Africa urged to act on Zimbabwe

The UN has urged African leaders at a key summit in Egypt to try to negotiate a solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe.

UN Deputy Secretary General Asha-Rose Migiro said this was the "moment of truth" for the African Union leaders.

President Robert Mugabe is attending the meeting. He was sworn in on Sunday after a victory that observers said had been undermined by pre-poll violence.

South Africa has now urged Mr Mugabe to hold talks with the opposition towards forming a transitional government.

Mr Mugabe claimed a landslide victory as the sole candidate after the leader of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), Morgan Tsvangirai, withdrew.

Draft resolution

Ms Migiro told the leaders of the 53-nation bloc: "This is a moment of truth for regional leaders... the secretary-general urges your excellencies to mobilise support for a negotiated solution."

She added: "This is the single greatest challenge to regional stability in southern Africa."

Ms Migiro again expressed UN regret that the election had been allowed to go ahead despite the violence.

In his welcoming speech, host President Hosni Mubarak said bolstering peace and security was "essential for resolving disputes and conflicts in the continent".

The AU has a rule not to accept leaders who have not been democratically elected - but observers say it is unlikely to take such strong action against Mr Mugabe so quickly.

A draft resolution written by African foreign ministers during talks ahead of the summit did not criticise the elections or Mr Mugabe, but condemned violence in general terms and called for dialogue.

Independent observers have criticised the poll.

The AU's own monitors said on Monday: "The vote fell short of the African Union's standards of democratic elections."

However, the said they were "encouraged" by the willingness of the MDC and Mr Mugabe's Zanu-PF to hold talks.

Earlier the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) observers said there was "politically-motivated violence, intimidation and displacements".

The Pan-African Parliament called for fresh elections to be held, saying the vote was not free or fair.

On Monday South Africa's foreign ministry said Zanu-PF and the MDC "must enter into negotiations which will lead to the formation of a transitional government".

The MDC has previously criticised South Africa's role and on Monday called for an additional mediator to be appointed to work alongside President Thabo Mbeki.

Also on Monday, France's Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said the election was a "farce" that it could not accept.

UK PM Gordon Brown said: "I hope that the African Union and its leaders will make it absolutely clear that there has to be change and a new government has got to be brought in."

Separately, on the eve of the summit, Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa, one of Mr Mugabe's leading critics, was rushed to hospital in Sharm el-Sheikh suffering chest pains. He is said to be stable.

Spoilt ballots

Mr Mugabe was sworn in during a quickly convened ceremony on Sunday, about an hour after the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission announced the results of the presidential election run-off.

Robert Mugabe is sworn in as Zimbabwe's president

The commission said Mr Mugabe won 85.5% of the vote, but many ballots were spoiled.

In a speech that followed the swearing-in ceremony, Mr Mugabe said he was committed to talks with the opposition to find a solution to the political crisis.

However, BBC Southern Africa correspondent Peter Biles says the opposition may reject any notion of a government of national unity in which Mr Mugabe is still in a key position.

The MDC said some 86 of its supporters were killed and 200,000 forced from their homes by militias loyal to the ruling Zanu-PF party in the weeks preceding the run-off.

The government has blamed the MDC for the violence.

Mr Mugabe has been in power since Zimbabwe gained independence from Britain in 1980.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/7480584.stm


This is just a topic we have not touched on and it is of major importance in the region. I encourage you to check out the actual article for a map of the nations surrounding Zimbabwe and their positions on the matter.

A chicken in every pot and a handgun in every purse

A powerful pro-gun lobby group in the United States has filed legal challenges to handgun bans in San Francisco and Chicago.

The lawsuits come a day after the US Supreme Court ruled that a ban on the private possession of handguns in Washington DC was unconstitutional.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) says it wants similar bans in other states and cities overturned as well.

San Francisco's mayor says he plans to fight the NRA challenge.

The NRA lawsuit in San Francisco challenges the city's handgun ban in public housing; while in Chicago it challenges a ruling that makes it illegal to possess or sell handguns in the city.

"In Washington DC, or in any state, whether you live in the housing projects or a high end suburb, you have the right to defend yourself and your family at home," said Chris Cox, from the NRA.

"These laws all deny that right."

Self-defence

The NRA is joined in the San Francisco suit by a gay man living in a government-owned housing development who says he needs a gun to protect himself from potential hate crimes.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said the city would "vigorously fight the NRA" and said the ban was good for public safety.

"Is there anyone out there who really believes that we need more guns in public housing? I can't for the life of me sit back and roll over on this. We will absolutely defend the rights of the housing authority," Mr Newsom said.

The Supreme Court's ruling says that the constitution "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defence within the home".

The ruling enshrines for the first time the individual right to own guns and limits efforts to reduce their role in American life.

"The Supreme Court's decision was very encouraging, but it is just a start," NRA lawyer C D Michel said.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/7478832.stm

Damn it, this is exactly what I was afraid would happen. I don't get this ruling at all. Prohibiting a class or category of guns in not a violation of the Second Amendment. Otherwise, the court should have ruled that the assault weapons ban and the ban on sawed off shotguns was a violation. I am starting to think that I know stray dogs that would make better decisions that Justice Asinine Scalia. Anyway, the point being, I am a gun owner, and I support the right of American's to own guns. But I also support significant constraints on these rights. For example, why is it that one must have a license to drive a car but not to shoot a gun? People that are wishy-washy on gun control seem to be misinformed about the laxity of current gun laws. I like to encourage all of my students to visit a gun show someday just for the cultural experience. I like to go myself, but it is always a little frightening (the scary conspiracy theory militia folk are an added bonus). Most people are shocked to learn how fucking easy it is to get a gun--last year I purchased a ticket to a gun show walked right up to a table and paid 100 dollars cash for a surplus military rifle--no id check, no signature, no questions asked. I also bought 50 rounds of ammunition at the next table. I am glad I am able to purchase the weapon, I love target practice. But I would also feel way more secure if I had had to show some official idea, maybe prove that I had taken a safety class, or had my info logged into some database.

Lastly, for those on the blog who disapprove of the court's recent ruling on executing child rapists because it overturned a state law approved by voters, how does this sit with you? If a state or municipality votes to ban some weapons or all weapons why should the court get to overturn it? (For the record I don't agree with that logic. People vote for all manner of retarded and vile things, and it is only the rule of law that prevents democracy from turning abysmally foul).

A little inappropriate religious humor

This picture kills me. Thank Matt for the contribution. I am just the holy messenger of mirth.

An Important Campaign Announcement from Barack Obama

*I was having major trouble Copying/Pasting the video. I couldn't get the embedded code to replicate and I wasn't about to type that crap out. Feel free to do it yourself and post it here Reed/Beck/Matt, you can get it from this address: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Snsnqbq_OCo "

Transcript:
Hi, this is Barack ObamaI have an important announcement and I wanted all of you – the people who built this movement from the bottom-up – to hear it first. We’ve made the decision not to participate in the public-financing system for the general election. This means we’ll be forgoing more than $80 million in public funds during the final months of this election.It’s not an easy decision, and especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections. But the public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken, and we face opponents who’ve become masters at gaming this broken system. John McCain’s campaign and the Republican National Committee are fueled by contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs. And we’ve already seen that he’s not going to stop the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups, who will spend millions and millions of dollars in unlimited donations.From the very beginning of this campaign, I have asked my supporters to avoid that kind of unregulated activity and join us in building a new kind of politics – and you have. Instead of forcing us to rely on millions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs, you’ve fueled this campaign with donations of $5, $10, $20, whatever you can afford. And because you did, we’ve built a grassroots movement of over 1.5 million Americans. We’ve won the Democratic nomination by relying on ordinary people coming together to achieve extraordinary things.You’ve already changed the way campaigns are funded because you know that’s the only way we can truly change how Washington works. And that’s the path we will continue in this general election. I’m asking you to try to do something that’s never been done before. Declare our independence from a broken system, and run the type of campaign that reflects the grassroots values that have already changed our politics and brought us this far.If we don’t stand together, the broken system we have now, a system where special interests drown out the voices of the American people will continue to erode our politics and prevent the possibility of real change. That’s why we must act. The stakes are higher than ever, and people are counting on us.Every American who is desperate for a fair economy and affordable healthcare, who wants to bring our troops back from Iraq. Who hopes for a better education and future for his or her child, these people are relying on us. You and me. This is our moment and our country is depending on us. So join me, and declare your independence from this broken system and let’s build the first general election campaign that’s truly funded by the American people. With this decision this campaign is in your hands in a way that no campaign has ever been before. Now is the time to act. Thank you so much.

I have some thoughts on this, but I have to go to work right now. I will express my opinion tonight in the comments section. BTW, I have the internet again - woohoo! I'm back online!

Child rapists can't be executed, Supreme Court rules

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Wednesday that child rapists cannot be executed, concluding that capital punishment can be applied only against murderers.
The ruling stemmed from the case of Patrick Kennedy, who appealed the 2003 death sentence he received in Louisiana after being convicted of raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion that execution in this case would violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, citing "evolving standards of decency" in the United States.

Such standards, the justice wrote, forbid capital punishment for any crime other than those that take a life.

"We conclude that, in determining whether the death penalty is excessive, there is a distinction between intentional first-degree murder on the one hand and nonhomicide crimes against individual persons, even including child rape, on the other," wrote Kennedy, who is not related to the convicted rapist.

Patrick Kennedy, 43, would have been the U.S.'s first convicted rapist since 1964 to be executed in a case in which the victim was not killed.

Kennedy was convicted of sexually assaulting his stepdaughter in her bed. The attack caused severe emotional trauma, internal injuries and bleeding to the child, requiring extensive surgery, Louisiana prosecutors said.

In the majority opinion, Anthony Kennedy acknowledged "the victim's fright, the sense of betrayal, and the nature of her injuries caused more prolonged physical and mental suffering than, say, a sudden killing by an unseen assassin."

But the justice -- supported by Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer -- wrote that when determining what punishment the Eighth Amendment prohibits, "evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society" must be taken into account.

After a review of the "history of the death penalty for this and other nonhomicide crimes, current state statutes and new enactments ... we conclude there is a national consensus against capital punishment for the crime of child rape," Anthony Kennedy wrote.

Attorneys at the Capital Appeals Project who represent Patrick Kennedy issued a statement applauding the ruling.

"We can only hope that the money that Louisiana has been spending drafting and defending this anomalous and unconstitutional statute will be reallocated to efforts at treatment for victims of sexual abuse and for measures that actually reduce the risk of such abuse in our communities," attorney Ben Cohen said in the statement.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissent, saying, "the harm that is caused to the victims and to society at large by the worst child rapist is grave." He was supported by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

Alito also wrote that the majority ruled against the death penalty "no matter how young the child, no matter how many times the child is raped, no matter how many children the perpetrator rapes, no matter how sadistic the crime, no matter how much physical or psychological trauma is inflicted and no matter how heinous the perpetrator's criminal record may be."

Wednesday's ruling will affect six states that allow the death penalty for rape, including Louisiana, where Patrick Kennedy was recently joined on death row by another convicted child rapist, Richard Davis.

Because of the ruling, the sentences of Davis and Kennedy will automatically be commuted to life in prison without the possibility of parole, the Capital Appeals Project said.

"Mr. Kennedy, who has consistently maintained his innocence, plans to continue to pursue his appeals in state and federal court," the appeals project said.

Florida, Montana, Oklahoma and South Carolina have death-penalty laws for rape but have not applied them in decades. Texas enacted a version a year ago, but no defendant has been designated death-eligible for child rape in any state but Louisiana.

U.S. Supreme Court rulings in 1976 and 1977 barred capital punishment for rape and, by implication, any other crime except murder. But in 1995, Louisiana passed a law allowing execution for the sexual violation of a child under 12. State lawmakers argued that the earlier high court cases pertained only to "adult women."

Supporters of Louisiana's law say that besides murder, no crime is more deserving of the death penalty than child rape and that the punishment would be used only in the most heinous of circumstances.

"A lot of people think there should not be a death penalty because the child survives," sex crimes prosecutor Kat Bartholomew said. "In my opinion, the rape of a child is more heinous and more hideous than a homicide."

She said a sexual assault on a child "takes away their innocence. It takes away their childhood. It mutilates their spirit. It kills their soul."

Death penalty opponents contend, among other things, that it could give attackers a reason to murder their victims. In Wednesday's ruling, Anthony Kennedy agreed, writing, "A state that punishes child rape by death may remove a strong incentive for the rapist not to kill the victim."
After the ruling, Lynn, a cousin of the victim's, said, "Just knowing the kind of man [Patrick Kennedy] is, we'll never be comfortable."

The high court has in recent years banned execution for the mentally retarded, underage killers and those deemed to have had an inadequate defense at trial.

Other state and federal crimes theoretically eligible for execution include treason, aggravated kidnapping, drug trafficking, aircraft hijacking and espionage. None of these crimes has been prosecuted as a capital offense in decades, if ever.

An uncomfortable topic... and one we have discussed previously. I'm still conflicted over the subject, but in the end, I can't help but feel the Supreme Court has (again) fallen on the wrong side of the issue. I just can't help but feel that it should be up to the citizens of a given state as to whether or not they apply capital punishment to child rape, regardless of what my personal feelings on the matter might be. Personally, I'd commute the death penalty of a spy or a traitor before I'd do so for a convicted child rapist.

Upscale urban tactical gear

Who says protecting yourself from sniper attacks or chemical warfare needs to be ugly business? Certainly not Dutch designer Tim Smit. His “Urban Security Suit” will be all the rage in a war zone near you. Made of stylish neoprene and strategically lined with body molded kevlar, this runway show stopper will be THE must have accessory for your next war, skirmish, struggle, conflict, combat zone or civil strife you find yourself in or starting. Aeon Flux eat your heart out.

Designer: Tim Smit

from:http://www.yankodesign.com/index.php/2008/04/28/body-armor-fashion-design-armorni/

And now for something completely different

The world can make a saving throw.

Israel-Palestine Fatality Data

Fatalities

Click on the numbers for a list of individual names and details about the circumstances of their death.

29.9.2000-31.5.2008	Occupied Territories			Israel
	Gaza Strip	West Bank	Total
Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces	2941	1777	4718	67
Palestinians killed by Israeli civilians	4	41	45
Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians	39	197	236	485
Israeli security force personnel killed by Palestinians	97	147	244	90
Foreign citizens killed by Palestinians	10	7	17	37
Foreign citizens killed by Israeli security forces	4	6	10
Palestinians killed by Palestinians	442	135	577
Additional data (included in previous table)	Occupied Territories			Israel
	Gaza Strip	West Bank	Total
Palestinian minors killed by Israeli security forces	633	311	944	3
Israeli minors killed by Palestinians	4	35	39	84
Palestinians killed during the course of a targeted killing	279	107	386
Palestinians who were the object of a targeted killing	150	82	232
Palestinians killed by Palestinians for suspected collaboration with Israel	11	109	120
Palestinians who took part in the hostilities and were killed by Israeli security forces	1176	461	1637	58
Palestinians who did not take part in the hostilities and were killed by Israeli security forces ( not including the objects of targeted killings).	1378	837	2215	5
Palestinians who were killed by Israeli security forces and it is not known if they were taking part in the hostilities	387	479	866	4

Notes:

1. The data may change due to ongoing research, which produces new information about the events .
2. The figures do not include :

• Palestinians who died after medical treatment was delayed due to restrictions of movement .
• Palestinians killed by an explosive device that they set or was on their person .
• 12 Palestinian citizens of Israel killed within Israel by the Israeli Police in October 2000 .
• One Jewish Israeli citizen killed within Israel by a Palestinian-Israeli citizen in October 2000 .
• Two Jewish Israeli citizens and One member of the Israeli security forces, killed by a Palestinian citizen of Israel in Nahariya in September 2001 .
• Four Palestinian-citizens of Israel killed by IDF gunfire in the Territories .
• One Palestinian-citizen of Israel killed by Border Police gunfire within Israel in July 2003 .
• Five Palestinian citizens of Israel killed by an absconded IDF soldier on a bus in Shfar'am, within Israel , in August 2005 and the shooting soldier, beaten to death by Palestinian-citizens of Israel.
• Seven members of the Ghaliya family (the two parents and their five children, one an adult), who were killed in June 2006 in an explosion on the coast by Beit Lahiya, in the northern Gaza Strip. The cause of the explosion remains unclear.
• One Palestinian resident of a-Sheikh Sa'ed was killed on May 2007 during a fire exchange between Palestinian militants and Israeli policemen at the a-Sheikh Sa'ed checkpoint in East Jerusalem.
• One Twelve-year-old Israeli child who, in August 2007 while on a family visit in the village of Saida in Tulkarm district, was killed by undercover troops who had come to arrest his brother and his brother's friend, who were wanted by Israel.
• One Israeli citizen from Kfar Qana, who was killed in August 2007 in the Old City in East Jerusalem after he grabbed a security guard's weapon.

Source: The B'tselem , the Israeli Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories

In light of some of our past discussion I thought some people might find this interesting. No real comment, the data speaks volumes.

Experts unveil 'cloak of silence'

A working device could be used to enhance the acoustics of concert hal

Being woken in the dead of night by noisy neighbours blasting out music could soon be a thing of the past.

Scientists have shown off the blueprint for an "acoustic cloak", which could make objects impervious to sound waves.

The technology, outlined in the New Journal of Physics, could be used to build sound-proof homes, advanced concert halls or stealth warships.

Scientists have previously demonstrated devices that cloak objects from microwaves, making them "invisible".

"The mathematics behind cloaking has been known for several years," said Professor John Pendry of Imperial College London, UK, an expert in cloaking.

"What hasn't been available for sound is the sort of materials you need to build a cloak out of."

Sound shield

The Spanish team who conducted the new work believe the key to a practical device are so-called "sonic crystals".

These artificial composites - also known as "meta-materials" - can be engineered to produce specific acoustical effects.

Sound waves are channelled around an object by sonic crystals

"Unlike ordinary materials, their acoustic properties are determined by their internal structure," explained Professor Pendry.

These would be used to channel any sound around an object, like water flowing around a rock in a stream.

"The idea of acoustic cloaking is to deviate the sounds waves around the object that has to be cloaked," said Jose Sanchez-Dehesa of the Polytechnic University of Valencia, one of the researchers behind the new work.

He believes a material that consists of arrays of tiny cylinders would achieve this effect.

Simulations showed that 200 layers of this metamaterial could effectively shield an object from noise.

Thinner stacks would shield an object from certain frequencies.

"The thickness depends on the wavelength you want to screen," he told BBC News.

Sub systems

Dr Sanchez-Dehesa now wants to make and test such a material in the lab to confirm the simulations.

But researchers, such as Professor Pendry, believe the initial work is already an important first step.

Acoustic cloaks could be used to make soundproof rooms or buildings

"It's not an unrealistic blueprint - it doesn't demand that we do extraordinary things," he said. "This is something that can easily be manufactured."

If a material could be commercialised, both researchers believe it could have many applications.

Walls of the material could be built to soundproof houses or it could be used in concert halls to enhance acoustics or direct noise away from certain areas.

The military may also be interested, the researchers believe, to conceal submarines from detection by sonar or to create a new class of stealth ships.

However, the material may need to be optimised first.

"You don't want to wrap a submarine in something that is heavy and several inches thick," said Professor Pendry. "It would add quite a lot to the Navy's fuel bill, I think."

Light touch

The research builds on work by scientists from Duke University in North Carolina, US, and the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.

Duke University researchers created an invisibility cloak in 2006

Earlier this year, independent teams from the two institutions demonstrated the mathematics necessary to create an acoustic cloak.

Other scientists have shown that objects can be cloaked from electromagnetic radiation, such as microwaves.

For example, in 2006, scientists at Duke University showed how a small copper cylinder could be rendered invisible from microwaves.

The technique used a metamaterial consisting of 10 fibreglass rings covered with copper elements, to deflect the microwaves around the object and restore them on the other side.

To an observer it looked like the microwaves had passed straight through the cylinder.

Other researchers hope to build the holy grail of cloaking: an invisibility device that would channel light at wavelengths normally visible to the eye.

However, this technology is in a more primitive state, according to Dr Sanchez-Dehesa.

"We believe the acoustic cloak is more feasible than a similar device for light," he said.

From BBC.co.uk

This is what I like to see, more science devoted to creating D&D magical items and various spells. What we need now is a cone of cold, a cloak of elven-kind, and a ring of the arachnid. Yeah, that would be sweet.

Go Hanuman, Go!

Indian school names monkey god as its chairman

By BISWAJEET BANERJEE
Associated Press Writer

He's a revered Hindu monkey god. And now, he's the chairman of an Indian business school.

Hanuman, the popular god known for his strength and valor, has been named official chairman of the recently opened Sardar Bhagat Singh College of Technology and Management in northern India, a school official said Saturday.

The position comes with an incense-filled office, a desk and a laptop computer. Four chairs will be placed facing the empty seat reserved for the chairman and all visitors must enter the office barefoot, said Vivek Kangdi, the school's vice chairman.

"It is our belief that any job that has the blessings of Lord Hanuman is bound to be a success," said Kangdi.

All Hindus know that Hanuman can lift mountains and leap oceans, but ancient texts make no mention of his business acumen.

"When we were looking for a chairman for our institution, we scanned many big names in the field of technology and management. Ultimately, we settled for Lord Hanuman, as none was bigger than him," Kangdi said.

Hanuman is one of the most popular gods in the crowded pantheon of Hindu deities. His most famous feat, as described in the Hindu epic the Ramayana, was leading a monkey army to fight the demon King Ravana and rescue a kidnapped princess.

The Sardar Bhagat Singh College in Lucknow, the capital of Uttar Pradesh, India's most populous state, awards bachelor's degrees in engineering and management. The school opened last year.

As reported by the AP wire service.

He tried to eat the sun, and now he has a laptop. Oh Hanuman, what will you do next?

The List: The Worst Places to Be a Terrorist

Fighting transnational terrorism often involves making unsavory choices between protecting civil rights and providing security. The following regimes have opted for the latter and are definitely not the kind of places you want to get caught if you’re plotting some terrorist mayhem.

ERIC FEFERBERG/AFP/Getty Images

France

Key tactics: Though many Americans view them as softies when it comes to the war on terror, the French actually have some of the world’s toughest and arguably most effective antiterrorism laws. In France, terrorist investigations are overseen by a special unit of magistrates with unprecedented powers to monitor suspects, enlist the help of other branches of law enforcement, and detain suspects for days without charges. Additionally, prosecutors have a mandate to pursue terrorists abroad if the suspect or victim is French. France is also not shy about deporting Muslim clerics it views as threatening. It shouldn’t be surprising that French law enforcement is well set up for counterterrorism: France was the first European country to fall victim to Middle Eastern terrorism during the Algerian war in the 1950s.

In action: France has not had a terrorist attack on its soil since 9/11, but it claims to have foiled several, including a chemical attack planned by Chechen operatives against Russian targets in Paris, a planned bombing of one of Paris’s airports, and a 9/11-like airline plot against the Eiffel Tower.

Concerns: French civil libertarians have raised concerns about detentions that, in some cases, can last for years without trials. Allegations of police brutality are also common in France’s predominantly Muslim suburbs.

---

Salah Malkawi/ Getty Images

Jordan

Key tactics: Since the November 2005 hotel bombings carried out by al Qaeda in Amman, Jordan’s King Abdullah II has made it a priority to stop the infiltration of terrorists from neighboring Iraq and Syria. Jordan’s intelligence service, the General Intelligence Department, has exploited close ties with Sunni tribes in Iraq’s Anbar province to provide its U.S. and Israeli counterparts with valuable intelligence about the structure and financing on terrorist organizations. Jordan also takes pride in the prowess of its Special Forces units and has opened a special operations training center to teach counterterrorism tactics to elite military units from around the world.

In action: It’s widely suspected that Jordanian spies tipped off the U.S. military to the location of al Qaeda in Iraq’s Jordanian-born leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leading to the U.S.-Iraqi military raid that killed him.

Concerns: Jordan has been criticized by human rights groups for its alleged participation in the “rendition” of U.S. terrorist suspects for torture.

---

PEDRO UGARTE/AFP/Getty Images

Egypt

Key tactics: No less an authority than al Qaeda’s No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri recently said of Egypt’s State Security, “They know more about the Islamic movements than many of those movements’ members know about them.” Zawahiri’s followers have good reason to worry. After a wave of terrorist attacks and political victories for the Muslim Brotherhood in the early 1990s, Hosni Mubarak’s government opted for a strategy of ruthless repression in combating the threat from terrorism and political Islam. The state’s strategy is to inhibit the Brotherhood from participating in the political process while carrying out wide-ranging arrests of militants and routinely using torture on prisoners.

In action: During the 1990s, the Egyptian regime essentially eliminated the domestic threat of groups such as the Islamic Group and Zawahiri’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad, largely by attacking their bases of operations and blocking their ability to transform into legitimate political movements. Overreaches by the groups themselves contributed greatly to their downfall.

Concerns: Human Rights Watch has complained that the Egyptian regime’s liberal use of torture simply leads prisoners to “confess to crimes real or imagined.” Analysts also question the strategy of repressing the Brotherhood, which they say only strengthens the group’s appeal.

---

ROSLAN RAHMAN/AFP/Getty Images

Singapore

Key tactics: Singapore, which is 15 percent Muslim, has had enormous success in combating regional terrorist groups such as the al Qaeda-linked Jemaah Islamiyah through a combination of tough Special Forces tactics and savvy rehabilitation programs. After 9/11, the island country strengthened its crackdown on terrorist funding, and it recently passed legislation giving the Army wide-ranging powers to pursue terrorists domestically. But Singapore’s approach goes beyond enforcement. Since 2003, a landmark government program has aimed to rehabilitate arrested militants. The state employs volunteer clerics who counsel detainees and rebut extremist arguments. The United States has studied the approach as a possible alternative to indefinite detention.

In action: A major operation in 2001 resulted in the arrest of 15 Jemaah Islamiyah operatives who were planning terrorist attacks within Singapore. Around 70 people have been detained since then, and about one third have been released after rehabilitation. Police continue monitoring those who are released.

Concerns: Democracy activists argue that the Singaporean government plays up the terrorist threat to justify its authoritarianism. The police also suffered a major embarrassment in February when a Jemaah Islamiyah militant escaped through the bathroom window of a detention center.

---

KAZBEK BASAYEV/AFP/Getty Images

Russia

Key tactics: In 1999, Boris Yeltsin elevated an obscure midlevel politician named Vladimir Putin to the rank of prime minister and entrusted him with putting down a raging insurgency in the breakaway region of Chechnya. Ever since, counterinsurgency and counterterrorism have been the hallmarks of Putin’s tenure, and he has largely built his popularity around his success in these areas. Russia has carried out a ruthless campaign of military suppression in Chechnya, and when it hasn’t been attacking militants, it has joined with them by elevating former rebel Ramzan Kadyrov to the presidency of the now largely peaceful region. Russian security forces were also willing to put down terrorist sieges by force even at the expense of high civilian casualties.

In action: After Chechen rebels took a Moscow theater hostage in 2002, Russian Special Forces pumped an unknown gas into the theater’s ventilation system and then stormed the building, killing nearly all the hostage-takers along with hundreds of hostages.

Concerns: Though Russia has largely succeeded in pacifying Chechnya, the neighboring regions of Dagestan and North Ossetia remain havens for militant groups. The government was widely criticized for the secrecy surrounding the Nord-Ost and Beslan school operations and the high number of hostages killed during the rescues.

From Foreign Policy Journal web exclusive week of June 1.

Just thought this might be of interest. I was kind of intrigued by the mix of countries and tactics. France is still pro-civil liberty and freedom even compared to the US, but especially compared to the rest. Singapore is a mixed bag but relies more on social programs, rehab, and policing than overt military tactics. Jordan would seem to be in the middle of the pack with its limited freedoms but notable lack of violent political repression and limited military usage. Egypt and Russia...mmm...not a model I would ever want to follow. Egypt arrests hundreds of dissidents and suspected terrorists a year and tortures quite a few. Russia seems to have no qualms about killing scores of civilians and executing people without trial (e.g. in the process of arrest attempts) if it might mean offing some bad guys.