News items that look towards Ezekiel 38 & 39

[Shammu]

A plan to attack Iran swiftly and from above

A bombing campaign has been in the works for months - a blistering air war that would last anywhere from one day to two weeks

PAUL KORING
November 22, 2007 at 5:11 AM EST

WASHINGTON — Massive, devastating air strikes, a full dose of "shock and awe" with hundreds of bunker-busting bombs slicing through concrete at more than a dozen nuclear sites across Iran is no longer just the idle musing of military planners and uber-hawks.

Although air strikes don't seem imminent as the U.S.-Iranian drama unfolds, planning for a bombing campaign and preparing for the geopolitical blowback has preoccupied military and political councils for months.

No one is predicting a full-blown ground war with Iran. The likeliest scenario, a blistering air war that could last as little as one night or as long as two weeks, would be designed to avoid the quagmire of invasion and regime change that now characterizes Iraq. But skepticism remains about whether any amount of bombing can substantially delay Iran's entry into the nuclear-weapons club.

Attacking Iran has gone far beyond the twilight musings of a lame-duck president. Almost all of those jockeying to succeed U.S. President George W. Bush are similarly bellicose. Both front-runners, Democrat Senator Hillary Clinton and Republican Rudy Giuliani, have said that Iran's ruling mullahs can't be allowed to go nuclear. "Iran would be very sure if I were president of the United States that I would not allow them to become nuclear," said Mr. Giuliani. Ms. Clinton is equally hard-line.

Nor does the threat come just from the United States. As hopes fade that sanctions and common sense might avert a military confrontation with Tehran - as they appear to have done with North Korea - other Western leaders are openly warning that bombing may be needed.

Unless Tehran scraps its clandestine and suspicious nuclear program and its quest for weapons-grade uranium (it already has the missiles capable of delivering an atomic warhead), the world will be "faced with an alternative that I call catastrophic: an Iranian bomb or the bombing of Iran," French President Nicolas Sarkozy has warned.

Bombing Iran would be relatively easy. Its antiquated air force and Russian air-defence missiles would be easy pickings for the U.S. warplanes.

But effectively destroying Iran's widely scattered and deeply buried nuclear facilities would be far harder, although achievable, according to air-power experts. But the fallout, especially the anger sown across much of the Muslim world by another U.S.-led attack in the Middle East, would be impossible to calculate.

Israel has twice launched pre-emptive air strikes ostensibly to cripple nuclear programs. In both instances, against Iraq in 1981 and Syria two months ago, the targeted regimes howled but did nothing.

The single-strike Israeli attacks would seem like pinpricks, compared with the rain of destruction U.S. warplanes would need to kneecap Iran's far larger nuclear network.

"American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osirak nuclear centre in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq," said John Pike, director at Globalsecurity.org, a leading defence and security group.

"Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the United States," along with warplanes from land bases in the region and carriers at sea, at least two-dozen suspected nuclear sites would be targeted, he said.

Although U.S. ground forces are stretched thin with nearly 200,000 fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the firepower of the U.S. air force and the warplanes aboard aircraft carriers could easily overwhelm Iran's defences, leaving U.S. warplanes in complete command of the skies and free to pound targets at will.

With air bases close by in neighbouring Iraq and Afghanistan, including Kandahar, and naval-carrier battle groups in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, hundreds of U.S. warplanes serviced by scores of airborne refuellers could deliver a near constant hail of high explosives.

Fighter-bombers and radar-jammers would spearhead any attack. B-2 bombers, each capable of delivering 20 four-tonne bunker-busting bombs, along with smaller stealth bombers and streams of F-18s from the carriers could maintain an open-ended bombing campaign.

"They could keep it up until the end of time, which might be hastened by the bombing," Mr. Pike said. "They could make the rubble jump; there's plenty of stuff to bomb," he added, a reference to the now famous line from former defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld that Afghanistan was a "target-poor" country.

Mr. Pike believes it could all be over in a single night. Others predict days, or even weeks, of sustained bombing.

Unidentified Pentagon planners have been cited talking of "1,500 aim points." What is clear is that a score or more known nuclear sites would be destroyed. Some, in remote deserts, would present little risk of "collateral damage," military jargon for unintended civilian causalities. Others, like laboratories at the University of Tehran, in the heart of a teeming capital city, would be hard to destroy without killing innocent Iranians.

What would likely unfold would be weeks of escalating tension, following a breakdown of diplomatic efforts.

The next crisis point may come later this month if the UN Security Council becomes deadlocked over further sanctions.

"China and Russia are more concerned about the prospect of the U.S. bombing Iran than of Iran getting a nuclear bomb," says Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Tehran remains defiant. Our enemies "must know that Iran will not give the slightest concession ... to any power," Iran's fiery President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said yesterday. For his part, Mr. Bush has pointedly refused to rule out resorting to war. Last month, another U.S. naval battle group - including the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Harry S Truman with 100 warplanes on board and the Canadian frigate HMCS Charlottetown as one of its screen of smaller warships - left for the Persian Gulf. At least one, and often two, carrier battle groups are always in the region.

Whether even weeks of bombing would cripple Iran's nuclear program cannot be known. Mr. Pike believes it would set back, by a decade or more, the time Tehran needs to develop a nuclear warhead. But Iran's clandestine program - international inspectors were completely clueless as to the existence of several major sites until exiles ratted out the mullahs - may be so extensive that even the longest target list will miss some.

"It's not a question of whether we can do a strike or not and whether the strike could be effective," retired Marine general Anthony Zinni told Time magazine. "It certainly would be, to some degree. But are you prepared for all that follows?"

Attacked and humiliated, Iran might be tempted, as Mr. Ahmadinejad has suggested, to strike back, although Iran has limited military options.

At least some Sunni governments in the region, not least Saudi Arabia, would be secretly delighted to see the Shia mullahs in Tehran bloodied. But the grave risk of any military action spiralling into a regional war, especially if Mr. Ahmadinejad tried to make good on his threat to attack Israel, remains.

"Arab leaders would like to see Iran taken down a notch," said Steven Cook, an analyst specializing in the Arab world at the Council on Foreign Relations, "but their citizens will see this as what they perceive to be America's ongoing war on Islam."

cont'd next post

[Shammu]

Building tension

The confrontation with Iran over its nuclear program has been simmering for more than five years. These are some of the key flashpoints.

August, 2002: Iranian exiles say that Tehran has built a vast uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and a heavy water plant at Arak without informing the United Nations.

December, 2002: The existence of the sites is confirmed by satellite photographs shown on U.S. television. The United States accuses Tehran of "across-the-board pursuit of weapons of mass destruction." Iran agrees to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

June, 2003: IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei accuses Iran of not revealing the extent of its nuclear work and urges leaders to sign up for more intrusive inspections.

October, 2003: After meeting French, German and British foreign ministers, Tehran agrees to stop producing enriched uranium and formally decides to sign the Additional Protocol, a measure that extends the IAEA's ability to detect undeclared nuclear activities. No evidence is produced to confirm the end of enrichment.

November, 2003: Mr. ElBaradei says there is "no evidence" that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. The United States disagrees.

February, 2004: An IAEA report says Iran experimented with polonium-210, which can be used to trigger the chain reaction in a nuclear bomb. Iran did not explain the experiments. Iran again agrees to suspend enrichment, but again does not do so.

March, 2004: Iran is urged to reveal its entire nuclear program to the IAEA by June 1, 2004.

September, 2004: The IAEA orders Iran to stop preparations for large-scale uranium enrichment. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell labels Iran a growing danger and calls for the UN Security Council to impose sanctions.

August, 2005: Hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is installed as Iranian President as Tehran pledges an "irreversible" resumption of enrichment.

Jan. 10, 2006: Iran removes UN seals at the Natanz enrichment plant and resumes nuclear fuel research.

February, 2006: The IAEA votes to report Iran to the UN Security Council. Iran ends snap UN nuclear inspections the next day.

July 31, 2006: The UN Security Council demands that Iran suspend its nuclear activities by Aug. 31.

Aug. 31, 2006: The UN Security Council deadline for Iran to halt its work on nuclear fuel passes. IAEA says Tehran has failed to suspend the program.

Dec. 23, 2006: The 15-member UN Security Council unanimously adopts a binding resolution that imposes some sanctions and calls on Iran to suspend its uranium-enrichment activities and to comply with its IAEA obligations.

March 24, 2007: The Security Council unanimously approves a resolution broadening UN sanctions against Iran for its continuing failure to halt uranium enrichment. Iranian officials call the new measures "unnecessary and unjustified."

April 10, 2007: Iran's Minister of Foreign Affairs says Iran will not accept any suspension of its uranium-enrichment activities and urges world powers to accept the "new reality" of the Islamic republic's nuclear program.

May 23, 2007: The IAEA says in a new report, issued to coincide with the expiration of a Security Council deadline for Tehran, that Iran continues to defy UN Security Council demands to halt uranium enrichment and has expanded such work. The report adds that the UN nuclear agency's ability to monitor nuclear activities in Iran has declined due to lack of access to sites.

Oct. 24, 2007: The United States imposes new sanctions on Iran and accuses the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps of spreading weapons of mass destruction.

A plan to attack Iran swiftly and from above

[Shammu]

Putin, Saudi Prince Sultan hold discussions in Moscow
Politics    11/23/2007 4:09:00 PM

MOSCOW, Nov 23 (KUNA) -- Visiting Saudi Crown Prince and Defense Minister Sultan Bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud lauded Friday relations with Russia at his meeting with President Vladimir Putin.

He indicated that relations were strong and ever-growing, thanking Russian officials for their hospitality.

On his part, Putin indicated that talks with Prince Sultan dealt with several important issues, affirming that bilateral relations were to be boosted in the future.

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that opinions between both parties were similar, revealing that there was a Saudi-Russian agreement on taking vital steps to resolve the Mideast situation.

Prince Sultan previously met with first Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov and Defense Minister Anatoly Serdiukov.

Putin, Saudi Prince Sultan hold discussions in Moscow

[Shammu]

Saudi crown prince meets Putin, foresees arms deal
Fri Nov 23, 8:09 AM

MOSCOW (AFP) - Saudi Arabia's Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz held talks here Friday with President Vladimir Putin expected to pave the way for the first purchase of Russian weapons by the kingdom, a close US ally.

Speaking as he met Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov ahead of his talks with Putin, the crown prince -- who doubles as Saudi defence minister -- gave a nod of approval to Kremlin policy.

"We are satisfied with Russian policy and we hope that it will continue," the prince said.

Putin visited Saudi Arabia last February and Saudi officials said afterwards that the desert kingdom was in negotiations with Moscow over the purchase of Russian weapons systems.

Lavrov described Sultan's meeting with Putin as the "main point" of his visit to Moscow, which he said would focus on implementing agreements penned when Putin went to Riyadh.

"Both sides are satisfied," Lavrov said, adding that Russia-Saudi ties had entered a phase of "intense development."

Officials in Moscow would not provide further information on the agenda for Sultan's talks with Putin.

But a Russian diplomat in Riyadh, speaking earlier this week, said he expected the Moscow talks to produce a "framework agreement for military cooperation" that would open the way for Saudi Arabia to buy Russian arms.

Speaking after Putin's visit to Riyadh, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said the desert kingdom was in talks with Russia over the possible purchase of Russian weapons.

"On the armament front, there have been discussions between the two countries.

"They are taking place in accordance with the kingdom's requirements in terms of armament and with what Russia can provide of the kingdom's needs for such equipment," he said.

Saud did not give details, but a diplomatic source in Riyadh had earlier said Putin's talks during his Saudi visit were expected to lead to a "verbal understanding" on the sale of about 150 Russian T-90 battle tanks to the kingdom.

The source said tests were carried out on the T-90 in Saudi Arabia last year to determine the tank's suitability for harsh desert conditions, and Russia is also looking to sell Mi-17 helicopters.

Saudi crown prince meets Putin, foresees arms deal

[Shammu]

Police beat protesters in Russia
Nearly 200 Putin critics detained
 By Denis Pinchuk
Reuters / November 26, 2007

ST. PETERSBURG - Russian riot police beat opposition activists yesterday and detained nearly 200 people at protest rallies against President Vladimir Putin a week before the country's parliamentary election.

Riot police in St. Petersburg, Russia's second-largest city and Putin's hometown, detained Boris Nemtsov and Nikita Belykh, leaders of the Union of Right Forces Party who are running in the Dec. 2 election. They were later released.

The protests were held a day after police detained opposition leader and former world chess champion Garry Kasparov in Moscow, a move the United States condemned yesterday as part of "aggressive tactics" by authorities.

"We are troubled that Garry Kasparov and other leaders of the opposition have been arrested and detained," said White House National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

Kasparov, leader of the Other Russia group, was among 60 detained in the 3,000-strong Moscow march, activists said.

In St. Petersburg, riot police were seen beating activists with batons and fists before forcing them into police buses.

Dozens more were detained outside the Winter Palace, the residence of the Tsars, and at another rally in the city center.

"They have forbidden us from discussing Putin," Nemtsov told the crowd. "But we have come here today to ask Mr. Putin and the authorities, why is there so much corruption in the country?"

He was promptly detained by five riot policemen as the crowd chanted "Russia without Putin."

Nemtsov told Reuters his detention was a breach of Russian law that forbids police from detaining candidates.

"Putin has total disregard for the country's constitution and laws," Nemtsov said. "He is afraid the people will find out the truth and so he hides behind the riot police."

About 500 activists made it to the marches but were vastly outnumbered by riot police. Most of those detained were later released, organizers said.

The city authorities had not given permission for the march and streets in the city center were blocked by riot police and snow-clearing trucks.

The "march of the discontented" brings together Putin's opponents into one movement which includes Other Russia, free-market parties such as Union of Right Forces and Yabloko, as well as anarchists and radical socialists.

Putin's opponents accuse the Kremlin chief of cracking down on the freedoms won after the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union, and of creating what they say is an unstable political system dependent on Putin alone.

"They have started a war with the people," said Tamara, a 72-year-old who took part in the march.

"Putin is very bad - look at the poverty in the country. Pensioners are forced to rummage in the dustbins."

Kremlin officials say the opposition marches are aimed at attracting attention in the West and that the activists are a mixed bag of marginal politicians with little public support.

Putin, ranked by opinion polls as the most popular politician in Russia, is credited by supporters for cementing political stability and presiding over the longest economic boom for a generation.

The former KGB spy has vowed to step down as president next year after his second consecutive four-year term in office.

But he has said he will use the pro-Kremlin United Russia party to preserve influence after he steps down.

He is running as the party's top candidate in the December election.

"We are ruled by the United Russia gang. They have taken away the elections," said Lyubov Chilipenko at the march.

Police beat protesters in Russia

[Shammu]

Putin says US behind poll boycott

Russian President Vladimir Putin has accused the United States of pushing Western observers into boycotting Russian elections.

Mr Putin said the goal was to discredit the parliamentary election to be held on 2 December.

The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) has categorically rejected the allegations.

Meanwhile, the European Commission has expressed concern at the treatment of the opposition in Russia.

'Nonsense'

The OSCE's election monitoring unit announced earlier this month that it would not attend Russia's election, saying Moscow had refused to provide visas to its staff.

The OSCE later said it would send a delegation of European MPs - rather than a full OSCE team - to monitor the vote.

Mr Putin said the boycott decision "was taken on the recommendation of the American state department".

"The aim is to discredit the elections, but they won't achieve their goal," he said.

"We will certainly take this into account with our bilateral ties with this state," he added, referring to the US.

But a spokeswoman for the OSCE in Warsaw, Urdur Gunnarsdottir, called Mr Putin's allegations "nonsense".

"The decision was not made in consultation with any government. It was made on operational, not political grounds," Ms Gunnarsdottir told the BBC.

"Our decision did not have the aim to influence the election."

The OSCE unites 56 member countries from Europe, Central Asia, the US and Canada.

The organisation will be represented by the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, which, together with the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, is sending about 100 MPs from member countries to Russia to observe the 2 December parliamentary poll.

EU worries

The head of the European Union's executive arm, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, has expressed worries about a weekend crackdown by Russian police on protests by opponents of President Vladimir Putin.

"I was very concerned to see reports of police harassment and arrests of politicians and peaceful demonstrators in Russia in the last two days," Mr Barroso said in a statement.

"The right to free speech and assembly are basic fundamental human rights and I very much regret that the authorities found it necessary to take such heavy-handed action."

Police broke up an opposition rally on Sunday, arresting 150 people in St Petersburg, including opposition leader Boris Nemtsov - who was later freed.

Another opposition figure, former chess champion Garry Kasparov, was arrested at a rally in Moscow on Saturday.

Putin says US behind poll boycott

[Shammu]

Iran to launch homemade submarine
Yaakov Katz
THE JERUSALEM POST
Nov. 25, 2007

Days ahead of the Annapolis peace conference, Iran flexed its military muscles on Saturday, announcing plans to unveil a new homemade submarine and navy destroyer later this week.

Iranian Naval Commander Admiral Habib Sayyari said Saturday that the navy would launch a homemade destroyer called Jamaran and a submarine called Ghadir on November 28.

Ghadir is a religious holiday which marks the day Shi'ite Muslims believe the prophet Muhammad gave his last sermon and confirmed Ali ibn Abi Talib's appointment as his successor.

Sayyari told the Iranian Fars News Agency that Iran's military capabilities served as a deterrent, but: "If the enemy makes a mistake, he will receive such a powerful second strike that he won't be able to stand up."

Iran has boasted in the past that its new Ghadir-class submarine could not be detected and was capable of firing missiles and torpedoes simultaneously. According to Globalsecurity.org, Iran's Navy has at least three Russian-built SSK Kilo-class submarines.

In August, Iran test-fired a new submarine-to-surface missile during war games in the Persian Gulf. Iran's current arsenal includes several types of torpedoes, including the Hoot, Farsi for "whale," which was tested for the first time in April and is capable of moving at some 357 kph, up to four times faster than a normal torpedo.

Sayyari told the news agency that his troops were closely monitoring US maneuvers in the region. "No move in the Sea of Oman, the Persian Gulf or the Strait of Hormoz could remain hidden from our eyes. The naval force is in full control over the region and monitors all the military moves of the enemies in the region," he said.

Iran to launch homemade submarine

[Shammu]

I just don't think I would want to be a crewman on Iran's first sub during its first dive. I think I'd rather babysit a couple blocks of C4 than be on that dive. 

[Shammu]

First target for Iran: Qatar?

By OLIVIER GUITTA (Middle East Times)
Published: November 26, 2007

What would be the most logical target Iran would strike in case of a U.S. or Israeli attack on its nuclear sites?

Qatar.

In fact, Iranian Revolutionary guards have already threatened to attack Qatari oil and gas facilities (hence crippling the world economy by creating an oil and gas shock) by sea and air by using suicide boats and air missiles.

For Iran, it's a no-brainer: Qatar hosts the largest U.S. base in the Middle East (8,000 U.S. soldiers are stationed there) and is also viewed by some as being friendly with Israel.

What is Qatar doing about it?

First and foremost, Qatar has been heavily using the diplomatic weapon. Its strategy is to befriend everyone: from Israel to Hamas, from Syria to France.

Even though Qatar's deputy foreign minister Mohamed al-Ruhaimi firmly believes that "speaking to everyone allows us to have a dynamic and independent policy," it is a recipe for disaster. For instance, Qatar has not been terror-free: in fact, in March 2005, a suicide bomber (most likely linked or inspired by al-Qaida) killed one Briton and wounded 12 people in Doha in an attack at a theater frequented by Westerners.

Also, while Qatar is the only country with Iran, heavily investing in Syria, and thereby propping up the Assad regime, it does not seem to pay off. Quite the contrary. In June 2006 the Kuwaiti daily Al Seyassah reported that Qatar had foiled a destabilization plot against the regime and that Qatari authorities had arrested about 100 Syrian workers and five Syrian intelligence officers. This plot was reportedly conceived by Syrian President Bashar Assad's brother-in-law and chief of Syria's security services, Assef Shawkat, with the help of Hezbollah's mastermind, Imad Mugniyeh. They were to activate sleeping cells in the Gulf and target vital and strategic centers in Qatar. Syria wanted to take revenge on Qatar because of its vote at the United Nations for resolution 1680, which calls for a final drawing of the borders between Syria and Lebanon and the reestablishment of normal diplomatic relations between the two states.

On the diplomatic front, Qatar has been handling Iran carefully.

For proof, Qatar was the only country to reject a U.N. Security Council resolution against Tehran. Another reason for this policy is that according to a figure cited by the French daily, Le Figaro, 30 to 40 percent of Qatari citizens are of Iranian descent.

But appeasing Iran might not be enough to stave off a conflict with its powerful Shiite neighbor. Just a spark might ignite a fire: for example a major diplomatic incident broke out last year between the two countries when Qatar's emir called the Gulf "Arabian" and not "Persian."

Finally another potential source of conflict is the sharing of the enormous offshore gas reserve of the North Field (the largest natural gas reserve in the world with 25 trillion cubic meters) between the two nations, which is bound to ignite major tension, in particular as the Iranian economy worsens.

But Qatar has also a few fail-safe measures: one of them is obviously the U.S. military presence in the country. Another one is a military treaty with France obligating the latter to intervene militarily to defend the tiny Gulf state. France would be treaty bound to send troops to the region to retaliate against Iran. Recently, Qatari diplomats have been reminding France of its commitments.

Last but not least, since March 2006 Qatari refineries and vital oil installations have been protected by batteries of Patriot missiles.

An Iranian attack on Qatar might literally plunge the world into a new global war. Gulf and Western countries are taking this scenario seriously. That is why military activity in the Gulf has been increasing tremendously in the past few months. According to British sources, the stock of weapons, missiles, and combat planes in the six neighboring countries to Iran is now three times what it was at the onset of the Iraq war in 2003. The skies are getting darker once more in the Middle East.

First target for Iran: Qatar?

[Soldier4Christ]

Qatar is not the only first level targets. Bahrain is also a strategic U.S. Military area and is the location of a British oil refinery. Both of these would be a major target.

[Shammu]

Russian workers told where, how to vote

By LYNN BERRY, Associated Press Writer Tue Nov 27, 12:33 PM ET

MOSCOW - With the Kremlin determined to see a high turnout in Sunday's election, many Russians say they are being pressured to vote at work under the watchful eyes of their bosses or risk losing their jobs.

They say they also are being told to provide lists of relatives and friends who will vote for United Russia, the party of President Vladimir Putin.

United Russia is expected to win handily. But Putin has turned the parliamentary elections into a plebiscite on his rule, and the Kremlin appears to be pushing for nothing short of a landslide.

The constitution requires Putin to step down as president in May, but with the support of the majority of Russians he could claim a popular mandate to retain power.

"The plebiscite will become a mockery if only slightly more than half of the people vote and if only 60 percent of those vote for United Russia," as the latest opinion polls predict, political analyst Alexei Makarkin said.

In the push to get out the vote, the absentee ballot has become a popular new tool.

A teacher in St. Petersburg said the school administration told staff members to get absentee ballots from their neighborhood polling stations ahead of the election. They are to vote together Sunday at a polling station at the school.

"They didn't tell us necessarily to vote for United Russia, but you can read between the lines," said the teacher, who was willing to give only her first name, Yelena, out of fear of being fired.

Similar accounts have been given by teachers, doctors, factory workers and others around the country. Some have said they were warned they would lose their jobs if they did not comply.

Hundreds of people have called an election hot line to complain about the use of absentee ballots, the Central Elections Commission said in a summary of the complaints posted on its Web site.

Some complaints came from hospital patients, who said they had been threatened with early discharge if they did not produce absentee ballots.

The commission's head, Vladimir Churov, said Tuesday that every effort would be made to prevent voting violations through the use of absentee ballots, but election officials have not discouraged voters from using them.

Non-governmental organizations and opposition political parties also have reported receiving many complaints.

"It is unbelievable. The use of bureaucracy is on an unprecedented scale," said Marina Dashenkova of Golos, an election-monitoring group. "People are complaining that their bosses are forcing them to take absentee ballots and vote for whom they say."

The use of absentee ballots in this way is new, she said, and kills two birds with one stone for the Kremlin: By getting absentee ballots, people are registered as voting even if the votes are never cast, boosting turnout; and when they vote under the supervision of bosses they are likely to vote "correctly."

People also have complained of being required to round up a certain number of votes for United Russia. Yelena, the St. Petersburg teacher, said she was told to compile a list of five relatives or friends.

Vladimir Ryzhkov, a parliament member whose liberal party was barred from the election, said he has received reports from his home district in Siberia that government agencies have been told to make sure all employees and their family members vote.

"They want to be legitimate in the public eye and that's why they are pressuring everyone to vote," Ryzhkov said on Ekho Moskvy radio. "Even if people come and vote for parties that are opposed to the ruling party, their votes will still raise the legitimacy of the elections."

Much of the pressure appears to be on teachers, doctors and others on the government payroll. But some company owners also have shown an eagerness to get out the vote.

A 23-year-old manager at the Moscow grocery store chain Sedmoi Kontinent said her company was putting strong pressure on her and colleagues to get absentee ballots and vote at company headquarters.

"It's pure pressure. They are saying, 'We are not forcing you, we are asking you, but if not, you will show your disloyalty to your company,'" said the woman, Anna, who declined to disclose her last name out of fear of being fired.

The pressure to get out the vote starts with Russia's more than 80 governors, most of whom are United Russia members. The orders, whether explicit or just implied, are then passed to government agencies, companies, hospitals and schools.

"For them to ensure a decent turnout and the necessary percentage of the right vote is not a referendum for or against the president but a question of either signing their own prison sentence or being able to continue to live peacefully and remain governor," the independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta wrote.

Russian workers told where, how to vote

[Shammu]

Iranian missile threatens Moscow
jpost.com staff and ap , THE JERUSALEM POST    Nov. 27, 2007

Iran's new ballistic missile not only increases the threat against Israel, but against European cities as well, including Moscow, MK Ephraim Sneh (Labor) said on Tuesday.

"It is time the world opened its eyes," Army Radio quoted him as saying.

Iranian Defense Minister Gen. Mostafa Muhammad-Najjar announced on Tuesday that his country had developed a new ballistic missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers, capable of reaching Israel and US Army bases in the Middle East.

According to the country's IRNA news agency, Najjar said the missile was named the "Ashoura," meaning "the tenth day" in Farsi - a sacred reference among Shi'ite Muslims to the martyrdom of the third imam.

The Iranian defense minister said that "the production of the new missile was one of the Defense Ministry's greatest achievements."

Najjar did not specify how the Ashoura was different from the Shihab-3 missile, which is currently considered the country's longest-range missile.

The Ashoura was produced by factories affiliated with the ministry, according to IRNA. Najjar did not say whether Iran had test fired the missile or had plans to do so.

Analysts believe much of Iran's military production has benefited from assistance from Russia, China and other countries, but many of their weapons development claims have not been independently verified.

Iran launched an arms development program during its war with Iraq to compensate for a US weapons embargo. Since 1992, Iran has reportedly produced its own jets, torpedoes, radar-avoiding missiles, tanks and armored personnel carriers.

Recent weapons development has been motivated by Iran's standoff with the US over its controversial nuclear program.

The Shihab-3, which means "shooting star" in Farsi, has a range of at least 1,300 kilometers. In 2005, Iranian officials said they had improved the range of the Shihab-3 to 2,000 kilometers, equal to the new missile announced Tuesday.

Experts also believe Iran is developing the Shihab-4 missile, thought to have a range between 2,000 and 3,000 kilometers, that would enable it to hit much of Europe.

Iranian missile threatens Moscow
~~~~~~~~~
According to the Bible that missle will not fly to Moscow, but Israel.

[Shammu]

1,500 Saudi militants go free after 'repenting'
By Agence France Presse (AFP)

Monday, November 26, 2007

RIYADH: Saudi Arabia, waging a crackdown on Islamist militants that has lasted for more than four years, has released some 1,500 jailed suspects after they "repented," a newspaper said on Sunday. The 1,500 were among about 3,200 militants with whom representatives of a government-appointed "advice committee" met around 5,000 times since it was formed three years ago, Al-Watan said, quoting committee member Mohammad al-Nujaimi.

The paper did not clarify if the remaining 1,700 detainees had refused to renounce the ideology of "taqfir" - branding other Muslims as apostates or infidels in order to legitimize violence against them.

The ideology is espoused by some militants who advocate the use of force to overthrow regimes deemed corrupt or unrepresentative and to establish a single Islamic state.

Nujaimi said the 1,500 militants who changed their views had renounced Saudi-born Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden's call on his followers to "cleanse the Arabian Peninsula of polytheists."

The advice committee is comprised of more than 100 Islamic scholars, preachers and experts in Sharia law, in addition to 30 psychologists and social workers, the paper said.

Saudi Arabia has cracked down on suspected Al-Qaeda militants since they launched a series of deadly bombings and shootings in the oil-rich kingdom in May 2003.

1,500 Saudi militants go free after 'repenting'

[Shammu]

Defense chiefs of Koreas begin talks

By HYUNG-JIN KIM, Associated Press Writer Tue Nov 27, 6:45 AM ET

SEOUL, South Korea - The defense chiefs of North and South Korea began a rare meeting Tuesday to discuss easing tension across their disputed sea border on a harmonious note, pledging to end the peninsula's division.

South Korean Defense Minister Kim Jang-soo arrived in Pyongyang Tuesday on a direct flight from Seoul for three days of talks with his North Korean counterpart Kim Il Chol — the first defense ministerial talks between the Koreas in seven years.

This week's talks are aimed at fleshing out agreements to foster peace and cooperation between the Koreas signed by South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun and North Korean leader Kim Jong Il last month, at only the second-ever summit between the countries.

The Koreas remain technically at war since the 1950-53 Korean War ended in an armistice, not a peace treaty.

The division of Korea "is a very important issue and is the matter that we have to resolve within our generation without further delay," the North's Kim said, according to pool reports. "I hope we will do something that goes down in history by advancing the unification."

The South's minister responded, "I think if we map out a stepping stone, the era that we want to have will come at an early date."

Earlier this month, the prime ministers of the two Koreas met and agreed to launch a cross-border train service and construction projects in the impoverished North, along with other reconciliation projects.

However, the defense talks were seen as crucial because the North's military has in the past put the brakes on burgeoning rapprochement because of security concerns.

The North's 1.1 million-strong army is the backbone of leader Kim's authoritarian rule of 23 million people. Soldiers get first pick of the country's scarce resources and are rewarded generously for their service as the vanguard against the outside world.

A plan to establish a joint fishing area in the West Sea and designate it as a "peace and cooperation zone" was expected to be a key issue at the defense talks.

The poorly marked western sea border was the scene of bloody naval skirmishes between the two Koreas in 1999 and 2002, and the North has long insisted the frontier be redrawn further south. The waters around the border are rich fishing grounds and boats from the two Koreas routinely jostle for position during the May-June crab-catching season.

Another issue that could be raised at the talks is Seoul's concern about more than 500 South Korean prisoners of war believed still alive in the North. The North insists there are no prisoners or abductees in the country, insisting any South Koreans there went voluntarily.

The defense talks come amid progress in international efforts to rid North Korea of its nuclear weapons program, with Pyongyang beginning to disable facilities in its main nuclear complex this month in return for energy aid and other benefits.

A team of U.S. experts has been in North Korea since early this month to monitor the disablement process. Officials from South Korea, China, Japan and Russia will visit the North Korean nuclear complex this week to check on progress, South Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman Cho Hee-yong said Monday.

The two Koreas held their first defense ministers' talks on the South Korean island of Jeju in September 2000, three months after the first-ever summit between the two countries.

Defense chiefs of Koreas begin talks

[Shammu]

Iran to host militants for Mideast meet
Nov 27 12:37 PM US/Eastern

Iran said on Tuesday that it had invited Palestinian militant factions to a meeting in Tehran aimed at countering a US-hosted Middle East peace conference seeking to kickstart the peace process.

"These groups are planning to come to Tehran within the next week or two and they are all the Palestinian groups that are struggling for the freedom of their land," government spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham told reporters.

Iran is one of the most vocal backers of Palestinian militant groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad and pledged millions of dollars in 2006 to the then Hamas government crippled by a Western aid cut.

The Islamic republic does not recognise Israel and its President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has provoked outrage by calling for the Jewish state to be wiped off the map.

Elham indicated the Tehran meeting would be a riposte to the conference bringing together Israeli and Palestinian leaders which started in Annapolis outside Washington on Tuesday.

"It means that the Annapolis conference is not representing the Palestinians and not talking on their behalf, but on the contrary is moving against their rights," he said.

More than a dozen Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia and Iran's top regional ally Syria, have sent representatives, leaving Tehran conspicuously isolated.

On Monday Ahmadinejad told Saudi King Abdullah in a telephone call that he "wished" the kingdom was not taking part in the peace conference.

Tehran's arch foe Washington, which is hosting the meeting, dismissed the Iranian criticism as "not surprising," and charged that Tehran backs the extremists sidelined by the talks.

Iran to host militants for Mideast meet