SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : GET THE U.S. OUT of The U.N NOW! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tom Clarke who wrote (138)5/23/2002 11:36:10 PM
From: Tadsamillionaire  Respond to of 411
 
INS confirms border incident with Mexico
By Bill McAllister
Denver Post Washington Bureau Chief
Wednesday, May 22, 2002 - WASHINGTON - Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., accused the Mexican army Tuesday of staging a "military incursion" Friday night into southern Arizona that ended with Mexican soldiers firing shots at a U.S. Border Patrol vehicle.
Lori Haley, an Immigration and Naturalization spokeswoman, confirmed that an incident occurred in a remote area near Ajo, Ariz.

A U.S. agent spotted three Mexican soldiers in a Mexican Humvee on U.S. soil and was attempting to leave the area when the rear window of his vehicle was apparently shattered by gunfire, she said. The agent was leaving the area "in an effort to avoid a confrontation" with the Mexicans, she said.

"Because of the seriousness of the incident" Haley said, U.S. authorities launched a formal investigation and are asking Mexican authorities to do the same.

The Mexican government previously has rejected Tancredo's charges that Mexican police and military units frequently cross the border. Tancredo, who leads a group of lawmakers opposed to liberalizing immigration laws, has said U.S. officials believe the incursions are related to drug trafficking.

The Republican from Littleton said he fears gunplay between U.S. and Mexican authorities unless officials stop the incursions. "Unless we open our eyes and recognize that what's happening along the U.S.-Mexico border is real, one of our guys is going to get killed," he said.

The INS confirmed the incident, but Tancredo's version differed somewhat. He said 10 soldiers were involved and the shot damaged more than the Border Patrol's rear window. He also said the Mexicans came 10 miles into the U.S before they were spotted.

Tancredo said U.S. agents believe the shots were fired because Mexican authorities were pursuing drug dealers into the U.S.

"They are saying they had interdicted a huge shipment of drugs," he said. "Therefore everyone was antsy."

But "regardless of the circumstances, they had happy trigger fingers," he said.

The U.S. vehicle was "clearly marked" and should have been recognizable, he said.

The agent told him, " "As far as I am concerned, that (incursion) should be an act of war,' " Tancredo said.

On May 3, Tancredo wrote Mexican President Vicente Fox demanding that he halt "incursions" by Mexican law enforcement officers into the U.S.

Fox didn't respond.
{ My Question, Where was the U.N when we were attacked}
denverpost.com.



To: Tom Clarke who wrote (138)5/28/2002 4:38:44 PM
From: Tadsamillionaire  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 411
 
U.N. agrees on new maritime anti-terror laws
By Stefano Ambrogi


LONDON (Reuters) - The United Nations said on Monday it had approved a raft of new and radical maritime security laws to counter the threat of terrorist attack through ports and shipping lines.

It said in a statement the measures, some of which are recommendations and others mandatory, include placing security officers on board every ship, fitting vessels with onboard technology that can relay information about the ship, cargo and crew back to the mainland, and enhancing existing port security arrangements.

The United States has been the driving force behind bolstering existing laws. Since September 11, maritime security experts have repeatedly warned of the vulnerability of the United States to attack from the sea.

U.S. intelligence chiefs fear fuel-laden tankers could be seized and used as floating missiles, or any one of tens of thousands of shipping containers shuttled into the country each day which could contain a nuclear device.

William O'Neil, Secretary-General of the 162-member International Maritime Organisation (IMO), the U.N.'s shipping body, called the marathon 10-day meeting in London to approve the historically significant measures.

"Not so much from the viewpoint of the volume of work the Committee was able to accomplish...but, more importantly, in respect of the substance of the decisions made," O'Neil said in the statement.

The far-reaching proposals are contained in a new ship and port facility code to be implemented through an existing maritime law introduced in 1974, known as the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS).

"This is the first time the need to look at and assess maritime security has become mandatory," a spokeswoman said of the proposals.

The IMO said each signatory would now be obliged to carry out a "risk management" assessment of its ships and ports and then determine which security measures to adopt.

"Each assessment must identify the actual threats to those critical assets and infrastructure in order to prioritise security measures," it said.

But it would then be up to each nation to decide on which part of the guidelines to adopt it added.

The new measures will be scrutinised again in September before finally being put forward for adoption at a diplomatic conference on security in December.

sg.news.yahoo.com



To: Tom Clarke who wrote (138)5/30/2002 9:54:12 PM
From: Tadsamillionaire  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 411
 
Lawyers paid by the United Nations to defend Yugoslav war-crimes suspects often face demands that they kick back a portion of their fees to the clients they are hired to represent. As a result, the tribunal at The Hague has become a lucrative source of cash, not only for lawyers hired to defend soldiers and politicians accused of crimes against humanity, but also for the defendants and their families back home.
Officials at the U.N.-sponsored International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, as it is formally known, confirmed that they began investigating the practice this year. No details on their findings have been made public.
Such charges are likely to resonate in the United States, which pays 23 percent of the regular U.N. budget, from which the tribunal gets nearly $100 million annually.
In all but a few cases — one exception being former Yugoslav strongman Slobodan Milosevic, who is defending himself — the tribunal pays defendants' lawyers a tax-exempt salary of as much as $200,000.
Hardly any lawyers can expect to get appointed unless they agree to share the fee with the client, said Zika Rakonjac, author of a forthcoming book on Yugoslav lawyers who practice at The Hague tribunal.
He said 1,000 people, including family members of those on trial, have benefited from the money.
"I know of families who used the money obtained from the lawyers to open up supermarket chains, luxury shops and pharmacies, and three coffee shops are currently being built," Mr. Rakonjac said in a recent interview.
"One of the lawyers told me that his client did not ask for a penny, but he had helped his [client´s] family through various donations amounting to 80,000 deutsche marks," Mr. Rakonjac said.
The euro replaced the German mark earlier this year at a rate of two marks to one euro. When converted to dollars at the present exchange rate, the amount would be about $37,000.
Mr. Rakonjac said war-crimes defendants usually ask for a kickback of as much as 30 percent but in most cases settle for 10 percent to 15 percent.
"Everyone wants their cut — Serbs, Croats and Muslims alike. The entire floor of the detention center in Scheveningen heard not too long ago when a Croat said to his counsel: 'If you don't give 10,000 deutsche marks [about $4,600] to my wife, I'll have you removed from the roster'" of appointed defense lawyers.
In May, Krstan Simic, a lawyer from Republika Srpska, the Serbian republic within Bosnia-Herzegovina, told a daily that Zoran Zigic, a Serb accused of crimes in the Omarska detention camp, is building a house with money from two of his defense attorneys.
Reports of financial arrangements between lawyers and defendants surfaced during the trial of Dusko Tadic, the first suspect to be tried by the tribunal.
In 1996, Mr. Tadic dismissed his attorney, Milan Vujin, accusing him in the courtroom of deliberately withholding evidence that was favorable to the defendant.
Mr. Vujin was subsequently fined and deleted from the tribunal's roster.
But Mr. Vujin's colleagues, who asked for anonymity, said the conflict revolved around money and that Mr. Tadic used the accusation as a means of revenge.
Mr. Vujin had refused to buy and equip a deli in Republika Srpska on Mr. Tadic's behalf, his colleagues said.
Privately, many lawyers in Belgrade concede that money has been at the heart of most disputes between attorneys and their clients. Some have begun to speak out.
Branislav Tapuskovic, chairman of the Administrative Board of the Chamber of Lawyers of Serbia, said that partly from his own experience he has no doubts the practice is widespread.
"Three years ago, when I defended Zdravko Mucic, one of the co-defendants on the case, Esad Landzo, changed his lawyer all of a sudden. This was then discussed at a special tribunal session.
"I was there when Landzo's lawyer, Mustafa Brackovic, stated in front of the tribunal that Landzo had fired him because he refused to share the honorarium with him," Mr. Tapuskovic said.
Mr. Brackovic confirmed the account.
"Landzo demanded that I 'support' him with 6,000 deutsche marks a month," he said. Six thousand marks is about $2,750.
"He even put that in writing as an indirect condition for me to continue representing him," he said. "I didn't want to even discuss it. The Trial Chamber overruled my dismissal, but I then resigned because the whole thing was morally unacceptable."
The "racket has been going on the whole time," Mr. Brackovic said.
"Everyone knows about it, but obviously those involved are not keen to talk about it in public."
Toma Fila, a Belgrade lawyer who represents a war-crimes suspect, flatly denied that the practice exists.
"I think the stories originate from less successful lawyers or those who are unscrupulous in their efforts to get paid. Those who have no integrity in Belgrade won't have any integrity in The Hague either," Mr. Fila said.
"I've been rumored to have offered half of my fee to my client Mladjo Radic, but the truth is that I have represented him for three years now and haven't given him a share of my fee.
"But there is something you need to understand: Every honest person would help the defendants' families to survive and to see their relatives in Scheveningen at least once a year.
"A visit to The Hague, including travel and accommodation costs, comes to 2,000 deutsche marks [about $900]. This is no concession to blackmail but rather an act of good will and a sign of a humane attitude," Mr. Fila said.
Nenad Petrusic, legal counsel to Gen. Radislav Krstic, a Bosnian Serb recently found guilty of genocide in Srebrenica, said he would never agree to work on a tribunal case if a defendant demanded kickbacks from him.
"Gen. Krstic is an extremely honest, fair and highly ethical man, and something like that, I'm positive, would have never occurred to him. But I'll be frank with you. I'm renting an apartment in The Hague, and when I'm not there, my client's family members have it at their disposal. They have no money to pay for a hotel, and I don't think I'm breaking any regulations by offering to let them stay there," Mr. Petrusic said.
Tribunal officials say lead counsels on even the least complex cases can expect to make around $77,000 in pretrial phases, $100,000 during trials; and as much as $50,000 during appeals. In the most complicated cases, the figures double, officials at The Hague said.
The Netherlands has exempted the fees from taxes.
washtimes.com