Football
I don't watch football! Nam was enough football for me.
5:54 PM. A bunch of dumbasses tearing up the turf, growling and glaring at each other, running at each other hopping to destroy each other's desire to fight, and all for the sake of stealing territory that does no belong to them, in the name of "WINNING" a game played for fun to the tune of billions of dollars a year that do not end up in the pockets of the idiots buying chips and beer!
7:02 PMOkay, I realize it is a long time until time (in your world) to chat, but I certainly am not up stairs watching a bunch of idiots throw themselves at each other for millions of dollars and enough injuries to use up most of those millions that no reasonable insurance company would cover...unless it pushes the costs off onto us, ...some of whom are NOT FOOTBALL FANS and who should NOT BE PAYING FOR WHAT CRETIN FOOTBALL FANS THINK IS ENTERTAINMENT!!!!!!

The McCain Doctrine, a Thought Process only a stereotypical
(Ed: Playing the guilt card to gain support for a failed and ultimately myopic, self-destructive policy is really low; really, really very low, far beneath any potentially serious Presidential Candidate, except a Republican one, apparently! Though they know not how to rid themselves of this scourge, most US Americans are sick of having the dumb asses who fall for this shit in charge of their lives and the lives of their children...and this goes for you, too, Hillary, though you will probably use it to WIN!)

McCain condemns anti-surge resolution

By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) sought to weaken support for a resolution opposing
President Bush's
Iraq war strategy Sunday, saying proponents are intellectually dishonest.

On the eve of a possible congressional showdown on Iraq strategy, McCain contended the bipartisan proposal amounted to a demoralizing "vote of no confidence" in the U.S. military.

The measure criticizes Bush's plan to add 21,500 troops in Iraq yet offers no concrete alternatives, he said.

"I don't think it's appropriate to say that you disapprove of a mission and you don't want to fund it and you don't want it to go, but yet you don't take the action necessary to prevent it," said McCain, top Republican on the
Senate Armed Services Committee and a 2008 presidential candidate from Arizona.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., called GOP efforts to block a vote on the resolution "obstructionism." Neither a Senate majority nor voters, she said, will tolerate such a delaying tactic.

"If we can't get this done, you can be sure a month or so down the pike, there's going to be much stronger legislation," she said.

The Senate, where Democrats hold a 51-49 working majority, has tentatively set an early test vote for Monday on the nonbinding resolution by Sen. John Warner (news, bio, voting record), R-Va.

In a bid to attract more GOP support, Warner added a provision pledging to protect money for troops in combat.

That compromise drew the ire of some Democrats who said it leaned too far in endorsing the status quo. They want to see binding legislation to cap troop levels, force a new vote to authorize the war or begin bringing troops home.

McCain is sponsoring a resolution expressing support for a troop increase and setting benchmark goals for the Iraqi government. He sought to capitalize on some of the Democratic division.

"I do believe that if you really believe that this is doomed to failure and is going to cost American lives, then you should do what's necessary to prevent it from happening rather than a vote of 'disapproval,'" McCain said.

"This is a vote of no confidence in both the mission and the troops who are going over there," he said, noting the proposal does not seek to cut off money for troops.

A fellow Vietnam veteran, GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record) of Nebraska, disagreed with McCain's assessment. Hagel said the resolution would make clear the Senate's belief that Bush's policy is misguided.

Hagel said the proposal also lays out alternatives such as moving troops away from the sectarian violence and closer to the Iraq border to provide "territorial integrity."

"We can't change the outcome of Iraq by putting American troops in the middle of a civil war," said Hagel, who is considering a run for the White House in 2008.

Republican leaders are working to block a vote on Warner's resolution. They insisted that at least two other GOP proposals also be considered — McCain's and one focused on maintaining money for troops in the field. Such a strategy could dilute support for Warner's measure and make it tougher for any measure to pass.

Democrats want to limit debate to just the Warner and McCain proposals.

Two Republicans who oppose Warner's proposal, Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record) of South Carolina and Richard Lugar (news, bio, voting record) of Indiana, said Sunday they were uncertain the Warner resolution would get the support of 60 senators.

"Even if there is, it's nonbinding, and has in my judgment no consequence," Lugar said.

Hagel said Warner's resolution strikes a careful balance for a majority of senators who oppose a troop buildup but differ on the appropriate response.

He called McCain's proposal meaningless because it offers benchmarks but does not spell out what the U.S. government will do if the Iraqi officials fail to meet them.

"What are the consequences? Are we then going to pull out?" Hagel asked. "Are we going to cut funding? Now, that falls more in the intellectually dishonest category."

The resolution debate comes as the White House and congressional Democrats prepared to square off over war spending.

Bush's new budget on Monday will ask for $100 billion more for military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan this year — on top of $70 billion already approved by Congress for the current year. The budget will call for $145 billion in war spending for 2008.

The spending request covers Bush's new war strategy, including the increase in troops, White House budget director Rob Portman said Sunday.

"It's extremely important that we support our troops," Portman said. He described the requested money as the amount needed "to be sure our troops have the equipment they need, that they are taken care of well."

Hagel and McCain appeared on ABC's "This Week," Graham was on "Fox News Sunday," and Feinstein, Lugar and Portman spoke on "Late Edition" on CNN.

Google Chuck Hagel! Behaving as a "Loyal Republican" can only lead to another "Nuremberg Trial"
Hit by Friendly Fire
With his polls down, Bush takes flak on Iraq from a host of critics--including some in his own party

By Kevin Whitelaw

6/27/05
Related Links

* In Fallujah, Americans and Iraqis are brothers in arms.

Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel is angry. He's upset about the more than 1,700 U.S. soldiers killed and nearly 13,000 wounded in Iraq. He's also aggravated by the continued string of sunny assessments from the Bush administration, such as Vice President Dick Cheney's recent remark that the insurgency is in its "last throes." "Things aren't getting better; they're getting worse. The White House is completely disconnected from reality," Hagel tells U.S. News. "It's like they're just making it up as they go along. The reality is that we're losing in Iraq."

That's strikingly blunt talk from a member of the president's party, even one cast as something of a pariah in the GOP because of his early skepticism about the war. "I got beat up pretty good by my own party and the White House that I was not a loyal Republican," he says. Today, he notes, things are changing: "More and more of my colleagues up here are concerned."

Indeed, there are signs that the politics of the Iraq war are being reshaped by the continuing tide of bad news. Take this month in Iraq, with 47 U.S. troops killed in the first 15 days. That's already five more than the toll for the entire month of June last year. With the rate of insurgent attacks near an all-time high and the war's cost set to top $230 billion, more politicians on both sides of the aisle are responding to opinion polls that show a growing number of Americans favoring a withdrawal from Iraq. Republican Sens. Lincoln Chafee and Lindsey Graham have voiced their concerns. And two Republicans, including the congressman who brought "freedom fries" to the Capitol, even joined a pair of Democratic colleagues in sponsoring a bill calling for a troop withdrawal plan to be drawn up by year's end. "I feel confident that the opposition is going to build," says Rep. Ron Paul, the other Republican sponsor and a longtime opponent of the war.

Sagging polls. The measure is not likely to go anywhere, but Hagel calls it "a major crack in the dike." Whether or not that's so, the White House has reason to worry that the assortment of critiques of Bush's wartime performance may be approaching a tipping point. Only 41 percent of Americans now support Bush's handling of the Iraq war, the lowest mark ever in the Associated Press-Ipsos poll. And the Iraq news has combined with a lethargic economy and doubts about the president's Social Security proposals to push Bush's overall approval ratings near all-time lows. For now, most Republicans remain publicly loyal to the White House. "Why would you give your enemies a timetable?" asks House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. "[Bush] doesn't fight the war on news articles or television or on polls."

Still, the Bush administration is planning to hit back, starting this week, with a renewed public-relations push by the president. Bush will host Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari and has scheduled a major speech for June 28, the anniversary of the handover of power to an Iraqi government from U.S. authorities. But Congress's patience could wear very thin going into an election year. "If things don't start to turn around in six months, then it may be too late," says Hagel. "I think it's that serious."

Bush's exit strategy--which depends on a successful Iraqi political process--got a boost last week when Sunni and Shiite politicians ended weeks of wrangling over how to increase Sunni representation on the constitution-writing committee. Now, however, committee members have less than two months before their mid-August deadline. And given how long it took to resolve who gets to draft the document, it's hard to imagine a quick accord on the politically explosive issues they face.

Get your wing out of our territory, you damned dirty human!
Wild eagles attack paraglider

By Rob Taylor Fri Feb 2, 9:22 AM ET

CANBERRA, Feb 2 (Reuters Life!) - Britain's top female paraglider has cheated death after being attacked by a pair of "screeching" wild eagles while competition flying in Australia.

Nicky Moss, 38, watched terrified as two huge birds began tearing into her parachute canopy, one becoming tangled in her lines and clawing at her head 2,500 meters (8,200ft) in the air.

"I heard screeching behind me and a eagle flew down and attacked me, swooping down and bouncing into the side of my wing with its claws," Moss told Reuters on Friday.

"Then another one appeared and together they launched a sustained attack on my glider, tearing at the wing."

The encounter happened on Monday while Moss -- a member of the British paragliding team -- was preparing for world titles this month at Manilla in northern New South Wales state.

One of the giant wedge-tailed eagles became wrapped in the canopy lines and slid down toward Moss, lashing at her face with its talons as her paraglider plummeted toward the ground.

"It swooped in and hit me on the back of the head, then got tangled in the glider which collapsed it. So I had a very, very large bird wrapped up screeching beside me as I screamed back," Moss said.

She said she thought about dumping her parachute-style canopy and using the reserve.

"But then I would have been descending on my reserve as the birds continued shredding it, which I wasn't happy about," she said.

Wedge-tailed eagles are Australia's largest predatory birds and have a wing-span of more than two meters.

Moss said the attack ended after the second bird freed itself and the glider reached a height of only 100m from the ground, taking her outside the territory of the pair, who probably mistook her as a bird intruder.

Veteran Australian paraglider pilot Godfrey Wenness said eagle attacks were rare, but Moss had been flying in an area where the birds were not accustomed to human pilots.

"Eagles are the sharks of the air. But if you're a regular they just treat you pretty indifferently," he said.

Moss, who crashed into a gum tree in Australia last year while flying in Victoria, said her latest encounter had not put her off flying.

"I see the eagles quite often and they are incredibly beautiful, but I must say I have never been so relieved to reach the ground," she said.

from AntiWar.com...Behind The Scenes, Chuck Hagel
February 2, 2007
The Maverick
It’s Hagel
by Justin Raimondo

The Hagel boom continues. Of course, regular observers of this space know that it started here, and here, but it is really beginning to take off now that Peggy Noonan has weighed in:

"Mr. Hagel has shown courage for a long time. He voted for the war resolution in 2002 but soon after began to question how it was being waged. This was before everyone did. He also stood against the war when that was a lonely place to be. Senate Democrats sat back and watched: If the war worked, they'd change the subject; and if it didn't, they'd hang it on President Bush. Republicans did their version of inaction; they supported the president until he was unpopular, and then peeled off. This is almost not to be criticized. It's what politicians do. But it's not what Mr. Hagel did. He had guts."

Mickey Kaus snarked that Hagel was merely jumping on a bandwagon that had already been rolling, but Noonan's timeline is correct: Hagel was criticizing the war long before any on the other side of the aisle, aside from Russ Feingold, found their voices.

Hagel has seized the moment to dramatize, with his straight talk, what most Americans are now thinking and saying about this rotten, seemingly endless war. A most unpleasant term of approbation has been attached to his rising political fortunes: they're calling him "the new McCain." Now, the old McCain was bad enough, and still is, but one can't help noticing that the old one's stock is falling, along with his poll numbers, even as Hagel's rise. There's only room for one "maverick Republican" in the media's collective consciousness, and in the public mind: aside from that, however, it's all about the war.

McCain is falling in the polls, and his former supporters among independent voters are falling away, entirely due to his ultra-hawkish stance on the war. If McCain had his way, we'd have 100,000 more troops in Iraq – and we'd already be halfway to Tehran. He's always been a more-interventionist-than-thou kinda guy, but his media fan club pretended not to notice this back in his glory days because he was such good copy. However, go back through the history of U.S. interventions in the recent past, and check his stance: from Kosovo to Iraq, his solution to each and every foreign policy crisis has been "more boots on the ground." When it comes to Iran, and even Russia, McCain's default position is invariably belligerent. A more determined enemy of peace does not exist in the U.S. Senate, or in American politics.

McCain and Hagel, apart from their diametrically opposed stances on the war, have much in common. Both are Vietnam war veterans, much decorated, and are gruffly direct and unvarnished in their speech and mannerisms. The two are good friends, and Hagel supported McCain over Bush in the 2000 presidential primaries.Yet they seem to have taken away from their military experiences very different conceptions of America's role in the world.

McCain exudes the barking belligerence of a bully who goes ballistic with ease. There is about him the aura of a man who is continually engaged in a balancing act between the overwhelming demands of his enormous ego and a deep well of anger that suddenly turns his face crimson with rage. One wonders: is that steam coming out his ears?

The Senator from Nebraska, on the other hand, while emanating a gruff assurance, lacks the fanatic certainty of his Senate colleague, and, instead, seems genuinely baffled by American policy in Iraq. Rather than projecting his ego, he puts it aside, and, in place of pushing some preordained agenda, bluntly asks the questions that are on everyone's mind. In doing so, avers Noonan, Hagel has injected a fresh note into the congressional debate over the war:

"Mr. Hagel said the most serious thing that has been said in Congress in a long time. This is what we're here for. This is why we're here, to decide, to think it through and take a stand, and if we can't do that, why don't we just leave and give someone else a chance?"

In Imperial America, the Senate is increasingly irrelevant, at least when it comes to foreign policy, and yet this effort to bring to the Senate floor and pass a resolution criticizing our Iraq policy could be the beginning of a new and very welcome trend. The out of control Presidency of George W. Bush has arrogated to itself more power than any Roman emperor – including Nero and Caligula – ever dreamed of. This is a dangerous "weapon of mass destruction" that needs to be defused for the peace of the world, as well as Americans' well-being and safety. What Hagel is saying is that we're still a republic, in spite of everything, and it's not too late to change a course set for empire.

On the question of Hagel's presidential prospects, the Senator has been saying that he'll make a statement soon. There is also some intriguing news that he might be considering a third party run. An Iowa poll already has him one point below Mitt Romney, the establishment conservative candidate.

With his military background, red-state persona, and rock-ribbed conservatism, Hagel's antiwar stance is all the more credible and palatable. Good old David Boaz, over at the Cato Institute's blog, says all too many conservatives are still in thrall to big-government Bushism:

"But I'll predict that over, say, the next 12 months leading up to the Iowa caucuses, Hagel is going to look increasingly wise and prescient to Republican voters. And as they come to discover that he's a commonsense Midwestern conservative who opposed many of the Bush administration's worst ideas, he's going to look more attractive."

The Republican revolt in the House and Senate is gathering strength, and the war is being increasingly questioned in conservative circles. Back in the day, when neocon enforcer David Frum smeared right-wing opponents of the war as "Unpatriotic Conservatives," the idea was to end all discussion of the issue on the right. "We turn our backs on you," announced Frum, but he and his fellow neocons can't turn their backs on their responsibility for the disaster that has befallen the U.S. in Iraq. (Not to mention the catastrophe that has been visited on the GOP.) Their day of reckoning is coming, perhaps, in the form of an antiwar Republican presidential candidate with a credible shot at the nomination and an excellent chance of winning the general election.

The problem for Hagel's presidential prospects is that he has very little cash on hand: rumors of his retirement from the Senate were due, in part, to the paucity of money raised for his reelection campaign. It will take a real grassroots movement to give him the momentum he needs to mount a serious effort. Whether or not he announces, what this episode reveals, so far, is that there is a tremendous vacuum where American leadership ought to be. The question is whether the American people will fill it with a man of substance, like Hagel, or a pretty face, like Obama or Edwards. Can authenticity win out over hype?

Long Live Molly Ivins!
Published on Thursday, January 11, 2007 by Creators Syndicate
Stand Up Against the Surge
by Molly Ivins


AUSTIN - The purpose of this old-fashioned newspaper crusade to stop the war is not to make George W. Bush look like the dumbest president ever. People have done dumber things. What were they thinking when they bought into the Bay of Pigs fiasco? How dumb was the Egypt-Suez war? How massively stupid was the entire war in Vietnam? Even at that, the challenge with this misbegotten adventure is that WE simply cannot let it continue.

It is not a matter of whether we will lose or we are losing. We have lost. Gen. John P. Abizaid, until recently the senior commander in the Middle East, insists that the answer to our problems there is not military. "You have to internationalize the problem. You have to attack it diplomatically, geo-strategically," he said.

His assessment is supported by Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the senior American commander in Iraq, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who only recommend releasing forces with a clear definition of the goals for the additional troops.

Bush's call for a "surge" or "escalation" also goes against the Iraq Study Group. Talk is that the White House has planned to do anything but what the group suggested after months of investigation and proposals based on much broader strategic implications.

About the only politician out there besides Bush actively calling for a surge is Sen. John McCain. In a recent opinion piece, he wrote: "The presence of additional coalition forces would allow the Iraqi government to do what it cannot accomplish today on its own -- impose its rule throughout the country. ... By surging troops and bringing security to Baghdad and other areas, we will give the Iraqis the best possible chance to succeed." But with all due respect to the senator from Arizona, that ship has long since sailed.

A surge is not acceptable to the people in this country -- we have voted overwhelmingly against this war in polls (about 80 percent of the public is against escalation, and a recent Military Times poll shows only 38 percent of active military want more troops sent) and at the polls. We know this is wrong. The people understand, the people have the right to make this decision, and the people have the obligation to make sure our will is implemented.

Congress must work for the people in the resolution of this fiasco. Ted Kennedy's proposal to control the money and tighten oversight is a welcome first step. And if Republicans want to continue to rubber-stamp this administration's idiotic "plans" and go against the will of the people, they should be thrown out as soon as possible, to join their recent colleagues.

Anyone who wants to talk knowledgably about our Iraq misadventure should pick up Rajiv Chandrasekaran's "Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green Zone." It's like reading a horror novel. You just want to put your face down and moan: How could we have let this happen? How could we have been so stupid?

As The Washington Post's review notes, Chandrasekaran's book "methodically documents the baffling ineptitude that dominated U.S. attempts to influence Iraq's fiendish politics, rebuild the electrical grid, privatize the economy, run the oil industry, recruit expert staff or instill a modicum of normalcy to the lives of Iraqis."

We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war. Raise hell. Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous. Make our troops know we're for them and trying to get them out of there. Hit the streets to protest Bush's proposed surge. If you can, go to the peace march in Washington on January 27. We need people in the streets, banging pots and pans and demanding, "Stop it, now!"

? Copyright 2007 Creators Syndicate

Bush is making Russia very nervous...!
Published on Sunday, January 28, 2007 by the Sunday Herald / Scotland
America ‘Poised to Strike at Iran’s Nuclear Sites’ from Bases in Bulgaria and Romania
Report suggest that ‘US defensive ring’ may be new front in war on terror.
by Gabriel Ronay


President Bush is preparing to attack Iran's nuclear facilities before the end of April and the US Air Force's new bases in Bulgaria and Romania would be used as back-up in the onslaught, according to an official report from Sofia.

"American forces could be using their two USAF bases in Bulgaria and one at Romania's Black Sea coast to launch an attack on Iran in April," the Bulgarian news agency Novinite said.

The American build-up along the Black Sea, coupled with the recent positioning of two US aircraft carrier battle groups off the Straits of Hormuz, appears to indicate president Bush has run out of patience with Tehran's nuclear misrepresentation and non-compliance with the UN Security Council's resolution. President Ahmeninejad of Iran has further ratcheted up tension in the region by putting on show his newly purchased state of the art Russian TOR-Ml anti-missile defence system.

Whether the Bulgarian news report is a tactical feint or a strategic event is hard to gauge at this stage. But, in conjunction with the beefing up of America's Italian bases and the acquisition of anti-missile defence bases in the Czech Republic and Poland, the Balkan developments seem to indicate a new phase in Bush's global war on terror.

Sofia's news of advanced war preparations along the Black Sea is backed up by some chilling details. One is the setting up of new refuelling places for US Stealth bombers, which would spearhead an attack on Iran. "The USAF's positioning of vital refuelling facilities for its B-2 bombers in unusual places, including Bulgaria, falls within the perspective of such an attack." Novinite named Colonel Sam Gardiner, "a US secret service officer stationed in Bulgaria", as the source of this revelation.

Curiously, the report noted that although Tony Blair, Bush's main ally in the global war on terror, would be leaving office, the president had opted to press on with his attack on Iran in April.

Before the end of March, 3000 US military personnel are scheduled to arrive "on a rotating basis" at America's Bulgarian bases. Under the US-Bulgarian military co-operation accord, signed in April,2006,an airbase at Bezmer, a second airfield at Graf Ignitievo and a shooting range at Novo Selo were leased to America. Significantly, last year's bases negotiations had at one point run into difficulties due to Sofia's demand "for advance warning if Washington intends to use Bulgarian soil for attacks against other nations, particularly Iran".

Romania, the other Black Sea host to th US military, is enjoying a dollar bonanza as its Mihail Kogalniceanu base at Constanta is being transformed into an American "place d'arme". It is also vital to the Iran scenario.

Last week, the Bucharest daily Evenimentual Zilei revealed the USAF is to site several flights of F-l5, F-l6 and Al0 aircraft at the Kogalniceanubase. Admiral Gheorghe Marin, Romania's chief of staff, confirmed "up to 2000 American military personnel will be temporarily stationed in Romania".

In Central Europe, the Czech Republic and Poland have also found themselves in the Pentagon's strategic focus. Last week, Mirek Topolanek, the Czech prime minister, and the country's national security council agreed to the siting of a US anti-missile radar defence system at Nepolisy. Poland has also agreed to having a US anti-missile missile base and interceptor aircraft stationed in the country.

Russia, however, does not see the chain of new US bases on its doorstep as a "defensive ring". Russia's defence chief has branded the planned US anti-missile missile sites on Czech and Polish soil as "an open threat to Russia".

Sergey Ivanov, Russia's defence minister,spoke more circumspectly while emphasizing Moscow's concern. He said: "Russia is no worried. Its strategic nuclear forces can assure in any circumstance its safety. Since neither Tehran, nor Pyongyang possess intercontinental missiles capable of threatening the USA, from whom is this new missile shield supposed to protect the West? All it actually amounts to is that Prague and Warsaw want to demonstrate their loyalty to Washington."

Bush's Iran attack plan has brought into sharp focus the possible costs to Central and Eastern Europe of being "pillars of Pax Americana".

?2007 newsquest (sunday herald) limited.

Reversing the cascading damage is out of the question in time to matter!
Can Humanity Survive? Want to Bet on It?
Carl Wiens

Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN TIERNEY
Published: January 30, 2007

Sixty ago years, a group of physicists concerned about nuclear weapons created the Doomsday Clock and set its hands at seven minutes to midnight. Now, the clock’s keepers, alarmed by new dangers like climate change, have moved the hands up to 11:55 p.m.

Can humanity survive? What are the odds? Join the discussion.
Go to TierneyLab >
Further Reading
"'Doomsday Clock'" Moves Two Minutes Closer To Midnight." Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Jan. 18, 2007.
"Our Final Hour." Martin Rees. Basic Books, 2003.
Long Bets.
"Wanna Bet?". Wired Magazine, May, 2002.
"Assessing the Biological Weapons and Bioterrorism Threat." Milton Leitenberg. Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College, 2005.
"Overblown: How Politicians and the Terrorism Industry Inflate National Security Threats, and Why We Believe Them." John Mueller. Free Press, 2006.

My first reaction was a sigh of relief. After all, the 1947 doomsday prediction marked the start of a golden age. Never have so many humans lived so long — and maybe never so peacefully — as during the past 60 years. The per-capita rate of violence, particularly in the West, seems remarkably low by historical standards. If the clock’s keepers are worried once again, their track record suggests we’re in for even happier days.

But there’s one novel twist that gives me pause. When the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists announced two weeks ago in Washington that it was adjusting the clock, it was joined in a trans-Atlantic press conference by scientists at the Royal Society in London. One of them was the society’s president, Martin Rees, a new breed of doomsayer.

Dr. Rees, a cosmologist at Cambridge and Britain’s astronomer royal, doesn’t just issue gloomy predictions. He doesn’t just move the hands of an imaginary and inscrutable clock. (Its keepers have never explained what one of their minutes equals on anyone else’s clock or calendar.)

No, Dr. Rees is braver. He gives odds on doomsday and offers to bet on disaster. In his 2003 book, “Our Final Hour,” he gives civilization no more than a 50 percent chance of surviving until 2100.

Dr. Rees is not a knee-jerk technophobe — he expects great advances as researchers around the world link their knowledge — but he fears that progress will be undone by what he calls the new global village idiots. He’s sure enough of himself to post an offer on Long Bets, a clever innovation on the Web that Stewart Brand helped start with money from Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon.com.

Long Bets is a nonprofit foundation that calls itself an “arena for competitive, accountable predictions.” It lets anyone make a prediction and take wagers on it, with the proceeds going to a charity named by the winner. The bets made so far are from $200 to $10,000, on topics ranging from the driving habits of Americans in 2010 to whether the universe will stop expanding. Mitchell Kapor, the software guru, is betting that in 2029 no computer will have passed the Turing test (by conversing so much like a human that you couldn’t tell the difference). The physicist Freeman Dyson’s money is on the first extraterrestrial life’s being found somewhere other than a planet or its satellite.

Five years ago, Dr. Rees posted this prediction: “By 2020, bioterror or bioerror will lead to one million casualties in a single event.” He reasoned that “by 2020 there will be thousands — even millions — of people with the capability to cause a catastrophic biological disaster. My concern is not only organized terrorist groups, but individual weirdos with the mindset of the people who now design computer viruses.”

He didn’t get any takers on LongBets.org, which seems to me a missed opportunity. So I’ve posted an offer there to bet him $200 — not a huge sum, but enough to put both our reputations on the line. I realize that betting on disaster may sound ghoulish, but neither of us will personally profit (if I win, the money goes to the International Red Cross). And I think bets like this serve a purpose.

Besides stimulating public debate, they focus the issue and discipline prophets. No matter how good their intentions, prophets face strong temptations to hype. In the current issue of The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Dr. Rees wryly describes what happened in 2003 when he turned in a manuscript titled, “Our Final Century?”

“My British publisher removed the question mark from the book’s title,” he recalls, “and the U.S. publisher changed it to ‘Our Final Hour.’ Pessimism, it seems, makes for better marketing.”

It doesn’t make for better public policy though. Heralds of the bioterror apocalypse have actually worsened the problem of bioterror, as Milton Leitenberg points out in a 2005 report for the Strategic Studies Institute of the United States Army War College.

Mr. Leitenberg is a scholar at the University of Maryland who has been studying biological weapons for decades — and debunking wild predictions. Dr. Rees is not alone. Senator Bill Frist called bioterrorism “the greatest existential threat we have in the world today” and urged a military effort that “even dwarfs the Manhattan Project.”

Such rhetoric, Mr. Leitenberg says, has had the perverse effect of encouraging terrorists to seek out biological weapons. But despite the much-publicized attempts of Al Qaeda and a Japanese group to go biological, terrorists haven’t had much luck, because it’s still quite hard for individuals or nongovernmental groups to obtain, manufacture or deploy biological weapons of mass destruction.

Mr. Leitenberg says the biggest threat is of a state deploying biological weapons, and he notes the encouraging decline in the number of countries working on this technology. Meanwhile, though, America has been so spooked by the horror-movie scenarios that it’s pouring money into defense against biological weapons. Dr. Leitenberg says that’s a mistake, both because it diverts resources from more serious threats — like natural diseases and epidemics — and because it could start a new biological arms race as other countries understandably fear that the United States is doing more than just playing defense.

It’s possible, as Dr. Rees fears, that terrorists will get a lot more sophisticated at biotech in the next decade, or that researchers will make some terrible mistake. The technology is getting cheaper and spreading rapidly. But so are the tools for preventing and coping with mistakes.

Whatever happens, I don’t expect biotechnology to pose an “existential threat.” The disaster predicted by Dr. Rees would be horrific, but humanity has survived worse, like the flu epidemic of 1918 that killed tens of millions of people. I know there are fears of new microorganisms or nanobots gobbling up our species, but I’m confident we’d somehow stop the Doomsday Clock from striking midnight.

In fact, the wager I’d really like to make with Dr. Rees is that we’ll make it to 2100. I’ve posted that prediction on Long Bets, and I’d be glad to give him better odds than the 50-50 chance he gives civilization of surviving the century.

I even think one of us might survive to see the payoff, although my techno-optimism has its limits. I hope some version of me will be around in 2100, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Deport those red necked ignoramuses who provoke and refuse to think outside their tiny box! Gift them Bikini Atol, as is!
Thais halt Hmong deportation after stand-off

By Nopporn Wong-Anan Tue Jan 30, 6:06 AM ET

BANGKOK (Reuters) - Thailand was forced on Tuesday to halt the deportation to Laos of 153 Hmong, the ethnic minority who fought alongside America in the Vietnam War, after the men in the group put up a struggle, the general in charge said.

"Top officials have decided to cancel the deportation," Lieutenant-General Nipat Thonglek, head of the army's border affairs, told Reuters from the border town of Nong Khai, where the group has been held since late last year.

He gave no details but apologized to Lao government officials who had arrived with three buses to repatriate them. Human rights organizations fear the group would face persecution from Vientiane's communist rulers.

Earlier, Nipat said police had managed to get 100 women and children onto the buses, but the remaining men refused to go. One human rights group said they had barricaded themselves inside the compound.

"There are three leading troublemakers among the men who refuse to go," Nipat said.

A California-based Hmong lobby group called the Factfinding Commission said two women who refused to board the buses had been beaten.

Nipat denied the report, saying: "We didn't beat them up."

Before Bangkok's change of tack, the
United Nations' refugee agency criticized the deportation, saying it broke international law as every person in the group had been accorded official refugee status.

They were also being considered for resettlement elsewhere and immigration officials from the United States, Canada, Australia and the Netherlands had already interviewed some of the group, the U.N.'s High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said.

Thai Foreign Ministry spokesman Kitti Wasinondh said the deportation had "put on hold indefinitely" after the four countries in question assured Bangkok they would take the Hmong.

UNHCR, which criticized Thailand last week for deporting 16 Hmong, said the Nong Khai group included a two-week-old child and three men described as "prominent figures who might be at particular risk."

Dubbed "America's forgotten allies" after the war, the Hmong have had a difficult relationship with the Pathet Lao communists who have run the landlocked southeast Asian nation since seizing power in 1975.

Human rights groups accused them of waging a 30-year campaign of vengeance against Hmong guerillas still hiding out in the forests. Vientiane denies the accusations.

Since the war, the United States has granted asylum to thousands of Hmong, although it has indicated in the last few years it will accept no more.

All this time and no one thought to stick a spade in the ground until NOW?
Neolithic site found near England's Stonehenge

By Patricia Reaney 1 hour, 35 minutes ago

LONDON (Reuters) - Evidence of a large settlement full of houses dating back to 2,600 BC has been discovered near the ancient stone monument of Stonehenge in southwest England, scientists said on Tuesday.

They suspect inhabitants of the houses, forming the largest Neolithic village ever found in Britain, built the stone circle at Stonehenge -- generally thought to have been a temple, burial ground or an astronomy site -- between 3,000 and 1,600 BC.

"We found the remains of eight houses," Mike Parker Pearson, a professor of archaeology at Sheffield University, said in a teleconference to announce the discovery.

"We think they are part of a much larger settlement. I suspect we can identify 25 likely house sites. My guess is that there are many more than that," he added.

During excavation at Durrington Walls, less than two miles from Stonehenge, scientists working on the seven-year Stonehenge Riverside Project detected dozens of hearths.

They also uncovered the outlines of box beds and wooden dressers or cupboards and 4,600 year-old debris, including burned stones and animal bones strewn on the clay floors.

"We think we are looking at the village of the builders of Stonehenge," he added.

The houses measured about 16 feet square and were located in a small valley north of Stonehenge that leads down to the River Avon. They are on either side of an avenue that leads from the river to a wooden version of Stonehenge.

"We think our discovery is very significant for understanding the purpose of Stonehenge. What we have revealed is that Stonehenge is one half of a larger complex," said Parker Pearson, referring to the stone and wooden circles.

The scientists believe Stonehenge and Durrington Walls were complementary sites. Neolithic people gathered at Durrington Walls for massive feasts and parties while Stonehenge was a memorial or burial site for the dead.

"We are looking at least a century, probably several centuries of use, at both sites," said Parker Pearson.

"Stonehenge is our biggest cemetery from that period. There is a very interesting contrast in terms of life and death," he added.

Stonehenge's avenue is aligned on the midsummer solstice sunrise while the Durrington avenue corresponds with the midwinter solstice sunset, according to the researchers.

Tourists are drawn to Stonehenge throughout the year but the most popular day at the site is the summer solstice, or longest day of the year.

Druids, a pagan religious order dating back to Celtic Britain, gather at Stonehenge, about 100 miles west of London, during the summer solstice because they believe it was a center of spiritualism.

"This is a place of enormous importance that has been remembered over a long period of time," said Julian Thomas of Manchester University who also worked on the project.

It's melting, melting. My beautiful World is melting!

Last Updated: Monday, 29 January 2007, 17:57 GMT
E-mail this to a friend Printable version
Melting of glaciers 'speeds up'
By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News website


Imaging a glacier's decline

In pictures
Mountain glaciers are shrinking three times faster than they were in the 1980s, scientists have announced.

The World Glacier Monitoring Service, which continuously studies a sample of 30 glaciers around the world, says the acceleration is down to climate change.

Its announcement came as climate scientists convened in Paris to decide the final wording of a major report.

There is reported to be some disagreement over what forecasts they will make for sea level rise.

But whatever form of words they agree on, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will declare that human-induced climate change is happening and needs to be tackled.


We will enter conditions which we have not seen in the past 10,000 years, and perhaps conditions which mankind has never experienced
Wilfried Haeberli, WGMS
"[The report] embodies substantial new research, it addresses gaps that existed in our knowledge earlier, it has reduced existing uncertainties," IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri told reporters at a news briefing in Paris.

"I hope policies and actions will be formed to address the problem."

The report, due out on Friday, forms the first part of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report, and will be the latest definitive assessment of climate science.

Melting away

Of all the various features that make up the surface of the Earth, glaciers are perhaps showing the starkest signs of rising temperatures.

The World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS), based in Switzerland, continuously studies a set of 30 mountain glaciers in different parts of the world. It is not quite a representative sample of all mountain glaciers, but does give a reliable indication of global trends.


MOUNTAIN GLACIERS DECLINE
Graph of glacier decline. Image: BBC
Data comes from sample of 30 mountain glaciers
Glaciers have different densities, so thinning is expressed in metres of water equivalent (mwe)
One mwe is roughly equivalent to 1.1m of ice
The latest survey, just released, shows accelerating decline. During 2005, this sample of 30 glaciers became, on average, 60-70cm thinner.

This figure is 1.6 times more than the average annual loss during the 1990s, and three times faster than in the 1980s.

With mountain glaciers typically only tens of metres thick, this meant, said WGMS director Wilfried Haeberli, that many would disappear on a timescale of decades if the trend continued.

"We can say there were times during the warmer periods of the last 10,000 years when glaciers have been comparable to what they are now," he told the BBC News website.

"But it is not the past that worries us, it is the future. With the scenarios predicted, we will enter conditions which we have not seen in the past 10,000 years, and perhaps conditions which mankind has never experienced."

Last year, WGMS scientists forecast that the Alps would lose up to three-quarters of their glaciers during the coming century.

The WGMS is closely allied to the United Nations Environment Programme, whose executive director Achim Steiner commented: "Glaciers are important sources of water for many important rivers upon which people depend for drinking water, agriculture and industrial purposes.

"The findings... should strengthen the resolve of governments to act now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

Rough seas

The IPCC report due out on Friday is likely to contain stronger wording than its previous assessment, in 2001, on the likelihood that human activities are principally responsible for the climatic changes observed around the world.

Protest banner. Image: AFP/Getty
Campaigners have sent a message to IPCC scientists meeting in Paris
The 2001 report forecast that by the end of this century, temperatures would have risen by between 1.4C and 5.8C.

The new report is likely to reduce the range of uncertainty, though not rule out the possibility entirely of increases in the order of 5.8C.

But there is reported to be disagreement over the wording on expected sea level rise.

A bigger network of tide gauges and other instruments has enabled researchers to conclude that the sea level is on average rising by about 2mm per year, or 20cm per century.

This is one of the factors which led to earlier drafts of this report projecting rises by the end of the century which were a lot less than the maximum figure of 88cm contained in the 2001 version.

But some scientists are arguing that recent observations of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets suggest a major melt may be commencing. This, they say, should be reflected in the eventual IPCC projections.

Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk

Killing and Oppression bring Defiance and Retaliation, so our "War on Drugs" is lost
Cocaine is king on Nicaragua's Caribbean coast

By Bernd Debusmann, Special Correspondent Mon Jan 29, 2:13 AM ET

BLUEFIELDS, Nicaragua (Reuters) - From the drug runners' point of view, the working environment along Nicaragua's Caribbean coast is as good as it gets.

Deep poverty, high unemployment and widespread resentment over decades of government neglect has made it easy for cocaine traffickers to set up support networks in the towns along the Miskito coast and the islands off it. The area is so remote and so different from the rest of Nicaragua, it could be another country.

Named after a 17th century Dutch pirate, Bluefields is the largest town in the area. The coast is populated largely by Miskito Indians and descendants of African slaves. English and Miskito are the dominant languages, corrugated iron and wood the dominant building materials.

To hear authorities tell it, many of the locals work for cocaine trafficking organizations as lookouts, intelligence agents, and suppliers of gasoline for speedboats refueling on the run from Colombia's northern coast to Mexico -- the penultimate stop on the long cocaine trail to the United States.

"On the islands, entire communities provide logistics support for the narcos," said Captain Manuel Mora, chief of Nicaragua's Atlantic Naval Command. "Everybody is involved, one way or the other. Everybody."

That gives an edge to the traffickers, according to authorities, and so does the fact that the smugglers are better equipped than those trying to intercept them. "They have night vision equipment," said Mora. "We don't. They have satellite communications. We don't. They have vast resources. We don't."

The Atlantic Naval Command has four patrol boats, all bought second-hand, more than 30 years old and in need of refurbishment. For three of the vessels, bought from
Israel, spare parts are virtually impossible to get. The United States is providing funds to replace their engines with American-made motors.

In the past four years, Mora said, his force had seized 11 tons (tonnes) of cocaine and 40 northbound speedboats. There are no estimates of how many managed to complete the trip but as a rule of thumb, narcotics experts say that for every vessel intercepted, at least four get through.

CRAFT OF CHOICE

According to the U.S. government's latest International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, most of the cocaine that ends up in the United States is shipped by speedboats, each capable of carrying 1.5 to 2 tons of cocaine, through the Western Caribbean, a route described as a "natural conduit for illicit drug trafficking organizations."

The report estimated that several hundred "go-fast vessels" leave the northern Colombian coast each year and added: "A go-fast boat is by far the hardest target to find and collectively they represent our greatest maritime threat."

The smugglers' craft of choice is a fiberglass vessel powered by three 250 horsepower motors for a top speed of 70 miles per hour (110 kmh) -- faster than the obsolescent patrol boats of Nicaragua's Atlantic Command.

What the U.S. sees as a threat, many of the impoverished inhabitants of the area see as an opportunity. Apart from steady incomes for those providing logistics support, many harbor hopes of winning the cocaine equivalent of the lottery -- finding 25-kilogram (55-pound) waterproof parcels of cocaine floating in the sea after being dumped by smugglers pursued by the navy or spilled in accidents.

One parcel would be worth around $75,000 here, a huge sum in the poorest region of the second-poorest country in the Western Hemisphere (after Haiti). Half of Nicaragua's 5.5 million people live on less than a dollar a day.

Rags-to-riches tales involving seaborne cocaine have become part of the local lore on the coast, and the islet of Sandy Bay is spoken of frequently. A Miskito-speaking community of a few hundred people, it has changed from wooden shacks and transistor radios to solid homes built of stone and sprouting satellite dishes.

"Somebody who fishes out a cocaine parcel would see it as a blessing from God, not a reason to alert the authorities," said Capt. Jose Echeverria, head of the port authority in Bluefields. "Take poverty and joblessness, add easy money and you get a bad mix."

The mix gets even worse, Bluefielders say, when cocaine replaces cash as payment for services rendered, a trend that has accelerated over the past few years. As a result, drug addiction has become a growing problem in Nicaragua, particularly on the Atlantic Coast.

Crack is sold openly in several neighborhoods of Bluefields, where groups of young men waiting for customers stand in front of ramshackle houses. Prices have gone up, the local people say, because of a series of offshore cocaine busts last year. But at around $1.50 a "rock," it still finds clients. There are at least 65 know crack houses in the town.

"It's a sad thing to say," remarked Luis, a retired fishing boat captain who did not want his last name used. "But it is hard to find a Bluefields family which has not been affected by drugs." That includes his own family. "I have 11 children and one of my sons has gone to work for the narcos. I told him that was a bad idea. He didn't listen."

Protest against Evil!
Tens of thousands demand U.S. get out of Iraq

By Deborah Charles Sat Jan 27, 5:19 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Chanting "bring our troops home," tens of thousands of anti-war protesters rallied in front of the U.S. Capitol on Saturday to pressure the government to get out of
Iraq.

Veterans and military families joined some lawmakers, peace groups and actors including Vietnam war protester Jane Fonda to urge Congress and
President George W. Bush to stop funding the war and pull troops from Iraq.

"When I served in the war, I thought I was serving honorably. Instead, I was sent to war ... for causes that have proved fraudulent," said Iraq war veteran Garett Reppenhagen.

"We need to put pressure on our elected government and force them to ... bring the troops home," the former sniper said to cheers from a sign-waving crowd.

Tens of thousands of people attended the rally on the National Mall, according to a park police officer.

For more than two hours, speakers atop a stage that also held a flag-draped coffin criticized Bush and the U.S. presence in Iraq before protesters marched around the Capitol.

In the crowd, a group of families of soldiers killed in Iraq held pictures of their loved ones, including one photo of a soldier in full dress uniform lying in a coffin.

More than 3,000 U.S. troops and tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The protest was one of several held around the United States. In California, thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in San Francisco and Los Angeles, where several dozen people carried flag-draped, mock coffins.

Protesters also planned coordinated efforts in Washington and across the country over the next week to lobby lawmakers to take action against the war.

DISAPPROVE OF MORE TROOPS

Bush's approval ratings have dropped to some of the weakest of his presidency and polls show a majority of Americans disapprove of his plan to send another 21,500 troops to Iraq.

But Bush said he has no intention of backing off his plan.

Asked about the protests, White House national security adviser spokesman Gordon Johndroe said Bush "understands that Americans want to see a conclusion to the war in Iraq and the new strategy is designed to do just that."

The demonstrations come amid growing efforts by lawmakers to protest Bush's plans in Iraq. The Senate Foreign Relations committee passed a resolution on Wednesday opposing the plan to send more troops.

Protesters are trying to send Bush and Congress a message that Americans do not support the war.

"I'm convinced this is Bush's war. He has his own agenda there," said Anne Chay, holding a sign with a picture of her 19-year-old son, John, who is serving in Iraq. "We're serving no purpose there."

Fonda, who was criticized for her opposition to the Vietnam War, drew huge cheers when she addressed the crowd. She noted that she had not spoken at an anti-war rally in 34 years.

"Silence is no longer an option," she said. "I'm so sad we have to do this -- that we did not learn from the lessons of the Vietnam War."

Democratic Rep. John Conyers (news, bio, voting record), a Michigan Democrat and chair of the
House Judiciary Committee, said the November 7 election -- which gave Democrats control of both houses of Congress -- showed Americans want change.

"It takes the ... outrage of the American people to force Washington to do the right thing," he said. "We've got to hold more of these ... until our government gets the message -- Out if Iraq immediately. This year. We've got to go."

(Additional reporting by Timothy Ryan in Washington and Lisa Baertlein in Los Angeles)

ROTC in Middle Schools and High Schools is Government Sanctioned Child Abuse!
No sex charges for S.C. Guard recruiter

By SEANNA ADCOX, Associated Press Writer 40 minutes ago

GREENWOOD, S.C. - A South Carolina National Guardsman who recruited at a high school and a former cheerleading coach each are accused of having sex with students, and the principal is charged with hindering the investigation, authorities said.

Former Ware Shoals High School coach Jill Moore, 28, took cheerleaders to a motel, where they met guardsmen for sex, according to Greenwood County sheriff's reports released late Thursday.

Moore, a married mother of two, also is accused of having sex with a male student on a different occasion, according to the reports.

Because all the students involved were 16 or older, none of the adults will be charged because the teens were old enough to consent under state law, according to the sheriff's reports.

Moore, however, is charged with supplying alcohol and cigarettes to students and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. She resigned earlier this month.

Principal Jane Blackwell also is accused of telling students and a school staff member not to talk about the allegations against Moore, authorities said. She was charged Monday with obstruction.

Two soldiers were suspended as part of the National Guard's investigation. The Guard said in a news release Friday that its investigation was continuing.

The sheriff's reports state Moore was having an affair with Guardsman Thomas Fletcher, 29, whom she met through the school.

Last year, Moore told two cheerleaders she was taking them to visit a prospective college, the reports said. Instead, they went to a motel where she met Fletcher in one room, and gave the cheerleaders vodka and put them in a room with Guardsman Jeremy Pileggi, according to the reports.

Pileggi, 21, acknowledged having sex with a cheerleader last year, and one of the cheerleaders said she watched Moore and Fletcher have sex, according to the reports.

The coach and the principal have denied the allegations.

Moore and Pileggi did not immediately respond to phone messages left by The Associated Press.

A woman answering Fletcher's phone said, "He can't talk right now," and hung up.

Watch newly appointed counter Guerilla expert General lose a lot of asses, but not his!
Troops died after, not in, sneak attack

By STEVEN R. HURST and QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writers 20 minutes ago

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Four American soldiers were abducted during a sophisticated sneak attack last week in the Shiite holy city of Karbala and their bodies were found up to 25 miles away, according to new information obtained by The Associated Press.

The brazen assault, 50 miles south of Baghdad on Jan. 20, was conducted by nine to 12 militants posing as an American security team. They traveled in black GMC Suburban vehicles _ the type used by U.S. government convoys _ had American weapons, wore new U.S. military combat fatigues, and spoke English.

In a written statement, the U.S. command reported at the time that five soldiers were killed while "repelling the attack." Now, two senior U.S. military officials as well as Iraqi officials say four of the five were captured and taken from the governor's compound alive. Three of them were found dead and one mortally wounded later that evening in locations as far as 25 miles east of the governor's office.

The U.S. officials said they could not be sure where the soldiers were shot after being captured at the compound. Iraqi officials said they believe the men were killed just before the Suburbans were abandoned.

The commando team also took an unclassified U.S. computer with them as its members fled with the four soldiers and left behind an American M-4 automatic rifle, senior U.S. military officials said.

The new information has emerged after nearly a week of inquiries. The U.S. military in Baghdad did not respond to repeated requests for comment on reports that began emerging from Iraqi government and military officials on the abduction and a major breakdown in security at Karbala site.

The two senior American military officials now confirm the reports, gathered by The Associated Press from five senior Iraqi government, military and religious leaders. The U.S. military also has provided additional details from internal military accounts.

None of the American or Iraqi officials would allow use of their names because of the sensitive nature of the information.

The Karbala raid, as explained by the Iraqi and American officials, began after nightfall at about 6 p.m. on Jan. 20, while American military officers were meeting with their Iraqi counterparts on the main floor of the Provisional Joint Coordination Center (PJCC) in Karbala.

The first U.S. military statement on the raid, which reported five soldiers killed and three wounded, said "the PJCC is a coordination center where local Iraqi officials, Iraqi security forces and coalition forces stationed within the center meet to address the security needs of the population."

Iraqi officials said the approaching convoy of black GMC Suburbans was waved through an Iraqi checkpoint at the edge of Karbala. The Iraqi soldiers believed it to be American because of the type of vehicles, the distinctive camouflage American uniforms and the fact that they spoke English. One Iraqi official said the leader of the assault team was blond, but no other official confirmed that.

A top Iraqi security official for Karbala province told the AP that the Iraqi guards at the checkpoint radioed ahead to their compatriots at the PJCC to alert them that the convoy was on its way.

Iraqi officials said the attackers' convoy divided upon arrival, with some vehicles parking at the back of the main building where the meeting was taking place, others parked in front.

The U.S. military in Baghdad received a first report of the attack about 6:15 p.m., the senior U.S. military officials said.

The attackers threw a grenade and opened fire with automatic rifles as they grabbed two soldiers inside the compound. Then the guerrilla assault team jumped on top of an armored U.S. Humvee and captured two more soldiers, the U.S. military officials said.

One U.S. soldier was killed in the melee at the compound, and three were wounded.

All the officials agreed the four abducted soldiers did not die in the fighting at the compound in Karbala, but it was unclear where they were killed.

The attackers fled with the four and the computer and headed east toward Mahwil, in neighboring Babil province, about 25 miles away, the U.S. military officials said.

The U.S. accounts did not say where the soldiers were killed. Iraqi officials said the four were captured alive and shot just before the vehicles were abandoned.

Iraqi officials said the U.S. military found the four U.S. soldiers in the Suburbans near Bu-Alwan, a village near Mahawil.

The U.S. officials, who had seen incident reports of the assault, said the documents indicated two of the soldiers were found in one of the Suburbans at one location and two others in a second Suburban elsewhere. The exact locations were not specified, they said.

Both sides agreed that _ when found _ three soldiers were dead and one was wounded and died as U.S. troops rushed the service member away for treatment.

Three days afterward, the U.S. military in Baghdad announced the arrest of four suspects in the attack and said they had been detained on a tip from a Karbala resident. No further information was released about the suspects.

The Defense Department has released the names of troops killed last Saturday but clearly identified only one as being killed because of the sneak attack.

Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, Calif., "died of wounds suffered when his meeting area came under attack by mortar and small arms fire." Freeman was assigned to the 412th Civil Affairs Battalion, Whitehall, Ohio.

The only other troops killed that day in that region of
Iraq were four Army soldiers said to have been "ambushed while conducting dismounted operations" in Karbala.

The four were identified as 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Neb.; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, La.; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, N.Y., and Pvt. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Ala. All were with the 2nd Battalion, 377th Parachute Field Artillery Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division, of Fort Richardson, Alaska.

Three days after the attack, the U.S. military in Baghdad announced the arrest of four suspects in the attack and said they had been detained on a tip from a Karbala resident. No further information was released about the suspects.