by Rupe | Nov 8, 2005 | Mad Musings
The White House announced last week that it would reinstate the Davis-Bacon Act, the law that guarantees that construction workers on federally financed projects be paid at least the minimum prevailing wage. In an executive proclamation shortly after Hurricane Katrina, President Bush had revoked the law’s wage protections for workers in storm-struck parts of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. Let’s hope this reversal is the start of a trend because more wrongs need righting.
The Labor Department has not yet restored the rule – also suspended shortly after Katrina – requiring federal contractors on hurricane-related projects to have a plan for hiring women, minorities, Vietnam veterans and the disabled. And Congress has not yet provided adequate unemployment benefits for some 400,000 people who lost their jobs to Katrina. Even a recent $400 million grant to help Louisiana with unemployment claims is less than half of the projected need for the coming year.
Unemployment pay from the states averages $270 a week nationwide. But in Louisiana, it’s $192, and in Mississippi it’s $169, the lowest in the country. Federal unemployment aid, generally for the self-employed, is no better. It all adds up to peanuts for the unemployed, who, in many cases, have lost everything and who are scattered around the country in places where costs are higher than in their home states.
The federal government must increase both state and federal unemployment benefits to a level that’s closer to the national average, and increase their duration, which is now 26 weeks. Widespread unemployment from Katrina is as much a national disaster as the destruction of infrastructure. The afflicted states simply can’t afford to foot the whole bill – and shouldn’t have to.
In the months since Katrina, plans to increase unemployment aid have flitted across Congress’s legislative radar screen, only to vanish as Republican lawmakers prepare to push a $70 billion tax cut package, much of it to benefit millionaire investors. As they did with the Davis-Bacon law, government leaders have to turn back from their wrongheaded pursuits and do the right things instead – and, preferably, soon.
Credit: New York Times Article
My Thoughts: These f#@!ers will face their judgement. What evil lurks in the house of white.
by Rupe | Nov 8, 2005 | Military-Political
White House Counsel to Give ‘Refresher’ Course
By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, November 5, 2005; Page A02
President Bush has ordered White House staff to attend mandatory briefings beginning next week on ethical behavior and the handling of classified material after the indictment last week of a senior administration official in the CIA leak probe.
According to a memo sent to aides yesterday, Bush expects all White House staff to adhere to the “spirit as well as the letter” of all ethics laws and rules. As a result, “the White House counsel’s office will conduct a series of presentations next week that will provide refresher lectures on general ethics rules, including the rules of governing the protection of classified information,” according to the memo, a copy of which was provided to The Washington Post by a senior White House aide.
The mandatory ethics primer is the first step Bush plans to take in coming weeks in response to the CIA leak probe that led to the indictment of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff, and which still threatens Karl Rove, the deputy White House chief of staff. Libby was indicted last week in connection with the two-year investigation. He resigned when the indictment was announced and on Thursday pleaded not guilty to charges of lying to federal investigators and a grand jury about his conversations with reporters.
A senior aide said Bush decided to mandate the ethics course during private meetings last weekend with Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. and counsel Harriet Miers. Miers’s office will conduct the ethics briefings.
The meetings come as Bush faces increasing pressure from Democrats to revoke a security clearance for Rove as punishment for Rove’s role in unmasking to reporters a CIA operative whose husband was critical of the White House’s prewar assessment of Iraq’s weapons capabilities. The five-count indictment against Libby maintains that other government officials were aware of, if not involved in, leaking the identity of Valerie Plame to the media.
Bush’s domestic woes followed him to a meeting of Western Hemisphere leaders in Argentina yesterday, where he sidestepped questions on whether Rove will keep his job.
Speaking to reporters before the official opening of the two-day Summit of the Americas, Bush refused to discuss Rove’s future while the probe is ongoing.
“We’re going through a very serious investigation,” Bush said. “And I . . . have told you before that I’m not going to discuss the investigation until it’s completed.”
Bush also refused to address a question about whether he owes the American people an apology for his administration’s assertions that Rove and Libby were not involved in leaking Plame’s name, when it later became clear that they were.
Plame is the wife of Joseph C. Wilson IV, a former diplomat who became a vocal critic of the administration’s rationale for invading Iraq.
“It’s a serious investigation, and it’s an important investigation. But it’s not over yet,” Bush said. “I think it’s important for the American people to know that I understand my job is to set clear goals and deal with the problems we face.”
The case has apparently helped erode public confidence in Bush’s integrity. Among those responding to a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, 40 percent said they viewed the president as honest and trustworthy — a drop of 13 percentage points in the past 18 months.
Half of those surveyed said they believed Rove did something wrong in the case, and about 6 in 10 said Rove should resign. But Bush attempted to wave away those findings yesterday.
“I understand that there is a preoccupation by polls by some,” the president said. “The way you earn credibility with the American people is to declare an agenda that everybody can understand, an agenda that relates to their lives, and get the job done.”
Some senior aides have privately discussed whether it is politically tenable for Rove to remain in the White House even if he is not charged. Others raised the possibility of Rove apologizing for his role, especially for telling White House spokesman Scott McClellan and Bush that he was not involved in the leak. McClellan relayed Rove’s denial to the public.
A senior Bush aide said the “mandatory sessions on classified material is a result of a directive by the president in light of the [CIA] investigation.”
Next week’s meeting is for West Wing aides with security clearance, which allows them to view and discuss sensitive or classified material. Information about Plame was classified. Rove is among those aides who must attend.
“There will be no exceptions,” the memo states.
Staff writer Michael A. Fletcher contributed to this report from Argentina.
My Thoughts: Pretty pointless at this juncture. Not sure if there was much credibility to be had in the first place. Now that it is out that they are not just a bunch of Bible toting idiots, but they are also endangering the lives of Americans, I think they, the President and his entire cabinet, should be indicted and thrown out of office..
by Rupe | Nov 4, 2005 | Military-Political
The Muslim holy month of Ramadan concluded Nov. 3 with celebrations marking the holiday of Eid al-Fitr. Many believe that Ramadan, the ninth month of the Muslim calendar, constitutes a greater terrorist threat than other months because of Ramadan’s great religious and historical significance. Though several reports indicated that militants were planning to carry out global offensive attacks against Western targets during the 2005 Ramadan season, as Stratfor predicted such attacks did not materialize. There are several reasons for this.
Historically, al Qaeda has made strategic decisions to attack only when operational components are in place that would allow for an attack’s successful completion. To al Qaeda, the fulfillment of its operational planning is much more important than striking on a particularly significant date. Though it is certainly possible that militant attacks could be launched during Ramadan, it is no more likely than at any other time of year.
Despite the popular idea that the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were carried out on that date to increase the attacks’ significance — because of the numbers “911” — the attacks were in fact planned to occur much earlier. According to the 9/11 Commission report, al Qaeda operational planners, including Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, originally intended to carry out the attacks in May 2001. However, because the operational teams were not fully prepared to strike, the attacks were postponed. When al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden learned that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon would be visiting the White House that summer, Mohammed was urged to strike in June or July 2001. But again, the operation was put off because the hijackers were not yet prepared. Planning and readiness trumped the possible benefits of launching the attacks to coincide with a particular date or event.
Also, once preparations for an attack are complete, any militant group exposes itself to additional risks by waiting for a specific date — and the longer the wait, the higher the risk. As a potential attack moves further into the operational cycle, the chances of detection grow significantly. Hesitation after preparations are complete can put the entire plan in jeopardy — an unacceptable risk. Al Qaeda emphasizes the successful completion of attacks and thus will strike as soon as possible once all operational components are in place.
Al Qaeda’s operational planning and training also show a preference for striking at times when attacks are unexpected. Specific anniversaries and dates seem to increase the amount of law enforcement vigilance as authorities attempt to thwart potential attacks. That additional attention creates an added risk for terrorists, who prefer to operate in times of decreased attention and awareness.
Al Qaeda’s leadership undoubtedly has read the 9/11 Commission report and thus learned just how close the attackers were to being thwarted on several occasions. With law enforcement’s increased awareness of al Qaeda tactics and vulnerabilities, the group’s leadership likely is more aware than ever that waiting to carry out an attack could be a serious miscalculation and could result in failure.
Recent years have seen some increase in attacks in the Iraqi theater during Ramadan, but this probably is because the number of large soft targets increases significantly during this time and probably has little to do with the holy month itself. Large groups of Muslims congregating in mosques, restaurants and other gathering places during Ramadan — and similarly in Muharram, the first month of the Muslim calendar that holds particular significance for the Shia — are attractive targets that have the potential for particularly high casualties.
by Rupe | Nov 4, 2005 | Mad Musings
Indonesian police continue to search for suspects involved in the gruesome deaths of three schoolgirls whose beheaded bodies were found near the town of Poso in Sulawesi province Oct. 29. The attackers, armed with machetes, descended on the girls from nearby hills as they walked through a cocoa plantation on their way to a private Christian school. In a particularly brazen move, the perpetrators left two of the bodies near a local police station and one of the girls’ heads outside a church.
Central Sulawesi is the scene of sporadic violence between the island’s Muslim majority and Christian minority populations, and the area around Poso is known to be particularly violent. The sectarian strife began in late 1998, but reached its height between 2000 and 2001, when more than 1,000 people lost their lives in sectarian conflicts. Despite a government-brokered peace deal in December 2001, tensions have remained high and isolated attacks against Christians continue. Beheadings, however, are uncommon, as most sectarian violence takes the form of bombings or shootings.
This attack, then, could indicate an escalation in anti-Christian violence in Poso. Whether this was a one-off incident is too soon to say, but the beheadings do indicate that the attackers either adopted a tactic used by militants in other parts of the world or are, in fact, militant or criminal elements from elsewhere, possibly Malaysia or the Philippines, were Abu Sayyaf operates. Abu Sayyaf, a Muslim separatist group-turned criminal gang, has strong ties to the al Qaeda-linked jihadist group Jemmah Islamiyah (JI), and it is possible that Abu Sayyaf members linked up with JI elements in Indonesia. It also is possible that the beheadings were the work of a small cell of local militants out to gain quick notoriety or establish a reputation for ruthlessness within a larger group.
In any case, the killings are testament to the spread of beheadings as a modern-day militant tactic. The latest wave appears to have begun in the late 1980s, when some of the death threats against British writer Salman Rushdie, author of the controversial book The Satanic Verses, specifically mentioned beheading. In the 1990s, foreign jihadists fighting in Bosnia were known to behead Serbian and Croatian prisoners. In June 2001, Abu Sayyaf beheaded two hostages in Indonesia’s southern island of Mindanao.
In the aftermath of the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraqi, videotaped beheadings by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s jihadist network al Qaeda in Iraq shocked the world. Among the most infamous of these were the beheadings of U.S. contractor Nicholas Berg in April 2004 and a Japanese traveler in October 2004. Since late 2004, al-Zarqawi has refrained from beheading foreign hostages, but beheadings still occur frequently in Iraq as part of sectarian or inter-tribal feuds between Iraqis. In June 2004, jihadists beheaded U.S. contractor Paul Johnson, Jr., that time in Saudi Arabia. In southern Thailand, ethnic violence involving beheadings occurs frequently between Muslims and Buddhists. In the Netherlands, Mohammed Bouyeri, the confessed killer of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, attempted to behead his victim after shooting and stabbing him.
The phenomenon of beheading as an element of sectarian violence continues to spread, as indicated by the recent attack in Indonesia. Unless the perpetrators of the Oct. 29 attack are identified and arrested, there is no reason not to expect more beheadings in Sulawesi.
by Rupe | Nov 4, 2005 | Mad Musings
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday made his second attempt to fill four Cabinet positions, after some of his initial nominations were overwhelmingly rejected by the Majlis for lacking relevant experience. Intriguingly, he seems set on treading the same path once again: He has appointed Sadeq Mahsuli, who like himself is a former commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, to head up the crucial oil ministry — although Mahsuli has no experience in the oil sector. The nomination is subject to a vote of confidence in the Majlis.
The nomination is adding to a growing perception, even within Iran, that Ahmadinejad is, in addition to being a political novice, possibly a loose cannon as well. His provocative statements, such as the recent and widely reported “Israel should be wiped off the map” remark, drew powerful condemnation from the international community (though only a mild response by Washington) — including calls by Israel for Iran to be ousted from the United Nations. As previously noted, his statement was hardly out of the ordinary, considering that it was delivered in an appearance at a student conference titled “The World Without Zionism,” but it certainly was an invitation for a media frenzy. And the timing was such that the controversy could undermine Iran’s confidence at the Nov. 25 IAEA meeting to discuss its nuclear program and in backchannel talks with Washington.
Despite misgivings about his qualifications for his role, Ahmadinejad does have certain uses within the Iranian regime, one of which is making inflammatory statements when Tehran needs a delaying tactic. One of Iran’s goals at this stage in the negotiations over the nuclear issue is simply to buy time: The longer talks continue, whether in the public sphere or behind the scenes, the longer it can stave off military action or some other type of unacceptable (from its standpoint) conclusion. It long has been our view that Iran has used talks with the EU-3 strategically, putting up a public show, while more substantive discussions with Washington over Iraq and the nuclear issue were taking place in private. By drawing attention to its nuclear ambitions, Iran sought to elevate its status as a global player and gain economic concessions along the way.
The question at this point is, if Iran is trying to buy time, to what end?
It is becoming more apparent that the hard-line power brokers in Tehran are unhappy with the pace and direction of talks with the United States. Iran certainly has an interest in sustaining the current level of talks with Washington in its bid to increase influence across the border in Iran, but there also is a desire to keep things from getting too close at this juncture. Although contacts are now at a level not seen since the 1979 revolution, Tehran has dealt warily with the Bush administration, and the unelected clerical establishment wants to remain reasonably conference that improving ties with Washington will not eventually cost them power. In other words, the goal is to make sure that as relations warm, the United States does not use the opportunity to back the more moderate elements within the regime.
Thus, a political figure like Ahmadinejad has utility — and when a reckless statement slows down talks, the establishment can plausibly claim deniability for his actions. But there are some worrying signs even here.
Reports have emerged that the regime has decided to purge as many as 40 ambassadors and senior diplomats from their posts when their terms expire in March. Many of the diplomats belong to the reformist camp of Ahmadinejad’s predecessor, Mohammad Khatami. Flushing out moderates from Tehran’s diplomatic circles, including those that have been engaged in nuclear talks with the United Kingdom, France and Germany would signal Tehran’s goal of consolidating hard-line control over the government and applying the brakes to backchannel talks. But there is a problem looming, hinted at with news — also on Wednesday — that Iran’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Javid Zarif, had been reinstated to his role.
Zarif resigned in early October from the nuclear negotiating team, and there has been speculation that he would be among the diplomats Ahmadinejad is now seeking to purge. However, it appears his time in office is being extended — either because the hard-liners need his services as they proceed with nuclear negotiations, or because they have not yet identified anyone capable of filling the void.
All of which leads to a question: If Ahmadinejad, who is coming to be viewed as a bull in the political china shop, embodies the next generation of hard-liners, will it be possible for Iran to carry the ideals of the 1979 revolution forward and still progress with foreign policy goals?
