Once they sent suicide bombers to Israel; now they bring discipline and a sense of realpolitik
Aluf Benn
Thursday February 9, 2006
The Guardian
A year ago I joined a planeload of Israeli journalists flying to the resort of Sharm el-Sheikh. We accompanied Ariel Sharon to a summit with Mahmoud Abbas, the recently elected president of the Palestinian Authority. They met to celebrate a new era in Palestinian-Israeli relations after the demise of Yasser Arafat.
Looking back, it appears that, while reporting scrupulously on exchanges between Sharon and Abbas, I missed the broader picture. Abbas was a figurehead, carrying messages between Israel's authorities and the Palestinian power-brokers, the leaders of Hamas. Abbas came to the summit only after Hamas agreed to hold fire in return for integration into the political process.
Hamas - the Islamic Resistance Movement - has born the torch of Palestinian armed struggle against Israel since the late 80s. Its suicide bombers murdered hundreds of Israelis, leading the second intifada. Two years ago Israel hit back, killing Hamas's founder and spiritual leader, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, and his successor, Abdel Aziz Rantisi. Israelis expected deadly retaliation, but it never came. Instead, Hamas decided to regroup and turn to politics. Sharon had already pledged to withdraw from Gaza. This was a major victory for Hamas, who did not want to spoil it.
Since then, both Israel and Hamas have abided by the ceasefire, as fighting went on between Israel and smaller Palestinian groups such as Islamic Jihad. The relative calm and the evacuation of Gaza facilitated Israel's economic boom.
Hamas also used the ceasefire to consolidate power. When it beat Fatah in last month's legislative elections, Israel was taken by surprise. In response, one camp argues Hamas will never rest until Israel's obliteration, and compromising will merely help the enemy. The counter argument is that responsibility will tame Hamas, and its record in social and municipal affairs suggests that a working "Hamastan" may be a lesser evil than a chaotic authority under Fatah.
Ehud Olmert, Israel's acting prime minister, with an eye on the coming election, is squeezed between domestic and international concerns. His rightwing rival, Binyamin Netanyahu, portrays Olmert as a Hamas patsy. The international community fears the collapse of the PA if Israel reacts to the Hamas victory with a boycott. Olmert's solution has been to buy time, using tough talk to fend off Netanyahu and offer Hamas a deal: a pardon for its murderous past in return for good behaviour. Jerusalem and Washington agree on the benchmarks for a Palestinian government: disarming the militias, renouncing violence and recognising Israel's right to exist.
Hamas and the new Israeli political mainstream share similar aims, believing a "final status" peace deal is a delusion. Olmert instead seeks to delineate the country's borders and end the occupation, without resolving the core issues of the conflict. Here lies the basis for a tacit understanding. Israeli Jews view Hamas's ideology - portraying Jews as aliens desecrating holy Muslim land - as encouraging their annihilation. At the same time, however, most Israelis care more about their day-to-day security. They want to board a bus knowing they will arrive in one piece, rather than be blown to bits by suicide bombers.
The exiled Hamas leader, Khalid Mesh'al, appears to understand this. In his article on these pages last week, he clung to his destruction rhetoric while offering a long-term truce. Would he and his colleagues shelve their unacceptable ideology in return for political legitimacy? The past year has shown that Hamas is highly disciplined and adept at realpolitik. If pursued earnestly, this policy could be the kernel of the next stage of Middle East diplomacy.
· Aluf Benn is diplomatic editor of the Israeli daily newspaper Ha'aret, aluf@haaretz.co.il
Source: Guardian Unlimited
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Friday, February 10, 2006
In Egyptian schools, a push for critical thinking
By Sarah Gauch, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor Thu Feb 9, 3:00 AM ET
CAIRO - Here in the sunny corridors of King Fahd Modern Language School, primary school students sit in rows reviewing the science midterms they just took.
The finale to nine days of test-taking that covered 13 subjects, these tests will account for half their yearly grade. The year-end exams will count for the other half.
But such ordeals may soon be a thing of the past as Egypt begins reforming a pedagogy based on rote memorization and test-based grading systems. Starting this school year, exams will together make up only half of the youngest primary students' yearly grades - the other half will come from activities like drawing, music, and acting.
"The door for human development and improving competitiveness is education," says Hossam Badrawy, the education committee chair of Egypt's ruling party. "The core of tolerance and democracy is education. This is the most important way to change the life of this country."
The reform program, which began in 2001, allows boards of trustees made up of parents, teachers, and at-large community members to share in decisionmaking. It also seeks to build more schools and improve curricula, testing methods, and teacher performance. The new methods also incorporate critical-thinking skills.
The changes are intended to address the needs of a rapidly growing population of 70 million people. Due to a lack of teachers, there are as many as 70 students to a class in some public schools.
A major component of Egypt's educational reform is a pilot school program also begun in 2001 with funding and technical assistance from the United States Agency for International Development. The program has become so successful that it expanded last year to 245 schools from 30.
The idea behind the initiative is to createmodel schools for the Egyptian government to imitate. Teaching regimens in the model schools encourage debate and problem-solving, and train teachers to engage students.
Some experts say a modern education that promotes critical thinking may support democracy initiatives in the region. The UN's 2003 Arab Human Development Report argues that schools in the region breed submission rather than critical thought.
Young people who learn by rote, say some education experts, are more easily manipulated and indoctrinated. Under an improved education system, students will learn tolerance and open-mindedness, some say. But others argue that tempering religious extremism is more complicated.
"So much is involved in the problem of preventing extremism," says one foreign development agency expert, who was not authorized to speak on the record. "It's not just a question of stopping rote memorization in schools."
But regardless of the ideological gains, improving the Arab world's educational systems is likely to play a major role in the region's long-term economic development by better preparing students for the globalized marketplace.
A number of other Arab countries have also begun reforming their troubled education systems. In Qatar, more than two dozen recently opened schools will follow a more modern curriculum that encourages active learning, asking questions, and problem solving. Tunisia and Jordan are also slowly instituting reforms with an aim toward increasing enrollment and offering more information technology training.
But effecting change can be a cumbersome process. Despite the increasing involvement of boards of trustees, Egypt's highly centralized educational system is still largely run by the Ministry of Education, many experts say.
Dr. Badrawy, who helped to create the blueprint for the government's present program, urges education authorities to move faster with reform.
He is calling for 1,000 new model schools, rather than the current 245. Badrawy says Egypt will need more than 10,000 new schools in the next decade to keep up with population growth. Meanwhile, Egyptian officials ask for patience.
"Education reform won't become apparent immediately," says Ibrahim Saad, technical adviser to the Ministry of Education. "We have a very ambitious plan, but it will take one to two years for it to really show."
Source: Christian Science Monitor via Yahoo! NewsThursday, February 09, 2006
Putin to invite Hamas to Moscow
Thursday 09 February 2006, 20:12 Makka Time, 17:12 GMT
The Russian president has said that he intends to invite the leaders of Hamas to Moscow.
Hamas defeated the mainstream Fatah movement in a surprise landslide victory in Palestinian polls on 25 January. It is expected to form a new government soon.
Vladimir Putin made the invitation while in the Spanish capital, Madrid.
"We are maintaining our contacts with Hamas and intend, in the near future, to invite the leadership of this organisation to Moscow," he said.
The United States and the European Union have called on the resistance group to renounce violence and disarm its fighters. Hamas, considered a terrorist organisation by the US, does not recognise Israel.
Political relations
Putin went on to say that he did not believe in burning bridges. "We have never called Hamas a terrorist organisation," he said.
"We have never called Hamas a terrorist organisation"
Vladimir Putin,
Russian president
"It has to be recognised that Hamas came to power in the Palestine autonomy through a democratic and legitimate election and one should respect the choice of the Palestinian people.
"But ... we must also seek steps that would be acceptable both for the political forces leading the Palestinian autonomy, for the international community and for Israel.
"We are deeply convinced that burning bridges, especially in politics, is the easiest thing to do but it has little future."
Response
Ismail Haniya, a senior Hamas official, told reporters after Putin made his comments: "If we receive an official invitation to visit Russia, we will visit Russia."
Mark Regev, the Israeli foreign ministry spokesman, said Israel would not negotiate with Hamas until it "recognises Israel's right to exist, renounces terror and accepts the Middle East peace process".
An Israeli government source said: "People in Jerusalem are raising an eyebrow - what's going on here?"
Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of stat
Source: al Jazeera
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Related:Cutting funds 'will hurt ordinary people'
The Russian president has said that he intends to invite the leaders of Hamas to Moscow.
Hamas defeated the mainstream Fatah movement in a surprise landslide victory in Palestinian polls on 25 January. It is expected to form a new government soon.
Vladimir Putin made the invitation while in the Spanish capital, Madrid.
"We are maintaining our contacts with Hamas and intend, in the near future, to invite the leadership of this organisation to Moscow," he said.
The United States and the European Union have called on the resistance group to renounce violence and disarm its fighters. Hamas, considered a terrorist organisation by the US, does not recognise Israel.
Political relations
Putin went on to say that he did not believe in burning bridges. "We have never called Hamas a terrorist organisation," he said.
"We have never called Hamas a terrorist organisation"
Vladimir Putin,
Russian president
"It has to be recognised that Hamas came to power in the Palestine autonomy through a democratic and legitimate election and one should respect the choice of the Palestinian people.
"But ... we must also seek steps that would be acceptable both for the political forces leading the Palestinian autonomy, for the international community and for Israel.
"We are deeply convinced that burning bridges, especially in politics, is the easiest thing to do but it has little future."
Response
Ismail Haniya, a senior Hamas official, told reporters after Putin made his comments: "If we receive an official invitation to visit Russia, we will visit Russia."
Mark Regev, the Israeli foreign ministry spokesman, said Israel would not negotiate with Hamas until it "recognises Israel's right to exist, renounces terror and accepts the Middle East peace process".
An Israeli government source said: "People in Jerusalem are raising an eyebrow - what's going on here?"
Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of stat
Source: al Jazeera
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Related:Cutting funds 'will hurt ordinary people'
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Danish paper refused "offensive" Jesus cartoons
By James Kilner
2 hours, 49 minutes ago
COPENHAGEN (Reuters) - The Danish newspaper that first published caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad infuriating Muslims worldwide previously turned down cartoons of Jesus as too offensive, a cartoonist said on Wednesday.
Twelve cartoons of the Prophet published last September by Jyllands-Posten newspaper have outraged Muslims, provoking violent protests in the Middle East, Africa and Asia.
"My cartoon, which certainly did not offend any Christians I showed it to, was rejected because the editor felt it would be considered offensive to readers -- readers in general, not necessarily Christians," cartoonist Christoffer Zieler said in an email he sent to Reuters on Wednesday.
Jens Kaiser, the former editor of Jyllands-Posten's Sunday edition who turned down the cartoons three years ago, said he had done so because they were no good.
"Having seen the cartoons, I found that they were not very good. I failed to see the purportedly provocative nature," he said in a statement.
"My fault is that I didn't tell him what I really meant: The cartoons were bad." Kaiser said he told Zieler he had not used the cartoons because they were offensive to some readers.
Zieler's five colored cartoons portrayed Jesus jumping out of holes in floors and walls during his resurrection. In one, gnomes rated Jesus for style, another entitled "Saviour-cam" showed Jesus with a camera on his head staring at his feet.
"I do think the cartoons would offend some readers, but only because they were silly," Kaiser said.
Unlike Muslims, who consider depictions of the Prophet to be deeply offensive, many Christians adorn churches with images and sculptures of Jesus. However, some Christian congregations have protested at portrayals they perceive as blasphemous, especially in the cinema.
The editor of Jyllands-Posten has apologized for offending Muslims by printing cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, including one of the founder of Islam holding a bomb in his turban, but defended his right to do so in the interests of free speech.
Dozens of newspapers in Europe and elsewhere have reproduced them with the same justification.
"Perhaps explaining my story of three years ago in its proper context at least won't make matters any worse," Zieler said.
Source: Reuters via Yahoo! NewsFriday, February 03, 2006
VIEW: Pakistan, Islam and Indian media stereotypes
Friday, February 03, 2006
VIEW: Pakistan, Islam and Indian media stereotypes —Yoginder Sikand
“[T]he limited support that radical Islamist groups enjoy in Pakistan reflects less a fierce commitment to their ultimate agenda of strict Islamist rule than a protest against the system which, ironically, has abetted such groups for its own purposes”
Contrary to Indian media representations, the average Pakistani is just about as religious or otherwise as the average Indian. The average Pakistani is certainly not the wild-eyed fanatic baying for non-Muslim blood or waging violent jihad to establish global Islamic hegemony that our media would have us believe. Like the average Indian, he is emotionally attached to and culturally rooted in his religion, but he does not wear it on his sleeve; nor does it dictate every thought or act of his. In fact, the thing that first strikes the Indian visitor to Pakistan is how almost identical the average Pakistani is, looks and behaves to the average north Indian.
Almost all the many people I met in the course of a recent month-long visit to Pakistan that took me to several places in Punjab and Sindh do not even remotely fit the description of the average Pakistani peddled by our media. Islamist radical groups undeniably do have an important presence in parts of Pakistan, but they certainly do not command widespread popular support all over the country. This explains the continual dismal performance of religious parties in every Pakistani election. Despite concerted efforts by Islamist and mullah-based parties to establish a theocracy in the country, Pakistani politics are not dominated by religion as much as by economic, ethnic and regional concerns. It is, therefore, crucial not to exaggerate the influence of radical religious outfits in Pakistan, as the Indian media generally does.
Indian media descriptions of Pakistan tend to portray Islam in the country as a seamless monolith. The variety of local expressions of Islam are consistently overlooked so as to reinforce the image of a single version of Islam that is defined by the most radical of Islamist groups. The fact, however, is, that most Punjabis and Sindhis, that is to say a majority of Pakistanis, ascribe to or are associated with the sufi traditions which are anathema for such Islamists. Popular sufism is deeply-rooted in Pakistani soil and provides a strong counter to radical Islamist groups and their exclusivist agenda. Many sufis were folk heroes, radicals in their own right, bitterly critiquing tyrannical rulers as well as Muslim and Hindu priests. This is why they exercised a powerful influence on the masses, irrespective of religion. This explains, in part, why Islamist radicals are so fiercely opposed to the traditions that have developed over the centuries around such figures.
The popular sufi tradition in large parts of Pakistan thus limits the appeal of radical Islamists, making the chances of an Islamist takeover of the country a remote possibility. In recent years, it is true, these groups have gained particular salience and strength, but this is said to be less a reflection of a growing popular commitment to the Islamist cause than to other factors. One of these is the role of the state. Although the ideological founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, envisaged Pakistan as a secular Muslim state, successive Pakistani governments have used Islam to bolster their own frail support base, exactly in the same manner as the Congress and the BJP have done with Hinduism in the Indian case. Islam has also been used to weld together a number of the country’s ethnic groups that have little in common other than their profession of Islam, in the same way in which advocates of both ‘soft’ Hindutva, such as the Congress, and ‘hard’ Hindutva, such as the BJP, have sought to invoke Brahminical Hinduism to define the Indian nation state. Hindutva ideologues propagate a form of Hindu ‘nationalism’ that has no space for Indians of other faiths, and is, in fact, based on an unrelenting hatred of non-Hindu ‘others’. Creating a Hindu identity in this fashion is predicated on excising all elements of culture and tradition that Hindus are seen to share with others. The same has happened in the case of official and radical versions of Islam in Pakistan. Yet, it is important to remember that this is not the only, and certainly not the dominant, form of Islam in Pakistan, as my interaction with numerous Pakistanis from different walks of life revealed to me.
“Radical Islamist groups are not a true reflection or representative of Pakistani Islam”, a social activist friend of mine from Sindh explains. “State manipulation of religion”, he argues, “has had a major role to play in promoting radical Islamism in Pakistan”, which, he says, “is largely an expression of elite politics and Western imperialist manipulation”. “To add to state patronage of such groups”, he points out, “there is the fact of mounting economic and social inequalities, sustained military rule, the continued stranglehold of feudal lords and the absence of mechanisms for expressing democratic dissent, all of which have enabled radical Islamist groups to assert the claim of representing normative Islam against other competing versions and visions of the faith.”
In some parts of Pakistan, such as Baluchistan and the North-West Frontier Province, he says, electoral support for Islamists “reflects anti-American sentiments rather than popular demands for theocratic rule”. Such groups, he says, have gained added strength from the ongoing conflict in Kashmir by “tapping into Pakistani nationalist sentiments on this issue in the same way as Hindutva groups used the Kashmir conflict in India, both seeking to present the issue in religious terms”. “In short”, he claims, “the limited support that radical Islamist groups enjoy in Pakistan reflects less a fierce commitment to their ultimate agenda of strict Islamist rule than a protest against the system which, ironically, has abetted such groups for its own purposes”.
“The task before Indians and Pakistanis seriously concerned about the future of our common subcontinent”, says another friend of mine, a journalist from Lahore, “is to rescue our religious traditions from the monopolistic claims of the radicals. Islamism in Pakistan and Hindutva in India feed on each other while claiming to be vociferous foes. We need to revive popular forms of religion, such as sufism and bhakti, that are accepting of other faiths and that at the same time are socially engaged and critique the system of domination that produces radicalism as a reaction while at the same time using it as a means of stifling challenges to it.”
The writer is post-doctoral fellow at the International Institute for the Study of Islam in the Modern World, Leiden. He also edits a web-magazine called Qalandar, which can be accessed at www.islaminterfaith.org.
Source: Daily Times
VIEW: Pakistan, Islam and Indian media stereotypes —Yoginder Sikand
“[T]he limited support that radical Islamist groups enjoy in Pakistan reflects less a fierce commitment to their ultimate agenda of strict Islamist rule than a protest against the system which, ironically, has abetted such groups for its own purposes”
Contrary to Indian media representations, the average Pakistani is just about as religious or otherwise as the average Indian. The average Pakistani is certainly not the wild-eyed fanatic baying for non-Muslim blood or waging violent jihad to establish global Islamic hegemony that our media would have us believe. Like the average Indian, he is emotionally attached to and culturally rooted in his religion, but he does not wear it on his sleeve; nor does it dictate every thought or act of his. In fact, the thing that first strikes the Indian visitor to Pakistan is how almost identical the average Pakistani is, looks and behaves to the average north Indian.
Almost all the many people I met in the course of a recent month-long visit to Pakistan that took me to several places in Punjab and Sindh do not even remotely fit the description of the average Pakistani peddled by our media. Islamist radical groups undeniably do have an important presence in parts of Pakistan, but they certainly do not command widespread popular support all over the country. This explains the continual dismal performance of religious parties in every Pakistani election. Despite concerted efforts by Islamist and mullah-based parties to establish a theocracy in the country, Pakistani politics are not dominated by religion as much as by economic, ethnic and regional concerns. It is, therefore, crucial not to exaggerate the influence of radical religious outfits in Pakistan, as the Indian media generally does.
Indian media descriptions of Pakistan tend to portray Islam in the country as a seamless monolith. The variety of local expressions of Islam are consistently overlooked so as to reinforce the image of a single version of Islam that is defined by the most radical of Islamist groups. The fact, however, is, that most Punjabis and Sindhis, that is to say a majority of Pakistanis, ascribe to or are associated with the sufi traditions which are anathema for such Islamists. Popular sufism is deeply-rooted in Pakistani soil and provides a strong counter to radical Islamist groups and their exclusivist agenda. Many sufis were folk heroes, radicals in their own right, bitterly critiquing tyrannical rulers as well as Muslim and Hindu priests. This is why they exercised a powerful influence on the masses, irrespective of religion. This explains, in part, why Islamist radicals are so fiercely opposed to the traditions that have developed over the centuries around such figures.
The popular sufi tradition in large parts of Pakistan thus limits the appeal of radical Islamists, making the chances of an Islamist takeover of the country a remote possibility. In recent years, it is true, these groups have gained particular salience and strength, but this is said to be less a reflection of a growing popular commitment to the Islamist cause than to other factors. One of these is the role of the state. Although the ideological founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, envisaged Pakistan as a secular Muslim state, successive Pakistani governments have used Islam to bolster their own frail support base, exactly in the same manner as the Congress and the BJP have done with Hinduism in the Indian case. Islam has also been used to weld together a number of the country’s ethnic groups that have little in common other than their profession of Islam, in the same way in which advocates of both ‘soft’ Hindutva, such as the Congress, and ‘hard’ Hindutva, such as the BJP, have sought to invoke Brahminical Hinduism to define the Indian nation state. Hindutva ideologues propagate a form of Hindu ‘nationalism’ that has no space for Indians of other faiths, and is, in fact, based on an unrelenting hatred of non-Hindu ‘others’. Creating a Hindu identity in this fashion is predicated on excising all elements of culture and tradition that Hindus are seen to share with others. The same has happened in the case of official and radical versions of Islam in Pakistan. Yet, it is important to remember that this is not the only, and certainly not the dominant, form of Islam in Pakistan, as my interaction with numerous Pakistanis from different walks of life revealed to me.
“Radical Islamist groups are not a true reflection or representative of Pakistani Islam”, a social activist friend of mine from Sindh explains. “State manipulation of religion”, he argues, “has had a major role to play in promoting radical Islamism in Pakistan”, which, he says, “is largely an expression of elite politics and Western imperialist manipulation”. “To add to state patronage of such groups”, he points out, “there is the fact of mounting economic and social inequalities, sustained military rule, the continued stranglehold of feudal lords and the absence of mechanisms for expressing democratic dissent, all of which have enabled radical Islamist groups to assert the claim of representing normative Islam against other competing versions and visions of the faith.”
In some parts of Pakistan, such as Baluchistan and the North-West Frontier Province, he says, electoral support for Islamists “reflects anti-American sentiments rather than popular demands for theocratic rule”. Such groups, he says, have gained added strength from the ongoing conflict in Kashmir by “tapping into Pakistani nationalist sentiments on this issue in the same way as Hindutva groups used the Kashmir conflict in India, both seeking to present the issue in religious terms”. “In short”, he claims, “the limited support that radical Islamist groups enjoy in Pakistan reflects less a fierce commitment to their ultimate agenda of strict Islamist rule than a protest against the system which, ironically, has abetted such groups for its own purposes”.
“The task before Indians and Pakistanis seriously concerned about the future of our common subcontinent”, says another friend of mine, a journalist from Lahore, “is to rescue our religious traditions from the monopolistic claims of the radicals. Islamism in Pakistan and Hindutva in India feed on each other while claiming to be vociferous foes. We need to revive popular forms of religion, such as sufism and bhakti, that are accepting of other faiths and that at the same time are socially engaged and critique the system of domination that produces radicalism as a reaction while at the same time using it as a means of stifling challenges to it.”
The writer is post-doctoral fellow at the International Institute for the Study of Islam in the Modern World, Leiden. He also edits a web-magazine called Qalandar, which can be accessed at www.islaminterfaith.org.
Source: Daily Times
Monday, January 30, 2006
Exxon Mobil posts record profit for any U.S. company
By STEVE QUINN, AP Business Writer 50 minutes ago
DALLAS - Exxon Mobil Corp. posted record profits for any U.S. company on Monday — $10.71 billion for the fourth quarter and $36.13 billion for the year — as the world's biggest publicly traded oil company benefited from high oil and gas prices and demand for refined products. The results exceeded Wall Street expectations and Exxon shares rose nearly 3 percent in morning trading.
The company's earnings amounted to $1.71 per share for the October-December quarter, up 27 percent from $8.42 billion, or $1.30 per share, in the year ago quarter. The result topped the then-record quarterly profit of $9.92 billion Exxon posted in the third quarter of 2005.
Exxon's profit for the year was also the largest annual reported net income in U.S. history, according to Howard Silverblatt, a stock market analyst for Standard & Poor's. He said the previous high was Exxon's $25.3 billion profit in 2004.
Exxon's results lifted the combined 2005 profits for the country's three largest integrated oil companies to more than $63 billion.
ConocoPhillips said last Wednesday that its fourth-quarter earnings rose 51 percent to $3.68 billion, while annual income climbed 66 percent to $13.53 billion. Two days later, Chevron Corp. said its fourth-quarter earnings rose 20 percent to $4.14 billion, while annual income jumped 6 percent to $14.1 billion.
The oil industry's stellar results renewed talk among some politicians for a windfall profit tax that would push companies to invest more in new production and refining capacity.
Sen. Babara Boxer, a California Democrat who sharply criticized oil executives appearing before Congress in November, struck again on Friday. She called on the Bush Administration and the Federal Trade Commission to "put an end to gouging," then suggested that FTC stood for "Friend to Chevron."
But John Felmy, chief economist for the American Petroleum Institute, a Washington-based trade group, said Monday that the political rhetoric was "not a case based on fact."
"We invested somewhere in the order of $86 billion last year," Felmy said. "Then we have to treat investors appropriately otherwise we'd have the Eliott Spitzers of the world coming after us."
The results for Exxon's latest quarter included a $390 million gain related to a litigation settlement. Excluding special items, earnings were $10.32 billion, or $1.65 per share. The result topped Wall Street's expectations. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial predicted earnings of $1.44 per share.
Exxon shares rose $1.87 to $63.16 in morning trade on the New York Stock Exchange.
Quarterly revenue ballooned to $99.66 billion from $83.37 billion a year ago but came in shy of the $100.72 billion Exxon posted in the third quarter, which was the first time a U.S. public company generated more than $100 billion in sales in a single quarter.
By segment, exploration and production earnings rose sharply to $7.04 billion, up $2.15 billion from the 2004 quarter, reflecting higher crude oil and natural gas prices. Production decreased by 1 percent due to the lingering effects of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which battered the Gulf Coast in August and September.
The company's refining and marketing segment reported $2.39 billion in earnings, as higher refining and marketing margins helped offset the residual effects of the hurricanes.
Exxon's chemicals business saw earnings, excluding special items, decline by $413 million to $835 million, as higher materials costs squeezed margins.
For the full year, net income surged to $5.71 per share from $3.89 per share in 2004. Annual revenue grew to $371 billion from $298.04 billion.
To put that into perspective, Exxon's revenue for the year exceeded Saudi Arabia's estimated 2005 gross domestic product of $340.5 billion, according to statistics maintained by the Central Intelligence Agency.
Source: AP via Yahoo! News
DALLAS - Exxon Mobil Corp. posted record profits for any U.S. company on Monday — $10.71 billion for the fourth quarter and $36.13 billion for the year — as the world's biggest publicly traded oil company benefited from high oil and gas prices and demand for refined products. The results exceeded Wall Street expectations and Exxon shares rose nearly 3 percent in morning trading.
The company's earnings amounted to $1.71 per share for the October-December quarter, up 27 percent from $8.42 billion, or $1.30 per share, in the year ago quarter. The result topped the then-record quarterly profit of $9.92 billion Exxon posted in the third quarter of 2005.
Exxon's profit for the year was also the largest annual reported net income in U.S. history, according to Howard Silverblatt, a stock market analyst for Standard & Poor's. He said the previous high was Exxon's $25.3 billion profit in 2004.
Exxon's results lifted the combined 2005 profits for the country's three largest integrated oil companies to more than $63 billion.
ConocoPhillips said last Wednesday that its fourth-quarter earnings rose 51 percent to $3.68 billion, while annual income climbed 66 percent to $13.53 billion. Two days later, Chevron Corp. said its fourth-quarter earnings rose 20 percent to $4.14 billion, while annual income jumped 6 percent to $14.1 billion.
The oil industry's stellar results renewed talk among some politicians for a windfall profit tax that would push companies to invest more in new production and refining capacity.
Sen. Babara Boxer, a California Democrat who sharply criticized oil executives appearing before Congress in November, struck again on Friday. She called on the Bush Administration and the Federal Trade Commission to "put an end to gouging," then suggested that FTC stood for "Friend to Chevron."
But John Felmy, chief economist for the American Petroleum Institute, a Washington-based trade group, said Monday that the political rhetoric was "not a case based on fact."
"We invested somewhere in the order of $86 billion last year," Felmy said. "Then we have to treat investors appropriately otherwise we'd have the Eliott Spitzers of the world coming after us."
The results for Exxon's latest quarter included a $390 million gain related to a litigation settlement. Excluding special items, earnings were $10.32 billion, or $1.65 per share. The result topped Wall Street's expectations. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial predicted earnings of $1.44 per share.
Exxon shares rose $1.87 to $63.16 in morning trade on the New York Stock Exchange.
Quarterly revenue ballooned to $99.66 billion from $83.37 billion a year ago but came in shy of the $100.72 billion Exxon posted in the third quarter, which was the first time a U.S. public company generated more than $100 billion in sales in a single quarter.
By segment, exploration and production earnings rose sharply to $7.04 billion, up $2.15 billion from the 2004 quarter, reflecting higher crude oil and natural gas prices. Production decreased by 1 percent due to the lingering effects of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which battered the Gulf Coast in August and September.
The company's refining and marketing segment reported $2.39 billion in earnings, as higher refining and marketing margins helped offset the residual effects of the hurricanes.
Exxon's chemicals business saw earnings, excluding special items, decline by $413 million to $835 million, as higher materials costs squeezed margins.
For the full year, net income surged to $5.71 per share from $3.89 per share in 2004. Annual revenue grew to $371 billion from $298.04 billion.
To put that into perspective, Exxon's revenue for the year exceeded Saudi Arabia's estimated 2005 gross domestic product of $340.5 billion, according to statistics maintained by the Central Intelligence Agency.
Source: AP via Yahoo! News
Friday, January 27, 2006
Documents Show Army Seized Wives As Tactic
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent 34 minutes ago
The U.S. Army in Iraq has at least twice seized and jailed the wives of suspected insurgents in hopes of "leveraging" their husbands into surrender, U.S. military documents show.
In one case, a secretive task force locked up the young mother of a nursing baby, a U.S. intelligence officer reported. In the case of a second detainee, one American colonel suggested to another that they catch her husband by tacking a note to the family's door telling him "to come get his wife."
The issue of female detentions in Iraq has taken on a higher profile since kidnappers seized American journalist Jill Carroll on Jan. 7 and threatened to kill her unless all Iraqi women detainees are freed.
The U.S. military on Thursday freed five of what it said were 11 women among the 14,000 detainees currently held in the 2 1/2-year-old insurgency. All were accused of "aiding terrorists or planting explosives," but an Iraqi government commission found that evidence was lacking.
Iraqi human rights activist Hind al-Salehi contends that U.S. anti-insurgent units, coming up empty-handed in raids on suspects' houses, have at times detained wives to pressure men into turning themselves in.
Iraq's deputy justice minister, Busho Ibrahim Ali, dismissed such claims, saying hostage-holding was a tactic used under the ousted Saddam Hussein dictatorship, and "we are not Saddam." A U.S. command spokesman in Baghdad, Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, said only Iraqis who pose an "imperative threat" are held in long-term U.S.-run detention facilities.
But documents describing two 2004 episodes tell a different story as far as short-term detentions by local U.S. units. The documents are among hundreds the Pentagon has released periodically under U.S. court order to meet an American Civil Liberties Union request for information on detention practices.
In one memo, a civilian Pentagon intelligence officer described what happened when he took part in a raid on an Iraqi suspect's house in Tarmiya, northwest of Baghdad, on May 9, 2004. The raid involved Task Force (TF) 6-26, a secretive military unit formed to handle high-profile targets.
"During the pre-operation brief it was recommended by TF personnel that if the wife were present, she be detained and held in order to leverage the primary target's surrender," wrote the 14-year veteran officer.
He said he objected, but when they raided the house the team leader, a senior sergeant, seized her anyway.
"The 28-year-old woman had three young children at the house, one being as young as six months and still nursing," the intelligence officer wrote. She was held for two days and was released after he complained, he said.
Like most names in the released documents, the officer's signature is blacked out on this for-the-record memorandum about his complaint.
Of this case, command spokesman Johnson said he could not judge, months later, the factors that led to the woman's detention.
The second episode, in June 2004, is found in sketchy detail in e-mail exchanges among six U.S. Army colonels, discussing an undisclosed number of female detainees held in northern Iraq by the Stryker Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division.
The first message, from a military police colonel, advised staff officers of the U.S. northern command that the Iraqi police would not take control of the jailed women without charges being brought against them.
In a second e-mail, a command staff officer asked an officer of the unit holding the women, "What are you guys doing to try to get the husband — have you tacked a note on the door and challenged him to come get his wife?"
Two days later, the brigade's deputy commander advised the higher command, "As each day goes by, I get more input that these gals have some info and/or will result in getting the husband."
He went on, "These ladies fought back extremely hard during the original detention. They have shown indications of deceit and misinformation."
The command staff colonel wrote in reply, referring to a commanding general, "CG wants the husband."
The released e-mails stop there, and the women's eventual status could not be immediately determined.
Of this episode, Johnson said, "It is clear the unit believed the females detained had substantial knowledge of insurgent activity and warranted being held."
___
On the Net:
First document: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/t2614_2616.pdf
E-mail exchange: http://www.aclu.org/projects/foiasearch/pdf/DOD044843.pdf
Source: AP via Yahoo! News
The U.S. Army in Iraq has at least twice seized and jailed the wives of suspected insurgents in hopes of "leveraging" their husbands into surrender, U.S. military documents show.
In one case, a secretive task force locked up the young mother of a nursing baby, a U.S. intelligence officer reported. In the case of a second detainee, one American colonel suggested to another that they catch her husband by tacking a note to the family's door telling him "to come get his wife."
The issue of female detentions in Iraq has taken on a higher profile since kidnappers seized American journalist Jill Carroll on Jan. 7 and threatened to kill her unless all Iraqi women detainees are freed.
The U.S. military on Thursday freed five of what it said were 11 women among the 14,000 detainees currently held in the 2 1/2-year-old insurgency. All were accused of "aiding terrorists or planting explosives," but an Iraqi government commission found that evidence was lacking.
Iraqi human rights activist Hind al-Salehi contends that U.S. anti-insurgent units, coming up empty-handed in raids on suspects' houses, have at times detained wives to pressure men into turning themselves in.
Iraq's deputy justice minister, Busho Ibrahim Ali, dismissed such claims, saying hostage-holding was a tactic used under the ousted Saddam Hussein dictatorship, and "we are not Saddam." A U.S. command spokesman in Baghdad, Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, said only Iraqis who pose an "imperative threat" are held in long-term U.S.-run detention facilities.
But documents describing two 2004 episodes tell a different story as far as short-term detentions by local U.S. units. The documents are among hundreds the Pentagon has released periodically under U.S. court order to meet an American Civil Liberties Union request for information on detention practices.
In one memo, a civilian Pentagon intelligence officer described what happened when he took part in a raid on an Iraqi suspect's house in Tarmiya, northwest of Baghdad, on May 9, 2004. The raid involved Task Force (TF) 6-26, a secretive military unit formed to handle high-profile targets.
"During the pre-operation brief it was recommended by TF personnel that if the wife were present, she be detained and held in order to leverage the primary target's surrender," wrote the 14-year veteran officer.
He said he objected, but when they raided the house the team leader, a senior sergeant, seized her anyway.
"The 28-year-old woman had three young children at the house, one being as young as six months and still nursing," the intelligence officer wrote. She was held for two days and was released after he complained, he said.
Like most names in the released documents, the officer's signature is blacked out on this for-the-record memorandum about his complaint.
Of this case, command spokesman Johnson said he could not judge, months later, the factors that led to the woman's detention.
The second episode, in June 2004, is found in sketchy detail in e-mail exchanges among six U.S. Army colonels, discussing an undisclosed number of female detainees held in northern Iraq by the Stryker Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division.
The first message, from a military police colonel, advised staff officers of the U.S. northern command that the Iraqi police would not take control of the jailed women without charges being brought against them.
In a second e-mail, a command staff officer asked an officer of the unit holding the women, "What are you guys doing to try to get the husband — have you tacked a note on the door and challenged him to come get his wife?"
Two days later, the brigade's deputy commander advised the higher command, "As each day goes by, I get more input that these gals have some info and/or will result in getting the husband."
He went on, "These ladies fought back extremely hard during the original detention. They have shown indications of deceit and misinformation."
The command staff colonel wrote in reply, referring to a commanding general, "CG wants the husband."
The released e-mails stop there, and the women's eventual status could not be immediately determined.
Of this episode, Johnson said, "It is clear the unit believed the females detained had substantial knowledge of insurgent activity and warranted being held."
___
On the Net:
First document: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/t2614_2616.pdf
E-mail exchange: http://www.aclu.org/projects/foiasearch/pdf/DOD044843.pdf
Source: AP via Yahoo! News
In Africa, Islam and Christianity are growing - and blending
By Abraham McLaughlin, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor Thu Jan 26, 3:00 AM ET
LAGOS, NIGERIA - At first, it seems a surprising sight: inside a two-story mosque in sub-Saharan Africa's largest metropolis hangs a life-size portrait of Jesus Christ.
Yet worshipers at "The True Message of God Mission" say it's entirely natural for Christianity and Islam to cexist, even overlap. They begin their worship by praying at the Jesus alcove and then "running their deliverance" - sprinting laps around the mosque's mosaic-tiled courtyard, praying to the one God for forgiveness and help. They say it's akin to Israelites circling the walls of Jericho - and Muslims swirling around the Ka'ba shrine in Mecca.
This group - originally called "Chris-lam-herb" for its mix-and-match approach to Christianity, Islam, and traditional medicine - is a window on an ongoing religious ferment in Africa. It's still up for debate whether this group, and others like it, could become models for Muslim-Christian unity worldwide or whether they're uniquely African. But either way, they are "part of a trend," says Dana Robert, a Boston University religion professor.
Amid intense sectarian violence in this half- Muslim, half-Christian country, these groups serve as tolerant peacemakers. Also, with widespread poverty and health concerns here, people are seeking practical, profitable religion more than rigid doctrine.
Before Islam and Christianity arrived in Africa, people here "believed in deities being close" - in gods who resided in trees or rivers and helped or hurt locals daily, explains Kamaldeen Balogun, an Islamic studies professor at Olabisi Onabanjo University in southeastern Nigeria.
"You in the West are satisfied with one hour of church on Sunday," says Mr. Balogun. But for people in Africa, who he says need so many solutions, "This is about a practical way of life," about a willingness to combine Christianity or Islam with their own traditions to "see if they can make something new" - something that will help.
Worshipers at the "True Message" mission say unifying the two theologies has made a major difference in their lives.
A slight woman with a quick smile, Kuburat Hamzat says she came here in 1998 with a severe menstruation problem. She was embraced by the mission's "man of God," a soft-spoken, bald man named Samusideen Saka. He told her, "Dancing will not kill you" and prescribed 91 laps of "running deliverance" each day. He also explained the commonalities of the great faiths to Ms. Hamzat who had grown up in Islam. That understanding, she says, changed her. "Because I understood that in my mind, I got healed," she says. Her problem hasn't recurred, she says. Others say they've been cured of barrenness, mental illness, and other troubles.
Pastor Saka explains that his father was an herbalist and that both Muslims and Christians would come to him for healing. Although he grew up Muslim, and has been to Mecca on pilgrimage several times, he couldn't comprehend Nigeria's sectarian strife. He now considers himself a Christian, "but that doesn't mean Islam is bad."
Quite the opposite. Next to his mosque is a televangelist's dream - an auditorium with 1,500 seats, banks of speakers, a live band, and klieg lights. On Sundays the choir switches easily between Muslim and Christian songs, and Pastor Saka preaches from both the Bible and the Koran. His sermons are often broadcast on local TV.
The broader context here is Africa's dramatic shift in recent decades to Christianity and Islam. During the 20th century, fully 40 percent of Africa's population moved from traditional religions to "different shades of Christianity," says Philip Jenkins, a history and religion professor at the University of Pennsylvania. It is, he adds, "the largest religious change that has ever occurred in history." There are debates about whether Christianity or Islam is spreading faster in Africa, but clearly they're both on the rise - and sometimes are the source of tension.
In Nigeria's religious city of Jos (short for "Jesus Our Savior") the government says 50,000 people died between 1999 and 2004 in sectarian clashes. Until a peace deal last year, Sudan's northern Muslims and southern Christians were at war for two decades.
Clearly, the religious revolution is still shaking out. "People are converting rapidly, but they don't necessarily have instruction" in the details of their faiths, says Boston University's Professor Robert. Nor have they had "time for their belief system to solidify." It is, she says, "still shifting." She argues that eventually the faithful will choose one religion or another, and the hybrids will fade away.
But the ferment is quite evident on the chaotic streets of Lagos, which is home to some 10 million people. Hundreds of church-sponsored banners scream out, "It's your day of RECOVERY @ LAST where life's pains are healed" or "Jesus Christ: A friend indeed! Even in times of need!!"
Healing is a regularly promised feature of churches across Africa. It's symbolic of a key element of the continent's religious explorations - fusing faith and rationality, Professor Balogun says. According to Western thought, with its emphasis on rationality, "Everything that goes up must come down," he says. But a more African approach is that, "By divine intervention it may not come down." In fact, his university is initiating a degree focusing on the religion-science nexus.
Meanwhile, it's not just Saka who's exploring the common ground between Christianity and Islam. Sitting in a wrought-iron throne, swathed in silky white fabric, the founder of "Chrislam" has these words for followers of the two great faiths: "The same sun that dries the clothes of Muslims also dries the clothes of Christians." Stroking his beard, the man named Tela Tella says, "I don't believe God loves Christians any more than Muslims."
His followers calls him His Royal Holiness, The Messenger, Ifeoluwa or "The Will of God." Since the religion's founding two decades ago, this small band has been gathering almost daily to hear his message of inclusiveness - that Christians and Muslims, "who are sons of Abraham, can be one."
Source: CS Monitor via Yahoo! News
LAGOS, NIGERIA - At first, it seems a surprising sight: inside a two-story mosque in sub-Saharan Africa's largest metropolis hangs a life-size portrait of Jesus Christ.
Yet worshipers at "The True Message of God Mission" say it's entirely natural for Christianity and Islam to cexist, even overlap. They begin their worship by praying at the Jesus alcove and then "running their deliverance" - sprinting laps around the mosque's mosaic-tiled courtyard, praying to the one God for forgiveness and help. They say it's akin to Israelites circling the walls of Jericho - and Muslims swirling around the Ka'ba shrine in Mecca.
This group - originally called "Chris-lam-herb" for its mix-and-match approach to Christianity, Islam, and traditional medicine - is a window on an ongoing religious ferment in Africa. It's still up for debate whether this group, and others like it, could become models for Muslim-Christian unity worldwide or whether they're uniquely African. But either way, they are "part of a trend," says Dana Robert, a Boston University religion professor.
Amid intense sectarian violence in this half- Muslim, half-Christian country, these groups serve as tolerant peacemakers. Also, with widespread poverty and health concerns here, people are seeking practical, profitable religion more than rigid doctrine.
Before Islam and Christianity arrived in Africa, people here "believed in deities being close" - in gods who resided in trees or rivers and helped or hurt locals daily, explains Kamaldeen Balogun, an Islamic studies professor at Olabisi Onabanjo University in southeastern Nigeria.
"You in the West are satisfied with one hour of church on Sunday," says Mr. Balogun. But for people in Africa, who he says need so many solutions, "This is about a practical way of life," about a willingness to combine Christianity or Islam with their own traditions to "see if they can make something new" - something that will help.
Worshipers at the "True Message" mission say unifying the two theologies has made a major difference in their lives.
A slight woman with a quick smile, Kuburat Hamzat says she came here in 1998 with a severe menstruation problem. She was embraced by the mission's "man of God," a soft-spoken, bald man named Samusideen Saka. He told her, "Dancing will not kill you" and prescribed 91 laps of "running deliverance" each day. He also explained the commonalities of the great faiths to Ms. Hamzat who had grown up in Islam. That understanding, she says, changed her. "Because I understood that in my mind, I got healed," she says. Her problem hasn't recurred, she says. Others say they've been cured of barrenness, mental illness, and other troubles.
Pastor Saka explains that his father was an herbalist and that both Muslims and Christians would come to him for healing. Although he grew up Muslim, and has been to Mecca on pilgrimage several times, he couldn't comprehend Nigeria's sectarian strife. He now considers himself a Christian, "but that doesn't mean Islam is bad."
Quite the opposite. Next to his mosque is a televangelist's dream - an auditorium with 1,500 seats, banks of speakers, a live band, and klieg lights. On Sundays the choir switches easily between Muslim and Christian songs, and Pastor Saka preaches from both the Bible and the Koran. His sermons are often broadcast on local TV.
The broader context here is Africa's dramatic shift in recent decades to Christianity and Islam. During the 20th century, fully 40 percent of Africa's population moved from traditional religions to "different shades of Christianity," says Philip Jenkins, a history and religion professor at the University of Pennsylvania. It is, he adds, "the largest religious change that has ever occurred in history." There are debates about whether Christianity or Islam is spreading faster in Africa, but clearly they're both on the rise - and sometimes are the source of tension.
In Nigeria's religious city of Jos (short for "Jesus Our Savior") the government says 50,000 people died between 1999 and 2004 in sectarian clashes. Until a peace deal last year, Sudan's northern Muslims and southern Christians were at war for two decades.
Clearly, the religious revolution is still shaking out. "People are converting rapidly, but they don't necessarily have instruction" in the details of their faiths, says Boston University's Professor Robert. Nor have they had "time for their belief system to solidify." It is, she says, "still shifting." She argues that eventually the faithful will choose one religion or another, and the hybrids will fade away.
But the ferment is quite evident on the chaotic streets of Lagos, which is home to some 10 million people. Hundreds of church-sponsored banners scream out, "It's your day of RECOVERY @ LAST where life's pains are healed" or "Jesus Christ: A friend indeed! Even in times of need!!"
Healing is a regularly promised feature of churches across Africa. It's symbolic of a key element of the continent's religious explorations - fusing faith and rationality, Professor Balogun says. According to Western thought, with its emphasis on rationality, "Everything that goes up must come down," he says. But a more African approach is that, "By divine intervention it may not come down." In fact, his university is initiating a degree focusing on the religion-science nexus.
Meanwhile, it's not just Saka who's exploring the common ground between Christianity and Islam. Sitting in a wrought-iron throne, swathed in silky white fabric, the founder of "Chrislam" has these words for followers of the two great faiths: "The same sun that dries the clothes of Muslims also dries the clothes of Christians." Stroking his beard, the man named Tela Tella says, "I don't believe God loves Christians any more than Muslims."
His followers calls him His Royal Holiness, The Messenger, Ifeoluwa or "The Will of God." Since the religion's founding two decades ago, this small band has been gathering almost daily to hear his message of inclusiveness - that Christians and Muslims, "who are sons of Abraham, can be one."
Source: CS Monitor via Yahoo! News
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
India history spat hits US
By Scott Baldauf, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
Tue Jan 24, 3:00 AM ET
NEW DELHI - In the halls of Sacramento, a special commission is rewriting Indian history: debating whether Aryan invaders conquered the subcontinent, whether Brahman priests had more rights than untouchables, and even whether ancient Indians ate beef.
That this seemingly arcane Indian debate has spilled over into California's board of education is a sign of the growing political muscle of Indian immigrants and the rising American interest in Asia.
The foes - who include established historians and Hindu nationalist revisionists - are familiar to each other in India. But America may increasingly become their new battlefield as other US states follow California in rewriting their own textbooks to bone up on Asian history.
At stake, say scholars who include some of the most elite historians on India, may be a truthful picture of one of the world's emerging powers - one arrived at by academic standards of proof rather than assertions of national or religious pride.
"Some of the groups involved here are not qualified to write textbooks, they do not draw lines between myth and history," says Anu Mandavilli, an Indian doctoral candidate at the University of Southern California, and activist against the Hindu right. Speaking of one of the groups, the Vedic Foundation in Austin, Texas, she adds, "On their website, they claim that Hindu civilization started 111.5 trillion years ago. That makes Hinduism billions of years older than the Big Bang." (The assertion has since been pulled from the site.)
"It would be ridiculous if it weren't so dangerous."
Communities use history to define themselves - their core ideals, achievements, and grudges. Small wonder, then, that history is frequently reevaluated as political pendulums shift, or as long-oppressed minority groups finally get their say. History, and efforts to revise it, have touched off recent controversies between Japan and its neighbors over its World War II past, as well as between France and its former colonies over the portrayal of imperialism.
Here in India, Hindu nationalists have pushed forcefully for revisionism after what they see as centuries of cultural domination by the British Raj and Muslim Mogul Empire.
Instigating the California debate were two US-based Hindu groups with long ties to Hindu nationalist parties in India. One, the Vedic Foundation, is a small Hindu sect that aims at simplifying Hinduism to the worship of one god, Vishnu. The other, the Hindu Education Foundation (HEF), was founded in 2004 by a branch of the right-wing Indian group the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.
This year, as California's Board of Education commissioned and put up for review textbooks to be used in its 6th-grade classrooms, these two groups came forward with demands for substantial changes.
Textbooks did have glaring mistakes
Some of the changes were no-brainers. One section said, incorrectly, that the Hindi language is written in Arabic script. One photo caption misidentified a Muslim as a Brahman priest.
But instead of focusing on such errors, the groups took steps to add their own nationalist imprint to Indian history.
In one edit, the HEF asked the textbook publisher to change a sentence describing discrimination against women in ancient society to the following: "Men had different duties (dharma) as well as rights than women."
In another edit, the HEF objected to a sentence that said that Aryan rulers had "created a caste system" in India that kept groups separated according to their jobs. The HEF asked this to be changed to the following: "During Vedic times, people were divided into different social groups (varnas) based on their capacity to undertake a particular profession."
The hottest debate centered on when Indian civilization began, and by whom. For the past 150 years, most historical, linguistic, and archaeological research has dated India's earliest settlements to around 2600 BC. And most established historical research contends that the cornerstone of Indian civilization - the practice of Hindu religion - was codified by people who came from outside India, specifically Aryan language speakers from the steppes of Central Asia.
Many Hindu nationalists are upset by the notion that Hinduism could be yet another religion, like Islam and Christianity, with foreign roots. The HEF and Vedic Foundation both lobbied hard to change the wording of California's textbooks so that Hinduism would be described as purely home grown.
"Textbooks must mention that none of the [ancient] texts, nor any Indian tradition, has a recollection of any Aryan invasion or migration," writes S. Kalyanaraman, an engineer and prominent pro-Hindu activist, in an e-mail to this reporter. He and other revisionists refer to recent studies that don't support an Aryan migration, including skeletal anthropology research that claims to show a continuity of record from Neolithic times. Such research has not convinced top Indologists to abandon the Aryan theory, however.
The final changes in California's textbooks are expected in the next few weeks, but in the meantime, mainstream academics, both in America and abroad, are setting off alarm bells.
"It was a whitewash," says Michael Witzel, a Harvard University Sanskrit scholar and Indologist, who testified before the commission in Sacramento. "The textbooks before were not very good, but at least they were more or less presentable. Now, it is completely incorrect."
Aryan invasion a British-era theory
Early proponents of the "Aryan Invasion Theory" proposed in 1850 by philologist Max Mueller may have had political agendas to justify the subjugation of the subcontinent, Mr. Witzel says, but the preponderance of evidence shows that Aryans came to India, with their horses, their chariots, and their religious beliefs, from outside.
"Unquestionably, all sides of Indian history must be repeatedly re-examined," wrote Witzel and comparative historian Steve Farmer, in an influential article in the Indian magazine Frontline in 2000. "But any massive revisions must arise from the discovery of new evidence, not from desires to boost national or sectarian pride at any cost."
On the other side of the debate, the historian Meenakshi Jain, a self-described nationalist, says that history is meant to be rewritten, depending on the perspective and needs of the present time.
"Indic civilization has been a big victim of misrepresentation and belittling of our culture," says Ms. Jain, a historian at Delhi University and author of a high school history textbook accepted by India's previous government, led by the pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party.
Pride has its place in history?
Like many Hindus, Jain is proud of the accomplishments of Indian history, such as the fact that three small Hindu kingdoms - Kabul, Zabul, and Sindh - were able to hold off invading Muslim armies for 400 years. She also thinks that students should learn that some of India's most famous temples were commissioned not by upper caste Hindu kings but by aboriginal tribes, who in modern times have been relegated to "backward status."
"There is no such thing as an objective history," Jain says. "So when we write a textbook, we should make students aware of the status of current research of leading scholars in the field. It should not shut out a love for motherland, a pride in your past. If you teach that your country is backward, that it has no redeeming features in our civilization, it can damage a young perspective."
But no matter which version of Indian history California adopts for its 6th graders, it is bound to aggravate someone. The Board of Education has already heard from South Indians who argued that the HEF and Vedic Foundation represent a North Indian upper-caste perspective.
"We were saying, 'These groups don't speak for us,' " says Anu Mandavilli, herself a South Indian. When groups like the Vedic Foundation try to simplify Hinduism as the worship of a single god, "they have their own agendas."
Source: CS Monitor via Yahoo! News
Tue Jan 24, 3:00 AM ET
NEW DELHI - In the halls of Sacramento, a special commission is rewriting Indian history: debating whether Aryan invaders conquered the subcontinent, whether Brahman priests had more rights than untouchables, and even whether ancient Indians ate beef.
That this seemingly arcane Indian debate has spilled over into California's board of education is a sign of the growing political muscle of Indian immigrants and the rising American interest in Asia.
The foes - who include established historians and Hindu nationalist revisionists - are familiar to each other in India. But America may increasingly become their new battlefield as other US states follow California in rewriting their own textbooks to bone up on Asian history.
At stake, say scholars who include some of the most elite historians on India, may be a truthful picture of one of the world's emerging powers - one arrived at by academic standards of proof rather than assertions of national or religious pride.
"Some of the groups involved here are not qualified to write textbooks, they do not draw lines between myth and history," says Anu Mandavilli, an Indian doctoral candidate at the University of Southern California, and activist against the Hindu right. Speaking of one of the groups, the Vedic Foundation in Austin, Texas, she adds, "On their website, they claim that Hindu civilization started 111.5 trillion years ago. That makes Hinduism billions of years older than the Big Bang." (The assertion has since been pulled from the site.)
"It would be ridiculous if it weren't so dangerous."
Communities use history to define themselves - their core ideals, achievements, and grudges. Small wonder, then, that history is frequently reevaluated as political pendulums shift, or as long-oppressed minority groups finally get their say. History, and efforts to revise it, have touched off recent controversies between Japan and its neighbors over its World War II past, as well as between France and its former colonies over the portrayal of imperialism.
Here in India, Hindu nationalists have pushed forcefully for revisionism after what they see as centuries of cultural domination by the British Raj and Muslim Mogul Empire.
Instigating the California debate were two US-based Hindu groups with long ties to Hindu nationalist parties in India. One, the Vedic Foundation, is a small Hindu sect that aims at simplifying Hinduism to the worship of one god, Vishnu. The other, the Hindu Education Foundation (HEF), was founded in 2004 by a branch of the right-wing Indian group the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.
This year, as California's Board of Education commissioned and put up for review textbooks to be used in its 6th-grade classrooms, these two groups came forward with demands for substantial changes.
Textbooks did have glaring mistakes
Some of the changes were no-brainers. One section said, incorrectly, that the Hindi language is written in Arabic script. One photo caption misidentified a Muslim as a Brahman priest.
But instead of focusing on such errors, the groups took steps to add their own nationalist imprint to Indian history.
In one edit, the HEF asked the textbook publisher to change a sentence describing discrimination against women in ancient society to the following: "Men had different duties (dharma) as well as rights than women."
In another edit, the HEF objected to a sentence that said that Aryan rulers had "created a caste system" in India that kept groups separated according to their jobs. The HEF asked this to be changed to the following: "During Vedic times, people were divided into different social groups (varnas) based on their capacity to undertake a particular profession."
The hottest debate centered on when Indian civilization began, and by whom. For the past 150 years, most historical, linguistic, and archaeological research has dated India's earliest settlements to around 2600 BC. And most established historical research contends that the cornerstone of Indian civilization - the practice of Hindu religion - was codified by people who came from outside India, specifically Aryan language speakers from the steppes of Central Asia.
Many Hindu nationalists are upset by the notion that Hinduism could be yet another religion, like Islam and Christianity, with foreign roots. The HEF and Vedic Foundation both lobbied hard to change the wording of California's textbooks so that Hinduism would be described as purely home grown.
"Textbooks must mention that none of the [ancient] texts, nor any Indian tradition, has a recollection of any Aryan invasion or migration," writes S. Kalyanaraman, an engineer and prominent pro-Hindu activist, in an e-mail to this reporter. He and other revisionists refer to recent studies that don't support an Aryan migration, including skeletal anthropology research that claims to show a continuity of record from Neolithic times. Such research has not convinced top Indologists to abandon the Aryan theory, however.
The final changes in California's textbooks are expected in the next few weeks, but in the meantime, mainstream academics, both in America and abroad, are setting off alarm bells.
"It was a whitewash," says Michael Witzel, a Harvard University Sanskrit scholar and Indologist, who testified before the commission in Sacramento. "The textbooks before were not very good, but at least they were more or less presentable. Now, it is completely incorrect."
Aryan invasion a British-era theory
Early proponents of the "Aryan Invasion Theory" proposed in 1850 by philologist Max Mueller may have had political agendas to justify the subjugation of the subcontinent, Mr. Witzel says, but the preponderance of evidence shows that Aryans came to India, with their horses, their chariots, and their religious beliefs, from outside.
"Unquestionably, all sides of Indian history must be repeatedly re-examined," wrote Witzel and comparative historian Steve Farmer, in an influential article in the Indian magazine Frontline in 2000. "But any massive revisions must arise from the discovery of new evidence, not from desires to boost national or sectarian pride at any cost."
On the other side of the debate, the historian Meenakshi Jain, a self-described nationalist, says that history is meant to be rewritten, depending on the perspective and needs of the present time.
"Indic civilization has been a big victim of misrepresentation and belittling of our culture," says Ms. Jain, a historian at Delhi University and author of a high school history textbook accepted by India's previous government, led by the pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party.
Pride has its place in history?
Like many Hindus, Jain is proud of the accomplishments of Indian history, such as the fact that three small Hindu kingdoms - Kabul, Zabul, and Sindh - were able to hold off invading Muslim armies for 400 years. She also thinks that students should learn that some of India's most famous temples were commissioned not by upper caste Hindu kings but by aboriginal tribes, who in modern times have been relegated to "backward status."
"There is no such thing as an objective history," Jain says. "So when we write a textbook, we should make students aware of the status of current research of leading scholars in the field. It should not shut out a love for motherland, a pride in your past. If you teach that your country is backward, that it has no redeeming features in our civilization, it can damage a young perspective."
But no matter which version of Indian history California adopts for its 6th graders, it is bound to aggravate someone. The Board of Education has already heard from South Indians who argued that the HEF and Vedic Foundation represent a North Indian upper-caste perspective.
"We were saying, 'These groups don't speak for us,' " says Anu Mandavilli, herself a South Indian. When groups like the Vedic Foundation try to simplify Hinduism as the worship of a single god, "they have their own agendas."
Source: CS Monitor via Yahoo! News
'Gangster US' accused over torture
By David Rennie, in Strasbourg
(Filed: 25/01/2006)
An investigator for Europe's leading human rights watchdog accused America yesterday of "gangster tactics" in its war on terrorism, notably the illegal transfer of terrorist suspects to countries likely to torture them.
Dick Marty, a Swiss senator, told the Council of Europe that the US, with European complicity, had shipped possibly more than 100 suspects to countries where they faced torture.
"The entire continent is involved," Mr Marty told its parliamentary assembly.
He presented colleagues with an interim report dominated by newspaper cuttings and buttressed with evidence from an Italian inquiry into the alleged 2003 kidnapping by the CIA of a radical Egyptian cleric, Osama Moustafa Hassan Nasr, in Milan.
Mr Marty said it was "highly unlikely that European governments, or at least their intelligence services, were unaware" of such abductions.
He accused Britain of particular complicity on the basis of a leaked secret memo from Sir Michael Wood, the chief legal adviser to the Foreign Office. In the 2003 memo Sir Michael asserted that there was no legal barrier to using foreign intelligence obtained under torture.
The document was handed to Mr Marty and the Council of Europe by Craig Murray, a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan who has become a fierce critic of British foreign policy. Giving evidence to the Strasbourg assembly, he said that, as envoy in Tashkent after September 11, 2001, he read CIA intelligence, shared with MI6, derived from torture sessions.
Later he said Britain was "much more deeply implicated" than other European nations in CIA extraordinary renditions, or the transfer of detainees outside normal judicial channels.
Several British members of the assembly, which gathers MPs from 46 countries, criticised Mr Marty's report.
Michael Hancock, a Liberal Democrat, said it needed to have "more substance. . . many of the issues are clouded in myth and a desire to kick America."
Denis MacShane, the former Europe minister, said the report had "more holes than a Swiss cheese".
The Council of Europe, which is independent of the European Union, was set up in 1949 as a guardian of human rights in Europe.
Source: Telegraph | News
(Filed: 25/01/2006)
An investigator for Europe's leading human rights watchdog accused America yesterday of "gangster tactics" in its war on terrorism, notably the illegal transfer of terrorist suspects to countries likely to torture them.
Dick Marty, a Swiss senator, told the Council of Europe that the US, with European complicity, had shipped possibly more than 100 suspects to countries where they faced torture.
"The entire continent is involved," Mr Marty told its parliamentary assembly.
He presented colleagues with an interim report dominated by newspaper cuttings and buttressed with evidence from an Italian inquiry into the alleged 2003 kidnapping by the CIA of a radical Egyptian cleric, Osama Moustafa Hassan Nasr, in Milan.
Mr Marty said it was "highly unlikely that European governments, or at least their intelligence services, were unaware" of such abductions.
He accused Britain of particular complicity on the basis of a leaked secret memo from Sir Michael Wood, the chief legal adviser to the Foreign Office. In the 2003 memo Sir Michael asserted that there was no legal barrier to using foreign intelligence obtained under torture.
The document was handed to Mr Marty and the Council of Europe by Craig Murray, a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan who has become a fierce critic of British foreign policy. Giving evidence to the Strasbourg assembly, he said that, as envoy in Tashkent after September 11, 2001, he read CIA intelligence, shared with MI6, derived from torture sessions.
Later he said Britain was "much more deeply implicated" than other European nations in CIA extraordinary renditions, or the transfer of detainees outside normal judicial channels.
Several British members of the assembly, which gathers MPs from 46 countries, criticised Mr Marty's report.
Michael Hancock, a Liberal Democrat, said it needed to have "more substance. . . many of the issues are clouded in myth and a desire to kick America."
Denis MacShane, the former Europe minister, said the report had "more holes than a Swiss cheese".
The Council of Europe, which is independent of the European Union, was set up in 1949 as a guardian of human rights in Europe.
Source: Telegraph | News
Sunday, January 22, 2006
Pakistan lifts ban on Indian films
Randeep Ramesh, south Asia correspondent
Monday January 23, 2006
The Guardian
Bollywood movies, the subcontinent's most visible cultural export, are to be allowed to be screened in Pakistan, which has decided to lift the decades-old ban on Indian films as part of the peace process between the two neighbours.
Pakistan has outlawed public screenings of Indian films since a 1965 war, but has now removed from censorship guidelines the all-important words "Indian artiste" and "Indian director", according to the Times of India.
The paper quoted Saeed Rizvi, president of the Pakistan Film Producers Association, as saying prohibitions on these two had "had earlier prevented release of films of Indian actors and directors in Pakistan".
The first Indian film to be shown in Pakistan with formal permission will be the 1984 romance Sohni Mahiwal, a Russian-Indian venture. Mr Rizvi said the decision could lead to joint Pakistan-India projects. "We have wanted this to happen for a long time. With this notification things definitely look bright for our industry," he was quoted as saying.
India's Hindi-language film industry, centred in Mumbai and known as Bollywood, is the world's largest in terms of viewers and number of films it produces. Pakistanis, whose language Urdu is closely related to Hindi, lap up Indian films - usually by watching them on illegally recorded videos and DVDs. Illicit copies are easy to find in every Pakistani city.
Mutual admiration has toned down the jingoism in Bollywood, letting in storylines that reflect the current mood of reconciliation between the countries.
Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf is a Bollywood fan. Last year, invited to a state dinner with the Pakistani leader was Mukherjee, an actress whose role as a Pakistani woman who falls in love with an Indian jet fighter ace in Veer Zaara won hearts across the border. Despite 50 years of antagonism, cinema-goers in both countries have made Bollywood actors superstars.
Source: Guardian Unlimited
Monday January 23, 2006
The Guardian
Bollywood movies, the subcontinent's most visible cultural export, are to be allowed to be screened in Pakistan, which has decided to lift the decades-old ban on Indian films as part of the peace process between the two neighbours.
Pakistan has outlawed public screenings of Indian films since a 1965 war, but has now removed from censorship guidelines the all-important words "Indian artiste" and "Indian director", according to the Times of India.
The paper quoted Saeed Rizvi, president of the Pakistan Film Producers Association, as saying prohibitions on these two had "had earlier prevented release of films of Indian actors and directors in Pakistan".
The first Indian film to be shown in Pakistan with formal permission will be the 1984 romance Sohni Mahiwal, a Russian-Indian venture. Mr Rizvi said the decision could lead to joint Pakistan-India projects. "We have wanted this to happen for a long time. With this notification things definitely look bright for our industry," he was quoted as saying.
India's Hindi-language film industry, centred in Mumbai and known as Bollywood, is the world's largest in terms of viewers and number of films it produces. Pakistanis, whose language Urdu is closely related to Hindi, lap up Indian films - usually by watching them on illegally recorded videos and DVDs. Illicit copies are easy to find in every Pakistani city.
Mutual admiration has toned down the jingoism in Bollywood, letting in storylines that reflect the current mood of reconciliation between the countries.
Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf is a Bollywood fan. Last year, invited to a state dinner with the Pakistani leader was Mukherjee, an actress whose role as a Pakistani woman who falls in love with an Indian jet fighter ace in Veer Zaara won hearts across the border. Despite 50 years of antagonism, cinema-goers in both countries have made Bollywood actors superstars.
Source: Guardian Unlimited
Saturday, January 21, 2006
Pakistan-India bus links Punjab
India and Pakistan have launched a new cross-border bus service which directly links divided Punjab for the first time since partition in 1947.
Source: BBC News
Passengers travelling on the inaugural Lahore-Amritsar bus received a rousing welcome as they crossed into India at the Wagah border post.
Among the 26 passengers were 15 Pakistani officials and the famous folk singer, Reshma.
This is the rivals' third such link and is seen as a symbol of peace.
School children showered rose petals on the bus as it crossed the land border into India.
Earlier, the bus had left the Pakistani city of Lahore amid the beating of drums.
India and Pakistan restarted a Delhi to Lahore service in 2003 and a route across the disputed and divided region of Kashmir began in April last year.
Cultural ties
"It will promote tourism, understanding and stability between the two countries," Aslam Iqbal, a minister in the provincial Punjab government, told the Associated Press.
Reshma told the BBC her journey had been pleasant and comfortable.
"I was originally booked on a flight to India but cancelled my booking and bought a bus ticket instead," she said.
"Cultural ties are going to play a major role in improving ties."
She plans to give a number of performances during her stay in India.
The new service comes as a boost to India's Sikh population who will be able to use it to visit the holy site of Nankana Sahib in Pakistan, where the founder of their faith, Guru Nanak, was born.
A separate service connecting Amritsar to Nankana Sahib is also due to begin later this year.
Bus diplomacy
Next month, India and Pakistan will also relaunch a rail service between the Indian state of Rajasthan and Pakistan's Sindh province.
The service was stopped 40 years ago when the two countries went to war.
The bus diplomacy is one of the more tangible elements of the two-year peace process between the nuclear-capable rivals, who nearly went to war over Kashmir in 2002.
India and Pakistan both claim Kashmir in its entirety and have fought two of their three wars since independence in 1947 over the region.
Despite the increasing transport links, the two nations have still made little progress on a political solution for Kashmir.
The cross-Kashmir bus service was suspended indefinitely in the wake of the 8 October earthquake that killed about 75,000 people.Source: BBC News
Friday, January 20, 2006
Google Rebuffs Feds on Search Requests
By MICHAEL LIEDTKE, AP Business Writer Thu Jan 19, 11:04 PM ET
SAN FRANCISCO - Google Inc. is rebuffing the Bush administration's demand for a peek at what millions of people have been looking up on the Internet's leading search engine — a request that underscores the potential for online databases to become tools for government surveillance.
Mountain View-based Google has refused to comply with a White House subpoena first issued last summer, prompting U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales this week to ask a federal judge in San Jose for an order to hand over the requested records.
The government wants a list all requests entered into Google's search engine during an unspecified single week — a breakdown that could conceivably span tens of millions of queries. In addition, it seeks 1 million randomly selected Web addresses from various Google databases.
In court papers that the San Jose Mercury News reported on after seeing them Wednesday, the Bush administration depicts the information as vital in its effort to restore online child protection laws that have been struck down by the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Yahoo Inc., which runs the Internet's second-most used search engine behind Google, confirmed Thursday that it had complied with a similar government subpoena.
Although the government says it isn't seeking any data that ties personal information to search requests, the subpoena still raises serious privacy concerns, experts said. Those worries have been magnified by recent revelations that the White House authorized eavesdropping on civilian communications after the Sept. 11 attacks without obtaining court approval.
"Search engines now play such an important part in our daily lives that many people probably contact Google more often than they do their own mother," said Thomas Burke, a San Francisco attorney who has handled several prominent cases involving privacy issues.
"Just as most people would be upset if the government wanted to know how much you called your mother and what you talked about, they should be upset about this, too."
The content of search request sometimes contain information about the person making the query.
For instance, it's not unusual for search requests to include names, medical profiles or
Social Security information, said Pam Dixon, executive director for the World Privacy Forum.
"This is exactly the kind of thing we have been worrying about with search engines for some time," Dixon said. "Google should be commended for fighting this."
Every other search engine served similar subpoenas by the Bush administration has complied so far, according to court documents. The cooperating search engines weren't identified.
Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Yahoo stressed that it didn't reveal any personal information. "We are rigorous defenders of our users' privacy," Yahoo spokeswoman Mary Osako said Thursday. "In our opinion, this is not a privacy issue."
Microsoft Corp. MSN, the No. 3 search engine, declined to say whether it even received a similar subpoena. "MSN works closely with law enforcement officials worldwide to assist them when requested," the company said in a statement.
As the Internet's dominant search engine, Google has built up a valuable storehouse of information that "makes it a very attractive target for law enforcement," said Chris Hoofnagle, senior counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
The
Department of Justice argues that Google's cooperation is essential in its effort to simulate how people navigate the Web.
In a separate case in Pennsylvania, the Bush administration is trying to prove that Internet filters don't do an adequate job of preventing children from accessing online pornography and other objectionable destinations.
Obtaining the subpoenaed information from Google "would assist the government in its efforts to understand the behavior of current Web users, (and) to estimate how often Web users encounter harmful-to-minors material in the course of their searches," the Justice Department wrote in a brief filed Wednesday
Google — whose motto when it went public in 2004 was "do no evil" — contends that submitting to the subpoena would represent a betrayal to its users, even if all personal information is stripped from the search terms sought by the government.
"Google's acceding to the request would suggest that it is willing to reveal information about those who use its services. This is not a perception that Google can accept," company attorney Ashok Ramani wrote in a letter included in the government's filing.
Complying with the subpoena also wound threaten to expose some of Google's "crown-jewel trade secrets," Ramani wrote. Google is particularly concerned that the information could be used to deduce the size of its index and how many computers it uses to crunch the requests.
"This information would be highly valuable to competitors or miscreants seeking to harm Google's business," Ramani wrote.
Dixon is hoping Google's battle with the government reminds people to be careful how they interact with search engines.
"When you are looking at that blank search box, you should remember that what you fill can come back to haunt you unless you take precautions," she said.
___
On the Web:
http://www.worldprivacyforum.org
Electronic Privacy Information Center: http://www.epic.org
Source: AP via Yahoo! News
SAN FRANCISCO - Google Inc. is rebuffing the Bush administration's demand for a peek at what millions of people have been looking up on the Internet's leading search engine — a request that underscores the potential for online databases to become tools for government surveillance.
Mountain View-based Google has refused to comply with a White House subpoena first issued last summer, prompting U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales this week to ask a federal judge in San Jose for an order to hand over the requested records.
The government wants a list all requests entered into Google's search engine during an unspecified single week — a breakdown that could conceivably span tens of millions of queries. In addition, it seeks 1 million randomly selected Web addresses from various Google databases.
In court papers that the San Jose Mercury News reported on after seeing them Wednesday, the Bush administration depicts the information as vital in its effort to restore online child protection laws that have been struck down by the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Yahoo Inc., which runs the Internet's second-most used search engine behind Google, confirmed Thursday that it had complied with a similar government subpoena.
Although the government says it isn't seeking any data that ties personal information to search requests, the subpoena still raises serious privacy concerns, experts said. Those worries have been magnified by recent revelations that the White House authorized eavesdropping on civilian communications after the Sept. 11 attacks without obtaining court approval.
"Search engines now play such an important part in our daily lives that many people probably contact Google more often than they do their own mother," said Thomas Burke, a San Francisco attorney who has handled several prominent cases involving privacy issues.
"Just as most people would be upset if the government wanted to know how much you called your mother and what you talked about, they should be upset about this, too."
The content of search request sometimes contain information about the person making the query.
For instance, it's not unusual for search requests to include names, medical profiles or
Social Security information, said Pam Dixon, executive director for the World Privacy Forum.
"This is exactly the kind of thing we have been worrying about with search engines for some time," Dixon said. "Google should be commended for fighting this."
Every other search engine served similar subpoenas by the Bush administration has complied so far, according to court documents. The cooperating search engines weren't identified.
Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Yahoo stressed that it didn't reveal any personal information. "We are rigorous defenders of our users' privacy," Yahoo spokeswoman Mary Osako said Thursday. "In our opinion, this is not a privacy issue."
Microsoft Corp. MSN, the No. 3 search engine, declined to say whether it even received a similar subpoena. "MSN works closely with law enforcement officials worldwide to assist them when requested," the company said in a statement.
As the Internet's dominant search engine, Google has built up a valuable storehouse of information that "makes it a very attractive target for law enforcement," said Chris Hoofnagle, senior counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
The
Department of Justice argues that Google's cooperation is essential in its effort to simulate how people navigate the Web.
In a separate case in Pennsylvania, the Bush administration is trying to prove that Internet filters don't do an adequate job of preventing children from accessing online pornography and other objectionable destinations.
Obtaining the subpoenaed information from Google "would assist the government in its efforts to understand the behavior of current Web users, (and) to estimate how often Web users encounter harmful-to-minors material in the course of their searches," the Justice Department wrote in a brief filed Wednesday
Google — whose motto when it went public in 2004 was "do no evil" — contends that submitting to the subpoena would represent a betrayal to its users, even if all personal information is stripped from the search terms sought by the government.
"Google's acceding to the request would suggest that it is willing to reveal information about those who use its services. This is not a perception that Google can accept," company attorney Ashok Ramani wrote in a letter included in the government's filing.
Complying with the subpoena also wound threaten to expose some of Google's "crown-jewel trade secrets," Ramani wrote. Google is particularly concerned that the information could be used to deduce the size of its index and how many computers it uses to crunch the requests.
"This information would be highly valuable to competitors or miscreants seeking to harm Google's business," Ramani wrote.
Dixon is hoping Google's battle with the government reminds people to be careful how they interact with search engines.
"When you are looking at that blank search box, you should remember that what you fill can come back to haunt you unless you take precautions," she said.
___
On the Web:
http://www.worldprivacyforum.org
Electronic Privacy Information Center: http://www.epic.org
Source: AP via Yahoo! News
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Palestinian Film Gets Thumbs Down at Home
By ALI DARAGHMEH, Associated Press Writer Tue Jan 17, 4:38 PM ETNABLUS, West Bank - The Palestinian film "Paradise Now," which explores the lives of a pair of suicide bombers and just won the Golden Globe for best foreign film, got two thumbs down Tuesday in this tough West Bank city where it was filmed.
Although the film — which snared the Golden Globe in Los Angeles on Monday — has never been screened in Nablus, residents here said the clips they saw on satellite television portrayed the bombers as godless and less than heroic.
"This movie doesn't help the Palestinian cause," said an armed Palestinian militant who would not give his name because he's on the run. "People who go to carry out bombings do not hesitate so much."
The film tells the story of two Nablus car mechanics who are sent to carry out a double suicide-bombing in Tel Aviv. They shave their beards to blend into Israeli crowds more easily, pray and prepare farewell videos.
The movie has received praise around the world and has been played in about 60 countries, according to director Hany Abu-Assad.
Speaking during the glitzy award ceremony Monday, Abu-Assad said he believed the film's success stemmed from the world's recognition that the Palestinians deserve "liberty and equality unconditionally."
Most of the movie was shot in Nablus, a militant stronghold and the home base of many of the suicide bombers sent to attack Israeli targets in recent years. The conflict served as a constant backdrop for the film, which showed houses demolished in Israeli army operations, the sound of airstrikes against Palestinian militants and large crowds waiting at army roadblocks.
The violence even interrupted the filming — once when
Israel carried out a missile strike at militants near the camera crew and once when militants briefly kidnapped a cameraman in an effort to stop the filming of a movie they believed would portray them in a negative light.
The filming was then moved to an Israeli Arab city to avoid further interruptions.
On Tuesday, a group of Palestinians at the Sport Shoes store in the center of the city argued over a breakfast of humus and falafel about whether or not the film should be shown in Nablus, where movie theaters were closed more than five years ago for providing frivolous entertainment in light of the bloodshed with Israel.
"This movie wasn't interesting enough for us," said Ghassan Jbeileh, a shoe salesman. "We have enough problems with people who can't put food on the table."
A man with a pistol on his belt who would not give his name said the movie must be good for Israel or it would never have succeeded in Hollywood.
But Peter Samchan, a trader on the Palestinian stock exchange who saw clips of the film on the Al Jazeera satellite station and read about it in the newspaper, said the Palestinians have to foster openness and should not have interrupted the filming or prejudged the movie.
"We need to let them do their work and then decide if it's good or not," he said. "How can we be called a democratic people if we don't let someone film a movie in Nablus."
Some hoped the film's international recognition would help relieve the Islamic hard-liners' influence on society and allow the screening of such a movie here.
"I have a dream that one day we will see it in a cinema in Nablus," said Muthana al-Qadi, who helped coordinate the filming here.
The film has met with mixed success in Israel, having been screened only a few times at a handful of cinemas. Some Israeli viewers said it helped them understand Palestinian suicide bombers, although not legitimize them.
During the Golden Globe ceremony, the film's place of origin was announced as "Palestine." It's also in the running for the foreign film Academy Award as the entry for "Palestine." Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said that it was incorrect to refer to a Palestine before a Palestinian state has been established.
"There is a Palestinian Authority, but not a Palestinian state," Regev said.
Amir Harel, the film's Israeli producer, said the mention of "Palestine" in the ceremony did not bother him and he supported its presentation of a different, more human face for Palestinian suicide bombers.
"First and foremost the movie is a good work of art," Harel said. "But if the movie raises awareness or presents a different side of reality, this is an important thing."
Source: AP via Yahoo! News
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
How the suicide bomber saved Zionism
By Bradley Burston
It has been suggested that suicide bombings were a total failure. Maybe not.
True, as far as its stated objectives were concerned, the people who invented suicide bombing accomplished nothing.
They had hoped to see Israel, to paraphrase Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, collapse as weakly as a spider's web under pressure. They had advertised the suicide bomber to crowds in Jenin and Jabalya as the sole Palestinian defense against attacks by U.S.-made IDF weaponry. They had argued that the shahid salvaged Palestinian honor.
All they managed to salvage, in the end, was Zionism.
Think back. The 1990s, the decade of false dawns, nearly killed this country. The Oslo delusion of peace combined with the NASDAQ illusion of wealth-beyond-measure, to divide and alienate Israelis as never before.
Members of the secular left suddenly imagined themselves to have become citizens of the world, shackled no longer by tradition, parochialism, patriotism. Ultra-orthodox in their non-conventionality, cool to the point of anesthesia, their antipathy to Zionism bordered on the physical.
The very mention of Zionism had become a joke. The Hebrew words Tzionut [Zionism] and Tziniut [cynicism] had become interchangeable.
The religious right steamed down the opposite path. Betrayed by Oslo and Yitzhak Rabin, the very man who had brought them Greater Israel in 1967, many on the right plunged into a mindset that implied that settlements were the only genuine Zionism, and that Israel had been better off when the world had kept the whole country in diplomatic quarantine in the 1970s and 80s
As Palestinian armed groups vied with one another for the title of most vicious, least scrupulous, most likely to kill innocents - as terror gangs turned Palestine into Columbine by teaching children to worship weaponry and the death it manufactures - an unfamiliar sensation was felt across Israel. Unity. A renewed sense of mutual responsibility. A return to caring for one's neighbor, and for the stranger in distress.
In this place, where the banality of violence and the venality of leadership have rendered shock as rare as awe, suicide bombings shook Israelis back into caring about Israel.
For the first time in decades, a genuine consensus was felt in this country, a mass movement of the heart, identifiable not by the colors red, orange, or yellow, neither by round spectacles or head-coverings, dismissible neither by ethnic, religious nor class categorization.
There was quiet courage in this movement of the Radical Center, this breaking of tribal bonds that dictated voting, thinking, medical care, soccer allegiance. There's a quiet defiance in telling extremists that they can no longer speak and act in the name of the People as a whole.
For my Palestinian friends, this word:
At this point you hardly need to be told that suicidal policies are, well, self-destructive. But it might be prove instructive to see the effect that the last suicide bombing of 2005 had on this country.
It was Hanukkah, and a young IDF officer stood between a young Jihadist and the celebrating children next to whom the bomber planned to detonate his 33 pounds of explosives.
The day after the bomber hit the detonator at that last-minute checkpoint, killing himself, the officer, a Palestinian taxi driver, and another Palestinian, the headlines in Israel referred to the slain second lieutenant Binamo by his first name only, as if his loss was felt by nearly every household in Israel. Because it was.
This is the lesson that Palestinians would be well advised to learn about the people on this side:
You have made a new kind of martyr hero in the Holy Land, the kind who keeps the shahid from making Jewish infants and Jewish mothers into martyrs against their will.
You have demolished your cause by restoring our faith in the concept that there are those who believe strongly in the elimination of the Jewish people by violent means.
You may believe that you invented steadfastness and stubbornness. Think again.
Now is the time to decide. Hamas listens to public opinion. Make it known. You have a choice. You can play with your guns, or you can have a country.
There is a new kind of Israel, a better one, in fact, for which, perversion of perversions, we have the suicide bomber to thank.
This Israel will be harder to defeat that the enemy you faced five years ago. You have only yourselves to thank. You and your bomber.
Source: Haaretz
It has been suggested that suicide bombings were a total failure. Maybe not.
True, as far as its stated objectives were concerned, the people who invented suicide bombing accomplished nothing.
They had hoped to see Israel, to paraphrase Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, collapse as weakly as a spider's web under pressure. They had advertised the suicide bomber to crowds in Jenin and Jabalya as the sole Palestinian defense against attacks by U.S.-made IDF weaponry. They had argued that the shahid salvaged Palestinian honor.
All they managed to salvage, in the end, was Zionism.
Think back. The 1990s, the decade of false dawns, nearly killed this country. The Oslo delusion of peace combined with the NASDAQ illusion of wealth-beyond-measure, to divide and alienate Israelis as never before.
Members of the secular left suddenly imagined themselves to have become citizens of the world, shackled no longer by tradition, parochialism, patriotism. Ultra-orthodox in their non-conventionality, cool to the point of anesthesia, their antipathy to Zionism bordered on the physical.
The very mention of Zionism had become a joke. The Hebrew words Tzionut [Zionism] and Tziniut [cynicism] had become interchangeable.
The religious right steamed down the opposite path. Betrayed by Oslo and Yitzhak Rabin, the very man who had brought them Greater Israel in 1967, many on the right plunged into a mindset that implied that settlements were the only genuine Zionism, and that Israel had been better off when the world had kept the whole country in diplomatic quarantine in the 1970s and 80s
As Palestinian armed groups vied with one another for the title of most vicious, least scrupulous, most likely to kill innocents - as terror gangs turned Palestine into Columbine by teaching children to worship weaponry and the death it manufactures - an unfamiliar sensation was felt across Israel. Unity. A renewed sense of mutual responsibility. A return to caring for one's neighbor, and for the stranger in distress.
In this place, where the banality of violence and the venality of leadership have rendered shock as rare as awe, suicide bombings shook Israelis back into caring about Israel.
For the first time in decades, a genuine consensus was felt in this country, a mass movement of the heart, identifiable not by the colors red, orange, or yellow, neither by round spectacles or head-coverings, dismissible neither by ethnic, religious nor class categorization.
There was quiet courage in this movement of the Radical Center, this breaking of tribal bonds that dictated voting, thinking, medical care, soccer allegiance. There's a quiet defiance in telling extremists that they can no longer speak and act in the name of the People as a whole.
For my Palestinian friends, this word:
At this point you hardly need to be told that suicidal policies are, well, self-destructive. But it might be prove instructive to see the effect that the last suicide bombing of 2005 had on this country.
It was Hanukkah, and a young IDF officer stood between a young Jihadist and the celebrating children next to whom the bomber planned to detonate his 33 pounds of explosives.
The day after the bomber hit the detonator at that last-minute checkpoint, killing himself, the officer, a Palestinian taxi driver, and another Palestinian, the headlines in Israel referred to the slain second lieutenant Binamo by his first name only, as if his loss was felt by nearly every household in Israel. Because it was.
This is the lesson that Palestinians would be well advised to learn about the people on this side:
You have made a new kind of martyr hero in the Holy Land, the kind who keeps the shahid from making Jewish infants and Jewish mothers into martyrs against their will.
You have demolished your cause by restoring our faith in the concept that there are those who believe strongly in the elimination of the Jewish people by violent means.
You may believe that you invented steadfastness and stubbornness. Think again.
Now is the time to decide. Hamas listens to public opinion. Make it known. You have a choice. You can play with your guns, or you can have a country.
There is a new kind of Israel, a better one, in fact, for which, perversion of perversions, we have the suicide bomber to thank.
This Israel will be harder to defeat that the enemy you faced five years ago. You have only yourselves to thank. You and your bomber.
Source: Haaretz
Saturday, January 14, 2006
Ex-US diplomat blames Israel for Pakistani leader's death
Declan Walsh
Monday December 5, 2005
A retired US ambassador has reignited the debate about one of south Asia's greatest whodunits, the death in 1988 of Pakistan's president General Zia ul-Haq, by saying that Israel was responsible.
John Gunther Dean, then US ambassador to India, said he suspected Israel's secret service Mossad of downing Gen Zia's aircraft in an effort to stop Pakistan developing the nuclear bomb. But when he reported these suspicions to Washington, he was accused of being mentally unbalanced and subsequently forced into retirement. Almost 20 years later, Mr Dean, 80, was speaking out in an attempt to tell his side of the story.
Article continues
The circumstances of Gen Zia ul-Haq's death are as contentious as the 1963 assassination of John F Kennedy. The military dictator died on August 17 1988, after leaving the town of Bahawalpur, in Punjab province, where he had been watching a trial of American M1 tanks.
Moments after Gen Zia's C-130 plane took off it wobbled then plunged to the ground, killing all on board including the US ambassador to Pakistan and a US general. Conspiracy theorists have focused on a crate of mangos placed on board moments before take-off. Some believe it was sprayed with VX, a poison gas, which only a few countries had.
Gen Zia had a long list of enemies, all of whom have been blamed for his death over the years. But Israel has received little attention. Mr Dean told the World Policy Journal that it was plausible Mossad had orchestrated an assassination plot, believing Gen Zia's boast that he was only "a screwdriver's turn away from the bomb". But when he told his superiors he was removed from his position in Delhi and his career ended. Mr Dean, a Jew who fled Nazi Germany, said he had no proof of Israeli responsibility. General Muhammad Ali Durrani, a retired Zia-era commander, told the journal the Israeli thesis was "far-fetched" and blamed the crash on the C-130, which he said had a history of faults.
Source: Guardian Unlimited
Monday December 5, 2005
A retired US ambassador has reignited the debate about one of south Asia's greatest whodunits, the death in 1988 of Pakistan's president General Zia ul-Haq, by saying that Israel was responsible.
John Gunther Dean, then US ambassador to India, said he suspected Israel's secret service Mossad of downing Gen Zia's aircraft in an effort to stop Pakistan developing the nuclear bomb. But when he reported these suspicions to Washington, he was accused of being mentally unbalanced and subsequently forced into retirement. Almost 20 years later, Mr Dean, 80, was speaking out in an attempt to tell his side of the story.
Article continues
The circumstances of Gen Zia ul-Haq's death are as contentious as the 1963 assassination of John F Kennedy. The military dictator died on August 17 1988, after leaving the town of Bahawalpur, in Punjab province, where he had been watching a trial of American M1 tanks.
Moments after Gen Zia's C-130 plane took off it wobbled then plunged to the ground, killing all on board including the US ambassador to Pakistan and a US general. Conspiracy theorists have focused on a crate of mangos placed on board moments before take-off. Some believe it was sprayed with VX, a poison gas, which only a few countries had.
Gen Zia had a long list of enemies, all of whom have been blamed for his death over the years. But Israel has received little attention. Mr Dean told the World Policy Journal that it was plausible Mossad had orchestrated an assassination plot, believing Gen Zia's boast that he was only "a screwdriver's turn away from the bomb". But when he told his superiors he was removed from his position in Delhi and his career ended. Mr Dean, a Jew who fled Nazi Germany, said he had no proof of Israeli responsibility. General Muhammad Ali Durrani, a retired Zia-era commander, told the journal the Israeli thesis was "far-fetched" and blamed the crash on the C-130, which he said had a history of faults.
Source: Guardian Unlimited
Thursday, January 12, 2006
The Briefing (1.26.06)
ROLLING STONE - January 26, 2006
CIA Plot to Dupe Iran With Falwed Nuke Backfires
In a secret - code named Merlin - the CIA apparently recruited a Russian scientist to deliver plans for a nuclear bomb to Iranian agents. According to State of War, a new book by New York Times reporter James Risen, the idea was to dupe Tehran by inserting design flaws into the blueprints, causing the Iranians to waste years building a fission bomb that would ultimately fizzle. But the plan backfired when the Russian scientist noticed the all-too-obvious flaws and offered to help the Iranians fix them. Though initiated under President Clinton in 2000, Merlin was endorsed by the Bush administration, which may have tried the same ruse on North Korea.
Bush Bypasses Senate to Appoint Unqualified Crony
While the Senate was adjourned for Christmas, President Bush used his power of "recess appointment" to install Julie Myers as the nation's top immigration official. Myers makes up for her complete lack of experience with some high-level connections: She is the niece of former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Richard Myers and the wife of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff's chief of staff. Bush's backdoor appointment avoided a showdown with Republican Sen. George Voinovich, who told Myers at her confirmation hearing that Chertoff should appear before the Senate and explain "why he thinks you're qualified for the job. Because based on your resume, I don't think you are."
President Reserves Right to Torture Terror Suspects
On December 15th, the president finally appeared to endorse the anti-torture statue authored by Sen. John McCain, declaring flatly that "this government does not torture." But when Bush signed the law on December 30th, he added a loophole: a "signing statement" asserting his authority to "protect the American people from further terrorist attacks." As a senior administration official explained, the statement allows Bush to waive the law - and torture terror suspects - in the name of national security. McCain quickly issued a statement noting that Congress refused to grant the president such a waiver - and pledged "strict oversight" to ensure the Bush implements the new law.
--------------
Source: January 26, 2006 issue of Rolling Stone.
CIA Plot to Dupe Iran With Falwed Nuke Backfires
In a secret - code named Merlin - the CIA apparently recruited a Russian scientist to deliver plans for a nuclear bomb to Iranian agents. According to State of War, a new book by New York Times reporter James Risen, the idea was to dupe Tehran by inserting design flaws into the blueprints, causing the Iranians to waste years building a fission bomb that would ultimately fizzle. But the plan backfired when the Russian scientist noticed the all-too-obvious flaws and offered to help the Iranians fix them. Though initiated under President Clinton in 2000, Merlin was endorsed by the Bush administration, which may have tried the same ruse on North Korea.
Bush Bypasses Senate to Appoint Unqualified Crony
While the Senate was adjourned for Christmas, President Bush used his power of "recess appointment" to install Julie Myers as the nation's top immigration official. Myers makes up for her complete lack of experience with some high-level connections: She is the niece of former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Richard Myers and the wife of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff's chief of staff. Bush's backdoor appointment avoided a showdown with Republican Sen. George Voinovich, who told Myers at her confirmation hearing that Chertoff should appear before the Senate and explain "why he thinks you're qualified for the job. Because based on your resume, I don't think you are."
President Reserves Right to Torture Terror Suspects
On December 15th, the president finally appeared to endorse the anti-torture statue authored by Sen. John McCain, declaring flatly that "this government does not torture." But when Bush signed the law on December 30th, he added a loophole: a "signing statement" asserting his authority to "protect the American people from further terrorist attacks." As a senior administration official explained, the statement allows Bush to waive the law - and torture terror suspects - in the name of national security. McCain quickly issued a statement noting that Congress refused to grant the president such a waiver - and pledged "strict oversight" to ensure the Bush implements the new law.
--------------
Source: January 26, 2006 issue of Rolling Stone.
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Israel Suspends Contact With Pat Robertson
JERUSALEM - Israel has suspended contact with evangelist Pat Robertson for suggesting Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine punishment for withdrawing from the Gaza Strip.
The controversy has cast doubt on plans for a Christian tourism center that would showcase the growing flow of money and influence from U.S. church groups.
The decision, announced Wednesday by Israeli officials, does not affect other Christian groups that also consider it their spiritual duty to support Israel as fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
Israeli leaders see the Christian allies as tireless lobbyists in Washington and elsewhere. The evangelicals also funnel millions of dollars each year to Jewish settlers in the West Bank and — before last year's pullout — the Gaza Strip.
Tourism Minister Abraham Hirchson said he gave instructions to "stop all contact" with groups associated with Robertson. Last week, Robertson implied Sharon's massive stroke was a blow for "dividing God's land" with the withdrawal from Gaza and four West Bank settlements.
But Hirchson said the order did not apply to "all the evangelical community, God forbid."
Robertson is leading a group of evangelicals who have pledged to raise $50 million to build the Christian Heritage Center in Israel's northern Galilee region, where tradition says Jesus lived and taught.
Under a tentative agreement, Robertson's group was to put up the funding, while Israel would provide land and infrastructure. Hirchson had predicted it would draw up to 1 million pilgrims a year, generate $1.5 billion in spending and support about 40,000 jobs.
But the fate of the project is now in question, said Ido Hartuv, spokesman for the tourism ministry.
"We will not do business with him, only with other evangelicals who don't back these comments," Hartuv said. "We will do business with other evangelical leaders, friends of Israel, but not with him."
A spokeswoman for Robertson's ministry declined to comment on Israel's decision.
"We have not talked to the Israelis on this topic," said spokeswoman Angell Watts. "We continue to maintain our long-standing commitment to the Jewish people and the state of Israel."
Robertson's comments on Sharon drew condemnation from other Christian leaders and President Bush.
"God considers this land to be his," Robertson said on his TV program "The 700 Club." "You read the Bible and he says 'This is my land,' and for any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away, God says, 'No, this is mine.'"
The "Christian Zionist" movement began to take shape in the 19th century, but in recent decades it strengthened into a powerful force with deep pockets. Some estimates place the annual figure of evangelical aid to Israel at more than $25 million. The Gaza withdrawal has become a new and potent rallying point.
In October, a group of Gaza settlers received a standing ovation from more than 5,000 Christians at a conference in Jerusalem sponsored by the International Christian Embassy, a private agency that promotes Christian ties to Israel.
Robertson's Christian Heritage Center is planned for 35 acres of rolling Galilee hills near key Christian sites, including Capernaum, the Mount of the Beatitudes, where Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount, and Tabgha — on the shores of the Sea of Galilee — where Christians believe Jesus performed the miracle of the loaves and fish.
Israel was considering leasing the land to the Christians for free.
Hartuv left the door open for continuing the project, but only with people who don't back Robertson's statements.
"We want to see who in the group supports his (Robertson's) statements. Those who support the statements cannot do business with us. Those that publicly support Ariel Sharon's recovery ... are welcome to do business with us," Hartuv said.
Source: AP via Yahoo! News
The controversy has cast doubt on plans for a Christian tourism center that would showcase the growing flow of money and influence from U.S. church groups.
The decision, announced Wednesday by Israeli officials, does not affect other Christian groups that also consider it their spiritual duty to support Israel as fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
Israeli leaders see the Christian allies as tireless lobbyists in Washington and elsewhere. The evangelicals also funnel millions of dollars each year to Jewish settlers in the West Bank and — before last year's pullout — the Gaza Strip.
Tourism Minister Abraham Hirchson said he gave instructions to "stop all contact" with groups associated with Robertson. Last week, Robertson implied Sharon's massive stroke was a blow for "dividing God's land" with the withdrawal from Gaza and four West Bank settlements.
But Hirchson said the order did not apply to "all the evangelical community, God forbid."
Robertson is leading a group of evangelicals who have pledged to raise $50 million to build the Christian Heritage Center in Israel's northern Galilee region, where tradition says Jesus lived and taught.
Under a tentative agreement, Robertson's group was to put up the funding, while Israel would provide land and infrastructure. Hirchson had predicted it would draw up to 1 million pilgrims a year, generate $1.5 billion in spending and support about 40,000 jobs.
But the fate of the project is now in question, said Ido Hartuv, spokesman for the tourism ministry.
"We will not do business with him, only with other evangelicals who don't back these comments," Hartuv said. "We will do business with other evangelical leaders, friends of Israel, but not with him."
A spokeswoman for Robertson's ministry declined to comment on Israel's decision.
"We have not talked to the Israelis on this topic," said spokeswoman Angell Watts. "We continue to maintain our long-standing commitment to the Jewish people and the state of Israel."
Robertson's comments on Sharon drew condemnation from other Christian leaders and President Bush.
"God considers this land to be his," Robertson said on his TV program "The 700 Club." "You read the Bible and he says 'This is my land,' and for any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away, God says, 'No, this is mine.'"
The "Christian Zionist" movement began to take shape in the 19th century, but in recent decades it strengthened into a powerful force with deep pockets. Some estimates place the annual figure of evangelical aid to Israel at more than $25 million. The Gaza withdrawal has become a new and potent rallying point.
In October, a group of Gaza settlers received a standing ovation from more than 5,000 Christians at a conference in Jerusalem sponsored by the International Christian Embassy, a private agency that promotes Christian ties to Israel.
Robertson's Christian Heritage Center is planned for 35 acres of rolling Galilee hills near key Christian sites, including Capernaum, the Mount of the Beatitudes, where Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount, and Tabgha — on the shores of the Sea of Galilee — where Christians believe Jesus performed the miracle of the loaves and fish.
Israel was considering leasing the land to the Christians for free.
Hartuv left the door open for continuing the project, but only with people who don't back Robertson's statements.
"We want to see who in the group supports his (Robertson's) statements. Those who support the statements cannot do business with us. Those that publicly support Ariel Sharon's recovery ... are welcome to do business with us," Hartuv said.
Source: AP via Yahoo! News
CBS Evening News gets new chief, no radical fixes
Third-place newscast is only network news show to see growth in viewers.
CBS Evening News is undergoing a quiet transformation and so far not the radical change that had been contemplated in the past year.
Another part of the shift began Monday as 60 Minutes veteran Rome Hartman took over as executive producer of the number three newscast, replacing Jim Murphy, who left before Christmas.
But Hartman and anchor Bob Schieffer say they aren't going to make wholesale changes to the house that Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather built.
"I'm going to try from the very start to raise the bar of our storytelling, reporting," Hartman said in a recent interview. "I want to break news, I want our reporting to be relentlessly original. But it's not going to be a radically different broadcast."
Hartman said there won't be different graphics or other eye-catching changes.
"You're not going to see anything radically different," Hartman said. "This is a good broadcast. It's been a good broadcast, and we're going to make it better."
Long an also-ran in the nightly newscasts, CBS has had more and more reasons for cheer recently at its West 57th Street Broadcast Center. After a serious wound from "Memogate"--the flawed report about President George W. Bush's Vietnam service--and Rather's departure after 24 years as anchor, Schieffer and the rest of the team have, since March, been righting the ship and launching the future of the news division. Ratings are up, as is morale.
Even as CBS News conducts its not-always-secret wooing of Today cohost Katie Couric, Hartman and Schieffer aren't treating the current CBS Evening News as temporary. The fate of the newscast, in one respect, has been in doubt for more than a year because Schieffer initially was a temporary anchor. And though CBS chief Leslie Moonves had been unimpressed with former CBS News president Andrew Heyward's efforts to remake the evening news, he's happy with what Schieffer has done.
Schieffer opened up the newscast and made it less stiff since he started in March. In an interview, Schieffer said he considers himself more of a "player-coach" who is trying to spotlight the next generation of CBS News. That's Lara Logan, Trish Regan, Sharon Alfonsi, and Lee Cowan, among others, as well as such other established correspondents as Gloria Borger, Bob Orr, and Jim Axelrod.
"These are people you can build a news department around. That's what we're going to do. My job is to make sure these people get on television," Schieffer said. He added: "You've got to have a good mix of veterans and younger people. I'm not the one that gets the news here. They're the ones who get the news."
While still firmly in third place, CBS is the only nightly newscast season-to-date to see an increase in total viewers (up 216,000 through January 1, compared with about 600,000 declines at ABC and NBC). That improvement is due in no small measure to Murphy, whose six-year tenure was the longest of any executive producer in CBS Evening News history.
"We could not have done this without him," Schieffer said.
Schieffer's own future? He said he's having fun and enjoying himself but knows the assignment isn't permanent.
"It depends on Katie," Schieffer said of the options Couric is said to be weighing as her contract at NBC News expires. "I hope we can get her here."
Source: Reuters via Yahoo! News
Sunday, January 08, 2006
The Last Word: Noam Chomsky
A Tale of Two Quagmires
Newsweek International
Jan. 9, 2006 issue - Noam Chomsky has been called one of the most influential intellectuals of the 20th century, but it's an accolade the 77-year-old MIT professor doesn't take very seriously. "People just want to hear something outside the rigid dogma they're used to," he says. "They're not going to hear it in the media." The linguistics prodigy turned political theorist has been a leading mind in the antiwar movement since the early '60s; he's also still a prolific author, producing more than six books in the past five years. He spoke to NEWSWEEK's Michael Hastings about the current geopolitical climate. Excerpts:
Hastings: Where do you see Iraq heading right now?
Chomsky: Well, it's extremely difficult to talk about this because of a very rigid doctrine that prevails in the United States and Britain which prevents us from looking at the situation realistically. The doctrine, to oversimplify, is that we have to believe the United States would have so-called liberated Iraq even if its main products were lettuce and pickles and [the] main energy resource of the world were in central Africa. Anyone who doesn't accept that is dismissed as a conspiracy theorist or a lunatic or something. But anyone with a functioning brain knows that that's not true—as all Iraqis do, for example. The United States invaded Iraq because its major resource is oil. And it gives the United States, to quote [Zbigniew] Brzezinski, "critical leverage" over its competitors, Europe and Japan. That's a policy that goes way back to the second world war. That's the fundamental reason for invading Iraq, not anything else.
Once we recognize that, we're able to begin talking about where Iraq is going. For example, there's a lot of talk about the United States bringing [about] a sovereign independent Iraq. That can't possibly be true. All you have to do is ask yourself what the policies would be in a more-or-less democratic Iraq. We know what they're likely to be. A democratic Iraq will have a Shiite majority, [with] close links to Iran. Furthermore, it's right across the border from Saudi Arabia, where there's a Shiite population which has been brutally repressed by the U.S.-backed fundamentalist tyranny. If there are any moves toward sovereignty in Shiite Iraq, or at least some sort of freedom, there are going to be effects across the border. That happens to be where most of Saudi Arabia's oil is. So you can see the ultimate nightmare developing from Washington's point of view.
You were involved in the antiwar movement in the 1960s. What do you think of the Vietnam-Iraq analogy?
I think there is no analogy whatsoever. That analogy is based on a misunderstanding of Iraq, and a misunderstanding of Vietnam. The misunderstanding of Iraq I've already described. The misunderstanding of Vietnam had to do with the war aims. The United States went to war in Vietnam for a very good reason. They were afraid Vietnam would be a successful model of independent development and that would have a virus effect—infect others who might try to follow the same course. There was a very simple war aim—destroy Vietnam. And they did it. The United States basically achieved its war aims in Vietnam by [1967]. It's called a loss, a defeat, because they didn't achieve the maximal aims, the maximal aims being turning it into something like the Philippines. They didn't do that. [But] they did achieve the major aims. It was possible to destroy Vietnam and leave. You can't destroy Iraq and leave. It's inconceivable.
Was the antiwar movement more successful in the '60s than it is today?
I think it's the other way around. The United States attacked Vietnam in 1962. It took years before any protest developed. Iraq is the first time in hundreds of years of European and American history that a war was massively protested before it was launched. There was huge protest in February 2003. It had never happened in the history of the West.
Where do you put George W. Bush in the pantheon of American presidents?
He's more or less a symbol, but I think the people around him are the most dangerous administration in American history. I think they're driving the world to destruction. There are two major threats that face the world, threats of the destruction of the species, and they're not a joke. One of them is nuclear war, and the other is environmental catastrophe, and they are driving toward destruction in both domains. They're compelling competitors to escalate their own offensive military capacity—Russia, China, now Iran. That means putting their offensive nuclear missiles on hair-trigger alert.
The Bush administration has succeeded in making the United States one of the most feared and hated countries in the world. The talent of these guys is unbelievable. They have even succeeded at alienating Canada. I mean, that takes genius, literally.
Source: Newsweek International
Newsweek International
Jan. 9, 2006 issue - Noam Chomsky has been called one of the most influential intellectuals of the 20th century, but it's an accolade the 77-year-old MIT professor doesn't take very seriously. "People just want to hear something outside the rigid dogma they're used to," he says. "They're not going to hear it in the media." The linguistics prodigy turned political theorist has been a leading mind in the antiwar movement since the early '60s; he's also still a prolific author, producing more than six books in the past five years. He spoke to NEWSWEEK's Michael Hastings about the current geopolitical climate. Excerpts:
Hastings: Where do you see Iraq heading right now?
Chomsky: Well, it's extremely difficult to talk about this because of a very rigid doctrine that prevails in the United States and Britain which prevents us from looking at the situation realistically. The doctrine, to oversimplify, is that we have to believe the United States would have so-called liberated Iraq even if its main products were lettuce and pickles and [the] main energy resource of the world were in central Africa. Anyone who doesn't accept that is dismissed as a conspiracy theorist or a lunatic or something. But anyone with a functioning brain knows that that's not true—as all Iraqis do, for example. The United States invaded Iraq because its major resource is oil. And it gives the United States, to quote [Zbigniew] Brzezinski, "critical leverage" over its competitors, Europe and Japan. That's a policy that goes way back to the second world war. That's the fundamental reason for invading Iraq, not anything else.
Once we recognize that, we're able to begin talking about where Iraq is going. For example, there's a lot of talk about the United States bringing [about] a sovereign independent Iraq. That can't possibly be true. All you have to do is ask yourself what the policies would be in a more-or-less democratic Iraq. We know what they're likely to be. A democratic Iraq will have a Shiite majority, [with] close links to Iran. Furthermore, it's right across the border from Saudi Arabia, where there's a Shiite population which has been brutally repressed by the U.S.-backed fundamentalist tyranny. If there are any moves toward sovereignty in Shiite Iraq, or at least some sort of freedom, there are going to be effects across the border. That happens to be where most of Saudi Arabia's oil is. So you can see the ultimate nightmare developing from Washington's point of view.
You were involved in the antiwar movement in the 1960s. What do you think of the Vietnam-Iraq analogy?
I think there is no analogy whatsoever. That analogy is based on a misunderstanding of Iraq, and a misunderstanding of Vietnam. The misunderstanding of Iraq I've already described. The misunderstanding of Vietnam had to do with the war aims. The United States went to war in Vietnam for a very good reason. They were afraid Vietnam would be a successful model of independent development and that would have a virus effect—infect others who might try to follow the same course. There was a very simple war aim—destroy Vietnam. And they did it. The United States basically achieved its war aims in Vietnam by [1967]. It's called a loss, a defeat, because they didn't achieve the maximal aims, the maximal aims being turning it into something like the Philippines. They didn't do that. [But] they did achieve the major aims. It was possible to destroy Vietnam and leave. You can't destroy Iraq and leave. It's inconceivable.
Was the antiwar movement more successful in the '60s than it is today?
I think it's the other way around. The United States attacked Vietnam in 1962. It took years before any protest developed. Iraq is the first time in hundreds of years of European and American history that a war was massively protested before it was launched. There was huge protest in February 2003. It had never happened in the history of the West.
Where do you put George W. Bush in the pantheon of American presidents?
He's more or less a symbol, but I think the people around him are the most dangerous administration in American history. I think they're driving the world to destruction. There are two major threats that face the world, threats of the destruction of the species, and they're not a joke. One of them is nuclear war, and the other is environmental catastrophe, and they are driving toward destruction in both domains. They're compelling competitors to escalate their own offensive military capacity—Russia, China, now Iran. That means putting their offensive nuclear missiles on hair-trigger alert.
The Bush administration has succeeded in making the United States one of the most feared and hated countries in the world. The talent of these guys is unbelievable. They have even succeeded at alienating Canada. I mean, that takes genius, literally.
Source: Newsweek International
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
Abramof Pleads Guilty
WASHINGTON - Embattled lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty Tuesday to federal charges of conspiracy, tax evasion and mail fraud, agreeing to cooperate in an influence-peddling investigation that threatens powerful members of Congress.
In a heavily scripted court appearance, Abramoff agreed with U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle when she said he had engaged in a conspiracy involving "corruption of public officials." The lobbyist also agreed when she said he and others had engaged in a scheme to provide campaign contributions, trips and other items "in exchange for certain official acts."
"Words will not ever be able to express my sorrow and my profound regret for all my actions and mistakes," Abramoff said, addressing the judge. "I hope I can merit forgiveness from the Almighty and those I've wronged or caused to suffer."
To each of the three charges, Abramoff said, "I plead guilty, your honor." Huvelle and lawyers in the case said Abramoff had agreed to make an estimated $25 million in restitution to his victims and pay $1.7 million to the Internal Revenue Service for taxes he evaded. As is typically the case in such pleadings, what happened in the courtroom Tuesday was arranged in advance between lawyers for the defendant and the prosecutors.
According to the plea agreement, prosecutors will recommend a sentence of 9 1/2 to 11 years, providing he cooperates with federal prosecutors in a wide-ranging corruption investigation that is believed to be focusing on as many as 20 members of Congress and aides.
Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher said the Justice Department will pursue the investigation "wherever it goes."
"We're going to expend the resources to make sure people know that government is not for sale," she said at a news conference.
Abramoff's activities went "far beyond lawful lobbying to the illegal act of paying for official acts," she said. "The Justice Department will aggressively investigate and prosecute these types of cases which have a devastating impact on the public's trust of government."
Abramoff's travels with former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay are already under criminal investigation. The lobbyist's interactions with the Texas Republican's congressional office frequently came around the time of campaign donations, golf outings or other trips provided or arranged by Abramoff for DeLay and other lawmakers. In all, DeLay received at least $57,000 in political contributions from Abramoff, his lobbying associates or his tribal clients between 2001 and 2004.
Court papers released Tuesday also detailed lavish gifts and contributions that Abramoff gave an unnamed House member, identified elsewhere as Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Administration Committee, in return for Ney's agreement to use his office to aid Abramoff clients.
In a statement Tuesday, Ney said, "At the time I dealt with Jack Abramoff, I obviously did not know, and had no way of knowing, the self-serving and fraudulent nature of Abramoff's activities."
Abramoff also was expected to plead guilty in Florida to two of the six charges in a federal indictment, according to his lawyer there, Neal Sonnett. A change of plea hearing has been scheduled in Miami for Wednesday afternoon, Justice officials said.
Abramoff attorney Abbe Lowell said in a statement that 18 months ago Abramoff made contact with prosecutors "to admit his wrongdoing and to seek forgiveness from those he has wronged. He intends to continue to work with the Justice Department and others to fully resolve all matters of interest, to provide restitution to anyone he has harmed, and to seek absolution from all."
Prosecutors say Abramoff and Scanlon conspired to defraud Indian tribes in Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico and Texas of millions of dollars. Abramoff reaped roughly $20 million in hidden profits from the scheme, according to the information. Lobbying partner Michael Scanlon pleaded guilty in November.
Abramoff and Scanlon also lavished a golf trip to Scotland and other things of value on Ney, the court document said. Ney has denied doing anything wrong.
The Bush administration's former chief procurement official, David H. Safavian, was charged this fall with making false statements and obstructing investigations into the 2002 golf outing. Safavian, former chief of staff of the General Services Administration, the government's procurement arm, has pleaded innocent to those charges.
Court documents also said Abramoff solicited $50,000 from a wireless telephone company and got Ney's agreement to push the company's application to install a wireless telephone infrastructure in the House of Representatives, a job Ney's committee would have overseen.
Pressure had been intensifying on Abramoff to strike a deal with prosecutors since another former partner, Adam Kidan, pleaded guilty earlier this month to fraud and conspiracy in connection with the 2000 SunCruz boat deal in Florida.
The continuing saga of Abramoff's legal problems has caused anxiety at high levels in Washington, in both the Republican and Democratic parties.
Abramoff raised at least $100,000 for President Bush's 2004 re-election effort, earning the honorary title "pioneer" from the campaign.
In Bush's first 10 months in office in 2001, Abramoff and other members of his lobbying team logged at least 200 contacts with the administration on behalf of at least one client, the Northern Mariana Islands. The meetings included some with high-ranking officials such as then-Attorney General John Ashcroft and policy advisers in Vice President Dick Cheney's office. The Marianas' agenda included seeking friendly hires at federal agencies and preservation of its exemption from the U.S. minimum wage.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan could not say Tuesday whether Abramoff ever met President Bush. But when asked at the White House about this, the spokesman said that "what he is reportedly acknowledging doing is unacceptable and outrageous."
"If laws were broken, he must be held to account for what he did," McClellan said.
For months, prosecutors in Washington have focused on whether Abramoff defrauded his Indian tribal clients of millions of dollars and used improper influence on members of Congress.
In a five-year span ending in early 2004, tribes represented by the lobbyist contributed millions of dollars in casino income to congressional campaigns, often routing the money through political action committees for conservative lawmakers who opposed gambling.
Abramoff also provided trips, sports skybox fundraisers, golf fees, frequent meals, entertainment and jobs for lawmakers' relatives and aides.
In Florida, Abramoff and Kidan were indicted in August on charges of conspiracy, wire fraud and mail fraud in connection with their purchase of the SunCruz fleet for $147.5 million from Miami businessman Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis.
Prosecutors said the pair faked a $23 million wire transfer to make it appear that they were making a significant contribution of their own money into the deal. Based on that transfer, lenders Foothill Capital Corp. and Citadel Equity Fund Ltd. agreed to provide $60 million in financing for the purchase.
Kidan pleaded guilty Dec. 15 to one count of conspiracy and one count of wire fraud. He faces a maximum of 10 years in prison and up to $500,000 in fines at sentencing scheduled for March 1.
Source: Yahoo! News
___
In a heavily scripted court appearance, Abramoff agreed with U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle when she said he had engaged in a conspiracy involving "corruption of public officials." The lobbyist also agreed when she said he and others had engaged in a scheme to provide campaign contributions, trips and other items "in exchange for certain official acts."
"Words will not ever be able to express my sorrow and my profound regret for all my actions and mistakes," Abramoff said, addressing the judge. "I hope I can merit forgiveness from the Almighty and those I've wronged or caused to suffer."
To each of the three charges, Abramoff said, "I plead guilty, your honor." Huvelle and lawyers in the case said Abramoff had agreed to make an estimated $25 million in restitution to his victims and pay $1.7 million to the Internal Revenue Service for taxes he evaded. As is typically the case in such pleadings, what happened in the courtroom Tuesday was arranged in advance between lawyers for the defendant and the prosecutors.
According to the plea agreement, prosecutors will recommend a sentence of 9 1/2 to 11 years, providing he cooperates with federal prosecutors in a wide-ranging corruption investigation that is believed to be focusing on as many as 20 members of Congress and aides.
Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher said the Justice Department will pursue the investigation "wherever it goes."
"We're going to expend the resources to make sure people know that government is not for sale," she said at a news conference.
Abramoff's activities went "far beyond lawful lobbying to the illegal act of paying for official acts," she said. "The Justice Department will aggressively investigate and prosecute these types of cases which have a devastating impact on the public's trust of government."
Abramoff's travels with former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay are already under criminal investigation. The lobbyist's interactions with the Texas Republican's congressional office frequently came around the time of campaign donations, golf outings or other trips provided or arranged by Abramoff for DeLay and other lawmakers. In all, DeLay received at least $57,000 in political contributions from Abramoff, his lobbying associates or his tribal clients between 2001 and 2004.
Court papers released Tuesday also detailed lavish gifts and contributions that Abramoff gave an unnamed House member, identified elsewhere as Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Administration Committee, in return for Ney's agreement to use his office to aid Abramoff clients.
In a statement Tuesday, Ney said, "At the time I dealt with Jack Abramoff, I obviously did not know, and had no way of knowing, the self-serving and fraudulent nature of Abramoff's activities."
Abramoff also was expected to plead guilty in Florida to two of the six charges in a federal indictment, according to his lawyer there, Neal Sonnett. A change of plea hearing has been scheduled in Miami for Wednesday afternoon, Justice officials said.
Abramoff attorney Abbe Lowell said in a statement that 18 months ago Abramoff made contact with prosecutors "to admit his wrongdoing and to seek forgiveness from those he has wronged. He intends to continue to work with the Justice Department and others to fully resolve all matters of interest, to provide restitution to anyone he has harmed, and to seek absolution from all."
Prosecutors say Abramoff and Scanlon conspired to defraud Indian tribes in Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico and Texas of millions of dollars. Abramoff reaped roughly $20 million in hidden profits from the scheme, according to the information. Lobbying partner Michael Scanlon pleaded guilty in November.
Abramoff and Scanlon also lavished a golf trip to Scotland and other things of value on Ney, the court document said. Ney has denied doing anything wrong.
The Bush administration's former chief procurement official, David H. Safavian, was charged this fall with making false statements and obstructing investigations into the 2002 golf outing. Safavian, former chief of staff of the General Services Administration, the government's procurement arm, has pleaded innocent to those charges.
Court documents also said Abramoff solicited $50,000 from a wireless telephone company and got Ney's agreement to push the company's application to install a wireless telephone infrastructure in the House of Representatives, a job Ney's committee would have overseen.
Pressure had been intensifying on Abramoff to strike a deal with prosecutors since another former partner, Adam Kidan, pleaded guilty earlier this month to fraud and conspiracy in connection with the 2000 SunCruz boat deal in Florida.
The continuing saga of Abramoff's legal problems has caused anxiety at high levels in Washington, in both the Republican and Democratic parties.
Abramoff raised at least $100,000 for President Bush's 2004 re-election effort, earning the honorary title "pioneer" from the campaign.
In Bush's first 10 months in office in 2001, Abramoff and other members of his lobbying team logged at least 200 contacts with the administration on behalf of at least one client, the Northern Mariana Islands. The meetings included some with high-ranking officials such as then-Attorney General John Ashcroft and policy advisers in Vice President Dick Cheney's office. The Marianas' agenda included seeking friendly hires at federal agencies and preservation of its exemption from the U.S. minimum wage.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan could not say Tuesday whether Abramoff ever met President Bush. But when asked at the White House about this, the spokesman said that "what he is reportedly acknowledging doing is unacceptable and outrageous."
"If laws were broken, he must be held to account for what he did," McClellan said.
For months, prosecutors in Washington have focused on whether Abramoff defrauded his Indian tribal clients of millions of dollars and used improper influence on members of Congress.
In a five-year span ending in early 2004, tribes represented by the lobbyist contributed millions of dollars in casino income to congressional campaigns, often routing the money through political action committees for conservative lawmakers who opposed gambling.
Abramoff also provided trips, sports skybox fundraisers, golf fees, frequent meals, entertainment and jobs for lawmakers' relatives and aides.
In Florida, Abramoff and Kidan were indicted in August on charges of conspiracy, wire fraud and mail fraud in connection with their purchase of the SunCruz fleet for $147.5 million from Miami businessman Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis.
Prosecutors said the pair faked a $23 million wire transfer to make it appear that they were making a significant contribution of their own money into the deal. Based on that transfer, lenders Foothill Capital Corp. and Citadel Equity Fund Ltd. agreed to provide $60 million in financing for the purchase.
Kidan pleaded guilty Dec. 15 to one count of conspiracy and one count of wire fraud. He faces a maximum of 10 years in prison and up to $500,000 in fines at sentencing scheduled for March 1.
Source: Yahoo! News
___
- Interactive Graphic - The Jack Abramoff Story at Washington Post
- Key Events in the Jack Abramoff Probe at Guardian Unlimited (UK)
- Abramoff deals, Congress quakes at Christian Science Moniter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
