Sen. Kerry in Pakistan

[TayTay]

A nice pic: (I don't know though, I think the Pakistani Prez looks a little like Dustin Hoffman in this pic. Ah, maybe it's just me.)



And an interesting story:

Pakistan should move towards democracy, says John Kerry
B. Muralidhar Reddy

ISLAMABAD: U.S. Senator and a former Democratic Presidential candidate, John Kerry, has said for a U.S.-India like civilian nuclear cooperation deal, Pakistan would have to move towards democracy and demonstrate commitment to non-proliferation.

Mr. Kerry, currently on a visit here, called on Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf on Sunday in the port city of Karachi and exchanged views on a wide range of subjects.

Appropriate goal

On Saturday besides visiting the earthquake-affected areas in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), Mr. Kerry met Pakistan Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz. In response to questions after his meeting with Mr. Aziz, the U.S. leader said that a civilian nuclear cooperation pact with his country was "an appropriate goal" for Pakistan but linked the same with democracy and nuclear non-proliferation.

"India is a democracy and it has adhered to the non-proliferation agreement in all the years of its involvement with nuclear facilities. This is not yet true of Pakistan, though Pakistan is moving in that direction," he told reporters.

He said Pakistan and the United States could explore a common ground for cooperation in civilian nuclear technology. Mr. Kerry said during his meeting with Gen. Musharraf he would discuss things that Pakistan needed to do to qualify for equal treatment in this regard — a subject which he had also discussed with the Prime Minister.

http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/16/stories/2006011615481500.htm

[TayTay]

1. Another press story

That recaps what I posted above. But read the end of the story for this:

John Kerry calls on Senate Chairman

ISLAMABAD Jan 15 : US Senator John Kerry, currently on a visit to Pakistan, called on Chairman Senate Mohammadmian Soomro at his residence and held wide ranging talks on Pak-US relations, ongoing Pak-India peace dialogue and regional situation with particular reference to the issue of terrorism.

SNIP

Later the Chairman Senate hosted a reception in honour of Senator John Kerry.

Speaking on the occasion Senator Kerry commended Pakistan for its cooperation in the difficult period following the 9/11 incident. He underlined the need for continued cooperation and observed that if we stay on the course and worked together, all of us would be stronger. He expressed satisfaction that Pakistan was trying to crush the activities of religious extremists.

Kerry also spoke on the issue of Iraq. He underlined the need for political reconciliation between Shias and Sunnis and observed that only then Iraq could be a place where the world could make investment. He was of the view that more diplomatic efforts and greater US share in the reconstruction process in Iraq was the need of the hour.

http://www.pakistanlink.com/Headlines/Jan06/15/06.htm

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Bush decides to 'cut and run' on the Reconstruction funds for Iraq. This was one of the cornerstones of his mythical 'Iraq policy' and now he has decided to just stop pretending he is going to rebuild Iraq at all. (Whoops, my mistake. I forgot, tax cuts for the rich trump everything, even my rationale for my war. Sorry about that little Iraqi people who wanted that socialist stuff like electricity, water, plumbing and food. Not today. Daddy's got a headache. Sigh!)

'Marshall Plan' for Iraq Fades
Once the $18.6 billion for reconstruction is spent, the nation might have to rely on private investment. 'No pain, no gain,' a U.S. official says.

By Doug Smith and Borzou Daragahi, Times Staff Writers

BAGHDAD — After more than 2 1/2 years of sputtering reconstruction work, the United States' "Marshall Plan" to rebuild this war-torn country is drawing to a close this year with much of its promise unmet and no plans to extend its funding.

The $18.6 billion approved by Congress in 2003 will be spent by the end of this year, officials here say. Foreign governments have given only a fraction of the billions they pledged two years ago.

With the country still a shambles, U.S. officials are promoting a tough-love vision of reconstruction that puts the burden on the Iraqi people.

"The world is a competitive place," Tom Delare, economics counselor at the U.S. Embassy, said this month during a news briefing. "You have to convince the investor that it is worth his while to put his money in your community."

An embassy spokeswoman later said that the Bush administration was not abandoning the Iraqi reconstruction effort. It "remains committed to helping build Iraq and continues to assess needs on the ground," she said. No decisions on future funding requests have been made, she said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-aid15jan15,0,1402940.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Did we get that? "An embassy spokeswoman later said that the Bush administration was not abandoning the Iraqi reconstruction effort. It "remains committed to helping build Iraq and continues to assess needs on the ground," she said" We are just going to do it with Monopoly money because we have no plans whatsoever to ask anyone in America's upper income brackets to help out. That would be stupidly responsible and we don't want to go there. Sigh!

[jillan]

3. Abandoning the reconstruction efforts?

Isn't that what daddy did as well?

[sandnsea]

4. no pain, no gain???

Well yet another shut my mouth moment. I am stunned that these people are still able to do and say the most outlandish things and continue to just shock the bejeebuz out of me. No pain no gain??? Tough love? They blow the shit out of this country and catapult it into civil war, and then have the audacity to blame them for their own problems!?!? And now they're saber rattling towards Iran. How much longer can this possibly continue.

[wisteria]

2. Thanks for posting both articles. Interesting how unimportant the

reconstruction is to Bush now that it's obvious the reconstruction has been going poorly and won't be completed without more funds. I just don't get this, does he think the Iraqi's are going to appreciate us abandoning our reconstruction commitment? Is it possible he is holding off and using the tough approach until after the 2006 elections when it is safer to ask for additional funds? In the meantime, the Iraqi's suffer because of our politics.

[ProSense]

5. Bush Sr. visiting Pakistan

Elder Bush arrives on maiden visit to quake-hit Pakistan
Jan 16, 2006, 11:10 GMT

Islamabad - Former U.S. president George Bush, now the United Nations' special envoy to areas hit in South Asia by last year's earthquake, arrived Monday in Islamabad to assess the damage caused by the temblor in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, a U.N. official said.

The visit is the first to the country by Bush, who was appointed as the U.N. special envoy in December.

'Bush's itinerary includes meetings with Pakistani leaders and visits to the quake-hit areas in Northwestern Frontier Province and the Kashmir region,' U.N spokesman Ben Malor told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

The magnitude-7.6 earthquake on October 8 killed about 75,000 people and left more than 3.5 million people homeless while causing massive destruction in an area covering more than 28,000 square kilometres.

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/southasia/article_1076394.php/Elder_Bush_arrives_on_maiden_visit_to_quake-hit_Pakistan

Snip...

MMA leader Ghafoor Haidri said: "Former US president George Bush should not be allowed to visit Pakistan until the US government apologises over the killings" referring to a scheduled visit by the senior Mr Bush as a special envoy of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to discuss earthquake relief to Kashmir.

http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=126847®ion=2

Former U.S. President George Bush, the U.N. special envoy for the relief operation, arrived in Pakistan on Monday and was to visit the quake zone on Tuesday, weather permitting.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/ISL308309.htm

[whometense]

6. What do you make of the

reception JK got in Pakistan?

Is he being received as just another senator? Is he receiving special access that an average US Senator would not be likely to get?

I admit I'm a little confused about this. It seems like he is in a way not getting the blame for the bombing - not that he should, mind you, but it wouldn't be surprising if they took some of their anger out on him.

What do you think?

[TayTay]

7. Well, no one said he shouldn't be let in, like Bush 41

Sen. Kerry does have standing to go and visit Pakistan as a senior member of the SFRC. (He has been on that committee for 22 years and this is hardly his meeting time to Pakistan or his visit with Pakistan's President.)

It sounds like they wanted him to come, especially after Kerry's visit to Pakistan's sworn enemy: India. They want to see what he said to the Indian govt, about the nuclear program and monitor this. Talking to Pakistan about nukes is always very interesting, given that Pakistan, under AQ Khan, had an open-market on selling nuclear plans and secrets for so many years. (Wasn't that part of the BCCI scandal? Pakistan was a very bad player on the international scene.) That has the possibility of being a very interesting dicusssion.

Sen. Kerry, in his speech at Georgetown in Oct and the one at the Council on Foreign Relations in Dec. specifically mentioned how important the reconstruction money was to Iraq. Kerry said the following at the CFR speech in regards to a question about how you get the 'hearts and minds of the Iraqi' people:

"The biggest single other thing are the two things I mentioned earlier — the political resolution and the reconstruction. Now, a lot of countries offered to help with reconstruction. As you know, we gave them the stiff-arm. Even today, there’s $13 billion committed, but only $3 billion has been put up. Why? What’s going on, folks?

So again, you know, that would aid our people enormously, to begin to get that money flowing so that the sewage is being picked up. They call it SWET over there. It’s the sewage, the water, the electricity and the trash. And the SWET deal, it would make as much difference as anything else if we paid attention to it.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9390/real_security_in_a_post911_world.html

This is not good. Bush is dropping financial committments either because it has finally dawned on him that we don't have the money or to lighten the load for something else. (Iran?)

(btw, I really do think that Pres Musharrif looks like Dustin Hoffman in that pic at the top of this thread. Anyone else? It's just the angle and lighting, but damn.)

[globalvillage]

8. All the Pres Men, maybe.

Tootsie, not so much.
Yes. he does look very much like Hoffman in that pic.

[whometense]

9. I do see the resemblance.

I'm so upset about that bombing that I've been avoiding the news.

Dropping the rebuilding plans for Iraq - new motto, "We broke it, you fix it."

Bombing innocent civilians in a country at least nominally on our side. Smart. And which, at least according to Rachel Maddow, hates Americans more than any other place on earth.

And don't get me started on Feinstein and Alito...

[globalvillage]

10. Specter: Bush has no `blank check' to spy

What do you think about this? I wish he hadn't qualified his statement about impeachment, but at least he put it out there as an option. It's something, anyway.

Specter: Bush has no `blank check' to spy

By Maura Reynolds, Tribune Newspapers: Los Angeles Times. Tribune news services contributed to this report
Published January 16, 2006


WASHINGTON -- The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sunday reiterated his reservations about President Bush's legal authority to order domestic spying, noting that Congress had not given Bush a "blank check" for warrantless eavesdropping.

But Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said he is prepared to listen to the administration's case during the congressional hearings he intends to convene next month. If the hearings determine that the president broke the law, "the remedy could be a variety of things," including impeachment or criminal prosecution, "but the principal remedy . . . under our society is to pay a political price," Specter told ABC's "This Week."

He said he was willing to follow the investigation as far as it needs to go, "but I don't see any talk about impeachment here."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0601160233jan16,1,413848.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

[whometense]

11. I actually saw this yesterday

on This Week.

It was weird - he stammered and stammered before he could cough out the "i" word. And then backpedaled as fast as his little legs ever could.

The message seemed to be, "He broke the law, but he's a good man and only wants what's best for us and how can we punish him for that?" HUH???

Crooks and Liars has the video: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/15.html#a6718

I'd be interested to hear what you think.

I think, frankly, that he's full of shit. He said he would oppose Alito if he was anti-choice, and then once it became clear that he was anti-choice (excuse me, Roe is not settled law), then Specter said he'd vote for him. Full of shit.

[globalvillage]

12. I think he's conflicted.

And I think he's being heavily pressured. I keep hoping he'll do the right thing, that maybe his brush with cancer would be a wake up call. It may be a long wait.
If we are to get any R's on our side, though, Specter is one, IMO, that has some promise.
Why was he stammering? I think the words that were in his head wouldn't come out of his mouth for a reason.
I keep wondering what it is that causes men like McCain and Specter to abandon what they know is right. It's more than their political careers. And it's more than money. I'm convinced of it.
:tinfoilhat:

[whometense]

14. Do you think it's fear?

I agree about Specter - I think at bottom he has the right instincts, and I don't think he's a bad person. Nor do I think of him as a coward.

About his cancer - I kind of had the same idea; that a brush with death might bring him to the light. After what he's been though, how can he be afraid of BushCo?

[globalvillage]

15. Maybe it's not himself that he's afraid for?

Just a thought. Nothing to back that up.

[ProSense]

13. Agree, about the money.

Either way it's a really bad sign, but horrific if it's for Iran.