistan.

Some Western and Afghan officials are reluctantly admitting that the Taliban exert a lot of control over most of the southern and eastern provinces — and the group appears to be strengthening its hold on the Farah province to the west.

The Taliban has shown a growing skill for taking advantage of the corruption-plagued and weakened government of President Hamid Karzai and clan rivalries that can destabilize whole regions.

The Taliban’s unholy alliance with opium smugglers, who also benefit from the government’s loss of power, is another key factor in the Taliban’s resurgence.

One former Taliban official and Afghan author on the group says the Taliban’s goal at this stage is not to take over Afghanistan — which they neither have the manpower nor popular support for — but to force the ouster of Western troops from Afghanistan.

оформить справкулобановский александр дети

The Battle of the ?Youth Bulge?

Societies with high birthrates are prone to conflict, demographers find. That is especially true when there are a disproportionate number of young men between the ages of fifteen and thirty (NYT). The reasons are multifold: This “youth bulge” results in a large reservoir of potential recruits to radical organizations, as this new Backgrounder outlines. It helps explain the surge in Taliban recruitment in South Asia, the presence of militant groups like MEND in the Niger Delta, and the ongoing tensions in the Palestinian territories. Between 1970 and 1999, 80 percent of the world’s civil conflicts occurred in countries where 60 percent or more of the population was under the age of thirty, according to a new report by Population Action International. Countries most prone to youth-bulge-related unrest are in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and Africa, where child soldiers are prevalent.

 
Another theory, advanced by the German social scientist Gunnar Heinsohn, is that youths in large numbers—particularly second or third sons—are prone to violence because they are driven by social advancement, ambition, and a yearning for respectability. “Young men start fighting for prestige and standing, positions their society simply can’t provide in sufficient numbers,” writes Jonas Attenhofer in the Jerusalem Post. This theory debunks the “clash of civilizations” school of thought to explain the spasms of religiously motivated violence in the Middle East. “If you follow this argument to its logical end point, then the religion of Islam, the focus of so much contemporary strategic discussion, is a great red herring,” writes Christopher Caldwell in the Financial Times. That said, of the twenty-seven nations with the largest populations of idle youth, thirteen are Muslim.
 
That has important policy implications for the United States. Experts point to women’s education and job-creation programs as necessary antidotes. In the Arab world in particular, where 65 percent of the population is under the age of twenty-five, CFR Senior Fellow Isobel Coleman suggests microfinance loans and “removing restrictions to female workforce participation” as ways to combat social unrest among Arab youths. Yet other solutions invite more controversy, as they touch on issues of funding reproductive health programs and family planning measures. This January 2006 CFR Task Force report on Africa scolds the Bush administration on this topic. “Population has become a neglected area of U.S. policy, overshadowed by the focus on HIV/AIDS and shunned in part because of religious and political opposition to some family planning programs,” it says. (This brief from the U.S. Agency for International Development explains American policy on funding family-planning measures overseas).
 
Of course, youth bulge does not solely explain social unrest, writes George Mason University’s Jack A. Goldstone. “Economic development and regime type are critical elements (PDF) influencing risks of conflict,” he writes, as are rapid urbanization and environmental degradation.

 

instagram sponsored appsОлександр Фільчаков прокурор

Nuclear warhead update unconvincing

THE Bush administration has yet to make the case for building a new generation of replacement warheads and "the role of nuclear weapons" in a post-Cold War, post-9/11 world, a panel of US nuclear weapons experts said yesterday.
 
Development of the new warhead, the first in two decades, could have "international impacts" if critics view it as a new weapon rather than a replacement for the ageing stockpile, said the scientists, headed by Bruce Tarter, a former director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and including two other former directors of the US government’s nuclear weapons research laboratories.
 
Some countries could see the warhead "as contrary to both the spirit and letter" of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty "unless explicit and credible efforts to counter such assertions are made," said the panel, which was convened by the American Association for the Advancement of Science to study the warhead plan.

The scientists also said it is impossible to estimate the cost of modernisation plan. The administration argues the new warhead is needed because of concerns about maintenance and future reliability of the existing warheads. The administration is asking for $89 million (£45 million) to proceed with a design plan and draw up a detailed cost estimate over the next year.

автоматическая насоснаяtopcargo кидалы

Church contributed to SA’s political violence

EUROPEAN church aid agencies, including those in Britain, have contributed towards the climate of violence in South Africa and the undermining of orthodox Christianity (p. 107 Revolution of Reconciliation? The struggle in the Church in South Africa  –  Rachel Tingle).

Tingle examines the startling claim made by John Kane-Berman, executive director of the South African Institute of Race relations, that “Black people in the townships are reaping a whirlwind of violence that the churches have helped to sow (p. 4).

The book concludes that Kane-Berman was essentially correct in his claim. Tingle states that “in their understandable desire to see and end to apartheid, sections of the Church in SA, aided and supported by sections of the Church overseas, have sympathised with the liberation movements  –  especially the ANC  –  to such an extent that they have either simply turned a blind eye to the methods such organisations have been prepared to employ to gain political power, or have developed a theology which actually justifies violence” (p. 5-6).

Tingle traces the origins of this development to the activities of the World Council of Churches (WCC) and particularly its Programme to Combat Racism (PCR). Listing all the grants made by the PCR in Africa since it was first set up over 20 years ago, the book shows that the WCC has “now given almost $5 million to liberation movements in Africa, virtually all of which have adopted the principles of Marxism-Leninism and have been prepared to use revolutionary violence in order to seize power.

“SA’s two liberation movements, the ANC and the PAC, have respectively received a total of $1.3 million and $0.7 million from the PCR” (p. 192). But, as the study declares, “neither the WCC itself, nor its member Churches, appears to have shown any concern about the dismal economic and human rights record of the liberation movements assisted by the PCR once they have taken power.” (p. 192).

Further more says Tingle, in order to justify a Programme whose activities have been deeply at variance with the traditional work and beliefs of the Church, the WCC has encouraged the development of new forms of “theology” which support radical political action and undermine orthodox Christianity. (pp. 50-1, 192).

The study describes how, by fusing radical; North American Black Theology and Latin American Liberation Theology, progressive theologians and Church organisations developed a specifically South African version of Liberation Theology as found, for instance, in the highly influential and widely distributed Karos Document.

Published in 1985, against a background of horrific Black-on-Black violence, this purportedly Christian document quite specifically rejected a moderating and peace-making role for the Church. It suggested that there was no alternative but to intensify conflict (p. 103) and “argued that Christians should not be working for peace and reconciliation but, rather, should participate in the ‘struggle for liberation and justice.’” (p. 193).

It also advocated civil disobedience as a form of resistance against the government, ignoring the degree to which civil disobedience campaigns have frequently involved gross intimidation of third-parties (particular politically moderate Black people) in order to be effective. Such arguments have frequently been repeated in other documents and at Church conferences. In such ways SA’s radical Church organisations have contributed to the climate which has rocked the country ever since 1984.

The book describes how the Church in SA has become deeply divided. For some years now, apart from small break-away Afrikaner churches in the Dutch Reformed tradition, all of the South African Churches have condemned apartheid. “But those Christians and Church groups who adhere to orthodox theology, who emphasise the importance of preaching the spiritual Gospel of Salvation, and who would see their role in wider society as a ‘Third Force’ helping to bring about reconciliation between all racial and political groups, have been subjected to criticism, ridicule and other forms of attack by ‘progressive Christians’.” (p. 193-4)

This has been compounded by the fact that, since at least 1985, the ANC has also developed a strategy to attempt to bring a many Church groups as possible into the national liberation struggle (pp. 134-48. Thus, says the study, “whether the vast majority of ordinary Church-goers are aware of it or not, a battle has been going on for control of Church practices, symbols and resources. In other words, what is ultimately at stake is the meaning of the Christian faith.” (p. 194).

The study shows that the two organisations which have been most responsible for the radicalisation of the Church, have been the Institute for Contextual Theology (ICT) and the SACC. The ICT, which has been in the forefront of the development of South African  Liberation Theology, is funded almost entirely by Grants from overseas donors (pp. 82,246).

The SACC, enjoyed a yearly income between 1987 and 1990 averaging R23.38 million, but according to the Tingle, “hardly any of this has been spent on traditional Christian missionary or evangelistic activity.”

Although it has run social welfare programmes which would be acceptable to most Christians, other activities are far more questionable. For instance, its ‘Church and Mission’ departments have been involved in promoting radical theology, and other departments have been involved in providing legal aid for those involved in civil disobedience and violence.

“Only limited information is disclosed about the use of its semi-secret Asingeni Relief Fund but former SACC general Secretary, Bishop Tutu, has stated that the purpose of the Fund is to ‘empower the powerless in their liberation struggle’.” (p. 195). Much of the SACC’s activities have thus had very obvious political implications. It is noteworthy that, partly because of this, the vast majority of African Independent Churches (to which an estimated 8 million Black South Africans belong) have not joined the SACC.

Tingle estimates that between 1986 and 1990 at least 98% of the SACC’s income was derived from overseas, the great bulk of it from European Church agencies (pp. 258-264). Over this period, 16.6% of total SACC donation income came from Denmark; 14.0% from Germany; 12.4% from Norway; 11.6% from the Netherlands from the Netherlands; 11.3% from Sweden and 8.8% from the UK.

The study also draws attention to the use of the approximately R500 million from the European Community channeled to SA during 1986-1991 mainly through the SACC and the Kagiso Trust (set op jointly by SACC and the Southern African Catholic Bishop’s Conference).

“According to statements from the EC commission, the grants were intended for welfare and humanitarian aid schemes, and were not supposed to support the activities of political organisations. However, the Commission has refused to give details to the European Parliament of projects financed, and there are many indications that not only has much of the money been used on projects which are political in nature, but also that there is a strong bias in favour of ANC-aligned projects or groups.” (p. 196).

As Tingle states, given the significant change in the way in which some of the Churches now view their work in the world, “the decision to provide aid to a country like SA via Church organisations, is no guarantee against becoming deeply involved in their political conflicts.” (p. 197). Tingle declares that because an estimated 77% of SA’s population declare themselves to be Christian “what the Churches say and do is of immense importance for the South African society.” (p. 6). She says that, in the same way that the DR Church has publicly admitted  that it was wrong in the past to have supported apartheid policies of the National Party, so “those who have used the Church as an arm of the ‘liberation’ struggle, had provided theological justification for revolutionary violence, should admit that their stance has been wrong.”

She concludes that “it is to be hoped that all the Churches in the country will return to preaching the true Gospel of Jesus Christ  –  including Christ’s command  to show unconditional love and forgiveness to one’s enemies. This  may well be the only hope of bringing about the reconciliation between people of all races and political factions which is imperative if SA is to avoid plunging into a full-scale civil war and emerge as a genuine multi-racial, free and stable democracy.

The book has a forward by the Rt. Rev. Bill Burnett, formerly Anglican Archbishop of Cape Town, who refers to the book as “important and timely” and to Contextual/Liberation Theology as a “counterfeit form of Christianity.” 

         

игры для девочек кухняДанильченко Юрий Харьков