XIAM007

Making Unique Observations in a Very Cluttered World

Tuesday 1 May 2012

Obama N. Sec. Chief Calls Drone Strikes “Just,” “Wise,” Concedes We Attacked Militants Knowing Civilians Would Be Killed -

Obama N. Sec. Chief Calls Drone Strikes “Just,” “Wise,” Concedes We Attacked Militants Knowing Civilians Would Be Killed - 




As we near the first anniversary of the assassination of Osama bin Laden (tomorrow) and the 2012 presidential election, the Obama administration is trying to prove how much hair it has on its chest regarding national security.  Possibly, Medea Benjamin’s Drone Summit has spooked them a bit too.  So they trotted out John Brennan, the national security advisor, who claimed his speech was an attempt to be more “transparent” about U.S. policy on drones and similar counter-terror measures:
I’m here today because President Obama has instructed us to be more open with the American people about these efforts…I venture to say that the United States government has never been so open regarding its counterterrorism policies and their legal justification.
…We reject the notion that any discussion of these matters is to step onto a slippery slope that inevitably endangers our national security.  Too often, that fear can become an excuse for saying nothing at all—which creates a void that is then filled with myths and falsehoods.  That, in turn, can erode our credibility with the American people and with foreign partners, and it can undermine the public’s understanding and support for our efforts.  In contrast, President Obama believes that—done carefully, deliberately and responsibly—we can be more transparent and still ensure our nation’s security.
But if you read the speech closely you realize there’s been no substantive change and this speech in fact is little better than “saying nothing at all.”   For example, what happened in the bin Laden compound?  Was he assassinated?  The U.S. has video and conveniently says the live feed went dead as soon as the Navy Seals entered the residence.  But it won’t show you the video.  In fact, I’m virtually certain they intended to assassinate him all along and deliberately shut down the feed so as not to enable human rights NGOs to subpoena administration figures to testify to what they saw.
About Anwar al-Awlaki, he makes the following unsubstantiated claims:
[He was the] leader of external operations who was responsible for planning and directing terrorist attacks against the United States.
This is precisely the problem with targeted killings.  There is no evidence, no court proceedings, no standards of proof.  There are secret deliberations by a secret cabal of unknown officials who use procedures and follow criteria no one ever sees.  The U.S. never presented any evidence that al Awlaki was any more than an ideological firebrand and preacher.  If it had evidence, even if it intended to assassinate him, it should present it.  It didn’t.  Brennan’s vague word is simply not good enough.
Brennan attempts to argue that targeted killings are just because of the meticulous process by which we vet targets and the safeguards we impose to ensure the victims are bad guys and worthy of death.  But listen to how vague and empty are his claims of accountability:
President Obama has demanded that we hold ourselves to the highest possible standards and processes…This leads me to the…rigorous standards and process of review to which we hold ourselves today when considering and authorizing strikes…
…We require ourselves to meet [a high bar] when making these profound decisions today.
…We’ve worked to refine, clarify, and strengthen this process and our standards, and we continue to do so.  If our counterterrorism professionals assess, for example, that a suspected member of al-Qa’ida poses such a threat to the United States as to warrant lethal action, they may raise that individual’s name for consideration.  The proposal will go through a careful review and, as appropriate, will be evaluated by the very most senior officials in our government for decision.
…The individual must be a legitimate target under the law…If, after a legal review, we determine that the individual is not a lawful target, end of discussion.  We are a nation of laws, and we will always act within the bounds of the law.
…Even if it is lawful to pursue a specific member of al-Qa’ida, we ask ourselves whether that individual’s activities rise to a certain threshold for action, and whether taking action will, in fact, enhance our security.
…We review the most up-to-date intelligence, drawing on the full range of our intelligence capabilities.  And we…challenge it, we question it, including any assumptions on which it might be based…We don’t just hear out differing views, we ask for them and encourage them.  We discuss.  We debate.  We disagree.
…As the President’s counterterrorism advisor, I feel that it is important for the American people to know that these efforts are overseen with extraordinary care and thoughtfulness.
Not so fast.  I’ve posted here about a major Reuters review of the procedures and criteria Brennan outlines above.  Here’s what I wrote then:
What’s astonishing about all this is that the names of those on the panel are unknown, how they decide someone should die is unknown, and what evidence is used to determine on a death sentence is unknown.  Everything about this process is deliberately opaque.  And there is no written record of the panel’s deliberations in order to further insulate participants, especially the president himself.
In short, Brennan talks a good game.  But in reality the entire process by which we target our victims is opaque, anonymous, and lacking accountability.
Obama’s national security czar makes a laughingstock of national sovereignty as well.  Keep in mind what we’ve been doing in Pakistan as you read the following:
We do not use force whenever we want, wherever we want.  International legal principles, including respect for a state’s sovereignty and the laws of war, impose constraints.  The United States of America respects national sovereignty and international law.
How are we respecting Pakistani sovereignty?  We clearly do not have Pakistani permission for our drone strikes.  If we do, then present it for public review.
Here Brennan says with a straight face that we consider our relations with countries like Pakistan when we kill their citizens:
We consider the broader strategic implications of any action, including what effect, if any, an action might have on our relationships with other countries.
Brennan further dissembles in this passage in which he magically conjures an “armed conflict” sanctioned by “international law” to justify the worst depredations of our counter-terror policies:
As a matter of international law, the United States is in an armed conflict with al-Qa’ida, the Taliban, and associated forces, in response to the 9/11 attacks.   and we may also use force consistent with our inherent right of national self-defense.
Though the national security advisor concedes that his government no longer uses the term “war on terror,” apparently he still needs the 9/11 attacks to justify wars and violence which have gone far, far beyond 9/11.  Once again, what we are doing in Pakistan has very little, if anything to do with 9/11 or with protecting our homeland.  It has everything to do with a president who sees political utility in mounting his own personal war on terror.  In some ways, it’s not that dissimilar to the ways in which Bush-Cheney exploited 9/11 to create a permanent counter-terror constituency that guaranteed them two terms in office.
The true danger of Obama’s counter-terror presidency is that it has no ultimate goal beyond the immediate one of liquidating Al Qaeda.  What do you do when you’ve killed it off?  No answer.  What vision or image do you project for the U.S. in the Middle East?  No answer.  Do we think a single well-meaning speech in Cairo constitutes a policy?  Obama has nothing after Al Qaeda.  Which is why we will never fully rid the world of radical Islam and perhaps don’t even deserve to.
Even if we do end this threat, with what will we replace it?  How will this vacuum be filled?  By our golden values of democracy and freedom?  What example have we set that any Middle Eastern nation will seek to emulate?  In truth, we offer them nothing but drones, Navy Seals, and cruise missiles.


Read more -
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-national-security-chief-calls-drone-strikes-%E2%80%9Cjust%E2%80%9D-%E2%80%9Cwise%E2%80%9D-but-concedes-we-attacked-militants-knowing-civilians-would-be-killed.html

Man Killed During Initiation at Masonic Lodge -

Man Killed During Initiation at Masonic Lodge - 


A man was killed during a Masonic initiation ceremony when another member fired a gun loaded with real bullets instead of the expected blanks and shot him in the face, police said Tuesday.
A 76-year-old man alleged to have fired the shot was charged with manslaughter.
William James, 47, was shot while participating in an induction Monday night at the Southside Masonic Lodge, Suffolk County police said. He was pronounced dead at the scene.
Detective Lt. Jack Fitzpatrick said the ritual that went "tragically wrong" involves making a loud noise to frighten the new member.
"The ceremony was designed to create a state of anxiety," he said.
The lieutenant said the Masons sat James in a chair and placed cans on a small platform around his head.
The alleged shooter, Albert Eid, was standing approximately 20 feet away holding a gun, Fitzpatrick said at a news conference. When the gun was fired, a man who had been holding a stick out of sight was supposed to knock the cans off the platform to make the inductee think they had been struck by bullets, he said.
Eid had two guns — one with blanks and one with real bullets — and apparently pulled the wrong one out of his pocket and fired, shooting James in the face, the lieutenant said.
"We believe it was completely accidental," Fitzpatrick said. Eid was quite "stunned and distraught" at James' death, he said.
Eid, of Patchogue, had had a permit since 1951 for the .32-caliber handgun used in the shooting but it was not clear why he took it to the ceremony, police said. He pleaded innocent to a manslaughter charge and bail was set at $2,500. His next court date was scheduled for April 27.
Eid's lawyer did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
Carl Fitje, grand master of the New York State Freemasons, issued a statement Tuesday denying that guns play a role in any officially sanctioned lodge ceremonies.
"We don't use pistols," Steve Mayo, who described himself as a senior deacon of the lodge, told reporters Tuesday. "This is not a Masonic ceremony where we bring pistols."
However, Fitzpatrick said members told police the rite involving a gun goes back at least 70 years.
Mayo said the Monday night ceremony was an initiation into the Fellow Craft, which is the second degree within the multilevel Masonic system.
Mayo said James, of Medford, had been a member of the lodge for a few months while Eid had been a member for many years.
"This is very upsetting, very upsetting that one of our brothers was accidentally killed," he said.
James worked for the planning department of the Long Island town of Brookhaven, spokesman Dave Kennedy said.




Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,113691,00.html?intcmp=obnetwork

Supermoon alert: Biggest full moon of 2012 due Saturday May 5th -

Supermoon alert: Biggest full moon of 2012 due Saturday May 5th - 


Skywatchers take note: The biggest full moon of the year is due to arrive this weekend.
The moon will officially become full Saturday (May 5) at 11:35 p.m. EDT. And because this month's full moon coincides with the moon's perigee — its closest approach to Earth — it will also be the year's biggest.
The moon will swing in 221,802 miles (356,955 kilometers) from our planet, offering skywatchers a spectacular view of an extra-big, extra-bright moon, nicknamed a supermoon.
And not only does the moon's perigee coincide with full moon this month, but this perigee will be the nearest to Earth of any this year, as the distance of the moon's close approach varies by about 3 percent, according to meteorologist Joe Rao, SPACE.com's skywatching columnist. This happens because the moon's orbit is not perfectly circular.
This month's full moon is due to be about 16 percent brighter than average. In contrast, later this year on Nov. 28, the full moon will coincide with apogee, the moon's farthest approach, offering a particularly small and dim full moon.
Though the unusual appearance of this month's full moon may be surprising to some, there's no reason for alarm, scientists warn. The slight distance difference isn't enough to cause any earthquakes or extreme tidal effects, experts say.
However, the normal tides around the world will be particularly high and low. At perigee, the moon will exert about 42 percent more tidal force than it will during its next apogee two weeks later, Rao said.
The last supermoon occurred in March 2011.
To view this weekend's supermoon to best effect, look for it just after it rises or before it sets, when it is close to the horizon. There, you can catch a view of the moon behind buildings or trees, an effect which produces an optical illusion, making the moon seem even larger than it really is.




Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/05/01/supermoon-alert-biggest-full-moon-2012/?intcmp=obnetwork

Researchers Discover Breakthrough To Make Mice Resistant To Obesity... -

Researchers Discover Breakthrough To Make Mice Resistant To Obesity... - 




Some North Texas researchers believe they have found a way to control obesity by manipulating molecules in the heart.


Researchers at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas have demonstrated, for the first time, that the heart can regulate energy balance.


“We discovered a protein that’s expressed in the heart, it’s a protein called MED 13, and it turns out that this protein regulates metabolism in the whole body,” explained Dr. Eric Olson, chairman of molecular biology at UT Southwestern.


Dr. Olson said researchers fed mice a high-fat diet, then ‘turned on’ the protein and were genuinely surprised.


“Of course we went back and said ‘wait a minute we better check this again’ and have done it many times,” Olson said, “It was really unexpected. We didn’t go into this looking for a way to treat obesity, it just was a serendipitous observation.”


Of the test Dr. Olson said researchers learned, “We can make them resistant to obesity,” but that wasn’t all, “We can also treat many of the other aspects of abnormal metabolism like the struggle to lower cholesterol and improve glucose handling in these animals.”


Researchers said despite their high-fat diet the mice stayed lean as long as the protein was ‘activated’. When the protein was removed the mice become obese.


Olson said they’re now using the protein to develop an obesity drug that might also be used to combat high cholesterol and Type 2 Diabetes. But researchers say that drug is still a long way from even being tested in humans.


Read more - 
http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2012/04/30/ut-southwestern-docs-make-metabolism-breakthrough/