The elections in Palestine, the freest of the four recent polls, could have provided both stability and democracy. One party, Hamas, won a clear victory in a contest judged by all national and international observers as free and fair. Having won, it sensibly offered the losers - Fatah - posts in a government of national unity.Unbelievable. I wonder if he can say this to the Shalit and the Asheri families face to face. On second thought, what am I talking about, I'm sure he could.
If this has not happened, the fault does not lie with Hamas. Fatah militants refused to accept the voters' verdict gracefully, they rejected the coalition offer, and outside powers have increasingly interfered by holding Hamas to international blackmail and demanding it reverse its positions or see Palestinians starve. The latest disruption of the election result was President Mahmoud Abbas' attempt to force a referendum defining relations with Israel - a move that was unnecessary, divisive, and likely to produce violence at a precarious moment when Palestinians need unity.
The moral in Palestine is not that democracy brings instability, but that it is the failure of powerful forces to accept democracy's results that causes instability.
Is there some illegality going on in the government’s Terrorist Finance Tracking Program (exposed by the Times and other news outlets Friday)? No, no laws have been broken. Is there some abuse of power? No, there seem to have been extraordinary steps taken to inform relevant officials and win international cooperation. Why then? Why take action that can only aid and comfort the enemy in wartime?
Because, Keller haughtily pronounced, American methods of monitoring enemy money transfers are “a matter of public interest.”
Really? The Times prattles on about what it claims is a dearth of checks and balances, but what are the checks and balances on Bill Keller? Can it be that our security hinges on whether the editor of an antiwar, for-profit journal thinks some defense measure might be interesting?
Well, here’s something truly interesting: There are people in the U.S. intelligence community who are revealing the nation’s most precious secrets.
The media aspire to be the public’s watchdog? Ever on the prowl to promote good government? Okay, here we have public officials endangering American lives. Public officials whose violation of a solemn oath to protect national defense information is both a profound offense against honor and a serious crime.
What about the public interest in that? What about the public interest in rooting out those who betray their country in wartime?
Not on your life.
National-security secrets? All fair game. If it’s about how we detain, or infiltrate, or defang the monsters pledged to kill us, the New York Times reserves the right to derail us any time it finds such matters … interesting.
But the media’s own sources? That, and that alone, is sacrosanct. Worth protecting above all else.
National-security secrets, after all, are merely the public treasure that keeps us alive. Press informants are the private preserve of the media.
And they’re just more important than you are.
Sheik Hassan Dahir Aweys, who already was on the U.S. terrorist watch list as a suspected collaborator with al Qaeda, made the comment while discussing efforts to form a functioning central government in Somalia for the first time in 15 years. "Somalia is a Muslim nation and its people are also Muslim, 100 percent. Therefore, any government we agree on would be based on the holy Koran and the teachings of our prophet Muhammad," Sheik Aweys told the Associated Press in a telephone interview, his first comments to the press since being named head of the Islamic militia Saturday.
Levin told Andrews after he studied the indictment and met with his client, he feels this is a case of “entrapment, entrapment, entrapment”.I think your client entrapped himself, Mr. Levin.
Levin says getting a fair jury will be a big challenge.
“This climate is horrible, obviously to get 12 people that can be fair and impartial to people charged with allegedly waging war or planning a war against the United States providing material support to a terrorist organization, Al Qaeda, I mean Osama Bin Laden is our number one enemy,” said Levin.
The court documents say alleged ring leader Narseal Batiste told friends he wanted to train an army of soldiers to wage war on the U.S. which would be initiated by the destruction of the Sears Tower in Chicago.Oops!
The documents also reveal Batiste attempted to recruit a person whom he had learned was traveling to the Middle East to assist him in finding foreign Islamic extremists to fund his mission.
Unknown to Batiste, the person he asked alerted the FBI who arranged a meeting with an informant of Arabic descent who passed himself off as a member of Al Qaeda.