Was young Obama Indonesian citizen?

(Compiler's note: Does anyone really know who Obama really is? It is high-time we start putting it all together BEFORE this man is elected to the highest office in the land.)

By Aaron Klein
.... An investigation into Indonesian citizenship law and a review of Obama's biography and travels

suggest the Illinois senator at one point may have been a citizen of Indonesia. That would not necessarily disqualify Obama to run for president, but it could raise loyalty concerns.

A 2007 Associated Press photograph taken by Tatan Syuflana, an Indonesian AP reporter and photographer, surfaced last week on the Daylife.com photographic website showing an image of Obama's registration card at Indonesia's Fransiskus Assisi school, a Catholic institution.

In the picture, Obama is registered under the name Barry Soetoro by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro. The school card lists Barry Soetoro as a Indonesian citizen born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii. His religion is listed as Muslim. ....

.... In a revelation that raised a few eyebrows, Obama last April disclosed he traveled as a college student to Pakistan in 1981.

"I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college – I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee," Obama reportedly stated at a fundraising event.

The senator had not previously discussed any trip to Pakistan, either in his books or in scores of policy talks regarding Pakistan.

Prompted by Obama's statements, ABC News contacted the presidential candidate's campaign, which affirmed that in 1981 – the year Obama transferred from Occidental College to Columbia University – Obama visited his mother and sister Maya in Indonesia. Obama then went on to Pakistan with a friend from college whose family was from that country, the campaign said.

Obama was in Pakistan for about three weeks, said the campaign, staying with his friend's family in Karachi and also visiting Hyderabad in Southern India.

Pakistan in 1981 was under military rule. It was difficult for U.S. citizens to travel to the country without assistance. It would have been easier for someone to enter Pakistan on an Indonesian passport.

If Obama indeed possessed Indonesian citizenship as a child, it is unlikely he retains such citizenship. The country's bylaws require any Indonesian citizen living abroad for more than five years to formally declare his intention to return, otherwise risk losing his citizenship status. The law does not necessarily mean Indonesian citizenship would be immediately lost. The law can be overruled by ministerial order.

Obama's registration in Indonesia under the name "Barry Soetoro" also raises questions as to whether he adopted that name in the U.S. at any time. According to Illinois state filings, when Obama registered as an attorney in 1991, he stated he did not have any former names.

Click here for additional facts and insight.

Iran now says “dummy satellite” into orbit. Israel concerned by missile capability

DEBKAfile Special Report

The head of Iran’s aerospace program qualified Tehran’s earlier announcement that its first home-made communications was launched Sunday, Aug. 17. Reza Taghizadeh said: “The Safir satellite carrier was launched today and for the first time we successfully launched a dummy satellite into orbit.”

Earlier, the Iranian news network IRNN showed footage of what it called a domestically-manufactured communications satellite named Safir-e Omid being launched in darkness, accompanied by patriotic hymns.

DEBKAfile reports form one Iranian source that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad personally recited the countdown.

Our military sources stress that confirmation of Iran’s successful launch would represent a strategic breakthrough, testifying to Tehran’s long-range missile delivery capability, possibly armed with nuclear warheads, to distances of thousands of kilometers, against Israel and beyond; Europe and parts of Asia would also be in range. The missile program has been advancing in parallel to Iran’s drive for a nuclear weapon.

Iran would also have paved the way for spy satellites. If verified, Iran’s space achievement would offset one of Israel’s prime military assets, its superiority in space technology.

According to our sources, Tehran caught Israel, the United States and both their undercover agencies by surprise. They knew Iran was working on a space program but not how close the Iranians were to placing a satellite in orbit.

Our sources believe that the capsule was boosted by the Shehab-5 missile, whose range the Iranians boast is up to 5,000 km and, according to some military experts, reaches 7,000 km.

The Islamic Republic’s reported feat comes at a bad time for Moscow internationally. The Russians emphatically dismiss America’s argument for installing missile interceptors in Poland as a shield against Iranian ballistic missile attack, claiming they were aimed at Russia. The Kremlin accuses the Bush administration using this false claim as a pretext, because Iran had not so far developed a ballistic threat. Now, that proof may have been provided Sunday, Moscow will have to reconsider its position.

American Officials Say Russia Is Moving Missile Launchers Into Disputed Georgian Enclave

Even as Russia pledged to begin withdrawing its forces from neighboring Georgia on Monday, American officials said the Russian military had been moving launchers for short-range ballistic missiles into South Ossetia, a step that appeared intended to tighten its hold on the breakaway territory.

The Russian military deployed several SS-21 missile launchers and supply vehicles to South Ossetia on Friday, according to American officials familiar with intelligence reports. From the new launching positions north of Tskhinvali, the South Ossetian capital, the missiles can reach much of Georgia, including Tbilisi, the capital. ....

Breaking up big banks questioned as losses mount

By JOE BEL BRUNO

NEW YORK (AP) - America's biggest banks have suffered unprecedented losses from the ongoing credit crisis, and that's made some investors question whether the big financial conglomerates should be broken up in order to survive.

Break-up advocates, who for months have been clamoring for Citigroup Inc. (C) to be dismantled, got some validation of their viewpoint this past week. Europe's UBS AG (UBS) - created through the combination of Swiss Bank Corp. and Union Bank of Switzerland in 1997 - on Wednesday laid the groundwork to tear up its business model after another quarter of steep losses.

Though the UBS announcement was expected, it was nonetheless a departure from what executives promised during a wave of big bank deals that began in the late 1990s. The creators of global banks like Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), and HSBC Holdings PLC (HBC) had promised customers and shareholders that a diverse set of businesses would shield them from economic volatility.

But, those models haven't sheltered the banks from the subprime mortgage crisis that turned into a dislocation of the credit markets. Major global banks have taken more than $300 billion in asset write-downs, and organizations like the International Monetary Fund believe that amount could reach $1 trillion. ...

Can Britain Survive multiculturalism?

(Compiler's note: More insight into Sharia Law in action.)

Well, can it? Before you answer, take a look at the short video, available on YouTube, that the journalist Dale Hurd posted on CBN, the Christian Broadcasting Network, a few days ago.

Don’t let the word “Christian” frighten you: this is not a proselytizing documentary but rather an educational one. Hurd begins with the by-now-familiar news that Britains’s top judge and the Archbishop of Canterbury have both publicly declared themselves in favor of instituting some elements of Islamic sharia law in Britain. Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips recently decided that “Islamic legal principles could be employed to deal with family and marital arguments and to regulate finance,” while the Primate of All England called for a “constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law.” He also notes that British authorities have been bending over backwards to cater to Muslim sensitivities. You might think of Fido as Man’s Best Friend, but Muslims think dogs are unclean. Hence the recent flap in Dundee, Scotland, over a police advertisement which portrayed a cuddly puppy called Rebel. “Islamic leaders” declared the advertisement “offensive” and police officials fell over themselves apologizing for their insensitivity. Mr. Hurd points out that Islamic kunophobia is so severe that police dogs in Britain “might have to wear booties when they search Muslim homes.”

He also notes how unevenly the enforcement of so-called “hate speech” legislation has been. When a Danish newspaper published some cartoons of a 7th-century religious figure, Muslims living in Britain took to the street and demanded blood: “Slay those who insult Islam” read one placard. “We want Danish blood,” shouted some protesters. But when a British news program on channel four exposed the violent rhetoric that is a staple at many British mosques, the police did not charge the Imams who preached violence. No, that might offend Muslims. Instead, they charged the news program for fomenting “racial hatred.” And then there was a blogger called Paul Ray who had the temerity to describe the Muslim drug gangs in his home town as “savages” and was promptly arrested on suspicion of a hate crime. According to Hurd, Mr. Ray fled Britain after the providing CBN with interview because of threats against his life.

The rhetorical apex of Britain’s accommodationist spirit was achieved when Jacqui Smith, the British Home Secretary, announced that henceforth that Islamic terrorism–that is, terrorism carried out by Muslims–would be rebranded “anti-Islamic activity” in order to “woo” Muslims. Would that George Orwell were around to update his disquisition on Newspeak: War is Peace, Hate is Love, and when Muslims blow up a bus in central London that is an example of anti-Islamic activity.

But let’s return to the Lord Chief Justice and his call for the application of “Islamic legal principles” in the case of “family and marital arguments.” What do you suppose that might mean? If you listen to some well-meaning folks–the people who tell you that, really, “jihad” is not about blowing up stuff and murdering people but is rather about the “inner struggle” to be a better person–then you might think that what the Lord Chief Justice recommends is something out of Court TV. Mr. Hurd’s documentary reminds us that this is not the case. (Andrew McCarthy, in his book Willful Blindness puts paid to all these euphemisms about the meaning of jihad by quoting Omar Abdel Rahman, the “Blind Sheikh” who masterminded the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. “Jihad,” quoth Rahman, “means fighting the enemies.” He explained what he meant: “There is no such thing as commerce, industry and science in jihad. This is calling things . . . other than by [their] own name. If God . . . says, ‘Do jihad,’ it means do jihad with the sword, with the cannon, with the grenades and with the missile. This is jihad. Jihad against God’s enemies for God’s cause and his word.” Thus the Sheikh.)

But I digress. Back to family matters. Mr. Hurd interviews a woman called Gina Kahn, who left an arranged marriage and now lives in hiding for fear of her life. As Ms Kahn notes, whenever radical Islam gets the upper hand in a neighborhood one sees more polygamy, more domestic violence, more forced marriages, and more honor killings. Memo to the Lord Chief Justice: this is what the application of “Islamic legal principles” to family arguments means: more dead women.

As it happens, Gina Kahn is (so far) among the more fortunate victims of Islamic legal principles. Not so lucky was another women portrayed in “Can Britain Survive multiculturalism?” Mr. Hurd shows a clip of the woman speaking from her hospital bed after the first time her father and uncle tried to kill her for refusing an arranged marriage. She went to the British police and begged for their help. “They ignored her,” Mr. Hurd notes, “because the police thought they should respect ethnic diversity and not get involved.” Well, the police do not have to worry about that particular troublemaker any longer. If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again: that was her father and uncle’s motto, and eventually they succeeded in murdering her, stuffing her body into a suitcase and burying it in the back yard.

“Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?” I’d say the answer is No. But that doesn’t mean it can’t fight, and fight successfully, against multiculturalism and the ruinous cultural relativism it has insinuated into the sinews of British society. If it is to be successful, though, that struggle will have to encompass not only the negative fight against the Islamic enemies of Western civilization. It will also have to involve the reanimation of the central principles of Western civilization: virtues like patriotism, public affirmation of the rule of law, and an outspoken allegiance to the formative values of Western democratic society: values like freedom of religion, respect for individual initiative, and equality before the law. In his peroration, Dale Hurd goes to the heart of the matter: “It’s clear,” he says, “that multiculturalism and political correctness have backfired badly. The hard-core Islamists have not been assimilated into society. But Britain’s confidence in democracy and Christian civilization have been seriously weakened.”

What happens next is anyone’s guess.

Iran successfully tests rocket capable of carrying satellites, among other things

from Jihad Watch

As noted here, the same technology is involved in ballistic missile development, and close Iranian ally North Korea has set a strong precedent for using a "space" program as a cover for its missile projects.

"Iran successfully test launches rocket set to carry satellite," from the Associated Press, August 17:

Iran test launched a rocket it plans to use to carry a research satellite into orbit, state television reported Sunday.

Saturday's test of the two-stage rocket, called the Safir, or Ambassador, was successful, state TV said, as it broadcast images of the nighttime launch.

It said the Omid research satellite will gather atmospheric data from a low orbit but did not give a date for its launch.

Iran has long held the goal of developing a space program.

In 2005, it launched its first commercial satellite on a Russian rocket in a joint project with Moscow, which appears to be the main partner in transferring space technology to Iran.

Iran first tested a rocket it said was capable of delivering a satellite in February, saying that trial was also successful. It said then that it planned two more test launches before attempting to put its first domestically built satellite into orbit.

The country's fledgling space program, like its nuclear program, has provoked unease abroad. The same technology used to put satellites into space can also be used to deliver warheads.

The United States called the February 4 launch "just another troubling development," saying it was a cause for concern about Iran's continuing development of medium- and long-range missiles.

Meanwhile, Iran claimed Sunday it has increased the range of its warplanes, allowing them to fly as far as Israel and back without refueling.

State TV quoted air force chief Gen. Ahmad Mighani as saying Iranian warplanes can now fly 3,000 kilometers without refueling. He didn't specify the aircraft type or explain how the range was extended.

Israel is about 1,000 kilometers from Iran.

Such a range could be achieved by using external fuel tanks attached to the wings or fuselage that can be released when empty...

Greetings from Iraq

(Compiler's note: Received this note from a friend)

To:
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:35:59 +0300
Subject: Greetings from Iraq

Hello everyone. Hope this email finds you all well. We finally have an extended amount of down time (2 days) so I thought I’d write you all and say hi.

Things here are going pretty well. The intense heat has finally hit and is here to stay, at least for the next month or so. The past few days the temps have reached into the 130s so we try to stay inside as much as possible during the day. We really can’t complain too much though, it’s actually been a pretty mild summer, for Iraq that is. Back in 2006 when I was here it broke 130 around the beginning of July and stayed until September, this time it wasn’t until August so we’ve been pretty lucky so far. Hopefully it won’t stay too hot for too long.

The team is doing pretty well. We’ve started sending people home on their 2 week R&R which seams to make the time go by even faster. We actually track things by the 3 weeks that a person is gone and every time one comes back and another leaves it’s almost another month down. We try to stay as busy as possible in what little down time we have. If we’re not out on a mission or working with the Iraqis, we’re usually doing maintenance on our trucks or planning for the following day’s activities. We try to get at least half a day of every week but of course it can’t always happen. I’ve been taking it kind of easy the past week since I separated my shoulder back on the first and been told to rest it for 2 weeks.

Things with the Iraqi National Police are going as good as can be expected. We work with them almost daily and have managed to get a pretty good relationship with them. The job of advising them is defiantly a very unique one and probably a job that nothing else can compare to. If you had told me 10 years ago when I first joined the Army that in 2008 I would be a Captain working with and mentoring the Iraqi Security Forces to secure and defend their own country I would have called you nuts. But here we are doing just that, and learning a lot in the process.

Working with them can be very frustrating at times, but very rewarding at others. Even in the short amount of time that we’ve been here we have seen, and helped in, our battalion making great strives to being self sufficient and able to operate independently without Coalition support. When we got here the battalion was barely able to maintain the status quo, basically manning several checkpoints throughout their area of operations. And even that was not done very well; many of the checkpoints were abandoned during heavy fighting in the weeks before we arrived. Now, they not only man those checkpoints 24/7 but they are able to plan and execute missions completely on their own. Just today we returned from a level mission that was completely planned, briefed and executed by the Iraqis. Seeing over 400 shurta (National Police Officers), from 5 different battalions, all come together and execute the mission was quite a site to see. Even our battalion on their own is making tremendous gains. It seems like every day we are hearing about another cache or high value target (a known terrorist being searched for) that the have captured and taken off the streets.

The gains we’re seeing aren’t just with the National Police. The area that we are operating in is making huge progress to returning to normal. In the past 4 months over 1,000 families have returned and moved back into their homes. Some of these families left shortly after the 2003 invasion but most of them left when the sectarian violence started. Seeing them move back to their homes is huge and one of the most important, and rewarding, things we have seen happen. We also get to watch, literally as we drive through the area, the constant area beautification that is going on. Many of the main roads are being repaved and getting decorative medians and sidewalks put in. This is a great thing to see happen since up until recently most of the roads were in disrepair with tons of trash and what not all over the place. We also like to see it because it makes it harder for the insurgents to emplace and hide IEDs, which of course makes it a lot safer for all of us.

The security situation here has gotten so much better that it’s like night and day from just 12 months ago. While there are still attacks on both Coalition and Iraqi forces, the number, frequency and severity of them have dropped dramatically. In the area we operate in, both the number of attacks and the number of casualties have almost bottomed out. In any given week we can count the number of attacks against Coalition on one hand, if there are any at all. This trend is mirrored is almost every other region of the country and some have been able to report a month or more between attacks. Al-Anbar province in the western part of the country use to be one of the most dangerous areas for US troops. But now it is one of the safest and most secure. A little over a month ago they reported the first attack, against any one, in almost 6 months.

Much of this progress can be attributed to the Iraqis themselves. Not only are the Security Forces defeating the insurgents but so is the population as a whole. The civilian population is tired of 5 years of fighting and wants to return to peaceful living. Everyday, more and more people come in to volunteer for the Army or Police forces, or they come in to volunteer information that is helping us win against the insurgents. While they do want us to leave, they don’t want us to leave before the insurgents are defeated and the Iraqi Security Forces can maintain the peace. And thanks to them we’re even closer to being at that point then we ever have been in the past.

Well I think I’ve rambled on for long enough. Got some work to do anyway. Hope everyone is doing well and I miss you all. Hope to hear from you all soon, and looking forward to getting back and seeing everyone in person. Stay safe.

Your ain't gonna like it!

(Compiler's note: Shared with me by a friend and too good not to share with you. rca)

I know everyone has a different opinion on the war and our current President. But, this article makes a lot of sense, take 2 minutes, read it and give it some thought.

When electing the next President, "the only decision you have to make is who you want sitting in that seat in the White House when - not if - WHEN we get hit again and millions of American lives are put at risk!"

This is from: "You ain't gonna like losing." found here

Bill Croghan

President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism. But the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq. Bush's mistake came in his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in WWII. It is not.

Back then, they had just come out of a vicious depression. The country was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their leaders, so it was the people's duty to back those leaders.

Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not or whether the war was going badly or not.

And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great then as it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WWII than we have had in the entire Iraq war. But that did not matter. The people stuck with the President because it was their patriotic duty. Americans put aside their differences in WWII and worked together to win that war.

Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in. Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war bonds to help the effort. Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition trying their best to join the military.

Women doubled their work to keep things going at home. Harsh rationing of everything from gasoline to soap, to butter was imposed, yet there was very little complaining.

You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the President. Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile countries and complain to them about our President. Instead, they made upbeat films and entertained our troops to help the troops' morale. And a bunch even enlisted.

And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off with a Pledge of Allegiance, and with prayers for our country and our troops!

Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies. A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained that German or Japanese soldiers were being 'tortured' by being forced to wear women's underwear, or subjected to interrogation by a woman, or being scared by a dog or did not have air conditioning.

There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in movies or on radio. We did not have legions of crack heads, dope pushers and armed gangs roaming our streets.

No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism. He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that our fathers fought so dearly to preserve.

It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and Gomorra and the land of Oz. We did unite for a short while after 9/11, but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country would require some sacrifices.

We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims. They believe that it is okay, even their duty, to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam. It has been estimated that about one third or over three hundred million Muslims are sympathetic to the terrorists cause... Hitler and Tojo combined did not have nearly that many potential recruits. So... We either win it - or lose it - and you ain't gonna like losing.

America is not at war. The military is at war.

America is at the mall, or watching the movie stars.

(Remember Obama said in his book "Audacity of Hope", 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction'.....what better place for the Muslins to control our country, than in the office of the President of USA .

Click here to see how the British citizens like Islamic Radicals. I must warn you that the language is a bit course in places, but the clear message, laced with facts and strong opinion as well, is still not lost.

Setting The Record Straight:

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

_______________________________________________________

For Immediate Release August 13, 2008

President Bush Has Taken Action To Ensure Peace, Security And Humanitarian Aid In Georgia

The Wall Street Journal Inaccurately Claims The Administration Was Slow To Respond To The Conflict Between Georgia And Russia

The Wall Street Journal asserts that "U.S. credibility is … on the line as the Bush Administration stumbles to respond to the Russian invasion of Georgia. So far the Administration has been missing in action." (Editorial, "Bush And Georgia," The Wall Street Journal, 8/13/08)

President Bush and his Administration have taken aggressive action, both public and non-public, to manage this crisis.

Friday, August 8, 2008:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice speaks several times with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and makes a statement calling for an immediate ceasefire.

"Senior U.S. officials and I have spoken with the parties and continue to work with them to seek an end to hostilities. The United States is working actively with its European partners to launch international mediation. We urgently seek Russia's support of these efforts." (Secretary Condoleezza Rice, "Russia Move Into Georgia," Press Release, 8/8/08)

· President Bush meets with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in Beijing and again that evening.

· National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley speaks twice with Prime Minister Putin's Foreign Policy Advisor Yuriy Ushakov.

· Defense Secretary Robert Gates speaks with Russian Defense Minister Anatoliy Serdyukov as well as Georgian Defense Minister Davit Kezerashvili.

· Deputy Secretary Negroponte meets with Russian Charge.

· U.S. Ambassador in Tbilisi and Charge in Moscow remain in regular contact with Georgian and Russian officials.

· U.S. Embassy Tbilisi releases State Department pre-positioned disaster packages – valued at $1.2 million – to help those in need. The packages include basic medical supplies, tents, blankets, bedding, hygiene items, clothing, beds, and cots.

· Ambassadors Khalilzad and Wolff make statements in New York UNSC sessions from August 8 to 11 stressing the inviolability of Georgia's territorial integrity and calling on Russia to cease its attacks.

Saturday, August 9, 2008:

· Secretary Rice speaks with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili.

· President Bush speaks with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

· President Bush speaks with Georgian President Saakashvili.

· President Bush delivers a statement from Beijing.

"This situation can be resolved peacefully. We've been in contact with leaders in both Georgia and Russia at all levels of government. Georgia is a sovereign nation and its territorial integrity must be respected. We have urged an immediate halt to the violence and a stand-down by all troops. We call for an end to the Russian bombings, and a return by the parties to the status quo of August the 6th." (President George W. Bush, Statement On Escalation Of Violence In Georgia, Beijing, People's Republic of China, 8/9/08)

· National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley speaks with British Foreign Policy Advisor Simon McDonald.

· National Security Advisor Hadley speaks with French Diplomatic Advisor Jean-David Levitte.

· Defense Secretary Gates speaks with Georgian President Saakashvili.

Sunday, August 10, 2008:

· President Bush speaks with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

· U.S. Ambassador John F. Tefft declares a disaster due to the effects of armed conflict in Georgia and USAID provides an initial $250,000 for the local procurement and distribution of emergency relief supplies.

· U.S. begins airlift of Georgian troops home from Iraq.

· State Department officials meet with Russian Charge.

Monday, August 11, 2008:

· President Bush discusses the situation in Georgia during an interview with NBC.

"I said this violence is unacceptable – I not only said it to Vladimir Putin, I've said it to the President of the country, Dmitriy Medvedev. And my Administration has been engaged with both sides in this, trying to get a cease-fire, and saying that the status quo ante for all troops should be August 6th. And, look, I expressed my grave concern about the disproportionate response of Russia and that we strongly condemn bombing outside of South Ossetia." (President George W. Bush, Interview By Bob Costas, NBC Sports, Beijing, People's Republic of China, 8/11/08)

· Secretary Rice hosts a conference call with G7 Counterparts.

· Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert M. Kimmitt issues statement on support for Georgia's economy.

"Given its sound macroeconomic and fiscal policies and excellent progress in transition to a market economy, Georgia is well placed to weather the current crisis. Georgia's economy has been one of the strongest in the region owing to its proven record of reforms, and this reform effort deserves continued international support. The United States has strongly supported Georgia's reform and economic development programs and is prepared to join other countries to support the International Financial Institutions' future engagement to promote a vibrant economy that builds on the existing foundations." (Deputy Secretary Robert Kimmitt, Statement on Georgia's Economy, 8/11/08)

· President Bush speaks with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

· President Bush delivers statement upon arrival at the White House calling on Russia to end this crisis.

"Russia's actions this week have raised serious questions about its intentions in Georgia and the region. These actions have substantially damaged Russia's standing in the world. And these actions jeopardize Russians' relations – Russia's relations with the United States and Europe. It is time for Russia to be true to its word and to act to end this crisis." (President George W. Bush, Statement On Situation In Georgia, The White House, 8/11/08)

· President Bush speaks with Lithuanian President Valdas Adamkus.

· President Bush speaks with Polish President Lech Kaczynski.

· National Security Advisor Hadley speaks with French Diplomatic Advisor Levitte.

· President Bush speaks with Georgian President Saakashvili.

· Secretary Rice speaks with Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski.

· Department of Defense cancels naval exercise with Russia

· U.S. completes airlift of Georgian troops from Iraq to Georgia.

Tuesday, August 12, 2008:

· President Bush speaks with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.

· President Bush speaks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

· Secretary Rice makes a statement after meeting with the President at the White House.

"I want to make very clear that the United States stands for the territorial integrity of Georgia, for the sovereignty of Georgia, that we support its democratically elected government and its people. We are reviewing our options for humanitarian and reconstruction assistance to Georgia. But the most important thing right now is that these military operations need to stop. We will continue to work diplomatically on this matter and will continue our discussions with all the parties involved." (Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Remarks On Situation In Georgia, The White House, 8/12/08)

· USAID provides an initial $250,000 for the local procurement and distribution of emergency relief supplies.

· U.S. Department of Defense announces cancellation of annual French-Russian-UK-U.S. (FRUKUS) military exercise.

· Secretary Rice discusses situation in Georgia in an interview with ABC.

"[W]e're concentrating right now on getting this conflict stopped, so that people can stop dying, on getting the Russians to stop their bombardment of Georgian infrastructure and even Georgian ports and towns like Gori. We are concentrating on the humanitarian assistance that Georgia will need. We're concentrating on getting an assessment of what Georgia will need, in terms of reconstruction, and in sending very strong signals of support to democratically elected government of Georgia and its people." (ABC News' "World News With Charles Gibson," 8/12/08)

Wednesday, August 13, 2008:

· President Bush speaks with Georgian President Saakashvili.

· President Bush speaks with French President Sarkozy.

· President Bush makes a statement in the Rose Garden. Announces he has asked Secretary Rice to travel to France for a meeting with President Sarkozy and then on to Georgia to personally convey America's unwavering support for Georgia's democratic government

"We expect Russia to honor its commitment to let in all forms of humanitarian assistance. We expect Russia to ensure that all lines of communication and transport, including seaports, airports, roads, and airspace, remain open for the delivery of humanitarian assistance and for civilian transit. We expect Russia to meet its commitment to cease all military activities in Georgia. And we expect all Russian forces that entered Georgia in recent days to withdraw from that country." (President George W. Bush, Statement On The Situation In Georgia, The White House, 8/13/08)

· Defense Secretary Robert Gates directs the U.S. military to begin humanitarian assistance to the citizens of Georgia.

· A EUCOM C-17 plane arrives in Tbilisi, Georgia carrying $850,000 in medical supplies.

· Tonight a C-130 will arrive carrying an ESAT survey team to prepare the way for further humanitarian assistance.

· State Department is sending 104,000 doses of antibiotics in response to a request from the Georgian Minister of Health.

· State Department is supporting the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) as it prepares to send a team of surgeons to Georgia to help treat victims of the conflict in South Ossetia. ICRC plans to deliver 15 tons of water treatment equipment and medical aid, which will provide clean water for 20,000 people and medicine for about 400 wounded.

· State Department is supporting the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which is moving stocks from one of its emergency warehouses in Dubai; 21,000 blankets, 1,850 tents, and 8,000 jerry cans should arrive in Tbilisi today. UNHCR also purchased locally emergency supplies ($250,000).

· USAID's Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance Washington-based regional team is coordinating U.S. humanitarian response activities, maintaining close contact with U.S. Embassy Tbilisi and partners on the ground.

· USAID is coordinating the U.S. response efforts with the international community, including the European Commission, the UN, NGO partners and the Government of Georgia.

Terrorism threat might not be an empty threat

By Cliff May

If you don't live in Washington, New York or another big city, you may think: "Even if the terrorists do strike again on American soil, my hometown and my family probably aren't in danger." Think again.

In 2001 the U.S. government established a commission to "assess the threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) attack." The commission recently reported to Congress that if a nuclear warhead were to be detonated at high altitude over the American mainland the blast would produce an EMP -- a shockwave so powerful that it would "cripple military and civilian communications, power, transportation, water, food, and other infrastructure."

Lights would go out. Telecommunications would fail. Computers would crash. Bank accounts would disappear. The stock market would cease operation. Refrigerated food warehouse would shut down. Sanitation and emergency services would be crippled.

Before long, millions of Americans would, as the Wall Street Journal flatly phrased it, "die of starvation or want of medical care." Any number of terrorists groups would be proud to carry out such an attack. But, as the EMP commission also reported, only Iran (1) is attempting to develop nuclear weapons, (2) has recently conducted multiple missile tests of its nuclear-capable Shahab-3 missiles, (3) has done so from cargo ships in the Caspian Sea, and (4) also has detonated those missiles at high altitude. What's more, the CIA has translated Iranian military journals in which EMP attacks against the U.S. are explicitly discussed.

The terrorists learned from those experiences -- America's political leaders did not. They failed to imagine or prepare for what the terrorists might do next -- what the terrorists did do on Sept. 11, 2001.

Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.

ALSO read EMP threat not being addressed by U.S.

Capability is one thing. Intention is another. Or is it?

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said: "The time for the fall of the satanic power of the United States has come and the countdown to the annihilation of the emperor of power and wealth has started." He has added: "A world without the United States ... can be achieved."

An EMP attack would achieve that goal most rapidly because it would require only one nuclear weapon, and by using a ship as the launch pad, it would obviate the need for very long-range missiles (which Iran has not yet acquired).

You may be thinking: "Ahmadinejad and his mullah masters wouldn't dare! They must know the destruction we'd rain on them in response."

First, those who believe — as, for example, Islamist suicide-bombers do — that death in a war against Infidels leads to martyrdom and heavenly rewards cannot be deterred. For them, as Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis has observed, "mutually assured destruction in not a deterrent — it is an inducement."

Islamic banking is in its golden period of growth

(Compiler's note: Talk about financing our enemy .... Other than just pure greed, why on earth would any of the free world want to support Sharia Law. This is the same Sharia law wants us converted to Islam, enslaved or dead. rca)

Dr Jasim Ali, Special to Gulf New

Last week Moody's Investors Services published an exceptional report about Islamic banking industry. Entitled, "Frequently Asked Questions: Notable Trends in Global Islamic Finance", the report revealed some valuable insights into the potential of Islamic banking. Yet, one could disagree with some of the arguments made by the report's author, Anouar Hassoune, vice-president and senior credit officer at the company.

Amongst others, the report claims that the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries do not want the private sector dominating the realm of Islamic banking. Accordingly, the GCC governments are increasingly entering as strategic investors in Islamic financial institutions (IFIs). Cases in point are Dubai government owning a controlling stake at Noor Islamic Bank (NIB). Set up 2007, NIB aims at becoming the largest IFI in the world within the next five years. Also, state pension funds own 30 per cent of Alinma Bank in Saudi Arabia. Set up in 2006, Alinma sold 70 per cent of shares through initial public offers earlier in the year. Likewise, the Qatari government partly owns Masraf Al Rayan.

The report suggests that government ownership should help making IFIs only more acceptable. "If governments have an increasing share of ownership in IFIs, the risk of consumers perceiving an IFI as insufficiently compliant with sharia is somewhat mitigated," it said. However, existing IFIs are not suffering from a reputation of being overtly commercial.

In reality what makes existing IFIs acceptable is endorsement granted by Islamic scholars. Some IFIs publish paid interviews with scholars if deemed necessary to win public acceptance for innovative products. Nevertheless, ensuring the availability of sharia scholars with knowledge of conventional and Islamic finance is a key challenge facing Islamic banking.

Yet, it is probable that authorities want to have a piece of profitability pie of IFIs, which are not known for reporting sustained growth in net income. For instance, Bahrain-based Ithmaar Bank saw its profit for the first half of this year surging 115 per cent to a record $141.9 million, up from $65.9 million for the same period last year.

One such additional evidence that Islamic banking has extraordinary potential relates to rivalry between London and Paris in dominating the industry in Europe. To be sure, the UK is relatively ahead of France in embracing the concept. In fact, the UK has modified its financial regulations to accommodate Islamic sharia. In fact, it is suggested that the UK government is contemplating issuing sukuk (Islamic bonds).

Yet, France is eagerly attempting to entice Islamic banking by virtue of hosting the largest Muslim community in Western Europe. Chances are that France could score some success through President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has developed a reputation of crisscrossing the world ever since assuming power in 2007.

The report put a sizable figure on the monetary value of Islamic banking. The suggested amount of $700 billion is considerably higher than previously assumed. Still, the report asserts that the figure could reach as high as $4 trillion in the too distant future. Other researches have put value of total assets of some 300 IFIs at $500 billion.

I agree with the report in stressing that expansion of the Islamic financial industry should lead to further diversification. In essence, benefits are expected to be extracted from increasing sophistication and further innovation as well as from growing operating and geographic diversification. Undoubtedly, Islamic banking is growing through its golden period.

- The writer is a Member of Parliament in Bahrain.

A military observation ...

Many journalists reporting on the present situation in Georgia use standard phrases expressing Russian "power" and "might" etc. But if the photographs show the present state of the Russian army, then it is not in a good state at all. For first-class Russian frontline units, there is strange mixture of obsolete and semi-obsolete armoured vehicles, with tanks in particular ranging from truly ancient T-54s to mid-life T-70s smothered in reactive armour. The use of this appliqui armour alone shows somewhat primitive tank thinking as compare to up-to-date Western models. Reactive armour is a cheap and cheerful form interim anti-tank protection pending the arrival of new tank models, and never used on Western tanks. Ceramic Cobham armour is used on Challenger 2 and Abrahams tanks, and the Russians appear not to have developed this. Also, it is surprising for a first-class tank unit to have some of its vehicles show appliqui armour whilst others show no such things. Also there appears to have been no attempt by lackadaisical tank crews to camouflage their vehicles and break up profiles.

The Russian transport, mainly, 1960s-design Ural trucks, is equally as ancient, and their thinly-armoured BTR armoured personnel carriers are of a model which hardly compares as with such advanced vehicles as the British Warrior, the US Bradley, or the US state-of-the-art Stryker vehicles, all of which which sprout multi-tasking aerials all over the place. On the Russian BTRs, here is no sign of anti-RPG bar armour, and absolutely no sign of mine-protected vehicles which have proved so necessary in Iraq. The Russians columns appear not to be alert as concerns mines or possible ambushes. The single aerials installed on all vehicles show that the internal VHF communications suites are almost of 1960s standard.

The state of the Russian infantry as observed is even more worrying. Their uniforms are not standard, their vehicle discipline looks casual, and the foot deployment of infantry is sloppy, with rifle and kit not properly adjusted, with Kalshnikovs pointing all over the place. Frankly, it is enough to make a British Sergeant-Major go apeshit. Also, the infantry have no body armour (or even steel helmets), and lacking man pack aerials, appear to have no good communications kit at all.

The age range of some of the Russian infantry must also be worrying to Russian trainers and instructors. I have seen men of well over thirty in infantry sections, and any number of over-plump tummies on display. There is also a racial mix which must present problems to any basic training programme as concerns language difficulties. Infantry appear in particular are drawn from every conceivable area in Russia, which must make for training and co-ordination difficulties.

Frankly, on detailed technical observation, this display the Russian army shows it appearing to have sunk to a third-world standard which only succeeded in this case by confronting a numerically inferior force. If the Russians had any alert propaganda sense at all, on this spotlight occasion, they would have fielded a modern elite force instead of the dog's breakfast as observed. On this evidence, goodness only knows what their second line units are like.