30/5/11 - Preparing for World War 3: Satellite images reveal alarming speed Pakistan is rushing to finish weapons-grade nuclear reactor

Posted on Pakalert on May 20, 2011 // 7 Comments

[Translate]

---

By Daily Mail Reporter
New satellite images have shown the alarming speed at which Pakistan is constructing a weapons-grade nuclear reactor.
The aerial images, taken on April 20, show the rapid building progress of the fourth reactor to produce plutonium in Pakistan’s Khushab facility.
The site was barren in 2009 and the facility ‘costing billions’ was undetectable by satellite just 17 months ago, but has since grown at an alarming rate.

Alarming: The rate of construction at the Khushab nuclear facility has ‘raised eyebrows’ with US officials 

The facility in Khushab is the fastest growing nuclear program in the world, with the speed of the latest reactor’s construction prompting concern from U.S. officials.
Pakistan first revealed the Khushab site and its plutonium production facility in 1998 after the country’s first nuclear test.
Although the U.S. has provided Pakistan with $20 billion in military and economic aid since September 11, 2001, it has been said that there is ‘no explanation’ as to how Pakistan are paying for the latest reactor.
Paul Brannon, a nuclear analyst with the Institute for Science and International Security, said: ‘The buildup is remarkable.
‘You can see the square of the reactor building, you can see the inner square of the reactor hall where the actual reactor goes, and if you measure the dimensions of the building it matches up exactly to the second and the third reactors.
‘And that nobody in the U.S. or in the Pakistani government says anything about this — especially in this day and age—is perplexing.’

A similar image taken in March 2000 shows an earlier Pakistan plutonium reactor at Khushab 

Describing the potential cost of the latest development, Mr Brannon added: ‘It would be in the billions.
‘This is a military reactor. It’s outside of the civilian program.’
U.S. officials have been watching the Khushab facility for some time, but say there is no good explanation how Pakistan is paying for this.
The rapid progress of the nuclear facility comes as tensions between the USA and Pakistan increase.
Pakistan officials welcomed the death of Osama Bin Laden after a raid by U.S Navy Seals, but were still unhappy they were not informed about the attack, saying it ‘violated Pakistan’s sovereignty’.
And there was further anger yesterday when a Nato helicopter attacked a Pakistani army post near the Afghan border today, injuring two Pakistani soldiers
Senator John Kerry, who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, returned from Islamabad on Tuesday after Pakistan agreed to return the stealth helicopter tail of the downed Blackhawk MH-60 damaged in the raid that killed Bin Laden.
Senator Kerry has since warned about cutting off aid to Pakistan.
He said: ‘Right now, we have about 100,000 reasons for worrying about our relationship with Pakistan.
‘And they’re called our young men and women, and they’re in uniform in Afghanistan.’
Pakistan controls 70 percent of the supply routes into Afghanistan, according to Pentagon officials.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and others have warned that cutting off relations or aid to Pakistan would be dangerous because the government and military of Pakistan could fall under more influence from Islamic radicals who are sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
It is also feared any nuclear weapons made at the facility could fall into the hands of hardline militants.
Grand Plan in final phase – US to deploy troops to ‘proctect’ Pakistan nuclear arsenal.. Get ready for World War 3
World War 3 Legislation Introduced – The US Congress To Vote On Declaration Of World War 3 — An Endless War With No Borders, No Clear Enemies
Alert: U.S. Withdraws All Pakistan Embassy Staff… Prepare for War
Webster Tarpley : Next False Flag Terror Attack will be Blamed on Pakistan to start World War 3
Preparing for World War 3? Pakistan Steps Up Production Of Nuclear Weaponry

20/5/11 - World War 3 Legislation Introduced – The US Congress To Vote On Declaration Of World War 3 — An Endless War With No Borders, No Clear Enemies

he United States Congress is set to vote on legislation that authorizes the official start of World War 3.

The legislation authorizes the President of the United States to take unilateral military action against all nations, organizations, and persons, both domestically and abroad, who are alleged to be currently or who have in the past supported or engaged in hostilities or who have provided aid in support of hostilities against the United States or any of its coalition allies.
The legislation removes the requirement of congressional approval for the use of military force and instead gives the President totalitarian dictatorial authority to engage in any and all military actions for an indefinite period of time.
It even gives the President the authority to launch attacks against American Citizens inside the United States with no congressional oversight whatsoever.
Just to recap, because that was a mouthful:

• Endless War – The war will continue until all hostilities are terminated, which will never happen.
• No Borders – The president will have the full authority to launch military strikes against any country, organization or person, including against U.S citizens on U.S soil.
• Unilateral Military Action – Full authority to invade any nation at any time with no congressional approval required.
• No Clearly Defined Enemy – The US can declare or allege anyone a terrorist or allege they are or have been supporting “hostilities” against the US and attack at will.
• Authorization To Invade Several Countries – The president would have full authority to invade Iran, Syria, North Korea, along with several other nations in Africa and the Middle East and even Russia and China under the legislation all of which are “know” to have supported and aided hostilities against the United States.

House Dems protest GOP’s plans for permanent war against terror

Nearly three dozen House Democrats are calling on Republicans to withdraw a section of the 2012 defense authorization bill that they say would effectively declare a state of permanent war against unnamed Taliban and al Qaeda operatives.
A Tuesday letter from House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and 32 other Democrats argues that affirming continued war against terrorist forces goes too far, giving too much authority to the president without debate in Congress.
Their letter cites language in the authorization bill that incorporates the Detainee Security Act, which affirms continued armed conflict against terrorists overseas.
“By declaring a global war against nameless individuals, organizations and nations ‘associated’ with the Taliban and al Qaeda, as well as those playing a supporting role in their efforts, the Detainee Security Act would appear to grant the president near unfettered authority to initiate military action around the world without further congressional approval,” Democrats wrote. “Such authority must not be ceded to the president without careful deliberation from Congress.”
The specific language in the bill is found in section 1034 of H.R. 1540, which affirms that the U.S. is “engaged in an armed conflict with al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated forces.” It also affirms that the president has the authority to detain “certain belligerents” until the armed conflict is over.
“Al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated forces still pose a grave threat to U.S. national security,” the bill says. “The Authorization for Use of Military Force necessarily includes the authority to address the continuing and evolving threat posed by these groups.”

The America Civil Liberties Union writes:

New Authorization of Worldwide War Without End?

Congress may soon vote on a new declaration of worldwide war without end, and without clear enemies. A “sleeper provision” deep inside defense bills pending before Congress could become the single biggest hand-over of unchecked war authority from Congress to the executive branch in modern American history.
President Obama has not sought new war authority. In fact, his administration has made clear that it believes it already has all of the authority that it needs to fight terrorism.
But Congress is considering monumental new legislation that would grant the president – and all presidents after him – sweeping new power to make war almost anywhere and everywhere. Unlike previous grants of authority for the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the proposed legislation would allow a president to use military force wherever terrorism suspects are present in the world, regardless of whether there has been any harm to U.S. citizens, or any attack on the United States, or any imminent threat of an attack. The legislation is broad enough to permit a president to use military force within the United States and against American citizens. The legislation contains no expiration date, and no criteria to determine when a president’s authority to use military force would end.
Of all of the powers that the Constitution assigns to Congress, no power is more fundamental or important than the power “to declare War.” That is why, in 2002, when Congress was considering whether to authorize war in Iraq, it held fifteen hearings, and passed legislation that cited specific harms, set limits, and defined a clear objective. Now, Congress is poised to give unchecked authority to the executive branch to use military force worldwide, with profoundly negative consequences for our fundamental democratic system of checks and balances. Once Congress expands the president’s war power, it will be nearly impossible to rein it back in. The ACLU strongly opposes a wholesale turnover of war power from Congress to the president – and all of his successors.

Coalition Memo to the House Committee on Armed Services Regarding a Proposed New Declaration of War

Comparison of 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force and Proposed Expanded Authorization

The offending text (Here In The Full Text Of H.R. 1540 – section 1034) uses doublespeak to declare World War 3. Specifically, the text uses the phrase “affirms” “armed conflict” which is the terminology used by congress declare war in every war since World War 2.

Congress affirms that —
(1) the United States is engaged in an armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces and that those entities continue to pose a threat to the United States and its citizens, both domestically and abroad;
(2) the President has the authority to use all necessary and appropriate force during the current armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note);
(3) the current armed conflict includes nations, organization, and persons who—
(A) are part of, or are substantially supporting, al‐Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners; or
(B) have engaged in hostilities or have directly supported hostilities in aid of a nation, organization, or person described in subparagraph (A); and
(4) the President’s authority pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority to detain belligerents, including persons described in paragraph (3), until the termination of hostilities.

A joint letter regarding the proposed legislation has been sent to congress condemning the proposed legislation.

MEMORANDUM

TO:	All Members of the House Committee on Armed Services
FROM:	American Civil Liberties Union Appeal for Justice Brave New Foundation Center for Constitutional Rights CREDO Action Defending Dissent Foundation High Road for Human Rights Human Rights First International Justice Network Just Foreign Policy Leadership Conference of Women Religious MoveOn.org Muslim Public Affairs Council New Security Action Pax Christi USA Peace Action Physicians for Human Rights Psychologists for Social Responsibility Shalom Center Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society USAction Win Without War
DATE:	May 9th, 2010
RE:	Oppose Section 1034 and Any Similar New Declaration of War or New Authorization for Use of Military Force in the National Defense Authorization Act

The undersigned organizations strongly oppose the new Declaration of War, which is in Section 1034 of the Chairman’s mark for the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”). We urge you to oppose the provision and any other similar new Declaration of War or new Authorization for Use of Military Force (“AUMF”) in the NDAA.
While we have written separately, and met with many of you and your military legislative assistants, on our concerns with other provisions of the Chairman’s mark, we are writing on this new Declaration of War specifically because it is a provision that has received almost no review, despite its likely tremendous effect on almost every facet of United States national security policy. At minimum, Congress should hold hearings andfollow regular order before even considering such sweeping legislation.
This monumental legislation–with a large-scale and practically irrevocable delegation of war power from Congress to the President–could commit the United States to a worldwide war without clear enemies, without any geographical boundaries (the use of military force within the United States could be permitted), and without any boundary relating to time or specific objective to be achieved. Unlike the AUMF that authorized the Afghanistan War and the pursuit of Osama bin Laden, the proposed new Declaration of War does not cite any specific harm, such as the 9/11 attacks, or specific threat of harm to the United States. It appears to be stating that the United States is at war wherever terrorism suspects reside, regardless of whether there is any danger to the United States.
Under the guise of a “reaffirmation” of authority, Section 1034 of the Chairman’s mark for the NDAA would give the President unchecked authority–and if the section constitutes a declared “war,”¹ possibly the unchecked duty² –to use military force worldwide against or within any country in which terrorism suspects reside. The proposed new Declaration of War would be without precedent in the scope of war authority or duties transferred by Congress to the President:

• The President would be able to use this authority–or might be required to use this authority–regardless of whether there has been any harm to United States citizens, or any attack on the United States or any imminent threat of any attack. There is not even any requirement of any threat whatsoever to the national security of the United States.
• There is no geographical limitation–the new Declaration of War has no specification of countries against which military force could be used, and no specification of countries where U.S. armed forces could be deployed with or without the permission of the host country. Military force could even be used within the United States and against American citizens.
• There is no specific objective for the new Declaration of War, which means that there is no clear criteria after which the President’s authority to use military force would expire. Although the proposed new Declaration of War lists “al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces” as the “threat,” there is no definition for any of these entities, which historically have been amorphous, with shifting names, memberships, and organizational relationships.
• If Congress broadly turns over to the President the power that Article I of the Constitution provides to Congress to declare war, it very likely will never get the power back. The broad terms of the proposed new Declaration of War could last for decades.
• Whether Congress realizes it or not, the proposed new Declaration of War would authorize the President to use the United States military against countries such as Somalia, Iran, or Yemen, or send the American military into any of the scores of countries where suspected terrorists reside, which include not only nearly all Middle East, African, and Asian countries, but also European countries and Canada–and of course, the United States itself. Under the expansive terms used for organizations in the proposed new Declaration of War, targets could include suspects having no connection to the 9/11 attacks or to any other specific harm or threat to the United States. The President would have the power to go to war almost anywhere, at any time, and based on the presence of suspects who do not have to pose any threat to the national security of the United States.
• If Section 1034 of the Chairman’s mark for the NDAA constitutes a declaration of war–which Congress has not declared since 1942–the declaration would trigger various exemptions from federal statutes and even broader authority for the President to control more aspects of both government and private businesses. The March 17, 2011 report from the Congressional Research Service, “Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Historical Background and Legal Implications,” lists all of the statutory provisions, ranging from exemptions from budgetary limitations to new government claims over oil and mineral resources, that are triggered by a declaration of war.
• Of course, if Congress believes that there is a significant new threat to the national security of the United States that requires significant military force as a response, it can declare war or enact a new AUMF, but Congress should, at minimum, follow what it did in 2002 with the AUMF for the Iraq War, where it held fifteen hearings on the proposed war and passed an AUMF that cited specific harms, set limits, and defined a clear objective that, if met, would effectively terminate the AUMF. A specific declaration of war or a specific AUMF would better preserve the system of checks and balances and make an endless, worldwide war less likely.

To be clear, President Obama has not sought enactment of the proposed new Declaration of War. To the contrary, his Administration has made clear its position that it believes it already has all of the authority that it needs to fight terrorism. But if the proposed new Declaration of War becomes law, President Obama and all of his successors, until and unless a future Congress and future President repeal it, will have the sweeping new power to make war almost anywhere and everywhere.
Of all of the powers that Article I of the Constitution assigns to Congress, no power is more fundamental or important than the power “to declare War.” We urge you to use this power carefully, and to oppose this wholesale turnover of war power, without any checks–and without even holding a single hearing. Thank you for your attention to this issue, and we would be pleased to meet with you or your staff to discuss our concerns further.
¹ The most critical sentence of section 1034 of the Chairman’s mark for the NDAA is “Congress affirms that the United States is engaged in an armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces and that those entities continue to pose a threat to the United States and its citizens, both domestically and abroad.” If “affirms” is replaced with the synonym “declares” and “armed conflict” is replaced with the synonym “war,” the result is “Congress declares that the United States is in a war with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces . . . “, which is very similar to the declaration of war clauses of the eleven declarations of war made by Congress, from the War of 1812 through World War II. Since 1942, Congress has passed several authorizations for use of military force, but has not made any declarations of war.
² Although the question of whether a declaration of war imposes a duty on the President to carry out the war has only rarely come up in court decisions, at least one federal court, in comparing the legal consequences of a declaration of war with an authorization for use of military force, stated, “If war existed why empower the President to apprehend foreign enemies? War itself placed that duty upon him as a necessary and inherent incident of military command.” Gray v. United States, 21 Ct. Cl. 340, 373 (1886) (emphasis added).

The bill has many other shocking elements as well, such as the requirement that all arrests related to terrorism be treated as military arrests (section 4), thus circumventing the constitution. Furthermore, legislation introduce under the McCain bill would make it illegal for military prisoners in US overseas torture prisons to be returned to US Facilities.
Indeed, the moment we all feared has come before us as the Congress meddles giving the President absolute power over the military, including the authority to launch military strikes within the United States against U.S. Citizens. With the assassination of Osama Bin Laden on Pakistan soil many of were naïve in believing that the War on Terror would come to an end.
Instead,  the reported success of the raid is being used as a crutch to push through new legislation in the defense bills up for vote before congress which literally authorize World War 3, which will be declared as an endless war with no defined enemies and no borders. Short of committing genocide the termination of the hostilities will never come and as such the war will never come to end.
We have already learned that officials falsified reports that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction to justify the invasion of Iraq for the “prize” of oil. If a whole government of top officials can not be trusted then surely a single president cannot be trusted either.

We have seen the U.S Government turn Nazi and buy and burn every copy of a book that had evidence of a 9/11 coverup. The Department of Justice has already published a memo calling constitutionalists and survivalist as potential terrorists.
Is it not bad enough that the U.S courts have already legalized the abduction of U.S Citizens along with their indefinite detention and torture in overseas prison camps? Or that the U.S Government openly admits to gunning down, kidnapping and torturing American college students?
Under the definition of the legislation, the President could authorize the military to attack the ACLU building because they have supported the “terrorists” by arguing for their civil rights.
It will not be long before they are assassinating activists. The have already labeled conspiracy theories as “dangerous thoughts that could lead to violence” and have even specifically called The Intel Hub, which routinely publishes my articles, as an echo chamber pushing out these “dangerous thoughts that could lead to violence”.
Uncle Sam openly admits to turning its multi-billion dollar espionage network against U.S Citizens which has produced such great fruits as innocent activists exercising their first amendment rights being placed on the terrorist watch list by the FBI and DHS.
Seriously, this is so out of control and it is only a time that the World War 3 is being fought against you and me. Just remember as long as we are in a state of war your civil liberties and constitutional rights are pretty much null and void, only enforceable if the Government allows you to have them. Even then, they can declare you as a terrorist, enemy combatant or a threat to national security to revoke your constitutional rights anyway. Then they can play the national security card when they are asked to explain their allegations.
All around this is rotten and the first step to getting our rights back is to end the perpetual wars.
Contact your congressman and tell them No Way To this egregious bill!

---

Update – Here is some corporate media coverage of this story, since some people like to see it in the mainstream media to believe it.
Salon:

Critics: GOP bill a declaration of constant war

House Republicans want to reaffirm war against al-Qaida, the Taliban — and anyone else — with controversial bill

Republican chair of the Armed Services Committee, Howard McKeon, R-Calif., revealed The National Defense Authorization Act on Monday, which includes a bill renewing an act passed just days after 9/11, the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). AUMF gave then-President George W. Bush carte blanche to hunt down the 9/11 perpetrators and their allies. The renewed bill, however, makes no reference to the 9/11 attackers and some critics have called it “the first full-scale declaration of war by the U.S. since World War II,” since it makes no reference to the capturing of parties guilty of a specific act. Indeed, the section of The National Defense Authorization Act under question here is called the Declaration of War.
According to POLITICO:

The new language drops any reference to 9/11 and “affirms” a state of “armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban and associated forces.” The measure also explicitly gives the president the right to take prisoners “until the termination of hostilities” – something the courts have found to be implicit in the current version of the AUMF, though the new proposal could be seen to extend that power.

The argument from proponents of the Republican-backed bill is that, in the decade since AUMF was enacted, terror groups with no connection to 9/11 have come into the picture. Critics say such terror suspects should be dealt with using law enforcement and that we should not be affirming a commitment to war without specific aims or boundaries. The bill would also give the president the ability to attack an individual, group, or nation without Congressional approval.

The Daily Paul:

ALERT: Congress is About to Vote on Worldwide War Authority

The time is now to restore respect for the Constitution. Tell Congress that a blank check on war isn’t just unnecessary — it’s truly dangerous.
They have to be kidding. Congress is about to vote on worldwide war authority. This was long on the Bush administration’s wish list. Now, a few top congressional insiders see an opportunity to sneak it in to a “must pass” piece of legislation: the Defense Authorization bill.
This expanded war authority would give the president — any president — the power to use military force, whenever and however he or she sees fit. It would essentially declare a worldwide war without end.
It is shocking that Congress is entertaining such legislation at a time when many are looking to see an end to escalating conflict and abuses of power in the name of fighting terrorism.

ACLU Petition

Oppose New Worldwide War Authority

A few top congressional insiders are aiming to sneak new worldwide war authority in to a “must pass” piece of legislation: the Defense Authorization bill.
This new war authority would give the president — any president — the power to unilaterally take our country to war wherever, whenever and however he or she sees fit. It would essentially declare a worldwide war without end.
It is shocking that Congress is entertaining such legislation at a time when many are looking to see an end to escalating conflict and abuses of power in the name of fighting terrorism.
Take action! Tell your representative to oppose new worldwide war authority.

Politico:

GOP seeks to redefine war on terror

A little over a week after the United States finally succeeded in its long-sought goal of killing Osama bin Laden, Congress is set to engage in a debate over whether to extend the war on terror indefinitely or leave in place legislation that could eventually wind it down.
Enacted over a lone dissenting vote just three days after the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, the “Authorization for the Use of Military Force,” or AUMF, authorized President George W. Bush to use “all necessary and appropriate force” against those involved in the 9/11 attacks as well as anyone who harbored the perpetrators.
…
The new language drops any reference to 9/11 and “affirms” a state of “armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban and associated forces.” The measure also explicitly gives the president the right to take prisoners “until the termination of hostilities” – something the courts have found to be implicit in the current version of the AUMF, though the new proposal could be seen to extend that power.
…
But critics say the Republican-sponsored measure amounts to the first full-scale declaration of war by the U.S. since World War II – at a moment when counter-terrorism efforts are succeeding, the U.S. is withdrawing from Iraq, and about to begin a withdrawal from Afghanistan. And, they say, it gives Obama and any successor carte blanche to attack any individual or any nation without further approval from Congress.

The Wall Street Journal.

Defense Bill Would ‘Affirm’ War With al Qaeda

Even though Osama bin Laden is dead, Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon (R., Calif.) wants to remind Washington: The war on terror ain’t over.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Howard McKeon (R., Calif.) (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
And with that in mind, Rep. McKeon, who chairs the House Armed Services Committee, is pushing for Congress to renew the 2001 authorization to use military force against terrorists.
The chairman on Monday revealed his version of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2012, and his mark of the bill includes a provision that “would affirm that the United States is engaged in an armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces.”
Critics say provisions in the bill are tantamount to a congressional declaration of war that could give the president broad new powers over private business and government spending.
One provision seeks to bolster the Authorization for Military Force, passed by Congress in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, which the Bush and Obama administration have used as legal authority to conduct military and intelligence operations in Afghanistan and other countries where al Qaeda affiliates have sprung up.
The American Civil Liberties Union and more than a dozen mostly left leaning groups wrote a letter to members of the House Armed Services Committee to oppose the “reaffirmation” saying that it essentially declares war and gives broad powers to the president that normally belong to Congress.
[...]

15/5/11 - Palestinians, Syrians, Hizballah smash through three Israeli borders

DEBKAfile Special Report May 15, 2011, 3:49 PM (GMT+02:00)

Tags:  Syria   Golan   Nakba Day   Hizballah   Lebanon   Gaza 

Majdal al Shams, Israeli Golan

Israeli forces on high alert for Nakba Day, Sunday, May 15, failed to seal three national borders on the Golan, Lebanon and the Gaza Strip against large-scale incursions. Dozens of Syrians and Hizballah invaders were able to overrun the Israeli Golan village of Majd al Shams and hoist Syrian and Palestinian flags in the main square; Hizballah-sponsored Palestinian demonstrators breached the Lebanese-Israeli border and damaged IDF installations; and hundreds of Palestinians battered the Erez crossing from the Gaza Strip.
The interlopers sustained dozens of casualties including fatalities from Israeli fire these events in which Israelis too were injured. In the Gaza sector 40-50 casualties are reported. Lebanon reports five demonstrators killed.

On the Syrian border, Israeli snipers and helicopters belatedly opened fire to halt the thousands attempting to cross the border, but dozens got through to Majd al Shams. Some were killed or injured by Israeli fire. Three Israel civilians were wounded. Israeli tanks were speeded to the Syrian border to halt the incident.
debkafile reports that despite the high IDF border alert for Nakba Day invasions from neighboring Arab countries, Israeli forces were not deployed in sufficient strength on the Golan border, even though debkafile reported Saturday, May 14 that Damascus planned trouble on the border with Israel as a diversion from the rebellion against the Assad regime.

 We also quoted Bashar Assad's cousin Ramy Makhlouf as threatening Tuesday, May 10, that if the Americans and Europeans did not stop backing the Syrian anti-regime uprising, Damascus would go to war on Israel and/or arm West Bank Palestinians and Israeli Arabs for action against Israel.

While attempting to block demonstrators at Ras a-Maroun from reaching Israel, the Lebanese army is also on high alert on the Syrian border. Fighting between Syrian forces and anti-regime protesters has escalated in Syrian border villages, centering on Tall Kalakh near Homs.
developing...

Israel-Palestinian violence erupts on three borders

• Play Video Mideast Video:Thousands of Palestinians rally in Ramallah for Nakba AFP
• Play Video Mideast Video:Four die in Lebanon border shootings Reuters
• Play Video Mideast Video:Violence marks Israel anniversary Reuters

By Haim Shafir Haim Shafir – Sun May 15, 8:56 am ET

MAJDAL SHAMS, Golan Heights (Reuters) – Violence erupted on Israel's borders with Syria, Lebanon and Gaza on Sunday, leaving at least eight dead and dozens wounded, as Palestinians marked what they term "the catastrophe" of Israel's founding in 1948.

Israeli troops shot at protesters in three separate locations to prevent crowds from crossing Israeli frontier lines in the deadliest such confrontation in years.

Israeli and Syrian media reports said Israeli gunfire killed four people after dozens of Palestinian refugees infiltrated the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights from Syria, along a disputed border that has been quiet for decades.

Witnesses on the nearby Lebanese frontier said four Palestinians were killed after Israeli forces fired at rock-throwing protesters to prevent them from crossing the border.
The Lebanese army had also earlier fired in the air in an attempt to hold back the crowds.
On Israel's tense southern border with the Gaza Strip, Israeli gunfire wounded 60 Palestinians as demonstrators approached Israel's fence with the Hamas Islamist-run enclave, medical workers said.
In Tel Aviv, Israel's commercial hub, a truck driven by an Arab Israeli slammed into vehicles and pedestrians, killing one man and injuring 17 people.

Police were trying to determine whether the incident was an accident or an attack. Witnesses said the driver, who was arrested, ran amok with his truck in downtown traffic.
ALERT

Israeli security forces had been on alert for violence on Sunday, the day Palestinians mark the "Nakba," or catastrophe, of Israel's founding in a 1948 war, when hundreds of thousands of their brethren fled or were forced to leave their homes.

In the Druze village of Majdal Shams, on the Golan Heights captured by Israel from Syria in 1967, Mayor Dolan Abu Salah said between 40 and 50 Nakba demonstrators from Syria tore through the frontier fence.
Hundreds of protesters flooded the lush green valley that marks the border area, waving Palestinian flags. Israeli troops attempted to mend the breached fence, firing at what the army described as infiltrators.
"We are seeing here an Iranian provocation, on both the Syrian and the Lebanese frontiers, to try to exploit the Nakba day commemorations," said the army's chief spokesman, Lieutenant-Colonel Yoav Mordechai.
Syria is home to 470,000 Palestinian refugees and its leadership, now facing fierce internal unrest, had in previous years prevented protesters from reaching the frontier fence.

"This appears to be a cynical and transparent act by the Syrian leadership to deliberately create a crisis on the border so as to distract attention from the very real problems that regime is facing at home," said a senior Israeli government official who declined to be named.

In a Nakba protest in the occupied West Bank, Palestinian youths threw rocks at Israeli soldiers, who fired tear gas and rubber bullets in a clash at the Israeli military checkpoint outside the city of Ramallah -- a constant flashpoint.

A Palestinian teenager was shot dead during protests in Jerusalem on Friday. Police said it was unclear who had shot him and they were investigating.

That shooting took place in the tense neighborhood of Silwan in East Jerusalem, where violence regularly breaks out between Palestinian stone throwers and Israeli police and Jewish settlers.
Palestinians want East Jerusalem as the capital of the state they intend to establish in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

(Additional reporting by Nidal al-Mughrabi in Gaza, Jeffrey Heller, Dan Williams and Ori Lewis in Jerusalem, Ali Sawafta in Ramallah and Yara Bayoumy in Beirut, Writing by Douglas Hamilton; editing by Crispian Balmer)

13/5/11 - Tention building in Israel

Israeli-Palestinian tensions rise in Jerusalem, West Bank as Nakba Day nears

Israel police on high alert as 'Nakba' events begin

Israel May Rush Deployment of Advanced Antimissile System

Israeli soldiers train to shoot down missiles

Egypt turmoil helping arms smuggling to Gaza-Israel

Egyptians urge rulers to step up Palestinian support

Jordanians protest for Palestinian right of return

Sanctions hold up Iran nuclear drive: UN report

Iran operating 'worldwide smuggling network'

Thousands protest across Syria; at least 1 killed

Russia warns West against 'Libya scenario' in Syria

Pakistan suicide bombs kill 80 to avenge bin Laden

Apocalypse Angst Adds to Terrorist Threat as Rich Russians Acquire Bunkers

11/5/11 - Tention building in the Middle east

Tention building in the Middle east 

Cairo to move Meshaal's Hamas base to Gaza - Assad threatens Israel with war

Hamas accepts 1967 borders, but will never recognize Israel, top official says

Barak calls on international community to demand Hamas recognize Israel

Following US killing of Osama bin Laden, Obama seeks opportunity to lay new Mideast strategy

Egypt Plans March to Gaza

IDF reinforcing W. Bank troops ahead of 'Nakba Day'

UN chief concerned by Egypt religious violence

Ahmadinejad: Iran fighting a righteous battle with evil forces

Iran gets another nuclear fuel batch from Russia

Deadly clashes and gunfire rattle Syrian cities

Syria's Assad using overwhelming force to gain the upper hand

Rebels: Gadhafi forces pushed back from Misrata

Al Qaeda Leader Vows Revenge So Fierce That U.S. Will Miss Osama Bin Laden

7/5/11 - Rights group: Syria uprising death toll reaches 800

 

Rights group: Syria uprising death toll reaches 800

Syrian tanks storm the mostly Sunni city of Banias, raising sectarian tensions; six civilians killed, including four women.

Syrian security forces have shot dead at least 800 civilians since pro-democracy protests erupted seven weeks ago, Syrian rights groups Sawasiah said on Saturday. 

The organization, which was founded by jailed human rights lawyer Mohannad al-Hassani, said in a statement sent to Reuters it had the names of the 800 civilians killed. Among them were 220 killed in a tank-backed army attack on the city of Daraa.

	Syrians living in Greece burn posters of Syrian President Bashar Assad, in solidarity with anti-government protesters in Syria, outside the Syrian embassy in Athens, May 6, 2011.

On Saturday, Syrian tanks stormed the mostly Sunni city of Banias, a rights campaigner said, raising sectarian tensions in a country swept by protests against the rule of President Bashar Assad, an Allawite.
At least six civilians were killed in the attack, including four women, human rights campaigners said.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights confirmed the death toll. The Observatory said the six where killed during the attack on Banias and demanded the Syrian authorities allow an independent committee to investigate the deaths. 

The attack on Banias came hours after the United States, reacting to the death of 27 protesters on Friday, threatened to take new steps against Syria's rulers unless they stopped killing and harassing their people.
The army entered Banias, a coastal city of 50,000 people, from three directions, advancing into Sunni districts but not Alawite neighbourhoods, the campaigner said. 

Most communication with Banias has been cut but the campaigner said he was able to contact several residents. 

"Residents are reporting the sound of heavy gunfire and seeing Syrian navy boats off the Banias coast. Sunni and mixed neighborhoods are totally besieged now," said the campaigner, who did not want to be identified.
Banias has seen some of the most persistent demonstrations since an uprising erupted in the southern city of Daraa seven weeks ago demanding political freedom and an end to corruption. 

Authorities said the coastal city was a "center of Salafist terrorism" and said armed groups had killed soldiers near the city. Salafism is an ultra-conservative brand Sunni Islam. 

Civic leaders in Banias, issued a statement denying the accusation and saying the authorities were trying to spread fear among Alawites, who occupy most senior positions in the army and security apparatus.
Assad said the protesters were part of a foreign conspiracy to cause sectarian strife.
His father Hafez Assad brutally suppressed an armed Islamist uprising in 1982 in which 30,000 people were killed. 

Mostly Sunni districts of Banias have been under the control of protesters since Assad loyalists, known as "al-shabbiha", fired at residents from speeding cars on April 10, after a large demonstration that demanded the "overthrow of the regime". 


International sanctions

International criticism has mounted against Assad, who is trying to maintain his family's four-decade grip on power in the country of 20 million. 

European Union governments agreed on Friday to impose asset freezes and travel restrictions on up to 14 Syrian officials and to impose sanctions in response to Assad's violent crackdown. 

The United States imposed sanctions of its own last week against some figures in the Syrian government. On Friday it threatened to step up the pressure to try to stop the violence. 

Officials give a lower death toll and say half the fatalities have been soldiers and police, blaming "armed terrorist groups" for the violence. They say demonstrators are few in number and do not represent the majority of Syrians. 

"The United States believes that Syria's deplorable actions toward its people warrant a strong international response," White House press secretary Jay Carney said in a statement. 

"Absent significant change in the Syrian government's current approach, including an end to the government's killing of protesters ... the United States and its international 

partners will take additional steps to make clear our strong opposition to the Syrian government's treatment of its people."
Protests broke out after Friday prayers in cities across Syria, from Banias on the Mediterranean coast to Qamishly in the Kurdish east, demanding an end to Assad's autocratic rule. Friday's bloodiest confrontation was in the city of Homs where 15 protesters were killed, activist Ammar Qurabi said.
State news agency SANA said on Saturday that "terrorist groups" had killed 11 soldiers and policemen in Homs, listing the names of those dead. The figure was put at 5 on Friday. 

Wissam Tarif an activist outside Syria said witnesses told him nine soldiers defected in Homs to the protesters and may have clashed with other troops. 

Four protesters were killed by security forces in Deir al-Zor, a local tribal leader said, the first deaths reported from the region which produces most of Syria's 380,000 barrels
per day of oil in seven weeks of unrest. 

A Western diplomat said 7,000 people had been arrested since the demonstrations broke out on March 18 in Daraa, where an ultra-loyalist division led by Assad's brother Maher shelled and machinegunned the old quarter last Saturday, residents said.
The United States condemned the assault as "barbaric".

More on this topic

• Syria tanks storm coastal Sunni district of as protests persist
• U.S. threatens additional Syria sanctions as violent crackdowns continue
• Witnesses: 25 killed by Syria security forces during Friday protests

6/5/11 - Osama was planning attacks on US railways, big cities

Osama was planning attacks on US railways, big cities

2011-05-06 09:07:42

Invest in Malaysia Ads by Google Learn more about Investment Opportunities in Malaysia pemandu.gov.my/etp

Washington: A treasure trove of materials taken from Osama bin Laden's hideout in Pakistan indicates that Al Qaeda was mulling attacks on key US cities and railways timed to significant dates, according to US officials. Material recovered from the raid on bin Laden's Abbottabad hideout indicated that in February 2010, Al Qaeda members discussed a plan to derail trains in the US on the 10th anniversary of the Sep 11, 2001 attacks by placing obstructions on tracks, multiple media reports said. Other material gathered from the site also suggests that Al Qaeda was particularly interested in striking Washington, New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, the CNN said. Obama lays wreath at 9/11 Ground Zero, says 'we never forget' US authorities have found that Al Qaeda appears especially interested in striking on significant dates like America's July 4 Independence Day, Christmas and the opening day of the United Nations. As a precaution, the Department of Homeland Security on Thursday sent out an alert advising federal, state and local agencies about the new evidence of a possible rail plot. "As one option, Al Qaeda was looking into trying to tip a train by tampering with the rails so that the train would fall off the track at either a valley or a bridge," said the DHS advisory. After reviewing computer files and seized documents, American intelligence analysts have concluded that bin Laden played a direct role for years in plotting terror attacks from his Abbottabad hide-out, The New York Times said citing US officials. The materials, along with others reviewed in the intelligence cache, have given intelligence officials a much richer picture of the Qaeda founder's leadership of the network as he tried to elude a global dragnet, it said. "He wasn't just a figurehead," the Times cited one American official as saying. "He continued to plot and plan, to come up with ideas about targets, and to communicate those ideas to other senior Qaeda leaders." The fact that Bin Laden was found not in Pakistan's rugged tribal areas but on the outskirts of an affluent town less than an hour's drive from the capital, Islamabad, has prompted a rethinking of the widespread notion that he had little control over the rest of Al Qaeda, the daily said. If sovereignty is breached, US ties will be reviewed: Kayani Other gleanings from the roughly 100 pieces of computer gear seized on Sunday included possible leads on the whereabouts of other senior Al Qaeda leaders, the Washington Post reported. While intelligence officials declined to comment on specific tips, a key congressional leader briefed on the findings suggested that the search for Al Qaeda's No. 2 leader was in a newly active phase, it said. The task of identifying and exploiting intelligence tips has been assigned extraordinary urgency, since the raid likely alerted top Al Qaeda figures that their safe houses and plans may have been compromised, the Post said citing a US official.

6/5/11 - Al-Qaida vows revenge for Osama bin Laden's death

Al-Qaida vows revenge for Osama bin Laden's death

 

 

Reuters – A supporter of the Pakistani religious party Jamiat-e-ulema-e-Islam holds an image of Osama bin Laden …

• Slideshow:Osama bin Laden Dead
• Play Video Video:Osama Bin Laden Dead: CIA Next Door ABC News
• Play Video Video:Obama to Congratulate Navy SEAL Team 6 ABC News

By MAGGIE MICHAEL, Associated Press Maggie Michael, Associated Press – 6 mins ago

CAIRO – Al-Qaida vowed to keep fighting the United States and avenge the death of Osama bin Laden, which it acknowledged for the first time Friday in an Internet statement apparently designed to convince followers that it will remain vigorous and intact even after its founder's demise.

Al-Qaida's plots are usually large-scale and involve planning over months or even years. But Western intelligence officials say they are seeing increased chatter about cheap, small-scale attacks — perhaps by individuals or small extremist groups inspired to take revenge for the killing.

"USA, you will pay!" chanted more than 100 participants in a pro-bin Laden protest outside the U.S. Embassy in London on Friday.

A Western intelligence official said no concrete threat has emerged so far that authorities considered credible. "There have been mentions of shootings, bombings and random violence, though it is not surprising, given bin Laden's death," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Authorities in the U.S. and Europe chose not to elevate threat levels.

Interpol has asked law enforcement agencies in 188 countries to be on alert for retaliatory attacks. Communities have been warned to report anything suspicious. Embassies and some American businesses have added new security measures.

Despite the Internet chatter, reaction in the Islamic world to bin Laden's death has been relatively muted compared with the rage that he long inspired, raising questions about his relevance in the Middle East — a region that has been changed by a wave of pro-democracy uprisings.

The al-Qaida statement, entitled "You lived as a good man, you died as a martyr," did not name a successor to bin Laden. His deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, is now the most prominent figure in the group and a likely contender to take his place.

"The blood of the holy warrior sheik, Osama bin Laden, God bless him, is too precious to us and to all Muslims to go in vain," the statement said. "We will remain, God willing, a curse chasing the Americans and their agents, following them outside and inside their countries."
"Soon, God willing, their happiness will turn to sadness," it said, "their blood will be mingled with their tears."

Click image to see photos of bin Laden

AP/Mohammad Sajjad

Although the statement's authenticity could not be independently confirmed, it was considered to be authentic. It was posted on militant websites Friday by the al-Fajr Center, al-Qaida's online media distribution network, and the writing style was typical for al-Qaida. The statement was issued in the name of the organization's General Command and dated Tuesday, the day after bin Laden's death.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said U.S. officials are aware of the statement and the threat. "What it does obviously is acknowledge the obvious, which is that Osama bin Laden was killed," said Carney. "We're quite aware of the potential for (terrorist) activity and are highly vigilant on that matter for that reason."
Despite the new threats against the United States, the overall theme of the al-Qaida statement was that of continuity for the organization. Much of the 11-paragraph statement was dedicated to underlining that al-Qaida would live on, depicting him as another in a line of "martyrs" from the group.

"Sheik Osama didn't build an organization to die when he dies," the statement read. "The university of faith, Quran and jihad from which bin Laden graduated will not close its doors," it added.

"The soldiers of Islam will continue in groups and united, plotting and planning without getting bored, tired, with determination, without giving up until striking a blow," the statement said.
It said bin Laden was killed "along an established path followed by the best of those who came before him and those who will come after him."

The acknowledgment by al-Qaida should remove doubt among all but the most die-hard conspiracy theorists that bin Laden is in fact dead.

The need to provide proof was behind some arguments that the U.S. should release a photo of the slain terror leader. President Barack Obama has chosen to withhold the photo.

Earlier Friday, hundreds of members of radical Islamic parties protested in several Pakistan cities against the U.S. raid. Many chanted "Osama is alive" and criticized the U.S. for violating the country's sovereignty.
In the statement, al-Qaida also called on Pakistanis to revolt against the country's leaders to "cleanse the shame." And it said that an audio message bin Laden recorded a week before his death would be issued soon.

The writers of the al-Qaida statement appeared unaware of the U.S. announcement that bin Laden's body had been buried at sea. The statement warned against mishandling or mistreating bin Laden's body and demanded that it be handed over to his family, saying "any harm (to the body) will open more doors of evil, and there will be no one to blame but yourselves."

There had been hope that bin Laden's death would cause the Afghan Taliban to rethink its ties with al-Qaida — a union the U.S. insists must end if the insurgents want to talk peace. The foundation of their relationship was believed to be rooted in bin Laden's long friendship with the Taliban's reclusive leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar.

But on Friday, the Afghan Taliban issued a statement saying bin Laden's death will only boost morale among insurgents fighting the U.S. and NATO.

The Taliban praised bin Laden for his sacrifice in the Afghan war against the Soviets in the 1980s and said anyone who believes his death will undermine the current conflict is displaying a "lack of insight."
Al-Zawahri, an Egyptian who is the most likely successor to bin Laden, is a less charismatic, unifying figure. He is believed to lack bin Laden's ability to bring together the many nationalities and ethnic groups that make up al-Qaida. His appointment could further fracture an organization that is thought to be increasingly decentralized.

Al-Zawahri has long been considered the operational head of al-Qaida while bin Laden was assumed to be an inspirational figure who was uninvolved in operations.

But documents Navy SEALs seized in Monday's raid on the hideout in the Pakistani town of Abbottabad suggest that bin Laden may have been more involved in operations than had been thought.
The documents reveal plans for derailing an American train on the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2011 attacks. Counterterrorism officials said they believe the plot was in the initial planning stages at the time.
Al-Qaida, which carried out the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, has never abandoned its hope of again attacking the U.S. homeland.

U.S. Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican from Maine, urged that the country's threat level be stepped up while the material seized from bin Laden's compound is reviewed.

In Europe, security officials said there is no specific plot to justify raising the threat level.
British cleric Anjem Choudary, who helped organize Friday's demonstration outside the U.S. Embassy in London, said revenge attacks in Britain and abroad were likely. Choudary used to head the outlawed al-Muhajiroun group and is now a member of the Muslims Against Crusades group.

"I think Britain is more likely to face a 7/7 today than ever," he said in reference to the London suicide bombings on July 7, 2005. "Osama bin Laden was a high-profile leader. If the Americans talk of justice, they shouldn't have killed him. The next attacks will likely be high profile and could very well happen in Europe or in the U.S."

He said he had no knowledge of any planned attacks.
___
Associated Press writers Paisley Dodds in London and Lolita C. Baldor in Washington contributed to this report.