Guess what? The Fema Camp Bill is Back!

Guess what? The Fema Camp Bill is Back!HT: BlacklistedNews.By Lee Rogers.

It looks as if Representative Alcee Hastings a Democrat from Florida has decided to reintroduce his FEMA Camp bill.

A few years ago I was the first person to write an article about this awful piece of legislation. Fortunately, I was successful in exposing it to a much larger group of people via the alternative media and the bill did not move forward in the legislative process. The latest iteration of this bill has been introduced as House Resolution 390 otherwise known as the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act. This bill would authorize not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers to be run by FEMA under the command of the Secretary of Homeland Security.
I was extremely critical of an earlier version of the bill which was proposed in the 111th Congress as HR 645. The bill used vague language to give the Secretary of Homeland Security carte blanche power to use these facilities for anything that the Secretary felt was appropriate. In other words if the Secretary of Homeland Security felt like using them as death camps than potentially that could have been considered a lawful use of the facilities according to the language in the bill. 
In this new version it looks like Representative Hastings got the message and decided to remove the vague language even though the Secretary of Homeland Security would still be in charge of the proposed facilities.
One of the minimum requirements of a national emergency center as defined by the bill is that it is capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster. It basically sounds like a concentration camp.
Similar types of facilities were setup by Franklin Delano Roosevelt during World War II to house large numbers of Japanese Americans. In other words, there is historical precedence for the federal government forcibly relocating large numbers of people into government run concentration camps. There is an increasing amount of rhetoric from the federal government and corporate media that Constitutionalists, gun owners and other liberty minded people might be considered potential terrorists. Would it really be a stretch to think that these facilities could be used to house people that they consider to be enemies?
Considering how much the federal government has lied to the American people in the past, you would be absolutely insane to set foot in one of these proposed national emergency centers. For anybody who believes this is conspiracy theory talk, you have to understand that nobody in the federal government is going to openly propose that they are building facilities to detain large numbers of Americans during a martial law scenario.
If they did they’d be widely criticized and the legislation would go nowhere. Instead they are going to make it sound as if these facilities are to be used for a beneficial purpose in order to conceal what they could ultimately be used for which is why they are called national emergency centers instead of FEMA camps or concentration camp facilities. It is the same concept used by the power structure in George Orwell’s book 1984 where the government agency called the Ministry of Love is in reality the Ministry of Torture.
Not only that, but why do we need the federal government specifically establishing national emergency centers on closed military installations? These are places that were designed to control who can enter and who can leave. Interestingly enough, one of the limitations included in the new version of the bill is that it does not authorize any federal officer or employee to force an individual to enter a national emergency center or prevent an individual from leaving a national emergency center. This is funny because a member of the U.S. military is technically not considered a federal officer or employee. So even though a federal officer or employee wouldn’t be able to force a person into one of these facilities or prevent them from leaving, it does not necessarily prevent a member of the military from performing these functions. 
Considering that members of the military would most likely be the ones responsible for the security of such a facility, it makes the limitation entirely meaningless.
To summarize, it looks as if the new bill has been changed to deflect the most damning criticisms posed towards earlier versions but it still is a dangerous piece of legislation. It is no secret that the federal government already has facilities that can hold large numbers of people if they have the need to do so.
The Bush 43 regime approved the refurbishment of the old Japanese internment camps and in the mid-2000s KBR was literally given a multi-million dollar contract to build detention facilities.
In the 1980s, Lt. Col. Oliver North was questioned during the Iran Contra hearings about his role in the development of a continuity of government plan known as Readiness Exercise 1984 or Rex 84 for short. This plan involved the implementation of martial law which included the detainment of large numbers of American citizens who the federal government deemed to be threats to national security. Subsequently, the Miami Herald on July 5th 1987 did a story on this same continuity of government plan even going into how FEMA would run these internment facilities during a declaration of martial law.Read the full story here.

Alleged Fema camp locations

WH Petition Demands Obama Cancel Hawaii Vacation.

WH Petition Demands Obama Cancel Hawaii Vacation.HT: WhiteHouseDossier.By KeithKoffler.A new petition gaining ground on the White House website calls on President Obama to cancel his estimated $4 million vacation and devote the money instead to helping victims of Hurricane Sandy.
The petition, which was created just two days ago, had 872 signatures as of 8:45 am ET this morning and is potentially be on its way to garnering the 25,000 signatures in 30 days required to elicit a response from the White House.
According to the news site delmarvanow.com, the petition was filed by John Phoebus, the organizer of a volunteer hurricane recovery group in Somerset County, Maryland. Phoebus was angered that the storm-ravaged county was denied direct funding from FEMA.
The petition states that for about the cost to the government of sending Obama on an expected three-week Hawaii vacation, Somerset could be rebuilt.
The petition reads:

On December 3, 2012, President Obama denied the request of Governor O’Malley and the entire Maryland congressional delegation to award Individual Assistance to Somerset County, Maryland to recover from Hurricane Sandy.
Somerset County is Maryland’s poorest county. The towns of Crisfield, Fairmount, and Deal Island were devastated by the hurricane, with flood waters causing widespread damage. These poor, working waterfront communities were already fragile from the decline of the seafood industry. Super Storm Sandy left them with no where to turn except FEMA for assistance.
For the $4 million it will cost taxpayers for the President to vacation in Hawaii, we could rebuild Somerset County. The President should stay home and send our tax money to Somerset County to rebuild.

The $4 million price tag for Obama’s vacation was calculated by the Hawaii Reporter and includes $250,000 in local costs.
But the actual expense to the federal government alone is likely even higher than $4 million, since the cost of just the transportation – roundtrip flights for Air Force One and an accompanying cargo plane – amounts to about $3,530,000, according to the Reporter.

ISAAC: Heading into GOM & Forecast to Ramp to Cat 3 to 5.

                                              Five day forecasted track for Isaac.

ISAAC: Heading into GOM , Forecast to Ramp to Cat 3 to 5.(Fema).New severe weather watches and warnings continue to come out from the NOAA National Weather Service as Isaac moves closer to the U.S. Isolated tornadoes are possible in some areas of Florida today, so be sure to follow local TV and radio reports for your local forecast (also at weather.gov or mobile.weather.gov). In addition, a hurricane watch has been issued for much of the Gulf Coast, stretching from the Florida panhandle westward to Morgan City, Louisiana (this includes New Orleans and Lake Ponchartrain.)Full story here, more here.

Warnings and 5-Day Forecast Cone for Storm Center here.

MFS - The Other News

                    Morning Posting.

• Updated !Earthquakes in the last 24 hours in the world seismic activity situation Dominican republic 5.3 !More info here.

• Obama: With Coming Cuts to Defense, New Military Will Be Leaner. Still Superior.(Fox).President Obama offered a new Pentagon strategy that cuts billions of dollars in defense and which he says will "turn the page on a decade of war," but that critics argue will gut the U.S. ability to defend itself.In a rare appearance in the Pentagon press briefing room Thursday where he announced that the military will be reshaped over time, Obama suggested that the reality of the U.S. economy is forcing the Defense Department to look at its strategy in an all-new way. "We have to renew our economic strength here at home, which is the foundation of our strength in the world. That includes putting our fiscal house in order," the president said.But that doesn't mean hollowing out the military, the president stressed, noting that a comprehensive defense review resulted in a new emphasis on counter-terrorism, maintaining a nuclear deterrent, protecting the U.S. homeland and deterring and defeating aggression by any potential adversary."Yes, our military will be leaner, but the world must know -- the United States is going to maintain our military superiority with Armed Forces that are agile, flexible and ready for the full range of contingencies and threats," Obama said.Obama did not announce new missions, capabilities or defense initiatives. But, Obama said, the defense budget while growing more slowly will still grow."We have global responsibilities that demand our leadership. In fact, the defense budget will still be larger than it was toward the end of the Bush administration. And I firmly believe, and I think the American people understand, that we can keep our military strong -- and our nation secure --with a defense budget that continues to be larger than roughly the next 10 countries combined."Calling the "debt and deficit problem at home" a national security risk, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who spoke after the president, said curbing the growth in the defense budget from its expected $487 billion in increases over the next decade doesn't mean choosing between national and fiscal security."The president has made clear, and I've made clear that the savings that we've been mandated to achieve must be driven by strategy and must be driven by analysis, and must not be driven by numbers alone," he said.Read the full story here.

• Santorum says Senate should sue over Obama appointments.(TheHill).Rick Santorum said the Senate should sue over President Obama's decision Wednesday to appoint Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and name three members to vacancies on the National Labor Relations Board. "What the president did was wrong — pretty scary stuff," Santorum said. "I hope that the United States Senate does what they're supposed to do, and they should go and even take the president to court. This is not something that the president should get away with," he added.Republicans had been hoping to cripple the agencies, unpopular in conservative circles, by refusing to confirm appointments. The GOP maintained Wednesday that the president's move was unconstitutional because the Senate was in a pro forma session and not technically in recess, during which the president can make temporary appointments.Obama defended the move in a speech in Ohio on Wednesday."When Congress refuses to act and as a result hurts our economy and puts people at risk, I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them," Obama said. "I have an obligation to act on behalf of the American people."Hmmmm......."Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty". ~ Plato.Read the full story here.

• A Tyrannical Abuse of Power: Obama Attempts to Appoint Cordray to CFPB.(Heritage).By Todd Gaziano.In a revelation that is quite shocking to anyone who knows anything about the 100-plus years of precedent on the recess appointment power or the separation of powers, the White House today announced that the President planned on making a purported recess appointment of Richard Cordray to the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. This is a position the Senate has refused to confirm Cordray for, and it is also of note that the White House announced this momentous decision in an official tweet from communications director Dan Pfeiffer.Heritage’s Diane Katz has explained why that position should remain unfilled until the agency’s powers are modified, but the alleged recess appointment is outrageous no matter what position it would supposedly fill. What is shocking is that the Senate is not in a recess that would allow a recess appointment, and it can’t be under the Constitution, even if many Senators are not in D.C.The Constitution, in Article I, section 5, plainly states that neither house of Congress can recess for more than three days without the consent of the other house. The House of Representatives did not consent to a Senate recess of more than three days at the end of last year, and so the Senate—consistent with the requirements of the Constitution—is having pro forma sessions every few days. In short, Congress is still in session, and no one in Congress is saying (or can reasonably say) otherwise. It does not matter a wit that most Members of Congress are not in town voting on legislation, because ending a session of Congress requires the passage of a formal resolution, which never occurred.Under Article II, section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution, the President has the power to fill vacancies that may happen during Senate recesses. That power has been interpreted by scores of attorneys general and their designees in the Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) for over 100 years to require an official, legal Senate recess of at least 10–25 days of duration. (There are a few outlier opinions, never sanctioned by the courts, that suggest a recess of six to seven days might be enough—but never less than that.)The President’s purported recess appointment of Cordray would render the Senate’s advice and consent role to normal appointments almost meaningless. It is a grave constitutional wrong that Senator Mitch McConnell (R–KY) has already denounced. But it fits a pattern of extra-constitutional abuse by the White House that seems more interested in energizing a liberal base than safeguarding the office of the presidency.As a former OLC lawyer, I have and will continue to defend President Obama’s issuance of signing statements and other powers that are truly his, but there is no argument that the President can make a recess appointment without doing serious damage to the office Obama holds.Press reports suggest that “White House lawyers” advised the President that he has such power. What did Attorney General Eric Holder, the most senior lawyer for the President, have to say about that? If he or others at DOJ were asked and provided an affirmative response, that is surprising enough. If Holder was not asked, that is equally telling.No matter how the decision was reached in the White House, both houses of Congress should respond forcefully to this tyrannical abuse of power, and as soon as possible. A lawsuit would take time and faces various jurisdictional problems that are not necessary to relate here. If a party with standing could be found before the agency head took any adverse action, the courts still might decline to rule on the matter, believing that it is a political question. But that would not mean that there was no wrong or that Congress is without any power to respond.Congress and the general public should speak out vigorously lest this usurpation lead to yet others.Read the full story here.

• Why don't supporters of Israel trust Barack Hussein Obama? Let me count the reasons.HT: IsraelMatzav.(DiscoverTheNetworks).Why don't supporters of Israel trust Barack Hussein Obama? Here's the most comprehensive list I have ever seen.Read it all.Here.

• Obama’s Constitutional Gamble on Consumer Finance Nomination.(DocsTalk).By Mark A. Calabria.President Obama is announcing today that despite the fact that the Senate is not in recess, he’s going to recess appoint Richard Cordray to be the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), created under the Dodd-Frank Act.Of course the President is actually claiming that the Senate isn’t in session and that its “pro forma” sessions are just a “gimmick”. Funny I don’t remember then Senator Obama complaining about gimmicks when the Senate used the sames tactics to block Bush recess appointments. But then again this is the guy who signs a bill allowing indefinite detention of American citizens after having campaigned on shutting down Guantanamo. Only a former constitutional law professor could be so creative with the Constitution.More importantly the “recess” appointment of Cordray doesn’t solve the President’s problem. The Dodd-Frank Act is very clear, even a law professor can probably under this section, that authorities under the Act remain with the Treasury Secretary until the Director is “confirmed by the Senate”. A recess appointment is not a Senate confirmation. Now don’t ask me why Dodd and Frank included such unusual language, they could have just given the Bureau the new authorities, but they didn’t. So even with this appointment, the CFPB won’t be able to go after all those non-banks, like the pay-day lenders and check-cashiers that caused the financial crisis (oh wait, those industries didn’t have anything to do with the crisis).This appointment also guarantees that Obama, even if he gets a second term, is unlikely to ever get a CFPB Director past the Senate. Maybe not such a big deal for Cordray since the rumor has always been this is just a political stepping stone so he can go back to Ohio and run for office. The real harm is that Obama has decided to take a gamble with the Constitution, risk the further erosion of the Senate’s advise and consent powers, solely to have another campaign issue. So he can try to paint Republicans as captive to Wall Street, all despite the fact the new agency exempts Wall Street (who will continue under the ever effective oversight of the SEC). Maybe he can have Geithner and the various Goldman alum in the Administration stand next to him to help remind us how hard he is fighting for the middle class.Read the full story here.

• Flashback: Senator Outlines Objections to ‘Unaccountable’ Consumer Czar.(Heritage).Last fall Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) visited Heritage to talk about the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the “unaccountable” nominee to head the agency. At the time, there was speculation President Obama would attempt to bypass the U.S. Senate to install Richard Cordray as CFPB director. That’s exactly what happened today in what Heritage’s Todd Gaziano calls a “tyrannical abuse of power.”At the time of his visit in October, Shelby said bluntly, “I think it would be devastating if we let [Obama] make a recess appointment.”Of course, this purported “recess appointment” comes with the Senate not even in recess. Congress is still in session, and the Senate is having pro forma sessions every few days based on requirements of the Constitution.The debate over Cordray and former CFPB special adviser Elizabeth Warren dates to the bureau’s creation. Senate Republicans had asked the White House to make three reforms to the CFPB. They included creating a board rather than a single czar to run the agency, subjecting the CFPB to the congressional appropriations process, and making sure it considers impact of new rules on the safety and soundness of financial institutions.“Forty-four of us have written a letter to the president and asked for three changes,” Shelby said. “We haven’t heard from the president. Maybe he’s off campaigning. … Until we hear from him, I don’t believe we’re going to confirm anyone.”Heritage has outlined a number of problems with the CFPB. Research fellow Diane Katz writes that “eliminating the bureau outright would be the best option.”Hmmmm......Thugocracy in it's natural habitat.Read the full story here.

• Richard Cordray: Any Legislation Which Has Even "Incidental Effects on the Economy" is a "Valid Exercise of Congressional Authority".(Mrctv).President Obama announced today that he was going to take a new step in the expansion of executive authority by recess appointing a head to the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau despite the fact that the Senate isn't actually in recess. This has, of course, spawned an angry backlash. However, the man that the President is appointing is relatively unknown.His name is Richard Cordray and he has some interesting views on the limits of congressional power. Before losing his bid for reelection as Ohio's Attorney General Cordray appeared on a program called Capitol Square. He was asked about his decision not to join Attorney Generals, including one democrat, in filing suit against Obamacare. The full interview can be seen here but his answer to this question is most interesting:Cordray essentially says that lawsuits against Obamacare are "frivolous" because courts have held, and Cordray seems to agree that, any legislation which has even "incidental effects on the economy" is a "valid exercise of congressional authority" because of the commerce clause. Now the surprising aspect of what Cordray says certainly isn't that courts have held that the commerce clause basically negates the rest of the constitution. Some courts certainly have and very famously so.The surprising aspect of what Cordray says isn't even that someone would have to implicitly hold this extremely far left view of the commerce clause to justify the individual mandate.No, the surprising aspect is that he said this at all. Most liberal politicians have better sense then to explicitly spell out the radical beliefs that make up the foundation of their political philosophy. Off the wall interpretations of the Constitution are generally disliked by average Americans when explained to them so bluntly.Honestly, how many people in this country would agree that the Constitution views any legislation that has any effect on the economy, no matter how slight or round about, as a valid exercise of congressional authority? After all, what legislation wouldn't fall under that standard? What human action, or in Obamacare's case, inaction wouldn't be under congress's authority to impose its will upon?Apparently, unlike most of us, when Richard Cordray gets to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution and reads "[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes" he takes that to mean any law that leads to even "incidental effects on the economy" is a "valid exercise of congressional authority".Hmmmm......I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes. ~ Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776.Read and see the full story here.

• Obama to Share Missile Defense Secrets With Russia?(BigPeace).Bill Gertz of the Washington Times reports that President Barack Obama has indicated he is prepared to convey information about secret American missile defense technology to Russia: In the president’s signing statement issued Saturday in passing into law the fiscal 2012 defense authorization bill, Mr. Obama said restrictions aimed at protecting top-secret technical data on U.S. Standard Missile-3 velocity burnout parameters might impinge on his constitutional foreign policy authority.As first disclosed in this space several weeks ago, U.S. officials are planning to provide Moscow with the SM-3 data, despite reservations from security officials who say that doing so could compromise the effectiveness of the system by allowing Russian weapons technicians to counter the missile. The weapons are considered some of the most effective high-speed interceptors in the U.S. missile defense arsenal.There are also concerns that Russia could share the secret data with China and rogue states such as Iran and North Korea to help their missile programs defeat U.S. missile defenses.Even before this latest revelation, the entire enterprise of President Obama’s disarmament policy–from “reset” with Russia to selling out our European allies–had been a colossal failure, an exercise in cowardice and appeasement that placed the security of the United States at risk.In the pursuit of a thirty-year-old leftist grudge against President Ronald Reagan’s policy of “peace through strength,” Obama has now apparently suggested his willingness to give away a technological edge eagerly coveted by Russia and especially by China.There can be no stronger case for replacing Barack Obama in November.Read the full story here.

• Obama’s EPA Opens Another Front in the War on Coal.(BigGovernment).Now we know why President Obama isn’t spending any time fighting a war on unemployment. He’s too busy fighting his war on coal.Indeed, while the past few months have seen tiny signs our economy might be growing despite Obama’s anti-job policies, the White House is ramping up its effort to make sure our labor force is expunged of every last coal job it can find. It’d be humorous if it wasn’t so real.If we start exposing this radical nonsense coming out of the Obama EPA, conservatives can push back on these bad policies. Environmentalists rarely get their way when people actually pay attention to what they want to do.The latest battle will be coming any day now, as the EPA has said it will issue its Utility NSPS (New Source Performance Standards) sometime in January. Any new utility plants will have to meet a new set of environmental standards – standards that conveniently work out great for natural gas but are prohibitively expensive for coal plants, even new ones, to meet.In capitalist terms, this means the United States can say goodbye to the construction of any new coal plants on its soil.Sadly, this war on coal didn’t start here. Last month, moments before Christmas weekend, the EPA released its new Utility MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) rule, which set new emissions standards for pre-existing U.S. coal and oil power plants. The EPA did this in spite of the fact that the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) warned in November that such a rule would shut down as many as 300 coal power plants at the same time. Some of the older plants would be unable to meet the post-modern standards so quickly.Nearly half of total U.S. electrical supply is provided by coal. It’s one of the most vibrant and successful industries in the country. It’s a home-grown resource, begging for U.S. workers to mine it out of the ground and convert it into electricity that millions of Americans can use to power their homes and small businesses.27 states have filed complaints asking for a delay, arguing the strict standards under such a short time span are realistically unfeasible.I’d start asking why the Obama Administration has decided to demonize the coal industry, risking massive power shortages and thousands of American jobs just to satisfy the environmentalist left. They’ve always hated coal, and under this White House, as early as this year, they might get their wish.Hmmmm........How many Americans will loose their job now thanks to Obama?Read the full story here.

• An Election-Year Trend: Disaster Declarations on the Rise.(Heritage).The Iowa Caucus was not the only thing folks looking to the 2012 election were talking about this week. Barron’s Washington Editor Jim McTague warned that 2012 is likely to be a banner year for natural disaster declarations. Why? As the numbers show, “In nearly every presidential election year since 1972, there was an increase in disaster declaration; the same holds for the year before the elections.”Citing Heritage expert Matt A. Mayer, McTague goes on to explain that in 2011, the Obama Administration issued a whopping 242 disaster declarations. This figure was an all-time high and well surpassed the 108 declarations issued by the Administration each year in both 2009 and 2010. It also represents a 54 percent increase over the previous record, set in 1996 when President Bill Clinton was running for reelection.Election years aren’t the only problem. Since 1993, the number of federal disaster declarations has been climbing quickly. And no, this isn’t some manifestation of 2012 doomsday prophecy coming true. Catastrophic natural disasters are not increasing at the same rate as disaster declarations. Rather, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is granting declarations for a growing number of routine disasters, seemingly for nearly every minor flood, fire, earthquake, and snow storm that comes its way. To put this into perspective: Hurricane Irene—barely a Category 1 hurricane when it finally struck the U.S.—resulted in Major Disaster Declarations for 12 states, largely for flooding. In sharp contrast, just six years ago, Hurricane Katrina—America’s costliest disaster by tens of billions of dollars, with more than 60,000 square miles impacted—resulted in just four states receiving Major Disaster Declarations.Ultimately, this means that the costs of response to and recovery from our nation’s natural disasters are increasingly being shifted from the states in which they occurred to the federal government. It should be no wonder that FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) nearly ran out of money last year.Yet 2012 need not necessarily follow the election-year trend. By setting clear requirements that limit the types of disasters eligible for a federal disaster declaration and reducing the federal cost-share for disaster declarations to no more than 25 percent, the Administration has the chance to stop abusing FEMA declarations and reverse the trend.See our chart  for a list of FEMA declarations by year and presidential administration.Read the full story here.

• Court to Hear Obama Eligibility Challenge on Merits, First Time Ever, Jan. 26.(GulagBound).“This will be the first time ever, since this whole thing began, that it will be looked on, on merit.” Those are the words of Carl Swensson, Republican Party Chairman of Clayton County, Georgia. “This” refers to an actual judicial hearing of the case against the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. to be, according to the United States Constitution, “Commander in Chief” and United States President.The attorneys of Barack Obama requested a pretrial dismissal, as it had done on so many other occasions, against so many other cases. But yesterday, one judge denied and scheduled an official hearing of the case to commence, January 26.From 2008 to the present, judicial standing has been refused the plaintiff, often via convoluted rationale, many say sophistry. The question however is elementary to our constitutional republic: can we as Citizens be assured those presented to us for our votes are eligible to hold office?Unlike many other states, Georgia has a statue requiring just that. For Swensson’s part, he had “resolved that I would not let anyone on the ballot who is not demonstrably qualified to hold that office.” That would appear to be part of his job as party official and it is the job of Georgia’s Secretary of State, Brian Kemp (R) to assure election law is justly carried out. Swensson relates, “We have been hounding him at hearings he’s been having across the state.”And so it came to pass that Kemp after some delay, followed due process and called forth the court designated by Georgia law, to hear such a case. This particular case was brought by Swensson and co-litigant, Kevin Richard Powell, attorney: J. Mark Hatfield, judge: Michael M. Malihi.While Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, had argued that the requirements didn’t apply to candidates for a presidential primary, the judge said that isn’t how he reads state law.“Statutory provisions must be read as they are written, and this court finds that the cases cited by [Obama] are not controlling. When the court construes a constitutional or statutory provision, the ‘first step … is to examine the plain statutory language,” the judge wrote. “Section 21-2-1(a) states that ‘every candidate for federal and state office’ must meet the qualifications for holding that particular office, and this court has seen no case law limiting this provision, nor found any language that contains an exception for the office of president or stating that the provision does not apply to the presidential preference primary.”Read the full story here.

• "Dear Leader" Obama to help unveil 'realistic' US military plan.(JPost).WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama will join top Pentagon commanders to unveil a new "more realistic" vision for the US military, including cuts to ground force numbers as a result of budget strains, officials familiar with the plans said on Wednesday.Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will hold a news conference fleshing out the contents of the strategic review of US security interests after Obama's brief remarks on Thursday at the Pentagon, the officials said.They said the review would emphasize military investment in Asia as well as US air and maritime power, while reducing the pace of growth in Pentagon budgets overall and relying less on ground troops for American engagement abroad. Read the full story here.

• US troops deploying to Israel?(IsraelMatzav).Calling it not just an “exercise”, but a “deployment”, the Jerusalem Post quotes US Lt.-Gen Frank Gorenc, Commander of the US Third Air Force based in Germany. The US Commander visited Israel two weeks ago to confirm details for “the deployment of several thousand American soldiers to Israel.” In an effort to respond to recent Iranian threats and counter-threats, Israel announced the largest ever missile defense exercise in its history. Now, it’s reported that the US military, including the US Navy, will be stationed throughout Israel, also taking part.Also confirming the upcoming US-Israeli military missile exercises is JTA.org - 'global news service of the Jewish people'. In their account, they report, 'Last week, plans for Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, to visit Israel in January were leaked to Israeli media; his visit likely will coincide with the largest-ever joint U.S.-Israel anti-missile exercise'.While American troops will be stationed in Israel for an unspecified amount of time, Israeli military personnel will be added to EUCOM in Germany. EUCOM stands for United States European Command.In preparation for anticipated Iranian missile attacks upon Israel, the US is reportedly bringing its THAAD, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, and ship-based Aegis ballistic missile systems to Israel. The US forces will join Israeli missile defense systems like the Patriot and Arrow. The deployment comes with “the ultimate goal of establishing joint task forces in the event of a large-scale conflict in the Middle East”.Read the full story here.

• Egypt’s Islamists could soon challenge generals.(WP).CAIRO — The dominant showing by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party in Egypt’s first post-revolution elections puts the country on a collision course, analysts say, with emboldened Islamists and the entrenched military set to vie for power.The Brotherhood, which was the leading opposition force under now-deposed leader Hosni Mubarak, has emerged as the country’s most viable political power. While votes are still being counted in the last of three stages of elections for parliament’s lower house, the Brotherhood expects to take more than 40 percent of seats and could claim an outright majority on Jan. 23, when the new parliament is scheduled to convene.Until now, the relatively moderate Islamist group had an uneasy alliance with the council of generals who took control of the country after Mubarak’s ouster on Feb. 11. But with the military leaders intent on protecting their political and economic interests as Egypt lurches toward democracy, some analysts say a clash between the two centers of power is inevitable.The long-term interests of the military leaders and the Brotherhood “do not converge,” said Shadi Hamid, an Egypt expert at the Brookings Doha Center. “The military wants to effectively stay in power behind the scenes. That certainly is not what the Brotherhood wants.”The powers of the incoming parliament remain unclear and are to be laid out in the as-yet-unwritten constitution, a document that the ruling generals have said they want military-appointed bodies to influence. But the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party is calling for real powers for the parliament, including the authority to appoint a prime minister and full control over the writing of the constitution.Read the full story here.

• Goodbye Democracy: My Political Analysis is Banned By A European Government’s Computer Program As “Hate Speech”.(PJM)By BarryRubin.I have just been informed that my PJ article, “Egypt: As Grim Islamists March Toward Power, The Naïve Dance in Tahrir Square” has been barred on sites used by officials of a European government–hint, they speak English there and it is the birthplace of modern democracy and free speech–on the grounds that this article is “hate speech.”What this means is that if you work for any institution that is part of this government–including the Foreign or Defense ministries–you cannot read this PJ Media column on your computer that’s part of such a server.The message reads: Access denied — reason given : hate speech. My reader asks sarcastically if complaining about this action would constitute a “thought crime” on his part.Update: A reliable reader reports the same thing happened on a business computer in the United States where the sheriff is apparently something called DansGuardian.This is the first time ever that one of my articles has been so flagged. But it brings out an important point: A computer program that picks out “key words” can accuse you of a crime and block your free speech. If I had to guess at the phrase it would be my reference (that’s a guess) to “Muslim [space inserted to avoid censorship] riots” in France several years ago. But they were riots by Muslims and that is not only factually correct but necessary for making an important point.  Apparently, this system has done the same thing to articles by other people before though I don’t know the details.So there are three problems here:

1. Free speech is now conditional on someone’s judgment of your viewpoint. This also has a chilling effect since the reader might say, “I’m not the kind of person who wants to see hate speech!” or frightened, “What if my employer sees that I’m viewing such material? I might be fired or not promoted!”
2. That judge isn’t even a human being but a computer program that makes arbitrary selections out of context. Would the phrases “Christian riot,” “Hindu riot,” “Jewish riot,” “Caucasian riot,” etc., trigger an accusation of hate speech? Who decides? Where is this information available to the public? Perhaps we might be told what we are and aren’t allowed to say now so we can save time by censoring ourselves.
3. As far as I can see, all of the intimidation and censorship are in one direction. It’s like in Lebanon where all these moderate politicians, judges, and journalists were attacked and assassinated while not a single supporter of Hizballah or Syrian-Iranian client was hit.

I cannot even figure out who I am supposedly telling people to “hate” in this article. Is it “hate speech” to argue anything other than that the Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate pro-democratic group? Are the messages of Hamas, Hizballah, Hizb al-Tahrir, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaida, and the Taliban, groups that explicitly and deliberately call for genocide, ever blocked as “hate speech?” I’ve never heard of that happening.Well, Western democracies have finally accepted censorship based on the clever lie that they are only protecting people from racism and those who want to incite violence and murder. The door that this is opened has now made possible what liberals and democrats have warned against for more than a century–even though people claiming such positions are responsible for this–giving authorities to block and ban political views that they don’t like.It’s proper to defend the rights of those who are being provocative in some way. But we have gone far beyond that: the censorship of straight political analysis that conflicts with the “official line” and that’s a line determined by a software program. A lawyer points out that employers have a right to stop their workers from using official computers to play games or engage in personal activities. But blocking non-relevant sites is quite different from accusing people of crimes, censoring speech, having an official governmental standard of impermissible phrases, and blocking people from reading material that is relevant for their work.Hmmmm......."Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty". ~ Plato.Read the full story here.

• Speculation swirls over Erdogan’s health.(JPost).Speculation is mounting that Recep Tayyip Erdogan has cancer, and political jostling has already begun in Ankara to replace the rabble-rousing prime minister who is Turkey’s most popular leader since Kemal Ataturk.Last month Turkish media revealed that Erdogan had had stomach surgery the month before – the reports said doctors had removed polyps from his intestines, but found no traces of cancer.The 57-year-old spent several weeks at home recuperating, but President Abdullah Gul, an Erdogan ally, was quick with reassurances the premier remained in good health.“It was a preventative operation,” Gul said. “There is nothing more normal than someone who has undergone an operation to rest for a while.”But a Turkish blogger said a physician with ties to the Turkish executive branch told him Erdogan is suffering from colorectal cancer and is under close examination to determine its severity. On the condition of anonymity, the blogger said a respected authority in academia had told him the prime minister was expected to start chemotherapy last month.The blogger said Turkish media have reported almost nothing about Erdogan’s condition, leaving most Turks totally unaware anything might be wrong. Still, he said, it’s an “open secret” in the Turkish medical community that Erdogan has been diagnosed with cancer.Last month the Jerusalem-based intelligence website DEBKAfile quoted “Western intelligence sources” as saying Erdogan had been diagnosed with colorectal cancer, also known as colon cancer.Official Turkish sources have remained tight-lipped. Following Erdogan’s surgery the AKP’s English- language website ran a three-sentence news item headlined “Premier Erdogan says he is fine,” quoting the premier as saying only, “I’m fine and I will be better.”Erdogan is immensely popular not only in Turkey but around the Muslim world for promoting Islamic values, growing the economy and adopting a hardline foreign policy that is often at odds with Ankara’s former allies Israel and America.First elected in 2003, Erdogan was reelected in June for a third-straight term after his Islamist Justice and Development Party (AKP) won fully half of the national vote.AKP bylaws, however, prevent candidates from running for parliament for a fourth time. Instead, Erdogan was widely expected to stand for president in the next national elections in 2014, when Gul’s two-term tenure expires. (Like its Israeli counterpart, the Turkish presidency is largely a ceremonial position.) Four senior AKP figures – Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc, Economy Minister Ali Babacan and Gul himself – have been named as possible successors.None of the candidates, however, match Erdogan’s popular appeal: A recent poll conducted by an independent US-based NGO found one-third of Turks would “definitely not” vote for AKP if it were run by anyone other than Erdogan.“From an electability perspective, there is no one who can replace Erdogan,” the blogger said.Davutoglu is an erudite former political-science professor fluent in English, German and Arabic, and his piety and sense of Turkish exceptionalism endear him to many conservative voters. Gul boasts leadership experience (he served four years as foreign minister and briefly as premier) who has the backing of the Fethullah Gulen movement, an obscure but powerful Islamist movement led by a US-based religious scholar of the Sufi mystical order.Another potential candidate is Kemal Kılıçdarog˘lu, leader of the Republican People’s Party, an opposition movement known by its Turkish acronym CHP. But despite its venerable legacy – it was founded by Ataturk, the father of modern Turkey – the CHP remains driven by internal divisions that make a challenge to AKP dominance unlikely.Erdogan reiterated the unyielding positions that have become his hallmark – Hamas, he said, is not a terrorist group but “freedom fighters protecting their land.”Images from the meeting showed him looking pale and gaunt.Hmmmm......"And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." ~ Genesis 12:3.Read the full story here.

• 'Attacks on Iran won't be allowed from Turkish territory'.(JPost).Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu vowed Thursday that his country would not allow attacks on Iran to be carried out from its territory, Turkish daily Hurriyet reported.Davutoglu made the comments at a joint press conference in Tehran with his Iranian counterpart Ali Akbar Salehi.The Turkish foreign minister attempted to dispel rumors that the NATO missile shield recently stationed in Turkey, should pose as a threat to Iran or damage relations between the countries.Davutoglu stated that Turkey and Iran trust each other. "I certainly do not see Iran as a threat," Hurriyet quoted Davutoglu as saying.The Turkish foreign minister arrived in Iran on Wednesday for talks with Salehi on Iran's nuclear program and developments in neighboring Iraq and Syria.Davutoglu's visit was described as being in the framework of regular talks between the two ministers, but it comes at a key time for the region and relations between the two regional powers."It is intended that they will exchange views on topical subjects such as Iran's nuclear program and developments in Syria and Iraq," the Turkish foreign ministry said.Davutoglu's visit was set to finish on Thursday.Turkey is evaluating whether to seek a waiver from the United States to exempt Turkish oil importer Tupras from new US sanctions on institutions that deal with Iran's central bank, a Turkish official said on Tuesday.US ally Turkey is among the biggest buyers of Iranian oil and gas. It gets about 30 percent of its oil from neighbor Iran, and Tupras, Turkey's biggest crude oil importer is a big buyer of Iranian crude.Hmmmmm.....Can NATO and the U.S.even trust Turkey?Read the full story here.

• Hamas says Gaza ‘not occupied;’ UN disagrees.(DocsTalk).By HillelC.Neuer.GENEVA – The UN continues to label the Gaza Strip “occupied” by Israel, despite a Hamas leader stating this week that that’s no longer a tenable position.Hamas co-founder Mahmoud Zahar confirmed Tuesday there is no Israeli occupation of Gaza, according to a report published by Ma’an, a Bethlehem- based Palestinian news agency.Zahar was casting doubt on whether Hamas would organize anti-Israel marches in Gaza in conjunction with similar protests that the Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority would organize in the West Bank.“Against whom could we demonstrate in the Gaza Strip? When Gaza was occupied, that model was applicable,” Zahar said. The radical Islamist organization has merely recognized the obvious: that after Israel in 2005 dismantled its military administration in Gaza, forcibly evicted all Israeli residents and withdrew every last soldier, Israel no longer occupies the territory by any legal definition or other sense of the term.Whatever external control Israel – and Egypt - may exercise, everyone in Gaza knows that Hamas rules the territory with an iron fist.THE HAMAS statement follows growing recognition among international lawyers that the UN’s resistance to holding Palestinians responsible for territory they control is outdated.Four-and-a-half years after seizing power in Gaza, Hamas runs its own police, courts, jails, schools, media and social services, noted Abraham Bell and Dov Shefi, two international legal experts, in a 2010 research paper for the University of San Diego law school.Hamas regulates business activities, banks and land registries. It levies taxes, controls its own borders and even imposes a dress code. In sum, wrote Bell and Shefi, Hamas operates “a functioning and fully independent local civil government, buttressed by armed forces.”Similarly, in an article published in the American University International Law Review, Elizabeth Samson concluded that under the Geneva Conventions and international judicial precedents, Gaza can no longer be considered occupied because Israel, despite its ability to exercise certain powers over the area, no longer exercises “effective control,” the litmus test for what qualifies as occupation.Under Israel’s own law, the country’s Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that the Jewish state had disengaged from Gaza and no longer exercised “effective control over what occurred there.”Now that Hamas itself has publicly recognized this reality, the UN’s refusal to do the same is less defensible than ever. The organization’s official policy has not changed since Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s spokesman, Farhan Haq, declared in 2008 that “the UN defines Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem as occupied Palestinian territory.”In 2009, the UN’s Goldstone Report claimed that “the international community continues to regard [Israel] as the occupying Power” in Gaza, and cited to the UN Human Rights Council resolution that created their inquiry, which referred to “the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip.”This terminology continues to appear:

1. A September 22 report in the name of the secretary- general speaks of a UN mission’s visit to the “occupied Palestinian territory, specifically the Gaza Strip.”
2. In May, Richard Falk, the UN Human Rights Council’s permanent investigator on alleged Israeli violations, referred to the “occupied Gaza Strip.”
3. A UN fact sheet on “the Occupied Palestinian Territory” includes Gaza.

THERE IS a certain paradox in all of this. Even as a key UN agency, UNESCO, recently recognized “Palestine” – which includes Gaza – as a full and independent member of its organization, the UN continues to use the “occupied” terminology.The inconsistency isn’t new. For decades, the UN’s policy toward the Palestinians has been marked by a fundamental contradiction: giving them maximum privileges within the organization, while demanding minimum responsibilities.But absolving Palestinians of basic responsibility hasn’t helped them one iota. On the contrary, Palestinian citizens are the main losers when those that directly govern and police them are never seriously held accountable for their actions.It’s time for the UN to drop its intransigent insistence on a legal position that has the effect, if not intent, of justifying Palestinian terrorism as “resistance to occupation,” undermining Israel’s ability to invoke its inherent right of self-defense against deadly rockets fired from Gaza, and, not least, dehumanizing Israelis as the demonic and faceless “occupier.”And if the UN really wants to advance Palestinian self-rule and help Palestinians achieve sustainable independence, it must help, rather than hinder, the Palestinians develop a healthy culture of self-rule. The world body must stop patronizing them with a legal fiction designed to sustain a permanent state of grievance and absolve them of any responsibility.Hillel C. Neuer, an international lawyer, is executive director of the Geneva-based UN Watch. Read the full story here.

• Kurds launch "Letter to President Obama" campaign.(Firat).Within the frame of the campaign launched by KON-KURD (the Confederation of In Kurdish Associations in Europe) and other 10 federations affiliated to it, Kurds are beginning to send a letter to U.S. president Barack Obama. The campaign will last until January 31th.Kurdish institutions aim to point out the support the USA are providing to Turkey, both in terms of intelligence-sharing and military sales, ultimately hits Kurds. In the statement calling on people to mobilize, KON-KURD and the other associations organizing the protest underlined the recent massacres and operations in which the Turkish army had the support of the USA. It is no mystery that the USA have been providing Turkey with intelligence on PKK camps and movements. Indeed the U.S. have deployed four RQ-1 Predator MALE drones at Turkey’s southern İncirlik airbase to fly over PKK camps in northern Iraq and provide the Turkish military intelligence.The letter which is being sent to president Obama begins with a reminder of "the genocides and massacres that the Kurdish people have witnessed and also what the Kurdish people are facing today".The letter also stresses that "The Republic of Turkey, your strategic partner, is massacring Kurds everyday with the very support you give them whether it is military, political or economical. The very latest example of this is the most recent killing of 36 unarmed Kurdish civilians by F-16 Jets bought from the USA and intelligence gained from Predator Drones supplied by yourselves". Underlining that over 4 thousand people have been jailed by the Turkish government, the letter adds that "The Turkish Army, by using airspace that is controlled by your state, has massacred Kurdish civilians and ruined our landscape and yet you still have not said a word".The letter then underlined that for five months there has been no news from "the leader of our people Mr. Abdullah Ocalan who was actively kidnapped and handed over to the Turkish authorities by your predecessors, and yet not a word from your administration". The letter ends with some questions directly put to president Obama: "What have we, the Kurds, ever done to you or your country, what have we come against for you to declare us enemies? Or maybe this “democracy, human rights and freedom” are just part of a rhetoric only used to further the USA’s interests across the globe. What is the reason for this double standard? Why do you continue to support a state that bombs its own people within its own borders?" And then underlines that Kurds "will not allow for Kurdish children to be massacred in this way" nor "will allow for history to repeat itself".The final sentence of the letter is a reminder to president Obama, "the Nobel Prize for Peace". "To play the role of peacemaker for the Kurdish and Turkish people - says the letter - whom we believe is also in the best interests for the USA. We believe that you have a positive role to play in bringing peace to Kurdistan, the Middle East and the World".Hmmmm.....Did a US drone give the go Ahead for the last attack that killed 36 unarmed Kurdish civilians?Read the full story here.

• Snubbed Egyptian millionaire's brutal attack on Norwegian girlfriend, after he attacked first her small dog.(Emirates24/7).A Norwegian girl was brutally attacked by her boyfriend as she refused to marry him.Twenty four year old Sulvy Leopreez Sakkur was severely beaten by her Egyptian millionaire boyfriend.  The lady confirmed the news in an interview with Al Wafd newspaper. She identified her boyfriend as Ahmed AL Ajati, the son of Egyptian millionaire Yahiya Al Ajati. She said, “The reason behind this was because I refused to marry him and asked him to end our relationship".Sulvy said she feared to speak up about her ordeal for fear of being punished more by the businessman and his son.The incident took place on September 7th when she was in her flat at Ma’adi accompanied by her boyfriend. Sulvy asked him to end their relationship and refused his marriage proposal.She was surprised by his reactiono as he started screaming hysterically then hit her small dog on the wall and trumpled it under his feet.She pleaded and begged him to stop, but instead directed his anger towards her. He hit her hard on his face and stomach.She experienced heavy blood flow from her mouth and face. Her neighbour heard the comotion and inquired about the reason for her cries. But Ahmed threatened to beat Sulvy more if she dared to open her mouth.Ahmed AL Ajat lied to the neighbour who was at the door of her apartment.Soon after he dragged Sulvy by her hair from her apartment from the fifth floor to the ground and pulled her into the car.Sulvy tried to call her friend but could not manage to do so as Ahmed grabbed her hand and threw the mobile out of the car.Sulvy testified that she was saved by pedestrians who carried her to the hospital and reported the incident to the police. But she feared more torture from the powerful business family.Read and see the full story here.

• Uganda launches investigation into “nodding disease”.(BikyaMasr).Kampala (dpa) – Ugandan authorities have began an investigation into a mysterious disease that has left about 3,000 victims, mainly children, nodding their heads continuously, the Health Ministry said Wednesday.Medical and government authorities have so far failed to explain the cause and mode of transmission of the disease that has been attacking children between the ages of five and 15 in the districts of Pader and Kitgum, in the north.“Over 3,000 people have been affected by this nodding disease. (The) government has launched an investigation into the disease and we are going to release a statement next week,” Rukia Nakamatte, a spokeswoman for the ministry, told dpa.According to the Daily Monitor newspaper, in the past two years, 60 people have died from the disease. The illness causes the victims’ hands to shake repeatedly. They also nod their heads continuously and later faint.The newspaper said in its report Wednesday that it could be a result of toxic substances emitted from firearms during the 20-year rebellion launched by insurgents against government forces.The publication quoted local residents as saying they believed it could be the spirits of people killed by the rebels which were haunting the civilians.The civil waged by the Lord’s Resistance Army in the region left tens of thousands of people dead, mutilated, raped or tortured by the rebels, while more than 2 million others across eastern Africa were displaced.Hmmmm.....Sounds a bit similar to the 'Kuru disease' which is linked to Cannibalism.Read the full story here.

• The Worst Product Flops of 2011,'Bronze Medal winner': Nr. 3.The Chevy Volt.(Yahoo).GM was originally so excited about the Volt that the company had announced in January it was speeding up its roll-out by six months. But by November the excitement had fizzled out. Larry Nitz, GM’s executive director for vehicle electrification told Reuters, “It’s naive to think that the world is going to switch tomorrow to EVs [electric vehicles].” Indeed, sales for the vehicle have been consistently low. Only 125 models were sold in July 2011. This was after GM spokeswoman Michelle Bunker was quoted as saying that the Volt was “virtually sold out” due to its popularity — a statement later shown to be misguided. Adding insult to injury, Chevy Volts are under investigation for fires involving the cars’ lithium-ion batteries. For concerned Volt owners, GM has offered free loaner cars. Hmmmm......The Obama administration decides to purchase 116 Chevy Volts worth $41000 a piece, so who where the other 9 fools?Read the full story here.

MFS - The Other News

                    Morning Posting.

• Updated !Earthquakes in the last 24 hours in the world seismic activity situation update: Turkey 7.3 - 5.9  !More info here.

• Japan : For the most accurate info on the nuclear disaster go to : Paul Langley's Nuclear History Blog.Here.

• Did You Know Feds Will Temporarily Cut Off All TV and Radio Broadcasts on Nov. 9 ?(TheBlaze).If you have ever wondered about the government’s ability to control the civilian airwaves, you will have your answer on November 9th.On that day, federal authorities are going to shut off all television and radio communications simultaneously at 2:00PM EST to complete the first ever test of the national Emergency Alert System (EAS).This isn’t a wild conspiracy theory. The upcoming test is posted on the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau website.Only the President has the authority to activate EAS at the national level, and he has delegated that authority to the Director of FEMA. The test will be conducted jointly by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through FEMA, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Weather Service (NWS).In essence, the authority to seize control of all television and civilian communication has been asserted by the executive branch and handed to a government agency.The EAS has been around since 1994. Its precursor, the Emergency Broadcast System (EBS), started back in 1963. Television and radio broadcasters, satellite radio and satellite television providers, cable television and wireline video providers are all involved in the system.So this begs the question: is the first ever national EAS test really a big deal?Probably not. At least, not yet.But there are some troubling factors all coming together right now that could conceivably trigger a real usage of the EAS system in the not too distant future. A European financial collapse could bring down U.S. markets. What is now the “Occupy” movement could lead to widespread civil unrest. And there are ominous signs that radical groups such as Anonymous will attempt something major on November 5th- Guy Fawke’s day.Now we know in the event of a major crisis, the American people will be told with one voice, at the same time, about an emergency.All thats left to determine is who will have control of the EAS when that day comes, and what their message will be.Hmmm......Who has the autority to switch it back on?Read the full story here.

• Obama’s bold gamble on Iraq.(AlArabiya).By L. Paul Bremer III.In announcing that all American troops will be out of Iraq by year’s end, President Obama has placed a big bet on the future of Iraq and on America’s position in a restive Middle East. While the initial public response to his decision, in America and in Iraq, may be positive, this will not shield him from the consequences if his bet goes sour. The single most salient lesson in countries emerging from tyranny is the importance of providing security for the population. This is not just one of many tasks that must be addressed: security is the essential prerequisite to progress in the other two foreseeable challenges – in Iraq, Egypt, and now Libya: beginning a process of political reform and starting economic reconstruction.The American government learned this lesson the hard way in Iraq. For several years after Saddam was thrown out we lacked the comprehensive counterinsurgency strategy and sufficient forces needed to provide security to the Iraqi people. Predictably, security deteriorated as an unholy alliance of Sunni and Shia terrorists, the first backed by al Qaeda, the other by Iran, took advantage of the situation. The deficiencies in strategy and troops while Iraq’s own national security forces were still in training produced a bloody and chaotic year in 2006.There were two game-changers in Iraq.

1. President Bush’s courageous decision to change strategy and to surge forces. Contrary to widespread skepticism in the American political class, these decisions gradually brought the security under much better control.

2. The almost unimaginable stoicism of the Iraqi people. In many individual months in 2006 and early 2007, Iraqi casualties from terrorism were greater, as a percent of the country’s population, than the casualties America experienced on 9/11. Fortunately, by the summer of 2011 violence had fallen against both Americans and Iraqis.

Despite this progress, every Iraqi –Sunni or Shia, Arab or Kurd, man or woman – I have spoken to during the past year has insisted on the importance of keeping American forces in Iraq even after the expiration of the current Status of Forces Agreement. Despite a ramped-up program of military training, Iraqi military leaders have privately and publicly asserted that Iraq’s security forces are not yet prepared to protect the country. American military commanders share this assessment, which is one of several reasons a year ago the commanders on the ground recommended seeking Iraqi agreement to keep some 20,000 American troops there after 2011.Without access to all the diplomatic exchanges between our countries, it is difficult to judge whether a better outcome was possible. Certainly Iraqi national feeling against granting American forces immunities was strong. Clearly, no president could agree to station them there without those immunities. But it is the essence of good statecraft to resolve conflicting interests. And it is clear from his words and body language that President Obama’s heart was not in winning the war in Iraq. Indeed, when he announced the withdrawal he merely noted that “America’s war in Iraq is over.” That is cold comfort to the millions of Iraqis who are left to fend for themselves in one of the world’s most dangerous regions.The administration’s ill-disguised desire to get out of Iraq, mirrored by its decision to wage the war in Afghanistan on a political timetable, placed Iraqi politicians who wanted a residual American presence in an impossible situation. How could they stick their necks out to push for American troops when the administration gave them no cover?In his announcement the president noted that American troops have been in Iraq nine years. But no war can be waged or won on a timetable. NATO forces are still in the Balkans after almost 20 years. American forces have been in Europe and Asia for more than a half-century. During my service in Europe I saw firsthand how those troops added to American security by deterring conflict in two vital areas of the world.Perhaps quiet negotiations can still find a way to reverse this policy. American troops in Iraq would serve our joint interests in four ways:

First, by finishing the job of training Iraqi forces to defeat domestic enemies and deter foreign ones. Effective training requires professional American troops and Iraqis working side by side until the Iraqis are capable of handling the job themselves.

Second, by fighting al-Qaeda and Iranian-backed terrorists. Both are still active in Iraq. Our retreat will leave them a tempting vacuum.

Third, by continuing to provide an unspoken “buffer” along the Green Line that separates Iraqi Kurdish and Arab forces in the north.

Most importantly, a continuing American military presence would make it clear that America has enduring interests in the volatile Middle East and does not intend to let al Qaeda or Iraq’s neighbors, especially the terrorist states of Iran and Syria, benefit from any weakness of ours.Hmmm.......After handing over Tunesia toAl-Qaida and the MuslimBrotherhood receiving Egypt ...now presenting Iraq to Iran?Read the full story here.

• Obama's Foreign Policy: Manchurian Candidate or Keystone Kop?(DocsTalk).By BarryRubin.Virtually since the day President Barack Obama was inaugurated in January 2009, I’ve been reporting in great detail on his disastrous Middle East policy. I believe nobody in the world has written more thoroughly documented words and provided more factually based analysis explaining why this policy is so bad than me.And so I am often asked whether I believe this situation is caused by a deliberate, conscious effort to destroy U.S. interests, subvert Israel’s existence, and promote anti-American Islamists on the part of the president and his closest colleagues.No, I answer, it is the result of ignorance, incompetence, and a ridiculous ideological approach that has nothing to do with reality. But, I add, it certainly says something that the policy is so bad that it makes people think that deliberate treason is a credible explanation. Recently, an expert I respect who likes my work asked me the following:“At what point do "oblivious," clueless," or "misguided" no longer describe what is going on here? “At what point do we say that the top levels of the U.S. government and our national security leadership are wittingly complicit in supporting a Muslim Brotherhood takeover of large parts of the Middle East? As you lay out these events and facts, there is simply no other conclusion to be drawn: this is deliberate.

“When does it become treasonous or at the very least an abrogation of Constitutional oaths of office and dereliction of duty?

I believe the first and last paragraphs are wrong but the second one is partly right. They don’t fear the Muslim Brotherhood getting into office because they think it won’t happen or can be turned into a good thing. This is horrible but not consciously evil. How can we explain Obama’s behavior on the Middle East? I’m not the least bit surprised or baffled. I do not think the fact that this isn’t “treasonous” is a mitigating circumstance. Beyond a certain point, gross incompetence and systematic stupidity are inexcusable sins in politics even if not crimes. The sentence should be voting them out of office as soon as possible.The great French diplomatist (and thoroughly evil human being) Charles de Talleyrand put it this way: “This is worse than a crime, it’s a blunder.” You can feel some respect for an evil genius cleverly following his plan but none at all for a fool putting his country’s interests and the lives of millions of people at risk, refusing to change course even when his strategy is obviously failing.You just have to sit at dinner with a State Department guy, for example, who tells you in great detail how the battle went within the bureaucracy over accepting Islamism as something good for the United States or watch how the CIA generated studies fixed to exclude truth in arguing Islamism isn't a threat. It's only mysterious if you don't see it up close.Here is what we should see:

First, Obama thinks he’s very knowledgeable about Islam, based on very limited personal contacts. Aside from his profound misunderstandings, his experiences come from Indonesia, the place where mainstream Islam was more moderate than in any other Muslim-majority country. And even that predates the infusion of Wahhabi and al-Qaida thinking even in that country.In my opinion, the worst single blunder of Obama in the Middle East was his Cairo speech telling people in the region that they should perceive their primary identity as Muslim rather than in national terms. The idea that political Islam could be some asset for the United States--rather than an enemy being held back largely by nationalism--was like putting a big bomb next to a fragile dam. Yet Obama thought it was some act of far-sighted genius on his part because he could tame political Islam.

Second, Obama is a narrow-minded and arrogant man who understands little about international affairs or the profound differences of other cultures. He neither listens to ideas outside his own conception nor heeds proof that he has failed. A clever evil genius adjusts himself to circumstances, determined he will always look good. Obama is merely wrong and incompetent, openly displaying ignorance.

Third, his conception of the United States and its role in the world should render him unfit to be president. He views the United States as evil and aggressive historically while also rejecting the most basic concepts of U.S. interests and the conduct of international affairs.He deliberately refuses to show leadership; doesn’t think American diplomacy should reward friends and punish enemies; believes concessions and apologies can win over enemies; and really doesn’t understand the importance of credibility, deterrence, and leverage to frighten and constrain enemies. He is obsessed with popularity, that least important factor in international affairs. In his mind, there is a sneaking suspicion that the enemies are the good guys.In these ideas, Obama is similar to the far left in America and Europe. The problem, of course, is that none of those clueless impractical intellectuals is commander-in-chief of the world’s greatest power.

Fourth, he has two sets of people eager to misadvise him. One is the ideologues he has brought into government, especially in the National Security Council and several other appointees (David Axelrod and Ram Emanuel are of little or no importance on these foreign policy decision-making issues.) The other is a significant portion of the CIA.Large elements in the State and Defense departments are horrified by Obama’s Middle East policy. The Defense Department is burdened with new commitments and handed impossible missions by a man its officials know looks down on them, has little sympathy for their problems, and no appreciation of their professional culture.State gasps as Obama dismantles a Middle East policy it has spent decades building and nurturing. Briefly, that policy was alliance with relatively moderate states—Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia—to fight radical regimes and movements. They dislikeed Israel because they thought it got in the way of links to Arab powers. But they certainly don’t want their pet regimes overthrow, systematically insulted, while the president cares more for the very radical Islamists they were fighting to keep out of power!What is the alternative, now dominant view? This interpretation considers the virtually sole danger to be al-Qaida and its terrorist attacks against America. In order to ensure Islamists aren’t radicalized to behave that way, they want to coopt radical Islamists they consider far less threatening. They insist that such Islamists are far less extreme than people like me say and that holding power will moderate them. This travesty is born of Western ignorance about Islam and Islamism; discounting the power of ideology and the nature of these societies; assuming that everyone thinks alike in wanting more material goods; putting all their effort on stopping another September 11 (even at the expense of massive strategic losses); presuming moderation is inevitable, etc.These people believe that the “Turkish model” is just fine and dandy rather than seeing it as an extremely dangerous way for radical Islamists to seize and hold power to carry out anti-American and aggressive goals. This misunderstanding is key to their failure to understand Arab politics or Islamism, as is the idea that Facebook kid community organizer yuppies are any match for Jihadists.We’ve seen this before many times. Major General William Elphinstone, commander of the British army in Kabul, Afghanistan, in 1842, was no traitor. He simply believed the Afghan rulers who promised him safe passage back to India. Of 12,000 soldiers and civilians, only about 12 survived the subsequent massacre.Other examples include pre-World War Two appeasement and the post-World War Two view that Third World Communists could be coopted, or those portraying Fidel Castro as a misunderstood moderate and Mao Zedong as an agrarian reformer. Another case was the idea that Yasir Arafat could be turned into a pragmatic moderate by giving him power and meeting most of his demands.Then there are the current European domestic policies of funding and backing to radical Islamists in order to “defeat” Jihadists. When Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said last February that the Muslim Brotherhood was a harmless reformist group, he meant it. That’s what his CIA briefers told him. The only administration correction was that it isn’t a “secular” group. All the really damaging misconceptions were fully accepted by the Obama Administration.So the administration is either helping Islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood to get into power or risking this happening (wrongly thinking they won’t win elections) not because it wants to hurt America but because it is stupid and ignorant enough to think that will ultimately help America. Islamists will be moderated by power and the “need” to be pragmatic; or won’t win because the people want smart phones instead of suicide bombers; or they will love a U.S. government that is so nice to them.Similarly, this administration doesn’t hate Israel so much as think that country is foolish for not following policies that in fact would risk its existence. If only Israel realized how easy it would be to have a stable peace with a Palestinian state next door based on the 1967 borders, the Obama Administration thinks, the Israelis, too, would join the party and be much better off. Why are they such a stiff-necked people? This is all wrong and disastrous. But as George Orwell—who understood these things—once said, some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual will believe them.None of these points makes the current leadership and policy more acceptable or good. Having Gomer Pyle and Forrest Gump in power (without those innocent nice-guy fool’s humility and moral compass) is not better than having a James Bond villain or Dr. Evil running things.How much does this matter? Not a great deal. The motive for having terrible policies is far less important than the fact that the policies are terrible. Moreover, one can prove what's happening is a disaster but can never irrefutably prove why it is happening.A fool is worse than a traitor if only because more people will vote for him.Hmmmm......The question is "Who's the Fool"?Read the full story here.

• In first statement after his father’s death, Saif al-Islam Qaddafi vows to fight on.(AlArabiya).In his first statement after the death of his father Muammar Qaddafi, Saif al-Islam vowed to continue fighting “rats” and NATO forces in a one-minute audio message aired Saturday by a Syrian-based TV channel.“I say go to hell, you and NATO behind you. This is our country, we live in it, we die in it and we are continuing the struggle,” Saif al-Islam said, denying media reports that he had been captured and wounded in a final assault by revolutionary fighters on the coastal city of Sirte, where his father and brother Motassim were detained and killed under disputed circumstances.“I received a message from tribes in Bani Walid about a general consensus between them to respond to threats from the gangs of rats ─ revolutionaries and the NATO alliance,” Saif al-Islam said.Saif al-Islam’s whereabouts still remain unknown but a military commander of the interim National Transitional Council (NTC) said on Sunday that its fighters were surrounding an area where he was believed to have been hiding since fleeing Sirte last Wednesday.Commander Abdel Majid Mlegta was quoted as telling Reuters that the area is in the south of the town of Bani Walid, 150 km (100 miles) southwest of Tripoli. Bani Walid fell to the fighters earlier this month after putting up a determined resistance for several weeks. Saif al-Islam was widely reputed to have been based in the town during its resistance, before moving to Sirte.Mlegta said Qaddafi’s Niger-based security chief, Abdullah al-Senussi, had been in contact with Saif al-Islam to try to help him escape and flee to the neighboring country “but our brigades are encircling this area south of Bani Walid.”Mlegta did not elaborate on reports that NTC fighters had searched offices recently used by Saif al-Islam and had found material indicating that he had been researching areas south of Bani Walid include places called Wadi Zam Zam and Wadi al-Mandoum.Read the full story here.

• New euro 'empire' plot by Brussels.(TheTelegraph).The proposal, put forward by Herman Van Rompuy, the European Council president, would be the clearest sign yet of a new “United States of Europe” — with Britain left on the sidelines.The plan comes as European governments desperately trying to save the euro from collapse last night faced a new bombshell, with sources at the International Monetary Fund saying it would not pay for a second Greek bail-out.It was also disclosed last night that British businesses are turning their back on Brussels regulations to give temporary workers full employment rights, with supermarket chain Tesco leading the charge.Meanwhile, David Cameron is attempting to face down a rebellion tomorrow by Tory MPs in a vote over staging a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU.Ministers expect 60 or 70 MPs to defy the party’s high command and back the call for a referendum, while some rebels claim the final toll could be up to 100 — about a third of the parliamentary party.Downing Street has upped the stakes dramatically. Last night, No 10 sources insisted they would impose a three-line whip — effectively ordering all Tory MPs to fall in line.Mr Cameron, who yesterday took personal charge of the effort to persuade MPs to back the Government, has come under intense pressure from Cabinet colleagues to try to defuse the revolt by offering concessions or a way out to rebels. Sources say a handful of parliamentary private secretaries — the lowest rung on the government ladder — might resign.The single Treasury plan emerged in Brussels yesterday as Europe’s finance ministers tried to find a way out of the crisis engulfing the eurozone. A full-scale rescue plan could cost about £1.75 trillion.British sources said Mr Van Rompuy, who is regarded as being close to the German government, suggested plans for a “finance ministry” to be based either in Frankfurt or Paris. The EU already has its own “foreign ministry”, headed by Baroness Ashton, the former British Labour minister, and based in Brussels.A senior Coalition source told The Sunday Telegraph: “I am well aware of arguments in Brussels and elsewhere in favour of a single Treasury. You’d get any number of different versions of 'Europe’ all running at very different speeds.”A series of meetings are due to be held over the next few days on the eurozone crisis that will involve the leaders of EU member states.Hmmmm......Flashback: 22 June MFS - The Other News:" A financial transaction tax which will allow the EU to raise its own tax, even set its own tax rates, without democratic oversight. "Where you heard it before?Read the full story here.

• Libya's liberation: interim ruler unveils more radical than expected plans for Islamic law.(TheTelegraph).Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, the chairman of the National Transitional Council and de fact president, had already declared that Libyan laws in future would have Sharia, the Islamic code, as its "basic source".But that formulation can be interpreted in many ways - it was also the basis of Egypt's largely secular constitution under President Hosni Mubarak, and remains so after his fall.Mr Abdul-Jalil went further, specifically lifting immediately, by decree, one law from Col. Gaddafi's era that he said was in conflict with Sharia - that banning polygamy.In a blow to those who hoped to see Libya's economy integrate further into the western world, he announced that in future bank regulations would ban the charging of interest, in line with Sharia. "Interest creates disease and hatred among people," he said.Gulf states like the United Arab Emirates, and other Muslim countries, have pioneered the development of Sharia-compliant banks which charge fees rather than interest for loans but they normally run alongside western-style banks.In the first instance, interest on low-value loans would be waived altogether, he said.Libya is already the most conservative state in north Africa, banning the sale of alcohol. Mr Abdul-Jalil's decision - made in advance of the introduction of any democratic process - will please the Islamists who have played a strong role in opposition to Col Gaddafi's rule and in the uprising but worry the many young liberal Libyans who, while usually observant Muslims, take their political cues from the West.Hmmmm......Anytime a muslim with a zebiba on his forehead is declared a ‘moderate’ Islamist, Check for Unicorns in the neigbourhood.Read the full story here.

• Canadian man in Saudi jail faces deteriorating health.(BikyaMasr).DUBAI: A Canadian man awaiting trial in Saudi Arabia is facing deteriorating health concerns, friends of the family have reported.According to The Canadian Press, Mohamed Kohail has been behind bars since 2007 on murder charges and had been sentenced to beheading by sword before the country’s Supreme Court overturned the death sentence in 2010.The Montreal resident, his friends and relatives said, has been waiting for a retrial since, but has developed a number of health problems as a result of his jailing.Sources close to the 26-year-old told The Canadian Press he had multiple operations this past summer for chronic tuberculosis — with the infection spreading dangerously close to his spinal cord.According to the report, he narrowly escaped paralysis earlier this year.Born in Palestine, Kohail and his younger brother Sultan moved to Canada with their family in 2000 and became Canadian citizens in 2005. They moved to Jedda in 2006.The Canadian foreign ministry has been hush over the jailing of one of its citizens, but in recent weeks has seemingly put increase pressure on the government in Riyadh to release Kohail and another Canadian citizen and his family who have also been detained in the country.Earlier this month, Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis said that the government must do more to pressure the conservative Gulf kingdom for their release.The MP has called on the government that Canada should, at the very least, “pressure for the children, two girls, aged 18 months and five years, to be released.” He said their jailing is a violation of international law and it should not matter what the parents are charged with.In a statement released by Karygiannis’ office, he said Majeed Uddin Ahmed, his wife Zareen and their two girls were picked up by police two weeks ago in Jeddah, where the family has been living for about four years.No information has been released on why the family was arrested.Read the full story here.

• Saudi Arabia - The Shadow of Prince Nayef.(DocsTalk).By Irfan Al-Alawi.With the death of Saudi Crown Prince Sultan Ibn Abd Al-Aziz early October 22 in a New York hospital, his brother, Saudi interior minister and second deputy prime minister Prince Nayef Ibn Abd Al-Aziz, now looms large in the world's attention as a possible successor to Saudi Arabia's current ruler, King Abdullah, who is now 87.Prince Nayef is a committed adherent of the hardliners in the Wahhabi sect and has resisted the cautious moves by King Abdullah to restrict Wahhabi dominance in the kingdom, which was founded in a marriage alliance of the Al-Saud family and the descendants of Muhammad Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab, for which the radical doctrine is named. To this day, the head Islamic cleric in the kingdom is Abd Al-Aziz Al Ash-Sheikh, a descendant of Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab. The aging King Abdullah's limited reforms have included increased freedom of expression; appointment of representatives of the Saudi Shia minority, which is concentrated in the oil-bearing Eastern Province, to the consultative Shura council, which advises the king; measures for more participation of women in society, including announcement of limited electoral rights for women last month; separation of educational and religious authorities; dismissal of ultra-Wahhabi judges from the Saudi court system, and cuts in financing for the institution most despised by the Saudi public, the mutawiyin or morals militia, officially titled the 'Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice,' and often mis-called a morals police.In reality, the mutawiyin are not police in the normal sense, but a mob that harasses those they accuse of less-than-absolute fidelity to Wahhabi concepts: women who may let the un-Islamic but Saudi-imposed face veil (niqab) and long cloak (abaya) slip in public; couples that may be unmarried (and sometimes are attacked by the mutawiyin even if wed); people suspected of possessing alcohol in their homes; Shia Muslims; foreign Muslims participating in the hajj pilgrimage; non-Muslims; and anyone else the mutawiyin may allege to be violating Wahhabi strictures. As interior minister, Prince Nayef is their guardian and their abuses symbolize his role in the lives of many Saudis. King Abdullah has tried to make the mutawiyin accountable for its offenses against individual and public dignity.Prince Nayef is described widely among Saudis as an opponent of any measures intended to ameliorate the kingdom's oppressive image. He has rejected the notion that women should be permitted to drive or be granted any other liberalization of their status. He has disdained the introduction of voting in the kingdom. He has stood behind the most recalcitrant members of the Wahhabi clerical apparatus as they maintain their hold on religious life in the kingdom. He has declared that no Saudi terrorism suspect will ever be turned over to a foreign country.Yet Prince Nayef and his son Prince Muhammad Bin Nayef, who was targeted in a mysterious suicide-bomb attack in 2009, have supervised the Saudi program for abatement of Al-Qaida terrorism. Their program for fighting violent extremism has stressed a "light" approach based on "reeducation" of Wahhabi fanatics about their deviant views. In the 2009 bombing attempt on Prince Muhammad Bin Nayef's life, the young scion was recorded in a pleasant conversation, just prior to their meeting, with the man who killed himself when he came to visit, and, it was said, to attack Prince Muhammad Bin Nayef, in Jeddah. Prince Muhammad Bin Nayef was barely harmed.The main effect of Prince Nayef's campaign against Al-Qaida has been to "export" the Saudi cadres of the terrorist movement to Yemen, where they have organized Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). AQAP incited such actions against the U.S. as the Fort Hood massacre of 2009. Other AQAP conspiracies in the UK and U.S. have included targeting of aircraft, including the case of the "underwear bomb," employed in an attempt to bring down a jetliner over Detroit by Nigerian terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab at the end of the same year; Faisal Shahzad's placing of a truck bomb in Times Square in New York last year, and an endeavour to send bombs to Jewish synagogues in the U.S. via cargo courier services, also in 2010. In the last case, shipping numbers and addresses of the packages, in which explosives were placed, then handed to United Parcel Services and Federal Express offices in Yemen, were delivered by Prince Muhammad Bin Nayef to U.S. authorities... after the packages had been dispatched, but before they reached the U.S.The curious ease with which Prince Nayef and his son "handle" AQAP activities bespeaks an obvious question: is Prince Nayef's role that of a combatant against terrorism, or a figure who sees his mission as one of keeping Al-Qaida away from threats against the royal family and Saudi institutions? His fervent attachment to the Wahhabi creed seems to place him in the typical Saudi role of maintaining an alliance with the UK and U.S., which market Saudi oil and arm the Saudi defence establishment, while using Western money and security guarantees to promote the doctrines of the fundamentalists.The certainty of Prince Nayef's sinister reputation among the Saudi masses cannot be denied. He has declared "what we won by the sword we will keep by the sword." If Prince Nayef is elevated to the status of Crown Prince, and then succeeds King Abdullah as ruler, Saudis, other Muslims, and the world may expect a return of the kingdom to its old and worst habits. These will include suppression of internal dissent and of the forward-looking measures instituted by King Abdullah; attacks on non-Wahhabi Muslims; enhanced support for the mutawiyin as well as for jihadist adventurism in South Asia and elsewhere; and a more hostile line toward the UK and the U.S. As king, Nayef might continue to keep Al-Qaida out of Saudi territory, but it is doubtful he would act consequently against the sympathisers of the terrorists inside the Saudi elite, and their Wahhabi clerical enablers, as long as they do not threaten him, the Sudairis, and their accomplices. For the rest of the world, however, the shadow of Prince Nayef is long and menacing.While the effects of Prince Sultan's demise may be felt across the globe, only two things may be said with certainty about it, and it brings with it disturbing uncertainties, especially involving Prince Nayef.First, Crown Prince Sultan's death was not unexpected, since the seriousness of his illness – colon cancer – had been common knowledge for some time. But his biography included ambiguities, beginning with his age. According to an official statement, Crown Prince Sultan was 80 when he expired, although various media and related sources speculated that he might have been as old as 87.The other certainty about the death of Crown Prince Sultan is that Prince Nayef, aged 78 and his possible successor as Crown Prince, is feared profoundly by the kingdom's subjects for his extreme, retrograde views on Islam and the governance of the Saudi state. A new Crown Prince will be designated, but Prince Nayef, although treated by many foreign observers as inevitably next-in-line after Prince Sultan, may face significant opposition. Prince Nayef represents a genuine danger to the people of Saudi Arabia and the world, if he inherits the throne from King Abdullah.King Abdullah, a half-brother of Princes Sultan and Nayef, became monarch in 2005, with the death of the incapacitated King Fahd. Discontent between Abdullah, on one side, and the clan from which Fahd, Sultan and Nayef sprang, on the other, was already well-known in the kingdom and among foreign observers of its convoluted society. King Fahd, and Princes Sultan and Nayef, owed their power to membership in the influential set of full, blood brothers known as the Sudairi Seven, since they were all children of Princess Hassa Bint Ahmad Bin Muhammad Al-Sudairi, a favorite wife of King Muhammad Bin Abd Al-Aziz Ibn Saud, founder of the kingdom in 1932.The Sudairis are a powerful family in the central Arabian wasteland of Nejd, where the fundamentalist, exclusivist, radical and violent Wahhabi ideology emerged almost 300 years ago. With King Fahd and Crown Prince Sultan gone from the scene, the Sudairi clique at the summits of the monarchy now consists of five, among whom Prince Nayef is second in age, but the most important.King Abdullah, as a half-brother of the Sudairis, is not included in their preferred circle. He established an Allegiance Council in 2006-07, made up of 34 sons and grandsons of Ibn Saud, to administer the royal succession process. Most Saudis and foreign commentators interpreted the introduction of the new body as a means of diluting the power of the Sudairis, since they are a small minority within it. If the choice of a successor to Crown Prince Sultan is put in the hands of the Allegiance Council, Prince Nayef could be passed over in favour of someone else.In 2009, Prince Talal Bin Abd Al-Aziz challenged the appointment of Prince Nayef as second deputy prime minister, warning that this could make him 'heir apparent' to Crown Prince Sultan. The naming of Prince Nayef as second deputy prime minister was seen as a concession to the Sudairis. But Prince Talal called for strengthening the role of the Allegiance Council, of which he is a member, in the succession process. Still, no possible candidate to replace Crown Prince Sultan other than Prince Nayef has been suggested.King Abdullah's rise to the Saudi throne reflected a decline in the power of Princes Sultan, Nayef, and the rest of the Sudairis. Prince Sultan had served as minister of defence, in which position he oversaw extensive military contracting with the UK and U.S., and his son, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, was Saudi ambassador to Washington for more than 20 years, from 1983 until 2005. Prince Sultan enjoyed visiting the U.S. His son, Prince Bandar, was most famous for his cultivation of prominent Americans, his embassy parties, and his access to the White House, thanks to which Saudi Arabia gained advanced weaponry and military support.Although a full brother to the late Crown Prince Sultan, Prince Nayef is known for very different attitudes from his brother.Read the full story here.

• Iran says 8 of 13 trapped divers are dead.(CTV).Tehran, Iran — Eight divers trapped underwater with five others after their support ship sank three days ago in the Persian Gulf have died, Iran's official news agency reported Sunday. Mohammad Rastad, an official in charge of the rescue operation, said the bodies of the eight divers, six of them Indians, have been recovered. He said there is no word about the fate of the remaining five missing divers. Out of 73 people on board, 60 were rescued. He said six bodies were found earlier. "Bodies of two more divers have been recovered from the depth of 72 metres," IRNA quoted Rastad as saying. The divers -- seven Indians, five Iranians and one Ukrainian -- were part of a team installing an underwater oil pipeline and were inside a pressurized diving chamber when their Koosha-1 ship sank in the Persian Gulf on Thursday afternoon in stormy seas. The diving chamber was on board the ship when it sank, and the divers were already inside to avoid having to pressurize and depressurize for their dives. The Iran-flagged Koosha-1 left Thursday from offshore oil rigs near the underwater South Pars gas field, the largest in the world, shared by both Iran and Qatar. The ship was involved in installing underwater pipelines. It sank in the Persian Gulf about 25 kilometres off Iran's coast.Read the full story here.

• Saudi seizes toy guns mocking Prophet’s wife.(Emirates24/7).Saudi Arabia seized nearly 1,500 Chinese-made toy guns at a local market found to be issuing sounds that abuse and mock the Prophet’s (Peace Be Upon Him) wife, Aisha, newspapers in the Gulf kingdom reported on Sunday.Members of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, the most influential law enforcement authority in the country, seized the toys during a raid on a shopping centre in the western town of Jeddah.“The guns were found to be issuing sounds which are considered mocking and offending against the Prophet’s wife,” the newspaper said, quoting Commission spokesman in Jeddah, Turki Al Zahrani.He said sellers of those toys, mostly Asians, apparently do not know they offend Islam as the guns issue sounds in Arabic.Read the full story here.

• Analysis: India being ‘contained’ by growing Chinese footprint in Pakistan.(BigPeace).According to an Indian analysis, China’s rapidly increasing footprint in Pakistan-governed Kashmir and in Afghanistan represents an increasing military danger to India. There are some 3000-4000 Chinese, including troops, in Pakistan-governed Kashmir, stationed near the Line of Control (LOC) that separates the Pakistani and Indian regions, building major infrastructure projects. Kashmir and Jammu (K&J) were the site of an extremely bloody genocidal war between Hindus and Muslims following Partition, the 1947 war that following the partitioning of the Indian subcontinent, creating the states of India and Pakistan. The region is still disputed, and in recent years, China has become firmly and unequivocally on the side of Pakistan, making it clear that any war in the region will be on two fronts for India. In addition, China has been aggressively bidding for large energy and infrastructure projects in northern Afghanistan, meaning that China will have a strong presence in Afghanistan as the Americans withdraw. At that time, the Islamist Mujahadeen terrorists will be diverted away from Afghanistan towards K&J. The analysis concludes that India must increase its own footprint in Afghanistan. Generational Dynamics predicts that India and Pakistan will be re-fighting the genocidal 1947 war. Institute for Defence Studies & Analyses (IDSA).Read the full story here.