Four believed to have been killed after up to 15 militants entered the Mehran naval station in the southern city of Karachi Islamist militants have stormed one of Pakistan’s largest military bases, attacking a US supplied surveillance aircraft, in a move that will cause further embarrassment for the country just weeks after the death of Osama bin Laden. Four people including a Pakistani navy officer and a fire fighter were believed to have been killed after up to 15 militants entered the high-security Mehran naval station in the southern city of Karachi. The attack late on Sunday is believed to be the most serious attack against the military since October 2009. According to navy spokesman Irfan ul Haq, the fighters split up into smaller groups to set off the explosions before hiding in the sprawling security facility. A P-3C Orion, a maritime surveillance aircraft recently given to Pakistan by America, was destroyed, a second navy spokesman, Salman Ali, said. One report said a team of US technicians were working on the aircraft at the time of the strike, but US Embassy spokesman Alberto Rodriguez said no Americans were on the base. The attack began with at least three loud explosions heard by people who live around the base, according to one report. while the Associated Press reported there were at least six other explosions and sporadic firing. Several dozen navy and police commandos sent in to battle the militants were met with gunfire and grenades from the militants, said Ali. The coordinated strike rocked Pakistan’s largest city just under three weeks after the death of terrorist leader Osama bin Laden in a US raid on the northwestern garrison city of Abbottabad. Extremists allied with al-Qaida have vowed to avenge his death. The killing of bin Laden triggered a strong backlash in the country against Washington, trying to support Pakistan in its fight against militants, as well as rare domestic criticism against the armed forces for failing to detect or prevent the operation. Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani condemned the attack, saying such a “cowardly act of terror could not deter the commitment of the government and people of Pakistan to fight terrorism.” Sunday’s raid appeared to be most serious against the military since October 2009, when militants attacked the army headquarters near the capital, Islamabad. The country’s security forces, following heavy US prodding, have launched several operations against militants in their heartland close to the border with Afghanistan over the last three years. But extremists have struck back against police and army targets around Pakistan. No group has claimed responsibility for the attack. However the Pakistani Taliban, an al-Qaida allied network which has previously launched attacks in Karachi, has pledged to retaliate for the death bin Laden, and has claimed responsibility for several bloody attacks since then. The US gave two Orions to the Pakistan navy at a ceremony at the base in June 2010 attended by 250 Pakistan and US officials, according to the US Central Command website. It said by late 2012 the Pakistan would have eight of the planes. Global terrorism Pakistan Amy Fallon guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Four believed to have been killed after up to 15 militants entered the Mehran naval station in the southern city of Karachi Islamist militants have stormed one of Pakistan’s largest military bases, attacking a US supplied surveillance aircraft, in a move that will cause further embarrassment for the country just weeks after the death of Osama bin Laden. Four people including a Pakistani navy officer and a fire fighter were believed to have been killed after up to 15 militants entered the high-security Mehran naval station in the southern city of Karachi. The attack late on Sunday is believed to be the most serious attack against the military since October 2009. According to navy spokesman Irfan ul Haq, the fighters split up into smaller groups to set off the explosions before hiding in the sprawling security facility. A P-3C Orion, a maritime surveillance aircraft recently given to Pakistan by America, was destroyed, a second navy spokesman, Salman Ali, said. One report said a team of US technicians were working on the aircraft at the time of the strike, but US Embassy spokesman Alberto Rodriguez said no Americans were on the base. The attack began with at least three loud explosions heard by people who live around the base, according to one report. while the Associated Press reported there were at least six other explosions and sporadic firing. Several dozen navy and police commandos sent in to battle the militants were met with gunfire and grenades from the militants, said Ali. The coordinated strike rocked Pakistan’s largest city just under three weeks after the death of terrorist leader Osama bin Laden in a US raid on the northwestern garrison city of Abbottabad. Extremists allied with al-Qaida have vowed to avenge his death. The killing of bin Laden triggered a strong backlash in the country against Washington, trying to support Pakistan in its fight against militants, as well as rare domestic criticism against the armed forces for failing to detect or prevent the operation. Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani condemned the attack, saying such a “cowardly act of terror could not deter the commitment of the government and people of Pakistan to fight terrorism.” Sunday’s raid appeared to be most serious against the military since October 2009, when militants attacked the army headquarters near the capital, Islamabad. The country’s security forces, following heavy US prodding, have launched several operations against militants in their heartland close to the border with Afghanistan over the last three years. But extremists have struck back against police and army targets around Pakistan. No group has claimed responsibility for the attack. However the Pakistani Taliban, an al-Qaida allied network which has previously launched attacks in Karachi, has pledged to retaliate for the death bin Laden, and has claimed responsibility for several bloody attacks since then. The US gave two Orions to the Pakistan navy at a ceremony at the base in June 2010 attended by 250 Pakistan and US officials, according to the US Central Command website. It said by late 2012 the Pakistan would have eight of the planes. Global terrorism Pakistan Amy Fallon guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Yes, a car. The only country on the face of the earth to impose such laws. Via Al Jazeera : Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world to ban women, both Saudi and foreign, from driving. The prohibition forces families to hire live-in drivers, and those who cannot afford the $300 to $400 a month for a driver must rely on male relatives to drive them to work, school, shopping or the doctor. And people wonder why change is so difficult in an area with regimes as reactionary as Saudi Arabia, a country with enormous influence and clout, especially among the Gulf states. And it would be easy to dismiss this as simply the product of backwards thinking or religious intolerance, but it is more than that. Kafka himself would be impressed by the lengths they’ve gone to for complete and utter control. The reports are a bit sketchy but it appears the woman arrested (Manal al Sharif) was detained yesterday for questioning, let go, rearrested and is now being being held in a women’s prison, a reform facility. Her Facebook page taken down, and her YouTube account seems to have been closed in the last hour, although for now the videos are still up. This is the 21st century, right? Via The Guardian : Saudi authorities have arrested an activist who launched a campaign to challenge a ban on women driving in the conservative kingdom and posted a video on the internet of her behind the wheel, activists said. The YouTube video, posted on Thursday, has attracted more than 500,000 views and shows Manal Alsharif, who learned to drive in the US, driving her car in Khobar in the oil-producing Eastern Province. “Police arrested her at 3am this morning,” said Maha Taher, another activist who launched her own campaign for women driving four months ago to spread awareness of the issue. An Eastern Province police spokesman declined to comment and an interior ministry spokesman was not immediately available for comment. Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy that does not tolerate any form of dissent and applies an austere version of Sunni Islam, in which religious police patrol the streets to ensure public segregation between men and women. Women are not allowed to drive and must have written approval from a designated guardian – a father, husband, brother or son – to leave the country, work or travel abroad. The campaign Alsharif launched is aimed at teaching women to drive and encouraging them to start driving from 17 June, using foreign-issued licences. While there is no written law that specifically bans women from driving, citizens must use locally issued licences which are not issued to women, making it effectively illegal for them to drive.
Continue reading …Yes, a car. The only country on the face of the earth to impose such laws. Via Al Jazeera : Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world to ban women, both Saudi and foreign, from driving. The prohibition forces families to hire live-in drivers, and those who cannot afford the $300 to $400 a month for a driver must rely on male relatives to drive them to work, school, shopping or the doctor. And people wonder why change is so difficult in an area with regimes as reactionary as Saudi Arabia, a country with enormous influence and clout, especially among the Gulf states. And it would be easy to dismiss this as simply the product of backwards thinking or religious intolerance, but it is more than that. Kafka himself would be impressed by the lengths they’ve gone to for complete and utter control. The reports are a bit sketchy but it appears the woman arrested (Manal al Sharif) was detained yesterday for questioning, let go, rearrested and is now being being held in a women’s prison, a reform facility. Her Facebook page taken down, and her YouTube account seems to have been closed in the last hour, although for now the videos are still up. This is the 21st century, right? Via The Guardian : Saudi authorities have arrested an activist who launched a campaign to challenge a ban on women driving in the conservative kingdom and posted a video on the internet of her behind the wheel, activists said. The YouTube video, posted on Thursday, has attracted more than 500,000 views and shows Manal Alsharif, who learned to drive in the US, driving her car in Khobar in the oil-producing Eastern Province. “Police arrested her at 3am this morning,” said Maha Taher, another activist who launched her own campaign for women driving four months ago to spread awareness of the issue. An Eastern Province police spokesman declined to comment and an interior ministry spokesman was not immediately available for comment. Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy that does not tolerate any form of dissent and applies an austere version of Sunni Islam, in which religious police patrol the streets to ensure public segregation between men and women. Women are not allowed to drive and must have written approval from a designated guardian – a father, husband, brother or son – to leave the country, work or travel abroad. The campaign Alsharif launched is aimed at teaching women to drive and encouraging them to start driving from 17 June, using foreign-issued licences. While there is no written law that specifically bans women from driving, citizens must use locally issued licences which are not issued to women, making it effectively illegal for them to drive.
Continue reading …Downing Street acknowledges that it has struggled to explain the idea to voters who appear not to have digested the message David Cameron will launch his troubled “big society” for the fourth time on Monday as he describes the project as being more than a “fluffy add-on” for a government with greater ambitions than imposing the toughest spending cuts in a generation. Following an admission by the minister responsible for running the big society project that the government had failed to explain it, the prime minister will say the initiative runs through all the government’s public service reforms. It also explains why he wants to build a “stronger society” with families at its heart. Cameron will say: “You learn about responsibility and how to live in harmony with others. Strong families are the foundation of a bigger, stronger society. This isn’t some romanticised fiction. It’s a fact. There’s a whole body of evidence that shows how a bad relationship between parents means a child is more likely to live in poverty, fail at school, end up in prison or be unemployed in later life.” Downing Street acknowledges that it has struggled to explain to voters the big society, the central theme of last year’s general election campaign. It is intended to devolve power and to foster a greater sense of responsibility by loosening the role of the state. Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister who runs the project, admitted on Sunday the government had struggled to sell its message. “We may have failed to articulate it clearly and we’ll carry on explaining as best as we can,” Maude told Radio 4′s The World This Weekend. “I think people understand what is meant when we explain it and think that it is all a good idea.” Cameron will try to rejuvenate the big society as he attempts to show his government has bigger goals than simply “balancing the books”. He will say: “The big society is not some fluffy add-on to more gritty and important subjects. This is about as gritty and important as it gets: giving everyone the chance to get on and making our country a better place to live.” The prime minister will announce a series of concrete steps to illustrate his point: • A white paper on giving will be unveiled on Monday to encourage charitable donations. The Link cash machine network has reached agreement with banks that use its service to allow customers, who make 10m transactions a day, to donate through its machines from 2012. Paperwork for gift aid donations up to £5,000 will be removed and the rate of inheritance tax for estates that leave 10% or more to charity will be reduced. • The Whitehall green book, which is used to assess the costs and benefits of different government policies, will be amended to take account of their social impact. • Cabinet ministers will devote at least one day a year to volunteering. Cameron will say: “Too many people think that’s the limit of our ambitions, that all we care about is balancing the books. Wrong. I want to balance the books so we can achieve things I really care about.” The giving white paper will say charitable donations have “flatlined” in recent years and the poorest in society are, in relative terms, more generous than wealthier people. The white paper says: “Donors in the poorest income brackets give more as proportion of their income than those in middle-income households and the wealthiest. We think there’s significant potential for the better-off to give more.” Cameron will say the government is modernising public services in the spirit of the big society as he defends Michael Gove’s plans to expand academies and Andrew Lansley’s plans to hand greater commissioning powers to GPs, though he will acknowledge the NHS reforms are subject to a pause. He will say: “We’re not introducing free schools and expanding academies because it’s a way of saving money from the schools budget. We’re doing it because it’s the best way to improve education. More choice for parents. More freedom for professionals to innovate. A greater ability for new providers to come forward. It is the big society way to improve education. “In our health service, we’re not giving patients more control and doctors more professional freedom because we want to save money. We’re doing it because it’s the best way to improve the NHS.”Cameron will show the influence of the New York Times columnist David Brooks whose new book, The Social Animal, highlights the importance of social networks. He will say: “In the past, the left focused on the state and the right focused on the market. We’re harnessing that space in between – society – the ‘hidden wealth’ of our nation.” David Cameron Nicholas Watt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …US president will use visit to London to announce new co-operation to tackle long-term challenges Barack Obama will announce during his first state visit to Britain this week that the White House is to open up its highly secretive national security council to Downing Street in a move that appears to show the US still values the transatlantic “special relationship”. A joint National Security Strategy Board will be established to ensure that senior officials on both sides of the Atlantic confront long-term challenges rather than just hold emergency talks from the “situation room” in the White House and the Cobra room in the Cabinet Office. Obama will arrive in London on Tuesday from Dublin on the second leg of a European tour that will also take him to Warsaw and the G8 summit in Deauville in France on Thursday and Friday. The president, who will stay at Buckingham Palace with his wife, Michelle, will hold separate meetings with David Cameron and Ed Miliband. The main talks between Cameron and Obama on Wednesday will cover Afghanistan, Libya and counter-terrorism. The two leaders, who will serve the food at a barbecue hosted by their wives in the Downing Street garden for US and UK military veterans, will make two major announcements: • Tom Donilon, the US national security adviser, will work more closely with his British counterpart, Sir Peter Ricketts, to examine longer-term issues on the new National Security Strategy Board. Ricketts is to be replaced in the summer by Kim Darroch, currently Britain’s permanent representative to the EU. • A new service personnel joint taskforce, involving the veterans minister, Andrew Robathan, will co-ordinate work to help veterans on both sides of the Atlantic. Britain believes it can learn from the US which has an excellent track record in helping veterans settle into civilian life. The US is keen to learn from Britain’s work in helping veterans with mental problems. Britain believes that co-operation between the British and US national security councils marks a significant step. One British government source said: “The US and UK already work closely together on many national security issues. The new board will allow us to look ahead and develop a shared view of emerging challenges, how we should deal with them, and how our current policy can adapt to longer-term developments.” The new board is a rare step by the White House, which guards the secrecy of the national security council. Founded in 1947 by Harry Truman, the NSC was in 1949 placed in the executive office of the president, who chairs its meetings. Cameron tried to replicate the council when he established a body with the same name on his first full day as prime minister. It is chaired by the prime minister and designed to co-ordinate the work of the three Whitehall departments responsible for foreign affairs – the Foreign Office, the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development. One government source said that Ricketts and Donilon would have to tread with care. “There is a little bit of disconnect between the two. The US national security adviser is a political appointment, whereas Sir Peter Ricketts is a civil servant. But this does make sense. We have a highly developed relationship with the USA where our military and intelligence officials work closely together. This is a useful move.” The main discussions between Obama and Cameron will focus on Afghanistan, on which they have a similar outlook. They both aim to draw down combat troops and recognise that elements of the Taliban will have to be involved in a political settlement. Obama told the Andrew Marr Show on BBC1: “I agree with – and what I think prime minister Cameron would be the first to say – is that we’re not going to militarily solve this problem. We can’t expect Afghanistan, one of the poorest countries in the world, suddenly to have the same institutions that an advanced and well-developed democracy has. What we can do, I think, is use the efforts that we’ve made militarily to broker a political settlement that ensures the Afghanistan constitution is abided by, that elections remain free and fair, that human rights including women’s rights are respected.” Asked whether this would mean talking to the Taliban, Obama said: “Ultimately, it means talking to the Taliban, although we’ve been very clear about the requirements for any kind of serious reconciliation. The Taliban would have to cut all ties to al-Qaida. Renounce violence. And they would have to respect the Afghan constitution. Now those are some fairly bare-bones requirements.” Obama warned that he would be prepared to launch another raid into Pakistan, following the shooting of Osama bin Laden, if that was necessary “to secure the United States”. Jack Caravelli, an official in the Clinton and Bush administrations, told BBC Radio 5 Live on Sunday that Washington had contingency plans to undertake operations in Pakistan if a perfect storm occurred in which terrorists gained control of its nuclear weapons. The Cameron and Obama talks on Libya will be mildly less friendly. Britain recognises that Washington made clear from the outset that its military involvement would be brief. But one government source said: “Some people in Europe and Britain think that if only the US had continued with the heavy lifting then this might have been brought to a speedy conclusion. But the US military think: the bloody Europeans have bitten off more they can chew and once again expect us to do the heavy work.” Barack Obama Global terrorism David Cameron United States Afghanistan Foreign policy Nicholas Watt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Star witness David Headley set to claim ISI helped Lashkar-e-Taiba extremists carry out 2008 Mumbai massacre Allegations that Pakistan’s intelligence service was involved in the Mumbai terror attacks will be scrutinised in an American court case starting on Monday when the man who helped plan the 2008 strikes testifies against his alleged accomplice. David Headley, a Pakistani-American businessman who has confessed to his involvement in the attacks, will be the star witness in the trial of Tahawwur Rana, his childhood friend, in Chicago. Rana is charged with providing material support for terrorism in the assaults, which killed 166 people, as well as a plot in Denmark that was never carried out. Opening arguments in the case, based on the deaths of six Americans in Mumbai, will begin on Monday. The case has drawn international attention because Headley’s testimony is expected to reinforce allegations that Pakistan plays a double game in the fight against terrorism. Its success will depend largely on how the jury views Headley, 50, who is said to have juggled relationships with multiple wives, terrorist groups and intelligence agencies. Headley is a former informant for the US Dr ug Enforcement Administration (DEA). He pleaded guilty last year to conducting reconnaissance for the Mumbai attacks and for the Danish plot. His confessions painted a devastating portrait of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI) – he says ISI officers helped the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorist group plot the commando-style attacks on Mumbai. Rana’s defence will centre on the ISI links. His lawyers say Headley duped Rana into thinking he was helping an ISI espionage operation in India, then betrayed him to escape the death penalty. The defence will argue Rana had no idea Headley was plotting mass murder. “They are using a whale to catch a minnow,” said defence attorney Charles Swift, calling Headley “a master manipulator”. Prosecutors recently raised the political stakes by indicting a suspected ISI officer for the murders in Mumbai. The officer, identified only as Major Iqbal, allegedly oversaw Headley’s scouting in India. The decision to indict Iqbal was made at high levels in Washington, sending a signal from Barack Obama’s administration, which had expressed frustration about Pakistan’s reliability even before Osama bin Laden was found and killed in Abbottabad. “I think [the indictment] shows the government believes Headley when he says his handler was an ISI officer,” said James Kreindler, a former federal prosecutor who is suing the Pakistani spy agency in New York on behalf of the Mumbai victims and their families in a separate case. “At some point in time there is not going to be any doubt whatsoever that the ISI coordinated the attack with Lashkar.”The indictment does not mention the ISI, part of a calculated low-key approach, according to an Obama administration official who requested anonymity because of the pending trial. But the prosecutors are likely to address the allegations about the ISI, especially as the defence has emphasised them. “The decision not to name the ISI does not reflect second thoughts about the evidence,” the official said. “There are no second thoughts about the evidence.” The prosecution’s case is based on a secretive international investigation by the FBI and about 30,000 pages of court documents, most of them classified. Headley’s testimony is backed by corroborating evidence including other witnesses and communications intercepts. If there is strong evidence that the ISI helped kill Americans, it would inflict further damage on an endangered alliance with Pakistan into which Washington has poured billions of dollars. Pakistani officials deny any links to terrorism and question Headley’s credibility because of his past as a double agent and criminal. The Pakistani major and five of the six other alleged leaders of the Mumbai attacks charged in Chicago remain at large. The FBI has photos of some of them, intercepts of their voices and emails, and information about their whereabouts, but Pakistani authorities have done little to pursue the fugitives, US officials say. Pakistan’s prosecution of several Lashkar chiefs arrested in 2009, including one now under US indictment, has stalled. Rana, a doctor by training, met Headley when they attended an elite military school in Pakistan. He is the lowest-ranking suspect and is said to have let Headley use his immigration consulting firm as a cover overseas. In her first media interview, Rana’s wife, Samraz, who also has a medical degree, said she met Headley in the 1990s after she emigrated to the US. Although he was a convicted heroin dealer and recovering addict, he charmed her conservative family, she said from their bungalow near Devon Avenue, the heart of Chicago’s South Asian community. The bespectacled 48-year-old mother of three teenagers smiled wearily as she recalled Headley’s relationship with her children. “He was like a gateway to American culture for us,” she said. “He was like a second father for my kids. My kids would say, ‘he’s cool, this guy’. He was taking them to the movies, Chuck E Cheese, all this fun stuff … He talked to me like a brother. He knows what I liked. He knows what my husband liked. He knows what my children like … He has different faces.” Headley, formerly Daood Sayed Gilani, was born to a mother from a rich Philadelphia family and a father who was a renowned, politically influential Pakistani broadcaster. Headley told investigators that he had a distant Pakistani relative who was a former deputy director of the ISI and an army general, according to Indian and US officials. If that link is confirmed, it could help explain why the agency later recruited Headley and how he had access to senior officers and militant chiefs. At 17, he returned to the United States, where he managed bars and owned a video rental store. Multilingual and gregarious, he has shown a con man’s gift for winning over accomplices, investigators and romantic conquests. “He was a tall, handsome guy,” Samraz Rana said. “He was wearing very expensive clothes and, I mean, he was really impressive.” After a 1997 arrest for heroin smuggling, Headley became a prized DEA informant who targeted Pakistani traffickers. Immediately after the 11 September 2001 attacks, the DEA directed him to collect intelligence on terrorists as well as drugs. That December, the US government ended his probation early and rushed him to Pakistan, where he began training in Lashkar terror camps weeks later, according to court documents and his associates. Some federal officials say he remained an informant for at least three more years until 2005, but the DEA says he was deactivated in early 2002. Between 2001 and 2008, federal authorities were warned six times by his wives and associates that he was involved in terrorism. None of the resulting inquiries yielded anything. The FBI and CIA say he never worked for them. Headley’s personal life has also been dramatic. He has four children, including a son named Osama with a Pakistani wife from an arranged marriage in 1999. But he has been married to three other women and several of those relationships overlapped. At times, Headley has worn a full beard and traditional garb and expressed warlike beliefs, quoting the Qur’an, praising al-Qaida and declaring his hatred for India. But he has often gone clean-shaven and behaved like a high-rolling entrepreneur with a taste for champagne and luxury. After he began training with Lashkar, he joked with his third wife, a New York makeup artist, that their pet dog could be a good “jihadi dog,” according to a close associate. Hardcore extremists shun dogs because they see them as un-Islamic and unclean, making dog ownership a possible cover for terrorists. When the DEA arrested Headley in 1987 and 1997, Rana put up his house as bond. When the Ranas ran into financial trouble in 2005, Headley came to the rescue with a loan of more than $60,000 (£37,000), Rana’s wife said. “We were like almost at the border of bankruptcy,” she said. “So my husband he became more close to him. And he said: ‘Oh, he is my true friend because he helped me at this time when I really need money’.” But Headley had traits that made her uneasy. She said her husband told her Headley had once used an elderly aunt to smuggle drugs on a flight overseas, hiding the package in her pocket without her knowledge. In 2006, the ISI recruited Headley in Pakistan, according to his confession. In addition to Iqbal, his trainer and handler, he said he met ISI officers named Major Samir Ali, Lt Col Hamza and Col Shah. After specialised ISI training, he undertook two years of missions in India directed by Iqbal and Sajid Mir, a Lashkar chief who is the suspected project manager of the plot. Mir’s voice was caught on wiretaps overseeing the three-day slaughter in Mumbai by phone. Some US and European anti-terror officials believe Mir once belonged to the military or ISI; others say he only had close ties to the security forces. Iqbal is said to have assigned Headley to gather military intelligence, giving him about $28,000 to establish an office of Rana’s firm in Mumbai as a cover and for other expenses, the indictment says. Samraz Rana insists her husband had no idea about the plot. The Ranas travelled to Mumbai, where she has family, days before the attack in November 2008. “It’s a zero per cent chance that my husband is involved in this thing,” she said. “My relatives are there … I was there. My husband was there. We [could have been] killed in that attack.” The defence, however, will have to explain wiretaps in which Rana appears to praise the Mumbai masterminds. Evidence indicates he communicated with Iqbal and helped Headley maintain his cover in Denmark in January 2009 by sending an email to an advertising representative at the Jyllands Posten newspaper, which Lashkar targeted because it had published caricatures of the prophet Muhammad, according to the indictment. Iqbal met Headley at least twice about the Denmark plot, expressing enthusiasm about attacking the newspaper, according to Headley’s account. The officer cut off contact with Headley when Mir, the lead plotter, backed away from the operation in March 2009, documents say. But Headley continued meeting and communicating with Shah and Samir Ali as the Denmark plot was taken over by al-Qaida, according to officials and an Indian court document. Shortly before the Mumbai attack, Headley had brought his Pakistani wife and children to Chicago. They lived with the Ranas for 20 days before moving into a nearby apartment. “They become very close to my kids,” Samraz Rana said. “And the wife was nice. And we have like sort of family relationship at that time … Dave was not here, he only sent his family. So we were taking care of his family.” During this period, documents show, Headley was spending most of his time in Pakistan, where he had a Moroccan wife. The Ranas paid rent for Headley’s family as part of the strict conditions he had imposed for repaying the money he had loaned them, she said. The FBI arrested Headley and Rana in October 2009. A DEA agent who had handled Headley when he was a drug informant was present when investigators brought Headley in, perhaps in a strategy to induce co-operation. Headley quickly did what he had done in the past: he changed sides and spent weeks detailing his role in the Mumbai massacre. Despite Headley’s guilty plea, Samraz Rana finds it difficult to believe that her jovial family friend helped plan the carnage of Mumbai. She recalled an anecdote her husband told about their military school days, when Headley would avoid morning prayers. “Dave, he knocks on all the doors of students and he says, ‘Get up, get up, it’s time for prayer’,” she said. “And then when everybody gets up, he went to his room and went to sleep, you know. So he was laughing. He was like that.” Now, though, Samraz Rana sees Headley as a predator. “He just thinks about himself,” she said. “I think he [studies] human beings more as compared to the ordinary person. He can understand what [someone] likes and he changes himself according to that… Now I realise what intention he had.” This report is part of a ProPublica and PBS Frontline investigation. ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that produces investigative journalism Mumbai terror attacks India Global terrorism United States Pakistan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Click here to view this media After Newt Gingrich came on Meet the Press last week and had the unfortunate circumstance of finding out what happens to any Republican who dares to tell the truth about Paul Ryan’s budget plan , Ryan got a chance to respond this week. Apparently Ryan hasn’t figured out yet that his plan to turn Medicare into a voucher system or going after Social Security isn’t going to be popular with the voters, ever. Ryan is delusional enough to believe that somehow the Republicans are going to be able to “move the polls” on the issue. He also agrees with Freedom Works Dick Armey and Matt Kibbe that “entitlement reform” or a.k.a. dismantling our social safety nets should be a litmus test for any Republican running for office in 2012. I find it astounding that they actually think jumping off that cliff together is a good idea.
Continue reading …Education secretary argues in a Guardian interview that the changes will enable good schools to expand Ministers want to scrap restrictions on the expansion of the most popular state schools, allowing them to take on more pupils in a move that will increase the financial pressures on struggling schools. More parents will get their first choice of school under government plans to “remove bureaucracy” around the expansion of good schools, the education secretary, Michael Gove, revealed in an interview with the Guardian. Weaker schools will feel the squeeze because the level of school funding is determined by the number of pupils. The changes, which will apply to all state schools, will be outlined when ministers publish a revised school admissions code this summer. Ministers believe local authorities are in some cases deliberately preventing good schools from raising their “planned admissions numbers” because it becomes harder to sustain a weaker school if pupils defect. Some popular schools, including a Muslim girls’ school in Blackburn and a Catholic secondary school in Hull, are proposing to set up “overflow” free schools to absorb demand for places, but the government also wants to make it easier for successful schools to take on more children without creating an offshoot. Gove said: “We hope the new admissions code allows the possibility of increasing planned admissions numbers so good schools can expand, and there will be underperforming schools that have fewer and fewer numbers. That will compel their leadership and the local authority to ask: what’s wrong? “I think it’s wrong to have a situation where the local authority says: ‘This is a good school, it’s full up, parents have to go to the less good school down the road’.Because as a result of the local authority’s failure to deal with educational underperformance, children continue to go to a poor school.” Gove also compared the extension of the academies programme – schools that are independent of local authorities and get their funding directly from government – to council house sales in the 1980s. The government plans to lobby university vice-chancellors, businesses and private schools to become involved in sponsoring academies in an attempt to reach areas of the country where few have converted. A total of 658 schools are now academies. A further 686 are in the pipeline. But there are 18 local authorities where no academies have been established, including Blackpool, Leicestershire, Warrington and Wigan. Gove said: “There’s an analogy which, as a Conservative politician, I reach for … which is with council house sales … initially the people who bought council houses, people who were perhaps seen by their neighbours as a bit pushy and assertive – ‘Why do they think they’re so special?’. And then, after in a community a few people had done it, and the neighbours noticed they had a greater degree of freedom and flexibility, other people thought, that makes sense, I’ll take advantage of it too. So the position moved from being a few pioneers, to being a minority but respectable position to becoming mainstream, to becoming the majority position.” He said the plan was to identify areas “which stick out like sore thumbs” before picking sponsors to help establish academies. Gove also said he wanted to strengthen the role of the schools adjudicator, the government watchdog that rules in disputes over admissions. The current chief adjudicator, Ian Craig, announced in March he was stepping down early. Last year he warned that government plans to simplify the admissions code could weaken it. When Craig announced his decision to quit, the department said it would allow his successor time to “get up to speed” ahead of the new admissions process. Gove said: “One of the things we hope to do in the admissions code – still Is are being dotted and Ts crossed — one of the other things we want to do is ensure that in the system there will be more fairness, the schools adjudicator will have more teeth, so that anyone concerned about admissions arrangements can report them to the schools adjudicator. “Before it had to be a relevant individual, a parent at the school or connected [in some way], now if you are a parent anywhere and you see admissions arrangements which you think are unfair you can refer it to the schools adjudicator. Our aim is to allow good schools to expand, but also to have a strong adjudicator who is in a position to investigate and clamp down.” School admissions Schools Education policy Michael Gove Jeevan Vasagar guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Click here to view this media (h/t David at VideoCafe) I love Newt Gingrich’s campaign strategy of demanding that the media only hold him accountable for how great he is *right now*. Ignore all those ethical issues in his past tenure as Speaker of the House , he’s *now* the only one with leadership skills. Ignore all those infidelities in the past , he loves his wife *now*. Ignore what he said last week about Paul Ryan’s budget, he thinks it’s the best thing for America *now*. Likewise, *right now* Newt knows exactly how to get us out of the economic crisis we’re in because he’s debt-free and frugal, just ignore the fact that his own financial dealings have been less than cut and dried. Bob Schieffer brings up this week’s revelation that Callista Gingrich disclosed five years ago an outstanding debt to Tiffany’s Jewelers in the six figures. Callista claimed the debt (of somewhere between $250,000 and 500,000) was her husband’s. Now, I don’t know about you, but I think it’s hard to claim understanding the financial concerns of most Americans when you’re floating a six figure debt to Tiffany’s, but Newt wants you to know that *right now* he and Callista are living frugally and debt-free . Whew! I’m relieved to know that, aren’t you? Except… Newt’s “small businesses” actually owed back taxes just a short time ago : Companies run by Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich have faced overdue tax bills in four states worth more than $6,000, according to records reviewed by The Associated Press. The tax liens, which generally allow governments to seize assets or property to settle tax bills, ranged in size from a $195 property tax bill in the Atlanta suburbs to $1,969 in unpaid Missouri taxes. Most of the liens were paid shortly after tax authorities filed them. One exception was in Pennsylvania, where Gingrich Holdings Inc. last week paid off a $1,599 lien for unpaid corporate income taxes just days before Gingrich formally announced he would run against Democratic incumbent Barack Obama. Gingrich spokesman Rick Tyler said Gingrich and his firms were unaware of most of the tax liens until being contacted this week by the AP. And on the subject of being debt free…Newt never really has ever explained where he came up with the money to pay his ethics violation charges. Initially, he said he’d pay it via a $300K loan from Bob Dole , but then the outrage made him back down and offer to pay for it himself . Where that money came from is anyone’s guess. Then-wife Marianne Gingrich (Callista was only a little something something on the side) said that the Gingriches were extremely cash-poor in those days and Newt’s plan to write a book to cover expenses fell apart . So where did the money come from? We know that Citizens United donated money to Newt’s production company and we know he’s raking in cash (some $14 million according to some sources) from donations to various foundations . Maybe Gingrich ought to release his tax filings so we can see just how frugal and debt-free he is.
Continue reading …