Moscow has already conceded the blow of explosive findings of the investigation into the death of spy Alexander Litvinenko, according to which Vladimir Putin, “probably” approved the murder.
The first official reaction from Russia has come from an unnamed source according to RIA Novosti “Moscow will not accept the verdict of the British court” because “London has violated the presumption of innocence”.
The same source sees “illegitimate” that parts of the trial were maintained in secret and warns of “serious consequences” for relations with the United Kingdom.
Russia believes the accusations a “politicized case” and believes it”spoils bilateral relations,” added the Foreign Ministry spokesman, Maria Zajarova.
The Kremlin blamed of “British humor” the verdict in England, describing the conclusion of the investigation as a mokery of justice. “In general this can be attributed to the British humor so refined,” Kremlin spokesman, Dmitri Peskov, who warned that the report “further poisoned the atmosphere of our bilateral relations.”
For the process seems a joke “by the fact that an open public data is based on secrets about intelligence services that are not named, and that the verdict, which is held in such ephemeral information, regularly used words such as possibly and probably .”
This research terminology, he stressed, “is not tolerated in our legal practice or in other countries, and obviously can not be taken as a verdict.”
Andrei Lugovoi, one of the two Russians marked today by the British judge as the murderers of former spy Alexander Litvinenko, It has been said that the accusations against him are “absurd,” according to Interfax released.
In its conclusions, the judge clearly says he is “confident that Lugovoi and Dmitri Kovtun put polonium (…) with the intention of killing Litvinenko.” The investigation into the murder, executed in London in 2006, concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin, was aware of this operation the Russian espionage to assassinate former agent Lugovoi and Dimitri Kovtun KGB.
The old acquaintances Litvinenko and Litvinenko met them in London. And soon after they left a trail leading to Moscow. They were found traces of polonium from the places where they spent the suspects, from airplanes to Arsenal Stadium, where both attended a football game. Lugovoi and Kovtun have always denied involvement in the death of his former comrade explanation is that Litvinenko had many enemies. British authorities have asked unsuccessfully to extradite the two suspects to the United Kingdom.
Comments Off on Espionage: Russia condems Englands verdict
All you need is a 20 cm telescope to observe a nearby, active black hole.
An international research team reports that the activity of such phenomena can be observed by visible light during outbursts, and that flickering light emerging from gases surrounding black holes is a direct indicator of this. The team’s results, published in Nature, indicate that optical rays and not just X-rays provide reliable observational data for black hole activity.
Credit: Kyoto University
“We now know that we can make observations based on optical rays — visible light, in other words — and that black holes can be observed without high-spec X-ray or gamma-ray telescopes,” explains lead author Mariko Kimura, a master’s student at Kyoto University.
Once in several decades, some black hole binaries undergo “outbursts”, in which enormous amounts of energy — including X-rays — are emitted from substances that fall into the black hole. Black holes are commonly surrounded by an accretion disk, in which gas from a companion star is slowly drawn to the hole in a spiral pattern. Activities of black holes are typically observed through X-rays, generated in the inner portions of accretion disks where temperatures reach 10 million degrees Kelvin or more.
V404 Cygni, one of the black hole binaries thought to be nearest to Earth, “woke up” after 26 years of dormancy on 15 June 2015 as it underwent such an outburst.
Led by astronomers from Kyoto University, the team succeeded in obtaining unprecedented amounts of data from V404 Cygni, detecting repetitive patterns having timescales of several minutes to a few hours. The optical fluctuation patterns, the team found, were correlated with those of X-rays.
Based on analyses of optical and X-ray observational data, Kyoto astronomers and their collaborators at national space agency JAXA, national laboratory RIKEN, and Hiroshima University showed that the light originates from X-rays emerging from the innermost region of the accretion disk around a black hole. These X-rays irradiate and heat the outer region of the disk, making it emit optical rays and thus becoming visible to the human eye.
The outburst observation, the researchers say, was the fruit of international collaboration across countries in different time zones.
An international research team reports that the activity of such phenomena can be observed as visible light during outbursts, and that flickering light emerging from gases surrounding black holes is a direct indicator of this. The team’s results, published in Nature, indicate that optical rays and not just X-rays provide reliable observational data for black hole activity. The video shows violent optical variations observed from V404 Cyg (circled) on Jun 23, 2015. The flickering of visible light continued for 3.5 hours.
Credit: Michael Richmond/Rochester Institute of Technology
“Stars can only be observed after dark, and there are only so many hours each night, but by making observations from different locations around the globe we’re able to take more comprehensive data,” says co-author Daisaku Nogami. “We’re very pleased that our international observation network was able to come together to document this rare event.”
The study also revealed that these repetitive variations occur at mass accretion rates lower than one tenth of that previously thought. This indicates that the quantity of mass accretion rate isn’t the main factor triggering repetitive activity around black holes, but rather the length of orbital periods.
The paper “Repetitive patterns in rapid optical variations in the nearby black-hole binary V404 Cygni” appeared 06 January 2016 in Nature, with doi: 10.1038/nature16452
Kyoto University is one of Japan and Asia’s premier research institutions, founded in 1897 and responsible for producing numerous Nobel laureates and winners of other prestigious international prizes. A broad curriculum across the arts and sciences at both undergraduate and graduate levels is complemented by numerous research centers, as well as facilities and offices around Japan and the world.
Comments Off on Black Hole Activity Visible with Backyard Telescope
Recent fieldwork at the ancient city of Knossos on the Greek island of Crete finds that during the early Iron Age (1100 to 600 BC), the city was rich in imports and was nearly three times larger than what was believed from earlier excavations.
Palace of ancient city of Knossos
Credit: Google Earth
The discovery suggests that not only did this spectacular site in the Greek Bronze Age (between 3500 and 1100 BC) recover from the collapse of the socio-political system around 1200 BC, but also rapidly grew and thrived as a cosmopolitan hub of the Aegean and Mediterranean regions. Antonis Kotsonas, a University of Cincinnati assistant professor of classics, will highlight his field research with the Knossos Urban Landscape Project at the 117th annual meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America and Society for Classical Studies. The meeting takes place Jan. 7-10, 2016 in San Francisco.
Kotsonas explains that Knossos, “renowned as a glorious site of the Greek Bronze Age, the leader of Crete and the seat of the palace of the mythical King Minos and the home of the enigmatic labyrinth,” was the prosperous epicenter of Minoan culture. Scholars have studied the city’s Bronze Age remains for more than a century, but more recent research has focused on the urban development of the city after it entered the Iron Age — in the 11th century BC — following the Bronze Age collapse of the Aegean palaces.
The Knossos valley
Credit: Illustration by permission of Todd Whitelaw
The Knossos Urban Landscape Project over the past decade has recovered a large collection of ceramics and artifacts dating back to the Iron Age. The relics were spread over an extensive area that was previously unexplored. Kotsonas says that this exploration revealed considerable growth in the size of the settlement during the early Iron Age and also growth in the quantity and quality of its imports coming from mainland Greece, Cyprus, the Near East, Egypt, Italy, Sardinia and the western Mediterranean.
“No other site in the Aegean period has such a range of imports,” Kotsonas says. The imports include bronze and other metals — jewelry and adornments, as well as pottery. He adds that the majority of the materials, recovered from tombs, provide a glimpse of the wealth in the community, because status symbols were buried with the dead during this period.
The antiquities were collected from fields covering the remains of dwellings and cemeteries. “Distinguishing between domestic and burial contexts is essential for determining the size of the settlement and understanding the demographic, socio-political and economic development of the local community,” explains Kotsonas. “Even at this early stage in detailed analysis, it appears that this was a nucleated, rather densely occupied settlement extending over the core of the Knossos valley, from at least the east slopes of the acropolis hill on the west to the Kairatos River, and from the Vlychia stream on the south until roughly midway between the Minoan palace and the Kephala hill.”
Larger concentrations of better preserved material from the fringes of early Iron Age Knossos typically suggest a fairly recently disturbed burial context
Illustration by permission of Todd Whitelaw
Kotsonas’ Jan. 9, 2016 presentation is part of a colloquium themed, “Long-Term Urban Dynamics at Knossos: The Knossos Urban Landscape Project, 2005-2015.” Kotsonas serves as a consultant on the project, which is dedicated to intensively surveying the Knossos valley and documenting the development of the site from 7000 BC, to the early 20th century. The project is a research partnership between the Greek Archaeological Service and the British School at Athens. Kotsonas has served as a collaborator on the project since 2009.
Comments Off on Discovery Yields Surprising Revelations about Europe’s Oldest City
Scientists from the Senckenberg Center for Human Evolution and Palaeoenvironment in Tübingen and from the Senckenberg Research Institute in Frankfurt examined the demise of the giant ape Gigantopithecus. In their study, published recently in the scientific journal “Quaternary International,” they reach the conclusion that the presumably largest apes in geological history died due to their insufficient adaptability. Analyses of fossil tooth enamel show that the primates were restricted to forested habitats.
Estimated size of Giganthopithecus in comparison with a human
It is well documented that the giant ape Gigantopithecus was huge – but beyond this fact, there are many uncertainties regarding the extinct ancestor of the orangutan. Size indications vary from 1.8 to 3 meters, and weight estimates between 200 and 500 kilograms. And there are various theories regarding its diet as well: Some scientists assume a strictly vegetarian lifestyle, while others consider the ape a meat eater, and a few believe that its diet was exclusively limited to bamboo.
“Unfortunately, there are very few fossil finds of Gigantopithecus – only a few large teeth and bones from the lower mandible are known,” explains Prof. Dr. Hervé Bocherens of the Senckenberg Center for Human Evolution and Palaeoenvironment (HEP) at the University of Tübingen, and he continues, “But now, we were able to shed a little light on the obscure history of this primate.”
Prof. Dr. Friedemann Schrenk holds a molar (type specimen) of Giganthopithecus.
Together with his colleagues from the Senckenberg Research Institute, Prof. Dr. Friedmann Schrenk and PD Dr. Ottmar Kullmer, as well as other international scientists, the biogeologist from Tübingen examined the fossil giant ape’s tooth enamel in order to make inferences on its diet and to define potential factors for its extinction. “Our results indicate that the large primates only lived in the forest and obtained their food from this habitat,” explains Bocherens, and he adds, “Gigantopithecus was an exclusive vegetarian, but it did not specialize on bamboo.”
The team of researchers studied stable carbon isotopes in the tooth enamel of the large primates – which are able to reveal information about the animals’ dietary habits even after several million years. The examined teeth came from China and Thailand – among them the first record of Gigantopithecus, which was discovered by paleoanthropologist Gustav Heinrich Ralph von Koenigswald in 1935 among a collection of fossils from a Chinese pharmacy. The results show that the giant ape’s habitat was restricted to forested areas – even though the ape was presumably too heavy to climb trees. This was the case both in China and Thailand, where open savannas would have been available in addition to the wooded landscapes.
Large molar of Gigantopithecus from the collection Gustav Heinrich Ralph von Koenigswald in the Senckenberg Research Institute.
“In order to be able to comprehend the evolutionary history of primates, it is important to take a look at their diet,” explains Bocherens, and he adds, “Our results also contribute to a better understanding of the reasons that led to the giant ape’s extinction.”
Bocherens and his colleagues work on the assumption that Gigantopithecus’s size, in connection with its restriction to one habitat type, doomed the giant apes. “Relatives of the giant ape, such as the recent orangutan, have been able to survive despite their specialization on a certain habitat. However, orangutans have a slow metabolism and are able to survive on limited food.
Due to its size,Gigantopithecus presumably depended on a large amount of food. When during the Pleistocene era more and more forested areas turned into savanna landscapes, there was simply an insufficient food supply for the giant ape,” concludes the scientist from Tübingen.
Abandoned items of luggage are frequently found at airports and train stations. This is a case for the emergency services, who have to assume that these items might contain bombs. They must assess the potential threat quickly, avert any possible danger, and preserve evidence for criminal proceedings. In the future, police will have the support of a remote-controlled sensor system as they go about their duties. Fraunhofer researchers are developing this sensor suite in cooperation with industry partners and criminal investigation authorities.
Police emergency personnel defuse a suitcase bomb.
Anyone who forgets their luggage in public places, airports or train stations will spark off a large-scale police operation. Time and again, suitcases, bags or backpacks left lying around unsupervised cause a bomb alert. Admittedly, most abandoned luggage items turn out to be harmless. But in the first instance the emergency services have to proceed on the assumption of possible danger and check whether they are dealing with an improvised explosive device (IED) that might blow up at any time. This involves getting up close to the luggage to inspect it.
A system that makes it possible to assess the danger of the situation quickly – and also records 3D images of the contents and shape of the luggage as well as of the surrounding area – would make the specialists’ work considerably easier, speed up the reconnaissance process, and minimize the risk for the emergency personnel.
Since November 2014, researchers at the Fraunhofer Institute for High Frequency Physics and Radar Techniques FHR in Wachtberg have been developing such a system together with the North Rhine-Westphalia State Office of Criminal Investigation, the Leibnitz University in Hannover, ELP GmbH and Hentschel System GmbH. The German Federal Office of Criminal Investigation in Wiesbaden and the German Federal Police Force are supporting the project as additional expert consultants. The German Federal Ministry of Education and Research is funding the USBV Inspector project with a grant of two million euros as part of its Research for Civil Security program.
Emergency services do not have to enter the danger zoneThe system the researchers have developed comprises a multimodal sensor suite consisting of a millimeter wave scanner, a high-resolution digital camera, and a 3D environment monitoring system. The components are contained in a housing and mounted on a robot platform. Bomb disposal engineers remotely control the robot from a safe distance.
Its swiveling 3D sensors make a three-dimensional survey of the crime scene, and the digital camera provides high-resolution images for later optical evidence preservation. Meanwhile the millimeter wave sensor scans the source of danger and creates an image of what’s inside. A built-in embedded PC on the robot collects the data and sends it to the investigators, where it will be merged on the computer by means of sensor data fusion.
Three-dimensional survey of suitcase bomb contents“Up to now our techniques have not allowed us to form a 3D outline of suitcase bombs, and it has been impossible – or only partially possible – to make a spatial map of the contents. With the sensor suite we can visualize in three dimensions what’s inside a luggage item, and so determine the composition of the bomb and how the parts are arranged in the luggage,” explains Stefan A. Lang, team leader at the FHR and the project’s coordinator. This lets the explosives experts quickly assess the threat, and going forward they will also be able to preserve as much evidence as possible about the bomb. Until now, specialists were often forced to destroy suitcase bombs – making it difficult to identify the perpetrators. Other advantages of the contact-free detection system: it is light, compact, and platform independent, which means it can be mounted on any robot.
Within the project, the FHR researchers are developing the millimeter wave scanner (also referred to as a radar sensor) for fast reconnaissance. This scanner allows a very high depth resolution. “For the radar we make use of the synthetic aperture radar, or SAR, principle, by which the sensor is moved along a trajectory, a kind of track – from left to right in front of the case, for example – and the Doppler information generated in the process is used to create an image,” explains Lang. Apart from the research work on the sensor, the expert and his team are also looking into ways of determining the optimum trajectory for surveying an object. This depends on the shape of the luggage item or container, its position in the environment, and the position of the robot.
A radar sensor demonstrator will be ready in April 2016. Extensive field tests of the remote-controlled sensor suite begin in the middle of 2017, with the multimodal sensor suite set to be launched in 2019.
Comments Off on Remote-Controlled Robot Inspects Suitcase Bombs
North Korea has launched today an enormous challenge to the international community, including neighboring China, to announce that it has completed its first test with a hydrogen bomb, much more powerful than conventional atomic devices that equipped so far its limited nuclear arsenal.
North Korean leader Kim Il Sung, whose birthday on the 8th, had already warned in December that his country had enough technology and capability to detonate a bomb of this type “to reliably defend the sovereignty and dignity of the nation “.
Early indications of unusual activity in the area of Punggye-ri-the scene of previous Nuclear-Test were recorded around 10:30 am when experts from countries such as China, Japan or the United States warned of an earthquake that the area would have reached 5.1 magnitude on the international scale that measures earthquakes.
The Japanese Meteorological Agency warned that the quake could be the result of a nuclear explosion, and had the same characteristics as those that occurred in the previous three tests by Pyongyang in the region.
At 12:30 local television North Korea confirmed that it was a nuclear test personally approved Kim Il Sung on day three.
“We have performed the test with the knowledge, technology and national efforts. It is an amazing event that will be remembered in a special way in the country’s history. North Korea adds with pride to the most advanced nuclear countries with the H-bomb, ” said the North Korean national agency KCNA.
“The United States has met North Korea hostile forces and increased the smear campaign about human rights improvements to hinder North Korea. So it is fair to have a pump H. The fate of North Korea may be protected by other forces than North Korea itself, “he said the statement read on state radio.
38 North website specializing in North Korean affairs, had reported in early December that satellite images indicated that he had discussed Pyongyang was digging a new tunnel in the area of Punggye-ri, in the vicinity of the other three underground enclaves that has been used for its previous nuclear tests.
38 had begun to acquire significant dynamics from April.
The four drilled underground galleries have been given different names depending on their geographic location around Mount Musan. The Portal del Este was the location that was used for the first trial by Pyongyang in 2006. The North Portal was used to test 2009 and 2013.
Other facilities in the South are still under construction and the new West Portal could have been done with this last test.
38 North information reinforced the suspicions of Seoul, which in October was leaked to the Yonhap news agency that “the increase in the movement of people and vehicles” in the area of nuclear tests was a sign that “North Korea appears to be in process of digging another tunnel. ”
Both South Korea and Japan have convened an emergency meeting of his political and military leaders to discuss the event.
An expert quoted by NK News nuance the potential impact of North Korea’s rudeness. “Branches? What ramifications? A little noise, maybe another resolution of the Security Council of the United Nations, but that will not change anything,” said Professor Andrei Lankov of Kookmin University in Seoul.
The same analyst said that the main impact of this decision will be felt in Pyongyang relations with its neighbors and especially with China, with whom he seemed to have regained a certain proximity in recent months after a clear diplomatic tension in recent years precisely because Beijing’s opposition to the expansion of the North Korean nuclear program.
“In the short term it will have an impact but not in the long-term,” he said.
Comments Off on North Korea: Tensions rise after Hydrogen bomb test
On his way to reform the country’s armed forces and consolidate control of the Communist Party over the army (PLA), the Chinese authorities today announced the creation of three new military units to modernizing their equipment and command structures, “A great strategic decision will help realize the Chinese dream of having a powerful army, “according to its president Xi Jinping was quoted by state media.
This project, which was made public in September, has among its main objectives improving the fighting capacity of the largest army in the world and give it a navy and a powerful air force that can tackle the territorial disputes that the country suffers in the eastern South sea and with different nations.
The changes announced Saturday refer to three new units: one responsible for monitoring strategic missile arsenal, commanding general for the Army and a support unit for combat troops, according to Xinhua news agency.
The first one, based on the Second Artillery Corps, will take over the country’s nuclear arsenal and will report to the commander Wei Fenghe, while the strength of support will focus on cyber warfare.
The spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Defense Yang Yujun, wanted to make clear on Friday that these changes do not involve a change in the policy of nuclear weapons in the country. “China’s nuclear policy and nuclear strategy are consistent, there will be no change at all,” he said.
In addition, new plans seeking phasing out old equipment and the development of new weapons were announced.
Indeed, the Asian country confirmed Thursday it is building its second aircraft carrier, which is the first designed and manufactured entirely in the country. According to Yang Yujun, the new ship is being assembled in the port of Dalian that will carry the latest Chinese fighters and include a jump ramp, which means that its end is curved upwards to facilitate the takeoff of aircraft.
Analysts agree in pointing out that China seeks to give greater prominence to its navy and air force in the context of maritime and territorial disputes with its neighbors. On the eastern front, it maintains a dispute with Japan over the Diaoyu / Senkaku islands rich in fish and where it is believed that there is oil. Meanwhile, in the South China Sea, the dispute raging between six countries lay claim to different parts of the ocean and territories in the region, and in recent months there have been several skirmishes that have raised tensions.
“For a long time, China was not interested abroad, and the Navy and Air Force were relatively weak compared to the Army,” said analyst and university professor Ni Lexiong AFP. “To catch up with the US and European powers, China should increase the level of modernization and power of both.”
For its part, China Central Military Commission, headed by Xi Jinping made public on Friday new guidelines for the reform of the armed forces, some changes among which is included is the establishment of a centralized 2020 control, reduction military regions or cut of 300,000 soldiers to leave the total of two million uniformed.
However, the reform bill has caused some controversy in the country, especially as regards the cut in the number of personnel and military means have published a series of warning that no one who is opposed to these changes expects them to occur without cost or the negative effects that may have lost their jobs for so many people.
Analysts agree that all these variations contribute to consolidate power and control of the Chinese Communist Party over the army, an institution that has witnessed since Xi became the power of an anti-corruption campaign that has swept several senior officials, including generals of the Central Military Commission, Guo Boxiong and Xu Caihou, accused of taking bribes.
Comments Off on China creates 3 new military units
Alloush Zahran, head of Jaysh al Islam [Army of Islam], one of the most powerful rebel groups in the suburbs of Damascus, died Friday in an air strike that targeted its headquarters as confirmed by rebel sources. They have blamed “Russian planes” of the operation.
With the disposal of this Islamist leader, enemy of Syrian President Bashar Assad, and the Islamic State (IS) the UN passed a resolution to boot the negotiations of the peace process in Syria.
It is still not entirely clear who can sit at that table. Damascus and Moscow cooperate in the field of battle by attacking Syrian fighters, as Zahran Aloush represent a harsh version of Islam but at the same time fighting the IS. Moscow has submitted a list of armed groups classified as terrorists. And Jaysh al Islam is in it.
The Syrian army has confirmed the news of the death of Aloush. According to state television, his body and the other leaders were buried by debris. Up to 10 rockets have been fired while the heads of Jaysh al Islam had gathered, according to Al Arabiya television.
The lieutenant Aloush has also been killed. Both poses a threat especially for Bashar Assad, and hence a problem for Moscow, trying to create a margin as wide as possible for the Syrian government when negotiating.
In February, the Jaysh al Islam militants fired 40 rockets at civilian houses in Damascus in a massive attack. Dozens injured and caused at least three deaths among the civilian population. That attack was in retaliation for the bombing of Syrian aviation against Ghouta district, which includes an important agricultural area near the capital and was received in August 2013 Assad chemical attack.
Moscow began its air strikes in Syria in late September. It says its goal is the Islamic State, but during this time various rebel figures have been eliminated.
Although there was no confirmation from Moscow, the Syrian opposition yesterday accused “Russian planes” of the killings. This airstrike in Ghuta, which is precisely an area that was taken from the IS by Jaysh al Islam fighters.
Jaysh al Islam is composed of tens of thousands of fighters, though not part of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), the entity that includes the varied forces fighting Assad loyalists. With good connections to Riyadh, Jaysh al Islam participated earlier this month at a meeting organized by Saudi Arabia to agree a common position to negotiate with Assad. The armed factions as Ahrar al-Sham and Jaish al Islam is showed how divided the opposition really is.
Jaysh al Islam has been accused of using comparable to the Islamic state methods, such as public executions. In several similar propaganda materials as IS videos, Alloush called to “cleanse” the country of -the group Asad- Alawites and Shiites.
Jaysh al Islam also referred to the Al Nusra Front fighters as “our brothers”, adding that “they are fighting on our side.”
Although it is in the crosshairs of IS, Al Qaeda and the secular opposition, today Jaysh al Islam is one of the strongest rebel groups, both the number of fighters and its organization. In fact it has managed to create a genuine administrative structure Ghuta East.
Moscow criticizes that under these militant groups are plotting terrorist networks routes to get the precious Syrian oil towards Turkey are hidden. “They change routes to avoid our aircraft,” said Friday the Russian General Sergei Rudskoi, head of the Operations Department, which believes that the intervention of Moscow is pushing back the terrorists.
IS fighters and other groups have begun delivery of heavy weapons to the Syrian army in the Palestinian refugee camp of Yarmuk, south of Damascus, according to RIA Novosti reported a military source.
Comments Off on Russian airstrikes kill the leader of Jaysh Al-Islam in Syria
Researchers at Linköping University in Sweden have created analog and digital electronics circuits inside living plants. The group at the Laboratory of Organic Electronics (LOE), under the leadership of Professor Magnus Berggren, have used the vascular system of living roses to build key components of electronic circuits.
The article featured in the journal Science Advances demonstrates wires, digital logic, and even displays elements – fabricated inside the plants – that could develop new applications for organic electronics and new tools in plant science.
Augmenting plants with electronic functionality would make it possible to combine electric signals with the plant’s own chemical processes.
Credit: Laboratory of Organic Electronics
Plants are complex organisms that rely on the transport of ionic signals and hormones to perform necessary functions. However, plants operate on a much slower time scale making interacting with and studying plants difficult. Augmenting plants with electronic functionality would make it possible to combine electric signals with the plant’s own chemical processes. Controlling and interfacing with chemical pathways in plants could pave the way to photosynthesis-based fuel cells, sensors and growth regulators, and devices that modulate the internal functions of plants.
“Previously, we had no good tools for measuring the concentration of various molecules in living plants. Now we’ll be able to influence the concentration of the various substances in the plant that regulate growth and development. Here, I see great possibilities for learning more,” says Ove Nilsson, professor of plant reproduction biology and director of the Umeå Plant Science Center, as well as a co-author of the article.
The idea of putting electronics directly into trees for the paper industry originated in the 1990s while the LOE team at Linköping University was researching printed electronics on paper. Early efforts to introduce electronics in plants were attempted by Assistant Professor Daniel Simon, leader of the LOE’s bioelectronics team, and Professor Xavier Crispin, leader of the LOE’s solid-state device team, but a lack of funding from skeptical investors halted these projects.
Thanks to independent research money from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation in 2012, Professor Berggren was able to assemble a team of researchers to reboot the project. The team tried many attempts of introducing conductive polymers through rose stems. Only one polymer, called PEDOT-S, synthesized by Dr. Roger Gabrielsson, successfully assembled itself inside the xylem channels as conducting wires, while still allowing the transport of water and nutrients. Dr. Eleni Stavrinidou used the material to create long (10 cm) wires in the xylem channels of the rose. By combining the wires with the electrolyte that surrounds these channels she was able to create an electrochemical transistor, a transistor that converts ionic signals to electronic output. Using the xylem transistors she also demonstrated digital logic gate function.
Dr. Eliot Gomez used methods common in plant biology – vacuum infiltration – to infuse another PEDOT variant into the leaves. The infused polymer formed “pixels” of electrochemical cells partitioned by the veins. Applied voltage caused the polymer to interact with the ions in the leaf, subsequently changing the color of the PEDOT in a display-like device – functioning similarly to the roll-printed displays manufactured at Acreo Swedish ICT in Norrköping.
These results are early steps to merge the diverse fields of organic electronics and plant science. The aim is to develop applications for energy, environmental sustainability, and new ways of interacting with plants. Professor Berggren envisions the potential for an entirely new field of research:
“As far as we know, there are no previously published research results regarding electronics produced in plants. No one’s done this before,” he says.
Professor Berggren adds, “Now we can really start talking about ‘power plants’ – we can place sensors in plants and use the energy formed in the chlorophyll, produce green antennas, or produce new materials. Everything occurs naturally, and we use the plants’ own very advanced, unique systems.”
Comments Off on Electronic Plants Created in Sweden, Researchers Grow Digital and Analog Circuits
David Cameron’s government has given unanimous approval to the motion to be presented Wednesday at the British Parliament to authorize air strikes in Syria. The motion specifies that the objective will be the basis of the Islamic State (IS) on Syrian soil and stresses the need to reach a “political solution” to the conflict.
“The motion stresses the need to bring the IS military action in Syria, like Iraq, but part of a broader strategy,” remarked Cameron after the emergency meeting of his cabinet, hours before the debate and The vote will take place on Wednesday at 10.30 pm (11.30 in Spain) in the House of Commons.
“I will defend my position and I hope to have the support of deputies from other parties if possible,” Cameron, could have the “leak” of up to 60 Labour MPs, which are more than enough to ensure a comfortable majority and make possible he said the ” defections “in his own party.
“The motion stresses the need for political and diplomatic measures and humanitarian aid to Syria,” said Cameron. “But it is above all to protect our national interests in the fight against this terrible terrorist organization.”
The British premier confident as to remove the thorn in just over two years ago, when he failed the parliamentary majority (lost by 13 votes) in his first attempt to win support for air strikes in Syria. Cameron has been calibrating the time since winning the elections last May but has not stepped forward this time to have all the guarantees of a possible attack.
The opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn, contrary to air strikes, had no choice but to grant freedoms to vote for deputies fearing the threat of a rebellion within the party. Half of the members of his “shadow cabinet” announced in advance that they will support Cameron.
Comments Off on Cameron’s party ready to bombard ISIS
The Paris attack and the Russian commercial airliner blown up by ISIS, appears to be the beginning of a new terrorist campaign initiated by a brutal new generation of jihadist fighters against the west. ISIS has got all the media attention, but Al-Qaeda in order to compete with their jihadist rival has to come up sooner or later with another massive terrorist attack to prove their worth.
No matter the terrorist threat, I believe it would be hard to stop and I am expecting something much worse. I am not a firm believer in national security. American homegrown terrorist David Coleman Headley ultimately confessed to the Bombay attacks when he was caught in Denmark. If he would have not confessed his involvement in Bombay, the NSA, DHS, CIA and other quasi-government intelligence agencies would have granted him a free vacation to the Bahamas.
Ultimately, I am afraid one of these groups will bribe a former nuclear scientist and develop a dirty nuclear bomb. In the US, all they need is to bribe a cartel close to the Mexican border, and smuggle the bomb through a tunnel free from ICE. We don’t have enough human resources to stop drug smugglers. In Europe, it might be even relatively easier.
My question is.
Realistically can we really stop a terrorist attack in Europe and the US? Is it based on luck or track and data collection only?
Is Homeland Security recollection of data from all servers the best alternative to intercept future attacks or are they other ways to get the job done more efficiently?
If they detonated a nuclear bomb inside a major city in Europe or the US. Would we throw foreign diplomacy out the window and consider an extermination rampage including the expulsion of Muslims in western lands? Is this farfetched?
Has the moderate Muslim world done enough to stop terrorist networks or could they do a better job to help prevent attacks?
Dr. John Joseph RAY.
(He taught sociology at the University of New South Wales. His major research interests lays in psychological authoritarianism, conservatism, racism and achievement motivation.)
“A big one dropped on Raqqa would stop them.”
Mohsen Goudarzi.
(He is a PhD Candidate in Communication and Media Studies. Mohsen has worked for different Institutions and media as news secretary, producer, and researcher.)
“Terrorist attacks are not acceptable in France, but in other parts of the world such as Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon these are accepted. The terrorists who attacked Paris are not Muslim. They were Arabian French citizens who have been discriminated by society.
Their wrath has been rooted in western government policies including the daily humiliation refugees suffer all over Europe. So, such attacks do not relate to Islam and its rules. Also, doing different security jobs such as data collection will not work if western politicians do not change their policy about supporting terrorists in Syria and Iraq.”
Themistocles Konstantinou.
(Present Military data Analyst. Hellenic National Defense General Staff, Athens Greece)
“As it is obvious the US was extremely lazy on the issue. NSA, CIA and other agencies had the opportunity to eliminate those terrorists years ago, but instead eliminated European countries such as Greece with debt and chaos after Syria’s built war.
My opinion is that now the only solution is to send back all the muslims after a new crusade to eliminate all the radical islamists. All the people must be together on this plan. The western countries must eliminate ISIS and other movements like Al-Qaeda with a huge simultaneous attack on Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and Syria.
The idea is to stop any “Rescue Exit” from anybody who is inside Islamist fondamendalistic movements; not any other excuse for action.”
Johannes Nugroho.
(He is a political analyst as well as an author of fiction. He is currently a columnist at the English-language daily the Jakarta Globe)
“Prevention against terrorist attacks may be possible if any US or European government were prepared to fund more comprehensive intelligence agencies. Short of this, internet data intercept and any other electronic measures could only be supplementary to the good old intelligence gathering by real operatives.
One of the flaws in the current Western strategy is the tolerance given to Muslim countries that, by their virtue of their own societies, encourage the propagation of fundamentalist values, notably Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the two states that subscribe to the Wahabbi theology.
As Russia’s President Putin recently said at the G20 summit, private donors from wealthy Muslim countries can channel their funds into terrorist organisations with impunity. It is time Western
government pressures states like Saudi Arabia into getting their own act together.
At present, there is no such thing as “moderate Muslim world”. Every Muslim society in the world has been infiltrated by Wahabbism. Even Indonesia, supposedly a moderate Muslim-majority country, isn’t immune
to it. Radical factions continue to act against minorities with cabal government elements covertly supporting them through inaction.”
Claude Nougat.
(Passionate traveller (80 countries+) 25 years experience in United Nations: project evaluation specialist; FAO Director for Europe/Central Asia)
“1) Realistically can we really stop a terrorist attack in Europe and the US? Is it based on luck or track and data collection only?
Realistically, we can contain it. We have the technological means on both sides of the Atlantic and now, following the Paris attacks, the will to collaborate. And I mean contain – not “really stop”. Containing means that the world is allowed to function as before, with fear kept to a minimum and costs too.
2) Is Homeland Security recollection of data from all servers the best alternative to intercept future attacks or are they other ways to get the job done more efficiently?
Question is too technical and only concerned with US. I have no answers.
3) If they detonated a nuclear bomb inside a major city in Europe or the US. Would we throw foreign diplomacy out the window and consider an extermination rampage including the expulsion of Muslims in western lands? Is this farfetched?
Way too far-fetched on two grounds: one, the detonation of a nuclear bomb inside a major city is, while possible, highly unlikely; two, in the event it does occur, the reaction – “expulsion of Muslims in western lands”, while it might well be demanded by extremist right nationalistic leaders like Marine Le Pen or Donald Trump, is totally unlikely to happen for many reasons, the main one being that it is impossible to carry out – on what basis do you decide a Muslim is someone you expel? What about religious freedom? Anyone, even a born and bred blue-eyed American could decide to become a Muslim…And that is one of the major freedoms that make up our set of values. We can’t do without religious freedom.
4) Has the moderate Muslim world done enough to stop terrorist networks or could they do a better job to help prevent attacks?
The “moderate Muslim world” has done and is doing a lot in Europe and in America (for example, see ISCA, the Islamic Supreme Council of America). They can only do an even better job if we, non-Muslims, help them to, give them space and support. Incidentally, don’t misread me, I’m not a Muslim, I’m a practicing Catholic.”
Peter D. Rosenstein.
(He is a non-profit executive, journalist and Democratic and community activist. His background includes teaching; serving as Coordinator of Local Government for the City of New York; working in the Carter Administration; and Vice-chair of the Board of Trustees of the University of the District of Columbia)
“1.Realistically can we really stop a terrorist attack in Europe and the US? Is it based on luck or track and data collection only?
We will never stop every attack particularly those where the attacker is willing to lose their life. We can stop some of them with better data collection and more cooperation among governments sharing information.
2.Is Homeland Security recollection of data from all servers the best alternative to intercept future attacks or are they other ways to get the job done more efficiently?
I think we need to use every available source to collect data and then have the people available who can decipher it properly. Just getting the data isn’t enough. We also need more people imbedded on the ground within terror networks. Nothing is as good as that to stop some of the attacks.
3.If they detonated a nuclear bomb inside a major city in Europe or the US. Would we throw foreign diplomacy out the window and consider an extermination rampage including the expulsion of Muslims in western lands? Is this farfetched?
Actually I think this is farfetched. We need to remember this isn’t about a religion but about fanatics.
4.Has the moderate Muslim world done enough to stop terrorist networks or could they do a better job to help prevent attacks?
I think we all need to do more to stop attacks and the moderate Muslim world must do it’s share. I think we need to get the Muslim nations to be part of the coalition to fight ISIS and once we do we need to share information with each other and coordinate responses and planning.”
Dale Yeager.
(He is the CEO of SERAPH and F.L.E.T.C trained Forensic Profiler and U.S. DOJ DOD Federal Law Enforcement SME / Instructor.)
“1.Realistically can we really stop a terrorist attack in Europe and the US? Is it based on luck or track and data collection only?
I am in this field and we do stop attacks every day through actionable intelligence and operations.
Is Homeland Security recollection of data from all servers the best alternative to intercept future attacks or are they other ways to get the job done more efficiently?
Human intelligence gathering on the ground is just as valuable. Ironically after 9/11 it was the intel from DEA that was most current for world terrorism because they were on the ground tracking narco-terrorist organizations.
If they detonated a nuclear bomb inside a major city in Europe or the US. Would we throw foreign diplomacy out the window and consider an extermination rampage including the expulsion of Muslims in western lands? Is this farfetched?
Yes, while that would bring all out global war by the U.S. and our allies, the idea of a WWII / FDR illegal internment or exposition of Muslims would not happen.
Has the moderate Muslim world done enough to stop terrorist networks or could they do a better job to help prevent attacks?
No they have not because the moderate Muslim world is made up of NGO and academic types who are out of touch with real working class Muslims who favor the idea of a caliphate. Also anti-Semitism is a serious issue to factor in among moderate Muslims.”
Sebastian Sarbu.
(He is a military analyst and vice-president of National Academy of Security and Defense Planning. Member of American Diplomatic Mission for International Relations)
“In the occident, ISIS has become a real threat for values, human rights culture and overall stability of the social system.
The big enemy fighting ISIS is Russia. Russia is trying to undermine the globalist order and impose its hegemonic interests.
At world level, the globalization process would generate peace, cooperation, cultural changes and economic interdependence among other statues, but this interconnected world, paradoxically, has created more risks in the security and stability of Europe and indirectly encouraged the propagation of the false democratic values with extremist tendencies.
It is now clear that ISIS and Al-Qaeda’s international terrorist scheme have a common brain in the full function of mode operations worldwide.
International terrorism has nothing to do with religion or with nationality. It is a false illusion. Any terrorist group will try to recruit adepts no matter the country, religion or culture identity. ISIS has become a strong ideological enemy of the West and represents an occult interest into the final battle of the great world powers opting for supremacy.
The corruption and materialism of some European governments, the weakness of the international community leadership that should be united under a common voice, has generated more chaos, struggle and global insecurity.
Also the US is responsible for institutionalizing political control of new democratic and fragile political parties in Libya, Egypt, and Iraq among other Middle Eastern countries. The Arab spring generated important social changes, but the security system and corruption contamination represented a serious risk for political improvement. At this point, any solution is better than no action.
Data collection is not a solution, but if the political strategy does not change soon, the intelligence leadership won’t have a role in the matter of social networks with connection with terrorism links.
The hypothesis of nuclear bombs detonated by ISIS is one topic where Assad is no stranger. The nuclear issue, will be a determining factor to the mobilization of NATO engaging military options inclusive for Iran, not only Syria.
The war against counterterrorism now dominates France and the UE, which in reality is the preparation for a classic war. But the UE option will either be part of the solution, or will be in any case part of the problem.
Strategic solutions exist, but the world expects political decisions to be taken seriously because Russia is at the edge of new cold war.”
Igor Muradyan.
(Political analyst (Armenia) on the issues of regional security (Black Sea and Caucasus region, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, the Balkans, Central Asia) since 2008.)
“1) It is necessary to apply long-term and radical measures to restrict migration. Settlement of new immigrants with stiffer regulations should replace the current laws protecting radical migrants from the new member states of the European Union.
In Europe and the United States they should create a new police force to supervise migrants and radicalism. We must act now, it is time to leave policies that lead to liberalism at the side.
2) Any method of information processing is required and are not redundant.
3) No need to do stupid things, but obviously you need to evict people to their countries of origin, specially those who take part in the propagation of Muslim radicalism. These people know the problem very well, and you need to deal with them in this way in order to prevent the growth of new radicals.
They have no place in Europe and in the United States. Let them return to their countries. It will cover 10 – 20% of migrants and people who have received citizenship. It’s nothing that can’t be done.
4) Muslim communities and organized groups have an important responsibility for the actions of radicals. They should be able to solve many problems, if not all. Of course, Muslim organizations, first of all, need to do a better job with the prevention and elimination of radicalism.”
Ronald Bleier.
(Freelance journalist based in New York. His articles have appeared in Left Curve, In These Times, Middle East Labor Bulletin, The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, Lies of our Times, Middle East Policy, Between the Lines (Jerusalem) and The Link.)
“I’ve seen more than enough evidence to feel certain that 9/11, London 7/7, Oklahoma City, WTC ’93. Boston Marathon, Charlie Hebdo, were inside jobs, perpetrated by the U.S., UK, and French terror agencies under respective government approvals.
I’ve also seen evidence that the U.S. (along with other interested parties ) have been working to ensure the indefinite continuation of the war in Syria (not to mention Iraq and Afghanistan) and the latest proxy and pretext has been the emergence of ISIS.
Now Paris 11/13 has spiraled us even further downward into our terrible new world where threats of superpower war are rife.
I suppose we can all agree: the bad guys are winning – and the rest of us are losers.”
John D. Vernon Sr.
(He has proudly served the United States of America for over 37 years as a Military Officer, retiring at the rank of Colonel,later serving as a Department of Defense civilian, and finally as a Township Supervisor.In 2012, John ran as a Conservative candidate for the U.S. Senate in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. He is the CEO, American Warrior Press.)
“As a bottom line up front the US simply by geographical location has a less likely possibility of being attacked by terrorists than Europe and Africa. It’s all about logistics and the fact that it’s easier to launch an attack outside the US than inside the US. However, that does not mean that we are not a target. In fact we are the prize. I do not think there is luck involved in preventing an attack.
The tactics employed by DHD, specifically bulk data collection cannot by itself prevent a terrorist attack. I believe that no one individual tactic can prevent a terrorist attack and in order to do so, must be combined with other tactics to be successfully prevent or stop a terrorist attack.
Regarding terrorists using a dirty bomb, which will eventually happen, I see NATO using every asset to defeat the terrorist state or cell responsible when this occurs. Use of such an asset will be the tipping point and in my view will work against terrorists. They know that, which is likely why they haven’t used them thus far. To think that they are not in possession of such weapons is sophomoric.
Personally, I do not believe that the moderate Muslim world has been vocal enough to prevent these attacks. Privately, they support the terrorists by financing them or giving them safe passage/sanctuary. Publicly, they issue an initial condemnation of the attack or are simply silent. Until the free world can mobilize the Muslim countries to fight against the extremist arm of Islam, we are all at risk and terrorism is running wild world wide.”
Dr. John Bruni.
(open source intelligence and security consultancy) based in Adelaide, South Australia, formerly served as Special Military Researcher Adviser at the Emirates Centre for Strategic Studies and Research (ECSSR))
“1. Counter-terrorism is premised on both luck and good intelligence in equal measure. In any style of war, there is the problem of ‘fog’, when human systems break down for political, organisational or cultural reasons. No military power is perfect, no intelligence gathering system is perfect and no political environment is perfect. Proper counter-terrorism is based on acknowledging the existence of these imperfections and navigating the best way you can with what you have around known pitfalls. If you have an 80-85% strike rate at rolling up potential threats to the homeland, then a country can claim to be as safe as it can be. Improvements to this strike rate can only happen around the margins.
2. No. Intrusive data gathering means that there is too much information to sift through to look for one, minor but specific target. Unfortunately, for those who believe in a fair and non-discriminatory society, the best way to prevent jihadist extremism within Western countries is to ensure that the full weight of intrusive data gathering is placed against domestic Muslim communities where the radicals are hiding. Sucking up the pension data or the personal profiles of mainstream individuals is both unnecessary and wasteful of time and resources, and a threat to the privacy of the loyal citizens. Jihadist threats are not normally found enmeshed within the mainstream, they are fringe dwellers living among co-religionists.
3. Yes, this is far-fetched. What isn’t far-fetched is rounding up Muslim minorities and interning them in camps just as happened to Germans, Austrians and Turks in World War I and Germans, Italians and Japanese in World War II (e.g. in Canada, Australia and the U.S.). Should a terrorist organisation acquire the means to detonate a dirty bomb or chemical or biological device in a major capital city of the U.S., the extreme public backlash, fuelled by the 24/7 media cycle, would demand politicians to react radically in the national interest. It is unclear whether this reaction would include an ‘extermination rampage’, though government authorities may turn a blind eye to anti-Muslim/anti-Arab violence in Western countries.
4. You can’t stop terrorist violence when the root cause is not being addressed. In the case of ISIL, the group is useful to the Saudis in their sectarian/geopolitical conflict with a rising Iran; it is useful to Iran since an ‘enemy at the gates’ gives the Mullahs something around which the Iranian people can rally in their; and it is useful to corrupt Turkish officials profiteering from the sale and distribution of illicit ISIL oil trading. You need to break ISIL’s usefulness to regional actors before you can destroy it. Under current conditions, no Western state has the capacity or the will to do this so we will be stuck with the status quo for the medium term at least.”
David W. Kearn. Jr.
(He is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Government and Politics at St. John’s University in New York. He was published by the RAND Corporation in 2012 after he concluded a year-long Stanton Nuclear Security Fellowship in RAND’s Washington, DC office. His research interests include international relations theory, US foreign policy, military innovation, and arms control)
“1.Realistically can we really stop a terrorist attack in Europe and the US? Is it based on luck or track and data collection only?
“We” have – numbers of them. In the United States, the coming of the year 2000 placed US agencies on alert (particularly after the attacks on the USS Cole and the 1998 embassy bombings) that an attack on the US was likely. A plot to bomb targets in Los Angeles (including LAX) was foiled when a key operator was detained entering the country in Seattle. The U.S. and Europeans have foiled a number of plots – from early planning stages to near execution—by various actors—from relatively novice to serious committed, trained actors—since 2001.
A huge part of the reflection in the United States after September 11, 2001 was that there seemed to be enough “dots” to connect in the summer of 2001 that if officials from different agencies (FBI, CIA, immigration, etc.) had better communications and coordination, some of the hijackers should have been arrested and (ideally) the majority of the plot broken up. The unfortunate thing is that the upper echelon of the outgoing Clinton national security team really saw terrorism as a primary threat, whereas the incoming Bush administration did not seem to share the same views as to the gravity and likelihood of the problem. This is not necessarily to place blame—it seems to be a real challenge for presidential transitions in the US—but coordination between agencies and ideally cooperation among nations is clearly a priority in effective counterterrorism.
2.Is Homeland Security recollection of data from all servers the best alternative to intercept future attacks or are they other ways to get the job done more efficiently?
It has to be a multi-pronged approach. Terrorists have clearly gotten much more sophisticated in terms of the employment of communications and social media. Moreover, because many of this last wave of attacks (Paris, Charlie Hebdo, Toulouse, Boston Marathon, etc.) are “homegrown” in the sense that the actors are typically natives who have been radicalized outside of the country or via the internet, there simply is no substitute for good old fashioned police work. Despite the importance of national efforts in the technology and coordination realm, I don’t think we can overstate the importance of local policing (and coordination between local and federal CT officials) in avoiding future attacks.
3.If they detonated a nuclear bomb inside a major city in Europe or the US. Would we throw foreign diplomacy out the window and consider an extermination rampage including the expulsion of Muslims in western lands? Is this farfetched?
This is such a nightmare scenario that it is really difficult to even consider the implications. What we must do, is make sure nuclear materials are secure on the “front” end. So making sure Russian tactical weapons, Pakistani weapons and other potentially “at risk” materials are absolutely secure. This takes time, funding, and concerted cooperative efforts.Has the moderate Muslim world done enough to stop terrorist networks or could they do a better job to help prevent attacks?
4.This is probably the easiest question to answer, and it is a clear, resounding and emphatic “NO!” From active support to negligent indifference, much of the leadership of the Muslim world has been complicit in the global jihadist phenomenon. Saudi Arabia, first and foremost, has played a dangerous double-game with jihadists since Soviet intervention in Afghanistan and it hasn’t ended. ISIS is typically seen as having received key initial support from Saudi financiers, and Gulf money has supported radical Sunni elements in Syria since the beginning of the uprisings against Assad.
It’s incredibly frustrating that one of America’s “allies” has been so influential in initiating and sustaining the global jihadist movement, particularly when both bin-Laden and al-Baghdadi have called for the overthrow of the monarchy, but old diplomatic politics are difficult to change. What is clear is that they haven’t done enough to stop the flow of money and have let other interests (the perceived rise of Iran, removing Assad from power, maintaining influence in the Gulf) take priority.
Clearly, Pakistan is another complicit regime, but given the fragility of Pakistani politics and divisions within the military, it has been difficult to address the cynical game they have played with Islamic terrorists (not to mention the Taliban). And given their nuclear arsenal (to reference the nightmare you paint in Question 3) it has probably been wise to not “push too hard.”
Halyna Mokrushyna.
(Holds a doctorate in linguistics and MA degree in communication. She publishes in Counterpunch, Truthout, and New Cold War on Ukrainian politics, history, and culture. She is also a contributing editor to the New Cold War: Ukraine and beyond and a founder of the Civic group for democracy in Ukraine)
“On November 23, President of Russia Vladimir Putin ratified the federal law which bans the recognition of sacred scriptures as extremist. Putin himself proposed the bill to the Russian Parliament on October 14 of this year as a reaction to a widely debated decision of a judge of South Sakhalin court. This judge declared extremist some quotations from Koran along with the opinions of the author of a book interpreting the significance and place of du’a (a prayer, an act of worship) in Islam. This decision provoked a harsh reaction of Ramzan Kadyrov, the Head of the Chechen Republic, who appealed the decision of the judge. In Chechen Republic, or Chechnya, the majority of its 1, 2 million inhabitants adhere to the Sunni Islam. According to the 2012 national sociological survey and mapping of religious affiliation in Russia, published online under the title ARENA Atlas (http://sreda.org/en/arena ) there are 9.4 million Muslims in Russia, or 6.5% of the population.
In the explanatory note accompanying the bill, it was stated that Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and Buddhism are an integral part of the historical legacy of peoples of Russia and that in order to ensure an equal respect of world traditional religions, the content and quotations from the Bible, the Koran, the Tanakh (the canon of the Hebrew Bible), and Kangyur (the Tibetan Buddhist Canon), which constitute the spiritual foundation of these religion, cannot be recognized as extremist. The concept of the bill was agreed upon with the representatives of the major religious organizations in Russia (http://tass.ru/obschestvo/2464245 ).
I mentioned this law in support of my own opinion that any sacred text, which was written many centuries ago, cannot be interpreted literally or judged from the positions of modern norms, values and beliefs. The scriptures are eternal in the sense that they reflect some universal principles of the sanctity of human life, of love, of good. However, these texts were written in a certain historical time and therefore they reflect the level of spiritual maturity proper to that period.
We came a long way since Cain killed his brother Abel, apparently, out of jealousy and anger, because God accepted the offerings of Abel the shepherd, but rejected offerings of Cain, the tiller. By “we” I mean the Western world with its Judeo-Christian foundation. The Old Testament provides plenty of examples of human baseness, treachery, cruelty, misanthropy. We have made a remarkable progress since then, which is probably summarized the best in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
This Declaration was criticized in 1982 by the Iranian representative to the United Nations, Said Rajaie-Khorassani because, as he stated, it reflected “a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition” (https://web.archive.org/web/20060501234759/http://mypage.bluewin.ch/ameland/Islam.html ) and contradicted Sharia Law. Saudi Arabia abstained from the ratification of the Declaration in 1948 also on the grounds that it violates Sharia law. In 1990 the members of the Organization of Islamic Conference adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which proclaims that people have “freedom and right to a dignified life in accordance with the Islamic Shari’ah” (http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/cairodeclaration.html).
What is the relevance of these two foundational documents to the question of terrorism? It shows the divergence of opinion that exists between the West and the Muslim world on the most profound level of values and norms. I cannot delve into a detailed comparative analysis of these two different approaches, but my point is the following: if a disagreement exists between the governments, which are the most moderate, neutral representatives of the population inhabiting a country these governments govern, the disagreement transforms itself into criticism, non-acceptance, rejection of the opposing point of view, and finally an act of defiance by various groups.
The war that ISIS is now waging in Iraq and Syria is such an act of defiance. ISIS is the direct product of the US non-sanctioned, ill-conceived, illegal war against Iraq. American detention centers became a training ground for anti-American Sunni commandos, future leaders of the ISIS (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/-sp-isis-the-inside-story ). ISIS is the product of the US amazing self-righteousness, arrogance, and self-confidence that they understand and can manage countries which have a complex and old culture and history, different from the Western world.
The technological superiority does not equal the superiority in mind and does not guarantee victory in war against terrorism. I can illustrate this point by the example taken from the same article in the Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/-sp-isis-the-inside-story). In this article one of the senior commanders of the Islamic State recounts how he and other prisoners outsmarted Americans. While in prison, they wrote each other’s names on the elastics of their boxer shorts. After they were released from American prisons, they were able to reconnect with each other and start the fight against the American troops. Elastics of the boxer shorts against sophisticated high-tech surveillance equipment! Another example would be a simple note left on the table of a restaurant, indicating the place and time of an attack. How can you trace that?
Western intelligence and security services will always have hard time preventing terrorist attacks because they have two different logics of thinking and different motivations. Terrorists are ready to blow themselves to death in the name of Allah. What Westerner would be ready to do so in the name of God?
The West has become too rational and too humanistic to start an “extermination rampage”, as Jaime Ortega calls it. I think the West will prefer diplomacy to military action.
What is crucial for our common future in the globalized world is the genuine effort of the United States to understand the Other, to respect other countries’ right to have a different opinion, and to engage in a dialogue instead of imposing its own opinion by force.
Terrorism is the result of Western colonialism which was based on the erroneous approach to dealing with the Other from the position of superiority. The world has changed since then. We are all interconnected now and we cannot feel safe and protected 100 % just because we live in an apartment in Paris or a nice house in the suburbs of Toronto. In my opinion, the best way to ensure everyone’s safety and protection is by exchanging opinions, by establishing direct contacts between citizens of different countries, by holding our governments responsible for conducting a balanced foreign policy which reflects the view of the people, not the interests of political elites.
As for the “moderate” Muslims, I think this is faulty term. We should not throw into the same box culturally and ethnically different people who profess Islam. I am not an expert on Islam, but it seems to me that Islam as a code of beliefs, values, and norms is no more radical than Christianity is. As I said at the beginning, we should not take sacred scriptures as literal instructions for action. I have friends who are Muslims and who practice their religion without imposing it on others. I respect their difference and they respect mine. That is the way we should build relations between countries.”
Syed Qamar Afzal Rizvi.
(His research interests focus on the international relations, particularly with reference to the EU’s affairs, the United Nations affairs, the US foreign policy and prevention of conflict-studies. He contributed to the publications to the Daily Dawn (a leading English newspaper) and the Pakistan Observer (an Islamabad-based English daily.)
“1- The Paris attacks offered yet another opportunity to argue for taking prompt measures against the rising and expanding ties of terrorism both in the West and the Muslim world. The strategy of combating terrorism via data collection seems not working so fittingly. One thing that is very significant to be understood is that this is this ideological war combined with sectarian differences, which has taken the combatants to the hilt of lunacy. Such kind of differences provokes unidentified myths, which in turn take the people in an arena of unknown boundaries. This has happened in the Middle East, The sectarian differences have unleashed their brutalities from their origin to South Asia and now from South Asia to the frontiers of the Europe and America.
Now, this war has taken a turn in which the main actors are hidden, playing from the far flung areas and just moving the strings. The players are not the actual players and the masters of the game are not one. They are multi tempered with multi furious targets. Furthermore the players apparently seem to go out of control of their masters and now becoming threat for them. In view of this, The Saudi – Yemen crisis, The Kurd issue, removal of Assad, The Russian entry in the Middle East, the terror financing, all these issues have come to the point where this scenario appears to have become out of control. It is only because of this fact that the terror attacks appear to have threatened the whole world including Europe. Such attacks may be curbed or by having better surveillance or data tracking. But this is a short-term strategy. The actual removal of such threats lie in detailed examination of the root cause of such issues and the prevalence of the authority of state over the religion and sects.
Almost every major terrorist attack on Western soil in the past fifteen years has been committed by people who were already known to law enforcement. One of the gunmen in the attack on Charlie Hebdo, in Paris, had been sent to prison for recruiting jihadist fighters. The other had reportedly studied in Yemen with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the underwear bomber, who was arrested and interrogated by the F.B.I. in 2009. The leader of the 7/7 London suicide bombings, in 2005, had been observed by British intelligence meeting with a suspected terrorist, though MI5 later said that the bombers were “not on our radar.” The men who planned the Mumbai attacks, in 2008, were under electronic surveillance by the United States, the United Kingdom, and India, and one had been an informant for the Drug Enforcement Administration. One of the brothers accused of bombing the Boston Marathon was the subject of an F.B.I. threat assessment and a warning from Russian intelligence.
This shows that merely data collection can no more enough to save us from the future attempts at terrorism. Yet to watch and observe the trends of violent extremism may somehow, be an imperative exigency in this regard .Some important steps the western governments must take (a) to conduct interfaith-inter cultural dialogue via the West- based Islamic centers and with the help of Christian mercenaries (b)to enhance the intelligence co-ordination(c)to contain the policies that may engulf the differences between the West and the Muslim world(d)to enhance the cross checking mechanism about those elements who are involved in promoting radical Islam.(e) to exclusively watch and monitor the activities of the violent extremists.
2- As far as the Homeland security of intercepting the internet servers is concerned, it may partially be helpful in getting the information of the terrorist networks’ activities ;yet practically speaking it cannot be an ideal measure to be taken to counter the terrorism. Computer and network surveillance programs are widespread today and almost all Internet traffic can be monitored for illegal activity.] DHS defines Domestic Terrorism as: Any act of violence that is dangerous to human life or potentially destructive of critical infrastructure or key resources committed by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or its territories without direction or inspiration from a foreign terrorist group. The act is a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any state or other subdivision of the United States and appears to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping. A domestic terrorist differs from a homegrown violent extremist in that the former is not inspired by, and does not take direction from, a foreign terrorist group or other foreign power.
DHS defines a HVE as: A person of any citizenship who has lived or operated primarily in the United States or its territories who advocates, is engaged in, or is preparing to engage in ideologically-motivated terrorist activities (including providing material support to terrorism) in furtherance of political or social objectives promoted by a terrorist organization, but who is acting independently of direction by a terrorist organization.
Surveillance allows governments and other agencies to maintain social control, recognize and monitor threats, and prevent and investigate criminal activity. With the advent of programs such as the Total Information Awareness program, technologies such as high speed surveillance computers and biometrics software, and laws such as the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Act, governments now possess an unprecedented ability to monitor the activities of citizens.
However, many civil rights and privacy groups, such as Reporters Without Borders, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the American Civil Liberties Union, have expressed concern that with increasing surveillance of citizens we will end up in or are even already in a mass surveillance society, with limited political and/or personal freedoms. Such fear has led to numerous lawsuits such as Hepting v. AT&T. The hacktivist group Anonymous has hacked into government websites in protest of what it considers “draconian surveillance”.
Top Terrorism Experts Say that Mass Spying Doesn’t Work to Prevent Terrorism
The fact that mass spying on Americans isn’t necessary to keep us safe is finally going mainstream.
The top counter-terrorism czar under Presidents Clinton and Bush – Richard Clarke – says:
The argument that this sweeping search must be kept secret from the terrorists is laughable. Terrorists already assume this sort of thing is being done. Only law-abiding American citizens were blissfully ignorant of what their government was doing.
What is most important to understand about the revelations of massive message interception by the U.S. government is this:
In counterterrorist terms, it is a farce. Basically the NSA, as one of my readers suggested, is the digital equivalent of the TSA strip-searching an 80 year-old Minnesota grandmothers rather than profiling and focusing on the likely terrorists.
***
And isn’t it absurd that the United States can’t … stop a would-be terrorist in the U.S. army who gives a power point presentation on why he is about to shoot people (Major Nadal Hassan), can’t follow up on Russian intelligence warnings about Chechen terrorist contacts (the Boston bombing), or a dozen similar incidents must now collect every telephone call in the country? A system in which a photo shop clerk has to stop an attack on Fort Dix by overcoming his fear of appearing “racist” to report a cell of terrorists or brave passengers must jump a would-be “underpants bomber” from Nigeria because his own father’s warning that he was a terrorist was insufficient?
And how about a country where terrorists and terrorist supporters visit the White House, hang out with the FBI, advise the U.S. government on counter-terrorist policy (even while, like CAIR) advising Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement…
Surely, the process of data collection is an important segment of the Homeland security, but to say that this could be an effective tool to curb terrorism seems a devious assessment.
3–So far as this hypothetical situation is concerned that if the West becomes a victim of a nuclear terrorist attack by the Islamic radicals, what policy the west should adopt. By no means an expulsion policy seems to be a practical measure since it would create multiple challenges regarding the application of human rights within the reference of the UN and the EU’s Conventions on it and the western claim about liberal social contract regardingt its policies of immigration. In sum, while the predominant view among the world’s Muslims, insofar as we can learn from the observed polls, rejects terrorism, a significant minority does not. If, on the whole, say, 20 percent of Muslims, a conservative estimate of the average of these numbers, support terror “often” or “sometimes,” that amounts to 300 million people; and if, say, another 15 percent support it “rarely,” then the total base of support for at least occasional terror acts comes to 500 million.
There is little comfort to be found in such figures. Foreign Diplomacy can never be, not in any case, be left behind as tool of crisis management. In case of any severe accident attempted by these lunatics, the immediate reaction from Europe is best known to them. It cannot be predicted, as the quantum of the casualties would like to determine the exact stream of reaction, however the second option is debatable. The expulsion of Muslims from the western lands may not be one of the solutions because it would not be in any case helpful to eradicate the actual problem. It would further provoke the reaction in the quarters of the extremists.
They have already failed to understand that such killings or bombings have made the lives of the Muslims more miserable than anyone else. It is because of their actions that Muslims are taking refuge and shelter in the European countries. They are being judged with the lens of prejudice and finally if they are expelled from there, that would aggravate the situation. The actual theme needs to be comprehended which is that that these extremists are not only danger for the Europeans or Americans,
They are the actual enemy of the Muslims who have deprived the natives from their own lands, properties and the right to exercise their sectarian freedom. Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt, all countries have suffered at their hands, So it is not the question of the Muslims or Muslims, rather it is the question of non human elements, non state actors which are being funded by the vested parties to derive their interest and secure their energy needs, the gulf countries loves to play at their hands.
They also make nonsense of the claim that it is unfair to speak of Islamic violence or terrorism and not of Christian or Jewish violence or terrorism, even though occasional terrible acts are committed in the names of the latter two faiths. The obvious answer is that there are no Christian or Jewish analogues to the Islamic State; the numbers of such outrages are an infinitesimal fraction of those committed by Muslims; and there is no equivalent base of support in the respective religious communities.
Terrorism puts our democracy and fundamental principles to a test. Muslims in general want to be seen as partners who have much at stake in ensuring community safety. Security measures are needed, but they must be weighed against their impact on all communities and their human rights implications. Policy responses for community cohesion and integration risk being based not on the promotion of equality and fundamental rights, but on the prevention of terrorism.
It is important that Muslim communities do become double victims – first of terror attacks and then of policy responses to these attacks.
There is a need for more dialogue, social inclusion and non-discrimination policies in support of minority groups, which will ultimately have benefits for the entire society. Many Muslims acknowledge that they themselves also need to do more to engage with wider society, to overcome the obstacles and difficulties that they face and to take greater responsibility for integration. However, engagement and participation need also encouragement and support from mainstream society that needs to do more to accommodate diversity and remove barriers to integration.
Political leaders and the institutions have a particular responsibility to send a clear message of respect to all communities and provide convincing answers. Now more than ever they must establish meaningful intercultural dialogue and promote practical initiatives to bring communities together and tackle prejudice, disaffection and marginalization. Policy responses need to acknowledge that Muslim communities in general have experienced long-standing discrimination, whether direct or indirect, which has impacted on employment opportunities, education standards and social marginalization.
Policy responses need to react to the diversity of Muslim communities and be complemented by supporting action in communication, awareness-raising, capacity building and outreach. It is imperative that all Member States of the European Union apply the anti-discrimination Directives and make fuller use of their potential and provisions to address discrimination and promote equality. Surely, the media can play an important role in enhancing mutual understanding between communities of different religions and beliefs, cultures and traditions. The media has much to gain from working more closely with civil society and faith-based organizations, to counter stereotyping. In this expanding era of globalization, the western governments can not afford to foster the policies of expulsion and the discriminatory immigration since it may not provide better and sustainable results.
4- As for the moderate Muslim states response to the rising terrorism, most of the Muslim countries have recently been Western colonies or protectorates (the most significant exceptions, Turkey and Persia -now Iran- also were under heavily hit). After their (sometimes bloody) independence, the West (including Israel) has been either:
A post-colonial power who deposed/imposed regimes at its wish, and supported friendly governments no matter how tyrannical or corrupt they became (Suez crisis, Mubarak, Rezah Pahlevi -last Shah of Persia-).
The west welcomed democracy in Algeria, but when the FIS won the elections, we looked the other way when the army staged a coup and started a civil war.
The US welcomed democracy in Egypt, but when the Islamists won the elections, the West looked the other way when the army (heavily subsidized by the USA) staged a coup and ended the democracy with a blood bath.
A convenient scapegoat for the failures for the Arab leaders -who mostly were dictatorship were more sensible voices would not be heard-. Do you criticize the government corruption? You are a Western/ Israeli agent. So, either deserving it or not, there is an important part of the population that sees the West as part of the powers that make their live miserable. And, in the middle of thousands or tens of thousands who shout “Death to the USA” as a way to vent out their anger and then go home, it is way harder to spot the one who actually plans to commit terrorist acts.
And of course, all of the people who want to kill (and which in the West would usually end making the news as “shot out in a school for random motives”) suddenly have a “socially sanctioned” reason to do so, and sooner and later can find others to help coordinate the attacks. To make moderate Muslims more effective against radical Muslims, it would be good to convince moderate Muslims that the West is not against Muslims in general and moderate Muslims in particular; due to a long series of “misunderstandings” (some caused by the West, some others not) it may be not as crystal-clear to some moderate Muslims as it is for most Westerners.
The moderate Muslim intelligentsia and their scholars have tried their level best to present the counter narrative in this regard. But the liberal scholars were threatened of their lives or some of them were brutally killed, therefore, there was no better option but to surrender. However, the moderate Islamic states have failed to exercise their authority over these segments of the society. Some of the Muslim governments do not want to annoy their Western allies in this regard as this is an open secret now that the sheikhdoms in the gulf along with their western allies are actually funding some of the factions to get rid of that Assad regime. On the other hand, Russia and Iran want to preserve the Assad regime.
The west’s relationship with Middle Eastern dictatorships that have played a pernicious role in the rise of Islamist fundamentalist terrorism. And no wonder: the west is militarily, economically and diplomatically allied with these often brutal regimes, and the western media all too often reflects the foreign policy objectives of the governments. ‘There is no doubt that extremist Muslims are a driving force behind terrorism in the Middle East and South Asia, but the problem is clearly a much wider one. Ignoring this fact is to jeopardize our ability to comprehensively tackle the scourge that is terrorism.
No doubt, the Muslim governments may play a better role by improving the non-formal education and its curriculum, education and better health facilities are the only answer to the solution. Muslims governments are required to bring their young in the mainstream of the modern world by providing them better facilities for interaction with the moderate forces.”
Nake M. Kamrany.
(Professor at USC. He is an eminent Afghan-American development economist with superior experience in economic development who is held in high esteem by the international development community, Afghan leaders, scholars, the private sector and intellectuals. He has more than 20 publications on the political economy of Afghanistan)
“The recent tragic events in Paris and elsewhere is influencing a major shift in the world political economy toward war mentality on a global scale which is myopic, injurious and destructive. Let us carefully exam the options before humanity and select an optimal course for peace and prosperity. Since World War II to the tragedy of 9/11 the political economy of the world was dominated by a system of EXCHANGE in which mutual benefit was the outcome in peace and prosperity.
The event of 9/11 caused a major shift in thinking and behavior from the EXCHANGE SYSTEM to THE HREAT SYSTEM (use of MILITARY force). However, evidence shows that the use of force is superfluous, it does not work as evidenced by the wars in Iraq, the Middle East, and Afghanistan. And the current alignment of Russian, the U.S., France, and England is going to prolong the use of the THREAT (force) and is not going to work. The U.S, sustained enormous damages in blood and wealth in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East without finishing the job or winning the wars.
There are several reasons. The actions of the Western Powers have contributed to radicalization among the receiving countries. The incessant bombing of the villages have inflicted manifold more damages upon the innocent inhabitants of the villagers – far greater than the insurgents retaliations upon the innocent people in western cities. THz psychology of the insurgents has drastically changed. Their retaliation has been coupled with changes in the technology of warfare including the internet, east of transportation, mixture of population, and a sense of fairness. They seem to absorb the relative disadvantage and put up resistance than surrender and the marginal cost to the West has increased substantially.
What is the solution? The West must rethink of revising its political economy construct from a THREAT system to an EXCHANGE system. BECAUSE THE THREAT SYSTEM CANNOT BE LEGITIMIZED AND THEREFORE IT WILL NOT WORK.
The leader in all this is the United States. As discussed below, he United States after being engaged in the THREAT system is sustaining major domestic and foreign dissonance and it is time to embark on a new vision of political economy and opt for peace and prosperity for itself and globally.
There is a growing disdain of the American public with the existing political and economic order. Stagnating domestic conditions and a counterproductive foreign policy have prompted the emergence of unconventional candidates who appeal to voter disenchantment. The next president should note that it is vital for the U.S. government to reduce its reliance on military engagement as a solution to world concerns and instead focus its resources on tackling domestic problems such as our prison and justice system failures, immigration, and the burden of college debt. Moral arguments aside, economic strategy necessitates that we get the hundreds of thousands of non-violent incarcerated Americans out of the prison pipeline and back into the workforce in addition to enfranchising the 11 million immigrants who could further contribute to our tax base. Crippling college debt will also have rippling effects across our economy. In essence, issues of equality and opportunity will help define the upcoming election.
U.S. Must Reduce Military Engagement in Foreign Affairs
For the last four decades, U.S. hyper-reactive interventionist foreign policy has been costly and counterproductive, leaving some of the American public with a feeling of government failure. Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan have demonstrated that despite the loss of blood and wealth, the U.S. essentially left all theaters without improving our national security. During the Vietnam War, it was argued that if we did not defeat the communists in Vietnam they would eventually arrive on the shores of California. The North Vietnamese took over the U.S. embassy in Saigon but none showed up on the shores of California. Likewise with respect to Iraq, it was argued that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, and if we did not secure them, imminent atomic danger lurked off our shores. None were found. When we did finally pull out of Iraq, we ended up just turning over enormous influence to Iran, which was hardly a boon to our security. In Afghanistan, the Taliban regime was changed to our installed puppet governments who could neither defeat the Taliban nor create a stable democratic system. In the process, billions of American taxpayer dollars disappeared and thousands of lives were lost. Our current involvement in Syria, Libya, and a few places in Africa have pitted us in sectarian wars and ethnic discourses in which we have no clearly defined mission. It is now very obvious to the U.S. public that such military involvement has been more or less a catastrophe. Our interventions have resulted in the deaths of thousands of American troops and innocent civilians without concrete results . Our approach has been short sighted and arguably immoral given the repeated nature of our failures. Our policy in the Middle East essentially represents Bin Laden phobia, which ironically undermines our national security by fostering more radicalization and resentment towards the U.S.
The U.S. faces Major Domestic Policy Issues
While the U.S. government spends its treasure and time attempting to micromanage Middle Eastern affairs, on the domestic front, high and discriminatory incarceration, an unresolved immigration crisis, and mounting college debt are drawing public attention. The U.S. rate of incarceration is a disgrace. America incarcerates 753 per 100,000 , while comparable European incarceration rates per 100,000 are 153 for England, 96 for France, 92 for Italy, 66 for Denmark and 90 for Germany. This is largely due to our ineffective criminal system where prosecutors and judges are incentivized to incarcerate rather than cure. Nonviolent criminals should not clog our justice system, consume our tax payer dollars, and have their humanity and economic productivity stripped from them. It’s more expensive to incarcerate than to pursue other alternative forms of punishment or treatment. In particular, drugs addicts should be treated in clinics as they are in Europe instead of being jailed and provoked into becoming violent criminals. Moreover, the criminal justice system seems to overly convict and punish minorities, especially black men. The recent string of police shootings of unarmed black men reminds us of the pressing need to reform law enforcement protocols and rewrite our codes.
Recent vitriolic remarks by republic presidential candidates denouncing undocumented workers underscore the need to finally address immigration. For those undocumented immigrants – some 11 + million – who are already residing in the United States, a policy should be devised to allow them to become U.S. citizens in the long run. It is essential that they join the U.S. society as citizens and become acculturated rather than remain outside the American system of opportunity. While some argue that it isn’t fair to other immigrants waiting in line and to American workers trying to find jobs, our perception needs to square with economic reality and must also recognize the struggle of the 11 million people already here. Given the circumstances, we contend that the best way forward is to provide a path to citizenship and encourage work, thereby increasing the tax base. Moreover, it is imperative that we continue to ensure immigrants’ children are given the education opportunities to advance in American society. Certainly many schools and government programs are already full and underfunded, but the consequence of neglecting 11 million people is both morally heinous and economically disastrous. Citizenship, and the enfranchisement that comes with it, must be present in an immigration solution. Any presidential hopeful should straighten up to this reality and put forth a policy that is inclusive and fair.
Another white elephant that has emerged in the U.S is the cost of college education. As compared to the European countries where there is little or no tuition, we have our students take a heavy mortgage type loans for their education, which puts them into long term debt ranging from 10 to 30 years of loans. The average annual student loan in 2015 for private college education has reached $31,231 while the total student borrowing bill has reached $1.19 trillion . The worst aspect of these loans is the annual interest rate that students are charged. In 2015, the average annual interest charges for private student loans has been increasing, with some of the highest reaching 11% , as compared to 14.9% for credit card , 3.8% for mortgage loans and 3.7% for auto loans. Student college costs have defied the distributional objectives of the nation and will contribute to keeping the poor out of college and the middle class saddled with debt.
It follows that the U.S. should seek a smarter path forward to rectify the above inequities and dissonances. Specifically, we should reduce our over reliance on military engagement. As long as we are able to maintain superior military technology, then we should be able to cut the military budget appropriately. With these newly available resources, we could re-allocate the budget from building prisons and military equipment to schools. We should revise the minimum wage law to a “living wage” so that it would support even costs including room and board, healthcare, and education. Education, wellness and greater earnings tend to drive down crime and promote greater economic activity.
All of the above indicators are currently being provided in many European countries. The United States is the richest and most powerful country in the world and it should lead the rest of the world in all of these indicators as well. The proposals contained herein have nothing to do with the issue of capitalism or socialism. It has to do with the right of each individual to receive basic needs as a matter of right from the cradle to the grave. These rights will be a key point in the next election, so we hope the candidates are listening.”
Allen Schmertzler.
(He is an award winning and published political artist specializing in figurative, narrative and caricatured interpretations of current events)
“For everyone that boldly states we must not give in to terrorists by living in fear, I agree. For every person that continues to move about in locations that draw crowds seeking leisure, companionship, and community with intent to stretch their middle finger in defiance to terror I applaud. For those that can do so without hesitation and without an occasional nod of insecurity to glance around to measure their fellow humanity within suicide belt reach I especially applaud. Unfortunately, this is not who I am. I am rightfully fearful and believe we have everything to fear including fear itself. There are heavily armed monsters next door that worship death, and too many shallow and clueless politicians who are vendors of fear.
Somehow our world has created and unleashed an epidemic of de-evolved “Frankenhuman” monster body snatchers electrified by an insane perverted religious imperative to slaughter the innocent. It is as if the darkest evil imagined in movies that were created to entertain us has escaped from behind the viewing screens to infiltrate and reside among us.
I fear there is no way for humanity to retain freedoms we cherish in open societies to destroy these monsters in the World War of Terror. I fear there is no way to completely eliminate the savages salivating to take human lives. I fear that at best, the governing class can only talk bold and deploy newsworthy measures in hopes to sooth the masses while in secrecy build the Biggest Brother infrastructure too frightening for prime time debate. I am fearful and fearful of that fear that the world we knew shifted on 9/11 and the world we know ended in Paris on November 14, 2015.
The short sightedness of the massively militarized jingoistic 20th century has caught up with humanity just fifteen years into what was heralded to be a new enlightened humanity, a world where a profound Star Trekian shift in consciousness would give the 21st century peace, prosperity, a world without hardened borders requiring passports, heavily armed patrols and calculators for evaluating monetary exchange rates. The world was supposed to shrink along with the distance between cultures as technology and social media would be a unifying, equalizing and assimilating dynamic. We could finally boldly go without fear.
Instead, we are a world destabilized, fractured, more competitive than ever, armed such as never before, with peoples having accessibility to information and resources to organize and coordinate attacks to wreak havoc on civilian populations. The prospect of some rogue group finally acquiring a weapon of significant destruction and using it feels inevitable. Folks everywhere know they are vulnerable everywhere.
Folks everywhere know there are more pain, terror, and body snatching from more Frankenhuman cells yet to pop up. Folks know they are at a jumping off point and their patience, humanity, and capacity to forgive and look bold and compassionately into the future are about to surrender to a raging vengeance. Folks everywhere are wishing for a political savior that cannot exist to free them from this dystopian world. Sadly, the current Republican presidential wannabes have nothing to offer except to feed this state of fear and loathing and anti-establishment.”
Jack Shaka.
(He is a Conflict, Security and Democratic Governance specialist currently based in Somalia and Kenya. He has over 13 years experience in the NGO sector in Africa and Europe.He has written opinion pieces on conflict, security and democracy for several newspapers,academic journals and magazines around the world.)
“It is true that some terrorist attacks in Europe and America can be prevented based on intelligence gathered but at the same time there are other attacks that may not be stopped. Actionable intelligence is crucial but it also depends on how timely that intelligence is. Since 9/11; the London bombings of 2005; Madrid bombings of 2004 and the recent Paris massacre among other terror events, the approach to terror has changed. Nations have became more militant in their terror fighting strategies.
Torture, arbitrary arrests, extraordinary renditions and disappearances have become the norm. Remember Abu Ghraib? Remember Bagram? What about Guantanamo? Human rights have ceased to exist. All in the name of fighting terror. Recent intensified bombings by France on ISIS strongholds in Syria after the Paris massacre is exactly what America did in the past with calamitous results. Maybe France and her allies in the Syrian onslaught should take a lesson from Sun Tzu in the Art of War to appear when not expected.
Like the case of Afghanistan and Iraq, the number of civilian casualties in the Syria attacks is going to be huge. This trend gives credence to the Jihadists when recruiting children and youth to join their cause. It also makes them more militant and ready for martyrdom. Nations need to learn from the past and formulate new strategies. Otherwise the cycle will go on for centuries like the Crusades.
The arrests and disappearances have also brought in another conundrum. People with valuable intelligence are afraid of speaking up. They fear that they might ‘disappear’ or end up in a black site somewhere around the world. There are some incentives if one comes forward with information but people are still afraid. Fear remains an obstacle to saving lives.
Mass surveillance is becoming common despite the backlash it has received in Europe and America. The USA Freedom Act, which halted mass compilation of domestic phone data by the US government, did not however halt the compilation of other data, like emails and international phone calls. But electronic communication intercepts work in cases where the terrorist networks are using them as their primary mode of communication.
The rise of courier networks and other creative means for passing information among terrorists and other fundamentalists should be investigated. The key element is being ‘off radar.’ So, as the intelligence armies in Europe and America are busy intercepting electronic communication, they should be aware that terrorists are ‘off radar,’ and conducting counterintelligence. Like the nations, they have studied and learnt from their enemies.
The use of spy networks and undercover operatives should be well funded and developed by nations. They were instrumental during the cold war and continue to be so even today. Deception has been there for ages. A good spy network can be effective if well organized and coordinated. Information sharing among intelligence agencies should be encouraged and developed if terror is to be averted.
Hoarding crucial intelligence that could save lives is unacceptable or sharing the intelligence at the last hour when nothing can be done is also unacceptable. Going above the self to give critical intelligence key to saving human lives is laudable. Petty inter-nation rivalries should always be put aside when the future of humanity is at state.
The face of terror is changing. It is getting harder and harder to know or detect who a terrorist is. Just being a Christian or Muslim or Hindu does not make one a terrorist or fundamentalist. We are seeing youth from Europe and America joining the Jihadists or other radical fundamental groups. Home-grown terrorists are becoming the norm. It can be anyone sitting next to you on the train or bus or plane or that friendly person next to you in class or at the office.
The ordinary John or Jane. The guy next door. The case of Anders Behring Breivik of Norway is a solemn reminder that fundamentalists are with us whether we like it or not. Sun Tzu goes further to tell us that;
“…if you know others and know yourself, you will not be imperilled
in a hundred battles; if you do not know others but know yourself,
you win one and lose one; if you do not know others and do not
know yourself, you will be imperilled in every single battle.”
There is need to understand before being understood. Otherwise, we will be imperiled in every single battle. Terrorists are adapting, and changing tactics much faster than the intelligence armies of the nations. This is a worrying trend considering that nations have more resources and manpower. Nations need new strategies in fighting terror. The strategies formulated after 9/11 have become irrelevant since the enemy has adapted and changed its own strategies.
If a nuclear bomb is to be detonated in America, then I fear for the worst if lessons from the recent past are anything to go by. The US led invasions after 9/11 has had tragic consequences around the world. In March 2015, Physicians for Social Responsibility (PRS) published a study of the death toll from 10 years of the “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks.
The Washington DC-based organization puts the death toll at around 1.3 million but could be as high as two million. You can download and read their report to further understand the figures. You can imagine what the death toll will be, if a nuclear bomb is to detonate in America. Civilizations in ‘countries hosting terrorists’ will cease to exist.
Tens of millions will die. Foreign policy will be disregarded. Statements like, ‘that is an act of war against the United States. We must act,’ will be floated and generously used to fuel further invasions that will result in mass extermination of people.
Remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki? When America is hit, it hits back even harder! The expulsions, arbitrary arrests and detentions of Muslims began right after 9/11. And it is still going on as America and her European allies continue to fight terror. Europe is facing a defining moment with immigration after the Paris massacre. Fundamentalists are coming to Europe as refugees, and screening to know who is a genuine refugee, and who is not is an arduous task.
Will European borders be shut? That is what everyone wants to know now. Terrorism is a global problem not just in Europe and America. As the Paris massacre in France took place, there was an attack in Beirut, Lebanon. Followed by several other bombings in Nigeria before all that, there was the Garissa University massacre in Kenya where 147 people lost their lives. Terror affects us all, and nations must come together to fight terrorism by coming up with preventive strategies early enough.”
Jon Kofas.
(Retired Indiana University university professor. Academic Writing. International Political Economy – Fiction.)
“Governments, politicians, the media, and academics define the term “terrorism” in accordance with their political aims. Similarly, those engaged in unconventional methods of warfare (guerrilla war) have their own definition of their activities that they would define as “freedom struggle” from some oppressor (s). Although the term “terror” became popular during the French Revolution when Maximilen Robespierre and Saint-Just (September 1793 until July 1794) unleashed a campaign known as “The Reign of Terror”, it was the activities of late19th century anarchists in Russia and Europe that targeted public officials for assassination as a political statement about the need for political and social change.
Acts of violence against innocent civilians – not public officials – either as collateral damage or deliberately accelerated in the 20th century by non-state sponsored groups ranging from the extreme right to the extreme left with the intention of making a political statement. One could argue that the Ku Klux Klan clearly carried out acts of terror with the cooperation of the criminal justice system (from the sheriff to the courts and Department of Justice). Similarly, acts of terror have been sponsored overtly and covertly by states, and if one considers that the vast majority of people killed in wars are indeed civilians, the biggest sponsor of terror is the state simply because it has at its disposal the means for organized mass destruction that small groups simply do not have. For example, the Third Reich carried out the holocaust because it has the means to so, as it had the means to engage all of Europe, Russia and US in a global war. Yet, politicians, media and academics attribute “legitimacy” to mass killings and express rage at small scale individual assassinations by terrorists.
The topic of “terrorism” has been analyzed to the point of absurdity. Yet, despite such plethora of literature, European and US politicians promise to bring yet another plan to “end terrorism” which has been rising ever since the US launched war on terror in October 2001. A Google search with terms “terrorism” yields almost 100 million results; “fighting terrorism” yields 720,000 results; and “ending terrorism” yields close to 45,000 results. An Amazon book search with the word “terrorism” yields 39,640 results on the topic, while “fighting terrorism” yields 574 results and “ending terrorism” 21. These do not include the confidential studies by various agencies of governments and consulting firms working for fees to provide yet another solution to a problem that only grows as time passes and will continue to grow in what has become a thriving industry parallel to police and military operations.
Why is terrorism, as the US and its EU allies define it, namely Islamic-inspired groups organized in a fight to combat what they regard as evil regimes in the Middle East, the West, Africa and Asia, so prominent since the end of the Cold War? After looking at some of the literature on the subject, one could argue that the underlying cause is ideological, religious dogmatism and cultural owing to a “clash of civilizations” to borrow that favorite conservative and liberal Western cliché with underlying racist themes not by the author Samuel Huntington who came up with the concept but on the part of those interpreting it. The conservatives of the late 18th and early 19th century argued precisely along the same lines as modern conservatives blaming ideology when they tried to explain why the French Revolution took place. Similarly, conservative and liberals of the 20th century argued that ideological poisoning of the minds of rebels drove Russians to back the Bolsheviks, the Chinese to back Mao and the Cubans to support Fidel.
If you are conservative, the only motivation of leftist rebels or jihadist terrorists at the other end of the ideological spectrum is ideological, devoid of oppressive social, economic and political conditions, devoid of a sense that foreign powers compromise homeland’s national sovereignty. All one has to do to become a Jihadist terrorist or for that matter a Marxist rebel is to have ideological exposure and that would suffice to pick up a weapon and fight for the cause because a religious or secular ideology calls for change in the status quo.
Clearly, this naïve perspective flies in the face of empirical reality when we examine that the people who join a jihadist struggle do so because they are driven by desperation of their lives caused by their government and social elites (as is the case in much of sub-Sahara Africa), by a foreign government (s) and foreign corporations, or instigated and supported by counter-insurgency operations of foreign governments (as has been the case in Syria).
Religious dogma, ideology, and culture play a role in so far as they justify their position and provide a coherent way to articulate the cause and place it into a larger perspective. Otherwise they would merely be sharp shooters on the hunt to take down innocent people to prove a political point. Socioeconomic and political domestic conditions and external intervention intended to control through local the country through local elites are at the root of the problem driving people to rebels and unless these are addressed, terrorism will continue to evolve and expand from one group to the next. When Pope Francis announced that people join terrorists is the result of absence of social justice, many in the West took it as criticism that lacks basis in empirical reality. However, this is something well established long before the Pope’s announcement. Listening to Western politicians one would assume that they want to end terrorism, although everything they have been doing, not saying, points that they want even more terrorism.
There are two main reasons why terrorism serves the status quo of the countries ostensibly undertaking anti-terror policies, although in reality they are promoting terrorism; one has to do with domestic affairs and the second with foreign policy.
A culture of fear cultivated by politicians, the media, and businesses to engender conformity to the institutional structure is one of the reasons that terrorism is constantly presented as an “existential threat” when in reality the average person has a much greater chance of dying in a car accident or by gun-violence in the streets of the US or Europe. If people accept terrorism as the “real national security issue” rather than social justice, civil rights, extreme socioeconomic inequality, and a political system inclusive of all people and just the top ten percent of the wealthiest to the detriment of the majority, then the social contract and status quo remain unchanged.
Policies of militarism and covert operations to destabilize regimes for the purpose of gaining geopolitical advantage and economic imperialism is another reason to use terrorism as the pretext, and in fact to create and perpetuate it. During the Cold War, the US used Communism as an ‘existential threat’ to impose its role as the world’s policeman and expand economically, while engendering conformity at home amid a quasi-apartheid regime that kept minorities on the margins of society. The Cold War is over and terrorism simply took its place, especially since the US-EU efforts to recreate the Cold War with Russia over the Ukraine have turned out a dismal failure in the last two years. Not that the war in Iraq and Afghanistan aimed to end terrorism worked much better, and we must judge policy by results alone and not populist rhetoric and excuses. In the last analysis a foreign policy rooted in imperialism cannot be justified unless it has an “EVIL” enemy to blame and for the public to fear and this is where terrorism fits in so well.
Human Nature and Terrorism
People are not born “terrorists” any more than they are imperialists advocating economic, political and strategic hegemony that violates national sovereignty with the intent to subjugate and exploit. Institutional structures create terrorism as much as imperialism and the two are intertwined in modern history, at least from the late 19th century when European imperialists were using conventional military force to perpetuate their subjugation over the people of Africa and Asia (India, China, Sudan, South Africa, Philippines, to mention just a few).
In the aftermath of the Irish famine in the aftermath of the Revolutions of 1848, the Irish struggle for independence through various organizations Fenian Brotherhood and Irish Republican Brotherhood is indicative of militants employing unconventional means to fight against British imperialists. Similarly, there were armed anti-colonial struggles that the British labeled terrorist in the Sudan and Egypt (1880s-1890s) as well as Southern Africa, Nigeria and Ghana. Parallel to the anti-imperialist struggles in the non-Western World, there were also terrorist activities within the West, from Russia to Europe and US undertaken primarily by anarchists who believed that targeted attacks on high-profile public officials would publicize their cause for social justice and bring about systemic change.
Granted it takes a certain type of personality to engage in unconventional warfare, but the average person is not by nature prone to killing innocent civilians for the sake of revenge and publicity any more than they are interested in mass killings through the lawful cover of a government air force or army. Human beings within the context of an institutional structure can become part of a mass killing machine (armed forces), as they can just as easily become involved in “terrorism”, which is merely an unconventional form of war but lacking legitimacy. Just as many of those engaged in conventional war combat are mentally unstable if not sociopaths as there are terrorists who are just as mentally unbalanced. However, after the Paris bombing, one of the ISIS or ISIL operatives that defected explained to the authorities the reasons people at the grassroots gravitate toward the jihadist organization is mainly endemic poverty in Syria that did not exist before the US, Western and Turkish-Arab-backed rebel movement.
Even with all the deaths and injuries that terrorism has created, it is estimated that in the 20th century between 165 million and 175 million people were killed in conventional wars where most of the victims are indeed civilians. How many were killed by terrorism in the last 100 years? There are no precise statistics, but they number into the tens of thousands and not hundreds of millions. Even President Obama pointed out in one of his speeches that terrorism has killed a few thousand Americans in the last two decades, whereas gun violence has eliminated close to 350,000.
Despite these statistics, the US media, politicians and pundits incessantly perpetuate a culture of fear, projecting the impression that the average citizen is threatened by terrorism when in fact the average citizen is likely to die by gun violence in the hands of some mentally ill or enraged individual. Moreover, the media, pundits and politicians never point out that conventional wars kill on a massive scale, that gun violence is a real existential threat, while terrorism activities, as reprehensible and loathsome as they are, kill very few by comparison because of the nature of the operations. Nor do they ever address the underlying causes of terrorism, preferring instead to cultivate racist attitudes that a segment of the public entertains about Muslims no matter who they are.
There are outlets that try to provide a more rational approach to these issues, avd occasionally there are voices of reason even within the mainstreal media. However, self-censorship is what rules the day when it comes to conformity with government and business, otherwise people lose their jobs. For example, on 19 November 2015, CNN foreign affairs correspondent Elise Labott, had to apologize after her network suspended her merely because she wrote in TWITTER House passes bill that could limit Syrian refugees. Statue of Liberty bows head in anguish.
If this innocuous comment was sufficient for CNN to suspend this mainstream reporter, what would they do if the reporter dared ask who had been providing funding, technical training, intelligence and other support to Syrian rebels fighting against Assad but then turning against the West that had been supporting them in the first place? Given the reality of survival that comes first in peoples’ lives, they will not express their opinion freely – in government, media, academia, business, and even social circles – because they know self-censorship is the way to put food on the table.
Realistically, is it possible to stop terrorist attacks in Europe and the US, using modern intelligence and police methods?
If it were possible to stop terrorist attacks, why has it not happened since 9/11, especially with the institutionalization of an anti-terrorism virtual police state in the US that shares intelligence with its allies? It is completely understandable that the average person cries out for the government to just stop terrorism, just as they cried out in the 1980s “Say No to Drugs” and the government declared “war on drugs”. Has the US “won” the war on drugs, a war through which many banks were making immense profits laundering drug money? According to Huffington: “Bank of America, Western Union, and JP Morgan, are among the institutions allegedly involved in the drug trade. Meanwhile, HSBC has admitted its laundering role, and evaded criminal prosecution by paying a fine of almost $2 billion. The lack of imprisonment of any bankers involved is indicative of the hypocritical nature of the drug war.”http://www.huffingtonpost.com/avinash-tharoor/banks-cartel-money-laundering_b_4619464.html
Unlike conventional wars between countries with specific targets and through conventional means, terrorism is dispersed throughout the planet in more than one-third of the countries. Immediately after the Paris bombing, came a hit in northern Nigeria by Boko Haram, the militant Islamic group active in Nigeria, Niger, Cameroon, and Chad. Although the media hardly devoted any coverage to it because the victims were not Westerners, the organization has been active since 2002. Is the war on terror going to eliminate Boko Haram as well as Northern Mali where pro-al-Qaeda Islamic rebels took hostages on 20 November 2015 just as the West making promises to end terrorism? If there are an estimate 41 countries with Islamic rebels as some reports indicate, where exactly would the US and its allies begin to end terrorism on a world scale with more than one-and-a-half billion Muslims and growing at much faster rates than any other religious group?
Immediately after the Paris bombing, China asked for political support to crush its own militant Muslims, just as Russia demanded that its anti-jihadist campaign is justified. Besides going after Muslims in southern Xinjiang, spreading fear, repression, and violence, the Chinese government also has been fighting the Uyghur militants in the western region who want to create an independent East Turkestan. Are the Chinese repressing the minorities of their country and ignoring human rights, or are they fighting terrorism? Is the US interested in helping China fight its domestic terrorists, or is it only interesting in China backing US efforts to dethrone the pro-Russian Assad in Syria and fight against select jihadists in Syria and Iraq?
Where does this absurd game of the war on terror begin and where does it end in the 41 countries with Islamic militants? Does the Western war on terror stay focused on what the US and EU want, does it include what Russia and China want, does it go farther to include Africa and India? Who decides, who carries out these costly campaigns and where does it stop considering the nature of terrorism is unconventional and the next door neighbor could be one do carry out an act despite Russian, US, and French planes bombing specific targets. One reason that presidential candidate Hillary Clinton ruled out troops on the ground in Syria (19 November 2015) is because she knows it will end in political, military and economic failure for the US, while alienating if not radicalizing Muslims across the world.
On the eve of the 13th anniversary of 9/11, president Obama asked the American people to support his war on ISIS operating in parts of Syria and Iraq. If we look at the rebel groups operating in Syria against Assad just two years ago, there were more than 1000 and numbered roughly 100,000. Broken down, however, we are struck that they are either ISIS, al-Qaeda, pro-ISIS or pro-al-Qaeda (al-Nusra Front), with very few that are with neither ISIS nor al-Qaeda. In other words, where are the elements for establishing a pro-West moderate democratic regime in this country? Even if a few of them amid their struggle profess pro-US, pro-West leanings, what guarantees are there that they will not turn on the West just as did al-Qaeda that the US assisted in the 1980s during the war against the USSR in Afghanistan, or more recently ISIS in the war against Syria.
In his speech on the 13th anniversary of 9/11, Obama stated: “This counterterrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out ISIL wherever they exist using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground.” What he had in mind was drone warfare that many organizations and governments have condemned as causing indiscriminate damage and killing far more innocent civilians than rebels in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and other countries. For this kind of war that has proved controversial, if not a war crime, Obama is asking the support of the people, knowing full well very few would dare to criticize any kind of war against terrorism. Clinton supports this as well and many Republicans would have the marines land in Syria because the record shows that things worked out so well in Iraq and Afghanistan!
The Obama policy is in essence a rehashed Bush policy with drones and covert operations through various local agents. Will this achieve its goal, or create more terrorism which is the unspoken goal because it serves the political, economic and diplomatic (balance of power) interests of the US? The only thing that matters is that the president and the government project an image of strength identified with military action that makes Americans feel safer at home and perhaps put the fear of God in America’s enemies. Right wingers and of course Israel and its American supporters believe that America must do more militarily to teach terrorists a lesson – no doubt a lesson that would only create more terrorism as it has in the last fifteen years. Reality is not important for these people driven by ideology, racism, political opportunism, and defense industry lobbying influence. The image projected through the media that they are “fighting terrorism” is the only thing that matters.
Is Homeland Security recollection of data from all servers the best alternative to intercept future attacks or are they other ways to get the job done more efficiently?
It is incumbent upon any government to protect its citizens from threats domestic and foreign, while working within the constitutional and legal framework. The establishment of Homeland Security has violated the constitutional (Fourth Amendment – prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause) and legal framework (open records law) as we now know as a result of the Edward Snowden revelations, while it has not deterred terrorism on a global scale, although it has helped to deter it up to a degree domestically. Homeland Security projects the image that it is the solution to a problem. Moreover, Homeland Security is in essence a pretext to strengthen the police state that the US has become so that it can justify the continuation of the dying Pax Americana and neoliberal policies that continue to weaken the social fabric at home.
The key question is whether there has been an increase or decrease of terrorism in the last thirteen years that the US has been engaged in this global campaign at an enormous cost to the US taxpayers by creating Homeland Security. According to the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) (University of Maryland), terrorism increased in Asia, Africa, Middle East and on a global scale. Many have reached the conclusion that the war on terror feeds terrorism and its increase throughout the world. Others note that the US and its allies engaged in formal war against terrorism killing thousands of innocent civilians, injuring and many more millions of displaced and impoverished people that have become refugees.
The Homeland Security “fix” is in large measure an extension of the military-industrial complex intended to dish out contracts to private companies and to maintain the US a quasi-police state. The idea that more and better technology is the solution is itself an extension of such thinking to dish out billions of taxpayer dollars to high tech companies so that government could then argue that it provides security when in fact it is working hard to create insecurities and stimulate even more terrorism than we now have around the world. On the surface, this may indeed seem absurd, but it makes sense if examined from the perspective of the very influential corporate interests that have a role in policymaking and want nothing better than more government contracts for their companies and the public’s focus on terrorism rather than raising the minimum wage and raising living standards.
Homeland Security plays into the hands of right wing ideologues, racists and xenophobes what want strict immigration laws, applied in a discriminatory manner, all in the name of national security. Even Obama ridiculed the idea that a three-year Syrian orphan poses a threat to rightwing xenophobes who do not want Muslims coming to the US. France has already decided not to cave to right wing pressures on this issue and to accept 30,000 refugees in the next two years as agreed with Germany and its EU partners. The French government did not cave to the neo-Fascist National Front Party led by Marine. “Migrants bring filth, crime, poverty and Islamic terrorism, Ms. Le Pen has suggested in recent weeks; a dead migrant child’s photo was simply a ploy to manipulate European feelings of guilt. France is about to be “submerged” in a “terrifying” wave of migrants who represent only a “burden.”
Led by the populist billionaire Trump, the US Republican presidential candidates have taken a hard line on immigrants to win the right wing vote. That the Republican-led US House of Representatives passed xenophobic immigration reform blatantly racist a few days after the Paris bombing is indicative of the direction that a segment of the political elites are taking the public. People are looking for a scapegoat in the tragedy of Syrian migrants that the US and its allies caused in the first place by destabilizing Assad. Having absolutely nothing to show for US direct and indirect operations in Syria, largely because Russia, China and Iran would not cave in to US pressures, the solution is racist and xenophobic legislation against the victims of the war the US and its allies caused.
If terrorists detonated a nuclear bomb inside a major city in Europe or the US, would governments consider an extermination rampage, including the expulsion of Muslims in western countries?
Terrorists can only obtain nuclear weapons from governments, whereas conventional weapons are sold by commercial vendors for the right price. According to the UK paper The Daily Mail: “Isis are using ‘significant quantities’ of US-made weapons to spread their reign of terror across the Middle East, according to a new report. This finding came from London-based research group Conflict Armament Research (CAR) after it conducted on-the-ground investigations in Iraq and Syria. It’s been known for a while that Isis has been using U.S military hardware, but CAR’s study is the first by a non-government body to try and document in detail what hardware the terrorist group, also known as the Islamic State (IS), is deploying.”http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2749197/ISIS-arming-US-military-hardware-wage-jihad-Middle-East-seizing-weapons-Syrian-rebels-Iraqi-soldiers.html#ixzz3s20D4JCz
Just as terrorists today obtain arms, trucks, and all kinds of supplies as well as money from governments and businessmen, similarly the only way to secure a nuclear weapon would be from one of the “nuclear club” states. Just as ISIS had been receiving direct and indirect support of various kinds from the countries I mentioned above, including the US and UK largely responsible for its growth and expansion, similarly future terrorist organizations would enjoy the same privilege. If Israel, Pakistan, India, France, UK or the US wants to create havoc in the Middle East, giving jihadists a nuclear bomb would achieve the goal. However, the root cause of the problem would be the government that provided the nuclear weapon.
This is extremely unlikely and only a scenario of rightwing propaganda we have come to expect not just from FOXNEWS that ISIS particularly enjoys because it serves its goals to recruit and retain rebels and supporters, but mainstream media propaganda intended to cultivate the culture of fear among the public. It is just another in a series of myths so that people are not focused on their immediate lives, on repaying the college debt, having government raise the minimum wage above the poverty line, providing affordable housing, cops killing black teenagers every day and justifying on the basis of law and order. Nuclear bomb threats can only come from the “nuclear club” that has them and only if one of the club members wishes to sink the world into chaos would we see a nuclear bomb in the hands of rebel groups.
Has the moderate Muslim world done enough to stop terrorist networks or could they do a better job to help prevent attacks?
What is “the moderate Muslim World” and who exactly determines the criteria? Is it Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Gulf States that have a history of financing militant jihadists, including ISIS while closely allying themselves with the US? Is it pro-US Egypt that failed to protect the Russian plane from an ISIS bomb? Is it Pakistan that has been a US strategic satellite under the gun and all along playing all sides from the Chinese to the Taliban? Is it Iraq and Libya that the US and its allies left in shambles and caused the refugee problem?
Let us assume for the sake of argument that the anti-Islamist Egyptian government constitutes “moderate” because US the Arab dictatorships in the Gulf and Israel favor it. Why was ISIS able to plant a simple soda pop-bomb to bring down the Russian plane and kill 224 passengers? In the absence of cooperation on the ground, terrorist attacks are not possible at an airport, and cooperation on the ground means that there are enough people sympathetic to the jihadist cause.
Considering that the only stable and strong Middle East Islamic regime is Iran, which has been willing to cooperate with the US to contain Sunni jihadists, does Washington want Iran to play the preeminent role in the regional balance of power? Does Iran fit in with Washington’s broader goals of perpetually destabilizing the Middle East and using Israel to help out?
Considering the waning influence of the US in the region against the reality of China’s rising economic role in the world, Russia’s historic ties with certain countries like Syria, Iran’s dominant regional role, why would destabilization not make sense since Israel wants the exact same thing as the Washington?
Why would Muslim governments take comfort from US policy of destabilizing and overthrowing Middle East-North African regimes so that it could exert preeminent economic, military and strategic influence when in the process chaos is the only result? Even if Muslims want to support the US war against ISIS, how can they do so when the US has a long history of “a crusading foreign policy” toward Muslim countries, exempting the more authoritarian Saudi Arabia and Gulf States that have been funding ISIS, while striking selectively at regimes that the US wants replaced. Even after the Paris tragedy, the US goal remains to overthrow Assad and replace him with a pro-US puppet instead of one beholden to Russia and Iran.
Assuming there is 100% popular and political support for Obama’s version of the Bush anti-terrorism policy, or even the Republican version of revisiting the Iraq model of war and occupation in Syria, can this bring the desired goal into fruition, or is it merely another public relations ploy on the part of both Democrat and Republican politicians who cannot deal effectively with domestic problems like a declining middle class and a massive public debt?
Conclusions
Do US policies increase terrorism rather than decreasing it as the government claims? We must assume that policymakers are very smart people with experience who also rely on outside consultants to formulate policy. While this would be a safe assumption, it is not as safe to vouch for their mental stability, their blinding ideological frame of mind, and career-based opportunism that take precedence over everything else from human rights to social justice.
It is safe to assume that those in policymaking, politicians, pundits, and the media believe the same formula that worked in bringing down the Communist bloc would work on ending terrorism, regardless of the reality that Communists were organized in states and employed conventional methods just as those opposing them. Finally, it is safe to assume that the more astute apologists of the bogus “anti-terrorism” industry that the US has created realize it is doomed to fail and in fact to bring about an increase in terrorism.
The Turkish downing of a Russian jet fighter on 24 November 2015 and Putin ’s reaction that the government in Ankara is in essence an accomplice of ISIS and terrorism profiting from its operations going through the country are the latest and clearest evidence of a NATO member obstructing anti-ISIS operations. There are several issues here. First, Turkish air space is legitimate if it were not for the fact that Turkey repeatedly violates the airspace of all its neighbors without them shooting down Turkish war planes.
At the start of the foreign-instigated civil war in Syria, Syrian forces shut down a Turkish reconnaissance plane (June 2012). Unlike Turkey refusing to apologize to Russia for downing the Russian plane, Syria apologized for the incident and called for cordial relations with its neighbor. Second, ISIS oil does in fact go through Turkey and it is sold on the black market to the tune of $1.5 million per day. Amazingly, Erdogan argued that ISIS and Assad are collaborators because ISIS in fact sells its oil to Assad, the president they are trying to overthrow!
Third, Turkey as a NATO member most likely consulted with the US and probably NATO before it shot down the Russian plane, considering that the Russians had been violating Turkish air space for at least a month. Without US giving the green light, Ankara would never carry out such an act that would only cause a series of retaliatory measures from Moscow. Fourth, the shooting down of the Russian plane exposes the farce about the war on terror that is in fact a war to perpetuate terrorism, considering the message Turkey’s action and indirectly the US are sending to ISIS. Fifth, judging by the reaction of the Western media regarding the shooting down of the Russian place, the US and its partners had no problem at all with Ankara’s action. Russian intelligence did uncover that within the NATO alliance, some members were not happy with Turkey’s action, but the US position was to back Ankara.
I was hardly surprised to see a recent CNN report claiming that ISIS loves Western media because it plays into its propaganda goals. They are especially appreciative of FOXNEWS that constantly preaches war with Islam and “boots on the ground”, thus justifying the call of ISIS to recruit Muslims to defend their land and their faith. Absurdity’s limits do not stop with Jihadists that the West praises when they are involved in toppling a regime that the US opposes – Libya or Syria, for example – but baptizes terrorists when they carry out political acts of violence against Western or pro-Western targets.
Because of such blatant absurdities in US foreign policy reveal the ultimate in irrational, unconscionable sheer political opportunism and total absence of any moral foundation, Robert Ford, former US Ambassador to Syria, had warned that US policy assisting anti-Assad Islamic militants would result in the rise of terrorism that could potentially touch US interests. Ambassador Ford noted the example of Afghanistan in the 1980s when the US trained Jihadists that would eventually turn into al-Qaeda. Similar contradictions as Ambassador Ford noted are blatant in the case of Ukraine where containment and encirclement US policies are bound to backfire in the absence of a political solution or ideological foundation rooted in democratic principles rather than political opportunism intended for short-term geopolitical and economic gains. Supporting neo-Nazis among other heterogeneous elements in the Ukraine against the Russian-backed separatist elements is not merely a manifestation of an incoherent foreign policy filled with contradictions and aimlessness for the ‘democratic’ West, it also reveals Washington’s desperate anachronistic Cold War solutions to 21st century problems amid the slow decline of the US in relationship to China.
One could argue that there is no greater machine of terror than the state that has at its disposal the massive means of the police and military to inflict massive damage, as I noted in the introduction. It is also noteworthy to point out that “terrorizing” an entire nation can be carried out by non-military mechanisms, such as the IMF representing finance capital has at its disposal when imposing austerity and impoverishes and bankrupts millions of people within a remarkably short period. Finally, there is also the phenomenon of “corporate terrorism”, most prominently demonstrated in Colombia where US-based corporations were hiring death squads to assassinate and intimidate the peasants.
According to the UN, and human rights organizations, left wing killings carried out in Colombia have accounted for 12% of clash-related fatalities, while right wing paramilitary deaths account for 80%, raising the question of who is behind right-wing death squads and for what purpose. Similarly, the vast majority of disappearances and kidnappings are attributed to right wing paramilitary groups that are at the core of human rights violations invariably ignored by the Colombian government and the US that has historically close ties with Colombia. According to a number of pres reports and human rights organizations, Coca Cola Bottling, Chiquita Banana and Drummond mining operations are three companies that have in the past financed right wing paramilitary operations resulting in killings, disappearances and persecution of trade unionists, labor organizers and leftist activists. The German TV network Deutsche Wella recently ran a long documentary on this issue, focusing mostly on Drummond and its role in Colombia. This was taking place during the second term of the Bush administration and early years of Obama, years that coincided with US global campaign against Islamic terrorists, while turning a blind eye to US corporate-hired terrorists.
When the foreign minister of Sweden proposed that working toward a solution to the Palestinian Question could help contain terrorism, Israel and the Western press condemned such linkage. It is no secret to the entire world that Israel has been terrorizing the Palestinian people under apartheid conditions since 1948. It is also no secret that Palestinians are condemned as terrorists when they are fighting for a homeland while the Israeli armed forces killing them en masse is presented as “defending its security”. This type of hypocrisy is not lost on people, including many Jews all over the world. It is naïve to assume that simply settling once and for all the Palestinian Question while pursuing imperialist policies toward Islamic countries would somehow end terrorism.”
Jaime Ortega-Simo.
(The Daily Journalist president and founder)
“Not even at the early stages in the war on terror, when the US military occupation in Afghanistan and Iraq hit a record peak in deployment, were the US nor Europe capable of stopping the bombings in Madrid and London. Al-Qaeda at that time was financially crippled because the US froze the financial assets of the terrorist cell by eradicating the trade of Poppy seeds in South Central Asia. Al-Qaeda at its weakest point still was capable of creating havoc worldwide with sleeper cells in the Maghreb – never mind now.
Al-Qaeda is ten times worse now and ISIL is the upgraded version of Bin Laden’s network. But rest assure that Al-Qaeda are more dangerous than before because now like ISIL they control land in Syria, which allows them to have a base plus optimum energy to sell in exchange for weapons without the need of fundraisers from Qatar, Yemen and Saudi Arabia. ISIL controls oil resources and sales it in the black market for cheaper prices than that of UAE to its neighbors Libya and Turkey. Also money laundry and children sex trade profit millions of dollars that fall into extremist pockets.
ISIS and Al-Nusra since 2014 are recruiting tens of thousands of children to fight a future jihad against the west. ISIS is already in Afghanistan training kids at a young age to become suicide bombers; note, that the province of Kunar and Gandahar, was once Taliban and Al-Qaeda territory, and both groups have been expelled from the area or have deserted to ISIL in less than one year. How are we going to stop a terrorist attack? We don’t even know 1/10 of the current refugees immigrating to Europe; EU and US can’t contact the blown up Syrian ministry of citizenship to confirm valid identification — its absurd!
Another problem is the sterilization of intelligence collection promoted by liberal pundits to not violate the privacy of individual rights when searching for possible terrorist suspects. 9-11 could have been prevented only if the Clinton administration would have allowed FBI special agent John O’Neill to search for evidence in Yemen that would of link the terrorist perpetrators to the twin tower attacks; instead, former US Ambassador of Yemen Barbara Bodine, a liberal known for advocating peace and coexistence, complained to the Clinton administration that an investigation would jeopardize America’s relationship with the Muslim world. The investigation was suspended and not long after, 9-11 hit.
The US administrative incapability filled with never ending paperwork to oversee which political party violates the 4th amendment first to be put accountable in front of the Supreme Court, is only another reason for the demise of serious intelligence collection in the US. Then we have human right activist who push Pro-US forces in Afghanistan (Northern Alliance) and Syria not to “torture people” to gather information. I find that just absolutely incredible. Torture is necessary to protect western interest; liberal utopias should not be acceptable under threatening events created by fundamental narcissist.
We cannot swallow the mixture of Liberal utopias, and radical Islamic integration in the western world; otherwise, we are heading for something very bad, and the Obama Administration, with its absurd foreign policy has created a menace that could engulf the Middle East into a full out sectarian war.
If the US and Europe were run by the military or the military acted independently without approval from the United Nations to conduct missions these would exercise military might on the sectors where radicalism thrives and finish the problem. They are more terrorist attacks in the 21th century, than when the British and the French colonized the Middle East. Why? Because liberal participation in politics deteriorates military strength sponsoring only foreign diplomacy, which is a complete utopia in the Middle East considering that the Freedom and Justice Party, Hamas and the General Nation Council won the elections not to reform civil rights, but to sponsor a congressional tribune that would constitutionalize the adoption of Sharia-Law.
Liberals also promoted the Arab Spring, and now half of the Middle East looks like a hornets’ nest plagued with terrorist extremist. And trust me, we might be capable of stopping some people from bombing the west, but when you have over 2.000 independent cells operating differently all around the world not even the most avid intercept technology can stop 1/3 of these, and the new generation of jihadist are now trained to use technology much more efficiently.
The US foreign policy in the Middle East is vehemently absurd, and Europe with its large Muslim population is even in worse conditions unless they start to drastically implement techniques used in medieval times that will secure the augmentation of terrorism. China and Russia now hold the key to use action over words, and they will execute without remorse to finish the problem — not that China and Russia, won’t be another headache to solve in the near future.
As for now, I am afraid that ISIL and Al-Qaeda might be already in Mexico ready to plot a bomb attack in the West Coast. A few senators have warned about this rumor, but the liberals have adverted from this issue once again claiming it is unconstitutional to launch a secret military operation in Mexico without evidence. Well are we going to trust the Cartels corrupting the weak Mexican government, that smuggle drugs into the US, or would it be a better idea to go for a peek inside Mexico to assure the protection of millions of Americans?
RAW, ISI, MSS, MIT, and former KGB scientist currently unemployed could get gracious offers from one of these terrorist cells; it is not a far fetch scenario. The Mexico-US border offers a great gateway to the US, to smuggle weapons and target a major city. South America and US relations are scrawny, and the coastal and sea borders in Central America are not guarded by the US Coastal Police. I only see a great opportunity to manufacture a bomb and enter US territory without need for tight security.
In the end, it is inevitable that something of epic proportions is going to strike either in Europe or the US — — no one is safe. And all these progressive politicians are going to realize that history is cyclical and not progressive. What the Mongols did in Bagdad in 1258, will be eventually repeat itself because until today, only Genghis Khan was capable of exterminating Jihad from its root. The Abbasid Caliphate was notoriously cruel torturing and displaying Kazaks, Mongols and Tajiks in public squares and the Mongol retribution was without remorse. It brought 200 years of peace in the region as a result of the barbaric siege.
They are so many Muslims that even if one percent of one billion were extremist you still have ten million radicals floating worldwide. Islam and politics don’t work. It is like mixing oil and water, ink and paint and camels with horses. A religious based faith overwrites national laws, so it’s extremely hard for Muslims to adjust to the west under religious principles. Politicians cannot guarantee souls eternal heaven; whereas, religion in Islam plays a crucial factor in the choices people make.
I don’t see this getting any better, and in my opinion unless we adopt medieval techniques I hardly doubt prevention is possible to a 7th century religion that lives in the past.”
Comments Off on Can we really stop terrorist attacks?
Petitions have been launched demanding the Rupert Murdoch-owned Sun newspaper be charged with incitement to racial hatred after the tabloid published poll results alleging one in five Muslims “have sympathy for jihadis” on its front page.
One petition, which accuses the Sun of crossing the line from “merely distasteful into criminal incitement,” has amassed more than 8,000 signatures, while another on Change.org as attracted almost 21,000.
In the weeks since the terrorist attacks in Paris, hate crimes against Muslims have jumped a staggering 275 percent in the UK. The majority of the reported incidents were attacks against young Muslim women wearing the hijab.
Critics across the board have been quick to question the polling methodology used by Survation, the firm that conducted the survey.
The poll was gathered by calling people with Muslim-sounding surnames and asking them whether they identify as Muslim.
Rival polling companies have expressed concern that without a fuller picture of socioeconomic and demographic details, the results may not have generated a statistically representative sample of the almost three million Muslims living in the UK.
YouGov, the Sun’s regular pollster, had refused to conduct the poll, saying it would not be able to accurately represent Britain’s Muslim population with the timeframe and budget allocated by the Sun.
A spokesperson for YouGov told the Guardian: “To survey Britain’s Muslim population, particularly at a time of such heightened sensitivities, requires the kind of time, care, and therefore cost, that is beyond a newspaper’s budget.”
The Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) received more than 1,200 complaints about the poll.
The Sun has been lampooned by hundreds of Twitter users, many of whom appear more bemused than outraged at the poll. Using the hashtag #1in5Muslims, people tweeted made up facts about Muslims.
Survation, for its part, has defended its methods but distanced itself from the Sun’s incendiary interpretation of the findings.
“Survation do not support or endorse the way in which this poll’s findings have been interpreted. Neither the headline nor the body text of articles published were discussed with or approved by Survation prior to publication,” company research director Patrick Brione said in a statement on its website.
Comments Off on Thousands sign petitions to prosecute Sun over Muslim poll
The Turkish General Staff announced the downing of a Russian military plane in southern Turkey, on Tuesday morning for violating its airspace. The Russian Defense Ministry has confirmed that one of its fighters “SU-24” has been killed, although he clarifies that “the plane was flying at 6,000 meters” and never crossed into Turkish territory. The incident occurred in the Syrian-Turkish border between the Turkish and Yayladag district of Latakia suffering bouts for a week.
The information on the status of the two ‘SU-24’ pilots is very confusing. At first, the CNN-Turk reported that one of the pilots was captured alive, while another died. Soon after, an opposition militia known as 10th Brigade Coastal published pictures of an individual appearance and seemingly lifeless Russian uniform; then the brigade commander has assured Reuters that “both pilots are dead. Our comrades opened fire and killed in the air “, said Aspaslan Celik.
However, Turkish government sources said that they possessed reports that both drivers were alive, claiming they were trying to rescue them. However, late in the afternoon on Tuesday, the General Staff of the Russian Army has acknowledged the death of one of its pilots.
“In line with military rules of war, the Turkish authorities repeatedly warned apparatus unidentified that was 15 kilometers or so away from the border. The device did not respond to the warnings, and proceeded to fly over Turkey” , underlined a high Turkish official to The Daily Journalist, speaking on condition of anonymity as is standard. “Turkish Air Force responded toppling the device,” he adds.
According to the General Staff, an “unidentified” air unit entered at 9.20 Turkish airspace. “After issuing 10 warnings in five minutes,” continues the statement of the General Staff, “two F16 aircraft were involved.” Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has warned Turkey of “serious consequences” in bilateral relations, has subsequently said that the plane was shot down four kilometers from the border.
The Turkish military issued a map of the paths of aircraft involved in the incident. It will be seen how, after a circular maneuver and no indication how fast the designated warning to the Su-24 was given as it crossed about three kilometers from Turkish airspace. Video images published in the Turkish press show how a hunting type of aircraft is hit by a missile in the air and both drivers fail to eject from the cockpit
After the coup, the plane crashed in flames on Mount Turkmen, an area Syria inhabited by ethnic Turks. In the minutes after the impact, Russian helicopters were deployed to locate the crew.
The White House has confirmed that Turkey sent 10 warnings to Russian pilots before shooting, while Damascus has denounced what he described as “flagrant aggression”.
According to the pro-opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, they have raised militants killed in a nearby area, minutes after the downing of the plane and an anti-tank missile, including a Russian helicopter. This type of weapon is identical to that given by the US to several groups opposed to Damascus. The helicopter has not been reported killed by this attack, which follows the first downing of a Russian or Soviet ship, by a member of NATO since the 50s.
Turkey has summoned the Russian ambassador to the country, Andrei Karlov, to give explanations. The Russian Foreign Ministry has confirmed the cancellation of the visit of Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was scheduled for Wednesday to Turkey. Putin has called urgently to his security cabinet.
In addition, the Turkish Foreign Ministry has summoned the Russian ambassador to inform him of what happened.
Turkey, which supports light weapons and non-lethal assistance to several armed opposition groups – including Turkmens – against Syrian President Bashar Assad, clashes with Russia’s strategy, firm support of the Syrian government with weapons, aviation and troops. This diplomatic tension has nothing to do with the prolific trade relations. Russia is the main supplier of fossil fuels for Turkey, which in turn is a preferred tourist destination for Russians.
Ankara had called for consultations on the 19 November last year the Russian ambassador in Turkey to protest the Russian support to forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad. The Turkish government was particularly incensed because a week ago, the government’s offensive was advancing on territory inhabited by Turkmen, with whom maintains fraternal bonds. That area was, so far, controlled by an amalgam Militia including Islamic forces.
The Turkish government has complained that the Russian bombings in Latakia are designed not to fight the self-styled Islamic State, not present in the area, but Assad anti-government forces. Already on November 19 warned that the Turks would take action because of the proximity of these battles to turcosiria border, if a territorial violation occurred. Turkey also criticized the pro-Assad attack was causing thousands of new refugees.
“We have published in the past our rules of war and remind our counterparts that any violation of Turkish airspace would cause the actions prescribed by the military rules of war This is not a specific action against any country. Our fighters took the F16 necessary to defend the national sovereignty of Turkey measures ” the government official said.
Turkey and Russia, confronted positions in the Syrian war, already had a diplomatic confrontation over borders in early October. Then Deputy Secretary of Foreign summoned the ambassador of the Russian Federation and the Ministry in Ankara strongly protested a violation of airspace in an area very close to where the demolition took place on Tuesday. Moscow argued that this had accidentally occurred due to adverse weather conditions.
Maximum tension rises
What happened Tuesday maximizes the international political and diplomatic pressure. According to US media McClatchy, also in early October, a Russian fighter was even a target radar lock by Turkish military. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, firm foe of Syrian leader Bashar Assad, considered from the outset the Russian intervention on Syria, begun on September 29 past- “as a serious error”.
Since June 2012, when a Syrian anti-aircraft battery shot down a Turkish warplane that had penetrated Syrian sky, Turkey has maintained a “buffer area” de facto less than 10 km on Syrian territory intended to warn and eventually respond to any territorial aggression. Relying on the rules of war, Turkey, which has parliamentary permission to intervene in Syria, blocks everything on their radar apparatus to intercept unauthorized intrusions.
Under this premise, Turkey has demolished several Syrian apparatus in the past. This May Ankara announced it had shot a Syrian helicopter, that had traveled more than 10 kilometers in Turkey after launching several warnings. In March 2014 the Turkish plane shot down a Syrian MiG fighter type who, along with another ship, had entered Yailadagi. In September 2013 Ankara also shot down a Syrian helicopter in the same area.
Obama expressed support for Erdogan
The US president spoke by phone Tuesday with his Turkish counterpart Erdogan, to express the support of his country and NATO to Turkey’s right to “defend its sovereignty.”
In their telephone conversation, the two leaders agreed on the importance of calming the tensions between Turkey and Russia, as well as to “seek mechanisms to ensure that such incidents do not recur,” explained the White House statement.
In addition, Obama and Erdogan reiterated their “shared commitment” for “degrade and ultimately destroy” the jihadist Islamic State.
The division of the international community on how to deal with the fight against the Islamic state (IS, by its acronym in English) has come to the Security Council of the United Nations. The Council approved the French judgment regarding the fight against terrorism. Another resolution submitted by Russia that has been around long, but is paralyzed because it involves recognizing the dictatorship of Bashar Assad, something unacceptable to the West.
The resolution adopted filed Thursday by France amounts to a declaration of war by the UN to IS, as it believes that the group “constitutes an unprecedented threat to world peace and security,” and claimed “take all necessary measures in accordance with international law, and in particular Human Rights, humanitarian law and refugee law, in territory controlled by the IS on Syria to step up and coordinate efforts to prevent and suppress terrorist acts ” .
The document condemns the “harshest terms” the “horrendous terrorist attacks by the EI” in June in the Tunisian city of Sousse, in October in Ankara and shooting down a Russian plane over the Sinai and Friday in Paris as well as all other attacks by the group.
At the same time, Russia had raised its project which seeks to work with leaders in the region to fight the fundamentalists. That is an unacceptable proposal to Britain, the United States and France for the simple reason that when referring to “regional leaders” as partners is indirectly legitimizing Bashar Assad government, the Syrian dictator, who enjoys the backing of Moscow as a partner of the international community. And Washington, London and Paris require as a condition sine-qua-non for any peace plan in the region, pushing Assad to leave power.
After France announced Monday that it would take the issue to the UN, Moscow presented another draft resolution with a broader based and another that tried unsuccessfully to push through the end of Septembers character.
The main problem of this text was demanded by the “consent” of States to act against terrorism in its territory, which for France or the United Kingdom is unacceptable supposed to boost the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad.
Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, has backed the French initiative as a step to create an “anti-terrorist front” and insisted that this is also the intention of Russia, who has since September calling for a “grand coalition” against IS.
Churkin said he will continue to work for the adoption of Russian text and crossed the “attempts by some members” to block it as a “short-sighted policy”.
A US-led coalition takes over a year to attack from the air EI positions in Syria and Iraq, while Russia started their own in September bombings, which the West has mostly hit other opposition groups, not just jihadists.
On Tuesday, French President Francois Hollande continued the diplomatic offensive across the Atlantic with a lightning visit to Washington, where he will meet with Barack Obama to discuss the response to the killing of Paris.
Comments Off on The UN ready to declare war on ISIL
(PhD. Harvard) is Hazel Professor of Public Policy and a Fellow of the Mercatus Center of George Mason University. He is also Director of the International Research Laboratory on Political Demography at the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration in Moscow.
1) Today’s generation seems a lot less conservative than other past generations. It looks like liberal dogmas over the years have replaced several conservative values sacred to the pillar of true republicanism. Has the Republican Party significantly weakened over these past 8 years? Are republicans today closer to the left than they are to the right?
By no means! Rather, fiscal conservatism – small government, less spending on social issues, lower taxes – has become stronger, even though some elements of social conservatism – opposition to gay marriage and abortion – have become weaker. Yet opposition to gun control is, if anything, stronger than ever.
Republicans have drawn on all of this to win more governorships, more state legislatures, and more representatives to Congress and the Senate. In these contests, Republicans are doing better than ever. The only reasons Republicans have had trouble winning the presidency is that they have nominated extremists as Vice-President (Palin, Ryan) and older or distant candidates for President (McCain, Romney) who lost the youth and female vote. If Republicans nominate a younger, more dynamic presidential candidate and a vice presidential candidate who has credibility as a possible president, they could win the only prize that has eluded them.
2) Homosexuals, minorities and immigrants loath the Republican Party viewing it as religiously intolerant comprised of elites that sponsor foreign wars to spread capitalism globally. Many inside these groups would vote for Republicans if they were more accepting in terms of civil rights and immigration. Has the Republican Party done a good job trying to become more accepting to homosexuals, minorities and immigrants? If not, would it be a good idea that the Republican candidates win the hearts and minds of these groups without giving away conservative values? Is that even remotely possible?
The latest Republican debate shows the divisions within the party on these issues. Republican candidates generally can NOT embrace homosexuals, minorities, and immigrants because in primaries and local elections, where candidates are only running for Republican votes against other Republicans, there is no advantage to seeking minority support (as minority voters are very heavily Democratic). Moreover, these groups generally do not vote in large numbers EXCEPT in presidential elections. That is why democratic candidates have done better running for President than in local and state elections. That said, certain Republican candidates this year – Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio – do have minority background or family members. So perhaps if one of these gains the nomination, and mainly has to worry about attracting potential democratic voters, they will try to embrace minorities in the general election campaign.
3) Traditionally Latinos are conservative. Why do they swing to Democrats?
Latinos are socially conservative. But on fiscal issues – government support for the poor, gun control, progressive taxation, spending on health care and education, government regulation to curb discrimination – they tend to support Democratic positions.
4) Considering Donald Trump’s past… Is Donald Trump a true Republican or an opportunist?
More of an opportunist, it would seem. Though he will strive to be a true Republican if that will help him politically.
5) Donald Trump thus far has had a large impact in the GOP primaries beating almost all of his fellow competitors. But despite his sudden rise, skeptics, analyst and politicians hold deep concerns worried about his candidacy. Looking at his foreign and national policy, it is not clear how exactly he plans to implement most of his reforms. He said that “Mexico will pay for the wall he plans to construct in the border”. He also said “Putin would get along with him to solve the Syrian crisis.” Is Donald Trump the man for the job in DC? Would he really outsmart Mexico, China, and Putin?
Much of Trump’s campaign rests on aggressive promises and bluster. I doubt if he could implement many of his promised policies if elected. But that may not matter; people like what Trump is saying and America has a long history of candidates who promise everything, including things they often cannot deliver. Look at Obama’s promise to shut down Guantanamo Bay prison – which is still there 8 years later.
6) Dr. Ben Carson has also done fairly well in the GOP, now leading key states like Iowa and Arkansas. Could he beat Donald Trump? Could he take on Hillary and win?
Carson is very likable and an outsider, both of which help in the primaries. But he has no political experience, and has never been in a long political campaign. I think it very unlikely he could be the Republican party candidate. If he becomes the candidate, however, he might do well against Hilary.
7) Before the primaries everyone thought Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz were going to be the present frontrunners of the GOP. What has happened to the political class in the GOP and DC? Why the sudden demise? Are people tire of politicians?
Republican voters are clearly unhappy with Republican politicians, who have been unable to take the White House or stop Obama from implementing Democratic policies. So they are looking for a “savior” from outside the ranks of party politicians who could achieve these goals. Yet over the course of the debates, the greater experience and political skill of Rubio and Cruz has let them start to gain on Trump and Carson. Over the course of a long primary campaign, Bush, Rubio and Cruz may still emerge as the leading contenders for the Republican nomination.
8) They are concerns with new strands of liberalism creeping inside the Democratic Party coming from nonreligious groups. Many young radical reformers view Capitol Hill as corrupted, and not only have started to adopt principles of anarchy, but also of communism, Marxism and minarchism into the system to end capitalism. Christianity is under fire more than ever before under the scientific based state influenced by these groups. Are many new liberals not really democrats, but instead Neo-Liberal that adopt far- more radical leftist dogmas leeching moderate liberal progressives to establish a scientific state free of religion, military, capitalism and conservatism?
This is far too extreme a description. Many younger (and older) democrats worry about growing inequality and lack of opportunity under an economic system that seems to give most of the rewards from economic growth to a very few very rich individuals. So they have been turning to a more European-style democratic socialism, as represented by Bernie Sanders. But I do not see anarchists or communists or anti-religious groups becoming strong within the Democratic Party.
9) A lot of people, especially in social media believe that the high rise of ignorance and crime in the African-American community is the failed social experiment of liberals. They believe liberal activist support groups like “Black Lives Matter” that instigate violence victimizing race over crime, but ignore incidents of African Americans murdering African-Americans, Caucasians and police enforcement. Is this view farfetched? Are the struggles of the African American community the byproduct of the social experiments from the left?
The complexities and history of racism in American are so great that I cannot answer this question in a few sentences. I will say that in many communities, police actions and violence have disproportionately affected minorities, and where this situation involved a largely white police force acting to control minority populations, then violence almost always comes forth. This has very little to do with left or right politics, and much more with issues of police training and actions and community grievances about police practices.
10) Does the liberal establishment control most of the Media compared to Conservatives? Would you name a few television networks they control?
This has always been an odd claim – conservatives love to complain about the “lamestream” media. But it is hard to tell who they mean. Rupert Murdoch appears to be the most powerful media mogul and his empire is conservative. Conservative radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh are more popular than any liberal counterparts. The Wall Street Journal, which is highly conservative, seems more influential than the New York Time, which is supposed to be “liberal.” So I can’t justify the claim of “liberal establishment control of most of the Media.”
11) The Benghazi scandal temporarily hit Hillary’s campaign with ardor from the right, ravaged by republican interest groups trying to demonize her image to discourage her nomination, but despite all the negativity Hillary seems to have survived the storm. Should she be blamed for Benghazi? Why hasn’t the scandal hurt her campaign?
We won’t know whether or not it hurts her campaign until the general election. It is too early to tell. Right now, it is mostly Republicans who are angry about Benghazi, and Hillary is not yet running in contests where Republicans vote.
12) On the other hand, Bernie Sanders has revolutionized the DOP. He promised to bring down the elites, and transform the US with socialism. Does Bernie appeal to people more than Hillary? Is Bernie better equipped to run the nation than Hillary? Would socialism work?
Socialism has never had broad appeal in the United States, if by that is meant government control of large sections of the economy. On the other hand, if what you mean is government regulation to ensure fairness and stability in the private economy, and progressive taxation, all US administrations have practiced this to a greater or less degree, even that of Ronald Reagan. Bernie Sanders advocates these policies more strongly than most others today. But even he is not advocating socialism. In the U.S. “socialism” is a scare word that Republicans use to insult Democrats. Thus the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is labeled as “socialist” by Republicans. But in fact the Affordable Care Act is designed to strengthen private medical insurance, and was designed by a conservative think-tank and first implemented by a Republican governor. There is nothing socialist about Obamacare. So there is no real likelihood of any socialism in the U.S.
13) A lot of people claim that the nation is greatly divided thanks to liberals. It seems like the notion of Nationalism presented during the Reagan Administration hardly remains the same today. With decline in nationalism, many youths no longer believe in patriotism and demonize the military. Could it be said that many of the youths have lost the sense of national pride? If so, Is that good for the country?
The nation is divided, but you can hardly blame that on liberals. Republicans have done more than anyone else to identify “enemies” among opposition politicians. I do not think patriotism has declined at all. What is true is that since military service has become a profession and a choice, rather than a national obligation, few people really understand what military action means. Still, you will find respect and support for military veterans and active soldiers much, MUCH higher today than at any time since the Vietnam war. If Americans are demoralized, it is because after spending trillions of dollars and thousands of lives in campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Middle East seems even more dangerous and unsettled, and terrorist threats greater than ever.
14) Would the rise of a third political party eventually save nation from greater schisms or should we always rely on bipartisanship?
These are two separate questions. A third political party cannot “save” the nation unless people come together to support it. So whether we have two or three or more parties, we must rely on bipartisanship to get things done. That is what the structures in the American Constitution require.
15) Will Donald Trump take the GOP? Which out of the Republicans has a real chance against Hillary and why?
I am a scholar of social change, not a political campaign specialist. But even the latter could not tell you the answer to these questions. That is why we have a long primary season, stretching to next summer. If we could answer these questions now, based on information a full year before the election, then Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton and Barak Obama would never have become President.
16) Who wins the 2016 elections? Are any of the candidates good for the US?
I prefer not to answer this question so early; I will stick by my answer to question 15.
Comments Off on Expert answers questions regarding the present US political race
“The changes sought by the United Kingdom in the European Union are not mission impossible,” said David Cameron on his speech at Chatham House in London, the kick-off of the campaign referédum in the EU, for June 2016.
The British Prime Minister has outlined the broad outlines of its negotiations with Brussels -Reform immigration, fewer regulations, devolution to parliaments and a recognition of the role of countries outside the euro zone, contained in a letter he sent Tuesday to President of the European Council, Donald Tusk.
“The diversity of Europe is its great strength,” insisted Cameron. “In the UK we celebrate that hacho, but we must recognize that the answer to all problems is not always more Europe.” And added “Sometimes,” less Europe “is better.”
“Britain can not choose between being isolated outside the EU or marginalized within the organization,” the premier stressed the hardest part of his speech. The Conservative leader has said that he would not rule “no option” (including “Brexit” or output) if Brussels makes a “deaf ear” to their demands.
The list of reforms demanded by Cameron’s entry has been criticized as “trivial” by Dominic Cummings, head of the Leave Vote campaign. The output of the EU is gaining force among the British public after the Greek crisis and the refugee crisis.
“Europe’s problems can be resolved with political will and imagination,” Cameron stressed. “The history of the EU is full of problems that seemed intractable and have been resolved. This can be resolved if we want to change them.”
In their list of demands, Cameron also claims the “exclusion” of the United Kingdom to any proposal for greater integration or creation of a “superstate”. The conservative leader has again put on the table their country exemption Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and the enactment of a British Bill of Rights.
“My attitude during the negotiations will be pragmatic and not emotional,” anticipates Cameron, a week before the formal opening of talks on “reform.” The premier stressed to participate “vigorously” in a campaign for an EU “reformed” but also give carte blanche to the ministers who want to support the “out” and free vote to its 330 deputies (at least a third of them are defined as Eurosceptics).
“I have made clear the changes we want to see,” concluded Cameron. “There will be those who say that we have embarked on a mission impossible and I will answer; Why not deny that look for changes that require the agreement of 27 other democracies? it is a big task? ButI do not believe it for a minute?” .
His words have now been welcomed with skepticism in the EU. “If the United departs, it would be left stranded in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and would likely harm their financial services industry,” warned the Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte. The ‘Taoiseach’ Enda Kenny also added warnings on its way through London and said the withdrawal from the EU would open a rift between the two Irelands and endanger the peace process in Ulster.
Comments Off on Cameron believes reform in EU “not impossible”
An interactive swarm of flying 3D pixels (voxels) developed at Queen’s University’s Human Media Lab is set to revolutionize the way people interact with virtual reality. The system, called BitDrones, allows users to explore virtual 3D information by interacting with physical self-levitating building blocks.
Queen’s professor Roel Vertegaal and his students are unveiling the BitDrones system on Monday, Nov. 9 at the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology in Charlotte, North Carolina. BitDrones is the first step towards creating interactive self-levitating programmable matter – materials capable of changing their 3D shape in a programmable fashion – using swarms of nano quadcopters. The work highlights many possible applications for the new technology, including real-reality 3D modeling, gaming, molecular modeling, medical imaging, robotics and online information visualization.
Placing a ShapeDrone in mid-air.
“BitDrones brings flying programmable matter, such as featured in the futuristic Disney movie Big Hero 6, closer to reality,” says Dr. Vertegaal. “It is a first step towards allowing people to interact with virtual 3D objects as real physical objects.”
Dr. Vertegaal and his team at the Human Media Lab created three types of BitDrones, each representing self-levitating displays of distinct resolutions. “PixelDrones” are equipped with one LED and a small dot matrix display. “ShapeDrones” are augmented with a light-weight mesh and a 3D printed geometric frame, and serve as building blocks for complex 3D models.
“DisplayDrones” are fitted with a curved flexible high resolution touchscreen, a forward-facing video camera and Android smartphone board. All three BitDrone types are equipped with reflective markers, allowing them to be individually tracked and positioned in real time via motion capture technology. The system also tracks the user’s hand motion and touch, allowing users to manipulate the voxels in space.
“We call this a Real Reality interface rather than a Virtual Reality interface. This is what distinguishes it from technologies such as Microsoft HoloLens and the Oculus Rift: you can actually touch these pixels, and see them without a headset,” says Dr. Vertegaal.Dr. Vertegaal and his team describe a number of possible applications for this technology. In one scenario, users could physically explore a file folder by touching the folder’s associated PixelDrone. When the folder opens, its contents are shown by other PixelDrones flying in a horizontal wheel below it. Files in this wheel are browsed by physically swiping drones to the left or right.
ShapeDrones hover together to form a structure.
Users would also be able to manipulate ShapeDrones to serve as building blocks for a real-time 3D model. Finally, the BitDrone system will allow for remote telepresence by allowing users to appear locally through a DisplayDrone with Skype. The DisplayDrone would be capable of automatically tracking and replicating all of the remote user’s head movements, allowing a remote user to virtually inspect a location and making it easier for the local user to understand the remote user’s actions.
TelePresence through a DisplayDrone with Skype.
While their system currently only supports dozens of comparatively large 2.5″ – 5″ sized drones, the team at the Human Media Lab are working to scale up their system to support thousands of drones. These future drones would measure no more than a half inch in size, allowing users to render more seamless, high resolution programmable matter.
Comments Off on Bitdrones: The future of virtual reality
A large team of scientists has nearly completed the first map of the mantle under the tectonic plate that is colliding with the Pacific Northwest and putting Seattle, Portland and Vancouver at risk of the largest earthquakes and tsunamis in the world. The Juan de Fuca plate is first tectonic plate to be mapped from midocean ridge to subduction zone.
A new report from five members of the mapping team describes how the movement of the ocean-bottom Juan de Fuca plate is connected to the flow of the mantle 150 kilometers (100 miles) underground, which could help seismologists understand the forces generating quakes as large as the destructive Tohoku quake that struck Japan in 2011.
The Juan de Fuca and Gorda plates offshore of the Pacific Northwest. The plate moves eastward from the midocean ridge and spreading center on the plate’s western edge to the trench on the eastern margin where the plate subducts under the North American plate. The Cascadia subduction zone is capable of generating magnitude 9 quakes, which can also produce deadly tsunamis.
Credit: UC Berkeley
“This is the first time we’ve been able to map out the flow of mantle across an entire plate, so as to understand plate tectonics on a grand scale,” said Richard Allen, a professor and chair of earth and planetary science at the University of California, Berkeley, and the senior author of a paper published online Nov. 2 in the journal Nature Geoscience. “Our goal is to understand large-scale plate tectonic processes and start to link them all the way down to the smallest scale, to specific earthquakes in the Pacific Northwest.”
The major surprise, Allen said, is that the mantle beneath a small piece of the Juan de Fuca plate is moving differently from the rest of the plate, resulting in segmentation of the subduction zone. Similar segmentation is seen in Pacific Northwest megaquakes, which don’t always break along the entire 1,000-kilometer (600-mile) length, producing magnitude 9 or greater events. Instead, it often breaks along shorter segments, generating quakes of magnitude 7 or 8.
Plate tectonics
The Juan de Fuca plate offshore of Oregon, Washington and British Columbia is small – about the size of California and 50-70 kilometers thick – but “big enough to generate magnitude 9 earthquakes” as it’s shoved under the continental North American plate, Allen said. Because of the hazard from this so-called Cascadia Subduction Zone, a recent New Yorker article portrayed the area as a disaster waiting to happen, predicting that “an earthquake will destroy a sizable portion of the coastal Northwest.”
But little is known about the tectonic plates submerged under the oceans, how they are linked to processes inside the earth, such as the melted mantle rock underlying them, or how the crust and mantle interact to cause megathrust earthquakes at subductions zones.
The Juan de Fuca plate is one of seven major and dozens of minor plates that cover the earth like a jigsaw puzzle, pushed around by molten rock rising at mid-ocean ridges and, at their margins, diving under other plates or ramming into them to generate mountain ranges like the Himalayas. The largest of Earth’s tectonic plates, the Pacific Plate, is moving eastward and plunging under the entire western edge of the Americas, creating a “ring of fire” dotted with volcanoes and mountain ranges and imperiled by earthquakes.
Until now, however, scientists have deployed only a handful of seismometers on the seabed worldwide to explore the mantle underlying these plates, said Allen, who also is director of the Berkeley Seismological Laboratory and one of the co-principal investigators for the $20 million Cascadia Initiative. Led by the University of Oregon, the initiative is funded by the National Science Foundation to develop new underwater and on-shore seismic instruments to measure the plate’s interaction with the mantle or asthenosphere, and monitor quake and volcanic activity at the trench off the coast where the Juan de Fuca plate subducts under the North American plate.
“The experiment was unprecedented in that there were 70 seismometers deployed at a time, sitting there for 10 months, which is much bigger than any other ocean-bottom experiment ever done before,” said Robert Martin-Short, a UC Berkeley graduate student and first author of the paper. “We’ve learned a lot from the deployment of these new instruments, and now have a giant array that we know works well on the seafloor and which we can move somewhere else in the future for a similar experiment.”
While the deployment of seismometers at 120 sites on the ocean floor was a technical challenge, Allen said, “the offshore environment is much simpler, the plates are thinner and more uniform than continental plates and we can see through them to get a better sense of what is going on beneath.”
Since 2012, the team has made 24 two-week ocean voyages to place and retrieve the seabed seismometers, providing dozens of students – undergraduates and graduate students from UC Berkeley, Columbia University, the universities of Oregon and Washington, and Imperial College in the UK – an opportunity to participate in field research. The last of the seabed seismometers were pulled up this month and the data is being prepared for analysis.
Based on the first three years of data, Allen and his team confirmed what geophysicists suspected. At the mid-ocean Juan de Fuca ridge about 500 kilometers (300 miles) offshore of Seattle – the western edge of the Juan de Fuca plate – the flow of the mantle below the plate is perpendicular to the ridge, presumably because the newly formed plate drags the underlying mantle eastward with it.
As the plate moves away from the ridge, the mantle flow rotates slightly northward toward the trench. At its eastern margin, the plate and underlying mantle move in alignment, perpendicular to the subduction zone, as expected. Presumably, the subducted portion of the plate deep under the trench is pulling the massive plate downward at the same time that the emerging lava at the mid-ocean spreading ridge is elevating the plate and pushing it eastward.
Gorda plate adrift
Allen and his colleagues found, however, that a part of the Juan de Fuca plate called the Gorda Plate, located off the northern California coast, is not coupled to the mantle, leaving the mantle beneath Gorda to move independently of the plate above. Instead, the Gorda mantle seems to be aligned with the mantle moving under the Pacific plate.
“The Juan de Fuca plate is clearly influencing the flow of the mantle beneath it, but the Gorda Plate is apparently too small to affect the underlying mantle,” he said.
This change in mantle flow produces a break or discontinuity in the forces on the plate, possibly explaining segmentation along the subduction zone.
“When you look at earthquakes in Cascadia, they sometimes break just along the southern segment, sometimes on the southern two-thirds, and sometimes along the entire length of the plate,” Allen said. “The change in the mantle flow could be linked to that segmentation.”
The Cascadia Initiative is a community experiment designed by the research community with all data immediately available to the public. NSF funded the project with money it received through the 2009 stimulus or American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Eleven scientists, including Allen, from across the U.S. formed the Cascadia Initiative Expedition Team responsible for the offshore seismic deployment.
Allen and Martin-Short’s co-authors on the Nature Geosciences paper are Ian Bastow and Eoghan Totten of Imperial College and UC Berkeley geophysicist Mark Richards, a professor of earth and planetary science. Richards helped develop the geodynamic model of the interaction between the plate and the mantle that explains how the faster moving Pacific Plate could override the influence that the Gorda Plate has on the mantle below.
Comments Off on Scientists Map Source of Northwest’s Next Major Quake
The landslide victory of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Sunday’s legislative reform has returned to the center of the presidential debate system. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan wants to change the Constitution to establish a president with executive power. The opposition is favorable to revamp the Constitution, written after the 1980 coup, but fears that the real objective of the head of state is to concentrate power in his unimted credit with little accountability. It was not even a day after the announcement of the AKP parliamentary absolute majority of its members were already declaring intentions to reform the financial and social sectors. Some, such as up to 30% the minimum wage, were received with open arms; others, like remaking the 1982 Constitution, with eyebrow bows. The spokesman for the Islamist training, Ömer Çelik, called on day two the opposition to work collectively for a new constitution, “according to the needs of the country.”
Çelik not elaborated on its proposed Constitution, but Deputy Prime Minister Akdogan Yalçin did so the next day, when he remembered that the AKP’s electoral program included the reform of the presidential system. Finally, a day later, the president’s spokesman, Ibrahim Kalin, told reporters that “such an important issue, this debate can not be considered outside the country. If the mechanism changed, it would lead to a referendum” .
Shortly after he spoke Kalin, the November 4, Recep Tayyip Erdogan addressed the audience from his palace to a group of Muhtar (neighborhood leaders), and told them to work for a new Constitution should start immediately. Erdogan won the August 10, 2014, the first presidential election with direct suffrage. Have been chosen by the people is one of the reasons that argues to defend its legitimate right to govern.
On November 1, the AKP, Erdogan left party to be elected head of state, won 317 of 550 seats is in the Grand National Assembly. That is an absolute majority in the House, but is less than the two-thirds majority needed to amend the Constitution unilaterally, and is 13 deputies of three-fifths, so he could not make a binding referendum on constitutional reform without the support of some MPs who are now in other formations.
Another Constitution, yes, but which one?
The opposition wants to sit to rewrite the constitution. Gürsel Tekin, secretary general of the Social Democratic People’s Republican Party (CHP) -the second most voted list the 1N- this week announced its willingness to dialogue, which has also made the pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP). But neither formations wants to pass along to the new constitution, reform of the political system, without describing clearly, Erdogan craves.
“I who decides who should be working and can not do under the current system because there are those, judges, for example, they avoid” protested Erdogan during an interview on the public channel TRT earlier this year. Then he charged as “inadequate” the current parliamentary system in Turkey: “You can not run a country or a city like this,” he complained.
His detractors accuse Erdogan of seeking a presidency with minimal accountability and broad powers of the deputies, what they call “authoritarianism”. A Turkish government official, quoted on condition of anonymity because his position qualifies to the world that the lack of accountability is just a problem of the current formulation of the president. “The [new] presidential system would introduce accountability to the presidency,” he stresses.
A ceremonial and neutral charge
Until 2007 the reform approved in a referendum to elect the president by voting, as designated by this Parliament. The office established in 1923, is ceremonial and neutral while allowing important provisions such as the mobilization of troops, the presence in cabinet meetings, the adoption of laws and the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court. “The system was designed for the president, a representative of the military, not to surrender accounts,” said the same official.
Since the arrival of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, their presence in cabinet meetings have been regular. Even more are recurring pronouncements on political issues and opinions in favor of the AKP party, which he founded and who was prime minister for more than a decade. For voters of the AKP, Erdogan is a charismatic leader and a necessary reference. For opponents, the president is someone who exceeded his duties and by remote control against the Constitution.
The role of president is the cornerstone that prevents the drafting of a new constitution. And it was in 2011, when the parties in Parliament opened a commission to draft a new text. Erdogan demands to reformulate the presidency, the group can only agree on 60 items and could not go on. To reopen this commission ultranationalists required to negotiate with the pro-Kurdish, something that until now he has refused.
Although Erdogan decided impulses and the AKP to install a presidential system, emphasizing that they have the votes of the majority of people, surveys contradict his intentions. The latter, developed by the IPSOS firm after the election, indicates that 57% of Turks opt for maintaining the current parliamentary system. 31% opt for the presidential system, but lack itemize to the public the project of the president.
“Turkey needs a constitution. Discuss this with the [pretext] of the presidential debate is wrong,” said Selahattin Demirtas this week, co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP). “We want a strong democratic parliamentary system, strengthening decentralization,” said Demirtas. This training is another issue at hand intimately tied to dialogue with the AKP, which is to resume the peace process with the PKK guerrillas.
The militants are happy to announce the end of the unilateral ceasefire declared on the occasion of the elections. “You can not keep [the ceasefire] no effect against pro-war policies of the AKP and its operations [against the PKK],” the guerrillas announced in a statement. In the last hours, the Government has declared a curfew in 22 neighborhoods in southeast Turkey, mainly Kurdish, as part of a macro operation against the militants.
Several civilians and three Turkish soldiers were killed in clashes in the region in recent days. On Wednesday, two soldiers were killed in clashes with the PKK in Yüksekova. In Silvan, Diyarbakir province, two young men were shot dead during street battles. The second injured aunt to go to death by his nephew. They joined the three civilians killed in the area on Tuesday.
Ankara has ordered to continue military operations against the PKK even during winter, a time when usually the militia stopped their attacks. In recent months, however, its scope of action has been extended to the less isolated than the mountains, which are based towns. Both the AKP and the HDP calls made this week to back the peace process in the fridge from the return to arms of the PKK four months ago.
Comments Off on AKP wins, but leaves Turkey with uncertainty
The hepatitis A virus can trigger acute liver inflammation which generally has a mild course in small children but which can become dangerous in adults. The virus, which is found worldwide, has previously been considered to be a purely human pathogen which at most is found in isolated cases in non-human primates.
Ghanaian leaf-nosed bat. Bats are evolutionary old mammals which are extremely important ecologically and are under stringent species protection. They often live in large colonies and form reservoirs for various viruses.
An international team of researchers under the direction of the University of Bonn has now discovered in a large-scale study with nearly 16,000 specimens from small mammals from various continents that the hepatitis A virus – like HIV or Ebola as well – is of likely animal origin. The results currently appear in the renowned journal “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America” (PNAS).
An infection with the hepatitis A virus can trigger acute inflammation of the liver which generally does not cause any symptoms in children and resolves without major complications. “In tropical regions, nearly all young children are infected with the hepatitis A virus and from that time on, they are immune to this disease,” says Prof. Dr. Jan Felix Drexler from the Institute of Virology at the University of Bonn Medical Centre and the German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF). By contrast, if adults become infected with the hepatitis A virus, the symptoms can be more serious, and the disease can even have a fatal outcome. The virus has been found to date only in humans and a few non-human primates. Its origins were mysterious.
15,987 specimens from 209 different species of small mammals
Virologists from the University of Bonn Hospital, together with their colleagues from several German and international research institutes worldwide, searched for viruses related to the hepatitis A virus. They investigated a total of 15,987 specimens from 209 different species of small mammals: from rodents to shrews and bats to hedgehogs. Viruses from these mammals are very similar to the human hepatitis A virus with regard to their genetic properties, protein structures, immune response and patterns of infection. “The seemingly purely human virus is thus most likely of animal origin,” says Drexler. “The study enables new perspectives for risk assessments of emerging viruses by investigating functional, ecologic and pathogenic patterns instead of phylogeny only”.
The scientists’ evolutionary investigations may even hint at distant ancestry of the hepatitis A virus in primordial insect viruses. “It is possible that insect viruses infected insect-eating small mammals millions of years ago and that these viruses then developed into the precursors of the hepatitis A virus,” says the virologist from the University of Bonn Medical Centre.
Small mammals contribute to the preservation of the hepatitis A virus
The researcher assumes that small mammals were important hosts for the preservation and evolution of the viruses. “Otherwise the hepatitis A virus would actually have gone extinct long ago in small human populations due to the lifelong immunity of the persons once infected with it,” Drexler reasons. “However, patients need not fear that they could contract a hepatitis A virus infection through bats or hedgehogs. It has likely been a very long time since humans first contracted the hepatitis A precursor virus from animals – moreover, such incidents are very rare,” says the virologist from the University of Bonn Medical Centre.
Comments Off on The Hepatitis a virus is of animal origin
