Bush vows to "rid the world of evil." What does that entail? The first mission is homeland defense. To that end he will call up 50,000 reservists. The impending war will result in many deaths of American soldiers, and further strikes against Americans at home. The situation is useful to the President, however. "This nation is peaceful, but fierce when stirred to anger.'' Bush declares he has a "war mentality." Congress has now passed two important pieces of legislation. The first condemns the attacks. The second gives Bush $40 billion in funding to fight the terrorists, and to clean up after the attacks. The third and fourth are discussed later in this message. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010914/ts/terrorist_attacks_27.html Bush has declared a state of emergency, as Macdonald Stainsby just posted. I don't think it gives the President the power to suspend civil liberties or anything. I think it's more of a power that gives the President the ability to hurry administrative decisions along. Please correct me if I'm wrong. A Defense Department official now says that military aircraft were in a position to shoot down United Airlines 93, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. The DoD has not changed its earlier position that they did not shoot down. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010914/ts/attack_pennsylvania_military _dc_1.html The Taliban charge d'affaires in the United Arab Emirates has said that while the Afghan government does not extradite criminals, Osama bin Laden is free to leave Afghanistan of his o volition. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010914/ts/attack_afghan_diplomat_dc_1. html The leader of the Taliban, Mullah Mohammed Omar, is a recluse. Recently he stated that to give up bin Laden would be to betray Islam. A Guardian article speculates that this position is guided by the Taliban's need to appease the foreign "guests" that are playing a key role in the Taliban military campaign against the Afghan rebels. This foreign legion includes as many as 6,000 nationals of Uzbekistan and Pakistan, and residents of the Chechnya region. As an inspirational leader and a foreigner to Afghanistan himself, bin Laden might be regarded by the Taliban as their only hope of standing fast against the rebels. http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,552097,00.html Afghan officials say they will resist a US attack, and will have their revenge after successfully doing so. From the AP: "We have suffered so much. Every night so many children go to bed hungry,'' said Zalmai, a teacher who like many Afghans uses only one name. "What do we have to live for? Let the rockets come and set this whole country on fire once and for all.'' http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010914/ts/attacks_afghanistan_4.html The Afghan people seem to have learned that the US is angry with them. Despite the exhortations of their leaders to stand up to the Americans, many Afghans are fleeing the cities. Foreigners are all leaving, except, presumably, for the ones in the Talib army. http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010914/ts /attack_afghan_dc.html Eighty percent of Americans say they support military action. Seventy percent say they support military action even if it results in a longer, broader war, and costs many American lives. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010914/ts/attacks_polls_2.html Colin Powell is attempting to put together a global alliance to fight terrorism. (What was that mission again? Let's try to avoid mission creep here.) The mission is to attack those who attacked the United States. Who are they again? This will be another grand alliance in the tradition of "41," Bush the Elder. Powell has asked Pakistan to let US planes fly overhead, but they haven't responded. A country of 140 million Muslims, Pakistan has its own fundamentalist movement to deal with. The Pakistani government can't appear soft on America. Not mentioned below, however, is the possibility that if hundreds of Pakistani nationals are among the WTC dead, that could give the leadership a good excuse to cooperate. In the end, the global alliance could be less important militarily than it is politically. If enough Arab states join it, Pakistan can, too. Although it is not an Arab state, Powell has not ruled out inviting Iran to join. The subtext of all this, by the way, is if Pakistan does not join or at least remain neutral, they could be dragged into the conflict against the USS, unless the US uses only the Russian and Tajikist bases. http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international/attack-usa-alliance.h tml Powell has sent diplomatic messages that, in the future, American benevolence is contingent on opposition to terrorism. http://www.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=1198062270 In later reports, Pakistan will allow the US to use its air space, but could not guarantee the safety of US troops in Pakistan, due to potential civil unrest by radical Muslims. Pakistan's conservative groups were encouraged by the US back in Cold War days, when Pakistan helped stop the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. As the Soviets withdrew, so did American money to the region. The results are hard times and desperation. http://www.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=1182652844 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34083-2001Sep14.html The US is approaching Russia and Tajikistan (the latter borders Afghanistan) for permission to use some of their bases. The Taliban will declare war on Tajikistan if Tajikistan lets the US operate from their country. As a caveat, this information comes from the infamous "Pravda," villified in Cold War days. http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/09/14/15203.html Russia doesn't want NATO troops in CIS countries, though. These countries include Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Presumably American troops alone would be okay. Or a combination of American and Russian troops. http://www.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_ID=1089316062 In the third major piece of legislation passing through Congress, the Senate has authorized Bush to use force, voting 98-0. This seems to satisfy the War Powers Resolution of 1973 for now. If the war does not go well, the Resolution will become a focal point of debate, however. It was not a complete legislative victory for Bush. He originally wanted preemptive authority to quell any possible terrorist initiative that might occur in the future. The Senate Democrats kept out that bit of ill-consider language. http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010914/ts /attack_congress_force_dc_2.html The House has now passed the same authorization. Bush will probably sign the bi Saturday. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010914/ts/attack_congress_passage_dc_1 .html Gays, abortionists, pagans, and feminists are partially responsible for the attack, according to Jerry Falwell, because they are making God angry with America. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/abc/20010914/ts/wtc_falwell010914_1.html Ann Coulter implies that we should carpet bomb the Arabs. In any case, after we hurt them real bad, she says, we should convert them to Christianity. I guess converting them to paganism is out of the question. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/printac20010914.shtml Handgun sales in the US are taking off. http://www.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_ID=111653957 Esteemed British military historian John Keegan suggests that America should use Russian bases to strike at the perpetrators of the attack. He cautions against attempting to do anything else in Afghanistan. The country is ungovernable, he says. He suggests approaching the conflict like the successful British campaign in Afghanistan did in t 1870s. http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/dt?ac=006026232037638&rtmo=LSx7N3Sd&atmo =rrrrrrrq&pg=/01/9/14/do01.html An Iranian in a German jail attempted to warn the US of an attack this week. http://www.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_ID=1002333132 In the fourth piece of major legislation, Congress is debating whether to give US attorneys the power to order ISP's to hook up Carnivore, so every byte and bit that passes through the Internet provider can be examined by the government without a warrant. A second major change would require all encryption software packages to be equipped with a government accessible backdoor, so you can keep your secrets from peers, but not the US government. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46852,00.html As a final measure, this bill will allow the CIA to hire people with criminal backgrounds to spy on terrorists. http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cta.091401.html Quantum computing will soon change cryptography forever. It will render almost all current encryption techniques useless (the only survivor will be the inconvenient and risky one-time pad). A new form of cryptography, based on quantum techniques, however, will make a new generation of encryption possible. The inevitable result will be a race to see who will control quantum encryption. Perhaps the NSA wants to keep quantum encryption, once it becomes available, out of civilian hands. With quantum computing available everywhere, and quantum cryptography available only to the NSA, Echelon could work again, even against terrorists equipped with non-quantum encryption. http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/13468.html Finally, the SEC is using its emergency powers to relax many rules to soften the blow to the financial system. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010914/ts/sec_markets_7.html Andrew Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
