Controversial Article on General Mcchrystal

Typing from a German kezboard at the moment, so the kezs are fixed differentlz but I want to rush this; this is the article that has caused an uproar in the Obama administration and may lead to the relievement of General Mcchrstal in Afghanistan. It would be a sad end to one of the most brilliant military leaders of our generation

Suspected Sudan rebel leaders surrender to court

Abdallah Banda Abakaer Nourain and Saleh Mohammed Jerbo Jamus are charged with 3 counts of war crimes and arrived voluntarily at the Hague on Wednesday to turn themselves in.

Maybe this could turn into the turning point in the Sudan conflict if anymore rebel leaders turn themselves into the ICC. I doubt al-Bashir will turn himself in to the court as well, but now that all of the perpetrators of the deadliest attack on African Union peacekeepers are in custody, perhaps things will change.

If the ICC were stronger it could go into Sudan and arrest those responsible, including al-Bashir if they were lucky I think. But they are not and could only wait since Sudan refused to extradite them.

Controversy over Afghan Timetable

In a recently released book, Vice President Biden was cited as saying that July 2011 would mark a significant point of draw down for U.S. Forces. Secretary Gates says that this is not the case, and that the current offensives in Afghanistan have not gone as smoothly as hoped, putting any previously established timetable in jeopardy.

In terms of International Law, I feel this raises a moral question: does the U.S. owe the international community a full withdrawal from Afghanistan in light of the blunders and arguably shaky legal basis for invasion (vis-a-vis Iraq) or should the United States indeed stay the course? The insurgency in Afghanistan is now stronger than it has been in years, and a return to the warlord regime of the Taliban would be devastating not only to Afghanistan and American P.R. , but also the strategic position of U.S. interests and stabilizing efforts in the Middle East? Is there a question of justice if the United States were to leave and leave the region in chaos?

I argue that there is more justice to be done by, "staying the course," at this point in the war, as the injustices that would be inflicted upon the Afghan people would be laid at American feet for starting the war - an effect that could raise questions of human rights violations and American culpability thereof.

A Different Opinion..

The Express ran a short piece on Friday (Jun.18th) that I found interesting -- it was called "Muslim Effort Falls Flat" and reported on a recent Pew poll that found persistent negative views of the U.S., and Obama particularly, across much of the Muslim world. A Google News piece reporting on the same data can be found here. In much of the rest of the world, views of the U.S. and of our president are much higher than they were during the Bush Administration, but despite Obama's "drive to improve relations with the Muslim world," where opinions of the U.S. remain unchanged or even lower as compared to previous years.

Motives behind Gaza Blockade

Here is an interesting article from the AP that hasn't gotten much play. Most telling, regardless of whether there actually is a sinister Israeli document is an Israeli official stating that authorities will continue to ease the blockade but "could not lift the embargo altogether as long as Hamas remains in control" of Gaza. This quite nearly suggests the blockade as means of pushing Hamas out of power, clearly falling in line with the idea of a "limited economic war": Punishing civilians as a means of attacking Hamas. What the article also illuminates is the extent of all that is restricted now in Gaza: Up until two weeks ago soda, juice, jam, spices, shaving cream, potato chips, cookies and candy were all prohibited.

Is the World Cup Bad For South Africa

On June 11th, representatives from 32 nations and millions upon millions of futbol (soccer) fans worldwide descended upon South Africa for the beginning of the month-long World Cup. The World Cup is generally billed as the second largest international athletic competition--following the Olympics--and is being hosted in an African nation for the first time in the 80-year history of the tournament. Even Professor Weekes has made the connection between, "the ways in which the TRC process might have had an effect on the 2010 World Soccer Cup Games now being held in South Africa" (Sunday June 6).

As Rotberg detailed in Truth v. Justice, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was the first step in making South Africa the first African nation to host the World Cup. Writes Rotberg of the need for the TRC to come to terms with the past in order to move into the future, "In the South African case, that meant dealing with outrages committed by whites against Africans, Africans against Africans, Africans against whites, and the African National Congress (ANC)against its own members, as well as with whites coming to terms with the evils of apartheid, perpetrated over more than forty years, with blacks primarily the victims" (Rotberg, 6).

While the strides South Africa has made, which are detailed in the linked article, are immense--especially for only being sixteen years since achieving full democracy--there is always the opposing view. Though this article does not cover it, the full 14-page special report in the print edition (if anyone is interested in reading it or about the Israeli siege...whoever edited this issue must have known about our class...please let me know) details some of the drawbacks and steps still remaining that have been totally forgotten because of the positives that are being paraded.

For Neda

This documentary on HBO illustrates what happened to Neda Agha-Soltan as well as the Iranian election in 2009. After viewing this, I found many themes that we have covered in this class. An article from CNN.com by Mitra Mobasherat describes the film as " the personal story of the woman who unwittingly became the symbol of the post-election reform movement in Iran when her death was captured on a cell phone video and shown around the world." The CNN article also reports that the Iranian government tried to interrupt either electricity or satellite signal when the documentary was shown last week.

Doctors and torture

Physicians for human rights recently accused the C.I.A. under the Bush Administration of having used doctors to conduct human experiments by observing subjects of 'enhanced interrogation' and gauging the effects of different techniques (see the above article and an editorial written about it). Both the article and editorial note that the behavior was illegal. The C.I.A. has denied the allegations, but it made me wonder whether there would ever be a circumstance where the use of medical professionals in the process of torture might be allowed. Consider Henry Shue's article Torture (assigned for week 4), which sees some justification in torture if performed only under the most specific of circumstances (like the ticking time bomb scenario). He describes the use of a doctor as a way to keep the torture from becoming barbaric - the doctor would monitor the victim and allow only as much pain as necessary to be administered, and would administer a tranquilizer to relieve pain after the purpose of torture had been achieved. Could the use of medical professionals in a situation such as that be justified?

Yet another conflict over Islam in France

" The noisy rise to national concern of a $25 traffic ticket issued to Sandrine Mouleres last April in the port city of Nantes, 220 miles west of Paris, has illuminated the extent of unease in France and other Western European countries over Muslim populations whose customs and visibility often clash with the continent's secular and Christian values."

It is issues like this that create this misunderstanding about Islam. this article does not have to do with actual terrorism, but with the distrust of Islam and its culture.

Israel's Barak threatened

Key quote from the article: " Activists have previously tried to arrest Barak and other Israeli officials in Europe under the principle of universal jurisdiction. That principle allows the prosecution of suspected war criminals in countries that have no direct connection with the events"

Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute/ICC and therefore is not really able to be tried for what happened with the Gaza blockade. If the 'like-minded' group that Robertson talked about(p.347) had prevailed during the conference then there would be universal jurisdiction and the prosecutors would be able to go after those that were thought to have ordered the attack.

Violence breeding violence

The Washington Post Express ran a short piece earlier this week (Tuesday the 8th) on Egypt’s decision to open its border with Gaza. The story mentions that “With international pressure building to ease the blockade, an Egyptian security official said sealing off Hamas-ruled Gaza has only bred more militancy.” This reminded me of discussion from earlier in the course about the perpetuating cycle of violence, and how responding to terrorism with force usually just serves to worsen the problem – I wonder if the rest of you would agree that this logic applies to the situation in Gaza, or if anyone has a differing opinion?

U.N. Investigation of Israeli Actions

Rumors are beginning to turn up that indicate the United States will back efforts of the international community to order a third-party investigation until the actions of the Israel government when it stormed a humanitarian flotilla. It is a measure which, of course, Israel strongly opposes.

Yet, as Israeli ambassador Michael Oren discussed on the Colbert Report , just as the United States would not want nations such as Iran or North Korea sitting in judgment over its actions in the War on Terror (or elsewhere), neither does Israel want other nations, especially enemies, deciding what is in the best interest of its territorial and national security.

Therefore, what use does an independent tribunal serve in this instance? Does it show that the United Nations has more teeth? Only if the investigation's findings conclude action/intervention is necessary, and only if those actions are taken...which the United States, never mind Israel, would likely not stand for. Would an investigation shed light onto the matter? Probably not; it seems unlikely more evidence will surface beyond the video, cargo manifests, and testimony that has already come to light. What then, would this investigation accomplish aside from a large finger wagging by the international community and give support to Israel's regional enemies, which at the moment, happen to be very similar to the enemies the United States stands likely to face in the coming decade, namely Iran. Should we really seek to strength Iran's role in the region yet again?

American U Student Blog on CNN

Imagine my surprised checking cnn.com to see American University student Frankie Martin's blog on an Islamic identity in America. Martin worked with Professor Akbar Ahmed to produce a sequal to "Islam Under Siege" entitled "Journey into America: The Challenge of Islam." Definitely check it out!

Obscene Spending at Guantanamo

Beginning in 2002, at least 500 million dollars has been spent renovating U.S Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay. Among the expenditures, there has been:

$114 Million Suburban tract home housing units

$27 Million Two baseball fields, a football field complete with uprights and a running track are part of the Cooper Field complex. Go Kart tracks and Volleyball courts were also built, but are not used.

$26 Million Eight mile stretch of road improvements along the naval station's border with Cuba.

$3.5 million 27 renovated playgrounds across the base, with $1.6 million allotted for additional playgrounds.

All considerations on legality aside, I am most struck by all the amenities that the Navy paid for its service members. Morale, welfare and recreation spending is a necessary part of military expenditures, but in Iraq that means a gym, a computer center and a room with video games. It defines irony that the military base that has come to signify American injustice and negligence also enjoys a disparately higher standard of living compared to other posts.

"Things to know" about torture...

I came across this the other day, it lists some basic facts about torture (ignore the video at the very top - I'm not sure what that is, an ad of some sort?). It indicates, like the Boston Globe article from our discussion in week 2, that people who attend church regularly are more likely to support torture. But this graphic also breaks down the statistics of torture support by political party - saying 49% of Republicans, 24% of Democrats and 35% of Independents polled agreed that "torture to gain important information from suspected terrorists is justified." The graphic notes that (according to Amnesty International) torture is more prevalent in G-20 nations. It also lists, among other things, some outdated torture devices that have been used in the past - this may not be pertinent to our discussion, but I found it interesting!

The Sunnier Side of the Middle East Conflict

Though the Middle East has been a source of considerable conflict and devastation in recent memory, there is always a lighter side. The Middle East conflict has provided political cartoonists with increasing amounts of ammunition (no pun intended) to draw humorous depictions of various aspects of the dilemma between Israel and Hamas. The above link includes a series of 13 different cartoons that all relate to the Middle East conflict. Especially applicable to this week's discussion is the cartoon linked above "Wolf in Ship's Clothing."

As Walzer (227) notes, “Once soldiers are actually engaged, and especially if they are engaged in a Righteous War or a just war, a steady pressure builds up against the war convention and in favor of particular violations of its rules.” With Hamas seeing its sustainability in question, it is not unbelievable to picture a scenario where they would disguise themselves as a humanitarian ship just to sneak passed the Israelis.

Enjoy the cartoons!

Tortured Law Part 2

Tortured Law, a production from the Alliance for Justice. To see Part 1, click here.

Part 2:

Tortured Law Part 1

Tortured Law, a production from the Alliance for Justice. To see Part 2, click here.

Part 1:

Behind Taliban Lines

In this video from Frontline on PBS, a journalist, Najibullah Quraishi, is allowed to spend ten days with Mirwais, who are part of the Taliban. This is four parts that explores what a terrorist organization does and why they are fighting. Behind Taliban Lines looks at many issues that we have discussed in class, and I believe it is a great addition.

Recent articles from around the world on Gaza

"Israel vows to stop ship as it nears Gaza." http://www.theday.com/article/20100605/NWS14/306059898/-1/NWSnw.

"Testing the US' friendship?" http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/insidestory/2010/06/201062151512898182.html.

"Israel defends aid ship raid." http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/06/20106742339685948.html

"Humanitarian narrative means no one sees Israel as a victim," Conor Foley, The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/08/humanitarian-narrative-israel.

"Turkey calls on Israel to accept probe into raid." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/07/AR2010060700569.html.

"Managing the Gaza Blockade," Washington Post Editorial, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/07/AR2010060703785.html.

A Mosque at the site of the World Trade Centers?

"Building the Ground Zero mosque is not an issue of religious freedom, but of resisting an effort to insult the victims of 9/11 and to establish a beachhead for political Islam and Islamic supremacism in New York," the group "Stop the Islamicization of America" says on its website."

""We feel it would be more appropriate maybe to build a center dedicated to expunging the Quranic texts of the violent ideology that inspired jihad, or perhaps a center to the victims of hundreds of millions of years of jihadi wars, land enslavements, cultural annihilations and mass slaughter," Geller said."


These show the disintrest that some conservative people have in learning about other religions in order to know that they aren't all about what the news says they are, violence.

"There is a lot of ignorance about who Muslims are. A center like this will be dedicated to removing that ignoranceand it will also counter the extremists because moderate Muslims need a voice," she told CNN. "Their voices need to be amplified."

I think that a mosque at Ground Zero is an excellent idea- it can help educate New Yorkers and Americans that Islam is not all about violence and killing and hating America and Americans.

Legal action against foreign states for torture

As this news article from the LA Times illustrates, the Supreme Court just ruled in a 9-0 decision that former officials of foreign regimes may be sued in American Courts despite the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act in 1976.

Specifically in this case, allegations are being brought against a former Somali prime minister for war crimes, including torture of his victims.

My question is this, how is this former prime minister supposed to respond? Place himself at the mercy of American courts that are standing in, presumably, for the broader international community in global condemnation? What motive would he have for cooperating? Conversely, what right does the United States assume in bringing charges against former foreign leaders? What authority that Somali recognizes gives the United States this right?

There is none, and no sane nation-state would ascribe its sovereignty to an institution that could imprison (or worse) its leaders. Torture or not, this kind of system of international law breaks down swiftly.

John Stewart v. John Yoo

On January 11th, Jon Stewart invited former Justice Department Lawyer John Yoo onto the Daily Show to discuss his new book, Crisis in Command. For those of you who don't know who John Yoo is, during the first term of Bushes presidency he provided the legal framework by which Bush expanded executive powers to include warrantless wiretapping and waterboarding. As writer of the Bybee Memo, Yoo also advocated the techniques of : an attention grasp, slamming detainees heads through thin walls, sleep deprivation, and confining detainees in small boxes with insects. Many tuned in to watch this and expected John Stewart to hold Yoo accountable for his words, much in the way he did so with Jim Cramer.

What followed was a congenial exchange that was hailed as a victory for John Yoo, who would later go on to say part of the reason for the surprisingly good natured exchange was that "I've spent my whole career learning to settle down unruly college students who have not done the reading."

What I can't reconcile, and find quite frustrating with the debate on torture is the utter lack of positivistic analysis on these enhanced interrogation techniques. Liberals take the position that these techniques are torture, conservatives take the position that it isn't and we leave it at that (in this sense, Stewart lost the debate to Yoo by letting the discussion shift to a matter of the limits of executive power). If we are really so divided on the matter, why is it we have not sought the opinions of those who have actually been waterboarded and gone through the techniques in question? Staunch supporters of these techniques will most likely say that the techniques "simulate" pain, and though extremely uncomfortable do not constitute physical torture. I say try it.

Is Torture Ever Justified?

This article is kind of old, from 2007, but this article goes into exactly what this week was about in class- the justificaiton of torture. It mentions the memos drawn up in '02 and '03 by the Department of Justice and the Pentagon, as well as the example of a ticking bomb. It also goes into some of the different kinds of torture as well as what some states think about it. I thought that this was a very informative and interesting article.



Just in case the link didn't work in the title..... http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9832909&source=login_payBarrier

What would President Sun Tzu do? Torture and the Art of War

As much as I respect and honor our American Military their tactics sometimes just baffle me. I just read the Art of War by Sun Tzu and think his strategies on and off the battle field are just brilliant. Supposedly I’m not the only one. All the great commanders in battle have read him too and have followed some of his ideas, from Napoleon to Patton. So why today when our military gets baffled on how to do something don’t say, “hey, I know what we can do, let’s consult Sun Tzu’s Art of War! I have a copy back in my office.” Our boys and girls in the bureau should have done this when wondering what to do with terrorists they have captive on whether or not to torture. The translated copy I have is just great. I got it used on Amazon and it has really been rode hard and put up wet. All the pages are paper thin and discolored with age, so someone was really referencing it. Printed in 1963 and translated by Samuel Griffith, the text is really able to lay out the different terse in laymen terms.



Given the ease of understanding this book provides, right there in black and white on page 76 terse 19, the book reads “Treat captives well, and care for them. All soldiers taken must be cared for with magnanimity and sincerity so that they may be used by us.” My friend Bill countered with, “Sun Tzu was not dealing with terrorism he was dealing with traditional combat tactics, terrorists are merciless and driven by fanatic religious zeal!” I think Sun Tzu would respond something like “maybe so, but it is politically connected and for that reason torture must never be considered.” Why is our American government missing this obvious message?

Rules of Engagement

This PBS video looks at the investigation in what happened on November 19th 2006 in Haditha. Marines are accused of going on a rampage killing innocent men, women, and children. It brings in a lot of topics that we have been discussing over the past few weeks. Interestingly, the information in the video wasn't considered news due to the USMC press release on what happened.

A New National Security Plan

Last week, the Obama administration released its first National Security Plan, and it largely comes as a rebuke of Bush administration security policies.

More importantly to the topic of this class, however, is the stark absence of any mention of the word "Islamic," in favor of, "violent extremism." It is yet another attempt by Obama to redefine the enemy the United States faces in the twenty first century, and it is an attempt to assuage diplomatic relations still reeling from the previous eight years. Yet, the new National Security Strategy does not attempt to define exactly what violent extremism is, either, and only acknowledge that the gravest threat would be for one of these extremists to obtain a weapon of mass destruction. This lack of definition does of course leave the United States open to pursue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in a much broader manner than by specifically naming targets, but one wonders if "violent extremism," does disservice to the manner of the threat we are facing.

A Driving Sense of Islamophobia

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/27/anti.ahmadinejad.ads/index.html?hpt=T2
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/27/new.york.islam.ads/index.html?hpt=Sbin

It comes as no surprise that the first two cities that have what can easily be deemed Islamophobic advertisements on city transportation come in the two cities that were the main targets of the September 11th attacks: New York and Washington, DC. Both these articles from cnn.com illustrate the fears of Islamic fundamentalists and the religion of violence, that have emerged since 9/11.

On WMATA buses around Washington DC, Ahmadinejad's likeness is pictured next to text reading "Iran makes a KILLING every day we wait" supposedly referencing our nation's dependence on foreign oil. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology issued a report recently that includes the fact that changes from the clean energy legislation currently in Congress would reduce Iran's income by approximately $100 million per day. That's the "KILLING" the ad claims to be referencing, but with the nature of the ad and the capitalization of "KILLING" the links to Ahmadinejad's desires to wipe Israel off the map and his supposed links to terrorism are what come to mind.

Similarly, in New York City, a new series of ads sponsored by Stop the Islamization of America (SIOA) target those individuals that want to, "stand up against the evil of Islamic jihadi terrorism and Islamic supremacism." These ads read "Fatwa on your head? Is your community or family threatening you? Leaving Islam?" Once again the "unintended" message is that Islam is a religion of violence.

I would imagine that the public outcry against such ads would be much different had it been a religion other than Islam that was targeted. I find it shocking and frankly appalling that these two cities even accepted the ads. It just goes to show what really drives us...money.

The Few vs. the Many

I'm just in the middle of watching the PBS video about Saudi terrorist rehabilitation which Kelly recommended. One of Robert Lacey's comments really resonated with me - his remark that people remember the 15 Saudis who were involved in the events of 9/11, but will likely never consider the 15 million Saudis who "would never dream of" committing an act of terrorism. It made me think of this article, which details how an American college student was attacked while she was studying abroad in Amman. She describes how shortly following her ideal, a Bedouin man saw her and noticed her obviously visible bruises and injuries, and told her, "There are good men, and there are bad. In the whole world. This man, he was bad. But we, we are not all bad." This seems to be what people forget in their panic towards terrorism and fear of terrorist - that every country and society is host to both good and bad people.

Doha Debates: Discussion of the Major Political Topics in the Middle East

Thank you to Maha Hilal for suggesting this link to the Doha Debates, founded in 2004 by the Qatar Foundation, chaired by former BBC correspondent, Tim Sebastian. 

Rehabilitation for Terrorists? Recommended PBS Video

This PBS Video on Saudi Arabia's rehabilitation program has been suggested by Kelly McCormack.  The program asks, "can terrorists be rehabilitated with kindness?"

"Sweet" 16

I know this comes a week after our discussion of the definition of terrorism, but the fact that it's going on today makes it applicable. In the first week's readings we learned that different federal government agencies have different definitions of "terror" and "terrorism" making it difficult to fight terrorism nationally, and even harder to construct an international definition that can be adhered to. This CNN article highlights the difficulty federal agencies have in not only defining terrorism, but in figuring out who is supposed to be in charge of the counter-terrorism efforts and what authority the Director of National Intelligence should have with regard to overseeing the 16 (yes SIXTEEN...just stop and read that again...16, SIXTEEN) intelligence agencies that report to the DNI.

With 16 agencies--each with a slightly different definition of terror and terrorism--being headed by one Congressionally-mandated position that has no real authority, it's no wonder Dennis Blair became so frustrated he resigned.

Though it's a cliche, too many chefs does indeed spoil the pot, and with sixteen intelligence agencies and one powerless Director, the pot might be dangerously close to boiling over.

What if God was a Goddess?

Think of all the religions. Now take the male figure out and replace him with the Goddess. Quite a change, right? This idea struck me as I was reading Islam Under Siege by American University professor and author, Akbar Ahmed; somewhere around chapter two, What is Going Wrong?
I came across a description of the world we live in today by a scholar named Roland Barthes as “a moment of gentle apocalypse”. Then, I wondered if we would have the wars that are waged in the name of God as frequently as if they were in the name of a Goddess? It seems to me that the Goddess was predominating in planting cultures and it was the hunting nomadic cultures that have Gods. The connection with the Goddess and the planting cultures is connected with fertilization, feeding the crops, planting of the seeds and harvesting the crops. Just think how we refer to the Earth as “Mother Earth” all invoked through the mother image. If a tree or plant dies it goes back into the Earth and is reborn; you do not get this in the hunting cultures.
Just changing this metaphoric symbolization could change the whole psyche of an individual and how religion is viewed, I believe.
A mother is nurturing and is the first person you come in contact with once you are born and dependent on throughout your childhood. Why did religion kill the Goddess and what kind of world would this be if say somebody as a Christian started their prayer with "Our Mother" instead of "Our Father"?

Security Management: DHS Taps Parking Lot Attendants

Kelly McCormack is adding this post.  I'm uploading it for her while she and I work out some technical glitches.  She notes that this article is interesting because most of the time you hear negative things regarding counter terrorism.  She would like to see further discussion of this.

On the lighter side...

I found this comic while doing some random searching online - it made me laugh, and made me think about the focus from this week's reading on the relationship between religion and violence. Obviously religion is a personal and highly valued issue to many people, but why is it that the world is so quick to turn to violence in defending religious values?

The Medical Profession and Torture

Should individuals in the medical profession engage in the practice of torture? Do their ethical responsibilities in the helping professions provide guidelines against participating in torture? This article speaks to a proposed legislation that would prohibit those in the health professions from engaging in any practice amounting to torture. Do you think that health and helping professionals should establish codes of conduct within their professions against engaging in the practice of torture? Can you think of any codes that exist thus far (e.g. American Psychological Association)?

A Kick at the U.S.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8669040.stm

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/05/19/terror-alert-as-barack-obama-plans-trip-to-watch-england-v-usa-world-cup-match-115875-22268585/

Fear of terrorism (and a little bit of U.S. bashing) reached a new height earlier this month...the 2010 FIFA World Cup, which kicks off next month. With 32 nations from around the globe set to descend on South Africa from June 11 to July 11, the host nation's police chief has one prayer...that the US team gets knocked out early. "Our famous prayer is that the Americans don't make the second round," said General Bheki Cele.

Though Cele insists that the South African police force could provide the requisite security to protect the expected 43 heads of state attending the football (I'm being internationally friendly here) matches, he is most-concerned apparently, with President Obama. Though the White House hasn't released whether the President will attend America's opening match against England, South Africa has planned one of it's largest security operations ever.

I wonder (and welcome comments and opinions on) whether General Cele's comment has more to do with security issues or whether it is a legitimate excuse for a personal opinion of the United States and it's standing in the world as of now.

Revoking the Citizenship of Potential Terrorists

Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) and Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) have taken the controversy over reading Faisal Shahzad his constitutional Miranda rights to the next level with their proposed amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Aside from the vague clause regarding "material support," to terrorist organizations, there must be a pause and a question of justice when the revocation of citizenship for a lawful U.S. citizen is considered.

Muslim Hero?

This article discusses Alioune B. Niass' efforts in helping to report the New York Times bomb. The key issue that the article raises is the fact that Mr. Niass, a Muslim, received little if any attention in helping to uncover the plot, because of what might be seen as Muslims playing a positive role in abating terrorism rather than partaking in it. What do you think about this story? Should Mr. Niass' efforts have been recognized? Should his identity as a Muslim be highlighted?

Irony in the War on Terror

As has been in the news seemingly everyday since it happened, on May 1st, a Pakistani-born American citizen drove an SUV with an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) into Times Square and attempted to detonate the car.

As this article from The Economist details, the NYPD has increased the number of detectives on its joint task-force with the FBI from 17 to 120, has hired a former senior CIA official to head its counter-terrorism branch, has posted detectives internationally, and has hired native speakers of Arabic, Dari, Persian, Urdu, Pushtun, and Bengali, all in an effort to keep the city as secure as possible. Additionally, according to the article, New York City has been the target of approximately 11 unsuccessful attacks since 2001, including attempts to demolish the Brooklyn Bridge and numerous attacks on Times Square, all which have been stopped.

Even with the billions of dollars spent on counter-terrorism in New York since 2001, on May 1st, the true counter-terrorist fighters were.............street vendors. While NYPD ultimately coordinated the evacuation of Times Square, it was the "I <3 NY" t-shirt, roasted nuts, and hotdog vendors, that first noticed the smoking car and reported it to authorities.

The article also mentions a disturbing trend that has taken place recently, with "home-grown" American citizens turning against the country that raised or welcomed them. From Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistani-born American citizen, to Najibullah Zazi, who was arrested for attempting to blowup a New York subway, to the Muslim army major who killed 12 people in Fort Hood, Texas, one-third of all those charged as terror suspects have been American citizens.

While the work NYPD has done since 2001 is commendable, this new home-grown trend makes the street vendors that line the sidewalks of New York just as important in the war on terror as the detectives and former CIA officials that work inside its buildings.

"Jihadi Intent"

Last week, conservative columnist David Pipes seemingly coined a new phrase in the ongoing linguistic dispute over "terrorism," "man-made disasters," "Islamist," and others: he referred to the actions of the attempted Times Square bomber as having "jihadi intent."

While this is perhaps a slightly different take on the strict definition/usage of "terrorism," in that Pipes refers more directly to the motivations of the individual, it does beg the question of what precisely encompasses "jihadi intent," as opposed to simply "anti-U.S. sentiment," or simply various other "ideological/political sympathies." I am admittedly not entirely familiar with David Pipes (a friend forwarded me the article) but I am not sure the substitution of a new term into the terrorism debate will solve some of the issues Pipes is looking to address.

On the "Otherization" of Muslims

Read the attached article for Gerstein's discussion of otherization, "Islamist," and for an introduction to the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy. Does the definition of otherization used by the speaker Gerstein is describing, White House lawyer Rashad Hussein, help you understand otherization and the other? Do Gerstein's discussions of "Islamist" and the phrase, "violent extremism" in place of the term, "terrorism" help advance your understanding of Professor Akbar Ahmed's introduction to Islam in Islam Under Siege and of the uses of rhetoric in our grappling with terror?

Survivor of Torture: Sister Dianna Ortiz

Frontline: The Torture Question

Ghosts of Abu Ghraib

Torture Timeline

Extraordinary Rendition, Torture and Disappearances in the "War on Terror"

Torturing Democracy

Jennifer Harbury: The United States on Torture Part (4)

Jennifer Harbury: The United States on Torture Part (3)

Jennifer Harbury: The United States on Torture Part (2)

Jennifer Harbury: The United States on Torture Part (1)