|
GEORGIA AT CIVILIZATION’S CROSSROADS
By Avi Davis
On August 7 , there were probably few, even among the cognoscenti, who could have explained where the Republic of Georgia was even located.. Of course, since August 8, the republic which earned its independence under a euphonic sounding popular revolt known as the Rose Revolution, seems now to be on the frontier of a new global crisis, having stepped on the toes of the awakened Russian bear.
There has been much written in the past week or so about the revival of Russian imperialism and the “return of history.” Russian resolve to regain its rightful world status after the humiliating collapse of the Soviet Union has been no secret - and has been expressed time again, not only by Vladmir Putin but by Boris Yeltsin and other Russian leaders . The sudden boom in oil prices helped catapult the struggling Russian economy into the playing fields of the superpowers and it is in this context that Vladimir Putin and his cronies have felt it necessary to re-establish their local hegemony.
While the invasion is being decried as another example of resurgent Russian hubris and aggression, the more interesting question of the weak response by America and Europe, is what the flexing of Russian muscle means for the future of the West. Because a failed response to this kind of aggression against a democracy could doom the West to a series of stop gap and half measures that amounts to little more than appeasement.
In the articles below you will find many different opinions on what the West should have or should not have done. The question, for instance, might be asked whether the people of South Ossetia are worth the sacrifice of a relationship with a vital Security Council member whose good graces and cooperation are necessary in confronting the scourge of international terrorism and the rise of a nuclear armed Iran. On the other hand, if the democracies do not now stand up to such naked aggression from Russia, are they ever likely to do so? And in what practical way can Russia now be confronted? Lodged deep in Georgian territory will any military confrontation be merely symbolic and nothing more?
These are some of the issues which the opinion writers in this week’s Western Word address. We encourage you to write to us with your own opinion, which we hope share with our readers in a compendium in the weeks to come.
Avi Davis is the Executive Director and Senior Fellow of the American Freedom Alliance and is the coordinator of the upcoming European Freedom Alliance conference The Politicization of Human Rights and International Law, to be held in London in March, 2009.
Please write to:elisa@americanfreedomalliance.org
Appeasing Russia-John Barry
The historical reasons why the West should intervene in Georgia.
Is that "appeasement" we see sidling shyly out of the closet of history? Are we doomed to recall the infamous remark by a Western leader that it was "fantastic" to think Europe should involve itself in "a quarrel in a faraway country between people of which we know nothing"? As the United States and the Europeans feverishly debate how to respond to Russia's onslaught on Georgia, are the ghosts of Europe's bloody history rising from their shallow graves?
As those of a certain age will recall, "appeasement" encapsulated the determination of British governments of the 1930s to avoid war in Europe, even if it mean capitulating to the ever-increasing demands of Adolf Hitler. The nadir came in 1938, when British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain acceded to Hitler's demand to take over the western slice of Czechoslovakia—a dispute Chamberlain so derisively dismissed.
It is impossible to view the Russian onslaught against Georgia without these bloodstained memories rising to mind. In history, as the great French President Charles de Gaulle remarked—no doubt plagiarising someone else—the only constant is geography. And through centuries of European history the only constant has been that small countries, doomed by geography to lie between great powers, are destined to be the cockpit for their imperial ambitions. That's held true since the Low Countries' agony under Spanish power in the 1500s. And the lichen has not yet spread over the gravestones of Europe and America that mark the toll of the two European wars of the 20th century—both having their roots in struggles between rival empires to assert power over the luckless nations of central Europe. (Newsweek)
Column one: Georgia, Israel and the nature of man-Caroline Glick
In their statements Wednesday on Russia's invasion of Georgia, both US President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice openly acknowledged that Russia is the aggressor in the war and that the US stands by Georgia.
This is all very nice and well. But what does the fact that it took the US a full five days to issue a clear statement against Russian aggression tell us about the US? What does it say about Georgia and, in a larger sense, about the nature of world affairs?
Russia's blitzkrieg in Georgia this week was not simply an act of aggression against a small, weak democracy. It was an assault on vital Western security interests. Since it achieved independence in 1990, Georgia has been the only obstacle in Russia's path to exerting full control over oil supplies from Central Asia to the West. And now, in the aftermath of Russia's conquest of Georgia, that obstacle has been set aside.
Georgia has several oil and gas pipelines that traverse its territory from Azerbaijan to Turkey, the main one being the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline. Together they transport more than 1 percent of global oil supplies from east to west. In response to the Russian invasion, British Petroleum, which owns the pipelines, announced that it will close them.
This means that Russia has won. In the future that same oil and gas will either be shipped through Russia, or it will be shipped through Georgia under the benevolent control of Russian "peacekeeping" forces permanently stationed in Gori. The West now has no option other than appeasing Russia if it wishes to receive its oil from the Caucasus. (JerusalemPost)
It’s Not a Cold War-Frederick Kagan
It just sounds like one.
The most grotesque aspect of Russia’s aggression in Georgia is the repeated Russian claim that Georgia poses a threat to Russia and its citizens. In language harking back to the Orwellian rhetoric of the Cold War, all Russian troops are “peacekeepers” and all Georgian forces are “diversionaries” and “terrorists.” Russian troops are now openly occupying Georgian territory on the grounds that law and order in Georgia has collapsed. Of course it has. Russian tanks and airplanes crushed it underfoot. Moscow bemoans the absence of “legitimate political leadership” in Georgian territories like Gori even as its troops occupy Gori without the slightest shred of legitimacy in international law. And, yes, this is in contrast with American actions in Iraq, which took place on the legal basis of the U.N. resolutions that followed (and ended) the first Gulf War.
The Russian occupation of Georgia has no such legal basis at all — not even the legality of a declaration of war. Yet Moscow continues to portray this occupation as an unfortunate necessity imposed upon Russia by Georgian “genocide” and incapacity to govern. The poor Russian general staff officers complain that they cannot even plan properly for the pull-back (as they explained in detail, Russian forces are not “withdrawing” from Georgia) since the Georgians can’t seem to get their act together despite the assistance of Russian soldiers, tanks, and combat aircraft in their country. The most Orwellian claim of all came today, when the spokesman for the Russian general staff explained that Georgian troops were attempting to reconstitute their combat capabilities and were concentrating around Tbilisi, Georgia’s capital. What an outrage! How dare the Georgians prepare to defend their capital! It is nothing less than an act of provocation, according to the Russians.
Blame Everyone Except Russia!-Victor Davis Hanson
The West seems unable to speak with one voice against Russian aggression.
Everyone is distracted by the Olympics. The squabbling here on the campaign trail consumes the media. Two presidential candidates and a lame-duck president all are weighing in on foreign policy. No wonder Vladimir Putin thought it was a good time to invade Georgia. Apparently the Russian prime minister knew exactly what he was doing but assumed no one in the West did. And he was right. Our pundits and politicians are all over the map as Putin is variously portrayed as villain, victim, patriot, tyrant — and more still. THE NEOCONSERVATIVES We must make Russia pay a terrible price for subverting a democracy. Our policy of promoting liberal governments among the former Soviet republics, with integration into Europe and relations with NATO, was sound, and it cannot be allowed to be aborted by Putin. Bottom line: Form a ring of democracies around Russia until it sees the light and likewise evolves into a constitutional state. THE PALEOCONSERVATIVES Putin is only protecting his rightful national interests in his own backyard, which don’t really conflict with ours. You have to admire the old brute for taking care of business. Neocons — and no doubt Israelis in the background — provoked that Georgian loudmouthed dandy Saakashvili to stick his head in a noose — so he deserved the hanging he got. Bottom line: We should cut a deal with our natural ally Putin to keep out of each other’s proper sphere of influence — and let each deal as it wishes with these miserable little third-party troublemakers. THE REALISTS Don’t poke sticks at the Bear. We should define what our strategic interests in the region are. Maybe we can protect Eastern Europe, the Baltic republics and the Ukraine — but only if we accept that Georgia just isn’t part of the equation. We need to back out of the saloon with drawn pistols, and save as much face as we can. This is a reminder that we forgot the role of honor and fear in international relations when we encouraged weak former Soviet republics merrily to join the West and gratuitously humiliate Russia. (NationalReviewOnline)
NEWS: EUROPE AND AMERICA
Britian’s Youngest Terrorist, 16 Convicted Of ‘Conspiracy To Wipe Out Non-Muslims’
Guilty: Britain's youngest ever terrorist, 16, who had guide to death and explosives in his home-Chris Brooke and Colin Fernandez
 A schoolboy who joined a cell of Islamic fanatics targeting the Royal Family has become Britain's youngest convicted terrorist. Hammaad Munshi, now 18, became obsessed with terrorism while aged 15 and studying for his GCSEs. Instead of revising he spent hours secretly surfing jihadist websites and distributing material as part of a 'conspiracy to wipe out' non-Muslims. A computer expert, the teenager set up a website giving advice on how to make bombs, detonators, Napalm and using machine guns. He was arrested at the age of 16 as he walked home from school in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, following a GCSE exam. Police who had linked him to a terror cell ringleader found a handwritten note under his bed indicating he wanted to die as a martyr. A guide to death and explosives was found in his home and inside his wallet were the hand-written dimensions of a sub-machine gun taken from a book on homemade firearms. Munshi was found guilty at London's Blackfriars Crown Court on Monday of making a record of information likely to be useful in terrorism. Judge Timothy Pontius adjourned sentence until next month, but he was remanded in custody and warned a jail term was 'inevitable.' His mentor Aabid Hussain Khan, 23, a leading 'cyber terrorist' who radicalised impressionable Muslims and encouraged them to attend military terror camps in Pakistan, was found guilty of three offences of possessing articles for a purpose connected with terrorism. The former Bradford burger bar worker amassed detailed notes about the Royal Family, as well as information about subway systems in London and New York. Khan's cousin and right-hand man postal worker Sultan Muhammad, 23, of Mannigham, Bradford, was convicted of three similar offences and a fourth of recording information useful for terrorism and are awaiting sentencing. (DailyMail)
Now There’s Sharia Car Insurance For Muslims
Sharia car insurance: For the first time, Muslims can buy policies in line with Islamic law-Miles Goslett
Muslim drivers are, for the first time, being offered insurance that obeys the teachings of the Koran. Salaam Halal Insurance provides the same services as conventional companies but it is compliant with Islamic law. This means it cannot invest in any organisation associated with gambling, alcohol or pork. It is also not allowed to take financial risks or speculate with revenue. Halal insurance – known as takaful – differs from standard British products because the risk is shared between policyholders. Drivers pay into a fund, which is then invested in sharia-compliant ventures and any profits are put back into the fund. Claims are paid from the pooled sum and any surplus cash is distributed in the form of a discount for the following year’s premium. This is in addition to any conventional no-claims bonus. A committee of three independent Muslim scholars monitors the activities of the firm, which says its premiums are in line with the industry average and that it is able to match its bigger rivals because it is so confident of repeat business from Britain’s 600,000 Muslim car owners. (DailyMail)
Founder Of The Radical Islamist Organisation, Ansar al-Islam Sues Norway Over ‘Human Rights Violations’
Norway sued by Iraqi Muslim over human rights violations-A. Rienstra
The founder of Ansar al-Islam, a radical Islamist organisation, has filed a lawsuit against Norway in Europe’s human rights court citing “inhuman treatment.” Mullah Krekar, who lives in Norway, is on a global list of known terrorists and as such cannot enjoy the same freedoms as other citizens of the Nordic nation, Middle East Times reports. Krekar is an Iraqi Kurd who admits forming the fundamental Islamist group, but claims he has not been in charge since 2002. Krekar is on the UN list of terrorist groups and individuals, and has repeatedly publicly expressed his admiration of Osama bin Laden and the call for jihad in Iraq. Several court hearings in Norway have concluded that Krekar should be deported from Norway, including the Supreme Court last November. Krekar is deemed to be a national security threat; but Norwegian law forbids anyone to be deported to their homeland if that country is in a dangerous state of crisis. Brynjar Meling, Krekar’s lawyer, stated that “for nearly six years, my client has not been able to work, travel, or even pick up a package at the post office or open a bank account since he lacks any form of identification papers”. Meling added, “We lodged a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in April. The complaint is currently being handled.” Meling contends that Norway has violated the European Convention on Human Rights under three different articles. While Norway’s government wants Krekar deported as soon as possible, it is ironically bound by its own laws that will not send someone “to an area where they risk being the victims of torture”. (IceNews)
“The Conditions Of Hashmi’s Detention Are Draconian”
Academics protest treatment of Syed Hashmi, suspected of helping Al Qaeda-Thomas Zambito
 Some 500 academics have penned a letter protesting the harsh, post-9/11 conditions keeping accused terror suspect and Brooklyn College grad Syed Hashmi under 23-hour-a-day lockdown. The Flushing, Queens, man was extradited from London last year after being accused of providing Al Qaeda terrorists with cash and military supplies to wage jihad against U.S. troops in Afghanistan. He's expected to face trial in the coming months. Among those signing onto the letter are several Brooklyn College professors as well as political columnist Katha Pollitt and Harvard Prof. Henry Louis Gates. "The conditions of Hashmi's detention are Draconian," the letter says. "He is subject to 24-hour electronic monitoring, has no access to fresh air, and must take his one hour of daily recreation - when it is given - inside a cage." The letter came to light yesterday after Hashmi made a brief appearance in Manhattan Federal Court for a hearing conducted mostly behind closed doors. Hashmi's lawyer, Sean Maner, is challenging Judge Loretta Preska's decision forbidding him from discussing classified information with his client. Maher says Hashmi is being held in an isolation unit at the federal lockup in downtown Manhattan, where his contact with lawyers and family members is limited and the feds must approve his access to reading material. (NYDailyNews)
ACADEMIC FREEDOM
Today’s Universities Prolong Adolesence
College Daze-Charles Murray
College is not all it's cracked up to be. Dumbed-down courses, flaky majors and grade inflation have conspired to make the letters B.A. close to meaningless. But another problem with today's colleges is more insidious: They are no longer a good place for young people to make the transition from childhood to adulthood. Today's colleges are structured to prolong adolescence, not to midwife maturity. Once upon a time college was a halfway house for practicing how to be a grown-up. Students couldn't count on the dean of students to make allowances for adolescent misbehavior. If they wanted to avoid getting kicked out, they had to weigh the potential consequences of their actions, just as in adult life. The student-teacher relationship was more distant and less nurturing than in high school, and more like the employee-supervisor relationship awaiting them after graduation. Students had to accept that they no longer got hugs for trying hard. If they didn't get the job done, they were flunked with as little ceremony as they would be fired by an employer. This apprenticeship in adulthood has been gutted.
The demanding professor is close to being extinct. Due dates for papers are commonly extended when the student just can't get it done by then.
The light workload alone can make college today a joke. The most recent data say that students self-report only about 14 hours per week spent studying (the true figure is presumably lower). The definition of "weekend" has sprawled to the point that, as a Duke administrator put it, "We've run out of classroom space between 10 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. Tuesday through Thursday." The demanding professor is close to being extinct. Due dates for papers are commonly extended when the student just can't get it done by then. Many professors permit quizzes or even final exams to be made up if missed--missed not because of an emergency at home or a fever of 104, but just, sort of, like, missed. At many schools student evaluations of professors are now systematically collected and used as part of the tenure decision process. Warm and sympathetic is in. Strict and demanding is out. (AmericanEnterpriseInstittute)
The Politically Correct Version of Islam And Jihad Promoted In Textbooks
Textbook Lies about Islam-Gilbert T. Sewall
Islam is one of the most important issues of our time, but you wouldn't know it from reading a high school textbook. What students learn makes it almost impossible to understand Islam in history or the world today, much less what fuels Islam's challenge to peace and international security. A review of leading textbooks used in New York City and nationwide reveals they deliberately misrepresent Islamic history, jihad, Islamic law (sharia), global terrorism, and more. Thinking that jihad is "holy war" is wrong, students are told. Instead textbooks insist it is merely an effort to improve oneself and society. "Muslims should fulfill jihad with the heart, tongue, and hand. Muslims use the heart in their struggle to resist evil. The tongue may convince others to take up worthy causes, such as funding medical research. Hands may perform good works and correct wrongs," chimes one popular California textbook called "History Alive!" A widely used Houghton Mifflin textbook titled "Across the Centuries" defines jihad as an "inner struggle" to "do one's best to resist temptation and overcome evil." In spite of centuries of Islamic conquest and bloodshed, there's never any hint of aggression toward the "infidel." Illiberality and oppression are willfully ignored. "Traditionally, in Islamic countries women are not expected to read or write. Today, Muslim women are pursuing educations and new career opportunities. While Islamists call for a return to tradition, many Muslims embrace a mixture of traditional and modern ways," asserts Prentice Hall's "World History," a high school textbook popular in New York City and suburban schools. (FamilySecurityMatters)
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Danish Cartoonist Kurt Westergaard’s Interview with SpiegelOnline
'I Don't Allow Fanatics to Intimidate Me'- Interview conducted by Yassin Musharbash
After drawing a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad with a lit bomb in his turban in 2005, Kurt Westergaard has lived under constant police protection. Now Jordan wants to prosecute the Dane. In a SPIEGEL ONLINE interview he discusses the legal summons and his anger.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Mr. Westergaard, I am assuming you're not planning a vacation in Jordan this year?
Westergaard: No, I don't think so!
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The prosecutor general in Amman has issued a subpoena against you. He wants you to face a court in Jordan for the cartoon you drew of the Prophet Muhammad in 2005.
Westergaard: Yes, but so far I haven't received an official summons to court. I have already contacted the Jordanian Embassy in Berlin and asked them if they could inform me what the punishment would be. If I went to Amman would I be arrested as soon as I put my foot on Jordanian soil? But I never got an answer.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: You would likely be apprehended were you to travel to Jordan...
Westergaard: Yes, I suppose so.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: What would you tell a Jordanian court in your defense?
Westergaard: I would try to explain that the cartoon was not aimed at Islam as a whole but aimed at the terrorists, who use part of Islam as their spiritual ammunition. You could also say that the terrorists have taken the Prophet as their hostage.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The Jordanian government has passed a new law expressly forbidding the defamation of the Prophet Muhammad -- a direct reaction to your caricature and the others. There seems little doubt that you'd be convicted.
Westergaard: Yes, it has been very difficult to get Muslims to understand my intentions.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: It seems likely that other countries in the region would be risky for you to travel in as well.
Westergaard: I suppose so. But I think that it is not in the interest of politicians and governments in the Middle East to admit they understand my cartoon. People that I have spoken with are very intelligent and intellectual -- but for political reasons, they don't want any interpretations of this cartoon other than their own. It is more convenient in their domestic policy to keep up with what I would call a misunderstanding. (SpiegelOnline)
ANTISEMITISM
UN Admirers Praise Palestinian Jew Hating Poet Mahmoud Darwish
Eulogy for a Palestinian Propagandist-Joseph Klein
 The Palestinian ‘national poet’ Mahmoud Darwish passed away on August 9, 2008. Regarded by the Palestinians as the “poet of the Palestinian wound,” he was given the equivalent of a state funeral in the West Bank. Only the terrorist leader Yasser Arafat, with whom Darwish served in the PLO, had ever received such an honor.
As Aljazeera reported, Darwish’s “grave faces the outskirts of Jerusalem, where the Palestinians hope to create the capital of a future state which Darwish had yearned for in poems imbued with the agony of exile and loss.” In life, Darwish spent his considerable writing talents as an apologist for the Palestinians’ self-inflicted wounds. He wrote the veiled threat that Arafat spoke at the United Nations in 1974: "Today I have come bearing an olive branch and a freedom fighter's gun. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand." In death, senior United Nations officials joined a chorus of admirers in raising Darwish to the iconic level of a “universal” voice of “justice,” “dislocation” and “alienation” for all the suffering people of the world – except, of course, for the Jewish people whose more than 2000 years of exile and persecution Darwish and his UN admirers have conveniently ignored. In sending her condolences last week to the Palestinian people following Darwish’s death, for example, the Commissioner-General of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), Karen AbuZayd, issued a statement, saying that Darwish was “the poet of exile, the refugees’ poet” whose “universal language of dislocation and alienation will be heard for many years to come.” These encomiums should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with AbuZayd and her agency. She has sided with the Palestinians against Israel time and again, no matter what atrocities were committed by the Palestinian terrorists against innocent Israeli civilians. UNRWA itself has been complicit in such terrorist acts. King Solomon wrote long ago in Proverbs that "death and life are in the power of the tongue." The Talmud teaches us that words can kill. Darwish used his poetry to give voice to those who reject Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state in its ancient homeland. He called himself a “weapon” and wrote that “my words were stones.” Truth had no place in his poetry. (FrontpageMagazine)
Ahmadinejad Rips Israel In His Visit To Turkey
Iranian leader uses Turkey visit to slam Israel-The Jewish Chronicle
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seized the opportunity of visiting Istanbul to launch fierce attacks on Israel. His visit caused diplomatic tensions between Israel and Turkey, which enjoy close relations. ‘"The deep-rooted reason for all the aggressions, oppression and bloodshed in the region is the Zionist regime,'' he said at a press conference as he ended his two-day working visit to Istanbul last week during which he had extensive talks with Turkish leaders on bilateral relations and Tehran's nuclear ambitions. Referring to Israel as the "Zionist regime", he argued that there could not be peace in the Muslim world as long as it continued to exist and claimed that the Zionists' ambition was to dominate the whole region, covering all countries from Turkey to the Sudan. Mr Ahmadinejad made similar remarks in interviews with Turkish television channels, offering what he called "the best solution'' to settle the problems of the Middle East. "Let a referendum be held in Palestine so that the people will decide their own fate,'' he said. "In that case the Zionist regime will crumble and its people will have to withdraw.'' Asked about Turkey's efforts to mediate between Israel and Syria on their conflict over the Golan Heights, Mr Ahmadinejad said the "Zionist regime" must leave all the territories. (JC)
TERRORISM, INTERNET, JIHAD
Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga Admits To Italy Allowing Terrorists To Operate In The Country In Exchange For Immunity From Attacks
Fmr. Italian Pres.: We Signed Pact With Terrorists-Nissan Ratzlav-Katz
(IsraelNN.com) In a letter appearing in the weekend edition of the respected Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, former Italian President Francesco Cossiga revealed that the government of Italy agreed to allow Arab terrorist groups freedom of movement in the country in exchange for immunity from attacks in Italy. Cossiga wrote that the government of the late Prime Minister Aldo Moro reached a "secret non-belligerence pact between the Italian state and Palestinian resistance organizations, including terrorist groups," in the 1970s. According to the former president, it was Moro himself who designed the terms of the agreement with the foreign Arab terrorists. Ironically, Moro later met his death at the hands of homegrown Italian terrorists, the Red Brigades, in 1978. "The terms of the agreement were that the Palestinian organizations could even maintain armed bases of operation in the country, and they had freedom of entry and exit without being subject to normal police controls, because they were 'handled' by the secret services," Cossiga explained. (IsraelNationalNews)
Terrorist Who Targeted The Royal Family To Serve 12 Years In Prison
Terrorist mentor Aabid Hussain Khan jailed for 12 years-Duncan Gardham
 The leader of a terrorist cell who downloaded information about the royal family has been sentenced to 12 years in prison.
Aabid Hussain Khan was told he had shown a "dedicated and unswerving devotion" to the pursuit of fanaticism." His co-accused, Sultan Muhammed, was sentenced to 10 years in jail and, Hammaad Munshi, Britain's youngest terrorist who was 16 when he was arrested, will be sentenced next month. Sentencing Khan and Muhammed, both 23, on three counts of possessing articles for terrorism, Judge Timothy Pontius told them they had not been found guilty of preparing an attack because "the particular time and place had yet to be finalised." But he said the amount of material Khan and Muhammed had compiled made it among the most serious cases to come before the courts short of preparing an attack. Much of what was downloaded, including films of executions, was of a "particularly repulsive nature" and showed his "fanatical and perverted beliefs" the judge said. He added: "There is a huge quantity of material which does have a specific practical value to anyone who wants to carry out terrorist activity." He referred particularly to compiling information about explosives including acetone peroxide, ammonium nitrate and napalm along with wireless detonation and letter bombs. There were also details of the residences and opening hours for the homes of the Queen and several other members of the royal family. "Perhaps the most significant evidence was a video showing careful and methodical details about the construction of a suicide bomber's belt packed with ball bearings," the judge said. "During the playing of that 20 minute video the stunned silence in court was a telling reflection of the collective horror felt by such a potent demonstration of terrorist resolve." The judge said the evidence was "significant, compelling and incontrovertible" and the men had shown clear intent. "You have brought shame on yourselves, your families and your religion," he added. As the judge spoke, Khan's father, Sabir, shouted: "This is just hype. These are anti-Muslim laws" before he was thrown out of court. (TheTelegraph)
Cyber-Terrorism A Major Concern In The UK
Homegrown terror, learned online-Stephen Tankel
The conviction of three young men shows that jihadist activity in Britain has come an alarmingly long way, thanks to the internet. Al-Qaida celebrated its 20th birthday this past week, making it two years older than Hammaad Munshi who yesterday became the youngest person ever convicted of terrorism in the UK. After two decades al-Qaida is nowhere near achieving its ultimate objectives, and is unlikely to get any closer. However, even if it doesn't survive to see 30, disciples like Hammaad Munshi are proof that al-Qaida's impact will be felt for years to come. Munshi, and his co-conspirators Aabid Khan and Sultan Muhammad, typify the threat western governments fear most: the homegrown terrorist. These latest convictions shed light on jihadist activity in Britain today, which has come a long way since the days when Abu Hamza al-Masri operated out of the Finsbury Park Mosque. Ideologues continue to provide the mood music to which jihadists dance, but like so much music today it is available online. There's no need to leave home to catch the show.
The role of the internet as a gateway to jihad certainly helps account for how individuals as young as Messrs Khan and Munshi – aged 12 and 15 respectively when their interest in jihad began – were able to become involved to begin with. Khan was the quintessential cyber-terrorist, inveigling recruits like Munshi who spent hours surfing jihadist websites. Both disseminated terrorist instruction manuals. Indeed, Khan's arrest yielded the largest cyber "encyclopaedia" of articles promoting terrorism. The availability of tactics, techniques, and procedures to any lone-wolf with an internet connection remains a vital concern. (GuardianOnline)
The New Look of Hamas’s Al-Qassam English Forum
Below Are Screenshots Of Hamas’s Newly Redone English Forum Ezzedeen Al-Qassam Brigades
 
Radical ENVIRONMENTALISM
Prince Charles Criticised By Scientists For Being Ignorant On GM Crops
Scientists condemn 'ill-informed, negative' Prince over GM crops warning-Mark Henderson
The Prince of Wales was accused of launching an ignorant rant about genetically modified crops last night after claiming that the technology would cause “the biggest environmental disaster of all time” and lead to “no food in the future”. The Prince's comments, in which he blamed GM food and modern agriculture for environmental and social problems such as climate change and food shortages, were described by leading scientists as “shockingly ill-informed”. Plant researchers said that he had completely misunderstood the benefits and risks of GM crops, which the Prince labelled a “gigantic experiment with nature and the whole of humanity that has gone seriously wrong”. They also ridiculed his contention that agricultural biotechnology was contributing to major challenges such as global warming. Mike Childs, campaigns director of Friends of the Earth, defended the Prince's comments, however, saying that GM crops had been exaggerated as a potential weapon against world hunger. Prince Charles, a long-time critic of GM crops who accused scientists a decade ago of meddling in “realms that belong to God and God alone”, made his comments in an interview with The Daily Telegraph. Though the Government, plant scientists and industry are promoting GM crops as part of the solution to global food shortages, the Prince said that biotechnology had already proved itself a dangerous failure. “Why else do you think we are facing all these challenges, climate change and everything?” he said. (TimesOnline)
A CONVERSATION WITH NINA V. FEDOROFF
An Advocate for Science Diplomacy-Claudia Dreifus
When she was a single mother in the early 1960s, Nina V. Fedoroff, 66, defied odds and conventionality by working her way through college, graduate school and postdoctoral studies. Dr. Fedoroff, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, did fundamental research on plant transposons, or jumping genes, and was among the first to clone plant DNA. She is science adviser to the secretary of state and administrator of the Agency for International Development. We spoke last month in Washington and later on the telephone. An edited version of the conversations follows.
Q. WHEN YOU GAVE A RECENT SPEECH AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY ADVOCATING GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS, SOMEONE SITTING NEAR ME SAID, “OH GREAT, OUR STATE DEPARTMENT IS PUSHING G.M. FOOD. SHE’S THE AMBASSADOR FROM MONSANTO.” WHAT’S YOUR RESPONSE?
A. How do I answer him? My answer is: There’s almost no food that isn’t genetically modified. Genetic modification is the basis of all evolution.
Things change because our planet is subjected to a lot of radiation, which causes DNA damage, which gets repaired, but results in mutations, which create a ready mixture of plants that people can choose from to improve agriculture.
In the last century, as we learned more about genes, we were able to devise ways of accelerating evolution.
So a lot of modern plant strains were created by applying chemicals or radiation to cause mutations that improved the crop. That’s how plant breeding was done in the 20th century. The paradox is that now that we’ve invented techniques that introduce just one gene without disturbing the rest, some people think that’s terrible.
Q. WHY DO YOU THINK THERE IS SUCH FIERCE OPPOSITION TO GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS?
A. This is an unintended consequence of our success. We’ve gotten so good at growing food that we’ve gone, in a few generations, from nearly half of Americans living on farms to 2 percent. We no longer think about how the wonderful things in the grocery store got there, and we’d like to go back to what we think is a more natural way.
But I’m afraid we can’t, in part, because there are just too many of us in this world. If everybody switched to organic farming, we couldn’t support the earth’s current population — maybe half.
Q. YOU BELIEVE THAT ENVIRONMENTALISTS SHOULD BE EMBRACING GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS. WHAT’S YOUR ARGUMENT?
A. If we put more land under cultivation to feed the world’s growing population, we’re going to pull down the remaining forests.
And if that happens, it will contribute tremendously to desertification. The more we can grow on already cultivated land, the better. Europe, North America, Australia, Japan — we’ve been extremely successful in applying science to agriculture and we can afford to say, “Let’s go natural.” But there’s collateral damage.
When I went to Rwanda, you saw farmers with holdings of less than an acre.
If their population doubles again, we’re looking at more strife. Arguably, Darfur isn’t about politics, it’s about water. Many of the conflicts in the poorest countries are about too many people chasing too few resources. Do we have time to transition something that looks like Rwanda to a more efficient agriculture and to do it wisely enough to absorb the people?
Q. WHY DOES THE SECRETARY OF STATE NEED A SCIENCE ADVISER?
A. Because science and technology are the drivers of the 21st century’s most successful economies.
There are more than six billion of us, and the problems of a crowded planet are everyone’s: food, water, energy, climate change, environmental degradation. Other nations, even those that have lost respect for our culture and politics, still welcome collaboration on scientific and technological issues.
Q. REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE E. BROWN JR., ONCE THE HEAD OF THE HOUSE SCIENCE COMMITTEE, WORRIED THAT BECAUSE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AGREEMENTS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES WERE NOT FINANCED, THE UNITED STATES WAS HURTING ITSELF WITH EMPTY GESTURES. WAS HE RIGHT?
A. That’s a great question and a very current one. Yes, the State Department opens doors by negotiating government-to-government S&T agreements. It also takes the first step in fleshing out such agreements by bringing scientists, ministers and agency representatives together to explore mutual interests. But actually supporting collaborative research on problems of mutual interest, that’s just beginning to be recognized as important.
George Brown was right — without the resources to support collaborations, it’s much less than it could be. There are members of Congress who are keenly interested in science diplomacy.
But Congress will have to make a bigger investment for science diplomacy to flourish.
Q. CAN YOU NAME A SITUATION WHERE SCIENCE DIPLOMACY CHANGED HISTORY?
A. History isn’t like a science experiment. You can’t go back and rerun it “without science diplomacy” to see what happens.
Nonetheless, some historians credit ongoing relationships between Soviet and American scientists, particularly physicists, with preventing a flash-over of the cold war.
Today scientific interactions exist between the U.S. and certain countries with which we have no formal diplomatic relations. We’re promoting scientific interactions to address water and health issues among the countries of the Middle East. Our recent interactions with Libya had science and technology as a centerpiece, ranging from a major international astronomical event around a solar eclipse, to addressing issues of health, water desalinization and agriculture.
Another example of science diplomacy is a small group, the Israeli-Palestinian Science Organization. A project they’re doing that I’m enthusiastic about involves genetic assessments. There are some diseases unique to the region that may have a genetic basis. The question is: Which genes and how do you identify them? With that group, I see how science is a real force for bringing people together.
Q. WHY CAN SCIENCE CREATE COOPERATION IN PLACES WHERE EVERYTHING ELSE FAILS?
A. Because science is more collaborative than other types of endeavors. It aspires to more democratic principles than many political systems because we have an external reference.
People can have different theories, but we form an experiment to test it. It’s the evidence that matters. So in science, we can have differences of opinion, but we can’t have two sets of facts.
There is an in-built process that says, “You and I may have different religions, different politics, but we can talk about science across chasms.” (NewYorkTimes)
www.americanfreedomalliance.org
|
