FOX News, right wing operatives and grandstanding politicians like Rep. Peter King have been whipping up the idea that torture was used to get the vital bit of Intel that eventually helped lead the US to Bin Laden . King; We obtained that information through waterboarding. So for those who say that waterboarding doesn’t work, who say it should be stopped and never used again, we got vital information, which directly led us to Bin Laden.” O’Reilly: Wow! FOX News featured Rep. Peter King all day yesterday in their coverage along with every ex-Bushie from Andrew Card to Dick Cheney as I waded through hours of their programming and excluded the entire Democratic Party from their coverage except for some video excerpts of Obama and Hillary and a brief appearance by Blue Dog Democrat Dan Boren, who votes 84% of the time with the Republican party on Fox and Friends. John Brennan disputed King’s account, but some of what he said in his presser wasn’t very accurate, but Keith Olbermann uncovers a source that right wingers will have a tough time denouncing. Donald Rumsfeld, the man behind Abu Ghraib. Rumsfeld Disproves Conservatives’ Tortured Argument The GOP spin machine, caught with its Abu Ghraib pants down, has come up with only two rickety memes with which to pull itself out of the deep end of the political pool. The first was the simplest: “Obama merely finished what Bush began.” But the second was a little more robust: The Peter King (R-Stupidity) claim mirrored by a tweeter who asked me: “how does it feel knowing Bin Laden courier was discovered under Bush admin & info was obtained in Gitmo?” — Wait, it gets worse. Guess who’s out tonight denying that waterboarding, or even “harsh treatment” led to the info that led to Bin Laden? “It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding. ” That was said by Don Rumsfeld. I’ll stop writing now so you can spend a few minutes laughing through your mouth, nose, ears, feet, and eyeballs. If any ex-Bushie wanted torture to work it would be Donald Rumsfeld, who led the way for harsher treatment of detainees under his watch in 2002: In an extraordinary disclosure of classified material, the Bush administration released 258 pages of internal documents Tuesday that portray harsh interrogation techniques — including stripping terror suspects and threatening them with dogs — as a necessary response to threats from al-Qaeda terrorists — The alert set in motion a review that culminated with a Nov. 27, 2002, “action memo” in which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved interrogation techniques that included “removal of clothing” and “inducing stress by use of detainee’s fears (e.g. dogs).” Rumsfeld also approved placing detainees in “stress positions,” such as standing for up to 4 hours, though he apparently found this approach unimpressive. Rumsfeld, who works at a stand-up desk, scrawled on the memo, “I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to four hours? D.R.” (Related link: View memo ) Eventually, after military officers raised moral and legal concerns about the techniques and the Pentagon conducted an internal review, Rumsfeld issued revised rules for Guantanamo in April 2003 that omitted the stripping and use of dogs. Andrew Sullivan has a great round up about the lying Torture meme being pushed by the GOP and FOX: The Big Lie: Torture Got Bin Laden Think Progress: Senate Intelligence Chair: Information That Led To Bin Laden’s Killing Did Not Come From Torture TNR disputes the case for torture also.
Continue reading …FOX News, right wing operatives and grandstanding politicians like Rep. Peter King have been whipping up the idea that torture was used to get the vital bit of Intel that eventually helped lead the US to Bin Laden . King; We obtained that information through waterboarding. So for those who say that waterboarding doesn’t work, who say it should be stopped and never used again, we got vital information, which directly led us to Bin Laden.” O’Reilly: Wow! FOX News featured Rep. Peter King all day yesterday in their coverage along with every ex-Bushie from Andrew Card to Dick Cheney as I waded through hours of their programming and excluded the entire Democratic Party from their coverage except for some video excerpts of Obama and Hillary and a brief appearance by Blue Dog Democrat Dan Boren, who votes 84% of the time with the Republican party on Fox and Friends. John Brennan disputed King’s account, but some of what he said in his presser wasn’t very accurate, but Keith Olbermann uncovers a source that right wingers will have a tough time denouncing. Donald Rumsfeld, the man behind Abu Ghraib. Rumsfeld Disproves Conservatives’ Tortured Argument The GOP spin machine, caught with its Abu Ghraib pants down, has come up with only two rickety memes with which to pull itself out of the deep end of the political pool. The first was the simplest: “Obama merely finished what Bush began.” But the second was a little more robust: The Peter King (R-Stupidity) claim mirrored by a tweeter who asked me: “how does it feel knowing Bin Laden courier was discovered under Bush admin & info was obtained in Gitmo?” — Wait, it gets worse. Guess who’s out tonight denying that waterboarding, or even “harsh treatment” led to the info that led to Bin Laden? “It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding. ” That was said by Don Rumsfeld. I’ll stop writing now so you can spend a few minutes laughing through your mouth, nose, ears, feet, and eyeballs. If any ex-Bushie wanted torture to work it would be Donald Rumsfeld, who led the way for harsher treatment of detainees under his watch in 2002: In an extraordinary disclosure of classified material, the Bush administration released 258 pages of internal documents Tuesday that portray harsh interrogation techniques — including stripping terror suspects and threatening them with dogs — as a necessary response to threats from al-Qaeda terrorists — The alert set in motion a review that culminated with a Nov. 27, 2002, “action memo” in which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved interrogation techniques that included “removal of clothing” and “inducing stress by use of detainee’s fears (e.g. dogs).” Rumsfeld also approved placing detainees in “stress positions,” such as standing for up to 4 hours, though he apparently found this approach unimpressive. Rumsfeld, who works at a stand-up desk, scrawled on the memo, “I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to four hours? D.R.” (Related link: View memo ) Eventually, after military officers raised moral and legal concerns about the techniques and the Pentagon conducted an internal review, Rumsfeld issued revised rules for Guantanamo in April 2003 that omitted the stripping and use of dogs. Andrew Sullivan has a great round up about the lying Torture meme being pushed by the GOP and FOX: The Big Lie: Torture Got Bin Laden Think Progress: Senate Intelligence Chair: Information That Led To Bin Laden’s Killing Did Not Come From Torture TNR disputes the case for torture also.
Continue reading …While US officials amend narrative of raid, Abbottabad residents describe Bin Laden’s ‘mansion’ and the brothers who built it By the time Pakistani soldiers lifted the cordon around Osama bin Laden’s house in the garrison town of Abbottabad, triggering a media stampede, the most obvious traces of its infamous resident had been effaced. The American soldiers who had swept in aboard four helicopters on Sunday night had scoured the three-storey building, taking away computer hard disks and a trove of documents – as well as Bin Laden’s bloodied body, which was later buried at sea. The following day, Pakistani intelligence – angered at not having been informed of the raid, and embarrassed that it took place under their noses – made a second sweep. Tractors carted away furniture and other belongings. But it was impossible to erase every trace of the drama that ended the manhunt. Beyond the gates, children in flip-flops and salwar kameez fished chunks of blackened helicopter debris from the surrounding fields, flung there after a US helicopter that failed to take off was blown up by its own soldiers. One boy produced a jagged, soot-encrusted chunk of metal, perhaps part of an exhaust, from a drain. “This is silver!” declared 12-year-old Yasser. A nervous looking intelligence official, loitering nearby, grabbed the child by the hand and led him away. Fascination with the raid was not confined to Abbottabad. In Washington, fresh details were being revealed by the White House, some which contradicted the earlier version of events surrounding the killing of their most wanted man. In the immediate hours after Bin Laden’s death, US officials had briefed that he had put up a fight and shot at the Seal 6 team that had stormed the second and third floors of his hideout. Other details suggested he had used one of his wives as a human shield. The White House confirmed that neither was true. Bin Laden was unarmed, was shot in the head and chest, and his wife had been wounded in the leg while rushing towards the special forces before he was killed. The photographs of his body, the spokesman said, were probably too gruesome to be released. Another narrative to change somewhat concerned the property itself. Up close, Bin Laden’s house, a tall, unlovely piece of architecture, towering over the policemen guarding the gate, was not quite the million dollar mansion described by officials. The walls were high, certainly, but not unusually so for north-western Pakistan, where privacy is jealously guarded. The paint was peeling, there was no air conditioning. But it was the only house in the neighbourhood with barbed wire and surveillance cameras. And it towered over its only neighbour, a small, ramshackle dwelling made of rough bricks with plastic sheeting for windows. The people inside were scared and apprehensive. Zain Muhammad, an elderly man perched on a rope bed on the porch, said Pakistani soldiers had come in the night and taken away his son, Shamraiz. He produced a photo of a smiling man with a moustache in his early 40s. “I’ve no idea where he is. The soldiers won’t allow us to leave, not even to fetch water.” The residents had had their suspicions about the house across the street, they said: the thick walls and barbed wire, and the two secretive brothers who owned it, described as ethnic Pashtuns. “They told us they had to protect themselves because they had enemies back in their home village. They said they had to screen off the house to protect their women. A lot of us thought they were smugglers,” said Abid Khan. The house, it turned out, had been on the radar of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) for more than eight years. Construction started around 2001. Two years later, when it was still unfinished, ISI agents raided it in search of Abu Faraj al-Libbi, a senior Bin Laden lieutenant, but left empty-handed, an ISI official said. Around 2005, Bin Laden moved in, according to US officials – around about the time of the devastating Kashmir earthquake that killed 73,000 people in October of that year. As the wounded flooded into Abbottabad’s military hospital a mile away – so many that doctors set up a tent on the main lawn – the Saudi fugitive and his clan were settling into this house down the road. There had been great speculation about his whereabouts. Across the border in Afghanistan, US soldiers distributed matchboxes with Bin Laden’s picture and details of a $25m bounty. In Pakistan, the US embassy paid for expensive television ads appealing for information. “Who can stop these terrorists? Only you!” implored a voice as images of Bin Laden and 13 henchmen flashed across the screen. The then president, Pervez Musharraf, insisted the Americans were wrong. His security forces had “broken the vertical and horizontal command and communication links of al-Qaida” in Pakistan, he boasted. “There are a lot of people who say that Osama bin Laden is here in Pakistan,” he said. “Please come and show us where.” In Abbottabad, the two Pashtun brothers had finally completed their house, less than a mile from the Pakistan Military Academy where Musharraf himself had been trained. One of them was Bin Laden’s courier, the man trusted to take his messages to the outside world. CIA officials learned his nom de guerre from an al-Qaida militant picked up in Iraq: Sheikh Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti. US officials described him a Pakistani brought up in Kuwait. To the locals, however, he was simply a Pashtun businessman with an identity card issued in Charsadda, north of Peshawar. He and his brother seemed to be known by several names: Arshad and Tariq Khan, but also Rasheed, Ahmed and Nadeem. The gas bill was in the name of the elder brother, Arshad Khan, presumed to be the “courier” sought by the Americans. Oddly, the house had four separate gas connections. They kept largely to themselves, coming and going in a small white Suzuki van and a red jeep. But they joined in with neighbourhood rituals, condoling the bereaved, celebrating weddings and births. It may have been a necessary part of the cover story; to have done otherwise could have aroused greater suspicion. “They weren’t chatty,” said Rasheed, a 32-year-old local shopkeeper, lounging behind his counter. He sold the brothers salty biscuits and chewy toffees when they visited with their seven children. He refused to believe they had any links to Kuwait. “We absolutely believed they were Pashtuns,” he said. But he had noticed something odd. He had worked on the house as a labourer when it was being built, and had wondered why the brothers insisted that the walls should be 3ft thick. In the end, the two brothers were Bin Laden’s downfall. The CIA learned of Arshad Khan’s identity four years ago, and after a two-year hunt learned that he lived in the Abbottabad area. Then, last August, a Pakistani working for the CIA followed one of the brothers as he drove his Suzuki van from Peshawar, leading them to the house. In February, the CIA became convinced Bin Laden was inside, leading to last Sunday’s raid. The two brothers were killed, according to the CIA, along with Bin Laden and one of his sons, thought to be Khalid. Many details, however, remain blurred. US officials amended their initial version to reveal that a woman who was killed during the raid on the compound was not Bin Laden’s wife. It is also not clear how Bin Laden, who was cornered in a third-floor room now marked by a shattered windowpane, resisted as the US soldiers barged into his room. President Barack Obama insists the Navy Seals would have detained him if they could, but it is hard to imagine US officials would have relished either a trial or the spectacle of the al-Qaida leader being held in Guantánamo Bay. Bin Laden’s erstwhile neighbours, now in the gaze of the world’s media, congregated outside his house. Some seemed angry, others bemused. One bearded man scolded his friends for speaking to the foreign press; others seemed to relish the attention, presenting themselves for detailed interviews about their brushes with the neighbour they never knew. A few displayed pro-Osama bravado. “I would have opened fire on the Americans myself if I had to defend him!” declared one man. Others worried about more material problems. “It’s going to destroy property prices in this area,” muttered one. And there was a surreal moment when an Osama lookalike – a man with a thin face and a full, scraggly beard – turned before the front gate, triggering laughs and a flutter of camera shutters. But there was no sign of life from a large neighbouring house, about 50 metres from Bin Laden’s back wall, which also had a high perimeter wall and two watchtowers. Neighbours said it had been built three years ago by a man whose family has long owned property in the area. The nameplate read: Major Amir Aziz. Locals said he was a serving Pakistan army officer. Despite repeated rings on the doorbell, he refused to answer. It is unclear what will happen now to the house that Osama built. It has become an embarrassment for Pakistan, a reminder of the fact that the world’s most famous fugitive managed to live in suburban comfort, apparently undetected, for up to six years. Some fear it could become a shrine of sorts for al-Qaida supporters, and so it may be destroyed. But failing that, it may simply be rented out again. It is, after all, an attractive property – spacious, well located, and fully fitted with advanced security features. In fact it’s just the sort of house that is favoured by security-conscious US diplomats elsewhere in Pakistan. Perhaps they might consider taking it. Osama bin Laden Middle East Pakistan United States Obama administration US politics US foreign policy US military al-Qaida Global terrorism Declan Walsh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …The East Coast line’s dining cars have long pampered travellers. Now they are being withdrawn, Patrick Barkham joins the 16.30 from King’s Cross On a white tablecloth before me is a venison and pistachio terrine, two slabs of medium- rare ribeye and a plate of British cheeses. A gentle tinkle of silver cutlery, and unsurpassed views of the British countryside – May blossom, a paddock of horses, children on BMXs – unfurl under a setting sun. If this was the opening of a new restaurant, critics would be salivating. But this unique dining experience is, in fact, closing in three weeks. The east coast mainline’s 15 restaurant cars are being withdrawn from service , ending a 132-year tradition on the grand old route between King’s Cross, Newcastle and Edinburgh. The only crumb of comfort? The British restaurant car will survive on four trains a day between Paddington and Penzance. Dining cars were once the gilding on the age of the train. When James Bond enjoyed dinner on the Orient Express and watched his ally Captain Nash order red wine with fish , Bond knew he was really a Spectre assassin impersonating an English gentleman. In Stella Artois’ latest ad campaign , the dining carriage is the ultimate destination for the social-climbing drinker. These gently swaying restaurants have always been a classy public place where even grubby standard class passengers could taste first-class treatment. As a waiter on the East Coast service recalls, lone diners would complain about being seated together, but once the wine started flowing they would all be chatting and swapping business cards. “The deals that got done in this car,” he sighs. It is telling that East Coast ‘s restaurant car is being replaced by a new, dedicated quiet coach in first class. Travellers, it seems, no longer want fine dining, or a chance to socialise; we prefer to cocoon ourselves in a private world, logged on, spilling sandwich crumbs on our keyboards. So East Coast, the publicly owned company charged with spicing up the route ahead of re-privatisation, is following the example of Virgin and Eurostar and introducing “at-seat” dining – “free” hot meals for all first-class passengers. Almost half of the customers surveyed favoured these airline-style meals, says a spokesman; the rest, it seems, expressed no clear preference. To see what is being lost I boarded the 16:30 to Newark North Gate. There were no Bond villains or Stella babes; just me and four other business people. The venison terrine was nicely spiced; a perfect accompaniment to the vista north of Stevenage. As Peterborough cathedral hove into view, so did the ribeye – tender, enormous and perfectly cooked, delivered with silver service. I could choose from a selection of fine wines, prosecco or whisky but – Bond would assassinate me for this – it had to be a can of John Smiths. Between mouthfuls of Blacksticks blue cheese, I asked another diner, Alan Griffin, if he was saddened by the decline of the dining car. “The standard of food you get at a first-class seat when there isn’t a restaurant car definitely isn’t as good, so I do regret it a bit,” he says. “I don’t know what the motivation is but I assume it’s to make more money.” East Coast says the withdrawal of the cars is part of a £12m programme featuring 19 extra services a week, including new return services to Lincoln and Harrogate and a four-hour “Flying Scotsman” service from Edinburgh to London. Most of all, though, East Coast wants to increase disparity between standard and first class – or, as it prefers to put it, increase the incentive to travel first class – by offering free meals at every first-class seat. Surely serving a million meals each year instead of 100,000 will reduce quality? “We understand the heritage of the route and fine dining is very important for our consumers. We’re working very hard with suppliers to ensure the quality and variety remains as high as people expect,” says the spokesman. “It’s about providing better value with the first-class ticket.” Passengers are also suspicious that it will push up the price of first-class tickets. Serving all these extra meals certainly means the friendly train staff will no longer have the time to provide such excellent service. “It’s expensive, but you’ve got this,” says one of the train stewards, pointing to the woodlands and brilliant yellow fields of oilseed rape as I pay my £32.45 bill. To me that seems excellent value for such an elevated experience. The return journey from Newark North Gate, slumped in a standard seat and plugged into my laptop, seems both more hurried and a lot slower. Rail travel Patrick Barkham guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …First she turned down Jay-Z’s label, then she said no to a Jarvis Cocker track – not bad for someone who had just quit Topshop. Alexis Petridis meets singer-songwriter Clare Maguire The day she met Rick Rubin , says Clare Maguire , was “probably the most brilliant day of my life”. She was looking for a record deal, and was summoned to the Malibu home of the legendary producer and co-president of Columbia Records to perform for him. “I was just a huge fan of the records he made with Johnny Cash ,” she says. “I get there and there’s this big picture of Johnny Cash and [his wife] June Carter on the wall. We went into his kitchen and he gave me a guitar. I was so all over the place, the only song I could think of was an old Irish folk song. So I sang that, and he liked it. And because I was talking about Johnny Cash, he started playing me some tracks they’d done together that hadn’t been released.” This caused the 23-year-old to burst into tears: “It was just so overwhelming.” In a final flourish, Rubin suggested they go to see Leonard Cohen rehearsing, presumably in order to demonstrate what an artist who’s spent 44 years signed to Columbia looks like. “He was the nicest man I think I’ve ever met. He had this thing in his eyes, where he looked so kind and so genuine, and you just knew it was all about the music for him, and he was like . . .” Her voice tails off. “Just really . . . ” she says, before giving up trying to find words to describe him. But despite Rubin’s compound wonderfulness, the peek into the Cash archive and the presence of Cohen, she didn’t sign to his label. “No, no, no, no,” she frowns. “I was thinking, ‘Where can I go that, if I make a record, it’s going to get to as many people as possible?” I signed to the label that could do the most for me.” That was Polydor. You could, if you wished, say this anecdote tells you a lot about Maguire. It certainly tells you something about how desperate labels were to get her signature, and how improbable the ensuing bidding war must have seemed to someone who had been working in Topshop while playing Bruce Springsteen covers in Birmingham pubs by night. A few weeks before the Rubin incident, another label took her to The Spotted Pig , the New York gastropub co-owned by Jay-Z, when the rapper turned up (“I think the guy from the label texted him,” she notes, wryly). Jay-Z whisked her away from her burger, bought her drinks and told her that he could see that she was a star. “He said, ‘You can always tell someone’s going to be big because you can see the determination in their eyes.’ And, because I’d had five shots, I went, [drunk voice] ‘Can you see it in my eyes?’ and he said, ‘Yeah.’” But the thanks-but-no-thanks denouement suggests a certain steely determination on the part of Maguire to do things her way. It isn’t necessarily what you’d expect from an artist working in commercial pop-rock, albeit with a vaguely gothic twist on the evidence of debut album Light After Dark (she thinks the bleakness in her music might come from her parents’ love of Irish folk songs “where someone always dies at the end”). She also has an immensely powerful voice, which she discovered when starring in a school musical aged six. As is the way with artists working in vaguely commercial pop-rock, Maguire was encouraged by her record company to work with professional songwriters: not just the usual big guns for hire, such as Linda Perry , but Jarvis Cocker and Plan B . She was still living in a bedsit at the time, but turned all the results down. “I found that hard, because when you’re in the studio writing with someone, it’s such a personal thing, so intense. I hate to let people down.” You can see why labels thought she might be a star. Sitting in a Soho members’ club, picking at her macaroni cheese, she already looks like one. Her hair is dyed black and her grey-green eyes are ringed with kohl in the time-honoured manner of the provincial goth, but the dress is designer and the shoes are from outer space: a riot of grey suede and lace trimmings. She is charming but driven. Maguire left school in Solihull at 17, after an altercation with a teacher who suggested she might consider applying to university. “He basically said to me I’d never make it, which was the wrong thing to say. I was quite rebellious, very obsessed with the fact that [this] was what I wanted to do.” She is alleged to have signed in the end for what one journalist called “an eye-watering sum of money” (“Well, it all goes into the live show,” she frowns, “Me, personally, I don’t get that much”), which presumably means there’s an immense weight of expectation on her shoulders. Her debut album went top 10, but the singles so far have failed to break the top 20. “I’m not scared,” she says. “I’m getting a following; it may not be massive yet, but it’s there.” Besides, she says, she has enough to keep her occupied: video shoots, working with drum’n’bass producers Chase and Status , a second album “which I’ve already told the record company I want to make for June and they’re like, ‘You can’t do that.’” When we speak, she is preparing for her debut show at at London’s G-A-Y club. “It’s the biggest thing I’ve done. Four dancers covered in body paint, gold from head to toe,” she enthuses. “Everything’s in white on stage; it’s supposed to look like heaven. The gay clubs allow you to do that visual thing more. And I’ve got a solid gay fanbase, which is surprising, but they’re really sweet. They set up fan pages for me and bring me Valentine’s cards. “People either really like what I do, or not, but the ones who like it kind of start obsessing about it. I knew I’d get that. It’s a love it or hate it thing. It’s got some raw elements, but it’s very polished, it’s very bold, quite pop, and then there’s the voice, obviously. Some people are just going to . . .” Lost
Continue reading …enlarge Credit: AFP News spread quickly. Click here to view this media Certainly no shortage of reports, spin and observations coming from our own mainstream media, I thought I would take a look and see how the rest of the world was reacting to the news of the bin Laden death. And of course, there was plenty (and still is). Like all the news today, it’s coming thick and fast and the observations are running the gamut. Starting off this roundup of news reports and reactions, I’m beginning with the first hour of BBC Radio 4′s Today Program which featured initial reactions and reports, as the attack on the Bin Laden compound took place only three hours earlier. It’s the player at the top. Quickly followed by a Special program from the BBC Asian Service , getting reaction from members of the Asian community around London and updating the initial news reports. Click here to view this media Shortly after the BBC reports are three news bulletins from Radio Pakistan (might as well check out the source) beginning with the 12:00 noon news. There was no mention on the 8:00 news so it wasn’t included. Click here to view this media Next up is a special program from Radio Pakistan on the bin Laden news – this one is in Urdu and was aired shortly after the initial reports. Click here to view this media From Radio Algeria comes their Morning News, this time in French and it seems to have not been as big a deal in Algeria as one would imagine, since the hour newscast was mostly taken up with Football news (which was cut out). Different strokes . . . Click here to view this media The BBC World Service ran a Special edition of their Newshour program, featuring additional reports from Washington, Kabul and Islamabad. Click here to view this media And finally, ABC Radio National in Australia devoted the first third of their Late Night Live Program to the events of the day, with several interviews and reports. Click here to view this media A very busy day which is pretty far from over. But these are the initial reports and observations during the first few hours after President Obama’s official announcement. After fourteen hours of sifting, listening and editing you get some idea how the rest of the world was reacting to the news. Relief, optimism and caution – and that nagging feeling we haven’t heard the end of it yet. And of course, if this kind of over-the-top wrapup appeals to you, by all means,
Continue reading …U.S. officials have told CNN that the identity of the courier who led U.S. special forces to hunt and kill Osama bin Laden was a Kuwaiti named Abu Ahmad. After the U.S. established his identity back in 2007, they then began a path to the house where bin Laden lived for the past six years
Continue reading …Today CBS News officially announced that longtime correspondent Scott Pelley will be taking the reins of the CBS Evening News from departing anchor Katie Couric . A review of the MRC's archive reveals Pelley will most likely continue the long tradition of liberal bias advanced by his anchor predecessors Couric , Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite .
Continue reading …Coalition tensions rise over what could be crushing victory for no campaign in Thursday’s referendum on alternative vote Coalition tensions over what could be a crushing victory for the no campaign in Thursday’s referendum on the alternative vote have exploded into extraordinary scenes in cabinet , with the Liberal Democrat energy secretary, Chris Huhne, confronting David Cameron and George Osborne over campaign leaflets that he believed smeared Nick Clegg. During the ensuing row, Osborne said he was not going to be challenged by a cabinet colleague acting as if he was “Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight”. In tense exchanges, leaked by Conservative sources within an hour of the cabinet meeting, Huhne demanded to know if Cameron would disassociate himself from the leaflets issued by the no campaign that he said had smeared Clegg’s leadership of the Lib Dems. He challenged the prime minister to sack any Conservative official linked to this literature, which said Clegg had broken promises. Cameron replied that he was not responsible for the all-party no campaign literature. Huhne then asked the chancellor whether he had any knowledge of the literature. Osborne apparently replied that this was always going to be a difficult period for the coalition. When Huhne again asked him to explain if he had known of the leaflets, Osborne complained that cabinet was not the right venue for this discussion before making his Paxman remark. Huhne then suggested that people would draw their own conclusions from the pair’s failure to condemn such smears on the deputy prime minister. Huhne did not consult Nick Clegg before his demarche and defended his role in the confrontation. “I think these have been unacceptable leaflets,” he said. “In any other walk of life such behaviour would be seen as nasty, personal and vindictive.” He added: “The home secretary Theresa May used to characterise the Tory party as the nasty party and this episode shows it has a way to go to before it achieves full rehabilitation. The underhand tactics show how desperate the political establishment is to hang on to power.” Huhne’s increasingly bitter public attacks on his coalition colleagues, including such a direct challenge to the prime minister, were dismissed as a yes campaign stunt by Tory sources. The row also angered parts of the all-party yes campaign that saw the inter-party row as a distraction from its final push message, as well as an attempt to highlight the no campaign’s failure to disclose all its funding. One yes campaign spokesman said: “Nothing Huhne has done has been authorised by us, or been helpful to us. The difficulty from day one was that we didn’t want the referendum seen through the prism of the coalition.” A ComRes poll published by the Independent on Tuesday showed the no camp romping home by a massive 66% to 35% among those saying they were certain to vote. Yes campaigners sensed defeat was inevitable. Meanwhile the yes campaign published an appeal signed by Ed Miliband, David Miliband, Lord Ashdown, Gordon Brown, Nick Clegg and two-thirds of the shadow cabinet calling for a yes vote. Ed Miliband also made his most explicit appeal for a yes vote on the basis that it could help nurture an anti-Tory progressive alliance in the country. Labour has always been at its best when it been a force for political reform. Writing for Comment is Free, he said: “If you believe this is a big C conservative country then perhaps you will believe that when forced to choose and elect someone with more than 50% of the vote, it will aid the right. “But if you believe that this is a genuinely progressive country, then we need an electoral system that can reflect the views of the electorate and give expression to the anti-conservative majority.” But the former Labour cabinet minister Lord Boateng lambasted the appeal for a progressive left. “The irony is overwhelming Lib Dem cabinet ministers trying to unite the left while they prop up a Conservative government implementing Conservative policies. If the Lib Dems find the Tories so distasteful you have to ask why they continue in government then.” John Healey, the shadow health secretary, also shared a platform with May to say the only reason the referendum was being held was because the alternative vote “gives the Liberal Democrats an open return to power, gives the Lib Dems a way into government election after election, and gives the Lib Dems a shield against loss of support”. Huhne insisted he was not planning to resign, adding whatever the Liberal Democrats do after the results come in on Friday will be done as a team. Huhne is known to want the coalition to continue, but is understood to believe personal trust between the parties has been lost irrevocably. One source said: “From now we will be consulting the lawyers first when we are offered an agreement by our coalition partners.” Support for a more businesslike approach towards the coalition is also coming from another Lib Dem cabinet minister, Vince Cable. Cameron will deny he is making any explicit concessions, but there are already signs he is backtracking on health, public services reform and the speed with which he brings in elected police commissioners. AV referendum Alternative vote Liberal-Conservative coalition Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Coalition tensions rise over what could be crushing victory for no campaign in Thursday’s referendum on alternative vote Coalition tensions over what could be a crushing victory for the no campaign in Thursday’s referendum on the alternative vote have exploded into extraordinary scenes in cabinet , with the Liberal Democrat energy secretary, Chris Huhne, confronting David Cameron and George Osborne over campaign leaflets that he believed smeared Nick Clegg. During the ensuing row, Osborne said he was not going to be challenged by a cabinet colleague acting as if he was “Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight”. In tense exchanges, leaked by Conservative sources within an hour of the cabinet meeting, Huhne demanded to know if Cameron would disassociate himself from the leaflets issued by the no campaign that he said had smeared Clegg’s leadership of the Lib Dems. He challenged the prime minister to sack any Conservative official linked to this literature, which said Clegg had broken promises. Cameron replied that he was not responsible for the all-party no campaign literature. Huhne then asked the chancellor whether he had any knowledge of the literature. Osborne apparently replied that this was always going to be a difficult period for the coalition. When Huhne again asked him to explain if he had known of the leaflets, Osborne complained that cabinet was not the right venue for this discussion before making his Paxman remark. Huhne then suggested that people would draw their own conclusions from the pair’s failure to condemn such smears on the deputy prime minister. Huhne did not consult Nick Clegg before his demarche and defended his role in the confrontation. “I think these have been unacceptable leaflets,” he said. “In any other walk of life such behaviour would be seen as nasty, personal and vindictive.” He added: “The home secretary Theresa May used to characterise the Tory party as the nasty party and this episode shows it has a way to go to before it achieves full rehabilitation. The underhand tactics show how desperate the political establishment is to hang on to power.” Huhne’s increasingly bitter public attacks on his coalition colleagues, including such a direct challenge to the prime minister, were dismissed as a yes campaign stunt by Tory sources. The row also angered parts of the all-party yes campaign that saw the inter-party row as a distraction from its final push message, as well as an attempt to highlight the no campaign’s failure to disclose all its funding. One yes campaign spokesman said: “Nothing Huhne has done has been authorised by us, or been helpful to us. The difficulty from day one was that we didn’t want the referendum seen through the prism of the coalition.” A ComRes poll published by the Independent on Tuesday showed the no camp romping home by a massive 66% to 35% among those saying they were certain to vote. Yes campaigners sensed defeat was inevitable. Meanwhile the yes campaign published an appeal signed by Ed Miliband, David Miliband, Lord Ashdown, Gordon Brown, Nick Clegg and two-thirds of the shadow cabinet calling for a yes vote. Ed Miliband also made his most explicit appeal for a yes vote on the basis that it could help nurture an anti-Tory progressive alliance in the country. Labour has always been at its best when it been a force for political reform. Writing for Comment is Free, he said: “If you believe this is a big C conservative country then perhaps you will believe that when forced to choose and elect someone with more than 50% of the vote, it will aid the right. “But if you believe that this is a genuinely progressive country, then we need an electoral system that can reflect the views of the electorate and give expression to the anti-conservative majority.” But the former Labour cabinet minister Lord Boateng lambasted the appeal for a progressive left. “The irony is overwhelming Lib Dem cabinet ministers trying to unite the left while they prop up a Conservative government implementing Conservative policies. If the Lib Dems find the Tories so distasteful you have to ask why they continue in government then.” John Healey, the shadow health secretary, also shared a platform with May to say the only reason the referendum was being held was because the alternative vote “gives the Liberal Democrats an open return to power, gives the Lib Dems a way into government election after election, and gives the Lib Dems a shield against loss of support”. Huhne insisted he was not planning to resign, adding whatever the Liberal Democrats do after the results come in on Friday will be done as a team. Huhne is known to want the coalition to continue, but is understood to believe personal trust between the parties has been lost irrevocably. One source said: “From now we will be consulting the lawyers first when we are offered an agreement by our coalition partners.” Support for a more businesslike approach towards the coalition is also coming from another Lib Dem cabinet minister, Vince Cable. Cameron will deny he is making any explicit concessions, but there are already signs he is backtracking on health, public services reform and the speed with which he brings in elected police commissioners. AV referendum Alternative vote Liberal-Conservative coalition Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …