U.S. terror attack seen apt to follow ‘08 vote

Extremists view transition as window of opportunity, say intelligence experts.

When the next president takes office in January, he or she will likely receive an intelligence brief warning that Islamic terrorists will attempt to exploit the transition in power by planning an attack on America, intelligence experts say.

After all, that is what happened to Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush at a time when their national security teams and their counterterrorism plans were in flux.

Islamic terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in February 1993, in Mr. Clinton’s second month as president. Al Qaeda’s Sept. 11 attacks came in the Bush presidency’s first year. The strikes on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon happened as the White House national security director was formulating a comprehensive plan for combating Osama bin Laden’s terror network, which had declared war on the United States.

The pattern is clear to some national security experts. Terrorists pay particular attention to a government in transition as the most opportune window to launch an attack.

“If I were asked by the newly elected president, I would strongly encourage him to be extremely vigilant during the transition period and within the first six months of his administration against an attack by al Qaeda on American interests at home or abroad,” said Bart Bechtel, a retired CIA operations officer and assistant chief academic officer at Henley-Putnam University.

Mr. Bechtel said he thinks al Qaeda operatives will debate a future course based on who is elected.

Both Sens. Hillary Clinton and John McCain serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain, a former Navy fighter pilot, have had extensive exposure to military security issues.

Both have attacked first-term Sen. Barack Obama’s ability to handle national security.

Mr. McCain, Arizona Republican, has focused on Mr. Obama’s stated willingness to meet with any world leader, including Iran’s, without preconditions. Mrs. Clinton, New York Democrat, ran TV ads implying Mr. Obama is not qualified to manage an international crisis.

“I could see al Qaeda waiting to determine who was going to be the president and depending on which it is, taking an initial measure,” Mr. Bechtel said. “For instance, Obama may be viewed as someone who will accomplish what al Qaeda would like him to do, which is get out of the Middle East, and give him an opportunity to move in that direction. Failing that, they may decide to test him with a substantial attack on America or some American interest and see how he reacts.”

A U.S. intelligence official declined to comment on how the next president will be briefed.

Mr. Obama, Illinois Democrat, has vowed to remove all combat troops from Iraq within 16 months. He regularly has referred to the war against terror as centered in Afghanistan, while the Bush administration takes a broader view and sees Iraq as an opportunity to inflict a battlefield loss on al Qaeda. The White House has trumpeted the fact that the county has suffered no homeland terror strikes since Sept. 11, 2001.

Retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, a former Air Force chief of staff and an Obama campaign co-chairman, told The Washington Times that Mr. Obama’s rivals are underestimating his ability to meet a challenge. Gen. McPeak likened him to Abraham Lincoln.

“I think people are only now beginning to realize that Barack is not your run-of-the-mill, ordinary Illinois politician,” he said. “He’s more like another Illinois politician who everybody underestimated.”

Gen. McPeak added, “I feel bad about giving Barack advice because every time I do, I know that he’s thought about it already. So I would draw him aside and say, ‘The minute you’re inaugurated, you will be tested.’ He’ll say, ‘Oh, you mean like Kennedy was with the Bay of Pigs?’ He’ll show me some way that he’s thought about that some time ago. The guy is absolutely scary smart. The real mistake al Qaeda can make is the one everybody else makes of underestimating the man.”

Mr. Bechtel said bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders are likely weighing their next step right now.

“They are in a wait-and-see situation right now,” he said. “They run the risk, if they attack before the election, of really influencing the way the election goes, to their detriment. If there’s an attack, I really believe McCain is going to run away with the election, and I don’t think they want that. I think they really would like Obama as their first choice and Clinton as their second.”

Kenneth Katzman, a terrorism specialist at the Congressional Research Service, said “Al Qaeda has a pattern of testing new American leaders.”

“Even now, al Qaeda is probably trying to plan something for after the U.S. inauguration,” he said. “I think to a certain extent, al Qaeda tested President Clinton’s administration several times. The response was ineffective. I think al Qaeda concluded it could attempt something as ambitious as 9/11, but concluded the time was better after a new president, who would not have time to review his strategy on al Qaeda. The time settled on was the summer or early fall, after a new president was inaugurated. They chose September because they wanted all the officials to be back at their desks from summer vacations.”

A Congressional Research Service report last month noted that January will mark the first change in administrations since the 2001 al Qaeda attacks.

“Whether an incident of national security significance occurs just before or soon after the presidential transition, the actions or inactions of the outgoing administration may have a long-lasting effect on the new president’s ability to effectively safeguard U.S. interests and may affect the legacy of the outgoing president,” the report states.

The report urges the Bush administration to deliver extensive threat briefings to the president-elect’s national security team.

Congress foresaw such a need when it wrote the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. The law allows for presidential candidates to obtain pre-election security clearances for its chosen transition officials so they can immediately be briefed on security threats by the outgoing administration.

On al Qaeda’s ability to attack America again, Mr. Bechtel said, “I think they are still somewhat fractured. If you want to look at it as a piece of window glass, it’s broken, but there are lots of sharp pieces out there. I think within the tribal areas of Pakistan, they feel pretty darn comfortable.”

Washington Times | Rowan Scarborough | Monday, May 26, 2008

$70 Billion a Year for Drug Laws While Predators Remain Free

Outdated drug laws intended to lock non-violent offenders in jail results in more leeway and fewer arrests for violent criminals and predators.

(SALEM, Ore.) - Imagine a town, somewhere in the United States. At the local police station, Officer Joe is pouring himself a cup of coffee at the start of his shift, when a call comes in. A citizen thinks she smells marijuana coming from her neighbor’s house.

Joe proceeds to respond to the call, driving the 30 or so odd miles to the house. Just then, another call comes in. An armed man has taken 27 children hostage at the local elementary school - now 25 miles away from Joe’s location.

In this extreme example, there can be no doubt that Joe should abandon his investigation of the marijuana smell and proceed immediately to the school. No officer in his right mind would consider putting children’s lives at risk, in order to pursue the smell of cannabis, would he?

But on a larger scale, when we fund drug enforcement to the tune of 70 billion dollars every year, we are effectively putting lives at risk by not funding other important police work.

Officers are only charged with enforcing the laws that “we the people,” through our legislators enact, and according to the priorities these legislators reflect through their funding of all of the various departments of law enforcement. We must demand that our leaders choose to prioritize the health and safety of our nation’s communities, over policing the personal morals of the citizens of the “Land of the Free.”

As a nation, we’ve lost sight of the forest for the trees. We’ve charged law enforcement officers with the awesome responsibility of not only preventing violent crime and apprehending violent criminals, but we’ve further empowered them to act as the morality police, saving America from the evils of everything from cigarette smoke to cannabis to sex toys to, of all the crazy things - certain kinds of fat! Where does it end?

The U.S. currently incarcerates more people for non-violent crimes, than for violent crimes. We lock up more of our citizens per capita than any other nation, even Russia, China and Cuba. Yet, according to national data from the FBI for 2006, the clearance rate for all violent crime was an abysmal 44.3%. Our current approach is not working. In all of this often politically-driven chaos, our priorities have been perverted.

It’s time to reprioritize.

For decades we’ve waged a “War on Drugs,” supposedly designed to prevent and deter the abuse of ten substances through their prohibition. Instead of encouraging our citizens to abide by the laws of the land, this war on some drugs encourages entrepreneurial anarchy in a game “won” by survival of the most corrupt and callously capitalistic.

It has driven the major funding for organized crime and terrorism, created and maintains a black market so enormous that it rivals the wealthiest industries on Earth, and which has become directly responsible for far too much of the vigilante violence in our communities. It encourages everyone who would dare to taste the forbidden fruit to live outside of, and develop disrespect and disregard for, the laws of our land.

Instead of seeing heroes among police officers, suburbanites like me grow up to become adults who fear law enforcement. We view them as potential threats, terrorizing patients who need medical marijuana and pursuing and persecuting cannabis consumers, while child rapists are given slaps on the wrist - some never spending a single day in jail, even for raping multiple children. And that only includes the small percentage of predators that are caught.

Additionally, NIDA reports indicate that survivors of sexual assault are 4-10 times more likely to abuse illegal drugs, than those who do not suffer abuse. Incarcerating non-violent survivors of rape for using drugs to self-medicate anxiety, depression and other symptoms of PTSD, while allowing their perpetrators to roam our streets with impunity, does not make us safer.

A legislator once challenged me on the issue of medical marijuana. He said that he didn’t want to support an amendment to a funding bill which would have protected medical marijuana patients. His reason for objecting, however, surprised me. He said that he didn’t want to single out marijuana from every other medicine. He wanted to see all drugs regulated equally.

This makes perfect sense to me. As a patient with Crohn’s Disease, who relies on medical marijuana to ease severe symptoms, I couldn’t really argue with his logic. I could only ask him whether he felt it would be a wise investment of our scarce resources to send the DEA to break down my door, terrorize my five young children, and haul me off to jail, just for taking my medicine? He had to admit that would be a very poor use of our resources, and I’m thrilled to say he’s supported the Rohrabacher - Hinchey Medical Marijuana Amendment for four years in a row.

I keep coming back to that meeting with the Congressman in my mind, because I’d very much like to see his vision come to fruition. By regulating all drugs equally, effectively ending prohibition once and for all, we could accomplish what the originators of prohibition first promised - actually reducing drug abuse and violent crime in our nation.

No longer can we afford to funnel tens of billions of dollars annually into a “War on Drugs,” which effectively ensures the perpetual funding of organized crime and terrorism. We must not waste the precious time of our law enforcement officers in chasing down the sick and dying who need medical marijuana, while child rapists roam our communities, knowing that their chances of even getting caught, let alone doing any time in prison, are very low.

Do we want to cut crime in our nation by half?

Do we want to eliminate drug dealing overnight?

Do we want our police officers spending our scarce resources to pursue people who prefer cannabis to cocktails, or do we have more important work for them to do?

It all comes down to our priorities.

To learn more about prohibition and why “cops say legalize drugs,” please visit: LEAP.cc.

Another site worth visiting on this subject is: medicalcannabis.com.

For more information about medical marijuana and prohibition, please visit: ParentsEndingProhibition.org (currently undergoing revision).

Salem News | Erin Hildebrandt | Saturday, May 24, 2008

Video | McCain’s straight talk express has derailed

Video | RFK Jr. on Media Consolidation

South America nations found union

The leaders of 12 South American nations have formed a regional body aimed at boosting economic and political integration in the region.

At a summit in Brazil, they signed a treaty which created the Union of South American Nations (Unasur).

Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said the move showed that South America was becoming a “global player”.

But tensions between several members will make it difficult for the group to achieve its goals, observers say.

Mr Lula said at the summit in Brasilia that the differences between some Unasur governments were a sign of vitality in the region.

“The instability some want to see in our continent is a sign of life, especially political life,” Mr Lula said.

“There’s no democracy without people [protesting] in the streets,” he added.

The treaty envisages that Unasur will have a revolving presidency and bi-annual meetings of foreign ministers.

Prior to the Brasilia summit, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez described the “empire” of the United States as Unasur’s “number one enemy”.

Mr Chavez is embroiled in a bitter diplomatic row with his Colombian counterpart Alvaro Uribe - a staunch US ally - over Colombian claims that Venezuela has been helping to finance the activities of the Colombian Farc rebels.

The Unasur members are Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela.

BBC | Friday, May 23, 2008

Olbermann on Hillary’s RFK Assassination Remark

Pentagon public relations program investigated

The Pentagon’s internal watchdog is investigating a government public relations effort that relied on retired military officers to defend the administration’s Iraq war policies.

The House this past week passed an amendment to a defense authorization bill calling for reviews by both the inspector general’s office and the Government Accountability Office, Congress’ investigative arm.

The Pentagon suspended the program last month after The New York Times reported that retired officers who acted as military analysts for major news outlets were given plum access to the Pentagon. The analysts, many of whom had undisclosed ties to military contractors, received regular briefings by then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and a sponsored trip to the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba.

A Defense spokesman, Lt. Col. Brian Maka, said Saturday the inspector general’s review will look at whether special access to Pentagon leaders “may have given the contractors a competitive advantage.”

Earlier this month, 41 House members urged the Defense Department’s inspector general to investigate and look into whether the program was illegal.

The GAO also said it was reviewing the program and whether it violated policies barring use of government money to spread propaganda in the United States.

During debate on the amendment, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., said, “I was sorely distressed when I learned of the fact that there were a good number of former military officers that were given special access, many of whom had conflicts of interest in various defense businesses, and they were considered military television analysts.”

The amendment’s sponsor, Rep. Paul Hodes, D-N.H., argued that Americans “were spun by Bush administration message multipliers. They were fed administration talking points believing they were getting independent military analysis. … This amendment deals with what strikes at the very heart of our democracy: We must trust our military. We must have the truth.”

But the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, California Rep. Duncan Hunter, said “the idea that somehow Don Rumsfeld got these people in a room and told them what to say, if you believe that, you don’t believe in the independence of these general officers. None of them are used to having people tell them what to say. They’re independent. They’re a source of information to us.”

AP | Saturday, May 24, 2008

Buffett sees “long, deep” U.S. recession

The United States is already in a recession and it will be longer as well as deeper than many people expect, U.S. investor Warren Buffett said in an interview published in German magazine Der Spiegel on Saturday.

He said the United States was “already in recession” and added: “Perhaps not in the sense that economists would define it” with two consecutive quarters of negative growth.

“But the people are already feeling the effects,” said Buffett, the world’s richest man. “It will be deeper and last longer than many think.”

But he said that won’t stop him from investing in selected companies and said he remained interested in well-managed German family-owned companies.

“If the world were falling apart I’d still invest in companies,” he said.

Buffett also renewed his criticism of derivatives trading.

“It’s not right that hundreds of thousands of jobs are being eliminated, that entire industrial sectors in the real economy are being wiped out by financial bets even though the sectors are actually in good health.”

Buffett complained about the lack of effective controls.

“That’s the problem,” he said. “You can’t steer it, you can’t regulate it anymore. You can’t get the genie back in the bottle.”

(Writing by Erik Kirschbaum; editing by James Jukwey)

Reuters | Saturday, May 24, 2008

Energy fears looming, new survivalists prepare

(05-25) 01:29 PDT Buskirk, N.Y. (AP) –

A few years ago, Kathleen Breault was just another suburban grandma, driving countless hours every week, stopping for lunch at McDonald’s, buying clothes at the mall, watching TV in the evenings.

That was before Breault heard an author talk about the bleak future of the world’s oil supply. Now, she’s preparing for the world as we know it to disappear.

Breault cut her driving time in half. She switched to a diet of locally grown foods near her upstate New York home and lost 70 pounds. She sliced up her credit cards, banished her television and swore off plane travel. She began relying on a wood-burning stove.

“I was panic-stricken,” the 50-year-old recalled, her voice shaking. “Devastated. Depressed. Afraid. Vulnerable. Weak. Alone. Just terrible.”

Convinced the planet’s oil supply is dwindling and the world’s economies are heading for a crash, some people around the country are moving onto homesteads, learning to live off their land, conserving fuel and, in some cases, stocking up on guns they expect to use to defend themselves and their supplies from desperate crowds of people who didn’t prepare.

The exact number of people taking such steps is impossible to determine, but anecdotal evidence suggests that the movement has been gaining momentum in the last few years.

These energy survivalists are not leading some sort of green revolution meant to save the planet. Many of them believe it is too late for that, seeing signs in soaring fuel and food prices and a faltering U.S. economy, and are largely focused on saving themselves.

Some are doing it quietly, giving few details of their preparations - afraid that revealing such information as the location of their supplies will endanger themselves and their loved ones. They envision a future in which the nation’s cities will be filled with hungry, desperate refugees forced to go looking for food, shelter and water.

“There’s going to be things that happen when people can’t get things that they need for themselves and their families,” said Lynn-Marie, who believes cities could see a rise in violence as early as 2012.

Lynn-Marie asked to be identified by her first name to protect her homestead in rural western Idaho. Many of these survivalists declined to speak to The Associated Press for similar reasons.

These survivalists believe in “peak oil,” the idea that world oil production is set to hit a high point and then decline. Scientists who support idea say the amount of oil produced in the world each year has already or will soon begin a downward slide, even amid increased demand. But many scientists say such a scenario will be avoided as other sources of energy come in to fill the void.

On the PeakOil.com Web site, where upward of 800 people gathered on recent evenings, believers engage in a debate about what kind of world awaits.

Some members argue there will be no financial crash, but a slow slide into harder times. Some believe the federal government will respond to the loss of energy security with a clampdown on personal freedoms. Others simply don’t trust that the government can maintain basic services in the face of an energy crisis.

The powers that be, they’ve determined, will be largely powerless to stop what is to come.

Determined to guard themselves from potentially harsh times ahead, Lynn-Marie and her husband have already planted an orchard of about 40 trees and built a greenhouse on their 7 1/2 acres. They have built their own irrigation system. They’ve begun to raise chickens and pigs, and they’ve learned to slaughter them.

The couple have gotten rid of their TV and instead have been reading dusty old books published in their grandparents’ era, books that explain the simpler lifestyle they are trying to revive. Lynn-Marie has been teaching herself how to make soap. Her husband, concerned about one day being unable to get medications, has been training to become an herbalist.

By 2012, they expect to power their property with solar panels, and produce their own meat, milk and vegetables. When things start to fall apart, they expect their children and grandchildren will come back home and help them work the land. She envisions a day when the family may have to decide whether to turn needy people away from their door.

“People will be unprepared,” she said. “And we can imagine marauding hordes.”

So can Peter Laskowski. Living in a woodsy area outside of Montpelier, Vt., the 57-year-old retiree has become the local constable and a deputy sheriff for his county, as well as an emergency medical technician.

“I decided there was nothing like getting the training myself to deal with insurrections, if that’s a possibility,” said the former executive recruiter.

Laskowski is taking steps similar to environmentalists: conserving fuel, consuming less, studying global warming, and relying on local produce and craftsmen. Laskowski is powering his home with solar panels and is raising fish, geese, ducks and sheep. He has planted apple and pear trees and is growing lettuce, spinach and corn.

Whenever possible, he uses his bicycle to get into town.

“I remember the oil crisis in ‘73; I remember waiting in line for gas,” Laskowski said. “If there is a disruption in the oil supply it will be very quickly elevated into a disaster.”

Breault said she hopes to someday band together with her neighbors to form a self-sufficient community. Women will always be having babies, she notes, and she imagines her skills as a midwife will always be in demand.

For now, she is readying for the more immediate work ahead: There’s a root cellar to dig, fruit trees and vegetable plots to plant. She has put a bicycle on layaway, and soon she’ll be able to bike to visit her grandkids even if there is no oil at the pump.

Whatever the shape of things yet to come, she said, she’s done what she can to prepare.

AP | SAMANTHA GROSS | Sunday, May 25, 2008

Pakistan May Turn Over U.S. ‘Spies’ to Iran

In another sign of growing tensions with the United States, Pakistan is threatening to turn over to Iran six members of a tribal militant group Iran claims are “spies” for the CIA.

The group, Jundullah, operates in Baluchistan on both sides of the border between Iran and Pakistan and has carried out a number of violent attacks on Iranian army facilities and officers inside the country.

The CIA has denied any direct ties with the group, but U.S. officials tell ABC News U.S. intelligence officers frequently meet and advise Jundullah leaders, and current and former intelligence officers are working to prevent the men from being sent to Iran.

The six Jundullah members were taken into custody by Pakistani authorities last week, and the Iranian Mehr News Agency reported Pakistan would soon extradite the men to Iran, where they would likely be put on trial as spies and face execution.

Officials said the group’s leader, Abdel Malik Regi, was not among those arrested by Pakistan.

U.S. intelligence officials say they are aware of the developments with the Jundullah members and are said to be trying to block the extradition. In addition to causing turmoil in Iran, the officials say the group has been helpful in tracking al Qaeda figures trying to move through the Baluchistan region to Iran.

“The new Pakistan leaders have said they are going to do it, but they are saying a lot of things and trying to make a lot of deals,” said one U.S. official. “If they are seeking stability inside the country, why would they want to inflame people in this region?” the official asked.

Iranian officials claimed this week that the U.S. had “a hand” in an April 12 bomb attack at a mosque in Shiraz that killed 14 people, according to Mehr News Agency, quoting Iranian Intelligence Minister Gholam-Hossein Mohseni Ejei.

“The U.S. is behind many events in Iran and the region with the aim of bringing insecurity,” the intelligence minister reportedly said. “We have proper documentations in this regard,” the minister told the news agency’s reporters.

A senior U.S. official said Iran’s claims “are nonsense, ludicrous.”

The capture of the Jundullah members is seen by intelligence sources in the region as another indication that Pakistan’s new government is distancing itself from the U.S. and U.S. intelligence operations in the country.

Other such steps by Pakistan in recent days include an accord between Pakistan’s government and militant tribal leaders in the country’s Swat Valley region where Taliban figures are believed to be hiding. Increasingly, U.S. sources say, Pakistan is effectively handcuffing U.S. ground efforts against al Qaeda in the border region and emboldening the Taliban.

ABC News | RICHARD ESPOSITO and BRIAN ROSS | Friday, May 23, 2008

« Previous Page — Next Page »