The weak public finances of some euro-zone nations are a danger to the entire currency bloc, German Economics Minister Rainer Bruederle said Thursday without naming any country specifically.
He also told parliament that Germany must "remain the stability anchor in Europe" and criticized euro-zone nations with weak finances.
"A few European nations are exhibiting dangerous weaknesses," Bruederle said. "That could have a fatal impact on all countries in the euro zone."
Portugal's confirmation earlier this week that it's budget deficit was larger than expected has fueled fears that Greece isn't the only country in the euro zone with deep fiscal problems. Spain, Italy, and Ireland are also grappling with budget problems which have been compounded by weak growth and tax revenue.
While not naming any country specifically, Bruederle said there would be no bailout aid for problem nations. European governments should coordinate their recovery strategies, but they shouldn't rely on a "European economic government," he said.
Bruederle said U.S. President Barack Obama's proposals for bank regulation lend momentum to what is a critical process, but the best setting to design such measures internationally remains the Group of 20 industrialized and developing nations.
"The signal is important," Bruederle said of Obama's plan.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Tehran warns off Gulf-based attack
GCC countries should not allow the use of US military bases in their territories against Iran, Speaker of Iranian Parliament Ali Larijani told reporters Wednesday at the Kuwaiti Parliament. “GCC nations must prevent the use of these military bases as a launching pad for an attack on Iran. We do not mean harm to any of these countries,” Larijani asserted in a press conference before his departure. Larijani said his country’s strategy is based on the respect of other countries’ sovereignties, and non-interference in their domestic affairs. Stating his two-day official visit to Kuwait was aimed at bolstering tries between the Kuwaiti and Iranian parliaments, Larijani revealed his visit led to the formation of the Kuwaiti-Iranian Friendship Committee to strengthen bilateral ties.
“Discussions during this visit focused on a number of topics, including financial, political, and commercial, as well as some sensitive issues related to regional and international affairs. There are many opportunities for commercial exchange between the two countries,” Larijani opined, adding that an agreement has been reached for the commercial and trade chambers of both countries to “broaden fields of cooperation”. Other issues tackled during Larijani’s visit include the transport of water and gas. He clarified “negotiations are still ongoing” regarding the disputed Al-Dorra gas field. On the demonstrations in Iran following the presidential elections, Larijani stressed “conflicts are quite natural for a country where popular political participation is taken seriously, but unusual in politically dead nations whose rulers have been in power for many decades. Media institutions have been publishing exaggerated reports on the recent developments in Iran. There is a big difference between what has been published and the actual events in the Islamic Republic.”
Without ruling out external influences on the internal affairs of Iran, Larijani stated, “Some countries have been trying to realize their goals and implement their agendas in Iran, which explains the assassination of physicist Ali Mohamadi”. He added the Iranian revolution has overcome much tougher challenges.
Accusing some “regional, western and Zionist affiliations” of trying to instigate conflicts between Iran and countries in the region, Larijani affirmed Iran recognizes the right of nations to implement their own policies.
Narrating the history of ties between Iran and the Arab world, Larijani said the Iranian revolution never harmed any of the Arab states. “Our support to Hamas and Hezbollah does not mean interference in the internal affairs of other countries. We are doing this to advocate Islamic armed resistance to face Zionist aggression,” he argued. He went on to say if it was not for the Iranian support to Hamas, Israel would have belittled the whole region. “We are proud of supporting Hamas and those who pulled out should blame themselves,” he added.
Larijani lamented several countries have accused Iran of supporting Shiites when it backed up Hezbollah in its war against Israel in Southern Lebanon in 2006, while these countries held discreet talks with the Zionist side. “When Iran started supporting Hamas in Gaza, these voices can no longer claim we only support Shiites, so they started instigating conflicts between Iran and Arab nations,” he said. He also accused the US and Israel of trying to control more of the region’s wealth and military bases.
On the Iranian nuclear program, Larijani explained this has been in existence even prior to the Iranian revolution, during which Iran got assistance from many countries, including France and Germany. However, this assistance was cut off after the revolution, so Iran was forced to realize its nuclear goals on its own.
“The US imposed sanctions on us to stop working on our nuclear program, but we still succeeded. This is a major victory and the nuclear plant will be a base for the Islamic world since the West aims to hinder the Muslim world from having a nuclear plant. General Secretary of the European Union Javier Solana had earlier contended that if they approve the Iranian nuclear program, the other countries will follow suit, but we are determined,” Larijani said.
Larijani also rejected claims that Iran poses a grave threat to the region, asserting “the Zionist existence is the real threat” as Iran does not aim to own nuclear weapons. He added US President Barrak Obama has not changed the foreign policies of America and he had also failed in handling the Palestinian issue, citing the embargo on Gaza and the construction of Israeli settlements.
“Discussions during this visit focused on a number of topics, including financial, political, and commercial, as well as some sensitive issues related to regional and international affairs. There are many opportunities for commercial exchange between the two countries,” Larijani opined, adding that an agreement has been reached for the commercial and trade chambers of both countries to “broaden fields of cooperation”. Other issues tackled during Larijani’s visit include the transport of water and gas. He clarified “negotiations are still ongoing” regarding the disputed Al-Dorra gas field. On the demonstrations in Iran following the presidential elections, Larijani stressed “conflicts are quite natural for a country where popular political participation is taken seriously, but unusual in politically dead nations whose rulers have been in power for many decades. Media institutions have been publishing exaggerated reports on the recent developments in Iran. There is a big difference between what has been published and the actual events in the Islamic Republic.”
Without ruling out external influences on the internal affairs of Iran, Larijani stated, “Some countries have been trying to realize their goals and implement their agendas in Iran, which explains the assassination of physicist Ali Mohamadi”. He added the Iranian revolution has overcome much tougher challenges.
Accusing some “regional, western and Zionist affiliations” of trying to instigate conflicts between Iran and countries in the region, Larijani affirmed Iran recognizes the right of nations to implement their own policies.
Narrating the history of ties between Iran and the Arab world, Larijani said the Iranian revolution never harmed any of the Arab states. “Our support to Hamas and Hezbollah does not mean interference in the internal affairs of other countries. We are doing this to advocate Islamic armed resistance to face Zionist aggression,” he argued. He went on to say if it was not for the Iranian support to Hamas, Israel would have belittled the whole region. “We are proud of supporting Hamas and those who pulled out should blame themselves,” he added.
Larijani lamented several countries have accused Iran of supporting Shiites when it backed up Hezbollah in its war against Israel in Southern Lebanon in 2006, while these countries held discreet talks with the Zionist side. “When Iran started supporting Hamas in Gaza, these voices can no longer claim we only support Shiites, so they started instigating conflicts between Iran and Arab nations,” he said. He also accused the US and Israel of trying to control more of the region’s wealth and military bases.
On the Iranian nuclear program, Larijani explained this has been in existence even prior to the Iranian revolution, during which Iran got assistance from many countries, including France and Germany. However, this assistance was cut off after the revolution, so Iran was forced to realize its nuclear goals on its own.
“The US imposed sanctions on us to stop working on our nuclear program, but we still succeeded. This is a major victory and the nuclear plant will be a base for the Islamic world since the West aims to hinder the Muslim world from having a nuclear plant. General Secretary of the European Union Javier Solana had earlier contended that if they approve the Iranian nuclear program, the other countries will follow suit, but we are determined,” Larijani said.
Larijani also rejected claims that Iran poses a grave threat to the region, asserting “the Zionist existence is the real threat” as Iran does not aim to own nuclear weapons. He added US President Barrak Obama has not changed the foreign policies of America and he had also failed in handling the Palestinian issue, citing the embargo on Gaza and the construction of Israeli settlements.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Obama State of the Union speech
The State of the Union Wednesday, January 27, 2009 Washington, DC
Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, Members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:
Our Constitution declares that from time to time, the President shall give to Congress information about the state of our union. For two hundred and twenty years, our leaders have fulfilled this duty. They have done so during periods of prosperity and tranquility. And they have done so in the midst of war and depression; at moments of great strife and great struggle.
It's tempting to look back on these moments and assume that our progress was inevitable - that America was always destined to succeed. But when the Union was turned back at Bull Run and the Allies first landed at Omaha Beach, victory was very much in doubt. When the market crashed on Black Tuesday and civil rights marchers were beaten on Bloody Sunday, the future was anything but certain. These were times that tested the courage of our convictions, and the strength of our union. And despite all our divisions and disagreements; our hesitations and our fears; America prevailed because we chose to move forward as one nation, and one people.
Again, we are tested. And again, we must answer history's call.
One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression. So we acted - immediately and aggressively. And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed.
But the devastation remains. One in ten Americans still cannot find work. Many businesses have shuttered. Home values have declined. Small towns and rural communities have been hit especially hard. For those who had already known poverty, life has become that much harder.
This recession has also compounded the burdens that America's families have been dealing with for decades - the burden of working harder and longer for less; of being unable to save enough to retire or help kids with college.
So I know the anxieties that are out there right now. They're not new. These struggles are the reason I ran for President. These struggles are what I've witnessed for years in places like Elkhart, Indiana and Galesburg, Illinois. I hear about them in the letters that I read each night. The toughest to read are those written by children - asking why they have to move from their home, or when their mom or dad will be able to go back to work.
For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast enough. Some are frustrated; some are angry. They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded but hard work on Main Street isn't; or why Washington has been unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems. They are tired of the partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness. They know we can't afford it. Not now.
So we face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope - what they deserve - is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics. For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories and different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared. A job that pays the bills. A chance to get ahead. Most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.
You know what else they share? They share a stubborn resilience in the face of adversity. After one of the most difficult years in our history, they remain busy building cars and teaching kids; starting businesses and going back to school. They're coaching little league and helping their neighbors. As one woman wrote me, "We are strained but hopeful, struggling but encouraged."
So we face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope - what they deserve - is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics. For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories and different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared. A job that pays the bills. A chance to get ahead. Most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.
Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, Members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:
Our Constitution declares that from time to time, the President shall give to Congress information about the state of our union. For two hundred and twenty years, our leaders have fulfilled this duty. They have done so during periods of prosperity and tranquility. And they have done so in the midst of war and depression; at moments of great strife and great struggle.
It's tempting to look back on these moments and assume that our progress was inevitable - that America was always destined to succeed. But when the Union was turned back at Bull Run and the Allies first landed at Omaha Beach, victory was very much in doubt. When the market crashed on Black Tuesday and civil rights marchers were beaten on Bloody Sunday, the future was anything but certain. These were times that tested the courage of our convictions, and the strength of our union. And despite all our divisions and disagreements; our hesitations and our fears; America prevailed because we chose to move forward as one nation, and one people.
Again, we are tested. And again, we must answer history's call.
One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression. So we acted - immediately and aggressively. And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed.
But the devastation remains. One in ten Americans still cannot find work. Many businesses have shuttered. Home values have declined. Small towns and rural communities have been hit especially hard. For those who had already known poverty, life has become that much harder.
This recession has also compounded the burdens that America's families have been dealing with for decades - the burden of working harder and longer for less; of being unable to save enough to retire or help kids with college.
So I know the anxieties that are out there right now. They're not new. These struggles are the reason I ran for President. These struggles are what I've witnessed for years in places like Elkhart, Indiana and Galesburg, Illinois. I hear about them in the letters that I read each night. The toughest to read are those written by children - asking why they have to move from their home, or when their mom or dad will be able to go back to work.
For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast enough. Some are frustrated; some are angry. They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded but hard work on Main Street isn't; or why Washington has been unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems. They are tired of the partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness. They know we can't afford it. Not now.
So we face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope - what they deserve - is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics. For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories and different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared. A job that pays the bills. A chance to get ahead. Most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.
You know what else they share? They share a stubborn resilience in the face of adversity. After one of the most difficult years in our history, they remain busy building cars and teaching kids; starting businesses and going back to school. They're coaching little league and helping their neighbors. As one woman wrote me, "We are strained but hopeful, struggling but encouraged."
So we face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope - what they deserve - is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics. For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories and different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared. A job that pays the bills. A chance to get ahead. Most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.
Russian stealth fighter to fly by end-Jan
Russia will test fly by the end of January a new "fifth generation" stealth fighter that aims to challenge the United States for technical superiority, an aviation industry source told Reuters on Wednesday.
World | Russia
This would be the first all-new military aircraft Russia has built since the Soviet Union collapsed two decades ago and is crucial to showing that Moscow still has advanced technologies of its own, defense analysts said.
However, it would probably take five to seven years before Russia's military finally got to fly the first of these fighters, they said.
Fifth-generation jets are invisible to radar, have advanced on-board flight and weapons control systems and can cruise at supersonic speeds. Russia currently builds military aircraft based on designs dating from the Soviet era.
Asked when the new fighter, built by the Sukhoi company, would make its maiden flight, the industry source said: "By the end of this month."
Sukhoi is Russia's largest exporter of military planes and accounts for a quarter of the country's annual arms sales. It has foreign orders worth billions of dollars, with India its biggest client.
A spokesman for Sukhoi said the plane would fly "in the near future."
Interfax news agency quoted a source in the Far Eastern city of Komsomolsk-on-Amur, where the first prototype plane has been built, as saying its first flight could take place "in two or three days, depending on the actual weather."
DELAYED JET IS MOSCOW'S PRIDE
The warplane is seen as Moscow's challenge to the U.S.-built F-22 Raptor stealth fighter, which first flew in 1997.
"The importance of this project is huge. This is the first and principally new plane built in Russia after the fall of communism," said Alexander Khramchikhin, chief analyst at the Moscow-based Institute of Military and Political Analysis.
"This is good for Russia's defense capability, because so far only the United States has built such a jet."
But Khramchikhin said he was not starry-eyed about the plane, recalling delayed deliveries to Russia's armed forces of much-publicized new diesel submarines and the formidable Iskander tactical missiles.
A series of failed tests of the newest, submarine-launched Bulava (Mace) intercontinental nuclear missile, touted by the Kremlin as a perfect weapon able to pierce any air defense, has only added to Moscow's embarrassment in recent years.
"In an optimistic scenario, Russian air forces meanwhile will probably rely strongly on supplies of the less advanced Sukhoi Su-35 jet fighter whose deliveries are due to start this year," the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST) said in an analytical note sent to Reuters.
"It appears the new jet will take years to be fine-tuned, and its delivery to the armed forces would take between five and seven years at least." It said Russia was likely to produce the new jet jointly with its close partner India.
CAST said the mass output of the fifth-generation fighter and its future modifications would attract young engineers to the aviation sector and boost Moscow's military exports after the market for the current Su-30 had been saturated.
"The fifth-generation plane could easily occupy a niche of at least one third of the world market for this type of output," CAST said. "Europe is not building such jets, and China's would-be copycat planes will not match the high standards."
Potential exports of U.S. fifth-generation jets may be limited by Washington's security considerations, reducing sales to a narrow circle of close U.S. allies such as Israel, Saudi Arabia and Japan, CAST said.
World | Russia
This would be the first all-new military aircraft Russia has built since the Soviet Union collapsed two decades ago and is crucial to showing that Moscow still has advanced technologies of its own, defense analysts said.
However, it would probably take five to seven years before Russia's military finally got to fly the first of these fighters, they said.
Fifth-generation jets are invisible to radar, have advanced on-board flight and weapons control systems and can cruise at supersonic speeds. Russia currently builds military aircraft based on designs dating from the Soviet era.
Asked when the new fighter, built by the Sukhoi company, would make its maiden flight, the industry source said: "By the end of this month."
Sukhoi is Russia's largest exporter of military planes and accounts for a quarter of the country's annual arms sales. It has foreign orders worth billions of dollars, with India its biggest client.
A spokesman for Sukhoi said the plane would fly "in the near future."
Interfax news agency quoted a source in the Far Eastern city of Komsomolsk-on-Amur, where the first prototype plane has been built, as saying its first flight could take place "in two or three days, depending on the actual weather."
DELAYED JET IS MOSCOW'S PRIDE
The warplane is seen as Moscow's challenge to the U.S.-built F-22 Raptor stealth fighter, which first flew in 1997.
"The importance of this project is huge. This is the first and principally new plane built in Russia after the fall of communism," said Alexander Khramchikhin, chief analyst at the Moscow-based Institute of Military and Political Analysis.
"This is good for Russia's defense capability, because so far only the United States has built such a jet."
But Khramchikhin said he was not starry-eyed about the plane, recalling delayed deliveries to Russia's armed forces of much-publicized new diesel submarines and the formidable Iskander tactical missiles.
A series of failed tests of the newest, submarine-launched Bulava (Mace) intercontinental nuclear missile, touted by the Kremlin as a perfect weapon able to pierce any air defense, has only added to Moscow's embarrassment in recent years.
"In an optimistic scenario, Russian air forces meanwhile will probably rely strongly on supplies of the less advanced Sukhoi Su-35 jet fighter whose deliveries are due to start this year," the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST) said in an analytical note sent to Reuters.
"It appears the new jet will take years to be fine-tuned, and its delivery to the armed forces would take between five and seven years at least." It said Russia was likely to produce the new jet jointly with its close partner India.
CAST said the mass output of the fifth-generation fighter and its future modifications would attract young engineers to the aviation sector and boost Moscow's military exports after the market for the current Su-30 had been saturated.
"The fifth-generation plane could easily occupy a niche of at least one third of the world market for this type of output," CAST said. "Europe is not building such jets, and China's would-be copycat planes will not match the high standards."
Potential exports of U.S. fifth-generation jets may be limited by Washington's security considerations, reducing sales to a narrow circle of close U.S. allies such as Israel, Saudi Arabia and Japan, CAST said.
Military coup in Turkey to start at 3 am
A number of PowerPoint slides published in the Taraf daily on Tuesday suggest that a planned coup d'état was to be launched at 3 a.m. on an undisclosed date in İstanbul, with tanks patrolling the larger neighborhoods of the city to destroy any “threat” that might attempt to block the military takeover.
The PowerPoint slides were retrieved from a 5,000-page plan allegedly drafted by active duty members of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) in March 2003. The plan, titled the “Balyoz [Sledgehammer] Security Operation Plan,” was drafted only a couple of months after the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government came to power. The masterminds behind the plan were allegedly retired Gen. Çetin Doğan, who was then commander of the 1st Army, former Air Forces Commander Gen. İbrahim Fırtına and retired Gen. Ergin Saygun.
According to the slides, the major threat to the “secularist order of the Republic of Turkey” was posed by “internal targets.”
“As indicated by Great Leader [Mustafa Kemal] Atatürk, what is important is the internal front. Nothing can be achieved unless the internal front is strengthened. This main principle suggests that the elimination of the external threat could only be possible after the elimination of the internal threat.
What is problematic with the internal threat is the difficulty in the realistic determination of the ability and opportunities of the enemy. As we have witnessed in many countries, a small spark can bring together a massive crowd that displays unconscious reactions,” read one of the slides.
The document seems to refute a statement by the General Staff, which claimed that the Sledgehammer plan was part of a series of “scenarios” drafted by the armed forces against the possibility of an external threat. The plan was, however, mainly based on potential methods to “crush” internal threats.
The major internal threat, according to another slide, came from observant Muslims, who the military usually refers to as “reactionary.”
“To permanently get rid of the reactionary threat, necessary measures should occur as was done after the War of Independence and reactionary sympathizers should be assimilated,” stated the document. Another slide warned that reactionary activities had the potential to rapidly spread in İstanbul and southeastern Turkey unless “definite, quick and harsh” measures were taken.
Taraf reported last week that the armed forces had yet another plot to instigate chaos through bomb attacks on popular historic mosques in İstanbul to eventually lead to a military takeover. The plan would also have discharged hundreds of military officers after the coup.
The coup plotters planned to “make use of” the police force and soldiers to facilitate the staging of the coup. Police officers and soldiers would be used to establish special security teams, which would be deployed in various Turkish provinces for security reasons.
The PowerPoint slides also indicated that around 200,000 people residing in the duty zone of the 1st Army were deemed to “pose a threat” to the planned military takeover. Other documents published by Taraf last week suggested that the armed forces planned to detain and then arrest at least 200,000 individuals on charges of reactionary activities in İstanbul after the coup. Individuals who stood up against the coup were to be taken into custody and brought to large sports facilities for interrogation. Among the facilities mentioned were the Burhan Felek sports complex and Fenerbahçe Stadium. The suspects would be questioned by security forces there and then sent to prisons. If the prisons were unable to accommodate all the arrestees, military barracks would temporarily be turned into jails.
In order to prevent a public revolt against the coup, the armed forces planned to patrol several of İstanbul’s larger neighborhoods with tanks and armored vehicles. Among these neighborhoods were Gazi, Eyüp, Fatih and Sultanbeyli. Thousands of security forces would be deployed in İstanbul streets, as they were after the Sept. 12, 1980 military coup. The Hasdal Military Barracks would be turned into a command center to control the military takeover.
The armed forces also hoped to end transmission of many TV and radio stations, which they categorized as “extreme right,” “extreme left” and “missionary.” Among such stations were Radyo 7, Kanal 7, Yön FM and Mega FM.
The documents also suggested that the police was to be brought under the control of the military, that the National Intelligence Organization (MİT) would be restructured and that the new organization would be headed by an army general on active duty.
After the declaration of martial law, a curfew would be imposed and the prisoners at the Metris Prison in İstanbul would be transferred to other prisons in Thrace to open up more space for individuals to be arrested in İstanbul after the coup.
The PowerPoint slides were retrieved from a 5,000-page plan allegedly drafted by active duty members of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) in March 2003. The plan, titled the “Balyoz [Sledgehammer] Security Operation Plan,” was drafted only a couple of months after the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government came to power. The masterminds behind the plan were allegedly retired Gen. Çetin Doğan, who was then commander of the 1st Army, former Air Forces Commander Gen. İbrahim Fırtına and retired Gen. Ergin Saygun.
According to the slides, the major threat to the “secularist order of the Republic of Turkey” was posed by “internal targets.”
“As indicated by Great Leader [Mustafa Kemal] Atatürk, what is important is the internal front. Nothing can be achieved unless the internal front is strengthened. This main principle suggests that the elimination of the external threat could only be possible after the elimination of the internal threat.
What is problematic with the internal threat is the difficulty in the realistic determination of the ability and opportunities of the enemy. As we have witnessed in many countries, a small spark can bring together a massive crowd that displays unconscious reactions,” read one of the slides.
The document seems to refute a statement by the General Staff, which claimed that the Sledgehammer plan was part of a series of “scenarios” drafted by the armed forces against the possibility of an external threat. The plan was, however, mainly based on potential methods to “crush” internal threats.
The major internal threat, according to another slide, came from observant Muslims, who the military usually refers to as “reactionary.”
“To permanently get rid of the reactionary threat, necessary measures should occur as was done after the War of Independence and reactionary sympathizers should be assimilated,” stated the document. Another slide warned that reactionary activities had the potential to rapidly spread in İstanbul and southeastern Turkey unless “definite, quick and harsh” measures were taken.
Taraf reported last week that the armed forces had yet another plot to instigate chaos through bomb attacks on popular historic mosques in İstanbul to eventually lead to a military takeover. The plan would also have discharged hundreds of military officers after the coup.
The coup plotters planned to “make use of” the police force and soldiers to facilitate the staging of the coup. Police officers and soldiers would be used to establish special security teams, which would be deployed in various Turkish provinces for security reasons.
The PowerPoint slides also indicated that around 200,000 people residing in the duty zone of the 1st Army were deemed to “pose a threat” to the planned military takeover. Other documents published by Taraf last week suggested that the armed forces planned to detain and then arrest at least 200,000 individuals on charges of reactionary activities in İstanbul after the coup. Individuals who stood up against the coup were to be taken into custody and brought to large sports facilities for interrogation. Among the facilities mentioned were the Burhan Felek sports complex and Fenerbahçe Stadium. The suspects would be questioned by security forces there and then sent to prisons. If the prisons were unable to accommodate all the arrestees, military barracks would temporarily be turned into jails.
In order to prevent a public revolt against the coup, the armed forces planned to patrol several of İstanbul’s larger neighborhoods with tanks and armored vehicles. Among these neighborhoods were Gazi, Eyüp, Fatih and Sultanbeyli. Thousands of security forces would be deployed in İstanbul streets, as they were after the Sept. 12, 1980 military coup. The Hasdal Military Barracks would be turned into a command center to control the military takeover.
The armed forces also hoped to end transmission of many TV and radio stations, which they categorized as “extreme right,” “extreme left” and “missionary.” Among such stations were Radyo 7, Kanal 7, Yön FM and Mega FM.
The documents also suggested that the police was to be brought under the control of the military, that the National Intelligence Organization (MİT) would be restructured and that the new organization would be headed by an army general on active duty.
After the declaration of martial law, a curfew would be imposed and the prisoners at the Metris Prison in İstanbul would be transferred to other prisons in Thrace to open up more space for individuals to be arrested in İstanbul after the coup.
U.S. unprepared to defend against nuke, bio attacks
As terrifying as the Christmas Day plot was, as close as the underwear bomber got to bringing down that jet, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and the damage he might have wrought are nothing compared with what Al Qaeda has in store.
Two reports make clear that America's mortal enemy remains viciously focused on nuclear or biological attacks and that Washington is falling far short in its duty to protect the public.
First comes Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, former chief of the CIA's Weapons of Mass Destruction Department, now at Harvard. He dissects Al Qaeda's "decade-long effort to steal or construct an improvised nuclear device," fueled by "their perception of the benefits of producing the image of a mushroom cloud rising over a U.S. city, just as the 9/11 attacks have altered the course of history."
And, contrary to those who use the foiled Christmas plot as evidence of the terrorists' diminished capabilities ("The Decline of Al Qaeda," read one headline), he concludes that Al Qaeda's quiet these past eight years is not good news. Not at all.
Instead, Mowatt-Larssen paints a picture of an organization that is likely lying back on purpose.
He writes: "Events have shown that the Al Qaeda leadership does not choose weapons based on how easy they are to acquire and use, be they conventional or unconventional weapons. They choose them based on the best means of destroying the specific targets that they have in mind."
We haven't even gotten to the truly disturbing part yet. This is it: While Al Qaeda is determinedly plotting, the U.S. government's counterterrorism gears are barely spinning.
That is the conclusion of the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism, headed up by former Sens. Bob Graham and Jim Talent.
Two reports make clear that America's mortal enemy remains viciously focused on nuclear or biological attacks and that Washington is falling far short in its duty to protect the public.
First comes Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, former chief of the CIA's Weapons of Mass Destruction Department, now at Harvard. He dissects Al Qaeda's "decade-long effort to steal or construct an improvised nuclear device," fueled by "their perception of the benefits of producing the image of a mushroom cloud rising over a U.S. city, just as the 9/11 attacks have altered the course of history."
And, contrary to those who use the foiled Christmas plot as evidence of the terrorists' diminished capabilities ("The Decline of Al Qaeda," read one headline), he concludes that Al Qaeda's quiet these past eight years is not good news. Not at all.
Instead, Mowatt-Larssen paints a picture of an organization that is likely lying back on purpose.
He writes: "Events have shown that the Al Qaeda leadership does not choose weapons based on how easy they are to acquire and use, be they conventional or unconventional weapons. They choose them based on the best means of destroying the specific targets that they have in mind."
We haven't even gotten to the truly disturbing part yet. This is it: While Al Qaeda is determinedly plotting, the U.S. government's counterterrorism gears are barely spinning.
That is the conclusion of the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism, headed up by former Sens. Bob Graham and Jim Talent.
Obama approved secret operations in Yemen
President Barack Obama approved secret joint U.S. military and intelligence operations with Yemeni troops that began six weeks ago and killed six regional al Qaeda leaders, The Washington Post reported.
Obama approved a December 24 strike against a compound where a U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Aulaqi, was believed to be meeting with regional al Qaeda leaders, the newspaper said in its Wednesday editions.
He was not the target and was not killed but since has been added to a short list of U.S. citizens to be killed or captured by the U.S. military's clandestine Joint Special Operations Command, military officials told the Post.
The American advisers do not take part in raids in Yemen but help plan missions, develop tactics and provide weapons, the paper said.
The United States is also sharing highly sensitive intelligence with Yemeni forces, including electronic and video surveillance, three-dimensional terrain maps and analysis of the al Qaeda network, the Post said.
"We are very pleased with the direction this is going," a senior administration official was quoted as saying about the cooperation with Yemen.
A Yemeni official was quoted as saying the two countries maintained a "steadfast cooperation in combating AQAP (al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula), but there are clear limits to the U.S. involvement on the ground. Information sharing has been a key in carrying out recent successful counterterrorism operations."
Obama approved a December 24 strike against a compound where a U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Aulaqi, was believed to be meeting with regional al Qaeda leaders, the newspaper said in its Wednesday editions.
He was not the target and was not killed but since has been added to a short list of U.S. citizens to be killed or captured by the U.S. military's clandestine Joint Special Operations Command, military officials told the Post.
The American advisers do not take part in raids in Yemen but help plan missions, develop tactics and provide weapons, the paper said.
The United States is also sharing highly sensitive intelligence with Yemeni forces, including electronic and video surveillance, three-dimensional terrain maps and analysis of the al Qaeda network, the Post said.
"We are very pleased with the direction this is going," a senior administration official was quoted as saying about the cooperation with Yemen.
A Yemeni official was quoted as saying the two countries maintained a "steadfast cooperation in combating AQAP (al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula), but there are clear limits to the U.S. involvement on the ground. Information sharing has been a key in carrying out recent successful counterterrorism operations."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
