Early Bird summary:
Thursday’s Early Bird leads with a story from the Los Angeles Times, followed by similar stories from the Washington Post, New York Times and USA Today, reporting that Obama met for nearly two hours with the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the secure Pentagon conference room known as Tank. He emerged to shake hands with troops and promised to increase the involvement of civilian U.S. government agencies to work on governance, agriculture, civil justice and other issues in Afghanistan. The pledge addresses a long-standing Pentagon complaint.The meeting and Obama's comments follow recent indications that the new administration intends to limit U.S. goals in Afghanistan while intensifying the military aspects of the war. Vice President Joe Biden, who accompanied Obama, said this week that U.S. forces would step up action to counter recent Taliban advances.
The Associated Press reports that thousands of U.S. troops originally destined for Iraq have deployed south of Afghanistan's capital in the first illustration of a military refocus on the increasingly difficult fight in the South Asian nation, NATO said yesterday.Nearly 3,000 American soldiers with the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 10th Mountain Division out of Fort Drum, N.Y., moved into the provinces of Logar and Wardak to the south of Kabul, the military alliance said.The latest deployment indicates the shifting focus in military operations from Iraq to Afghanistan, where the U.S. and its allies are trying to turn the tide of Taliban gains and prop up the government of embattled President Hamid Karzai.
Other notable stories in today’s EB:
§ The New York Times says that a Russian news report on Wednesday that Russia is putting off its plan to deploy missiles near the Polish border raised speculation that the Kremlin is seeking ways to lower tensions with the United States now that a new administration has taken office.The report, from the Interfax news agency, was attributed to an unidentified Russian defense official, and when contacted later in the day, other Russian defense and Foreign Ministry officials in Moscow would not confirm it or comment on it.
§ The Financial Times reports that Nato member states are concerned by Russia’s decision to build a naval base in the breakaway territory of Abkhazia, a move which the alliance believes would further underline Moscow’s violation of Georgia’s sovereignty.Although Russia and Nato have seen a gradual improvement in relations in recent weeks, Jaap de Hopp Scheffer, Nato’s secretary-general is set to raise the issue when he meets Sergei Ivanov, the Russian deputy prime minister, next week.
§ DefenseNews.com carries a story from Agence France-Press reporting that the United States and its allies might have to deploy up to 460,000 soldiers to North Korea to stabilize the country if it collapses and an insurgency erupts, a private U.S. study said Jan. 28.The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) think tank outlined what amounted to a worst-case scenario in the event the country descends into total chaos and foreign troops intervene after a failed succession upon Kim Jong-Il's death.The South Korean agency Yonhap, quoting "well-informed intelligence sources," reported this month that Kim, 66, had named his third son, Kim Jong-Un, 24, as successor. Kim is reported to have suffered a stroke in August.
§ United Press International reports that New software being tested by U.S. Central Command would enable military computers for the first time ever to be connected at the same time to both classified and unclassified networks - including the public Internet.Officials say the technology, if it proves secure, could save more than $200 million for CENTCOM and eliminate the need to use work-arounds like thumb drives to move data between networks containing different levels of classified information."It has been called the Holy Grail," Elwood "Bud" Jones, a program manager for multinational information sharing at CENTCOM told United Press International.Mr. Jones said CENTCOM was engaged in a piloting and testing process called a Joint Capabilities Technology Demonstration Project, code-named "One Box, One Wire," or OB1, which would end after three years with the rollout of the software throughout CENTCOM.
Media summary
1. Leading newspaper headlines: The House approved the $819 billion stimulus package, but President Obama's efforts to bring Republicans to his side didn't pay off. (Slate Magazine)
2. President to Muslim world – “Americans are not your enemy”: Transcript of President Barack Obama’s interview with al-Arabiya television network
3. BAE receives $9.9 million Marine contract: Military contractor BAE Systems said Wednesday it has received a $9.9 million contract to provide gun shields for troops fighting in urban environments. (Associated Press)
4. FAA release of Marine crash tape delayed: (San Diego Union Tribune)
5. Iraq safer, but is democracy catching?: U.S. Marine Corps Maj. General John Kelly is on his second tour as a commander in Anbar province. He calls the security improvements in what was once Iraq's most dangerous area, "stunning, just stunning." (CBS News)
6. II Marine Expeditionary Force deploys: Around 200 Camp Lejeune marines and sailors packed their bags and began a long journey to Al Anbar Province in Iraq. (WNCT TV-9, CBS Affiliate, Greenville, Jacksonville, New Bern N.C.)
7. National Museum of the Marine Corps remains top Virginia destination: (Market Watch)
8. Iraq ends licence for Blackwater: Iraq will not renew the licence of US security firm Blackwater, which was involved in an 2007 incident in which at least 14 civilians were killed. (BBC)
Leading newspaper headlines
The House approved the $819 billion stimulus package, but President Obama's efforts to bring Republicans to his side didn't pay off. The bill passed without a single Republican vote, and 11 Democrats also opposed the measure. The Los Angeles Times declares that the package is "the largest attempt since World War II to use the federal budget to redirect the course of the nation's economy." The Washington Post specifies that the price tag is larger "than the combined total cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan so far," and the Wall Street Journal points out the cost of the bill is "almost equal to the entire cost of annual federal spending under Congress's discretion."
The New York Times notes that the lack of Republican support for the bill "seemed to echo the early months of the last Democratic administration, when President Bill Clinton in 1993 had to rely solely on Democrats to win passage of a deficit-reduction bill that was a signature element of his presidency." But USA Today says that "Obama's chance of winning GOP Senate votes next week is better." Indeed, Obama suggested that he will welcome changes to the bill in the Senate that might attract more support from Republicans. And a few Republicans hinted that they might support the final version of the bill if some changes are implemented in the Senate, suggesting the unanimous voting was a tactic to get Democrats to pay attention to their demands.
Implementing some changes requested by Republicans has already pushed the total cost of the bill in the Senate to almost $900 billion. And that's bound only to increase. The WP details that senators are preparing new amendments to the bill that include a reduction in taxes on corporate profits earned abroad and brought back to the United States. There are likely to be more amendments in the coming days as a variety of interest groups are busy clamoring for a piece of the pie. The Senate is likely to vote on the measure next week, and Democrats continue to emphasize that they want to get the package to Obama's desk by Feb. 13, before Congress goes on recess for Presidents Day.
So, what exactly is in the package? Several of the papers, particularly the WSJ, do an admirable job of trying to enumerate the main aspects of the package, and USAT provides a handy outline. But, as the LAT summarizes, it ultimately "contains an almost-bewildering array of provisions, many of them funded at all-but-unprecedented levels." Whichever way you look at it, the bill would be a major change in the way Washington goes about trying to boost the economy. As the WSJ notes, whereas the Bush administration leaned toward tax cuts that benefitted those in the middle class and above, the tax cuts in this stimulus package focus on lower-income Americans. And that's without considering the dizzying mixture of spending that makes up two-thirds of the total cost and includes both short-term and long-term projects.
In a piece inside, the WSJ highlights that the final version of the package "could include dozens of special-interest provisions" that were championed by lawmakers to help their constituents. And lobbyists are working overtime to try to get senators to throw a little bit of stimulus their way. In typical sausage-making fashion, some things were added to the bill that don't even have anything to do with the economy. For example, one Democratic lawmaker added a measure to give federal workers more whistle-blower protections.
The WP devotes a separate front-page piece to a provision in the Senate version of the package that would require "all stimulus-funded projects use only American-made equipment and goods." It is turning out to be one of the most controversial aspects of the bill as many of the largest American companies are characterizing it as a war against free trade. There are fears that if the provision stays in the bill, it would lead other countries to retaliate against U.S. companies and might encourage similar measures around the world, which could usher in a new era of protectionism.
In a front-page analysis, the NYT's David Herszenhorn says that while it's clear that some of the stimulus "will start to be felt within weeks" of Obama's signature, estimating the package's effectiveness "is a far more complex calculation requiring almost line-by-line scrutiny of the 647-page bill." The increase in unemployment benefits and food stamps would almost certainly produce a quick jolt to the economy, and the aid that would be provided to states is also generally seen as an area where the stimulus could be effective. One of the big unknowns is the infrastructure spending because it would generally take longer to implement. That could be good if the recovery is slow, but if the economy recovers quickly, these projects "could start just in time to compete with renewed private spending."
If there is one thing that was made clear this week, it's that partisan politics is alive and well in Washington, notes the LAT in an analysis piece inside the paper. While the approval of the bill was undoubtedly a victory for the new administration, it "also marked a victory of sorts for [Rush] Limbaugh and other conservative opinion leaders." In a tactic that dutifully followed the partisan playbook, Republicans focused much of their attention on some sections of the bill that were easy to mock. Limbaugh's power was in full view yesterday as one Republican lawmaker found himself apologizing after he criticized the radio host.
In an op-ed piece in the WSJ, Limbaugh writes that the "porkulus" bill is designed to "cement the party's majority power for decades." In a funny-if-it-weren't-so-sad moment, Limbaugh urges a bipartisanship approach to the bill, saying that since Obama got around 54 percent of the vote, then that same percentage of the stimulus package should be decided by Democrats, while the rest should "be directed toward tax cuts, as determined by me." The current crisis "is an opportunity to unify people, if we set aside the politics."
Moving on to another part of the ailing economy, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said yesterday that the administration is working on a plan to "repair the financial system." Geithner didn't release any details, but the WSJ hears word from officials that the Obama administration is looking at spending another $1 trillion to $2 trillion in its attempts to bolster financial institutions. And that huge figure might be optimistic. The NYT says some estimate it may take up to $3 trillion to $4 trillion to buy up the toxic assets currently plaguing banks' balance sheets. This, of course, would mean that the administration would have to go to Congress to ask for more funds since only $350 billion of the $700 billion financial bailout is still available, and some of that has already been earmarked for certain projects.
Just because financial companies across Wall Street lost billions of dollars and asked for help from Uncle Sam, that doesn't mean they didn't pay their employees enviable bonuses. The NYT reports that the New York state comptroller revealed that employees at financial companies received around $18.4 billion in bonuses in 2008, and that's without counting stock option awards. Although far less than recent years, it was the sixth-largest bonus season on record. It's unclear whether the companies used taxpayer money to pay for the bonuses, but it's a distinct possibility.
The Food and Drug Administration issued "one of the largest food recalls in history" yesterday when it announced that all products made from peanuts processed by Peanut Corp. of America's plant in Georgia over the last two years should be thrown out, the Post reports on Page One. The dramatic move came after investigators discovered that the plant knowingly shipped salmonella-contaminated products a dozen times in 2007 and 2008. One lawmaker said she would ask the Justice Department to investigate whether criminal charges should be filed against plant officials. Eight people have died and more than 500 people were sickened by salmonella poisoning linked to the Georgia plant.
Although Obama has been in office for barely a week, he has already managed to change the White House culture, notes the NYT. A photograph showing Obama sans suit jacket in the Oval Office shocked Bush administration officials, who were always required to wear one. Obama's advisers say the president likes it warm and had cranked up the heat (um, what about that global warming thing?), but it's clear the new president is less hung up on protocol than his predecessor. He is allowing staff members to dress "business casual" on weekends, roams the halls, and comes into work later and stays later than Bush did.
Top of the Document
President to Muslim World: “Americans are not your enemy”
Tuesday, January 27th, 2009 at 9:48 am
In his first interview with an Arab television station, President Barack Obama offered a bold change to America's relations with the Muslim world.
"My job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives," President Obama told Al Arabiya. "My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy."
In the interview, conducted in the White House map room, President Obama also expressed his commitment to tackling the Middle East peace process immediately.
"Sending George Mitchell to the Middle East is fulfilling my campaign promise that we're not going to wait until the end of my administration to deal with Palestinian and Israeli peace, we're going to start now," he said. "It may take a long time to do, but we're going to do it now."
The interview is part of the President’s broader outreach to the Muslim world, which includes a promise to make a major address from the capital of a Muslim nation.
Al Arabiya is a 24-hour Arabic-language news channel based out of Dubai.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript:
Q Mr. President, thank you for this opportunity, we really appreciate it.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much.
Q Sir, you just met with your personal envoy to the Middle East, Senator Mitchell. Obviously, his first task is to consolidate the cease-fire. But beyond that you've been saying that you want to pursue actively and aggressively peacemaking between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Tell us a little bit about how do you see your personal role, because, you know, if the President of the United States is not involved, nothing happens -- as the history of peacemaking shows. Will you be proposing ideas, pitching proposals, parameters, as one of your predecessors did? Or just urging the parties to come up with their own resolutions, as your immediate predecessor did?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think the most important thing is for the United States to get engaged right away. And George Mitchell is somebody of enormous stature. He is one of the few people who have international experience brokering peace deals.
And so what I told him is start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating -- in the past on some of these issues -- and we don't always know all the factors that are involved. So let's listen. He's going to be speaking to all the major parties involved. And he will then report back to me. From there we will formulate a specific response.
Ultimately, we cannot tell either the Israelis or the Palestinians what's best for them. They're going to have to make some decisions. But I do believe that the moment is ripe for both sides to realize that the path that they are on is one that is not going to result in prosperity and security for their people. And that instead, it's time to return to the negotiating table.
And it's going to be difficult, it's going to take time. I don't want to prejudge many of these issues, and I want to make sure that expectations are not raised so that we think that this is going to be resolved in a few months. But if we start the steady progress on these issues, I'm absolutely confident that the United States -- working in tandem with the European Union, with Russia, with all the Arab states in the region -- I'm absolutely certain that we can make significant progress.
Q You've been saying essentially that we should not look at these issues -- like the Palestinian-Israeli track and separation from the border region -- you've been talking about a kind of holistic approach to the region. Are we expecting a different paradigm in the sense that in the past one of the critiques -- at least from the Arab side, the Muslim side -- is that everything the Americans always tested with the Israelis, if it works. Now there is an Arab peace plan, there is a regional aspect to it. And you've indicated that. Would there be any shift, a paradigm shift?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, here's what I think is important. Look at the proposal that was put forth by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia --
Q Right.
THE PRESIDENT: I might not agree with every aspect of the proposal, but it took great courage --
Q Absolutely.
THE PRESIDENT: -- to put forward something that is as significant as that. I think that there are ideas across the region of how we might pursue peace.
I do think that it is impossible for us to think only in terms of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and not think in terms of what's happening with Syria or Iran or Lebanon or Afghanistan and Pakistan. These things are interrelated. And what I've said, and I think Hillary Clinton has expressed this in her confirmation, is that if we are looking at the region as a whole and communicating a message to the Arab world and the Muslim world, that we are ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest, then I think that we can make significant progress.
Now, Israel is a strong ally of the United States. They will not stop being a strong ally of the United States. And I will continue to believe that Israel's security is paramount. But I also believe that there are Israelis who recognize that it is important to achieve peace. They will be willing to make sacrifices if the time is appropriate and if there is serious partnership on the other side.
And so what we want to do is to listen, set aside some of the preconceptions that have existed and have built up over the last several years. And I think if we do that, then there's a possibility at least of achieving some breakthroughs.
Q I want to ask you about the broader Muslim world, but let me -- one final thing about the Palestinian-Israeli theater. There are many Palestinians and Israelis who are very frustrated now with the current conditions and they are losing hope, they are disillusioned, and they believe that time is running out on the two-state solution because -- mainly because of the settlement activities in Palestinian-occupied territories. Will it still be possible to see a Palestinian state -- and you know the contours of it -- within the first Obama administration?
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state -- I'm not going to put a time frame on it -- that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.
And, look, I think anybody who has studied the region recognizes that the situation for the ordinary Palestinian in many cases has not improved. And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves? And is the child in Israel going to feel confident about his or her safety and security? And if we can keep our focus on making their lives better and look forward, and not simply think about all the conflicts and tragedies of the past, then I think that we have an opportunity to make real progress.
But it is not going to be easy, and that's why we've got George Mitchell going there. This is somebody with extraordinary patience as well as extraordinary skill, and that's what's going to be necessary.
Q Absolutely. Let me take a broader look at the whole region. You are planning to address the Muslim world in your first 100 days from a Muslim capital. And everybody is speculating about the capital. (Laughter.) If you have anything further, that would be great.
How concerned are you -- because, let me tell you, honestly, when I see certain things about America -- in some parts, I don't want to exaggerate -- there is a demonization of America.
THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely.
Q It's become like a new religion, and like a new religion it has new converts -- like a new religion has its own high priests.
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
Q It's only a religious text.
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
Q And in the last -- since 9/11 and because of Iraq, that alienation is wider between the Americans and -- and in generations past, the United States was held high. It was the only Western power with no colonial legacy.
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
Q How concerned are you and -- because people sense that you have a different political discourse. And I think, judging by (inaudible) and Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden and all these, you know -- a chorus --
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I noticed this. They seem nervous.
Q They seem very nervous, exactly. Now, tell me why they should be more nervous?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that when you look at the rhetoric that they've been using against me before I even took office --
Q I know, I know.
THE PRESIDENT: -- what that tells me is that their ideas are bankrupt. There's no actions that they've taken that say a child in the Muslim world is getting a better education because of them, or has better health care because of them.
In my inauguration speech, I spoke about: You will be judged on what you've built, not what you've destroyed. And what they've been doing is destroying things. And over time, I think the Muslim world has recognized that that path is leading no place, except more death and destruction.
Now, my job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect. I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.
Q The largest one.
THE PRESIDENT: The largest one, Indonesia. And so what I want to communicate is the fact that in all my travels throughout the Muslim world, what I've come to understand is that regardless of your faith -- and America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers -- regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams.
And my job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives. My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect. But if you look at the track record, as you say, America was not born as a colonial power, and that the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago, there's no reason why we can't restore that. And that I think is going to be an important task.
But ultimately, people are going to judge me not by my words but by my actions and my administration's actions. And I think that what you will see over the next several years is that I'm not going to agree with everything that some Muslim leader may say, or what's on a television station in the Arab world -- but I think that what you'll see is somebody who is listening, who is respectful, and who is trying to promote the interests not just of the United States, but also ordinary people who right now are suffering from poverty and a lack of opportunity. I want to make sure that I'm speaking to them, as well.
Q Tell me, time is running out, any decision on from where you will be visiting the Muslim world?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm not going to break the news right here.
Q Afghanistan?
THE PRESIDENT: But maybe next time. But it is something that is going to be important. I want people to recognize, though, that we are going to be making a series of initiatives. Sending George Mitchell to the Middle East is fulfilling my campaign promise that we're not going to wait until the end of my administration to deal with Palestinian and Israeli peace, we're going to start now. It may take a long time to do, but we're going to do it now. We're going to follow through on our commitment for me to address the Muslim world from a Muslim capital. We are going to follow through on many of my commitments to do a more effective job of reaching out, listening, as well as speaking to the Muslim world.
And you're going to see me following through with dealing with a drawdown of troops in Iraq, so that Iraqis can start taking more responsibility. And finally, I think you've already seen a commitment, in terms of closing Guantanamo, and making clear that even as we are decisive in going after terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians, that we're going to do so on our terms, and we're going to do so respecting the rule of law that I think makes America great.
Q President Bush framed the war on terror conceptually in a way that was very broad, "war on terror," and used sometimes certain terminology that the many people -- Islamic fascism. You've always framed it in a different way, specifically against one group called al Qaeda and their collaborators. And is this one way of --
THE PRESIDENT: I think that you're making a very important point. And that is that the language we use matters. And what we need to understand is, is that there are extremist organizations -- whether Muslim or any other faith in the past -- that will use faith as a justification for violence. We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith's name.
And so you will I think see our administration be very clear in distinguishing between organizations like al Qaeda -- that espouse violence, espouse terror and act on it -- and people who may disagree with my administration and certain actions, or may have a particular viewpoint in terms of how their countries should develop. We can have legitimate disagreements but still be respectful. I cannot respect terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians and we will hunt them down.
But to the broader Muslim world what we are going to be offering is a hand of friendship.
Q Can I end with a question on Iran and Iraq then quickly?
THE PRESIDENT: It's up to the team --
MR. GIBBS: You have 30 seconds. (Laughter.)
Q Will the United States ever live with a nuclear Iran? And if not, how far are you going in the direction of preventing it?
THE PRESIDENT: You know, I said during the campaign that it is very important for us to make sure that we are using all the tools of U.S. power, including diplomacy, in our relationship with Iran.
Now, the Iranian people are a great people, and Persian civilization is a great civilization. Iran has acted in ways that's not conducive to peace and prosperity in the region: their threats against Israel; their pursuit of a nuclear weapon which could potentially set off an arms race in the region that would make everybody less safe; their support of terrorist organizations in the past -- none of these things have been helpful.
But I do think that it is important for us to be willing to talk to Iran, to express very clearly where our differences are, but where there are potential avenues for progress. And we will over the next several months be laying out our general framework and approach. And as I said during my inauguration speech, if countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fist, they will find an extended hand from us.
Q Shall we leave Iraq next interview, or just --
MR. GIBBS: Yes, let's -- we're past, and I got to get him back to dinner with his wife.
Q Sir, I really appreciate it.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much.
Q Thanks a lot.
THE PRESIDENT: I appreciate it.
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
Top of the Document
BAE receives $9.9 million Marines contract
SANTA CLARA, Calif. - Military contractor BAE Systems said Wednesday it has received a $9.9 million contract to provide gun shields for troops fighting in urban environments.
BAE Systems will provide 442 Marine Corps Transparent Armored Gun Shield turret kits used on vehicles such as the Bradley and M1 Abrams tanks and assault amphibious vehicle.
The design of the gun shield turret kits allows troops direct vision "while providing protection against blast fragmentation and small arms fire to the crew while in the turret," said Ann Hoholick, vice president of BAE Systems' amphibious vehicles and armor kits.
Work will begin immediately in York, Pa., and Santa Clara, Calif., and activity on the initial delivery order is expected to be completed in June.
The contract is managed by the Marine Corps Systems Command.
BAE Systems Inc. is the U.S. subsidiary of London-based BAE Systems PLC.
Top of the Document
FAA release of Marine crash tape delayed
By Steve Liewer (Contact) Union-Tribune Staff Writer
FAA officials have granted the military's request to delay the release of radio communications between its air traffic controllers and the Marine pilot whose jet crashed into a University City neighborhood last month.
The Federal Aviation Administration will wait until Feb. 27 to make public the recording, which is expected to shed light on what happened before the F/A-18 Hornet killed four people and damaged six homes.
“Our legal staff reviewed the Marine Corps' request and determined there was legal justification for temporarily delaying the release of the audio,” said Ian Gregor, an FAA spokesman.
Marine lawyers argued that public airing of the recording would jeopardize their investigations into the Dec. 8 crash. An aide to Rep. Duncan D. Hunter, R-Lakeside, said the service is finishing its preliminary investigation and expects to issue a report in February.
“I don't think there's any doubt they'll be released eventually,” said Maj. Eric Dent, a spokesman at Marine Corps headquarters. “We asked that it be delayed so (investigators) can consider it.”
FAA officials had signaled they would release the 16-minute recording yesterday to comply with Freedom of Information Act requests filed by The San Diego Union-Tribune and The Associated Press.
The recording could help answer why the student pilot decided to fly his crippled jet over several miles of densely populated neighborhoods near Miramar Marine Corps Air Station instead of diverting to North Island Naval Air Station, which offers an over-water approach.
Shortly before noon, the aircraft lost an engine on takeoff from the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln during an offshore training exercise. The second engine sputtered and failed as the F/A-18 flew over University City.
The pilot, Lt. Dan Neubauer, ejected safely seconds before the jet slammed into Cather Avenue, then plowed through the home of Don Yoon, a 37-year-old businessman, and left it a fiery ruin.
Yoon was at work at the time. But his wife, Youngmi Lee, 36; his two young daughters, Grace and Rachel; and his mother-in-law, Seokim Kim, all died. In the days afterward, Yoon's grace and his public forgiveness of Neubauer touched people around the world, with hundreds attending a prayer service and the funeral for his family.
Marine officials said they will make public the findings of their legal investigation into the crash. But Maj. Jay Delarosa, a Miramar spokesman, said it's unclear when that will happen.
“It's not complete,” he said. “We're still committed to doing the job right.”
Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition in San Rafael, said the Marine Corps appears to be within its rights to request a delay if the investigation is still ongoing.
“If it were to turn out that there was no real risk of jeopardizing the Marine investigation, delay of disclosure would raise serious legal questions,” Scheer said. “Any delay whose real purpose is to enable the Marine Corps to manipulate media coverage of the results of any investigation would be highly inappropriate.”
Top of the Document
Thursday’s Early Bird leads with a story from the Los Angeles Times, followed by similar stories from the Washington Post, New York Times and USA Today, reporting that Obama met for nearly two hours with the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the secure Pentagon conference room known as Tank. He emerged to shake hands with troops and promised to increase the involvement of civilian U.S. government agencies to work on governance, agriculture, civil justice and other issues in Afghanistan. The pledge addresses a long-standing Pentagon complaint.The meeting and Obama's comments follow recent indications that the new administration intends to limit U.S. goals in Afghanistan while intensifying the military aspects of the war. Vice President Joe Biden, who accompanied Obama, said this week that U.S. forces would step up action to counter recent Taliban advances.
The Associated Press reports that thousands of U.S. troops originally destined for Iraq have deployed south of Afghanistan's capital in the first illustration of a military refocus on the increasingly difficult fight in the South Asian nation, NATO said yesterday.Nearly 3,000 American soldiers with the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 10th Mountain Division out of Fort Drum, N.Y., moved into the provinces of Logar and Wardak to the south of Kabul, the military alliance said.The latest deployment indicates the shifting focus in military operations from Iraq to Afghanistan, where the U.S. and its allies are trying to turn the tide of Taliban gains and prop up the government of embattled President Hamid Karzai.
Other notable stories in today’s EB:
§ The New York Times says that a Russian news report on Wednesday that Russia is putting off its plan to deploy missiles near the Polish border raised speculation that the Kremlin is seeking ways to lower tensions with the United States now that a new administration has taken office.The report, from the Interfax news agency, was attributed to an unidentified Russian defense official, and when contacted later in the day, other Russian defense and Foreign Ministry officials in Moscow would not confirm it or comment on it.
§ The Financial Times reports that Nato member states are concerned by Russia’s decision to build a naval base in the breakaway territory of Abkhazia, a move which the alliance believes would further underline Moscow’s violation of Georgia’s sovereignty.Although Russia and Nato have seen a gradual improvement in relations in recent weeks, Jaap de Hopp Scheffer, Nato’s secretary-general is set to raise the issue when he meets Sergei Ivanov, the Russian deputy prime minister, next week.
§ DefenseNews.com carries a story from Agence France-Press reporting that the United States and its allies might have to deploy up to 460,000 soldiers to North Korea to stabilize the country if it collapses and an insurgency erupts, a private U.S. study said Jan. 28.The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) think tank outlined what amounted to a worst-case scenario in the event the country descends into total chaos and foreign troops intervene after a failed succession upon Kim Jong-Il's death.The South Korean agency Yonhap, quoting "well-informed intelligence sources," reported this month that Kim, 66, had named his third son, Kim Jong-Un, 24, as successor. Kim is reported to have suffered a stroke in August.
§ United Press International reports that New software being tested by U.S. Central Command would enable military computers for the first time ever to be connected at the same time to both classified and unclassified networks - including the public Internet.Officials say the technology, if it proves secure, could save more than $200 million for CENTCOM and eliminate the need to use work-arounds like thumb drives to move data between networks containing different levels of classified information."It has been called the Holy Grail," Elwood "Bud" Jones, a program manager for multinational information sharing at CENTCOM told United Press International.Mr. Jones said CENTCOM was engaged in a piloting and testing process called a Joint Capabilities Technology Demonstration Project, code-named "One Box, One Wire," or OB1, which would end after three years with the rollout of the software throughout CENTCOM.
Media summary
1. Leading newspaper headlines: The House approved the $819 billion stimulus package, but President Obama's efforts to bring Republicans to his side didn't pay off. (Slate Magazine)
2. President to Muslim world – “Americans are not your enemy”: Transcript of President Barack Obama’s interview with al-Arabiya television network
3. BAE receives $9.9 million Marine contract: Military contractor BAE Systems said Wednesday it has received a $9.9 million contract to provide gun shields for troops fighting in urban environments. (Associated Press)
4. FAA release of Marine crash tape delayed: (San Diego Union Tribune)
5. Iraq safer, but is democracy catching?: U.S. Marine Corps Maj. General John Kelly is on his second tour as a commander in Anbar province. He calls the security improvements in what was once Iraq's most dangerous area, "stunning, just stunning." (CBS News)
6. II Marine Expeditionary Force deploys: Around 200 Camp Lejeune marines and sailors packed their bags and began a long journey to Al Anbar Province in Iraq. (WNCT TV-9, CBS Affiliate, Greenville, Jacksonville, New Bern N.C.)
7. National Museum of the Marine Corps remains top Virginia destination: (Market Watch)
8. Iraq ends licence for Blackwater: Iraq will not renew the licence of US security firm Blackwater, which was involved in an 2007 incident in which at least 14 civilians were killed. (BBC)
Leading newspaper headlines
The House approved the $819 billion stimulus package, but President Obama's efforts to bring Republicans to his side didn't pay off. The bill passed without a single Republican vote, and 11 Democrats also opposed the measure. The Los Angeles Times declares that the package is "the largest attempt since World War II to use the federal budget to redirect the course of the nation's economy." The Washington Post specifies that the price tag is larger "than the combined total cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan so far," and the Wall Street Journal points out the cost of the bill is "almost equal to the entire cost of annual federal spending under Congress's discretion."
The New York Times notes that the lack of Republican support for the bill "seemed to echo the early months of the last Democratic administration, when President Bill Clinton in 1993 had to rely solely on Democrats to win passage of a deficit-reduction bill that was a signature element of his presidency." But USA Today says that "Obama's chance of winning GOP Senate votes next week is better." Indeed, Obama suggested that he will welcome changes to the bill in the Senate that might attract more support from Republicans. And a few Republicans hinted that they might support the final version of the bill if some changes are implemented in the Senate, suggesting the unanimous voting was a tactic to get Democrats to pay attention to their demands.
Implementing some changes requested by Republicans has already pushed the total cost of the bill in the Senate to almost $900 billion. And that's bound only to increase. The WP details that senators are preparing new amendments to the bill that include a reduction in taxes on corporate profits earned abroad and brought back to the United States. There are likely to be more amendments in the coming days as a variety of interest groups are busy clamoring for a piece of the pie. The Senate is likely to vote on the measure next week, and Democrats continue to emphasize that they want to get the package to Obama's desk by Feb. 13, before Congress goes on recess for Presidents Day.
So, what exactly is in the package? Several of the papers, particularly the WSJ, do an admirable job of trying to enumerate the main aspects of the package, and USAT provides a handy outline. But, as the LAT summarizes, it ultimately "contains an almost-bewildering array of provisions, many of them funded at all-but-unprecedented levels." Whichever way you look at it, the bill would be a major change in the way Washington goes about trying to boost the economy. As the WSJ notes, whereas the Bush administration leaned toward tax cuts that benefitted those in the middle class and above, the tax cuts in this stimulus package focus on lower-income Americans. And that's without considering the dizzying mixture of spending that makes up two-thirds of the total cost and includes both short-term and long-term projects.
In a piece inside, the WSJ highlights that the final version of the package "could include dozens of special-interest provisions" that were championed by lawmakers to help their constituents. And lobbyists are working overtime to try to get senators to throw a little bit of stimulus their way. In typical sausage-making fashion, some things were added to the bill that don't even have anything to do with the economy. For example, one Democratic lawmaker added a measure to give federal workers more whistle-blower protections.
The WP devotes a separate front-page piece to a provision in the Senate version of the package that would require "all stimulus-funded projects use only American-made equipment and goods." It is turning out to be one of the most controversial aspects of the bill as many of the largest American companies are characterizing it as a war against free trade. There are fears that if the provision stays in the bill, it would lead other countries to retaliate against U.S. companies and might encourage similar measures around the world, which could usher in a new era of protectionism.
In a front-page analysis, the NYT's David Herszenhorn says that while it's clear that some of the stimulus "will start to be felt within weeks" of Obama's signature, estimating the package's effectiveness "is a far more complex calculation requiring almost line-by-line scrutiny of the 647-page bill." The increase in unemployment benefits and food stamps would almost certainly produce a quick jolt to the economy, and the aid that would be provided to states is also generally seen as an area where the stimulus could be effective. One of the big unknowns is the infrastructure spending because it would generally take longer to implement. That could be good if the recovery is slow, but if the economy recovers quickly, these projects "could start just in time to compete with renewed private spending."
If there is one thing that was made clear this week, it's that partisan politics is alive and well in Washington, notes the LAT in an analysis piece inside the paper. While the approval of the bill was undoubtedly a victory for the new administration, it "also marked a victory of sorts for [Rush] Limbaugh and other conservative opinion leaders." In a tactic that dutifully followed the partisan playbook, Republicans focused much of their attention on some sections of the bill that were easy to mock. Limbaugh's power was in full view yesterday as one Republican lawmaker found himself apologizing after he criticized the radio host.
In an op-ed piece in the WSJ, Limbaugh writes that the "porkulus" bill is designed to "cement the party's majority power for decades." In a funny-if-it-weren't-so-sad moment, Limbaugh urges a bipartisanship approach to the bill, saying that since Obama got around 54 percent of the vote, then that same percentage of the stimulus package should be decided by Democrats, while the rest should "be directed toward tax cuts, as determined by me." The current crisis "is an opportunity to unify people, if we set aside the politics."
Moving on to another part of the ailing economy, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said yesterday that the administration is working on a plan to "repair the financial system." Geithner didn't release any details, but the WSJ hears word from officials that the Obama administration is looking at spending another $1 trillion to $2 trillion in its attempts to bolster financial institutions. And that huge figure might be optimistic. The NYT says some estimate it may take up to $3 trillion to $4 trillion to buy up the toxic assets currently plaguing banks' balance sheets. This, of course, would mean that the administration would have to go to Congress to ask for more funds since only $350 billion of the $700 billion financial bailout is still available, and some of that has already been earmarked for certain projects.
Just because financial companies across Wall Street lost billions of dollars and asked for help from Uncle Sam, that doesn't mean they didn't pay their employees enviable bonuses. The NYT reports that the New York state comptroller revealed that employees at financial companies received around $18.4 billion in bonuses in 2008, and that's without counting stock option awards. Although far less than recent years, it was the sixth-largest bonus season on record. It's unclear whether the companies used taxpayer money to pay for the bonuses, but it's a distinct possibility.
The Food and Drug Administration issued "one of the largest food recalls in history" yesterday when it announced that all products made from peanuts processed by Peanut Corp. of America's plant in Georgia over the last two years should be thrown out, the Post reports on Page One. The dramatic move came after investigators discovered that the plant knowingly shipped salmonella-contaminated products a dozen times in 2007 and 2008. One lawmaker said she would ask the Justice Department to investigate whether criminal charges should be filed against plant officials. Eight people have died and more than 500 people were sickened by salmonella poisoning linked to the Georgia plant.
Although Obama has been in office for barely a week, he has already managed to change the White House culture, notes the NYT. A photograph showing Obama sans suit jacket in the Oval Office shocked Bush administration officials, who were always required to wear one. Obama's advisers say the president likes it warm and had cranked up the heat (um, what about that global warming thing?), but it's clear the new president is less hung up on protocol than his predecessor. He is allowing staff members to dress "business casual" on weekends, roams the halls, and comes into work later and stays later than Bush did.
Top of the Document
President to Muslim World: “Americans are not your enemy”
Tuesday, January 27th, 2009 at 9:48 am
In his first interview with an Arab television station, President Barack Obama offered a bold change to America's relations with the Muslim world.
"My job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives," President Obama told Al Arabiya. "My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy."
In the interview, conducted in the White House map room, President Obama also expressed his commitment to tackling the Middle East peace process immediately.
"Sending George Mitchell to the Middle East is fulfilling my campaign promise that we're not going to wait until the end of my administration to deal with Palestinian and Israeli peace, we're going to start now," he said. "It may take a long time to do, but we're going to do it now."
The interview is part of the President’s broader outreach to the Muslim world, which includes a promise to make a major address from the capital of a Muslim nation.
Al Arabiya is a 24-hour Arabic-language news channel based out of Dubai.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript:
Q Mr. President, thank you for this opportunity, we really appreciate it.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much.
Q Sir, you just met with your personal envoy to the Middle East, Senator Mitchell. Obviously, his first task is to consolidate the cease-fire. But beyond that you've been saying that you want to pursue actively and aggressively peacemaking between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Tell us a little bit about how do you see your personal role, because, you know, if the President of the United States is not involved, nothing happens -- as the history of peacemaking shows. Will you be proposing ideas, pitching proposals, parameters, as one of your predecessors did? Or just urging the parties to come up with their own resolutions, as your immediate predecessor did?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think the most important thing is for the United States to get engaged right away. And George Mitchell is somebody of enormous stature. He is one of the few people who have international experience brokering peace deals.
And so what I told him is start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating -- in the past on some of these issues -- and we don't always know all the factors that are involved. So let's listen. He's going to be speaking to all the major parties involved. And he will then report back to me. From there we will formulate a specific response.
Ultimately, we cannot tell either the Israelis or the Palestinians what's best for them. They're going to have to make some decisions. But I do believe that the moment is ripe for both sides to realize that the path that they are on is one that is not going to result in prosperity and security for their people. And that instead, it's time to return to the negotiating table.
And it's going to be difficult, it's going to take time. I don't want to prejudge many of these issues, and I want to make sure that expectations are not raised so that we think that this is going to be resolved in a few months. But if we start the steady progress on these issues, I'm absolutely confident that the United States -- working in tandem with the European Union, with Russia, with all the Arab states in the region -- I'm absolutely certain that we can make significant progress.
Q You've been saying essentially that we should not look at these issues -- like the Palestinian-Israeli track and separation from the border region -- you've been talking about a kind of holistic approach to the region. Are we expecting a different paradigm in the sense that in the past one of the critiques -- at least from the Arab side, the Muslim side -- is that everything the Americans always tested with the Israelis, if it works. Now there is an Arab peace plan, there is a regional aspect to it. And you've indicated that. Would there be any shift, a paradigm shift?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, here's what I think is important. Look at the proposal that was put forth by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia --
Q Right.
THE PRESIDENT: I might not agree with every aspect of the proposal, but it took great courage --
Q Absolutely.
THE PRESIDENT: -- to put forward something that is as significant as that. I think that there are ideas across the region of how we might pursue peace.
I do think that it is impossible for us to think only in terms of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and not think in terms of what's happening with Syria or Iran or Lebanon or Afghanistan and Pakistan. These things are interrelated. And what I've said, and I think Hillary Clinton has expressed this in her confirmation, is that if we are looking at the region as a whole and communicating a message to the Arab world and the Muslim world, that we are ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest, then I think that we can make significant progress.
Now, Israel is a strong ally of the United States. They will not stop being a strong ally of the United States. And I will continue to believe that Israel's security is paramount. But I also believe that there are Israelis who recognize that it is important to achieve peace. They will be willing to make sacrifices if the time is appropriate and if there is serious partnership on the other side.
And so what we want to do is to listen, set aside some of the preconceptions that have existed and have built up over the last several years. And I think if we do that, then there's a possibility at least of achieving some breakthroughs.
Q I want to ask you about the broader Muslim world, but let me -- one final thing about the Palestinian-Israeli theater. There are many Palestinians and Israelis who are very frustrated now with the current conditions and they are losing hope, they are disillusioned, and they believe that time is running out on the two-state solution because -- mainly because of the settlement activities in Palestinian-occupied territories. Will it still be possible to see a Palestinian state -- and you know the contours of it -- within the first Obama administration?
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state -- I'm not going to put a time frame on it -- that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.
And, look, I think anybody who has studied the region recognizes that the situation for the ordinary Palestinian in many cases has not improved. And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves? And is the child in Israel going to feel confident about his or her safety and security? And if we can keep our focus on making their lives better and look forward, and not simply think about all the conflicts and tragedies of the past, then I think that we have an opportunity to make real progress.
But it is not going to be easy, and that's why we've got George Mitchell going there. This is somebody with extraordinary patience as well as extraordinary skill, and that's what's going to be necessary.
Q Absolutely. Let me take a broader look at the whole region. You are planning to address the Muslim world in your first 100 days from a Muslim capital. And everybody is speculating about the capital. (Laughter.) If you have anything further, that would be great.
How concerned are you -- because, let me tell you, honestly, when I see certain things about America -- in some parts, I don't want to exaggerate -- there is a demonization of America.
THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely.
Q It's become like a new religion, and like a new religion it has new converts -- like a new religion has its own high priests.
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
Q It's only a religious text.
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
Q And in the last -- since 9/11 and because of Iraq, that alienation is wider between the Americans and -- and in generations past, the United States was held high. It was the only Western power with no colonial legacy.
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
Q How concerned are you and -- because people sense that you have a different political discourse. And I think, judging by (inaudible) and Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden and all these, you know -- a chorus --
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I noticed this. They seem nervous.
Q They seem very nervous, exactly. Now, tell me why they should be more nervous?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that when you look at the rhetoric that they've been using against me before I even took office --
Q I know, I know.
THE PRESIDENT: -- what that tells me is that their ideas are bankrupt. There's no actions that they've taken that say a child in the Muslim world is getting a better education because of them, or has better health care because of them.
In my inauguration speech, I spoke about: You will be judged on what you've built, not what you've destroyed. And what they've been doing is destroying things. And over time, I think the Muslim world has recognized that that path is leading no place, except more death and destruction.
Now, my job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect. I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.
Q The largest one.
THE PRESIDENT: The largest one, Indonesia. And so what I want to communicate is the fact that in all my travels throughout the Muslim world, what I've come to understand is that regardless of your faith -- and America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers -- regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams.
And my job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives. My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect. But if you look at the track record, as you say, America was not born as a colonial power, and that the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago, there's no reason why we can't restore that. And that I think is going to be an important task.
But ultimately, people are going to judge me not by my words but by my actions and my administration's actions. And I think that what you will see over the next several years is that I'm not going to agree with everything that some Muslim leader may say, or what's on a television station in the Arab world -- but I think that what you'll see is somebody who is listening, who is respectful, and who is trying to promote the interests not just of the United States, but also ordinary people who right now are suffering from poverty and a lack of opportunity. I want to make sure that I'm speaking to them, as well.
Q Tell me, time is running out, any decision on from where you will be visiting the Muslim world?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm not going to break the news right here.
Q Afghanistan?
THE PRESIDENT: But maybe next time. But it is something that is going to be important. I want people to recognize, though, that we are going to be making a series of initiatives. Sending George Mitchell to the Middle East is fulfilling my campaign promise that we're not going to wait until the end of my administration to deal with Palestinian and Israeli peace, we're going to start now. It may take a long time to do, but we're going to do it now. We're going to follow through on our commitment for me to address the Muslim world from a Muslim capital. We are going to follow through on many of my commitments to do a more effective job of reaching out, listening, as well as speaking to the Muslim world.
And you're going to see me following through with dealing with a drawdown of troops in Iraq, so that Iraqis can start taking more responsibility. And finally, I think you've already seen a commitment, in terms of closing Guantanamo, and making clear that even as we are decisive in going after terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians, that we're going to do so on our terms, and we're going to do so respecting the rule of law that I think makes America great.
Q President Bush framed the war on terror conceptually in a way that was very broad, "war on terror," and used sometimes certain terminology that the many people -- Islamic fascism. You've always framed it in a different way, specifically against one group called al Qaeda and their collaborators. And is this one way of --
THE PRESIDENT: I think that you're making a very important point. And that is that the language we use matters. And what we need to understand is, is that there are extremist organizations -- whether Muslim or any other faith in the past -- that will use faith as a justification for violence. We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith's name.
And so you will I think see our administration be very clear in distinguishing between organizations like al Qaeda -- that espouse violence, espouse terror and act on it -- and people who may disagree with my administration and certain actions, or may have a particular viewpoint in terms of how their countries should develop. We can have legitimate disagreements but still be respectful. I cannot respect terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians and we will hunt them down.
But to the broader Muslim world what we are going to be offering is a hand of friendship.
Q Can I end with a question on Iran and Iraq then quickly?
THE PRESIDENT: It's up to the team --
MR. GIBBS: You have 30 seconds. (Laughter.)
Q Will the United States ever live with a nuclear Iran? And if not, how far are you going in the direction of preventing it?
THE PRESIDENT: You know, I said during the campaign that it is very important for us to make sure that we are using all the tools of U.S. power, including diplomacy, in our relationship with Iran.
Now, the Iranian people are a great people, and Persian civilization is a great civilization. Iran has acted in ways that's not conducive to peace and prosperity in the region: their threats against Israel; their pursuit of a nuclear weapon which could potentially set off an arms race in the region that would make everybody less safe; their support of terrorist organizations in the past -- none of these things have been helpful.
But I do think that it is important for us to be willing to talk to Iran, to express very clearly where our differences are, but where there are potential avenues for progress. And we will over the next several months be laying out our general framework and approach. And as I said during my inauguration speech, if countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fist, they will find an extended hand from us.
Q Shall we leave Iraq next interview, or just --
MR. GIBBS: Yes, let's -- we're past, and I got to get him back to dinner with his wife.
Q Sir, I really appreciate it.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much.
Q Thanks a lot.
THE PRESIDENT: I appreciate it.
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
Top of the Document
BAE receives $9.9 million Marines contract
SANTA CLARA, Calif. - Military contractor BAE Systems said Wednesday it has received a $9.9 million contract to provide gun shields for troops fighting in urban environments.
BAE Systems will provide 442 Marine Corps Transparent Armored Gun Shield turret kits used on vehicles such as the Bradley and M1 Abrams tanks and assault amphibious vehicle.
The design of the gun shield turret kits allows troops direct vision "while providing protection against blast fragmentation and small arms fire to the crew while in the turret," said Ann Hoholick, vice president of BAE Systems' amphibious vehicles and armor kits.
Work will begin immediately in York, Pa., and Santa Clara, Calif., and activity on the initial delivery order is expected to be completed in June.
The contract is managed by the Marine Corps Systems Command.
BAE Systems Inc. is the U.S. subsidiary of London-based BAE Systems PLC.
Top of the Document
FAA release of Marine crash tape delayed
By Steve Liewer (Contact) Union-Tribune Staff Writer
FAA officials have granted the military's request to delay the release of radio communications between its air traffic controllers and the Marine pilot whose jet crashed into a University City neighborhood last month.
The Federal Aviation Administration will wait until Feb. 27 to make public the recording, which is expected to shed light on what happened before the F/A-18 Hornet killed four people and damaged six homes.
“Our legal staff reviewed the Marine Corps' request and determined there was legal justification for temporarily delaying the release of the audio,” said Ian Gregor, an FAA spokesman.
Marine lawyers argued that public airing of the recording would jeopardize their investigations into the Dec. 8 crash. An aide to Rep. Duncan D. Hunter, R-Lakeside, said the service is finishing its preliminary investigation and expects to issue a report in February.
“I don't think there's any doubt they'll be released eventually,” said Maj. Eric Dent, a spokesman at Marine Corps headquarters. “We asked that it be delayed so (investigators) can consider it.”
FAA officials had signaled they would release the 16-minute recording yesterday to comply with Freedom of Information Act requests filed by The San Diego Union-Tribune and The Associated Press.
The recording could help answer why the student pilot decided to fly his crippled jet over several miles of densely populated neighborhoods near Miramar Marine Corps Air Station instead of diverting to North Island Naval Air Station, which offers an over-water approach.
Shortly before noon, the aircraft lost an engine on takeoff from the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln during an offshore training exercise. The second engine sputtered and failed as the F/A-18 flew over University City.
The pilot, Lt. Dan Neubauer, ejected safely seconds before the jet slammed into Cather Avenue, then plowed through the home of Don Yoon, a 37-year-old businessman, and left it a fiery ruin.
Yoon was at work at the time. But his wife, Youngmi Lee, 36; his two young daughters, Grace and Rachel; and his mother-in-law, Seokim Kim, all died. In the days afterward, Yoon's grace and his public forgiveness of Neubauer touched people around the world, with hundreds attending a prayer service and the funeral for his family.
Marine officials said they will make public the findings of their legal investigation into the crash. But Maj. Jay Delarosa, a Miramar spokesman, said it's unclear when that will happen.
“It's not complete,” he said. “We're still committed to doing the job right.”
Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition in San Rafael, said the Marine Corps appears to be within its rights to request a delay if the investigation is still ongoing.
“If it were to turn out that there was no real risk of jeopardizing the Marine investigation, delay of disclosure would raise serious legal questions,” Scheer said. “Any delay whose real purpose is to enable the Marine Corps to manipulate media coverage of the results of any investigation would be highly inappropriate.”
Top of the Document
Iraq safer, but is democracy catching?
Posted by Cami McCormick 7
This story was written by CBS News correspondent Cami McCormick, reporting from Anbar.
Posted by Cami McCormick 7
This story was written by CBS News correspondent Cami McCormick, reporting from Anbar.
(AP Photo/Wathiq Khuzaie)
U.S. Marine Corps Maj. General John Kelly is on his second tour as a commander in Anbar province. He calls the security improvements in what was once Iraq's most dangerous area, "stunning, just stunning." "It's not a safe place by any means, but the al Qaeda insurgency is gone." That's one major hurdle out of the way. But Iraq's provincial elections, taking place this Saturday, will be a key test as to whether the Sunni majority in Anbar is now willing to join the country's political process. Kelly says he tells them, "if you don't vote, don't complain". But he believes they will. "This is a province that had something like three percent or less vote in the last election. During the month of August, we did a voter registration drive, and virtually 100 percent of the citizens signed up and registered to vote," says Kelly. On election day, 28,000 police officers from Anbar will protect the province's voters. The police were expected to move into the 227 polling places days beforehand, to secure them. But Kelly isn't convinced there will be violence in Anbar, and he points out that its not suicide bombers the people here fear most. "When they talk about security during the elections, they talk about the security of those ballots," he said. "That Shiite officials don't somehow manipulate the vote in Baghdad." The ballots will be counted first at local polling places, then sealed and moved to a "central location" and "re-counted." Transparency is key, Kelly believes, and he will have his Marines observing much of the local vote counting. Anbar was once the most dangerous province for U.S. troops, but Kelly now talks of a trust that's developed between himself, his troops and the sheiks and people of the massive western province. "On the morning after the elections, if I can tell the people here... that in my view, this was a free and transparent election... that the ballots once cast were protected and counted properly, they will accept it," says Kelly. The commander, who has criticized Iraq's Shiite-dominated central government for what he sees as neglect in Anbar province, adds, "if I can't say it was a good election, the government of Iraq will have some problems."
Top of the Document
II Marine Expeditionary Force Deploys
By Laura VescoReporterPublished: January 28, 2009
Around 200 Camp Lejeune marines and sailors packed their bags and began a long journey to Al Anbar Province in Iraq. The II Marine Expeditionary Force will focus on maintaining security. Even though most Marine Corps families understand how important a marine’s job is as Nine on Your Sides Laura Vesco explains it doesn’t make saying goodbye any easier. A year from now, Sergeant Cato Johnson’s tiny bundle of joy won’t seem so small but he says one thing will remain the same. “She will get a little taller but she will still be sweet. She will still be daddy’s little girl,“ says Johnson.
Many Marine Corps parents struggle with leaving their kids behind, including mothers like gunnery Sergeant Sherrie Moore. “It’s real difficult because I’ve had them ever since they were born so its going to take time for me to get used to somebody else taking care of them and giving them the authority and the confidence they can do it as well as I can,“ says Moore.
However, for these marines they say looking at their children makes them remember why they’re willing to go in harms way. Johnson says, “We do it for the family. We want to keep our families safe and when we get that call, we go do what we gotta do.“
Once their boots hit Iraq Major General Richard Tryon says his marines dedication may soon pay off. Tryon says, “Today marks a journey in the marine experience in Iraq which may ultimately lead to the final deployment of the marines to operation Iraqi freedom.“
A final deployment is music to Marine Corps families ears because no matter how small or big your baby is saying goodbye never gets any easier.
Top of the Document
National Museum of the Marine Corps Remains Top Virginia Destination
Museum Attracts Over Half Million Visitors in Second Year
TRIANGLE, Va., Jan 27, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- The National Museum of the Marine Corps has announced over 500,000 visitors recorded in 2008, maintaining its position as a top Virginia attraction. In its second full year open to the public, the Museum's attendance was bolstered by attracting Marines and families not only from the region but from across the nation. Since opening to the public in November 2006, the Museum has received over 1.2 million visitors.
"We are extremely pleased, though not surprised, by the number of visitors we received in 2008," said Lin Ezell, the Museum's Director. "Today people are looking for economical ways to spend time with their families and as a free, cutting-edge and educational attraction located off I-95, we provide a great and convenient destination for them."
The Museum will soon expand to include three additional galleries with exhibits interpreting the periods from 1775 through World War I, each featuring new, state-of-the-art visitor immersive experiences. Construction on the new galleries, expected to open in the spring of 2010, has already begun. Despite construction on future galleries, the Museum remains open to the public, with several exhibits moving temporarily within the Museum and remaining on public display, including combat photographs of the Global War on Terrorism and a Pioneer unmanned aerial vehicle.
New exhibits and artifacts will also soon come to the Museum, including the Marine Corps flag that survived the Sept. 11, 2001 attack on the Pentagon and the traveling exhibit, "Memories of World War II", which includes photographs from the Associated Press archives. The black and white photography exhibit will be on display at the Museum January 30 through March 29.
With funding provided by the Marine Corps Heritage Foundation and its donors, the adjacent Semper Fidelis Memorial Park will also expand in 2009 with the addition of a new chapel slated to open in September. The $5 million nondenominational chapel is made possible by a gift from the Timothy Day Foundation of Phoenix, AZ and will be a quiet and contemplative space where visitors can honor the sacrifices of those who serve and have served the nation. The structure will evoke images and memories of the improvised field chapels familiar to all service members.
The initiatives to expand the National Museum of the Marine Corps and Marine Corps Heritage Center are fulfilling the Marine Corps Heritage Foundation's vision of creating a multi-dimensional, world-class facility to be enjoyed by visitors time and time again.
For more information on the National Museum of the Marine Corps, visit http://www.usmcmuseum.org/ or call 1-877-635-1775 to speak to a staff member during normal business hours.
SOURCE: National Museum of the Marine Corps
Top of the Document
Iraq ends licence for Blackwater
The incident in Baghdad in September 2007 caused anger across Iraq
Iraq will not renew the licence of US security firm Blackwater, which was involved in an 2007 incident in which at least 14 civilians were killed.
An interior ministry spokesman said the US embassy had been told it will have to use another security company.
Five former Blackwater guards have gone on trial in the United States over the killings in Baghdad.
They have pleaded not guilty to killing 14 Iraqi civilians and wounding 18 others by gunfire and grenades.
"The contract is finished and will be not be renewed by order of the minister of the interior," said interior ministry spokesman Maj Gen Abdel Karim Khalaf.
He said the decision had been sent to the US embassy in Baghdad and "they have to find a new security company".
He added that the decision had been prompted by the incident on 16 September 2007.
The killings took place when Blackwater guards opened fire in Nisoor Square, Baghdad, while escorting an American diplomatic convoy.
The firm says its guards were acting in self-defence but witnesses and relatives of those killed maintain that the shooting was unprovoked.
Children were among the victims.
The killings strained Iraq-US relations and raised questions about the oversight of US contractors operating in war zones.
After the incident, the Iraqi government pressed Washington to withdraw Blackwater from the country, but the security firm's contract was renewed in 2008.
A new US-Iraqi security agreement gives Baghdad the authority to determine which Western security companies operate in the country.
A US embassy official confirmed it had received the Iraqi decision, and said US officials were working with the Iraqi government and its contractors to address the "implications of this decision".
Top of the Document
No comments:
Post a Comment