Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Bush signed India nuclear deal with disappearing ink

India gave Iran nuclear technology. Think about it.
---

Bush signing statement on US-India nuclear deal erases Congressional restrictions

12/19/2006 @ 6:51 am

Filed by Michael Roston

Hours after signing an agreement yesterday on cooperation with India on civilian nuclear technology, President George W. Bush issued a "signing statement" insisting that the executive branch was not bound by terms of the agreement approved by the House of Representatives and Senate, RAW STORY has learned.

The "Henry Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act" was signed following a year of difficult negotiations with the Congress over the terms of the agreement. The agreement between the US and India itself took years to achieve. Critics of the agreement warned that it would send a bad message to states like Iran who may be on the threshold of a nuclear weapon capability. They also worry that by making it possible for the South Asian giant to access larger supplies of nuclear fuel for use in its civil nuclear power plants, the deal will free up India's small existing uranium supplies for use by its military.

But President Bush was unfazed in explaining his reasons for supporting the agreement, first and foremost emphasizing the benefits for the bilateral relationship between the US and India. He also used the legislation as an opportunity to promote the value of the use of nuclear energy by both states. Moreover, he reasoned "the bill will help keep America safe by paving the way for India to join the global effort to stop the spread of nuclear weapons."

To make these improvements in the bilateral relationship possible, President Bush pledged that "As part of the agreement, the United States and India have committed to take a series of steps to make nuclear cooperation a reality, and we're going to fulfill these commitments. The bill I sign today is one of the most important steps, and it's going to help clear the way for us to move forward with this process."

However, a reading of the presidential signing statement which came later in the day made unclear the strength of some of those commitments, especially those made to Congress. In all, President Bush took exception to nine full sections of the bill approved by Congress.

First, President Bush took particular exception to a section declaring the policies of the United States, noting that his "approval of the Act does not constitute my adoption of the statements of policy as U.S. foreign policy." The statements of policy included opposition to nuclear weapons production by all non-nuclear weapons states, as well as promoting India's commitments to control the proliferation of nuclear fuel cycle technology, cooperate in preventing Iran's development of nuclear weapons, and limit expansion of existing nuclear arsenals in South Asia.

Next, President Bush said that a control placed by Congress on transfers to India of items that would run afoul of Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines "unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to an international body," and he therefore considered the section "advisory" in nature.

Then, the president declared that 8 sections of the bill in total had to be construed "in a manner consistent with the President's constitutional authority to protect and control information that could impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative processes of the Executive, or the performance of the Executive's constitutional duties."

One section of the bill to which the president qualified his assent called on the the National Nuclear Security Administration of the US Department of Energy to engage the nuclear scientific community in India to develop cooperative nonproliferation activities, particularly with nuclear safeguards in mind. In another section of the bill, Congress had called on the president to issue determinations to Capitol Hill that India was aligning its nonproliferation policy in a manner consistent with US global nonproliferation goals, and also that civil cooperation with the US was not contributing to India's nuclear weapons program

Chris Kelley, a political science professor at Miami University of Ohio who has studied presidential signing statements closely, remarked on his personal blog last night that "All of the attention that the signing received was directed precisely where the administration wanted, and away from the sections of the bill that the President has undermined."

He added "With today's challenges, President Bush has issued a total of 137 signing statements and has made 1097 separate and distinct challenges to the provisions of the laws he has signed."

In a seeming echo of Bush's statement, Reuters reported India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as responding to domestic critics of the agreement that "India would not be bound by "extraneous" conditions attached to the deal when it was passed by the U.S. Congress this month, rejecting efforts to constrain New Delhi's policy towards Iran or its own nuclear weapons programme."

Bush's presidential signing statement can be accessed in full at the White House website. The sections of the legislation affected by the presidential signing statement are included at this link.

Inquiry Falters on Civilians Accused of Detainee Abuse

December 19, 2006

By DAVID JOHNSTON

WASHINGTON, Dec. 18 — A Justice Department team responsible for investigating accusations of detainee abuse by civilian government employees has decided against prosecution in most of the nearly 20 cases referred in the last two years by the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency, according to lawyers who have been officially briefed on the effort.

The prosecution team, which was established in June 2004 at the United States attorney’s office in Alexandria, Va., has not brought a single indictment and has been plagued by problems.

The team has been unable to collect forensic evidence or find witnesses needed to bring indictments out of war-ravaged areas of Iraq and Afghanistan. In some cases, the unit has been stymied by the absence of facts in the referrals, according to the lawyers. A few investigations remain open, although the lawyers declined to be specific about how many cases fell in that category.

The team was set up in the aftermath of the uproar over abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq to investigate accusations that detainees were mistreated by civilian personnel. Civilians have worked in large numbers in Afghanistan and Iraq, among them C.I.A. officers, Americans hired by companies under contract with the military as interrogators and translators, and local residents temporarily employed as support workers.

--MORE-

Prosecutors Drop A.C.L.U. Subpoena in Document Fight

December 19, 2006

By ADAM LIPTAK

Federal prosecutors in New York yesterday withdrew a subpoena to the American Civil Liberties Union that had sought to retrieve all copies of a classified document.

In an opaque and defensive four-page letter to the judge in the case, the prosecutors said they were acting “in light of changed circumstances” and their determination that “the grand jury can obtain the evidence necessary to its investigation from other sources.”

Another factor may have played a role. A transcript of a closed hearing in the case that was unsealed yesterday suggested the government was going to lose.

Anthony D. Romero, the A.C.L.U.’s executive director, sounded jubilant in describing the development. “The government blinked in this standoff,” Mr. Romero said. The subpoena was unusual in that it sought not only to gather evidence but also to confiscate all tangible traces of the information in the document, apparently with the goal of preventing its distribution.

--MORE--

White House Backs Off Bush's Iraq View

Google just changed the blog software and made it a worse piece of crap than it was.
---
Monday, December 18, 2006

(12-18) 11:04 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) --

The White House took a step back Monday from President Bush's confident assertion two months ago that "absolutely, we're winning" the war in Iraq.

"I'm not playing the game any more," said White House press secretary Tony Snow. "It's one of those things where you end up ... trying to summarize a complex situation with a single word or gerund, and — or even a participle."

Snow was questioned repeatedly on the point because former Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Sunday that the situation in Iraq is "grave and deteriorating, and we're not winning, we are losing. We haven't lost."

Bush's declaration — at a news conference on Oct. 25 — was challenged, albeit indirectly, by Robert Gates, the new defense secretary, who raised some eyebrows at his confirmation hearing on Dec. 5 by saying, when asked whether the U.S. was winning in Iraq, "No, sir."

Snow, asked Monday if Bush still believes the United States is winning, said, "I think at this point it ceases to be fruitful to jump into this." He said that "we will win and we have to win."

URL

This is an attempt to overturn our elections

Editor's note: This blog is acting up. I may be moving over to thre other one shortly: CRIMES AND CORRUPTION OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS
---
Karma Nabulsi
Tuesday December 19, 2006
The Guardian


Mahmoud Abbas declared yesterday: "Let the people decide for themselves what they want." But there already is a national consensus: there must be Palestinian elections, not for a president of the Palestinian Authority, or for members of its legislative council, but for the Palestinian National Council, the institutional body that forms the sovereign base of the Palestine Liberation Organisation and is the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people have already elected a legislative council that represents a proportion of the body politic. They now demand elections for the entire Palestinian population.



When Fatah lost power to Hamas in January, Fatah needed to avail itself of the democratic benefits that accrue to those who lose power in an election: the opportunity to reconnect with their constituents, to learn why it had lost and how to regain their people's trust. Instead, the "international community" told Fatah it was still in power and had to contnue to play this role or take responsibility for abandoning its suffering people to an even crueller fate .

What we are witnessing today is the horrific and inevitable outcome of a process of deliberate coercion, designed to force an occupied people to surrender their elected representatives. That this coercion is being carried out by the military occupier Israel and its neocon backers in the US administration is to be expected - and resisted. What is harder to understand is just how this coercion can be so flagrantly insisted upon by the British and the EU - who should be standing by the Palestinians, if not for the values of decency then as part of their responsibilities as co-signatories to the fourth Geneva convention.

The Palestinian people have indeed already spoken: for elections to the Palestinian National Council; for lifting the economic boycott of a democratically elected authority; for liberty and independence.

· Karma Nabulsi, a former PLO representative, is an Oxford politics fellow commentisfree.co.uk/karma_nabulsi


December 19, 2006

December 19, 2006

Attacks in Iraq at Record High, Pentagon Says

WASHINGTON, Dec. 18 — A Pentagon assessment of security conditions in Iraq concluded Monday that attacks against American and Iraqi targets had surged this summer and autumn to their highest level, and called violence by Shiite militants the most significant threat in Baghdad.

The report, which covers the period from early August to early November, found an average of almost 960 attacks against Americans and Iraqis every week, the highest level recorded since the Pentagon began issuing the quarterly reports in 2005, with the biggest surge in attacks against American-led forces. That was an increase of 22 percent from the level for early May to early August, the report said.

While most attacks were directed at American forces, most deaths and injuries were suffered by the Iraqi military and civilians.

--MORE--

Libya sentences foreign health workers to death

Associated Press
Tuesday December 19, 2006
Guardian Unlimited


Bulgarian medics Nasia Nenova (r), Snezana Dimitrova (c) and Palestinian doctor Ashraf Hajjuj, behind bars during their retrial in Libya.
Bulgarian medics Nasia Nenova (r), Snezana Dimitrova (c) and Palestinian doctor Ashraf Hajjuj, behind bars during their retrial in Libya. Photograph: Mahmud Turkia/AFP/Getty Images


A Libyan court today condemned to death five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor after finding them guilty of deliberately infecting 400 children with the HIV virus.

The presiding judge, Mahmoud Hawissa, read out the verdict in a seven-minute hearing in a Tripoli court at the end of the defendants' second trial.

The six defendants, detained for nearly seven years, had previously been convicted and condemned to death, but Libyan judges granted them a retrial after international protests over the fairness of the proceedings. Bulgaria contends the children were infected by unhygienic practices at their Libyan hospital.



The accused now have the right to appeal to the Libyan supreme court.

The long trial of the six foreign medical workers has become a bone of contention in Libyan leader Muammar Gadafy's efforts to rebuild ties with the west. The European Union and the United States have called for their release, indicating that future relations with Libya would be affected by the verdict.

But Libyans strongly supported a conviction. Relatives of the infected children - about 50 of whom have already died of Aids - waited outside the court early today, holding poster-sized pictures of their children and bearing placards that read "Death for the children killers" and "HIV made in Bulgaria".

When the supreme court ordered a retrial in December 2005, friends and relatives rioted in Benghazi - the Libyan city where the children were infected in a state hospital.

Bulgarians will be extremely disappointed by Tuesday's verdict. Hundreds of people staged peaceful protests in support of the five nurses yesterday in Bulgaria. The EU, the US and international rights groups have accused Libya of prosecuting the six foreign staff as scapegoats.

Luc Montagnier - the French doctor who was a co-discoverer of HIV - testified in the first trial that the deadly virus was active in the hospital before the Bulgarian nurses began their contracts there in 1998.