|
Iraq shrine bombing was specialist job: minister
By Agence France Presse
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12070.htm
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
02/25/06 "AFP" -- -- The bombing of a revered Shiite shrine which sparked a wave of violence in Iraq was the work of specialists, Construction Minister Jassem Mohammed Jaafar said Friday, adding that the placing of the explosives must have taken at least 12 hours.
"According to initial reports, the bombing was technically well conceived and could only have been carried out by specialists," the minister told Iraqia state television.
Jaafar, who toured the devastated thousand-year-old shrine on Thursday a day after the bombing which brought down its golden dome, said "holes were dug into the mausoleum's four main pillars and packed with explosives."
"Then the charges were connected together and linked to another charge placed just under the dome. The wires were then linked to a detonator which was triggered at a distance," the minister added.
To drill into the pillars would have taken at least four hours per pillar, he also estimated.
Damage to the mausoleum, holding the tombs of the 10th and 11th Shiite Imams, was extensive.
"The dome was completely wrecked and collapsed on the tombs which were covered over by debris. The shrine's foundations were also affected as 40 percent of the power of the blast was directed inwards," he added.
"It's a historic site, a symbol of Iraqi culture and must be treated as such," he said, adding that he would call on Iraqi officials and on UNESCO to help rebuilt the golden mosque.
Jaafar said he survived a double bomb attack while returning from Samarra when blasts went off in front of his convoy and behind it.
[How glibly The Guardian glosses over the fact that Indonesia, a founding member of OPEC, has become a net oil importer as depletion ravages its economy. There are great and potentially life-saving lessons to be learned as other nations slide down the far side of Peak Oil. What do they do wrong? What do they do right? The key lessons will come not from what governments do, but from what people do. – MCR]
Cracking up
Indonesia's infrastructure is heading south fast in a regional ranking. It must act now if it is to avoid hitting rock bottom, writes John Aglionby
Tuesday February 21, 2006
By John Aglionby The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,,1714658,00.html
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
It is hard to remember the last time four consecutive days passed in Jakarta without a power cut. Or a week when a toll road did not collapse somewhere in Indonesia, or a train did not derail, or one did not curse at the telephone over the difficulty in making a connection, or one's body did not jar after bumping over a pothole.
Those are just examples expatriates living in Jakarta notice through personal experience or reading the newspapers. The problems related to Indonesia's rapidly crumbling infrastructure go much, much deeper than that, as the government's 2006 infrastructure outlook, published last week, reveals with frightening clarity.
In a comparison of 12 south-east Asian nations from the independently produced 2003 Global Competitiveness Report, which included such backward places as Laos and Cambodia, Indonesia ranked 11th on electrification ratio (at 53%), 12th on fixed telephone line connections (at 4%), 9th on cellular phone users (6%), 8th on the extent of the road network (1.7km per 1,000 people) and 7th out of 11 on both access to proper sanitation (55%) and access to clean water in the home (14%).
According to the government's own data, only 23% of the country's road network is in good condition and only 12% of the water distribution companies are in a strong state. No figures are given for the frequency of blackouts but the report does say "several areas are experiencing an electricity crisis".
In the short term the situation is likely to deteriorate before it improves. This is due to a huge shortfall in investment since the Asian economic crisis in 1997-8. Prior to the crisis, according to the World Bank's Indonesia country director, Andrew Steer, £4.6bn was being invested in Indonesian infrastructure annually. By 2002, this figure had dropped to £1.15bn.
"What's required is $20bn-30bn [£11.5bn - 17.25bn] a year over the next five years if the government wants to meet its annual economic growth target of 6-7%," he said.
The government has said it can only fund 17% from its own budget and expects to receive another 7% from international donors. Where the remaining 76% is going to come from is the multibillion pound question, particularly considering Indonesia's investor-unfriendly legal system - which often leaves contracts worth less than the paper they are written on, rampantly corrupt bureaucracy and lack of policy clarity regarding government regulations on project implementation.
How dire the situation is was demonstrated last year when, after a big infrastructure summit in January attended by hundreds of potential investors and at which 91 projects valued at £12.9bn were listed, only six were tendered by year-end and of those only four - all toll roads - were nibbled at by investors.
What is almost amusing if it were not so tragic is that in Aceh, the province devastated by the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami, there is no shortage of reconstruction funds. Port and road building is proceeding apace, as is construction of houses, water and sanitation facilities, hospitals and much more. Meanwhile private companies are falling over themselves to install services such as state-of-the-art telecommunication networks. As things currently stand, it would not be a shock if, by 2008, Aceh had leapfrogged most of the rest of the country in terms of its infrastructure provision.
That might not happen, however, because in the past four days the government has taken significant steps to address the disincentives that had been turning people away.
On Friday it published a package of 153 steps it plans to take this year to stimulate and accelerate infrastructure development by improving regulations, simplifying licensing procedures and providing better facilities - such as granting foreigners limited land ownership rights - to implement projects.
That was followed today by a workshop to brainstorm with experts and potential investors on how to prepare for the next infrastructure summit, which is scheduled for June but has already been postponed twice. The aim of the meeting, as Mr Steer said, is "to hear professional input from those who can make a difference".
The next few months will tell whether the government is finally on the right track to holding a successful summit, but experts are encouraged by recent developments. Rod Williams, a British infrastructure expert, said: "They need to get their ducks in a row first, and the fact that they've recognised this is quite significant. They realise they can't put on another show with no substance."
He added: "The object of today is not to find solutions to problems [of overcoming the chilly investment climate] but to identify them, sign off on them and move forward to really address them."
Solutions will have to be found sooner rather than later, however, or else Indonesia, which only a few years ago was growing at a much faster pace than nearby countries such as Vietnam and China, will remain permanently in their shadows.
Key Excerpt:
“The country embarked on a major effort to wean itself off oil. Japan now imports 16 percent less oil than it did in 1973, although the economy has more than doubled. Billions of dollars were invested in converting oil-reliant electricity-generation systems into ones powered by natural gas, coal, nuclear energy or alternative fuels. Japan, for instance, now accounts for 48 percent of the globe's solar power generation -- compared with 15 percent in the United States.
“At the same time, Japanese industries dramatically reduced oil consumption. Nippon Steel, the nation's largest steelmaker, has cut its dependency on oil by 85 percent since 1974; oil now accounts for only 10 percent of the fuel used to heat its factory furnaces.”
[Japan’s will, experience and success at energy conservation harkens back to two recent landmark works on Peak Oil, David Goodstein’s Out of Gas and last year’s Hirsch report on Peak Oil out of SAIC. Goodstein, Vice Chancellor of Cal Tech, told us that it takes 30 years to change an energy infrastructure. The Hirsch report told us that even starting 20 years before Peak would still lead to serious dislocations. Japan did start 30 years ago and its achievements have been considerable even though they reveal how few are the options available. If there was a way to replace hydrocarbon energy without massive cutbacks in consumption the Japanese (or Germans) would have found it (Germany has also made exemplary progress). The ostensible Japanese success is belied by the fact that their industry switched from oil to natural gas and coal. Yet, on another level, what the Japanese people are doing – on their own – is a model for what we should be doing here in the Empire.
That’s what makes this story such a good read.
As a culture, Japan is infinitely better prepared to deal with massive challenges and to turn shared sacrifice into a tool that strengthens and binds their culture together than is the US. Here, I’m afraid Peak Oil will have the exact opposite effect. Any politician here who did or advocated such things as this story describes would be (and was) removed from office. Jimmy Carter’s cardigan was far less than what the Japanese are doing voluntarily. And any American who voluntarily made the sacrifices seen in Japan would be labeled either un-American, a Communist, or a child molester by his neighbors.
The day will come soon when Americans may look at what the Japanese people have done with envy. If only… If only… -- MCR]
Japanese Putting All Their Energy Into Saving Fuel
By Anthony Faiola
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, February 16, 2006; A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/15/ AR2006021502762.html
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
KAMIITA, Japan -- When the Japanese government issued a national battle cry against soaring global energy prices this winter, no one heeded the call to arms more than this farming town in the misty mountains of western Japan.
To save on energy, local officials shut off the heating system in the town hall, leaving themselves and 100 workers no respite from near-freezing temperatures. On a recent frosty morning, rows of desks were brimming with employees bundled in coats and wool blankets while nursing thermoses of hot tea. To cut back on gasoline use, officials say, most of the town's 13,000 citizens are strictly obeying a nationwide call to turn off car engines while idling, particularly when stopped at traffic lights.
Takao Iwase, Kamiita's husky administrative director, joined other locals in switching off the heat at home, too -- leaving his family to quickly hustle from steaming nighttime baths to the warm comforters on their traditional futons. "We're saving [$100] a day at city hall by shutting off the heat," Iwase, wearing four layers of clothing and a winter coat inside his office, said proudly. "But we no longer see this as just an economic issue. Japan has no natural resources of its own, so saving energy has become our national duty."
As President Bush calls on Americans to break their addiction to oil and increase energy efficiency in the face of soaring prices, perhaps no people serve as better role models than the energy-miser Japanese.
With the world's second-largest economy and virtually no domestic sources of fossil fuel, Japan has had little choice but to turn energy efficiency into an art form, experts say. Japan has dramatically diversified its power sources over the years, becoming far less dependent on oil while cultivating a culture of conservation.
Kamiita's decision to turn off the heat, which brought it national media attention, came after a nationwide "warm biz" campaign led thousands of businesses and government offices to set their thermostats no higher than 68 degrees this winter while encouraging employees to wear sweaters and jackets at work. If it sounds like a gimmick, consider the figures from the similar "cool biz" campaign launched by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's cabinet last summer. Companies including Toyota, Hitachi, Isuzu and Sharp asked everyone from chairmen down to salarymen to strip off their much-loved ties and jackets as office air conditioners were set no cooler than 82.4 degrees. In metropolitan Tokyo alone, the campaign saved 70 million kilowatts of power from June through August -- enough to power a city of a quarter-million people for one month, according to Tokyo Electric Power Co.
Low-emission vehicles -- including increasingly popular hybrids like Toyota's Prius that have recently caught on in the United States -- already account for almost 11 million, or 21 percent, of all autos on Japanese roads. Across greater Tokyo, the world's largest metropolis with a population roughly as large as California's, "intelligent machines" from subway fare chargers to building escalators automatically turn off when not in use.
The government has set strict new energy-saving targets for 18 kinds of consumer and business electronics. Home and office air conditioners, for instance, must be redesigned to use 63 percent less power by 2008. The targets have sparked a gold rush among electronics makers, who are churning out record numbers of energy-saving -- but higher-priced -- consumer products.
Canon's $225 Pixus MP500 printer, which uses 60 percent less electricity than the company's other models, has become the number one seller here despite a variety of less costly options on the market. Matsushita, maker of the Panasonic and National brands, is selling a $600 energy-efficient ceiling lamp that proudly tells its users, "You are saving 10 percent on electricity," each time it's switched on. Last year, the company jumped into the housing subdivision business and is now building suburban "eco-homes" fully equipped with energy-saving gadgets and solar panels that can chop 65 percent off the average Japanese power bill of about $180 a month.
For some products, it can take years for savings on energy bills to offset the initial investment. Thus, experts say, the boom here is not likely to spread overseas until product prices come down. But with opinion polls showing that more than three-fourths of Japanese view energy conservation as a personal responsibility, many here are willing to shell out the cash.
That has contributed to the fact that Japan's energy consumption per person is now almost half that of the United States. Conservation fever swept the nation after the Kyoto Protocol, the 1997 treaty written in Japan that aims to reduce greenhouse gases. The United States has not ratified the treaty.
But Japan's transformation, experts note, dates from well before the Kyoto treaty -- and was rooted more in economics than environmentalism.
After the 1970s oil crisis, Japan "went into a panic. We have no oil of our own, and are completely dependent on imports," said Takako Nakamura, an official at the Global Environment Bureau of the Environment Ministry. "That weakness changed the way we looked at energy."
The country embarked on a major effort to wean itself off oil. Japan now imports 16 percent less oil than it did in 1973, although the economy has more than doubled. Billions of dollars were invested in converting oil-reliant electricity-generation systems into ones powered by natural gas, coal, nuclear energy or alternative fuels. Japan, for instance, now accounts for 48 percent of the globe's solar power generation -- compared with 15 percent in the United States.
At the same time, Japanese industries dramatically reduced oil consumption. Nippon Steel, the nation's largest steelmaker, has cut its dependency on oil by 85 percent since 1974; oil now accounts for only 10 percent of the fuel used to heat its factory furnaces.
Oil was replaced in part by coal, a cheaper and more abundant fossil fuel. Yet critics say reliance on coal or natural gas remains only a temporary solution, particularly as prices for those commodities have risen along with those for oil in recent years.
That has left Japanese companies to focus increasingly on efficiency and alternative energy. Five of Nippon Steel's 10 factories are now burning used tires and recyclable plastics -- such as discarded grocery bags and bottles -- in addition to coal. Spurred by the Kyoto Protocol, Japan's steel industry has made significant upgrades at its plants. Factories here can now produce one ton of steel using 20 percent less fuel than American steelmakers -- and 50 percent less than those in China, according to the Japan Steel Association.
Some industries have done even better. The paper industry is using waste-based or alternative energies for 38 percent of its power.
"We recognize that there is an important environmental issue at stake, but economically it has also worked out for us," said Hiroshi Nakashima, a general administration division manager at Nippon Steel. "Improved energy efficiency means we need to buy less fuel, and that saves money. Otherwise, we never would have done it."
But energy conservation can have its drawbacks. Back in the cold town hall in Kamiita, for instance, more and more workers are coming to the office wearing surgical masks and taking preventive medicines to ward off winter colds. But it is a fate they brought upon themselves -- a vast majority of the town's workers agreed in a survey that the heat should be switched off to save on energy.
"I think we're doing the right thing," said Masaki Iuchi, the 34-year-old town dogcatcher. "But it's not always comfortable."
Special correspondent Akiko Yamamoto in Kamiita and researcher Robert Thomason in Washington contributed to this report.
Rumsfeld Zeros in on the Internet
By Mike Whitney
02/24/06
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12060.htm
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
"ICH" -- -- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was warmly greeted at the recent meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations. The CFR is the hand-picked assemblage of western elites from big-energy, corporate media, high-finance and the weapons industry. These are the 4,000 or so members of the American ruling class who determine the shape of policy and ensure that the management of the global economic system remains in the hands of U.S. bluebloods.
As the Pentagon’s chief-coordinator, Rumsfeld enjoys a prominent place among American mandarins. He is the caretaker of their most prized possession; the high-tech, taxpayer-funded, laser-guided war machine. The US Military is the crown-jewel of the American empire; a fully-operational security apparatus for the protection of pilfered resources and the ongoing subjugation of the developing world.
Rumsfeld’s speech alerted his audience to the threats facing America in the new century.
He opined: “We meet today in the 6th year in what promises to be a long struggle against an enemy that in many ways is unlike any our country has ever faced. And, in this war, some of the most critical battles may not be in the mountains in Afghanistan or in the streets of Iraq, but in newsrooms—in places like New York, London, Cairo, and elsewhere.”
“New York”?
“Our enemies have skillfully adapted to fighting wars in today’s media age, but for the most part our country has not”.
Huh? Does Rummy mean those grainy, poorly-produced videos of Bin Laden and co.?
“Consider that the violent extremists have established ‘media relations committees’—and have proven to be highly-successful at manipulating opinion-elites. They plan to design their headline-grabbing attacks using every means of communications to intimidate and break the collective will of free people”.
What gibberish.
It’s foolish to mention “intimidating and breaking the collective will of free people” without entering Abu Ghraib, Guantanomo and Falluja into the discussion. Rumsfeld is just griping about the disgrace he’s heaped on America’s reputation by his refusal to conform to even minimal standards of decency. Instead, he insists that America’s declining stature in the world is the result of a hostile media and “skillful enemies”; in other words, anyone with a computer keyboard and a rudimentary sense of moral judgment.
(Our enemies) “know that communications transcend borders…and that a single news story , handled skillfully, can be as damaging to our cause and as helpful to theirs, as any other method of military attack”.
If the Pentagon is really so worried about “bad press coverage” why not close down the torture-chambers and withdrawal from Iraq? Instead, Rumsfeld is making the case for a preemptive-assault on free speech.
“The growing number of media outlets in many parts of the world….too often serve to inflame and distort, rather than explain and inform. And while Al Qaida and extremist movements have utilized this forum for many years, and have successfully poisoned the Muslim public’s view of the West, we have barely even begun to compete in reaching their audiences.”
“Inflame and distort”?
What distortion? Do cameras distort the photos of abused prisoners, desperate people, or decimated cities?
Rumsfeld’s analysis borders on the delusional. Al Qaida doesn’t have a well-oiled propaganda mechanism that provides a steady stream of fabrications to whip the public into a frenzy. That’s the American media’s assignment. And, they haven’t “poisoned Muslim public opinion” against us. That has been entirely the doing of the Pentagon warlords and their White House compatriots.
“The standard US government public affairs operation was designed primarily …to be reactive rather than proactive…Government, however, is beginning to adapt”
“Proactive news”? In other words, propaganda.
Rumsfeld confirms his dedication to propaganda by defending the bogus stories that were printed in Iraqi newspapers by Pentagon contractors. (We) “sought non-traditional means to provide accurate information to the Iraqi people in the face of an aggressive campaign of disinformation….This has been deemed inappropriate—for examples the allegations of ‘buying news’”.
A brazen defense of intentionally planted lies; how low can we sink?
This has had a “chilling effect for those who are asked to serve in the military public affairs field.”
Is it really that difficult to print the truth?
Rumsfeld boasts of the vast changes in “communications planning” taking place at the Pentagon.
A “public affairs” strategy is at the heart of the new paradigm, replete with “rapid response” teams to address the nagging issues of bombed-out wedding parties, starving prisoners, and devastated cities. No problem is so great that it can’t be papered-over by a public relations team trained in the black-art of deception, obfuscation, and slight-of-hand. Trickery now tops the list of military priorities.
“US Central Command has launched an online communications effort that includes electronic news updates and a links campaign that has resulted in several hundred blogs receiving and publishing CENTCOM content.”
The military plans to develop the “institutional capability” to respond to critical news coverage within the same news cycle and to develop a comprehensive scheme for infiltrating the internet.
The Pentagon’s strategy for taking over the internet and controlling the free flow of information has already been chronicled in a recently declassified report, “The Information Operations Roadmap”; is a window into the minds of those who see free speech as dangerous as an “enemy weapons-system”.
The Pentagon is aiming for “full spectrum dominance” of the Internet. Their objective is to manipulate public perceptions, quash competing points of view, and perpetuate a narrative of American generosity and good-will.
Rumsfeld’s comments are intended to awaken his constituents to the massive information war that is being waged to transform the Internet into the progeny of the MSM; a reliable partner for the dissemination of establishment-friendly news.
The Associated Press reported recently that the US government conducted a massive simulated attack on the Internet called “Cyber-Storm”. The wargame was designed, among other things, to “respond to misinformation campaigns and activist calls by internet bloggers, online diarists whose ‘Web logs” include political rantings and musings about current events”.
Before Bush took office, “political rantings and musings about current events” were protected under the 1st amendment.
No more.
The War Department is planning to insert itself into every area of the Internet from blogs to chat rooms, from leftist web sites to editorial commentary. Their rapid response team will be on hair-trigger alert to dispute any tidbit of information that challenges the official storyline.
We can expect to encounter, as the BBC notes, “psychological operations (that) try to manipulate the thoughts and the beliefs of the enemy (as well as) computer network specialists who seek to destroy enemy networks.”
The enemy, of course, is anyone who refuses to accept their servile role in the new world order or who disrupts the smooth-operation of the Bush police-state.
The resolve to foreclose on free speech has never been greater.
As for Rumsfeld’s devotees at the CFR, the problem of savaging civil liberties is never seriously raised. After all, these are the primary beneficiaries of Washington’s global resource-war; should it matter that other people’s freedom is sacrificed to perpetuate the fundamental institutions of class and privilege?
Rumsfeld is right. The only way to prevail on the information-battlefield is to “take no prisoners”; police the Internet, uproot the troublemakers and activists who provide the truth, and “catapult the propaganda” (Bush) from every bullhorn and web site across the virtual-universe. Free speech is a luxury we cannot afford if it threatens to undermine the basic platforms of western white rule.
As Rumsfeld said, “We are fighting a battle where the survival of our free way of life is at stake.”
Indeed, it is.
Iran Says It Will Agree to Russian Enrichment Project
By Peter Finn Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, February 26, 2006; 12:12 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/26/ AR2006022600372.html
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
MOSCOW. Feb 26 -- The head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said Sunday that his country had agreed in principle to set up a joint uranium enrichment project with Russia, a potentially significant breakthrough in efforts to prevent an international confrontation over Iran's nuclear ambitions.
"Regarding this joint venture, we have reached a basic agreement," said Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the country's nuclear chief, speaking at a press conference with his Russian counterpart in Bushehr, where Russia is helping to build a nuclear power plant. "Talks to complete this package will continue in coming days in Russia."
Russia's offer to enrich uranium for Iran on Russian territory, a proposal backed by the United States and the European Union, has been the basis of intense but previously fruitless negotiations between the two countries. If Iran does agree to shift enrichment to Russia, Iran would cede control of a key element in the nuclear fuel cycle and ease suspicions that it could secretly produce uranium suitable for nuclear weapons.
A deal would also head-off punitive action by the U.N. Security Council after a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna on March 6. Aghazadeh made it clear, however, that there is still no formal agreement and some issues remain outstanding.
"There are different parts that need to be discussed," he said, according to Russian news agencies. "These are not just related to forming a company, there are other elements. There are political issues and the proposal should be seen as a package."
He went on to say that Iran has "set a precondition," which he declined to specify.
Russian analysts following the talks said Iran wants security guarantees that it would not be attacked by the United States.
The announcement followed two days of talks between Aghazadeh and Sergei Kiriyenko, the head of Russia's nuclear agency. Negotiations are expected to continue in Moscow in the next two or three days.
"I think there remain no organizational, technical or financial problems on the joint venture establishment," said Kiriyenko, but he added that "the international community must have guarantees of security and preservation of the nonproliferation regime."
Kiriyenko provided no specifics, including on key issues such as access to the Russian facility by Iranian scientists and whether or not Iran agreed that it would be permanently based in Russia.
An agreement, if one is reached and backed by the United States and the E.U., would be a significant boon for Russian diplomacy, which has been on the defensive because of Western concerns about the country's democratic direction and its alleged use of its energy resources to punish neighbors such as Ukraine. Russia is chairing meetings of the Group of Eight leading industrial democracies this year, and securing a deal with Iran would be a major boost to the country's desire to be seen as an essential and powerful partner.
More than two years of negotiations between Iran and an E.U. troika of Britain, France and Germany failed to produce an agreement. Russia, which has close financial and military ties with Iran, had much greater leverage, however, including stalling construction of the nuclear plant at Bushehr where Sunday's announcement was made.
In recent weeks Russia has been signaling its mounting frustration with Iran's stance and Russian lawmakers have said that sanctions might become unavoidable unless Iran yielded.
Aghazadeh said the decision to establish a uranium enrichment facility in Russia could be taken before the next IAEA meeting.
"We believe we can get an outcome that will be satisfying for the March 6 meeting," Aghazadeh said.
The board of the IAEA voted this month to report Iran to the Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions, but with the understanding that no action would be taken until after the March 6 meeting. That was to allow more time for negotiations on the Russian proposal. Russia backed the vote to report Iran, but publicly at least has been reluctant to endorse sanctions.
Iran resumed small-scale uranium enrichment after the vote to report the country, and Russian officials said Iran would also have to agree to restore a moratorium on enrichment.
"The Russia side intends to discuss the issue of setting up a joint venture with Iran to enrich uranium only as a package with all other problems concerning the Iranian nuclear dossier," a source in the Russian delegation told the Russian news agency Interfax. "These problems include, among other things, the resumption of an enrichment moratorium by Iran."
Aghazadeh also said Sunday that Iran also planned to add two more power generating units at the Bushehr plant, and was now preparing tender documents.
"Russia will certainly be invited to bid in the tender," Aghazadeh said. "We will be waiting for [Russia's] offer."
Russia had delayed completion of the plant to signal its displeasure, officials said. But Sunday, Kiriyenko said both sides had agreed on a timetable to finish the plant and deliver nuclear fuel to the facility for a launch this fall.
[There are several possible explanations for the attack on Abqaiq. None has emerged as the frontrunner. It’s possible these were US-originated attacks. Intense research from folks like me and Michel Chossudovsky has shown that Al Qaeda is basically a US intelligence creation. But that does not guarantee that there aren’t splinter, rogue or uncontrolled factions out there which are immune from US covert influence. It’s not possible to train and indoctrinate people, arm them, place them in a position to fight and not expect things to get shot up. I do think it’s safe to say that there will be more attacks this year. The question to hold in mind is what immediate effects the destabilization of the Saudi Monarchy might have on the region and the world.
Like oil, politics are now fungible and the less political elasticity there is, the more likely it is to see devastating, abrupt and “unexpected” outcomes. – MCR]
Al-Qaeda pledges war on Saudi oil plants
The Sunday Times
February 26, 2006
Syed Rashid Husain, Al-Khobar and Peter Conradi
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2058725,00.html
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
AL-QAEDA has threatened to launch further strikes to force “infidels” out of the Arabian peninsula after admitting responsibility for a suicide bomb attack on the world’s largest crude oil processing plant.
A local branch of Al-Qaeda said yesterday it had carried out the raid on the complex at Abqaiq, in the east of Saudi Arabia, which processes 5m-7m barrels of oil a day — up to 8% of the world’s consumption.
The bombing, named Operation Bin Laden Conquest, was part of efforts to prevent the “theft” of Muslims’ wealth by “crusaders and Jews”, according to a statement signed “Al-Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula” — the name of the terrorist network’s Saudi affiliate.
“There are more like them who are racing toward martyrdom and eager to fight the enemies of God, the Jews, the crusaders and their stooges, the renegade rulers” of Arab countries, the statement said. “You will see things that will make you happy, God willing.”
The huge facility, 35 miles from Dhahran, plays a pivotal role in the operations of Saudi Aramco. Besides the oil it processes itself, Abqaiq also handles an estimated 5m barrels a day from the Ghawar oil well. More than 90% of Saudi crude exports pass through the plant.
Al-Qaeda had long threatened to attack Saudi Arabia’s oil plants, but this was the first time it had tried to do so. Militants linked to the group had previously killed foreigners working in the oil industry, but had not targeted the facilities.
The strike sent oil futures in New York up $2.37 a barrel to $62.40 despite assurances by Ali Naimi, the Saudi oil minister, that production had continued without interruption. Analysts said prices would have risen by tens of dollars if the terrorists had succeeded in hitting the plant itself.
Naimi met Carlos Gutierrez, the American commerce secretary, in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, yesterday and assured him that the kingdom would “ensure the flow of oil despite the terrorist threats”.
Lieutenant-General Mansour al-Turki, a spokesman for the interior ministry, said the attack began at 3pm on Friday when two cars tried to drive through the gates of the outermost of three fences surrounding the processing facility. Guards shot at the cars and both vehicles exploded, causing a fire that was quickly controlled, he said.
This conflicted with unofficial reports that suggested the cars, both bearing Saudi Aramco logos, had succeeded in getting through the first gates but aroused the suspicion of guards at the second.
Two guards were critically injured in the ensuing gunfight and died later in the hospital, according to these reports. The bombers, wearing Saudi Aramco uniforms, then detonated the explosives in their vehicles. Several other people were also injured.
The attack, although thwarted, represented a serious blow for the Saudi authorities. The country suffered months of terrorist atrocities beginning in May 2003, when 35 people died in a series of bombings on compounds housing foreigners in Riyadh. But there had been no major incidents since December 2004, when terrorists stormed the American consulate, killing five employees.
Saudi authorities claimed afterwards to have crippled the insurgency by killing several Al-Qaeda leaders. They included Saleh al-Awfi, the organisation’s head in Saudi Arabia, who died in a gun battle with police in the holy city of Medina in August 2005.
Officials warned, however, that the group — which is believed to draw support from disaffected young Saudi men — will remain a threat in the kingdom for several years to come.
Bin Laden, who was born in Saudi Arabia, called for the overthrow of the Saudi royal family in 1990 during the build-up to the Gulf War after it allowed American military forces into the kingdom.
Security has been stepped up at oil facilities across Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest producer, in recent months in response to threats by Al-Qaeda.
In a statement issued before the attack Saudi Aramco said it remained “on alert at all times” to secure the world’s largest oil fields. The company is believed to employ 5,000 security guards who use helicopters, boats, cameras and other protection equipment.
Saudi Arabia holds more than 260 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, a quarter of the world’s total. It produces 9.5m barrels a day, equivalent to 11% of global consumption.
Some analysts tried to put a positive gloss on the attack, suggesting its failure showed the strength of security. For others, however, it appeared to have opened a new and potentially even more damaging front in Al-Qaeda’s campaign to undermine the West.
Michael Fitzpatrick, a New York-based oil expert, said Abqaiq was a “very tempting target for any opponent of the regime,” adding: “This forces us to focus on the worsening security situation in that part of the world.”
Average American Family Income Declines
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER,
AP Economics Writer Thu Feb 23, 6:18 PM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060223/ap_on_bi_ge/family_finances
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
WASHINGTON - After the booming 1990s when incomes and stock prices were soaring, this decade has been less of a thrill ride for most American families.
Average incomes after adjusting for inflation actually fell from 2001 to 2004, and the growth in net worth was the weakest in a decade, the Federal Reserve reported Thursday.
Many families were struggling in the aftermath of the 2001 recession and the bursting of the stock market bubble in 2000, the Fed's latest "Survey of Consumer Finances" showed. The comprehensive look at household balance sheets comes every three years.
Average family incomes, after adjusting for inflation, fell to $70,700 in 2004, a drop of 2.3 percent when compared with 2001. That was the weakest showing since a decline of 11.3 percent from 1989 to 1992, a period that also covered a recession.
The average incomes had soared by 17.3 percent in the 1998-2001 period and 12.3 percent from 1995 to 1998 as the country enjoyed the longest economic expansion in history.
The median family income, the point where half the families made more and half made less, rose a tiny 1.6 percent to $43,200 in 2004 compared with 2001. [which means it too would have declined if inflation had been reported honestly ]
Economists said the weakness in the most recent period was understandable given the loss of 2.7 million jobs from early 2001 through August of 2003, when the country was struggling with sizable layoffs caused by the recession, the terrorist attacks and corporate accounting scandals.
The weak income and the stock market decline in the early part of the decade, which wiped out $7 trillion of paper wealth, had an adverse impact on family balance sheets.
Net worth, the difference between assets and liabilities such as loans, rose by 6.3 percent in the 2001-2004 period to an average of $448,200, after adjusting for inflation. That gain was far below the huge increases of 25.6 percent from 1995 to 1998 and 28.7 percent from 1998 to 2001, increases that were fueled by soaring stock prices.
The 2001-2004 performance was the worst since net worth actually declined by 9.9 percent in the 1989-1992 period.
The median family net worth, the point where half the families owned more and half owned less, stood at $93,100 in 2004, a rise of 1.5 percent after adjusting for inflation from 2001. [ which means it too would have declined if inflation had been reported honestly ]
The report showed that the slowdown in the accumulation of net worth would have been even more sizable except for the fact that homeowners have enjoyed big gains in the value of their homes in recent years.
The gap between the very wealthy and other income groups widened during the period.
The top 10 percent of households saw their net worth rise by 6.1 percent to an average of $3.11 million while the bottom 25 percent suffered a decline from a net worth in which their assets equaled their liabilities in 2001 to owing $1,400 more than their total assets in 2004.
"This is the continuing story of the rich getting richer," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's in New York. "Clearly, the gains in wealth are going to the top end."
Democrats used the new report to blast President Bush's economic policies, contending it would be wrong to make permanent his tax cuts which primarily benefited the wealthy.
"These statistics show why, even though GDP is rising, most people do not feel better off," said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).
The Fed survey found that the percentage of Americans who owned stocks, either directly or through a mutual fund, fell by 3.3 percentage points to 48.6 percent in 2004, down from 51.9 percent in 2001. Analysts said this was an indication that investors burned by plunging stock prices in the decade's early years have been leery about getting back into the market.
The share of Americans' financial assets invested in stocks dipped to 17.6 percent in 2004, down from 21.7 percent in 2001. But reflecting the housing boom, the share of assets made up by home ownership rose to 50.3 percent in 2004, compared with 46.9 percent in 2001.
The Fed survey found that debts as a percent of total assets rose to 15 percent in 2004, up from 12.1 percent in 2001. Mortgages to finance home purchases were by far the biggest share of total debt at 75.2 percent in 2004, unchanged from the 2001 level.
There was concern that families may start to feel even more squeezed as the cost of financing their debts increases along with rising interest rates.
While surging home values have supported consumer spending in recent years, analysts worry about the economic impact if, as expected, the home price surge begins to slow this year.
"This report shows a race between factors boosting net worth such as home ownership and factors pushing the other way such as weak wage growth," said Jared Bernstein, senior economist at the liberal Economic Policy Institute, a Washington think tank. "Unless we start to see better income growth from jobs and wages, it is hard to see major gains in net worth for the typical family."
[Of course this is according to plan. It’s on the same map FTW drew for you two and three years ago showing that a civil war and Balkanization of Iraq was inevitable and has been on the US agenda for a decade or more. The timing now is interesting in that I’ll bet that somewhere in the bowels of DoD, State or the CFR there is some analyst insanely suggesting that a major Sunni-Shia rift now would also fragment any opposition to a US-led attack on Iran.
But this tactic is failing before it gets on its baby shoes. Already Muqtada Al Sadr and Sunni cleric Sheik Youssef al-Qaradawi (according to American Progress Action) are joining with Iran in blaming the US. I think that’s a pretty good call.
Needless to say, the inevitable Iraqi “civil war” is getting closer and closer. That’s another reason why a US or Israeli attack on Iran is less and less likely. The only way for the US to manage an Iraqi civil war is through the military. Otherwise, at the end of it, there might be three independent states, all disliking the US and two of them controlling around 80 billion barrels of oil with no mandate to sell it, either for dollars or to America. – MCR]
An apocalyptic day in Iraq
Iran Blames Bush - Sunni Shiite Clashes
By Juan Cole
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12020.htm
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
02/22/06 "ICH" ---- Shiites came out in the thousands all over the Shiite south on Wednesday to protest the bombing of the Askariiyah shrine in Samarra. A Sunni mosque was set afire. and a Sunni clergyman was assassinated.
The hardline Shiite Mahdi Army has come out of Sadr City and is all over Baghdad. They are clashing with Sunnis in Basra.
Sunni leader Tariq al- Hashimi threatened reprisals for reprisal killings.
Abdul Aziz al-Hakim blamed the US for holding back the Badr Corps.
Grand Ayatollah Sistani called for nonviolent street protests that he must know won't be nonviolent.
Iran is blaming Bush.
The threat of terrorism and attacks on Americans just went way up.
Shiite protests Roil Iraq
Tuesday was an apocalyptic day in Iraq. I am not normally exactly sanguine about the situation there. But the atmospherics are very, very bad, in a way that most Western observers will miss.
The day started out with a protest by ten thousand people in the Shiite holy city of Karbala, against the Danish caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. These days, Shiites are weeping, mourning and flagellating in commemoration of the martyrdom of the Prophet's grandson, Imam Husayn. So it is an emotional time in the ritual calendar. when feelings can easily be whipped up about issues like insults to the Prophet. An anti-Danish demonstration in Karbala is a surrogate for anti-American and anti-occupation sentiment. The US won't be able to stay in Iraq withiut increasing trouble of this sort.
Then guerrillas set off a huge bomb in a Shiite corner of the mostly Sunni Arab Dura quarter of Baghdad, killing 22 and wounding 28. Another 9 were killed in other violence around Iraq. These attacks are manifestations of an unconventional civil war.
Then real disaster struck. The guerriillas blew up the domed Askariyah shrine in Samarra. The shrine, sacred to Shiiites, honors 3 Imams or holy descendants of the Prophet. They are Ali al-Hadi, Hasan al-Askari, and his disappeared son Muhammad al-Mahdi. Thousands of Shiiites demonnstrated in Samarra and in East Baghdad, against this desecration.
The Twelfh Imam or Mahdi is believed by Shiites to have disappeared into a supernatural realm (just as Christians believe in the ascension of Christ) from which he will someday return.
Some Shiites think his second coming is imminent. Muqtada all-Sadr and his followers are among them. They are livid about this attack on the shrine of the Mahdi's father.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is also a firm believer in the imminent coming of the Mahdi. I worry that Iranian anger will boil over as a result of this bombing of a Shiite millenarian symbol.
Both Sunnis and Americans will be blamed. Very bad.
Juan Cole is Professor of History at the University of Michigan. Visit his website www.juancole.com
|
Iraq shrine bombing was specialist job: minister