Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (452987)	2/1/2009 12:39:28 AM
From: bentway	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573221

`War on Terror,' Bush catchphrase, fading away as Obama seeks better ties with Muslim nations newser.com By LOLITA C. BALDOR \| Associated Press \| 14 hours, 16 minutes ago in Politics The "War on Terror" is losing the war of words. The catchphrase burned into the American lexicon hours after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, is fading away, slowly if not deliberately being replaced by a new administration bent on repairing the U.S. image among Muslim nations. Since taking office less than two weeks ago, President Barack Obama has talked broadly of the "enduring struggle against terrorism and extremism." Another time it was an "ongoing struggle." He has pledged to "go after" extremists and "win this fight." There even was an oblique reference to a "twilight struggle" as the U.S. relentlessly pursues those who threaten the country. But only once since his Jan. 20 inauguration has Obama publicly strung those three words together into the explosive phrase that coalesced the country during its most terrifying time and eventually came to define the Bush administration. Speaking at the State Department on Jan. 22, Obama told his diplomatic corps, "We are confronted by extraordinary, complex and interconnected global challenges: war on terror, sectarian division and the spread of deadly technology. We did not ask for the burden that history has asked us to bear, but Americans will bear it. We must bear it." During the past seven years, the "War Against Terror" or "War on Terror" came to represent everything the U.S. military was doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the broader effort against extremists elsewhere or those seen as aiding militants aimed at destroying the West. Ultimately and perhaps inadvertently, however, the phrase "became associated in the minds of many people outside the Unites States and particularly in places where the countries are largely Islamic and Arab, as being anti-Islam and anti-Arab," said Anthony Cordesman, a national security analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank. Now, he said, there is a sense that the U.S. should be talking more about specific extremist groups _ ones that are recognized as militants in the Arab world and that are viewed as threats not just to America or the West, but also within the countries they operate. The thinking has evolved, he said, to focus on avoiding the kind of rhetoric "which could imply that this was a struggle against a religion or a culture." Obama has made it clear in his first days in office that he is courting the Muslim community and making what is at least a symbolic shift away from the previous administration's often more combative tone. He chose an Arab network for his first televised interview, declaring that "Americans are not your enemy." Before his first full week in office ended, he named former Sen. George J. Mitchell as his special envoy for the Middle East and sent him to the region for talks with leaders. According to the White House, Obama is intent on repairing America's image in the eyes of the Islamic world and addressing issues such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, unrest in Pakistan and India, Arab-Israeli peace talks and tensions with Iran. Using language is one way to help effect that change, said Wayne Fields, professor of English and American culture studies at Washington University in St. Louis. "One of the contrasts between the two administrations is the care with which Obama uses language. He thinks about the subtle implications," said Fields, an expert on presidential rhetoric. The Bush administration "didn't set out deliberately to do things that were offensive but they liked to do things that showed how strong they were, and to use language almost in an aggressive sense." Obama, he said, understands that language and conversation must be worked at and that it's "not just a series of sound bites." White House officials say there has been no deliberate ban on the war-on-terror phrase. And it hasn't completely disappeared. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has used the wording in briefings, and it's still in vogue among some in the Pentagon and State Department. Asked about Obama's avoidance of the phrase, Gibbs said the president's language is "consistent with what he said in his inaugural address on the 20th. I'm not aware of any larger charges than that." Juan Zarate, who served as the deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism during the Bush administration, said he has seen signs that the new White House is trying to subtly retool the words, if not the war. "There's no question that they're looking very carefully at all issues related to how the war on terror is packaged, to include lexicon," said Zarate. "All of this is part of an attempt to see how they could at least frame a change in policy even if, at the end of the day, the actual war on terrorism doesn't change all that much." Copyright 2008 The Associated Press

To: i-node who wrote (452987)	2/1/2009 12:41:46 AM
From: bentway	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1573221

Sunni Arabs in Baghdad enclave left off voter rolls Some Sunnis in Adhamiya are unable to find their names on the rolls or are registered to vote in distant precincts. They accuse the Shiite-led government of deliberating leaving them off. By Monte Morin latimes.com February 1, 2009 Reporting from Baghdad — The old man wore a red, checkered headdress and a frown as he left the polling station and shuffled down a bustling Baghdad street that smelled of roasted meat and sewage. "I have a complaint!" he yelled. "I didn't find my name." It was a lament that a group of Western election observers would hear often Saturday afternoon in Adhamiya, the Sunni Arab enclave that was once a hotbed of insurgent activity. Within the high walls of Al Neimaan secondary school for girls, scores of Iraqis clustered outside classrooms that had been converted into polling stations and waited for their chance to cast blue, poster-sized ballots. Among them, however, were smaller groups of men and women who waved yellow complaint forms and said they had either been left off voting rolls or been registered to vote in distant precincts. "We came here for an election," complained a young man in a green track suit who was told he had to vote at another station. "This is a disappointment." Some accused Shiite Muslim government officials of deliberately deleting from the rolls those voters with traditionally Sunni names such as Omar, Othman and Abu Bakr. "People with these names are missing from the list," said Mukdad Hassan, a college professor and polling center volunteer. "That looks bad to us. We're sure it's the Iraqi government that did this." In previous elections, Iraqis were registered at more than one polling site to allow them flexibility in voting. Officials now say the practice was a mistake and opened the door to people voting more than once. During this election, Iraqis are permitted to vote at one designated station. Polling officials said about 1,000 to 2,000 people were turned away from polling stations in Adhamiya because they were not registered. "We've had some problems," acknowledged Hussein Najib, an Adhamiya polling official. "Many people came and didn't find their names." In the afternoon, entire Iraqi families began appearing at polling centers. "Iraqis, they love dolma at lunch," said another polling official, referring to the Middle Eastern dish of rice wrapped in grape leaves. "They hit a good lunch, and then they really started coming in to vote." The number of yellow complaint forms swelled. monte.morin@latimes.com

To: i-node who wrote (452987)	2/1/2009 1:28:56 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1573221

Iraq is Terrible....so why are these people voting to keep the same government? Because the current gov't hates America and wants it out of Iraq.

To: i-node who wrote (452987)	2/1/2009 1:34:24 PM
From: tejek	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573221

Where are the Sunnis? Iraqi election turnout not as high as hoped Sun Feb 1, 2009 10:42am EST By Ahmed Rasheed BAGHDAD, Feb 1 (Reuters) - Turnout in Iraq's polls to elect councils governing 14 out of 18 provinces was lower than many had hoped due to voter registration problems and tight security. The elections took place on Saturday without the major bloodshed that has plagued Iraq since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion to oust Saddam Hussein. Five candidates were killed before the vote, some mortars were fired at but missed ballot stations on Saturday, and police said the house of a candidate of the mainly Sunni al-Hadba party was blown up in northern Iraq on Sunday, but no one was hurt. Officials said on Sunday 7.5 million or 51 percent of the more than 14 million registered voters had braved car bans, body searches, barbed wire barricades and checkpoints to take part. That was lower than the 60 percent or more that many political leaders, including Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, had spoken of during the campaign. Participation in Iraq's last vote, a parliamentary election in 2005, was 76 percent. In Baghdad, turnout on Saturday appeared to have been just under 40 percent, the independent electoral commission said. Commission chief Faraj al-Haidari attributed the low rate in the capital to problems with voter registration records, which were based on a government food rations distribution list. He said many people who failed to find their names on voter lists at polling stations appeared not to have updated their addresses in the records and had probably gone to the wrong ballot station. "It's not our fault that some people couldn't vote because they are lazy, because they didn't bother to ask where they should vote," Haidari said. read more.......... reuters.com